Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

The KJV 1611

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

I've been wanting to debate with someone who holds the KJV-only position. Thats why I am starting this thread.

I believe that the KJV is definitely a masterpeice of English literature. It has impacted many artists and poets over the years. Its language is also archaic and beautiful. But I do believe that it is a rather poor translation. Here is a few good examples:

God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.

(Numbers 23:22)

His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

(Deuteronomy 33:18)

Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?

(Job 39:10)

Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

(Psalm 22:21)

I would strongly disagree with the scholars who decided to translate "ra'em" as "unicorn". Most people would agree that "ra'em" is a sort of ox or bull rather than a unicorn. So my challenge to the KJV-onlyers: why should we accept that "ra'em" means unicorn rather than ox or bull?

But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there; and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures; and owls shall dwell there, and satyrs shall dance there.

(Isaiah 13:21)

The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the screech owl also shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest.

(Isaiah 34:14)

Here are some more examples of what I believe is a bad translation. The translators translated the Hebrew word "sa'ir" as "satyr". But I am curious as to why they translated the word as "satyr" in these two verses from Isaiah, but translated the same word as "goat" and "kid" in other verses:

And they took Joseph's coat, and killed a kid of the goats, and dipped the coat in the blood;

(Genesis 37:31)

Or if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge; he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a male without blemish:

(Leviticus 4:23)

And Moses diligently sought the goat of the sin offering, and, behold, it was burnt: and he was angry with Eleazar and Ithamar, the sons of Aaron which were left alive, saying,

(Leviticus 10:16)

Isn't a satyr some creature from Greek mythology? What is it doing in the Bible?

Another problem that I have with the KJV is that it has some verses that probably shouldn't have found their way into the Bible. One good example is 1 John 5:7:

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(1 John 5:7)

The problem with this verse is that it is not found in ANY Greek manuscripts (from which the KJV was translated) before the 16th century! This verse isn't even found in the Aramaic manuscripts. There are hundreds of ancient manuscripts, yet not one has this verse! Even the early church fathers, who loved to quote from the gospels and epistles, never quoted this verse! Not even when they were trying to make the case for the Trinity! Don't you think that some of the early church fathers who were trying to convince people to believe in the Trinity would have pointed to this verse? Don't you think that this verse would have silenced "heretics" like Arius? So I ask all of you "true" Christians, where was this verse for over a thousand years?

Salaam, Shalom, Shlama, Pax, Eirene

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

If the picture I included is indeed the Unicorn of the Bible.....then we have some good news....such a creature is believed to be alive today !

It is called Emela-ntouka [ " Killer of Elephants"] . It lives in the Likouala swamp regions of the Republic of Congo.

http://www.cryptozoology.net/english/afric...a/overview.html

---River

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Reverend Matthew, don't back out so easily by posting a link. If you are going to hold a belief that you demand on others, then YOU better be able to back it up.

So will you be able to prove that only the KJV is inspired of God? Or not?

This is as good of a place as any other to try and make a stand for your beliefs.

(ohh, and I did read through the link, but I'd like a little more input from all of the "true" christians out there.)

Salaam and Shalom.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If the picture I included is indeed the Unicorn of the Bible.....then we have some good news....such a creature is believed to be alive today !

It is called Emela-ntouka [ " Killer of Elephants"] . It lives in the Likouala swamp regions of the Republic of Congo.

http://www.cryptozoology.net/english/afric...a/overview.html

---River

Is this a joke ???????

DinoRiderMonoParts1.jpg

:!!!:

emela2.jpg

LoL.. These are the Nephelim, Refaim, Orafim (oFanim or watever), lingum shingum [Edited Out]?

I can't believe this .. These are the fallen angels? :!!!:

I wonder how Elohim would look like?

:angel:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The second of Yemenite's picture is by William Blake, judging

by the style. He was a poet, painter, calligrapher and, in trade,

a printer. Original editions of his works, written and painted by

him, are very rare and valuable. They are also very beautiful.

William Blake was very religious and this shows in his works.

Back to the point, why there is a unicorn in the Bible I do not

know. The word "satyr" is used in english to describe a kind

of loathsome man, one who lusts after women. To describe a

man as goat-like conveys a similar meaning. The greek satyr

had horns and hooves and may well have dwelt in the desert

(if you accept that it ever existed.)

1 John 5:7 - human error? The Bible has been translated in so

many versions that I do not believe any one, even the KJV, is

100% perfect. It cannot be, it was written by men!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

That first picture of "elohim" looks like some contemporary goth piece. How could anyone find enough gall in their hearts to say that God has sons? And how dare they carve a statue (a "graven image") and call it God! That smacks of idol-worship.

