[Greektim]

I figured I would miss the obvious. Thanks for the help.

[Brother Tim]

Now, GT, about the significance, as pointed out by Matthew?

[Greektim]

The significance found in an Egnlish translation's capital letters of a Greek text that did not make use of such a practice? What about it? I don't see significance, I see bias in translation and interpretation. But then again, I didn't really understand the force of the so called significance. Could you explain it to me one more time?

[Brother Tim]

How can one describe the beauty of a sunrise to another who will not open his eyes?


Do you think that the exclusive capitalization of "King" in Hebrews 7 just coincidentally occurred? Does it not seem curious to you that it matches the typology of Melchisedec to Christ? and that NO OTHER earthly king so given the capitalized title? No, the Greek did not have the capitalization. I don't read Greek. Its grammar does not help me today. What I do have is a Book that has been so perfectly prepared under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, that even the capital letters have a message hidden in them, such as "Spirit"/"spirit" and "King"/"king".

[Greektim]

Am I to understand that with this capitalization of "king" that there was new revelation in 1611+ which was not a part of the inspired originals?

[Brother Tim]

Not new revelation, just an eye-opener. It's been there all the time.

[Greektim]

If it has been there all the time, then I am missing the significance of the KJV's capitalization emphasis. If the KJV was bringing out a theological point like Melchizedek as a type of Christ by capitalizing "king", then what about the emphasis in capitalization pre-1611 or pre-English translations? The type might have been there, but the significance or the emphasis wasn't until the KJV. That seems to be 1 of 2 things: translators bias in the translation to make a theological point or new revelation.

English is a different language then Greek...can't it be inspired or perfectly preserved in both languages?

Originally Posted by Greektim

If it has been there all the time, then I am missing the significance of the KJV's capitalization emphasis. If the KJV was bringing out a theological point like Melchizedek as a type of Christ by capitalizing "king", then what about the emphasis in capitalization pre-1611 or pre-English translations? The type might have been there, but the significance or the emphasis wasn't until the KJV. That seems to be 1 of 2 things: translators bias in the translation to make a theological point or new revelation.

[slatts1611AV]

Originally Posted by Greektim

If it has been there all the time, then I am missing the significance of the KJV's capitalization emphasis. If the KJV was bringing out a theological point like Melchizedek as a type of Christ by capitalizing "king", then what about the emphasis in capitalization pre-1611 or pre-English translations? The type might have been there, but the significance or the emphasis wasn't until the KJV. That seems to be 1 of 2 things: translators bias in the translation to make a theological point or new revelation.

I'm glad I can hold a Book in my hands and know its perfect. Maybe I'm just a dumb bunny, but after years of looking at "manuscript evidence"and the like, I realized that, at the end of the day, a person is going to humble themselves and realize that he is not the final authority or he is not.. Until that day comes, men will simply place themselves as that final authority. I'm not picking on you Brother Tim, but it just seems that when an answer is provided you look for a way 'out' of the answer, and then add several questions along with the first. I see no value to it whatsoever.

In Christ, Brother Shane

[PeterAV]

Good point there Brother Shane.
Debate should be for finding the truth.
But some see debate as a tool for final authority.
*******
In reality, the issue is over, as the AV is the winner hands down.
All that is needed is the mop up crew to clean up the mess that all this doubting has taken the world into.
*******
In which Bible do you believe all content is pure, GreekTim?

[I suppose Mr.Decker thinks 1 Corinthians 13:10 is a positive proof text for the nullification of any more tongues.]
Just like the Pre-tribbers with their Rev 4:1 proof text of a pre-trib rapture.
Come up hither
*******

PeterAV
Every word of God is pure: