BATTLE TALK ~ Battle Royale IV - JALTUS vs. s9s27s54
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
bill betzler
New member
9-4-02 General Theology-Questions for KJV
Y
Yxboom
Guest
agape tou theou:
Romans 8:39 = “God loves us”
1 John 5:3 = “We love God”
Romans 8:39 = “God loves us”
1 John 5:3 = “We love God”
"How is saying that "only the originals are inspired" lying?"
Because there is NO evidence to suggest this is the truth, it is pulled out of thin air.
Only inspired scripture is inerrant, and visa versa. Jaltus was caught, and he tries to squirm his way out. You really have to be smart in order to not get caught when you lie.
Because there is NO evidence to suggest this is the truth, it is pulled out of thin air.
Only inspired scripture is inerrant, and visa versa. Jaltus was caught, and he tries to squirm his way out. You really have to be smart in order to not get caught when you lie.
GrayPilgrim
Wielder of the Flame of Arnor
THERE YOU GO AGAIN JALTUS CONFUSING THE ISSUE WITH THE FACTS!!!!
It's funny that someone brings up the issue of scribal techniques, Emmanuel Tov in his "Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible" Comments how those "fail-safes" are later additions. Moreover, these scribes admit to at least 11 (Zech 2:12; Mal 1:13; 1 Sam 3:13; Job 7:20; Hab 1:12; Jer 2:11; Ps 106: 20; Num 11:15; 1Kgs 12:16; Ezek 8:17; Num 12:12) modifications of the text to "make sense" or to cover up what they thought were blasphemous concepts. This is the Massoretic Text not WH or NA we're talking of the OT with the OCD Scribes who counted every letter of each book to prevent additions. These changes were made prior to the time of Christ, hence the divergence between the Targumim, Samaritan Pentateuch, LXX(s) [there is no one LXX, are we talking of the Theodotian, Aquilla, Lucian, Symmachus), the various Dead Sea MSS, Syriac, Amhardic, Old Latin, Vulgate, Coptic, and Masoretic (Aleppo Codex, Cairo Geniza, Karaite Synagogue, Leningradensis). None of these agree, [granted most of the differences are of spelling and very few make any substantive difference on meaning] but the arrogance of English speaking people that only their version is inspired. pish posh!
BTW Tov wrote his book in Modern Hebrew so he was not too interested in KJV or any other text.
Here is an example of a Tiqqune haSopherim--
Merebaal (man of Baal)-->Mephibosheth (shameful thing)
You know Saul's son, in 2 Samuel (which by the way is the most textually corrupt book in the OT, apparently Antiochus Epiphanies tried to eradicate it, but the Lord was able to preserve a witness of his goodness and faithfulness to David, despite a few scroll burnings).
On the issue of the manner of translation as Judah ben Ilai said in the Talmud, Kiddushin 49a:
So why does Jaltus refer to the innerancy of the autographs because no copy is every perfect. Even from a Xerox machine there are imperfections. Tov points out that in Joyce's Ulysses it took multiple editions and multiple corrections to get it right. Or more germane to the topic of the foibles of printers, let us not forget the Sinful Bible, you know the little oops where "not" was left out of an edition of the KJV and so we get "Thou Shall Commit Adultery" (sic) and (sick).
BTW The KJV is called the Authorized because some Dutch printer thought he could make a few more bucks off a Bible called "Authorized". It has nothing to do with royal sanction or church sanction. Just recall the Puritans were suspect of the Catholic nature of the KJV and when the Pilgrims journeyed to Plymouth, MA there was a ban on the KJV aboard the Mayflower. So be careful in your history.
Oh, yeah, why is it that the apostle named James and the book of the Bible titled James, when the Greek of the name is "Iakobos? Hmmm...the sainted translators wouldn't be attempting to curry the favor of a Catholic Monarch named...James, would they now?
--------------
I forgot the word "too" in the quote
It's funny that someone brings up the issue of scribal techniques, Emmanuel Tov in his "Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible" Comments how those "fail-safes" are later additions. Moreover, these scribes admit to at least 11 (Zech 2:12; Mal 1:13; 1 Sam 3:13; Job 7:20; Hab 1:12; Jer 2:11; Ps 106: 20; Num 11:15; 1Kgs 12:16; Ezek 8:17; Num 12:12) modifications of the text to "make sense" or to cover up what they thought were blasphemous concepts. This is the Massoretic Text not WH or NA we're talking of the OT with the OCD Scribes who counted every letter of each book to prevent additions. These changes were made prior to the time of Christ, hence the divergence between the Targumim, Samaritan Pentateuch, LXX(s) [there is no one LXX, are we talking of the Theodotian, Aquilla, Lucian, Symmachus), the various Dead Sea MSS, Syriac, Amhardic, Old Latin, Vulgate, Coptic, and Masoretic (Aleppo Codex, Cairo Geniza, Karaite Synagogue, Leningradensis). None of these agree, [granted most of the differences are of spelling and very few make any substantive difference on meaning] but the arrogance of English speaking people that only their version is inspired. pish posh!
