Battle Royale XIV discussion thread

MarleneJ

New member
I am a new member, and just read through the full debate, but not this thread. (So forgive me if I repeat what others have said! 100+ pages was a bit much for me!)

I am a person who has read 10 translations of the Bible over 50 times, plus French, some Spanish, the NT in Greek, and a lot of the OT in Hebrew. But, because of the archaic grammar, obsolete words, I have never been able to get through the KJV, although I have memorized many key verses in KJV, from my Sunday School days in the early 1960's.

So I did come into the debate a bit biased, (as an understatement). I have also done translations of the Hebrew and compared them to KJV for Hebrew classes (we compared to many versions, ESV most often came up as closest to the Hebrew!) and in my translating Greek, I can point to small errors in the KJV on almost any page.

Ok, so I am not biased, but rather have completely rejected the KJO claims. Although, I believe in its time, it was a crucial translation which greatly impacted the western world for immense good! One should never argue against the historical value of the KJV. I have also debated KJ Onlyists, and set them packing on a number of occasion, but from a much different angle than the tact that Bob Enyart and Will Duffy took.

My argument has always been how badly the KJV has been translated, compared to the newer versions. Besides being wooden, and claiming to be a word for word translation (which would be impossible with Greek, and in many cases for the Hebrew) the KJV simply makes mistakes.

I thought that would be the approach here, but I can see the value of using the actual earlier Bible with margin notes, to show the error corrections, especially because although the Middle English script was hard to read, it was certainly easier for people without a background in Koine Greek to read, and to transliterate into a more modern English.

It was a novel approach, and I was greatly rewarded by this discussion. I have read White's book on the KJO Controversy, and I did not see much overlap on the original posts by the anti-side. ("Anti" as in the KJV as the only "perfect" version!) I commend the scholarship and research that the Enyart-Duffy team did, too! Esp, the photos which showed the notations in the margins for changes.

It might be nice to do a similar debate, but use the Greek and Hebrew to show major translation mistakes. I also understand very few Greek manuscripts, and much later ones were used, which were very corrupt to translate the KJV.. I would love to see a few more photos of the Byzantine Greek, complete with their margin notations, which were incorporated into the next generation of manuscripts, resulting in the very corrupt versions the KJV used.

Kostenburger et al, in their text "Going Deeper with New Testament Greek" gets into this in the introduction and it is a good piece towards the effort to finally and completely put this KJV Only fallacy to rest, once and for all!

Congrats to Enyart-Duffy for an excellent job. My condolences to the loser, Will Kinney, who parroted things, and yes, looked very similar to the Mormons I had once on my door, claiming Joseph Smith to be the "final prophet, " or whatever he was. I appreciated that analogy from the winning side!

And thanks for letting me post this so much later, and the discussion not being closed to further replies!
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I am a new member, and just read through the full debate,


**snipped for brevity**

Welcome!

I am sure that anything you want to post right here in this thread will be appreciated for further study.
Or you can start a brand new thread of your own in the open religion forum here at TOL.
 

Bick

New member
The KJV was not translated fresh from the Greek Scriptures available, but was a compromise of the various English Versions at that time. In fact, the Great Bible was the one most copied.
The most literal translation that I use, and everyone can, are Young's Literal Translation,and Rotherham's Emphatic Version.
 

David Buzulak

New member
Saved or being saved?

Saved or being saved?

Yes. Perhaps eventually someone will make a list of the concessions/admissions made by the KJO side in the debate. Will Duffy and I would love to post that in the debate.

- Bob E.

To Bob E. Are you being saved? NIV, NKJV, NASB, HCSB

Or are you saved? KJV
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
To Bob E. Are you being saved? NIV, NKJV, NASB, HCSB

Or are you saved? KJV
Hi David :wave:.
Welcome to TOL.

I'm sure Bob will answer you as soon as he notices your post.
(Give him time as he is a busy man, but he will get to you.)

In the meantime, I would like to point something out without getting directly into the linguistics of the words themselves.
For it is not the words themselves that determine doctrine, but the concept/message the words are conveying.
For instance, Christ is called a lamb.
We know what the word itself means - :sheep:.
But the concept/message is not telling us that Christ is woolly critter born of a ewe.

I might ask, if I have the winning lotto ticket, but have not redeemed it yet; have I won or am I winning?
Even though I have not yet reaped the benefits of that win, it's a sure win for me.

It's the same way we should view that we have been buried and risen with Christ.
It's a sure thing, even though we have not yet reaped the full manifestation of the benefits of all that entails.
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
To Bob E. Are you being saved? NIV, NKJV, NASB, HCSB

Or are you saved? KJV
Just as the KJB reads and as our apostle received first and preached about those who have trusted the Lord believing the gospel declared in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV: we "are saved"! No process of "being saved"!
 

robycop3

New member
First, THANK YOU GENTS for the debate, keeping it orderly, etc.

However, as a Freedom Reader, I'd liketa say this:

There's absolutely NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for the KJVO myth ! And without it, no doctrine of faith/worship can be true.

I read Mr. Kinney's article about Scriptural support for the KJVO myth & found NO such passage of Scripture in it! I believe that if there was any Scriptural support for the KJVO myth, KJVOs before Mr. Kinney woulda posted it long ago!

Psalm 12:6-7 is often cited by KJVOs as such Scripture, but just WHERE does it name the KJV ?????????????????????????????????? And the same verses appear in all Bible versions, so, if they apply to the KJV, they apply to all other versions in which they appear ! Besides that, the KJV translators believed V7 applied to PEOPLE, as the whole chapter does. It has the marginal note "Heb. him, I. euery one of them." for the 2nd them in V.7.

And while the KJV (NOT "KJB" !)is an excellent translation, it has goofs & booboos. One glaring one is "Easter" in Acts 12:4.

The KJVO myth is simply FALSE !
 

brandplucked

New member
And while the KJV (NOT "KJB" !)is an excellent translation, it has goofs & booboos. One glaring one is "Easter" in Acts 12:4.

The KJVO myth is simply FALSE !

Hi all. Robycop3 is like so many other professing Christians today in that he has NO complete and inerrant Bible in any language that he can show us that he really believes is now or ever was the infallible words of God. He, like so many others, is his own authority when it comes to what he happens to think should or should not be in this "bible" he professes to believe in.


And like all other KJB critics, he is mistaken when he says that Easter is an error in Acts 12:4. It isn't. The Greek word paska has two meanings and one of them is Easter. Look it up in any Greek dictionary. The KJB is right for having Easter in Acts 12:4 and here is why.

https://brandplucked.webs.com/easter.htm

God bless.
 

robycop3

New member
Hi all. Robycop3 is like so many other professing Christians today in that he has NO complete and inerrant Bible in any language that he can show us that he really believes is now or ever was the infallible words of God. He, like so many others, is his own authority when it comes to what he happens to think should or should not be in this "bible" he professes to believe in.


And like all other KJB critics, he is mistaken when he says that Easter is an error in Acts 12:4. It isn't. The Greek word paska has two meanings and one of them is Easter. Look it up in any Greek dictionary. The KJB is right for having Easter in Acts 12:4 and here is why.

https://brandplucked.webs.com/easter.htm

God bless.

I knew the old "no incomplet5e, inerrant Bible line would come from you again. And it's KJV, not "KJB". Its makers called it the AV (Authorized VERSION), not "AB" (Authorized Bible). You should get the name of your pet version right.

And "Easter" Is a goof in the KJV. Proof? "Pascha" NOW means easter or passover, depending on context, in MODERN Greek, but in the NT's KOINE Greek, it meant only PASSOVER.

Besides, EASTER DIDN'T EXIST when Luke wrote "Acts". And if it HAD then existed, neither Herod nor the Orthodox Jews he was trying to please would've stopped to observe it.

Now, there's NOT ONE WORD of Scriptural support for the KJVO myth, even in the KJV itself. It's certainly NOT Psalm 12:6=7 as V7 is about people, as the AV makers themselves indicated by their marginal note; besides, those verses appear in all other translations, so, if in the KJV, they point to the KJV, in the NIV, they point to the NIV !

And the NKJV is less-errant than the old KJV, besides being in CURRENT language.

Now, it's time for your old "Bible agnostic " line !

Have a good day; enjoy your illusions !
 

brandplucked

New member
Hi saints. If Robycop had actually read the entire article, there are many sites now that defend the use of Easter in Acts 12:4 and not all of them are King James Bible believers.

The yearly celebration of the Resurrection of Christ, which in English is known as Easter, began by apostolic tradition handed down by the apostle John. It began very early in the church. The text says nothing about Herod or the Jews celebrating Easter. The Holy Ghost is referring to this time as Easter. The Greek word paska means Easter as well as Passover. Look it up in any Greek dictionary.

Yes, Easter is correct in Acts 12:4 and the KJB is not the only Bible to translate it this way.

And, Yes, it is true. Robycopy does NOT have or believe in any Bible in any language he can show us that he really thinks is the complete and inerrant words of God. He is his own authority, and not a very good one at that.

There is a LOT of information about Easter in my article with several other links. I don't think Roby took the time to actually read it all. He just glanced at it, and since he has his mind already made up, he is not willing to change.

Easter IS correct in Acts 12:4 and here is why.


https://brandplucked.webs.com/easter.htm

God bless.
 

robycop3

New member
Hi saints. If Robycop had actually read the entire article, there are many sites now that defend the use of Easter in Acts 12:4 and not all of them are King James Bible believers.

They're just-as-wrong as you KJVOs are.

The yearly celebration of the Resurrection of Christ, which in English is known as Easter, began by apostolic tradition handed down by the apostle John. It began very early in the church. The text says nothing about Herod or the Jews celebrating Easter. The Holy Ghost is referring to this time as Easter. The Greek word paska means Easter as well as Passover. Look it up in any Greek dictionary.

Now, I don't argue that pascha means either Easter or passover in MODERN Greek. I mentioned that fact in my last post, which you apparently skimmed over. And something else I readily admit-that in English, Easter once also meant passover, depending on the context of usage. But Tyndale had coined the word "passover" in the 1530s, & it soon became the accepted English word for the commemoration of God's letting Israel "pass over" the red sea & hor His destroyer to "pass over" Israel when God sent him to kill Egypt's firstborn sons. And we plainly see the AV men, in their extratextual material in the AV 1611, plainly knew Easter & passover apart.

The AV makers reckoned Easter & Christmas as the 2 holiest days of the year. They even put an "Easter-Finder" in the AV 1611. So, "Easter" in Acts 12:4 was just a goof.

Yes, Easter is correct in Acts 12:4 and the KJB is not the only Bible to translate it this way.

And, Yes, it is true. Robycopy does NOT have or believe in any Bible in any language he can show us that he really thinks is the complete and inerrant words of God. He is his own authority, and not a very good one at that.

No, NOT true. I have several - the NKJV, NASV, Holman, etc. You cannot prove they're just-as-, usually MORE inerrant as the KJV

There is a LOT of information about Easter in my article with several other links. I don't think Roby took the time to actually read it all. He just glanced at it, and since he has his mind already made up, he is not willing to change.

Easter IS correct in Acts 12:4 and here is why.


https://brandplucked.webs.com/easter.htm

God bless.

Actually, I DID read it all, & even checked the sources for accuracy. At least, it IS mostly-accurate.

BUT...

It's as asking some3one what a propeller is, & being told how to make an airplane - without an answer to the "propeller" question. You skip over the pertinent FACTS of why "Easter" in the KJV is a goof. Some of those facts are, if there was an observance of Jesus' resurrection when Herod busted Peter, it was not called Easter, Ostern, etc. then,& if such an observance did indeed exist then, neither Herod nor the Jews he was seeking to please would've paused in their dealings with Peter to have observed it.

And Acts 12:3 says PASSOVER was then ongoing, so it's obvious Herod was waiting for passover to end, knowing the Jews wouldn't lay a hand upon Peter lest they become ceremonially defiled & unable to eat the special passover meals.

And, of course, you didn't dare touch upon the fact that KJVO has no Scriptural support & is therefore false.

Nice try, but you're still in the penalty box. But may God bless you anyway!

Cheerios for today !
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Hi all. Robycop3 is like so many other professing Christians today in that he has NO complete and inerrant Bible in any language that he can show us that he really believes is now or ever was the infallible words of God.
It appears like you are claiming that there are two groups of Christians.

One group understands that the meanings of words change over time and that no translation can ever fully capture the meanings that are in the original language.
That group checks multiple translations and looks up the meanings of the words to try to get as close as possible to the true meaning of the passages.

The second group believes ignorance is the same as righteousness and claim that they have a translation that is more perfect than the text in the original languages.
This group relies upon an imperfect understanding of a translation written in an archaic dialect to condemn everyone else in a childish parody of the way the Pharisees condemned everyone that did not hold to their imperfect understanding of the Law.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Robycopy does NOT have or believe in any Bible in any language he can show us that he really thinks is the complete and inerrant words of God.
That only proves that he is wiser than the people who think their incomplete and errant translation is complete and inerrant.

If you had a complete and inerrant translation, it would include the two hundred and four books mentioned in the verses below.
Please note that the verses quoted below come from the KJV bible.


2 Esdras 14:38-48 KJV
38 And the next day, behold, a voice called me, saying, Esdras, open thy mouth, and drink that I give thee to drink.
39 Then opened I my mouth, and, behold, he reached me a full cup, which was full as it were with water, but the colour of it was like fire.
40 And I took it, and drank: and when I had drunk of it, my heart uttered understanding, and wisdom grew in my breast, for my spirit strengthened my memory:
41 And my mouth was opened, and shut no more.
42 The Highest gave understanding unto the five men, and they wrote the wonderful visions of the night that were told, which they knew not: and they sat forty days, and they wrote in the day, and at night they ate bread.
43 As for me. I spake in the day, and I held not my tongue by night.
44 In forty days they wrote two hundred and four books.
45 And it came to pass, when the forty days were filled, that the Highest spake, saying, The first that thou hast written publish openly, that the worthy and unworthy may read it:
46 But keep the seventy last, that thou mayest deliver them only to such as be wise among the people:
47 For in them is the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom, and the stream of knowledge.
48 And I did so.​

 

brandplucked

New member
That only proves that he is wiser than the people who think their incomplete and errant translation is complete and inerrant.

If you had a complete and inerrant translation, it would include the two hundred and four books mentioned in the verses below.
Please note that the verses quoted below come from the KJV bible.


2 Esdras 14:38-48 KJV
38 And the next day, behold, a voice called me, saying, Esdras, open thy mouth, and drink that I give thee to drink.
39 Then opened I my mouth, and, behold, he reached me a full cup, which was full as it were with water, but the colour of it was like fire.
40 And I took it, and drank: and when I had drunk of it, my heart uttered understanding, and wisdom grew in my breast, for my spirit strengthened my memory:
41 And my mouth was opened, and shut no more.
42 The Highest gave understanding unto the five men, and they wrote the wonderful visions of the night that were told, which they knew not: and they sat forty days, and they wrote in the day, and at night they ate bread.
43 As for me. I spake in the day, and I held not my tongue by night.
44 In forty days they wrote two hundred and four books.
45 And it came to pass, when the forty days were filled, that the Highest spake, saying, The first that thou hast written publish openly, that the worthy and unworthy may read it:
46 But keep the seventy last, that thou mayest deliver them only to such as be wise among the people:
47 For in them is the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom, and the stream of knowledge.
48 And I did so.​



Uhhh....genuineoriginal, this may come as a shock to you but neither I nor the King James Bible translators believed the Apocryphal books are inspired. And as for your other point about there being two types of people. My previous statement stands. There are those who really believe in the existence of an in print Bible that is the complete, inspired and 100% true and inerrant words of God (King James Bible believers) and then there are those like you and Robycop who do not believe there is such a thing they can show us that is now or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God.

This second category in which you are found are always their own authority when it comes to what they think should or should not be in this "bible" they profess to believe in, and of course, nobody else who is their own authority totally agrees with them.

It's Every Man For Himself Bible Versionism, and it is only going to get worse.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
as for your other point about there being two types of people. My previous statement stands. There are those who really believe in the existence of an in print Bible that is the complete, inspired and 100% true and inerrant words of God (King James Bible believers)
Those are known as the ones that are ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

and then there are those like you and Robycop who do not believe there is such a thing they can show us that is now or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God.
Those are known as the ones that believe and know the truth.

This second category in which you are found are always their own authority when it comes to what they think should or should not be in this "bible" they profess to believe in, and of course, nobody else who is their own authority totally agrees with them.
Isn't it amazing that the second group is the one that follows exactly what we are told to do in the Bible?

Romans 14:5
5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.​

 

robycop3

New member
Please note, Sportzz Fanzz, that Brandplucked failed to deal with the facts I presented about pascha/Easter & the fact that the KJVO myth has no Scriptural support & therefore cannot be true.

NO KJVO wants to try to deal with the "no Scriptural support" issue.

TRUTH is, the KJVO myth was invented solely by men. Brandplucked likes to accuse us Freedom Readers of being their own authorities, but where is HIS authority to proclaim the KJVO myth?
 

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
Please note, Sportzz Fanzz, that Brandplucked failed to deal with the facts I presented about pascha/Easter & the fact that the KJVO myth has no Scriptural support & therefore cannot be true.

Can you envision an example of words or phrases that might have been included by the authors of Scripture had it been in God's mind to validate, 1500 years prior to the introduction of the KJB, that version only?
 

robycop3

New member
Can you envision an example of words or phrases that might have been included by the authors of Scripture had it been in God's mind to validate, 1500 years prior to the introduction of the KJB, that version only?

I know that God, in His infinite wisdom, could've made it known to us somehow in His word, that if He wanted the KJV (NOT"KJB") to be His "official" English version, He would've done so. However, we see He hasn't endorsed any translation in any language, but He HAS made it known His word was to be translated into the various languages of the world.
 

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
I know that God, in His infinite wisdom, could've made it known to us somehow in His word, that if He wanted the KJV (NOT"KJB") to be His "official" English version, He would've done so. However, we see He hasn't endorsed any translation in any language, but He HAS made it known His word was to be translated into the various languages of the world.

I just wondered what form that might take. There is no denying that, historically, modern English is the language of choice for God in taking the gospel to the four corners of the globe; especially America. And for the first 250 years of the existence of modern English, it had no competition. It was as if modern English and the KJB were two inseparable witnesses to the world.

Perhaps a verse similar to:

"Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders." Isa 49:22KJV

"And the gospel must first be published among all nations." Mar 13:10KJV

"And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;" Rev 5:9KJV
 

robycop3

New member
I just wondered what form that might take. There is no denying that, historically, modern English is the language of choice for God in taking the gospel to the four corners of the globe; especially America. And for the first 250 years of the existence of modern English, it had no competition. It was as if modern English and the KJB were two inseparable witnesses to the world.

Perhaps a verse similar to:

"Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders." Isa 49:22KJV

"And the gospel must first be published among all nations." Mar 13:10KJV

"And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;" Rev 5:9KJV

Since God didn't do it, we can only speculate.
 
Top