Who is more wicked than the person who invents a falsehood about God?

And what's with the dinosaurs? Is someone saying that there are dinosaurs mentioned in the KJV 1611 Bible? And I don't mean whales, lizards or sea serpents, I mean dinosaurs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Reverend Matthew, don't back out so easily by posting a link. If you are going to hold a belief that you demand on others, then YOU better be able to back it up.

So will you be able to prove that only the KJV is inspired of God? Or not?

This is as good of a place as any other to try and make a stand for your beliefs.

(ohh, and I did read through the link, but I'd like a little more input from all of the "true" christians out there.)

Salaam and Shalom.

Unicorn referes to a wild beast with one horn. Most likely an extinct bull. There is no problem with the use of the word.

Likewise satyr is not a problem either. The Hebrew word signifies "hairy" or "rough," and is frequently applied to "he-goats." In the passages cited it refers to demons of woods and desert places.

And if you don't know that "kid" originally meant a young goat, and not a child, then you must be a product of the public school system.

All of the above are just differences between the modern English, and that of King James. None, however, create any difficulty in understanding the message of Word.

Now the utmost part of your idiocy:

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(1 John 5:7)

I don't know what "Bible" you got this from, but mine reads:

John 5:7

The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.

Edited by Reverend Matthew
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Matthew,

Unicorn referes to a wild beast with one horn. Most likely an extinct bull. There is no problem with the use of the word.

The only problem is that there are no mystical unicorns and there is nothing in the Bible to support the word being rendered as "unicorn."

Likewise satyr is not a problem either. The Hebrew word signifies "hairy" or "rough," and is frequently applied to "he-goats." In the passages cited it refers to demons of woods and desert places.

And if you don't know that "kid" originally meant a young goat, and not a child, then you must be a product of the public school system.

Demons? Please run this by me. And arn't "satyrs" creatures from Greek mythology?

And yes, I was aware "kid" means a young goat. I didn't indicate that it meant "child," did I?

Now the utmost part of your idiocy:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

(1 John 5:7)

I don't know what "Bible" you got this from, but mine reads:

John 5:7

The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.

Well I think that you should reconsider who the "idiot" is in this case. Look at your KJV Bible please. Now turn toward the back of it. You will see the book of Revelations. Now go to the 3 books before it. The 3 books are Johns Epistles. They are named 1 John, 2 John, 3 John. If you wern't aware of this, then you are in no condition to be on this board arguing with us. You seemed to think that I was talking about the Gospel of John.

Jokes on you buddy :P

Salaam and Shalom.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Matthew,

It's Reverend Matthew, or Mr. Matthew, dolt.

The only problem is that there are no mystical unicorns and there is nothing in the Bible to support the word being rendered as "unicorn."

Demons? Please run this by me. And arn't "satyrs" creatures from Greek mythology?

And yes, I was aware "kid" means a young goat. I didn't indicate that it meant "child," did I?

Explained previosly: All of the above are just differences between the modern English, and that of King James. None, however, create any difficulty in understanding the message of Word.

Well I think that you should reconsider who the "idiot" is in this case. Look at your KJV Bible please. Now turn toward the back of it. You will see the book of Revelations. Now go to the 3 books before it. The 3 books are Johns Epistles. They are named 1 John, 2 John, 3 John. If you wern't aware of this, then you are in no condition to be on this board arguing with us. You seemed to think that I was talking about the Gospel of John.

It is I John 5:7, not 1 John 5:7

Regarding this verse, it is indeed found in the Textus Receptus. The translations that don't have it are the corrupted Alexandrian texts. Even imperfect translations of Textus Receptus contain this verse:

Third Millennium Bible: I John 5:7

For there are three that bear record in Heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.

The Douay-Rheims Bible: I John 5:7

And there are Three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.

Young's Literal Translation: I John 5:7

because three are who are testifying [in the heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these -- the three -- are one;

Webster's Bible Translation: I John 5:7

For there are three that bear testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reverend Nathaniel P. Robbins' sermon on the subject:

Don't believe it when people tell you that the word of God is found only in the originals -- which NOBODY has! Jesus made a promise, and we know that He cannot lie:

"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."

Matthew 24:35

Many Bible college students, professors, pastors, teachers and lay people talk about, "we believe in the inerrancy of the scriptures as found in the originals" --- NOBODY has the originals! They are saying that we don't have God's word today which directly contradicts what Jesus said in Matthew 24:35. The faith of many young Christians is shattered by the time they leave Bible college. Don't fall prey to this trap!

Remember Satan's first words to Eve in the garden:

"Yea, hath God said...?"