BTW Tov wrote his book in Modern Hebrew so he was not too interested in KJV or any other text.
Here is an example of a Tiqqune haSopherim--
Merebaal (man of Baal)-->Mephibosheth (shameful thing)
You know Saul's son, in 2 Samuel (which by the way is the most textually corrupt book in the OT, apparently Antiochus Epiphanies tried to eradicate it, but the Lord was able to preserve a witness of his goodness and faithfulness to David, despite a few scroll burnings).
On the issue of the manner of translation as Judah ben Ilai said in the Talmud, Kiddushin 49a:
So why does Jaltus refer to the innerancy of the autographs because no copy is every perfect. Even from a Xerox machine there are imperfections. Tov points out that in Joyce's Ulysses it took multiple editions and multiple corrections to get it right. Or more germane to the topic of the foibles of printers, let us not forget the Sinful Bible, you know the little oops where "not" was left out of an edition of the KJV and so we get "Thou Shall Commit Adultery" (sic) and (sick).
BTW The KJV is called the Authorized because some Dutch printer thought he could make a few more bucks off a Bible called "Authorized". It has nothing to do with royal sanction or church sanction. Just recall the Puritans were suspect of the Catholic nature of the KJV and when the Pilgrims journeyed to Plymouth, MA there was a ban on the KJV aboard the Mayflower. So be careful in your history.
Oh, yeah, why is it that the apostle named James and the book of the Bible titled James, when the Greek of the name is "Iakobos? Hmmm...the sainted translators wouldn't be attempting to curry the favor of a Catholic Monarch named...James, would they now?
--------------
I forgot the word "too" in the quote
Last edited:
Explosived
New member
"AIDS" (Alexandrian Idiots Degrading Scripture).
"AIDS" (Alexandrian Idiots Degrading Scripture).
Apostasy - To profess to believe what you do NOT believe.
When I read the AV I read it with the utmost confidence that what I am reading is the PURE, unadulterated words of God, exactly as God intended for me to have them. If they disagree with "the Greek text", I simply discard "the Greek text."
The apostates RETAIN the Greek text, without believing it...
and then...
USE the English text without believing it either. ($$$)
"The love of money Is the root of all evll"
(King James ONLY: 1 Tim. 6:10).
"AIDS" (Alexandrian Idiots Degrading Scripture).
Apostasy - To profess to believe what you do NOT believe.
When I read the AV I read it with the utmost confidence that what I am reading is the PURE, unadulterated words of God, exactly as God intended for me to have them. If they disagree with "the Greek text", I simply discard "the Greek text."
The apostates RETAIN the Greek text, without believing it...
and then...
USE the English text without believing it either. ($$$)
"The love of money Is the root of all evll"
(King James ONLY: 1 Tim. 6:10).
Brother Vinny
Active member
AIDS! LOL!
"Authorized Is Damned Spurious"
"Authorized Is Damned Spurious"
drdeutsch
New member
Sorry I don't post so often: My computer is broken until I can get a new case, put everything back in there, and probably buy a new hard drive. Anywho (that word annoys Jaltus, does it? 
, I can only use the computer at the University, and that in between my schedule.
Ian Day,
Standard American English is the standard for America, not England. England has it's own standard. Although the British probably believe that American English is "corrupt" or not as "pure" as British English, you would probably be suprised to know that American English has exercised and will continue to excercise great influence over British English, i.e. Changes in American English cause changes in British English. cf. The Origins and Development of the English Language, 4th Ed. by Thomas Pyles and John Algeo. Last chapter, or maybe 2nd to last chapter, I think.
Also, "ain't" is a word. It used to be "An't," which was a contraction of "am not." Therefore, it's completely okay to say "Ain't I ..." and sure is much more grammatical than "Aren't I..."!! For instance, you would never say "I are going to the store" so why would you say "Aren't I going to store?"
Looks like this topic is pretty heated. probably would have made a good team battle royale topic.
God bless,
Dr. Deutsch
, I can only use the computer at the University, and that in between my schedule.Ian Day,
Standard American English is the standard for America, not England. England has it's own standard. Although the British probably believe that American English is "corrupt" or not as "pure" as British English, you would probably be suprised to know that American English has exercised and will continue to excercise great influence over British English, i.e. Changes in American English cause changes in British English. cf. The Origins and Development of the English Language, 4th Ed. by Thomas Pyles and John Algeo. Last chapter, or maybe 2nd to last chapter, I think.
Also, "ain't" is a word. It used to be "An't," which was a contraction of "am not." Therefore, it's completely okay to say "Ain't I ..." and sure is much more grammatical than "Aren't I..."!! For instance, you would never say "I are going to the store" so why would you say "Aren't I going to store?"
Looks like this topic is pretty heated. probably would have made a good team battle royale topic.
God bless,
Dr. Deutsch
P
Pilgrimagain
Guest
So they really do belive that Paul and all the boys wrote the Bible in English. That's just funny.
That last comment makes one wonder not about issues of salvation but rather issues of wit. "If the greek contradicts the KJV I disregard the Greek." (Which assumes you knew greek in the first place.) That is simply laughable and there is nothing anyone can do to counter such delberate thickness.
I say, the man is obviously Christian because he calls on the name of Christ for salvation. Let's leave it there. There is no way to change a mans IQ, so just be satisfued with his salvation.
That last comment makes one wonder not about issues of salvation but rather issues of wit. "If the greek contradicts the KJV I disregard the Greek." (Which assumes you knew greek in the first place.) That is simply laughable and there is nothing anyone can do to counter such delberate thickness.
I say, the man is obviously Christian because he calls on the name of Christ for salvation. Let's leave it there. There is no way to change a mans IQ, so just be satisfued with his salvation.
P
Pilgrimagain
Guest
This just occured to me. What the KJVO's are really saying is that as long as it is in the KJV it is inspired of God and only what is in the KJV is inspired of God. The also believe that inerrant=inspired. This being the case, anyone could add to the KJV anything they wanted and it would have to be considered the inspired inerrant word of God. As long as the title remains KJV, everything goes.
Explosived
New member
Preserved perfect, without error or contradiction
Preserved perfect, without error or contradiction
I do not believe that the King James Bible is a new inspiration. "Inspiration" starts with a blank sheet of paper, a man of God, and God. I am saying that the Authorized Version is every word of God that was in the original autographs, preserved to this day. "Preservation" starts with God's manuscripts, a man of God, and God. The end result of both is the same: the perfect Word and words of God. It only makes sense.
Preserved perfect, without error or contradiction
I do not believe that the King James Bible is a new inspiration. "Inspiration" starts with a blank sheet of paper, a man of God, and God. I am saying that the Authorized Version is every word of God that was in the original autographs, preserved to this day. "Preservation" starts with God's manuscripts, a man of God, and God. The end result of both is the same: the perfect Word and words of God. It only makes sense.
textman
New member
The Most Inspired Version
The Most Inspired Version
+
/ Topic > Re: Dual authorities / 30Sept02 /
.
> On 28Sept Explosived dared to manifest his vile thoughts and
> subversive opinions in a most highly offensive manner thusly:
> I believe Inspiration and Preservation are done by God. I
> have ONE final authority, the KJV. I have more respect for
> the man who says the NIV is Gods word than someone who
> runs to the Greek, trying to get you to accept THEM as final
> authorities.
.
Upon the reading of which the textman was hugely miffed and
thus sayeth: Since I see that many of the cyber-saints are
genuinely interested in, concerned about, and/or confused by
this tangled problem of inspired translations, I will now
attempt to clarify the matter somewhat. Firstly, observe
please the following verses:
.
"And for this very reason apply all diligence to lavishly
equip your faith with courageous and effective excellence,
your excellence with practical knowledge, your knowledge with
self-control and restraint, your self-control with patience
and endurance, your endurance with practical religion, your
religion with brotherly love, and your brotherly love with
divine love. For when these things are abounding within you,
they will make you effective and productive in the knowledge
of our Lord Jesus Christ." -- 2Peter 1:5-8 / Prophet Version
.
Now I will invite anyone to find ANY published English version
that is better than this one. I suspect that you will not be
able to find even one superior translation because all the
popular versions are flawed in one way or another. Therefore
it ought to be clear to the reader that the most inspired
translation is the *BEST* translation! :thumb:
.
And the best translation is the one that most accurately and
faithfully expresses the inspired author's actual and intended
thoughts in such a way that these thoughts are simply and
effectively transmitted to the reader.
.
Thus translation is not merely a question of changing words
from one language to another (ie. Greek to English), but it
also involves the more intangible element of literary quality.
That is, the translator must also be able to communicate the
emotional tone and personal energy of the author's vision.
.
And it is at this highly subjective level of interpersonal
communication that most translators err by inserting their
own emotions and assumptions in favor of the author's (which
they usually assume to be identical with their own).
.
And this is why all modern English translations are flawed:
because the translators lack enough respect for the author
so as to allow him to speak in a way that allows his own
emotions and assumptions to empower and enliven the words
and images he uses.
.
A good version of any given text is thus one wherein the
translation AND the translator are as transparent as possible.
By this yardstick, therefore, the KJV-only debate is clearly
seen to be a non-issue; for while the KJV can be accused of
many things, transparency is NOT one of them!
.
- the almost transparent one - textman ;>
.
P.S. "Most of what is divine escapes recognition
through unbelief." -- Heraclitus
x
The Most Inspired Version
+
/ Topic > Re: Dual authorities / 30Sept02 /
.
> On 28Sept Explosived dared to manifest his vile thoughts and
> subversive opinions in a most highly offensive manner thusly:
> I believe Inspiration and Preservation are done by God. I
> have ONE final authority, the KJV. I have more respect for
> the man who says the NIV is Gods word than someone who
> runs to the Greek, trying to get you to accept THEM as final
> authorities.
.
Upon the reading of which the textman was hugely miffed and
thus sayeth: Since I see that many of the cyber-saints are
genuinely interested in, concerned about, and/or confused by
this tangled problem of inspired translations, I will now
attempt to clarify the matter somewhat. Firstly, observe
please the following verses:
.
"And for this very reason apply all diligence to lavishly
equip your faith with courageous and effective excellence,
your excellence with practical knowledge, your knowledge with
self-control and restraint, your self-control with patience
and endurance, your endurance with practical religion, your
religion with brotherly love, and your brotherly love with
divine love. For when these things are abounding within you,
they will make you effective and productive in the knowledge
of our Lord Jesus Christ." -- 2Peter 1:5-8 / Prophet Version
.
Now I will invite anyone to find ANY published English version
that is better than this one. I suspect that you will not be
able to find even one superior translation because all the
popular versions are flawed in one way or another. Therefore
it ought to be clear to the reader that the most inspired
translation is the *BEST* translation! :thumb:
.
And the best translation is the one that most accurately and
faithfully expresses the inspired author's actual and intended
thoughts in such a way that these thoughts are simply and
effectively transmitted to the reader.
.
Thus translation is not merely a question of changing words
from one language to another (ie. Greek to English), but it
also involves the more intangible element of literary quality.
That is, the translator must also be able to communicate the
emotional tone and personal energy of the author's vision.
.
And it is at this highly subjective level of interpersonal
communication that most translators err by inserting their
own emotions and assumptions in favor of the author's (which
they usually assume to be identical with their own).
.
And this is why all modern English translations are flawed:
because the translators lack enough respect for the author
so as to allow him to speak in a way that allows his own
emotions and assumptions to empower and enliven the words
and images he uses.
.
A good version of any given text is thus one wherein the
translation AND the translator are as transparent as possible.
By this yardstick, therefore, the KJV-only debate is clearly
seen to be a non-issue; for while the KJV can be accused of
many things, transparency is NOT one of them!
.
- the almost transparent one - textman ;>
.
P.S. "Most of what is divine escapes recognition
through unbelief." -- Heraclitus
x
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
LOLOL!!! If anyone doubts that just take a look at BRIII
Knight, because I am on AOL and am your perpetual problem child, I cannot vote, so please, will you cast my vote for Jaltus on my behalf? Thank you.
Gotcha covered!Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
LOLOL!!! If anyone doubts that just take a look at BRIII
Knight, because I am on AOL and am your perpetual problem child, I cannot vote, so please, will you cast my vote for Jaltus on my behalf? Thank you.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Thanks Knight!!!
Y
Yxboom
Guest
Re: Ha!
Re: Ha!
Often 1013 has said to his women, "Stuff it". I once overheard him having an argument and said that if she wasn't gonna start listening and being obedient and submissive like a good girl should...it was over!
His mom sent him to his room.
Re: Ha!
Not a good idea.Originally posted by AVmetro
I did not know this:
Now I can tell my mother to "stuff it!!"
Often 1013 has said to his women, "Stuff it". I once overheard him having an argument and said that if she wasn't gonna start listening and being obedient and submissive like a good girl should...it was over!
His mom sent him to his room.
- Status