[Debau]

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

Since those Spanish folks have, are or will be learning English...

And since there is no entirely correct translation into Spanish, though some better than others...

It is obviously the best, and in line with God's providence, to yet yield to them a greater thing to be received, namely, the Word of God in English. There is a need for people to see that they are being called into the restitution of the "old ways".

While it was not a waste of time and wealth for the Word of God to be preached in Spanish, things are moving in the direction whereby it is now becoming a waste, in the big picture, because there really needs to be one unified Church in the world which agrees on doctrine and uses one Bible. If this is only possible in the Millennium, then the Gospel of Christ is weak.

I see. God really didn't intend the confusion of tongues at Babel to endure through the age of grace, we are bringing in the kingdom now, and the RVG has not been blessed by Him and is now a futile effort for Christ's sake.

[bibleprotector]

I see. God really didn't intend the confusion of tongues at Babel to endure through the age of grace, we are bringing in the kingdom now, and the RVG has not been blessed by Him and is now a futile effort for Christ's sake.

My, you are reading all kinds of things into what I have written. But it gives me opportunity to explain.

1. CONCERNING LANGUAGES AND THE REVERSAL OF BABEL

There are various Scriptures which show that God would turn the Jews to another language, e.g. “For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.” (Isaiah 28:11). This tongue would be the same as the pure language spoken of in Zephaniah 3:9, which must be the Word of God in a Gentile language spoken throughout the world. Of course, this is Bible-English, and the Gentile language is English, the global language which even today is spoken by many Jews. Moreover, the Christians are supposed to preach to the Jews, that they should hear the Gospel from us (Romans 11:31), and show that we are blessed with the truth (see Romans 11:11, Romans 10:19 and Matthew 21:43) and bring them into it. Therefore, while other languages may well exist in the future, there is one true message which is coming forth in one language to the world (see Revelation 10:11). This also explains which language God should use to make known His name, as is prophesied in various places, such as in Ezekiel 39. Therefore, the Gospel being published among all nations, many hearing and so on is how God should make known His truth by His power through the Church. It is not God’s will that the Babel judgment should continue to impede the Church, but that while Pentecost was for bringing the Gospel to the Gentiles, as is exhibited through the Reformation, we must now come to God’s working of having a faithful Remnant that is able to bring the Gospel to the world, because the entire Church has grown up in Him, and has come together in the unity of the faith, which is to labour in reaping the Earth.

2. CONCERNING THE KINGDOM AND NOW

I am saying that before Christ returns to take away His Church, His Church must be glorious, powerful and sanctified. Christ is not returning for a defeated Church. The Kingdom of God has been present since Christ was baptised at Jordan, and whether nations do specific Christian acts should not be seen as the coming of the Kingdom of God (though there are signs of Christ’s return), nor as though the throne of Christ is presently on Earth, or is to be established at any time before the translation and tribulation.

One of the worst deceptions around is that the Kingdom of God is either equal to Rome, or equal to all differing denominations collectively, and even worse is the idea that Christians are to take hold of the Roman Kingdom and possess it, and even worse is to say that Christ is not coming to translate and take away His saints. All these teachings are directly differing to what I am saying.

3. CONCERNING THE FOREIGN BIBLES

It is obvious that Spanish Bibles have been blessed and accomplished good, just as the Geneva Bible has done so. But the Geneva Bible has been superseded by another Bible, and this same principle applies with the Spanish Bibles. It is not that they were “bad”, just that we have the purified-seven-times manifestation, which obviously surpasses the other things.