Genesis 3:1

Satan questioned Eve about God's word and we know the results of her listening to him! That is what is happening today...

"Well, the Greek doesn't really say that."

"The Authorized King James does not say that properly."

"The Authorized King James is hard to read and outdated."

"You need to go to the Bible college and take some Hebrew classes so that you better understand the Bible."

I will NEVER go to school to translate the Bible. I've got the best teacher in the universe and beyond -- His name is the Holy Ghost! I've also got the word of God -- the Authorized King James Bible. I have NEVER once gotten increased understanding from a preacher's "explanation of the Greek". The forceful, unabated, irreverent attack on the Authorized King James Bible that has served Christendom for almost 400 years is the result of liberalism gone amuck. When some false prophet tries to turn us away from what we know, we need to say, "Get thee, hence Satan for thou desiredst not the things that be of God, but those that be of men!"

Instead of worrying about the Greek and the Hebrew and self-esteem and Christian financial seminars we need to get some spiritual power by OBEYING God's commands. The Lord's business is being left undone! Here's what we need to be doing:

We need to be out on the street witnessing and seeing souls saved, "He that winneth souls is wise."

Living holy and not watching Satan's t.v. and movies, "Be ye holy, for I am holy."

Keeping the Lord's commandments and stop saying, "I just don't measure up." -- "Whosoever loveth me keepeth my commandments."

Teaching our kids about Jesus and stop giving them video games to keep them quiet "And, ye fathers...bring [children] up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord."

Praying for our Pastor, families, acquaintances, friends, co-workers, government "Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much."

Wives, learn to submit to your husbands "...as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing."

There's plenty more that we can do, but as you can see, we have pressing business for the Lord!

Are the "Originals" Important to God? With all this talk about the originals, let's take time out to see what God thinks. Look at Jeremiah 36:23, 32. God had Jeremiah to write down His words. What happened? The originals were destroyed and Jeremiah re-wrote them. If the originals were that important to the Lord, He wouldn't have let them be destroyed. Let us not place an emphasis on the originals that God doesn't place there!

Someone once commented in a thread that I'm "arguing" about an unimportant point. That is untrue. The New Testament is full of warnings about Satan and false prophets trying to deceive us. Are these warnings given to us in vain? No, they're not. Let us be like the Berean Christians and check out everything that comes our way in the light of the Word of God comparing spiritual things with spiritual!

The Bible says that we are in a war! That means that we are fighting and contending for the faith once delivered to the saints. If you don't find yourself standing and fighting for the things of God, you've got to re-examine your walk. Can you see how our faith would be all messed up if Satan could change the Bible to say whatever he wants it to say? Can you see how all these different "versions" are desensitizing even true Christians to manipulation of God's word?

If you read about a wishy-washy, limp-wristed Jesus then you are NOT reading the KJV 1611! Amen!

Glory to the Lord!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

OK, for the time being purely for the sake of arguement let's accept your argument that there must be a single infallible version of the Bible (which of course in my case involves bracketing my Islamic theological committments). Why KJV 1611. Let me elaborate the question in accordance with my intentions in asking it. I am not asking why KJV 1611 is the best English version of the Bible. I've seen your site and its representatives on ShiaChat argue extensively to that effect. Again purely for the sake of arguement for the time being I'll accept your arguments that KJV 1611 is indeed the best English rendering. But why is an English language version necessarily the Infallible Word of God?

Let's start with the Greek manuscripts. You and your compatriots have made certain valid points, yet they do not entirely garuntee your intented conclusion. You mention for one that of course the manuscripts are not the same and perhaps even contradictory and hence not all (or even any two) can be the Infallible Word of God. True. You also have made clear there is no absolute unequivocal historic-textual evidence that one of of these manuscripts is indeed THE orginal. Likewise true. However, it is possible (given the assumptions I've made for the sake of arguement) that one of these manuscripts is the Infallible Word, albeit to the exclusion of the others. While I have already admitted the lack of absolute unequivocal historical-textual evidence to this end, this need not mean there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever - and it is not likely to be any more (or anywhere near as) tenuous as the evidence you've drawn to favor the KJV 1611.

Moving on from the Greek manuscripts, the Bible was translated into other languages long before its English versions such as the KJV 1611. Copts translated the Bible into Egyptian dialects, Ethiopian Christians into Amharic, those of the Levant into Syriac, the Nestorians into the tongues of Iraq, Persia, India, etc. - and of course Arabic. All this long predates KJV 1611. Why not one of these. For that matter why not another of the Bibles produced with the Reformation in the tongues of other European countries - German, French, Dutch or the Scandinavian languages?

Finally, and perhaps the biggest objection of all, why is the Infallible Word necessarily limited to only one tongue? I certainly agree as a matter of logic there can be no two infallible and innerant versions of the Bible rightfully claiming status as the literal word of God in any given language. Yet I see absolutely no reason to suppose many different different languages could not each have one innerant and infallible version of the Bible each being a manifestation of the literal word of God in that given language.

Even if English, then why ONLY English? As for the most reasonable position from my view, again bracketing my Islamic theological committments and assuming Christian ones for the sake of arguement, would be the position that even though no ONE manuscript or translation in any language is the infallible, inerrant and literal word of God, the CONSENSUS of the original manuscripts is indeed such. I suppose one could also put forward a more limited and conservative version of this position such that the consensus of the Textus Receptus is the infallibe, inerrant and literal word of God. You certainly have a lot of questions to address.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's Reverend Matthew, or Mr. Matthew

Are you really a Reverend? If that is the case, then i want to repent. Hear my confession. My confession is that like your counterparts, i also indulged in heinous acts with children, preferrably male ones.. And i loved it.. :lol:

Can i do it again? :hahahaaha:

Stop being a Trinitarian man. That's pagan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I read the link you posted, but it didn't really seem to answer my question. Tell me if I'm missing something. Could you please try to phrase this in some sort of a premise-conclusion argument. As is, the writing style - both for this link and the other TC literature linked to and provided - seems a bit loose and rambling. This is not per se a bad thing in and of itself, but I'm just not getting the point as of now and premise-conclusion arguments should help clarify your position for me as that is how my mind operates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I read the link you posted, but it didn't really seem to answer my question. Tell me if I'm missing something. Could you please try to phrase this in some sort of a premise-conclusion argument. As is, the writing style - both for this link and the other TC literature linked to and provided - seems a bit loose and rambling. This is not per se a bad thing in and of itself, but I'm just not getting the point as of now and premise-conclusion arguments should help clarify your position for me as that is how my mind operates.

Easily explained with Godly logic.

Yes, the Bible was translated into a number of primitive languages, including Aramaic, Amharic, Latin, Russian, etc. That is besides the point though. The important issue here, is the accuracy of these translations. We know for a fact that KJV 1611 is 100% accurate in everything it contains. We do not know that about these "earlier translations." Regarding the mordern translations into foreign languages, they are being translated from English anyway. Just search for the old messages from Kadhim, and find the one where he posted a link to an a Arabic "bible." That "Bible" is published by the same people (the Pope and his satanic buddies) that publish the NIV, and that's what it is, an NIV in Arabic.

The fact of the matter is, that KJV is the only True Bible we have today, and I believe it is much easier to teach English to all the Russians, Arabs, Chinese, Africans, and Latinos, so that they can read the Bible in its original language, instead of wasting time and resourses on translations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Teaching our kids about Jesus and stop giving them video games to keep them quiet "And, ye fathers...bring [children] up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord."

What ?!!?

There is no way I am giving up playing my Gamecube , Xbox , PS2 and Dreamcast..!

:P

The guy giving the sermon sounds like a dolt.....

by the way new research shows that doctors who play video games perform 37% less mistakes in laparascopic surgery and are 27% faster :

http://www.nlgaming.com/nl/asp/id_2364/nl/newsDisp.htm

---River

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

hmmm.....

now that I think of it .....the monoclonius might be too small for Emela-Ntouka......a little too small to be worthy of the name " Elephant Killer".

RA'EM [ VERSION 2/ PACHYRHINOSAURUS] Is this the Real Unicorn?

http://www.toyarchive.com/DinoRiders/DinoR...inosaurus2.html

---River

Edited by River
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

;) LOL. But these are very beautiful toys. Tyco's Dinoriders series as well as the Smithsonian Museum spinoffs are amongst the most beautifully packaged toys ever made.

B)

---River

Salaam

Edited by River
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I'm not sure If the Bible makes it clear that Unicorns were horses. I mean its possible that horses existed with horns or tumour like growths on their head. That is how the myth of the Jackalope was created....the rabbit that had horn like growths on its head.

Most grazing animals, cows, bison, ox, sheep, goats, rams , deer, moose, caribou , have horns on their head. So I can not completely dismiss a horse having a horn on its head. If a whale ( Narwhal) can have a horn on its head, why not a horse?

The reason I cited the dinosaurs, and their descendents has to do with other mention of " Leviathan" and " Behemoth " in the Bible. These creatures have been translated as " Kronosaur" and " Apatosaur/Brontosaurus". Thus, the idea of Dinosaurs in the Bible is not an interpretation that I made up. Perhaps , the " Leviathan" was nothing more than the Crocodile ...and so on....

Salaam

River

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...