[bibleprotector]

Originally Posted by HowlerMonkey

That is not where I thought you were going. I was afraid you were going to say that the translation of 1611 was a new revelation or some such.

Correct me if I am wrong, do you believe that God has preserved His Word in full in the original languages, but that that preservation is spread amongst various manuscripts so that no single manuscript contains the perfect Word of God in full? I am not trying to put words in your mouth, but I am trying to better understand your position.

God's Word has been fully preserved, but scattered. That is to say, that among all the various copies in the original languages, and in other sources as well (e.g. Latin), the true Word of God is to be found. We are talking about the text, every last letter.

But when you look at each individual manuscript, while that might be the Word of God, it will have some variations in it. Moreover, there is no single edition in the Greek which has the entire New Testament perfectly. They are right, good and have been useful, but they had variations and other issues (such as missing portions), so there is no extant perfect Greek Testament that matches the autographs exactly.

However, by gathering out of many sources, first the editors of the Textus Receptus were able to reconstruct the New Testament to a greater level of accuracy. Also, the early Protestant English translations were improvements in the area of better portraying the sense in English. Thus, eventually, the King James Bible, which considered many sources and a variety of witnesses, gathered perfectly, so we have a final text which matches what was first inspired in the autographs, and translation which gives fully and completely the sense in English.

[bibleprotector]

Originally Posted by HowlerMonkey

The Hebrew was God-breathed, the English was man-translated. For me not knowing Hebrew, this is a matter of faith I guess. Matthew 5:18 says:

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

There are no jots or tittles in English, so Jesus must be talking about the originals.

First of all, the Scripture was inspired in Hebrew. Not "God breathed", but "inspired". That is the right word.

Secondly, if the words were inspired then, and they were copied faithfully, though variations occurred due to copying errors, etc., yet it was possible to gather the right word, and translate them, the inspiration is never lost. Thus, we have divine words in English, though they were not made by inspiration in English, if they are faithful in English, they are inspired.

Thirdly, translation cannot be a limitation, because Scriptures indicate that Gentiles would obey the Scripture. Therefore the actual Scriptures must be in the Gentiles' languages, and most particularly, English. If the Bible is not fully in English, people would not be able to be converted, or perfected.

a. Matthew 28:19, 20 Jesus shows that the obedience of nations is to His commandments which the nations must be able to receive.

b. Romans 16:26 Paul shows that the nations must be able to be obedient to the Old Testament Scripture.

c. Romans 15:4 Paul shows that we must be able to know teachings of the Old Testament.

d. Colossians 1:5, 6, 27 Paul shows that the Word of God must be going forth to all Gentiles, and bringing forth fruit.

e. Acts 13:47-49 Luke states that the Word of God for salvation must go to the ends of the earth, and that Gentiles will glorify the Word, and that it shall be published abroad.

f. 1 Peter 1:23, 25 Peter proclaims that the Word of God to get Gentiles converted is going forth, and that it has come even to you.

Fourthly, the promise "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." is not restricted to the Hebrew. If so, how could promises regarding the Gentiles be fulfilled?
For example, how can people know that Gog was fulfiling prophecy when Bible Hebrew is no longer spoken? See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiAzJS8e-q0

Fifth, the promise of jots and tittles is not restricted to the Hebrew, in that we are observing the Bible in English, using the English words jot and tittle, and they are written with English letters. The dictionary shows these have an English meaning (in the Oxford English Dictionary). A jot is a small letter, or part of a letter, a tittle is a stroke or mark. Therefore, when no jot and tittle is to pass, and we have a perfect Bible in English, it can easily be argued that the Word of God is promising that itself would not fail in English, as much as the Word will not fail to come to pass, as has been recorded in heaven, in the autographs, in copies, in translations, and in the KJB as the final and world standard form.

[PaulB]

Hello again - I replied to your original post and have read through a number of your interactions in the forum. It is good to have you on board and I feel that you are honestly seeking answers.
This is like an e-fellowship where we get to know and love each other and you are like a new member of the family to me.
What I would suggest is that you search through a number of the older posts and see what conclusions you come to.
For one, it will give you answers and secondly it will help you to get to know the people better without getting misunderstood.

God bless

PaulB

[George]

Originally Posted by HowlerMonkey

Are you suggesting that we don't possess perfect copies of the Hebrew and Greek texts? I would think that for God to have preserved His Word we would have to have perfect examples in Greek and Hebrew. Am I wrong?

