ForeverHers,



I wanted to give a quick comment on your verse. Okay, not so quick, but here goes. I'm ready a wonderful book [color:"red"] "New Age Bible Versions: An Exhaustive Documentation exposing the Message, Men & Manuscripts Moving Mankind to the AntiChrist’s One World Religion". [/color]

What I found most compelling about your verse from the NIV is where it lists sexually immoral, I ask you "what is sexually immoral?" The actual Greek texts list porneau, porne, pornos, porneia which means "fornication". Yes, the word used in 21 verses of the New Testament is fornication, but in the NIV and many New Age Bible translations the word has been changed to immorality.

Immorality: State of quality of being immoral
Immoral: Not moral
Fornication: Illicit sexual intercourse on the part of an ummarried person
Morals: from the Latin moralis means "customs, mores" The word itself is detached from any objective standard of right and wrong.

Informal polling of university students between 1985 & 1991 with the question posed "What is immorality?" elicited responses ranging from pollution to political issues. To the question "What is sexual immorality?" student responses ranged from one night stands to various situational scenerios indicative of a highly desensitized & depraved nature of the mores of our current culture. Answers to both questions ALWAYS envoked responses showing the subjective and relative nature of the word "moral".

Revelation 9:21 (King James Version)
Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication , nor of their thefts.

Leviticus 18:30 (King James Version)
Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs , which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I am the LORD your God.

Deuteronomy 12:8 (King James Version)
Ye shall not do after all the things that we do here this day, every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes .

Don't these verses describe our society today?

I'm going to give you a couple of examples for your own to look up. First, you know who Lucifer is? Or so I think you do or do you? The reason I asked is not that I don't believe you are unsure, but your bible doesn't know. There is ONLY one location where Lucifer's name is mentioned. But, the NIV, NASB & other New Age Bibles have taken out Lucifer's name. Isaiah 14:12-17. This is the singular biography of Lucifer.

Compare your NIV with my KJV:

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to he11, to the sides of the pit. They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms; That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?

Now what does your bible say: O morning star, son of the dawn & grave.

The Hebrew is helel, ben shachar
tranlasted correctly means Lucifer, son of the morning. In order to be translated like the NIV, the Hebrew would need to be shachar kokab, ben shachar or morning star, son of the morning (dawn). Kokab means star. The word helel appears nowhere else in the Old Testament.

What is MOST disturbing about this is do you know who the morning star is? Rev. 22:16, 2:28 & II Peter 1:10 identify Jesus as the morning star.

Revelation 22:16 (King James Version)
I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star .

Revelation 2:28 (King James Version)
And I will give him the morning star .

2 Peter 1:19 (King James Version)
We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

Is that scary to you? Well, let me give you the definitions from the New Age Dictionary:

Lucifer: The morning star
The dragon: Great beneficent being; a symbol of wisdom
devil: great strength
sin: Sumerian Moon god
love: sexual passion or desire
Sanat: Lord of the world (Satan scrambled)
the Holy Spirit: a spirit that is whole
Christ: any full recognized person

Second point: Do you know the Lord's prayer? Again, your bible doesn't.

Luke 11:2-4 (King James Version)
And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven , Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.

The parts in bold are missing from the NIV, NASB, Living Bible, etc. The NIV has 64098 less words then the KJV. Why? Well, because it is Satan's agenda to confuse Christians so they will fall away from God, thinking they are following God & be ready to accept the Anti-Christ.

I could give you many, many more examples of either omitting or edited information by editors who follow the New Age.

Just thought you should know.

Want2BStrong - with all due respect, I am NOT getting into a "KJV ONLY" debate or discussion with you.

For the record, in answer to your questions, YES I know all of those answers and I use several different translations for clarity and understanding, including the 1611. If you want to posit for "KJV Only," be my guest, but we might as well argue for the "Original Manuscripts Only" and I don't see where it's all that helpful to the thread.

Perhaps if you want to discuss translations we could do so at some other time. But it is NOT germane, to the thread you pulled the quotation from, on adultery and the church that is being damaged by this tragedy.

To put it bluntly, JESUS never referred to the "Evil One" as Lucifer....but He did call him Satan. So is his "name" Lucifer, Satan, Devil, or whatever? He is the highest angel created by God who is now in opposition to God.

I happen to know him by his several names, including Lucifer. But it is irrelevant beyond knowing that he is in opposition to God and is trying to supplant God. That he is a real, living, being who is masquerading at times as an angel of light in order to deceive, if it were possible, even the elect. That he IS the "god of this world" until the end when he is tossed into the "lake of fire" for all eternity.