4. CONCERNING FUTILE EFFORTS

Just as for some years after 1611, the Geneva Bible still continued, so it can be considered in the present day concerning the better Spanish Bibles. If you look at what happened to the Geneva Bible, it is obvious that the King James Bible was accepted in two ways: 1. generally, and 2. by the most ardent Christians. There were attempts to continue the Geneva Bible by some (usually Presbyterian) Puritans. This parallels exactly today’s situation. We have a general acceptance of the King James Bible. We have an ardent minority who are zealous for fundamentalist Christianity, which is more and more linked with a King James Bible only view. And we have some who are in the “fundamentalist” category, but are open to “other good translations”, etc. I am happy to report that the true Puritan spirit prevailed over those who had the desire to schismaticise. Every attempt to replace the King James Bible was thwarted while the Puritans literally ruled England, and therefore we see that it is futile to resist God’s providence. You may even delight yourself to discover that while this sort of protectorial government was in place, the Cambridge printers had the mandate to print the King James Bible, which they did, and you might also note that what has manifested out of all that is what I have outlined above, namely, that Christ is most and best empowering those that do His will, and that this is not by chance, but being revealed and manifest by His Spirit.

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

About the laundry lists.

Originally Posted by Diligent

]No matter how many verses you defend in the KJV, they will have yet more rabbit trails of translation they demand you traverse.

Amen.

Sometimes what you can do is ask the person who posts the list whether he has carefully studied the verses at issue himself. And which one or two verses he really found, after his personal study, to be errors in the King James Bible. And would he explain why, in his own words.

This way you can try to discern whether the poster has any real interest and sincerity, or is just looking for a laundry list excuse. Some of the posters themselves might actually have some sincerity, and would be willing to see and understand by using a proper example or two.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

Since those Spanish folks have, are or will be learning English...

And since there is no entirely correct translation into Spanish, though some better than others...

It is obviously the best, and in line with God's providence, to yet yield to them a greater thing to be received, namely, the Word of God in English. There is a need for people to see that they are being called into the restitution of the "old ways". While it was not a waste of time and wealth for the Word of God to be preached in Spanish, things are moving in the direction whereby it is now becoming a waste, in the big picture,

What planet are you living on? Us English speaking people are going to have to learn Spanish in the next 20 years, here in American at least. Producing a more accurate Spanish translation isn't just going help the people who currently speak Spanish but also ourselves and our children, because the fact is, over here modern English is probably going to die out or become Spanglish in half a century or at least by the end of the century. Yet you expect all Spanish speaking people to learn English, and more absurdly to learn Elizabethan English to read the KJV? You're living in a phantasy world. God bless the translators who are trying to improve the Spanish translations. At least they're not sitting back pontificating out fantasy like you.

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

While it was not a waste of time and wealth for the Word of God to be preached in Spanish, things are moving in the direction whereby it is now becoming a waste, in the big picture, because there really needs to be one unified Church in the world which agrees on doctrine and uses one Bible.

So you're part of the one-world-religion,-lets-all-unify-under-the-pope-and-worship-Mary-NWO crowd, eh? It's never a waste to preach the word of God, in any language, to any people, not even to people like you, since the word of God always performs that for which it was sent. Isaiah 55:11 "So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." "Así será mi palabra que sale de mi boca: no volverá á mí vacía, antes hará lo que yo quiero, y será prosperada en aquello para que la envié." (Reina-Valera 1909)

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

If this is only possible in the Millennium, then the Gospel of Christ is weak.

The Bible never has said that everyone will beleive the gospel and that there will not be false churches. This shows how little you understand of the gospel. Jesus always said there would be few that are saved, the gate is strait and the way narrow, strive to enter the gate, etc. And Paul says "there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you." (1 Cor 11:19) If there ever is a one-world-church on this earth, it will be the church of antichrist.

Now, as to the imperfections of the Spanish Bibles, what imperfections are there in the 1909 Reina-Valera? They are few and small so far as I know, like Mark 1:2 saying "in Isaiah the prophet" rather than "in the prophets" (which is not going to make anyone fall into false doctrine!) "Como está escrito en Isaías el profeta: He aquí yo envío á mi mensajero delante de tu faz, Que apareje tu camino delante de ti." It has 1 Tim 3:16 right "Y sin cotradicción, grande es el misterio de la piedad: Dios ha sido manifestado en carne...." and Acts 8:37 "Y Felipe dijo: Si crees de todo corazón, bien puedes. Y respondiendo, dijo: Creo que Jesucristo es el Hijo de Dios" and the Johanine comma in 1 Juan 5:7 "Porque tres son los que dan testimonio en el cielo, el Padre, el Verbo, y el Espíritu Santo: y estos tres son uno." Fact is, the "Isaiah the prophet" rather than "prophets" thing in Mark 1:2 is the only standard inaccuracy that I can recall, and I'm not too concerned with it to be honest!