When I say that the Hebrew and Greek correct the English, what I am suggesting is that where they differ (Matthew 23:24 for example) the Greek is correct and the English is not. I often use my Textus Receptus to be sure that I am correctly understanding the wording of the AV.

Aloha HM,

The fact is there is NO ONE: "GREEK TEXT". And there is NO ONE "HEBREW TEXT". And IF there is NO ONE "AUTHORITATIVE TEXT" (in either "original language") that physically exists - then you have a "Phantom Text" as your FINAL AUTHORITY in all matters of faith and practice.

You are LIMITING God's "Inspiration" (concerning His "words") to the "ORIGINALS" (either the "original manuscripts" or the "original languages") Please read the following Threads and Posts - they be of some help in understanding where some of us are coming from:

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...19&postcount=1

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...3&postcount=69

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...78&postcount=1

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...2&postcount=33

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...96&postcount=9

Psalms 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.

[Jassy]

Originally Posted by HowlerMonkey

The Hebrew was God-breathed, the English was man-translated. For me not knowing Hebrew, this is a matter of faith I guess. Matthew 5:18 says:

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

There are no jots or tittles in English, so Jesus must be talking about the originals.

According to the following entries from very old dictionaries, I disagree. The English language DOES have "jots" and "tittles." They are found in the tiny DOT over the lower case letter i and the tiny DOT over the lower case letter j and the upper cross mark of the letter t, for some examples.

jot (n.)

1526, borrowing of L. jota, variant spelling of Gk. iota "the letter -i-, the smallest letter in the alphabet, hence the least part of anything. The verb "to make a short note of" is attested from 1721.
Online Etymology Dictionary

tittle

1382, "small stroke or point in writing," representing L. apex in L.L. sense of "accent mark over a vowel," borrowed (perhaps by infl. of Prov. titule "the dot over -i-") from L. titulus "inscription, heading."

Tittle

a point, (Matt. 5:18; Luke 16:17), the minute point or stroke added to some letters of the Hebrew alphabet to distinguish them from others which they resemble; hence, the very least point.

Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary
Online Etymology Dictionary

Hope this is helpful info.

Jassy

One interesting point is that in the Greek, the words translated "Jot" and "tittle" in the AV are the Greek words "iota" and "keraia."

I don't know, I think we may be drifting off topic a bit, we might be straining at gnats to put it another way.

In a nutshell I think that the AV is functionally perfect in so far as it was translated based on the correct manuscripts by able translators who had pure and honest ends as they performed their task. It is complete in that it contains verses omitted by the suspect Critical Text family of manuscripts, like the last several verses of Mark and I John 5:7. It is correct in that it accurately conveys the intended meaning of the originals and where translation errors do occur, they have no impact whatsoever on meaning or doctrine.

I am in no way, shape or form attacking the Authorized Version of the Bible. I'm hoping to refine and solidify an honest and rational view of the nature of the AV in terms of how it relates to the existing accurate manuscripts and how it and they relate to the original autographs.

I do not want to be branded a "Bible critic," "Bible doubter" or "Bible attacker," NOTHING could be further from the truth.

[Jassy]

Originally Posted by HowlerMonkey

One interesting point is that in the Greek, the words translated "Jot" and "tittle" in the AV are the Greek words "iota" and "keraia."

I don't know, I think we may be drifting off topic a bit, we might be straining at gnats to put it another way.

Yes, thank you for pointing that out. I sure don't want to be nitpicky. I appreciate you calling that to my attention.

Originally Posted by HowlerMonkey

I do not want to be branded a "Bible critic," "Bible doubter" or "Bible attacker," NOTHING could be further from the truth.

I'm glad to hear that - and I haven't seen you as any of those things. I do see you as genuinely seeking the truth and that is definitely welcome here at this Forum.

Jassy

Originally Posted by Jassy

I'm glad to hear that - and I haven't seen you as any of those things. I do see you as genuinely seeking the truth and that is definitely welcome here at this Forum.

Jassy

Thank you Jassy, you and many other people here have been very kind and welcoming and I appreciate that very much. I think it shows what sort of people you are when you welcome a brother in Christ as you all have.

I do really seek the truth and I also trust the AV Bible, that is not what is at issue with me.

Here is where I come from: I was saved in 1976 at a little church in Port Charlotte, Florida. I was 6 years old at the time. The pastor there was a really great guy named Bill Ross, who sadly (from our point of view) went to be with the Lord a few years ago. Pastor Ross had a much larger role in shaping the kind of Christian that I would become than he could have ever dreamed (but of course bears no blame for any of my many failings). The lessons I learned at that church have stuck with me all my life and I am trying to pass those along to my own two boys (both of whom thank God have accepted Christ as their savior). I was just a kid when I went to that church, but I do remember that they were AVO, at that age I was not very aware of differences in manuscripts methods of translation and so forth. I just used the AV because that is what my parents insisted on, what my church used and what was used at the school I attended. I remember when a buddy of mine got a new NKJV Bible in the early 1980's, he and I sat down with his NKJV and my AV and compared about three verses (thinking we had exhausted the issue) and they were either the same or almost the same, so I assumed that all versions were pretty much the same for years to come. My logic was that they were all translated from the exact same Hebrew and Greek, so there must on be slight changes and updates in wording. In spite of my enlightened 12 year old wisdom, I continued to use my AV through my teen years and into adulthood. I don't remember how the issue came back up for me, but somehow as a young adult I became interested in translations and manuscripts (hey I'm a history buff), and I began to do some research on the issue. I soon realized that the exact same manuscripts were not used in all cases and that the manuscripts used by most modern translators had some very serious issues that lead to a lot of words and even verses being left out of the MVs. I read things by people like Dr. Henry Morris defending the AV and I even decided to learn enough Greek to be able to look into these issues for myself (I'm a far cry from a Greek expert or even serious student, but I feel like I can wade into the shallow end of the pool). Perfect or not, I now have conviction that the AV is far and away the very best English translation of the Bible avaliable and unless God does something unexpected I'll use the AV for the rest of my life.

One other little asside, my "second choice" translation, which I will look at when I don't get what the AV is saying is not a modern version, but the Geneva Bible. If I am still confused I'll check with the Textus Receptus if the verse in question is in the NT. As I have said above, I don't know a jot or tittle of Hebrew, so failing clarity from the Geneva I am at the mercy of commentators when it comes to the OT.

Anyway, I love digging into the Bible, there are new treasures there that can never be exhausted no matter how many years are spent searching.

Originally Posted by HowlerMonkey

I am in no way, shape or form attacking the Authorized Version of the Bible. I'm hoping to refine and solidify an honest and rational view of the nature of the AV...

Well, I think you came to the right place brother,
and I do hope you continue to refine your view to the point where you can claim an inerrant English Bible here and now, for that is exactly what God has preserved for you... God bless.

[Jassy]

Originally Posted by HowlerMonkey

Thank you Jassy, you and many other people here have been very kind and welcoming and I appreciate that very much. I think it shows what sort of people you are when you welcome a brother in Christ as you all have.

I do really seek the truth and I also trust the AV Bible, that is not what is at issue with me.

Here is where I come from: I was saved in 1976 at a little church in Port Charlotte, Florida. I was 6 years old at the time. The pastor there was a really great guy named Bill Ross, who sadly (from our point of view) went to be with the Lord a few years ago. Pastor Ross had a much larger role in shaping the kind of Christian that I would become than he could have ever dreamed (but of course bears no blame for any of my many failings). The lessons I learned at that church have stuck with me all my life and I am trying to pass those along to my own two boys (both of whom thank God have accepted Christ as their savior). I was just a kid when I went to that church, but I do remember that they were AVO, at that age I was not very aware of differences in manuscripts methods of translation and so forth. I just used the AV because that is what my parents insisted on, what my church used and what was used at the school I attended. I remember when a buddy of mine got a new NKJV Bible in the early 1980's, he and I sat down with his NKJV and my AV and compared about three verses (thinking we had exhausted the issue) and they were either the same or almost the same, so I assumed that all versions were pretty much the same for years to come. My logic was that they were all translated from the exact same Hebrew and Greek, so there must on be slight changes and updates in wording. In spite of my enlightened 12 year old wisdom, I continued to use my AV through my teen years and into adulthood. I don't remember how the issue came back up for me, but somehow as a young adult I became interested in translations and manuscripts (hey I'm a history buff), and I began to do some research on the issue. I soon realized that the exact same manuscripts were not used in all cases and that the manuscripts used by most modern translators had some very serious issues that lead to a lot of words and even verses being left out of the MVs. I read things by people like Dr. Henry Morris defending the AV and I even decided to learn enough Greek to be able to look into these issues for myself (I'm a far cry from a Greek expert or even serious student, but I feel like I can wade into the shallow end of the pool). Perfect or not, I now have conviction that the AV is far and away the very best English translation of the Bible avaliable and unless God does something unexpected I'll use the AV for the rest of my life.

One other little asside, my "second choice" translation, which I will look at when I don't get what the AV is saying is not a modern version, but the Geneva Bible. If I am still confused I'll check with the Textus Receptus if the verse in question is in the NT. As I have said above, I don't know a jot or tittle of Hebrew, so failing clarity from the Geneva I am at the mercy of commentators when it comes to the OT.

Anyway, I love digging into the Bible, there are new treasures there that can never be exhausted no matter how many years are spent searching.

Brother, thank you so much for sharing your history with me. I think you were very blessed to be raised in an AV church. I was raised Catholic and didn't start reading the Bible until I was 22 years old. Sure, I was exposed to Bible "stories," from Jesus' earthly ministry, that Catholics priests like to tell - but, for the most part, I knew nothing about the Bible. As I began reading and comparing the Catholic Bible that I had and the Bible I had been sent by another Christian (I think it was the "Open Bible" - I was shocked to see the differences. I don't even remember what translation it was, but probably NIV? I then began "collecting" Bibles and I would read about 6 of them - side by side, lain across the table - and compare. At some point, I began reading the KJV and just found it to be very clear! I actually trashed all of the other Bibles that I had. For historical purposes, I wish I hadn't done that but... I did.

You can read my "mini history" in my profile, if you're curious. It's always great to know where people are coming from and how they arrived at the point they are at.

Like you, I am fascinated by history; I think I got that from my late father. He was a real history buff. My Mom would yawn when she saw us watching history programs and or bringing home history books from the library. It was never her cup of tea.

That is wonderful that you're bringing your children up in the AV. They certainly are blessed in that.

I still have yet to get my hands on a PCE Bible. So far, I only have one in PDF format. I do have a KJB though. I also have the KJB 1611 in electronic format to read from my computer. I love to have a Bible to hold in my hands and search and read. It is much more helpful in Scripture memorization - so that I'm aware of where to find things in the Bible. I find that sticking with the KJB, I can use familiar key words that are in a Scripture, to locate it, if I don't know where it is. There are many wonderful tools to search like that. I have e-Sword and I plan to purchase the Sword Searcher soon.

If you have any questions about my history, I'd be happy to share that with you. Have you done any evangelizing?

I've learned only very little Greek or Hebrew, although I know several other languages. At one time, I had a keen desire to learn Greek & Hebrew, but I didn't see any point in it - as I knew I'd never be an expert at it. I simply trust in the expert translators and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Yes, I love reading and studying the Bible - no matter how many times I read it or study it or how many hours I spend in its pages, I never tire of it. There is always something new, some gem of wisdom to be discovered. I love what the Bible itself says about wisdom:

Job 28:18 - "No mention shall be made of coral, or of pearls: for the price of wisdom is above rubies."

Proverbs 3:15 - "She [wisdom] is more precious than rubies: and all things thou canst desire are not to be compared with her."
8:11 - "For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it."
20:15 - "There is gold, and a multitude of rubies: but the lips of knowledge are a precious jewel."

Job 28:12 - "But where shall wisdom be found? and where is the place of understanding?
13 - "Man knoweth not the price thereof; neither is it found in the land of the living."
14 - "The depth saith, It is not in me: and the sea saith, It is not with me."
15 - "It cannot be gotten for gold, neither shall silver be weighed for the price thereof."
16 - "It cannot be valued with the gold of Ophir, with the precious onyx, or the sapphire."
17 - "The gold and the crystal cannot equal it: and the exchange of it shall not be for jewels of fine gold."
18 - "No mention shall be made of coral, or of pearls: for the price of wisdom is above rubies."
19 - "The topaz of Ethiopia shall not equal it, neither shall it be valued with pure gold."
20 - "Whence cometh wisdom? and where is the place of understanding?"
21 - "Seeing it is hid from the eyes of all living, and kept close from the fowls of the air."
22 - "Destruction and death say, We have heard the fame thereof with our ears."
23 - "God understandeth the way thereof, and he knoweth the place thereof."
24 - "For he looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under the whole heaven;"
25 - "To make the weight for the winds; and he weigheth the waters by measure."
26 - "When he made a decree for the rain, and a way for the lightning of the thunder:"
27 - "Then did he see it, and declare it; he prepared it, yea, and searched it out."
28 - "And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the LORD, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding."

Sorry for the long post. It is just so beautifully laid out, in the KJB, how very precious God's TRUTH - WISDOM - is!! It never ceases to impress upon me how much value it has. PRICELESS!!

Jassy