Now, can we get back to trying to help this dear sister in Christ?

I wasn't trying to start a debate - just thought you might be interested in knowing. That's all.

I didn't know you've already studied enough to have some understanding on the subject & make up your mind about it. I just thought if you didn't know, you might be interested.

It just disturbs me to know that the editor of the biblical Greek text, B. F. Westcott, used for the translations of the NIV & NASB was a spiritualist. Him & fellow editor, Hort, founded the Ghost Society in the 1850's.

Westcott's own words, "There was a time when it was usual to draw a sharp line between religious and worldly things." He wrote: "That time has happily gone by."

I'm just saying I wouldn't want to be reading a bible based on the translations of a man like that (which, btw, I have a NIV & NKJV before I knew & I grew up with a grandmother using the Living Bible so it wasn't like I was a "KJV only" person looking to reinforce my point of view, I stumbled on that info. I also checked out the differences in my bible.)

Just was trying to be nice. That is why I started another thread - didn't want to take attention off the "dear sister" by highjacking her thread.

I agree. My wife prefers the NKJV, and I use it also. In fact I just bought her a MacArthur Study Bible in the NKJV for Christmas (per her specific request for THAT particular bible). I "prefer" the "poetry" of the old english speech in the KJV, and that is what I grew up with, and that is what I memorized many things, like the Lord's prayer, from.

I like the NIV in many ways because it is much clearer, in today's speech, for many to understand. Especially in talking with unbelievers. I believe CLARITY is needed before their can be belief. If we don't understand what is written, it is hard to accept, let alone believe.

The rest of it, as in Wescott and Hort, and the other manuscripts, the method of translation, etc. is best left to another day as I simply don't have the time for it right now.

In all, though, the PURPOSE of the Scripture is to point us toward God's provision for our salvation...Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Son of Man, and all the various names and titles that describe Him.

God bless.

this is an interesting read:
KJV stuff

looks like everybody has an opinion.

The NIV is a seventh grade reading level with translation targeted towards sentence structure. It's purpose was to make it easy for people to read and understand the Bible and still have a fair degree of translation accuracy as compared to the Living Bible, which was a paraphrase.

If you want even easier reading, "The Message" Bible is one of the newer easy to read translations.

I know some people don't like the different translations, but if it stays true to the gospel and can win people to Christ and shows them the love of Jesus then I hope they read it whatever it might be.

AskMe - I know some people don't like the different translations, but if it stays true to the gospel and can win people to Christ and shows them the love of Jesus then I hope they read it whatever it might be.

Very good point. In that same vein, I wonder how the "KJV onliers" would view a translation in another language? I am specifically thinking about my wife's aunt and uncle who lived with a tribe of Aborigines for some 20 years. The language was spoken, but not written. So they first had to develop a written form of the language, teach the villagers the written representation of their language, and then translate the Scripture into that language. I am boggled by the undertaking and the dedication of translators like that.

For that matter I neither speak nor write Aramaic, Greek, or Hebrew....but I have resources that I can use to examine those sorts of texts that make them understandable to my "English" speech. Those "sources" DO understand the other languages and the meaning and intent of certain words and the context in which they were used.

God bless.

Ask Me,



That is what I believed too - that the translation was easier to read. However, there may be more to it then that.

The NKJV has followed right in line with the NIV, NASB, Living Bible, etc. Here's some interesting info on it.

The NKJV claims to make the "old" KJV "much clearer" by "updating obsolete words" (New King James Version, 1982e. p. 1235)

How about that "obsolete word" - "he11". The NKJV removes the word "he11" 23 times! And how do they make it "much clearer"? By replacing "he11" with "Hades" and "Sheol"! Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines Hades: "the underground abode of the dead in Greek MYTHOLOGY". By making it "much clearer" - they turn your Bible into MYTHOLOGY! Not only that, Hades is not always a place of torment or terror! The Assyrian Hades is an abode of blessedness with silver skies called "Happy Fields". In the satanic New Age Movement, Hades is an intermediate state of purification!

Who in their right mind would think "Hades" or "Sheol" is "up-to-date" and "much clearer" than "he11"?

Matthew 16:18
KJV: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of he11 shall not prevail against it."
NKJV: "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it."
Luke 16:23
KJV: "And in he11 he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom."
NKJV: "And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom."
He11 is removed in 2 Sam. 22:6, Job 11:8, 26:6, Psalm 16:10, 18:5, 86:13, 116:3, Isaiah 5:14, 14:15, 28:15,18, 57:9, Jonah 2:2, Matt. 11:23, 16:18, Luke 10:15, 16:23, Acts 2:27, 31, Rev. 1:18, 6:8, 20:13,14.

Then the NKJV decides that maybe "Hades" should be "grave"! So the NKJV makes 1 Corinthians 15:55 "much clearer" by changing "grave" to "Hades"! ". . . O Hades, where is your victory?" Clear as mud. . .

Another one of those "obsolete words" is "repent". They take it out 44 times! And how does the NKJV make it "much clearer"? In Matthew 21:32 they use "relent". Matthew 27:3 it's "remorseful" Or Romans 11:29 they change "repentance" to "irrevocable".

The term "new testament" is NOT in the NKJV! (see Matt. 26:28, Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20, 1 Cor. 11:25, 2 Cor. 3:6, Heb. 9:15,) The NKJV replaces "new testament" with "new covenant" (ditto NIV, NRSV, RSV, NASV). An obvious assault at the written word!

The word "damned", "damnation" is NOT in the NKJV! They make it "much clearer" by replacing it with "condemn" (ditto NIV, RSV, NRSV, NASV). "Condemned" is NO WHERE NEAR AS SERIOUS as "damned"! Damned is eternal! One can be "condemned" and not "damned". Romans 14:22 says, ". . . Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth." Webster defines "condemned": to declare to be wrong, but the much more serious and eternal "damn": "to condemn to ******".

The word "devils" (the singular, person called the "devil" is) is NOT in the NKJV! Replaced with the "transliterated" Greek word "demon" (ditto NIV, RSV, NRSV, NASV). The Theosophical Dictionary describes demon as: ". . . it has a meaning identical with that of 'god', 'angel' or 'genius'". Even Vines Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words (p.157) defines "demon" as: "an inferior deity, WHETHER GOOD OR BAD". Webster defines "demon" as: "divinity, spirit, an attendant power or spirit", but "devil" as: "the personal supreme spirit of EVIL. . ."

In 2 Timothy 2:15, the NKJV (like the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV) remove that "obsolete" word - "study"! The only time you're told to "study" your Bible. AND THEY ZAP IT! Why don't they want you to "study" your Bible? Maybe they don't want you to look too close - you might find out what they've ACTUALLY done to your Bible! The "real" KJV is the only English Bible in the world that instructs you to "study" your Bible!

That "obsolete" word "virtue" is replaced with "power" in Mark 5:30, Luke 6:19, 8:46! How does anybody confuse "virtue" with "power"? Simple - by being "bosom-buddies" with the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV! That's what they did!

One of the most absurd changes ever made is changing the word "servant" to "slave"! The NKJV in Romans 6:22, reads: "But now having been set FREE from sin, and having become SLAVES OF GOD. . ." The NKJV, in 1 Corinthians 7:22, calls the Christian, "Christ's slave". Talk about a contradiction! John 8:36 says, "If the Son therefore shall make you FREE, YE SHALL BE FREE INDEED." But isn't a Christian supposed to serve? Yes, in love. Not as a slave! Galatians 5:13 explains it, perfectly: "For, brethren, ye have been called unto LIBERTY;(not slavery!) only use not LIBERTY for an occasion to the flesh, but BY LOVE SERVE one another."

In order to "harmonize" with the satanic New Age Movement (and of course the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!), the NKJV changes "end of the WORLD" to "end of the AGE"! And in it's no longer the "WORLD to come" but "AGE to come". The New Age Movement teaches a series of ages (hence the name: New AGE). See Matthew 12:32, 13:39, 13:40, 13:49, 24:3, 28:20, Mark 10:30, Luke 13:30, 20:34,35, 1 Cor 1:21.

The New Age Movement and the occult are longing for one called the Maitreya. The Bible calls him the Anti-Christ. New Ager's refer to him as the "the Coming One" - AND SO DOES THE NKJV! In Luke 7:19, 20 (see also Matt 11:3) John told his disciples to ask Jesus: "Are You THE COMING ONE. . ." In the "The Great Invocation", a "prayer" highly reverenced among New Agers and chanted to "invoke" the Maitreya, says, "Let Light and Love and Power and Death, Fulfil the purpose of the Coming One."

And to REALLY show their sympathy with the satanic New Age Movement - BELIEVE IT OR NOT - in Acts 17:29 the New Age NKJV changes "Godhead" to "Divine Nature"! ( ditto NIV, NASV)

And if you think the NKJV just "innocently" updated the "obsolete words", removed the "thee's and thou's" - here's what the translators proudly admit: "IT IS CLEAR that this revision REQUIRED more than the dropping of "-eth" endings, removing, "thee's" and "thou's," and updating obsolete words." (The New King James Version, 1982e. p. 1235)

How does someone EXPLAIN those changes? When you make those type of changes, you CHANGE the gospel of Jesus Christ. There are SO many more changes too that in essence take away from the deity of Christ & what he has done for us. Maybe our generation isn't fooled at this point but what about your children's generation that never sees another bible translation will "he11" "repent" "servant" "study" "Godhead", etc.????

What will they believe? (Also, check out the mobius on the front of the NKJV)
http://www.av1611.org/nkjv.html

The NIV, NKJV, NASB, etc. are NOT translations (meaning translating word for word), they are dynamic equivolences (which means it's not exactly word for word). This makes the versions subjective on the part of the translator who decides what the meaning is vs. giving us exactly what was said. I personally just don't like the idea of some person deciding for me the meaning - I just want them to do what their job is - translation! What they have done with the NIV, NKJV, NASB & others is NOT translation.

same goes for KJV my freind

i refer to the link i posted earlier

wow

Biggles,

I read that page, but what is most curious to me is that I don't see where any of the problems that page finds with the KJV takes away from the deity of Christ, he11, etc. There are many, many more changes that "water down" what Jesus did for us in the new versions & start using the New Age language. Why? I believe those who follow the Anti-Christ will be holding a Bible in their hands praising "the Coming One".

If any of you question this, I just asked you to pray about it & I will pray as well.

It shocks me that the information I posted here isn't compelling to you. When I began reading the Lucifer was taken out & morning star put in it's place, it ran chills up my spine.

When I saw the butchered Lord's prayer where the very important aspects were removed, again, more chills.

To read that & still defend the New Age Versions seems to me to want to hold on to them despite the evidence. Are you telling me that the name Lucifer NEVER existed? And references to Heaven & evil in the Lord's prayer didn't exist either? I will leave it in God's hands!

the same people painted jesus as a pale white guy.

seems to me they were no less 'human' and 'influenced' than anyone else whos worked on a translation.

anyway...

Want2BStrong, calm down, dear lady. Let's not get sidetracked and dogmatic to the point where we lose sight of the only reason we HAVE for the Scriptures, to reveal God's will and His provision of Jesus Christ as the propitiation of our sins. Let's NOT get overly involved in "words" and how they are translated into our language when what we are looking for is Christ, and Christ only.

To "prove" my point, if you want one, and ONLY to illustrate the "meaningless" of strife over the "correct" translation and spelling of a CONCEPT (he11, hades, etc.) let me ask you what God's CORRECT and ONLY name is?

God has said to Moses "I Am." The Scripture records it is the tetragrammaton, YHWH. There WERE no vowels in the original Hebrew language. Later on the vowels were added and we get "Yahweh" and "Jehovah." Are either of them "correct" translations of the YHWH? Elohim, Adonai, El Shaddai, etc., are all descriptive names for God. Does it "matter" or does it matter what God Himself thinks? God, in the final analysis, looks at a man's (or woman's) heart.

What IS needed in order for someone to be saved? Is it an understanding of He11, or Heaven? Is it the "right words?" Or is it conviction that THEY are a sinner in need of a Savior who is Jesus Christ? Does it matter if one believes in water baptism, or not, by immersion or by sprinkling, or if the rapture is pre, mid, or post tribulation? Does it matter that the KJV traslates the animal that swallowed Jonah as a "whale" (a mammal) rather than a "great fish" (not a mammal)?

In the final analysis, all that matters is our relationship with Christ. The rest will sort itself out according to God's will.

Now if one wants to argue that Jesus is NOT the Christ and is NOT the Son of God and is NOT God, and there ARE translations out there like that (such as the New World Translation), I will stand shoulder to shoulder with you in protesting the willful changing of the MEANING and PERSON of Christianity.

God bless.

I'm calm. I understand that I can only give information, but I cannot change hearts, only God can do that.



Interesting point! It is God's WORD , right? Doesn't it matter what the words are? I would think God would call it something else if the WORD wasn't important (like message).

Mark 4:15
And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.

The Bible tells you what Satan is going to do. He will take away the word. So, does it matter what words are used. YES! Remember, the NIV has 64098 less words then the KJV - has Satan taketh away the word?




If all names happen to have a meaning, the name of the Creator of the universe must have a very special meaning. Even more, God reveals Himself by His deeds and by His names; that is why the Bible uses different names, because only one name wouldn't be enough to say everything that God is.

El , is used 200 times, and Elohim , which is the plural of El, is used 2,500 times. This is the first name the Bible uses referring to God as the Creator of the whole universe, as One who is over everything, One who has the power and authority over everything. It is used frequently in plural as it were several, not because God is several but because that is a way to refer to God as somebody magnificent. On the cross, Jesus called God by that name, as we read in Mark 15:34.

Yahveh , appears in the Bible 6,800 times. This is the proper name of God, this is the name which says what God is, who He is, because this name means I AM. When Moses told God: If the children of Israel ask me, Who sent you to us? what shall I say to them? God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And He said: "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, "I AM has sent me to you" (Exodus 3:14). God is the One who exists by Himself, the One who does not depend on anybody else to be: HE IS.

Jehovah is an incorrect translation of the Hebrew name Yahveh. The children of Israel were very respectful when pronouncing the name of God, being afraid of breaking the commandment of Exodus 24:16; thus, on the consonants of the name Yahveh, they put the vowels of Adonai (another name of God which means Lord), and, when they read the combination of those consonants with these vowels, they did not pronounce Yahveh but Jehovah, a name that never existed. The translators of the Bible in the XVII century, ignoring this fact, translated simple Jehovah, instead of Yahveh. Jehovah is not, therefore, a Hebrew name of God; His real name is Yahveh.

Adonai, used 360 times. This name, as we just said, means Lord; God is The Lord. This means that He has power over all mankind and the whole universe, and He deserves our reverence and service. This is a name that says what God is, and His relationship with us, His creatures: He is The Lord.

Shaddai or El Shaddai , means God Almighty, Sustainer, and was the name given to God before the name of Yahveh was revealed to Moses, as we read in Exodus 6:3: I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name Lord I was not known to them.

Eloah, which means The Only One, The Incomparable, The Truthful, as we read in Isaiah 44:8: Is there a God besides Me? Indeed there is no other Rock; I know not one. This name is found in particular in the poetic books of the Bible; Job uses it 57 times. Eloah means also Dread, in the sense that we must "fear" God, that is, that reverence is due to God; this is the meaning of the fear of God.

Yahveh of Sabaoth, which is 279 times and means Lord of Hosts; that is, that God has "hosts," probably of angels, who serve Him. This concept of God with "armies" was very familiar to the children of Israel who lived in war all the time.

It matters to me!!! It should matter to you.

The following is from Sam Gipp's The Answer Book.

QUESTION: Shouldn't we emphasize love for Jesus Christ rather than squabbling over Bible translations?

ANSWER: There is no better way to emphasize our love for Jesus Christ than to jealously and zealously guard His word.

EXPLANATION: You can show your "love" for the Lord Jesus Christ in two ways.

1. Any method that YOU deem as sincere and valid in your own sight. (See Lev. 10:1-3.)

2. You can endeavor to keep Christ's Scriptural admonitions as strictly as possible. (This tends to be a lifetime endeavor.)

In John 14:23 one of the identifying marks of anyone who loves Him is that they will "keep my words."

You may say, "That just means to keep the things that He said to do." BUT, the fact is that no "love" is required to keep His sayings as evidenced in John 8:51,52. Love is required to keep His "words."

Again an argument may be made that, "That just referred to the original Greek." But alas, such a statement only leads you into a deeper, more deadly trap. The following Scriptural example will explain.

In the book of Jonah, it is recorded that Jonah, while running from God, is swallowed by "a great fish" (Jonah 1:17).

In Matthew 12:40 the "great fish" is identified by Jesus Christ as a "whale. " (We are not arguing genetics here; we are arguing the value of Christ's "w-o-r-d-s .")

Strangely, at this very scripture, those who claim to be able to "love" Christ and correct His Bible steal the words right out of His mouth.

Every new translation changes Jesus' word "whale" to "fish." This is done because they learned in their seventh grade biology class that "a whale is not a fish." Faced not only with a Bible that has a seeming contradiction (not with itself but with their seventh grade biology teacher) but also with a Saviour who is so uninformed and uneducated as to not know that "a whale is not a fish," they panic. They rush to Matthew 12:40 and remove the word "whale" from both the Bible (their "authority in all matters of faith and practice") and from Jesus' lips (their "Lord" and Saviour.)

The Greek word used for "whale" in Matthew 12:40 is "ketos. " The Greek word for "fish" is "ichthus." They are NOT the same. Jesus used the Greek word "ichthus" in several places in Scripture, such as: Matthew 7:10 and 17:28. Certainly He could have used it in Matthew 12:40 if He so desired.

The fundamental Bible "enhancer" overlooks two monumental Scriptural truths.

First he overlooks the fact that Jonah was swallowed by a "great fish" that was specially "prepared" by God. It should be noted here that Adam gave names to all living creatures but one. God gave whales their name in Genesis 1:21 BEFORE Adam named the rest of creation in Genesis 2:19,20. That means the whale had a "pre-destination" (Gen. 1:21) and a "pre-destination" (Jonah 1:17) from the foundation of the earth is NOT something even a Bible corrector should take lightly.

The second truth ignored by God's little "helper" is that by changing "whale" to "fish" in Jesus' statement of Matthew 12:40 he is guilty of breaking Jesus' admonition of John 14:23 to "keep my w-o-r-d-s." ("Correcting" the Bible is like "treading" quicksand. The harder you kick, the faster you sink.)

Thus the authors of the New American Standard Version, the New International Version, the New King James Verslon and the rest of the new translations are not only wrong in their translation of "ketos" but in their defiance of Jesus mandate

So, when Jesus says one thing (whale) and your pastor, parent, or professor says another (fish) you are bound by LOVE for Christ to reject man's opinion and embrace and defend Jesus' w-o-r-d-s.

Okay, one more time I'm going to state that I have neither the time nor the inclination to begin a theological debate and/or discussion with you over your preferred translation. Perhaps if I can find the time I will post for you a little about the translation of the New International Version, which you apparantly distain.

Personally, I have NO problem if you prefer the KJV. As I said, for the beauty and poetry of the prose, I, too, prefer the KKV a lot of times. But more than that I want CLARITY of message so that it is understandable. We don't speak much 16th or 17th Century English anymore. To that end, I would state that NO "version" is needed to witness. One can live and one can speak for Christ, and Christ alone. NOTHING else matters, in the final analysis, when it comes to Salvation of lost souls, and the reconciliation with God. But, "it is written," certainly does help to get it out of the realm of "just my opinion" and to give us God's will when faced with difficulties, trials, and tribulations, not mention the occasional talking, teaching, and instructing, with others.



Uh huh. Hence your continuing attempts to argue of KJV only.


I am always interested in a good discussion when I have the time. I don't right now, because I know, having been involved in them before, how lengthy and time consuming they can get.


Uh huh. But you might want to check into this a little further. The Westcott and Hort text was the primary source for the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witness' and the Watchtower Society, not for the New International Version. But worse than that, NONE of the translators used by the Jehovah's Witnesses in making the New World Translation were scholars in Greek and Hebrew, and routinely violated their own translation "rules."

In addition, the Westcott and Hort text was also the primary source for the English Revised and the American Standard Versions. Furthermore the Jehovah's Witnesses used the King James Version and the American Standard Version for some 50 years before publishing their New World Translation. So it would seem that in the eyes of the JW's, NO prior version was an "adequate and accurate translation," even though they themselves used them as the "Word of God."

So tell me, are the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Massoretic Text, etc., etc., inferior to the KJV? Translations ARE just that, translations of the texts. And guess what, they didn't even have sources like the Dead Sea Scrolls for comparison when the 1611 version was written.

While accuracy in translation is essential, slavish devotion to "word for word" translation is not. It is the to be maintained whenever possible, but when the "word" has different meanings, context must also come into play for the best conveyance of the original intent for the usage of the word.

God bless.

Mmmm...here's the downfall of literal compliance. The WORDS do not matter if the MESSAGE is preserved. It is God's MESSAGE that is of supreme importance.

I can assure you that the veriosn of scripture that Peter and Paul used had very, very different words.

It should also go with out saying that a Russian Bible has very different words from the KJV.

The arguments for the KJV only are very similar to those used by the Catholic church in the middle ages to keep the scriptures in Latin.

I have faith that God has preserved the message He intends for me to get...and He helps me get that message through the power of the Holy Spirit.

As of late, I find that I cannot ascribe to a faith that places the authority of the letter above that of the Lawgiver Himself...and I'm seeing more and more of this.

Christians do not worship a book or any sacred writing. We have to be careful, lest we make scripture an idol in itself.

Excellent. I wholeheartedly agree.

ForeverHers

Well, like I said, I'll pray about it & you do the same. Only God can lead us to the right answers.

http://www.geocities.com/truedino/kjvissue.htm