Fact is, "in Isaiah the prophet" isn't even different from "in the prophets" if you take "in Isaiah the prophet" as meaning "in the scroll of the prophets which we Jews commonly refer to by the name of Isaiah since he is the greatest of the prophets."

By the way, the original Reina-Valera is from 1602, predating the KJV, and the KJV translators diligently compared the translations of other languages, including this one. In a way, the KJV is based on the Reina-Valera at least partially. And due to the awkward construction of the Spanish possessive and other things it often matches the Greek more literally in word order than the KJV, which doesn't mean anything except that if you read the KJV, the Reina-Valera 1909 and Scrivener's text together, you notice that sometimes the Spanish just has a more literal word order feel to it.

Another claim of some against the 1909 is that the use of the word pontifice in Hebreos 3:1 "POR tanto, hermanos santos, participantes de la vocación celestial, considerad al Apóstol y Pontífice de nuestra profesión, Cristo Jesús;" which these men say supports the papacy because the pope is called a pontiff, and here this translation uses the word pontifice. They think that changing pontifice to summo sacerdote fixes the "problemo," pero no hay problemo! (there is no problem) The reason why Catholics call the pope pontifex is that pontifex is a Latin word meaning "high priest" and they see the pope as their high priest. In fact, they call the pope "pontifex maximus" or "highest high priest." But here, who does the Spanish Reina-Valera of 1909 call Pontifice? JESUS CHRIST! In other words, so far from supporting the papacy it blasts it to smitherines! Fact is, those who want to change the word pontifice to summo sacerdote here are probably crypto-Catholics, tired of the tried and true Reina-Valera 1909 disrpoving their claim that the pope is pontifice. (But I am no expert in Spanish. Just mi opinion. I see that the RVG uses "Sumo Sacerdote" and that's fine, since it means High Priest. But I do think that saying Pontifice is an error is just silly.)

[bibleprotector]

What planet are you living on?

The one where English is being set as the global language, i.e. Earth. The same planet which should have a strong Christian witness, where the minority should be papists, antichrist-believers, railers and other heretics, but the majority as Bible loving Christians.

When the Scripture said, "Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." (Matthew 7:14), it was not actually saying that the Church would be defeated when Christ returns. This verse is not saying that the true Church is always a mere remnant or minority. In fact, Jesus showed that there would be many false brethren, if many false, how much more true? (Or is God too weak to get many saved?) Again, Jesus showed the Church should grow might, that it should be a sanctified and glorious Church for His return: "Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof." (Matthew 13:32). The King James Bible believing way is the way of victory.

[Debau]

Originally Posted by sophronismos

(But I am no expert in Spanish. Just mi opinion. I see that the RVG uses "Sumo Sacerdote" and that's fine, since it means High Priest. But I do think that saying Pontifice is an error is just silly.)

That you are not. Before arriving at judgment, why don't you ask Dr. Gomez what lengths he took to consider, including every single jot and tittle, before bringing any changes to RV-1909.

www.reinavaleragomez.com

.

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

Or is God too weak to get many saved?

Is God too weak to get ALL saved? No--and yet all will not be saved. That shows how puerile your logic is. Jesus himself says few will be saved, and you want to argue with the Lord Himself.

(Luke 13:23-24) "Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them, Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able."

And in another place Mat 7:14 "Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."

You can be a dork all you want and call God weak for not saving everyone, but that's just dorky Satan worship. Repent and beleive the gospel before it is too late.

(Mark 1:14-15) "Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel."