How has God preserved His word?

How has God preserved His word? How has the enemy tried to pervert the word of God?
Post Reply
David
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:38 pm
Location: Charleston, SC

How has God preserved His word?

Post by David »

Sorry I have yet to answer these questions from the other topic hope you don't mind me pasting it here don't know why call me crazy :P [I moved it appropriatley... Jim b. :) ]

Let me outline what I understand you to be saying about how God has preserved his word:

1. Our Lord used men, either Apostles or under the authority of Apostles, to write the words for our New Testament in the original manuscripts in Greek and Aramaic. YES; and on a side note I believe there is a difference between Aramaic and Hebrew used in the old testement manuscripts).

2. God enabled believers in Christ to faithfully copy the texts in Greek and Aramaic . YES; (I believe it was Ancient Hebrew used not Aramaic) and other faithful believers to translate those texts into english

3. God preserved copies of these copied manuscripts through the centuries that together made up what we call the Textus Receptus. YES

4. King James commissioned various scholars and clergymen to make an English translation of the Textus Receptus. YES a good read is The Rules to be observed in the Translation of the Bible. there it also has the names of other english bibles used to assist in translation like the Bishops Bible, Tyndales, Coverdales and Mathews

5. God used these scholars and clergymen and gave them similar authority and infallibility as He had given the Apostles to take manuscripts that were without error and make an English language translation that is without error and includes the exact words in English that God ordained. NO; This one is a bit more difficult for me to explain it deals more with faith and trust, God is able, with God no thing shall be impossible. I know God is capable of preserving His word, He promised, I don't know how exactly I but, regardless of mans involvement, God is capable of preserving his word perfectly without error even when translated to another language I just have no idea how, I just do. To help you understand my position is to ask you and others to read the The Epistle Dedicatorie and the preface THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER it used to be in every Holy Bible http://www.ccel.org/bible/kjv/preface/index.htm it's a pretty powerful testimimony, even some of the more contemporary ones like my parents owned from the 1960's had it sadly these have been removed from every other since. For me it is a blessing to read it offers for me confidence and comfort the King and men chosen desired to do God's will, their words matter a great deal to me. And my brother if you tire of reading from the computer I would be all to pleased to send you a copy of the 1611ed to read in more comfortable settings. Be warned it is not original dimension so a magnifying glass would be something to have handy (even with 20/20) or reading glasses if you have need.

6. From that point on, the Textus Receptus manuscripts ceased to be the preserved word of God, and now the King James English translation became the word of God. NO; Nothing ceased from being what has always been nor will it. The Holy Bible 1611 ed is a translation of the original tongue into English. nothing in that book (1611ed) lessens or releives the importance of the fountain from where it came.

David, is this outline what you believe?

I truly appreciate your participation in this discussion.

Jim Baumgaertel[/b]
Last edited by David on Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:13 am, edited 2 times in total.
jimbaum
Site Admin
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:07 pm
Location: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Contact:

Post by jimbaum »

This topic is a continuation of this one: http://x.procinwarn.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=124

Jim
wackzingo
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 12:23 am
Contact:

Post by wackzingo »

David,

Thanks for clarifying some things...it helps me understand your position a little better. But I still have a few questions.

You said:
5. God used these scholars and clergymen and gave them similar authority and infallibility as He had given the Apostles to take manuscripts that were without error and make an English language translation that is without error and includes the exact words in English that God ordained. NO; This one is a bit more difficult for me to explain it deals more with faith and trust. I believe, regardless of mans involvement, God is capable of preserving his word without error even when translated to another language I just have no idea how, I just do. To help you understand my position is to ask you and others to read the The Epistle Dedicatorie and the preface THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER it used to be in every Holy Bible http://www.ccel.org/bible/kjv/preface/index.htm , even some of the more contemporary ones like my parents owned from the 1960's had it sadly these have been removed from every other since. For me it is a blessing to read it offers for me confidence and comfort the King and men chosen desired to do God's will, their words matter a great deal to me.

I completely agree with you here if I am understanding you correctly. I believe that God can and does and has preserved His Word in spite of the fallibility of Godly Men.

What I don't understand is you say" regardless of mans involvement, God is capable of preserving his word without error even when translated to another language I just have no idea how, I just do. " Why do you believe that God failed to or chose not to preserve His word in the case of the NIV, NASB, BBE, NKJV, DARBY and ASV? Why did God only preserve His Word one time when it comes to the English Language.

How long does language have to keep changing before God will need to provide another version? If you have ever read English from the 1200's to 1300's then you know it's completely unreadable to us today. Even the literature from those times have to be translated into modern English.
David
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:38 pm
Location: Charleston, SC

Post by David »

It is my understanding you said there is error in all bibles because of mans fallibilty forgive me if I was mistaken.


I believe the Holy Bible 1611ed is without error but it does take an amount of prayer and studying to gain understanding of certain words and the context they are used in. I call that word study not error as some do. I think error is when things have been changed like in the 'The Best Way to Live and Die' by Donald Flood. Where he takes the newer versions and sets them against us. How do you explain to those Donald has decieved that Jesus is not his only son But God actually had begotten Him are we not also His sons by adoption? Trival to some but I find it troubling he uses certain books to back up what the Quran says. Islam is an anti-parallel religion to Christianity and anti-christ as no other before. Is there more error such as that in the newer versions I don't know but it's enough for me to leave that book on the shelf. The one bible I take my stand with is the Holy Bible 1611ed and those revised up to the 1700's (?) (another topic I'm sure).
Last edited by David on Sun Jan 28, 2007 5:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jimbaum
Site Admin
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:07 pm
Location: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Contact:

Post by jimbaum »

David,

You wrote, in red, in response to my number 6 proposal:
6. From that point on, the Textus Receptus manuscripts ceased to be the preserved word of God, and now the King James English translation became the word of God. NO; Nothing ceased from being what has always been nor will it. The Holy Bible 1611 ed is a translation of the original tongue into English. nothing in that book lessens or releives the importance of the fountain from where it came.

Do you see any problem with going to the Textus Receptus manuscripts (if they were available) today and translating into today's English?

Jim
David
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:38 pm
Location: Charleston, SC

Post by David »

Let me begin with For with God no thing shall be impossible. But in my opinion as the church age gets older its becoming luke warm. I don't think there are enough Godly scholarly men around anymore capable of taking on such a monumental task let alone a leader who would dare publicly declare it and most importantly provide the leadership. But that is just my opinion not Gods will or word nor does it mean thats the way he'd do it either :).

On another note I found out not long ago the New Scofield Study Bible purported to be a King James Version (KJV). Apparently it boasts using over 6,000 new readings from other manuscripts and verses used from other versions but nobody tells you where they all are! :cry: . I guess they think it can be stamped KJV because it has thee's thy's and thou's in it.

Brother Zack what is metaphysical? I looked in todays websters and websters 1828 dictionary and don't understand it can you or brother Jim give me an analogy or something to help me out here. Barely made it past high school.
jimbaum
Site Admin
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:07 pm
Location: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Contact:

Post by jimbaum »

Greetings,

I split the discussion about the word "begotten" into its own topic.

Jim B.
jimbaum
Site Admin
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:07 pm
Location: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Contact:

THE SCRIPTURES: WHAT WILL I DIE FOR?

Post by jimbaum »

THE SCRIPTURES: WHAT WILL I DIE FOR?
The following is from Steve Phillip's book on church history:

Are We Like Christ?, THE STORM BREAKS - Chapter 4

Diocletian’s edict that all the sacred books of the Christians should be burned was a fiery trial for the saints of God. Since the copies were hand written and not the common possession of all as our printed Bibles are to us today, the leaders of the churches were particularly sought after and afflicted in this way since they surely had copies with them.

It was a circumstance that required the church to seriously face the question, “What are we willing to die for? What books are actually the Word of God; which are merely the words of men?”

The authority of the NT writings had long been recognized and accepted by the church [I Cor.14:37; 2 Pet.3:1,2,15,16; compare I Tim.5:18 with Lk.10:7]. No Council told the Christians what to believe. The Spirit of God who was the Supreme Author of the Word of God did that [2 Pet.1:20,21; I Jn.2:27; Jn.16:13].

Including the NT books in a Council’s declaration did not give them authority: They had authority already as from God and were included by the Council because of it. The Synod of Carthage [397 AD] merely stated what was already common knowledge and believed when it canonized [accepted as genuine and inspired] the 27 books of the NT.

The Apocrypha was rejected by Christ, the Apostles, and the believers following them, and not included as part of the NT Canon: Only the Roman Catholic Church incorporated them officially as “inspired” in 1546 AD in order to buttress their false claims.
David
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:38 pm
Location: Charleston, SC

Re: How has God preserved His word?

Post by David »

A blast from the past, was this topic a silly arguement or what?

Once upon a time I always thought the KJV was the preserved correct text. Well I guess it isn't as perfect as I thought.

It seems the Greeks translated the name of the Son of God from hebrew to greek as Iesous (pronounced ee-ay-sooce), then one day it was translated from Greek to Latin as Isus. From latin to arabic Isa. In the King James 1611 edition it was translated from greek as Iesus. All of the translations come from the greek. Note the 'I' in all of the translations (greek, latin, arabic and english). Now look in your bibles notice now the translation has been changed again from the 'I' to a 'J'. Why? Who did this?

The Greeks apparently did not have an alphabet that could transliterate hebrew to greek. I guess it could be safe to say they did the best they could with what they had.

But the english alphabet allows us to translitorate the hebrew name of the Son of God and it does not come out as (Jee-zus) rather it is more along the line of Yahushua (prounounced as Ya-hoo-shoo-a)
Post Reply