Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
t3gah said:All of that and they, the persons who translated the KJV version, got the Hebrew word re'em, which means oxen or cow mixed up with Unicorn, a mythical animal.
Numbers 23:22
God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.
Numbers 24:8
God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce [them] through with his arrows.
Deuteronomy 33:17
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.
Job 39:9
Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?
Job 39:10
Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?
Psalms 22:21
Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.
Psalms 29:6
He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.
Psalms 92:10
But my horn shalt thou exalt like [the horn of] an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.
Isaiah 34:7
And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.
The first thing I will point out and holds true of all the new versions of the bible is that they are copyrighted. That means someone is claming authorship and ownership of the material .NetDoc said:As a noted humorist once remarked (and I can't think of his name), "It's not the things in the Bible that I don't understand that bother me, but the things that I do understand and don't do!".
I am thinking Will Rogers... but that's not quite right either. Maybe GK Chesterton.
The King James Version I have that was printed in 1939 has this on the preface pageNetDoc said:Yo Bro... Go read I Corinthians 13. Charity=Love??? We just don't speak that language anymore. The good King is dead, long live the King.
Clearly, your lucid and insightful harangue on "copyright law" has been lost on me. You can repeat it 20 times and it's still just as meaningless. Like the KJV, the NIV is MERELY a translation. But it's at least a translation into a modern language, and more specifically one that I am somewhat conversant in. Protecting your intellectual property is as American as apple pie. I don't think you can't find scriptures against having a copyright! But hey, you can surprise me!
You see, I asked for SCRIPTURAL references that the KJV was the "inspired version", and like the empty arguments you so emphatically contest you have come up with squat. Zero. Nada. Zip.
While you are free to fill up the forum with your rantings, you would be far more convincing if you could provide ONE scripture to prove your point. Just one. Uno. Ein. Oдно. ένας.
So please, either you believe that you should ONLY believe in the Bible (including whether there is an inspired version or not) or you don't. Show me in the scriptures or stop talking out of both sides of your mouth.
dhiannian said:There is no copyright you can't copyright something that does not belong to you.
HelpMe said:i believe we are very qualified to give our opinions and unless you know how much or what research someone else has been through i don't see what gives you the right to discredit their opinions.
dhiannian said:The first thing I will point out and holds true of all the new versions of the bible is that they are copyrighted. That means someone is claming authorship and ownership of the material .
I have a NIV in front of me right now the following is a direct quote.
"This copyrighted material may be quoted and/or reprinted for non-commercial purposes up to and inclusive of (50) verses without express written permission of the publisher, provided the following credit line appears with the material being quoted:
"Taken from the Holy Bible: New International Version & copy; 1978 by the New York International Bible Society, used by permission."
Quotations and/or reprints for commercial purposes or in excess of 50 verses, or other permission requests must be directed to, and approved in writing by the New York International Bible Society."
Ok that is great so if you or I want to quote the NIV we have to have permission if we want to reproduce the NIV we have to have permission. I have gone to Churches where the Preacher quoted more than 50 scriptures in his message if he was preaching from the NIV (according to the NIV) he would have to have WRITTEN permission, and if he is quoting less than 50 scriptures he is going to have to quote the little permission spill.
WHAT!! WHY!! it is "THE BIBLE" Gods words not mans OR is it!
The Holy Bible(KJV)
dhiannian said:There is no copyright you can't copyright something that does not belong to you.I know I know you say there is a copyright in my bible and it is a King James Version. Look close at the copyright and you will see that it is on study notes it is not on the scriptures. I could or you could take a Holy Bible The King James Version and quote it reproduce it reprint it for commercial purposes or not with out anyone's permission. How can we do this ? It is Gods words not mans..
www.kjvgodsword.com
dhinnian said:Show me a change in the KJV that affect the major doctrines of the bible,
I already put quite a few on an earlier post showing MAJOR changes in doctrine with the NIV.
And I don't care if some educated idiot said unicorn should be oxen, The bible
was completed with not one error in the doctrine it teaches.
God did not say go ahead and mess with my word.
dhiannian said:11 Peter 1:20-21 says "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Hmm so God didn't inspire it?
Do you even know the meaning of the word?
3 of it's meanings could be used in this instance, the best one, (cause I'm tired of repeating myself when eyes are blinded by satan)
This meaning is
To affect, guide, or arouse by divine influence.
Now what did the 11 Peter 1:20-21 say???
11Corinthians 4:2 (Handling the word of God deceitfully) vs 3 (If our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost) vs 4 (In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds)
dhiannian said:I'm not claiming to be a scholar, but anyone who has the Holy Spirit dwelling
inside of them can "Spiritually discern" and judge whether, or not all versions are the right one.
Proof? 1 Corinthians 2:14-15
God reveales to his children through? HOLY SPIRIT! Verses 10-12 same chapter.
Guess what else I found right across from 11Timothy 3:16? Which SAYS the scripture was given by INSPIRATION of God. (using that word)
11 Timothy 2:23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid.........
1-you already know i don't believe in greek primacy, right?No*s said:1). Avanced knowledge of Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic.
From what I've read of your posts, I don't think you qualify here, because I've read our exchanges. If you claim competence in these languages, I can very easily organize a test to check.
you've surely seen my personal opinion regarding greek text.so with me, why persist?No*s said:In John 3.13, there are a variety of readings, all centering around the phrase "o wn en tw ouranw." Which readin do you prefer. Why? I don't want doctrinal reasons, simply the listing of textual variants, principles of textual criticism, textual evidence, and the theory on the development of the text. All that you require is a good Greek New Testament with a critical apparatus.
and i wouldn't need to answer as i'm sincerely disinterested in your unnecessarily overly judgemental approach to this matter.No*s said:I don't need to test this, because I doubt you know the languages well enough to begin this study.
i honestly disagree.No*s said:4). You must have familiarity with almost all the Bibles to make a "best" judgement. I haven't even approached that, and I doubt anyone on here has read 200+ Bibles to do it either.
NetDoc,NetDoc said:Yo Bro... Go read I Corinthians 13. Charity=Love??? We just don't speak that language anymore.
HelpMe said:1-you already know i don't believe in greek primacy, right?
HelpMe said:2-shoot.not that i'll respond immediately, as you may of noticed my posts have dwindled of late.and if you'd payed attention, which apparently you haven't(more in a second), you wouldn't repeatedly ask me about the greek text.
HelpMe said:you've surely seen my personal opinion regarding greek text.so with me, why persist?
HelpMe said:if you think i'm going to explain why i prefer which translation of each verse, you've surely lost your mind or totally mistaken me for someone with either different beliefs from me or with too much time.
HelpMe said:And no one has gone up into the heaven except He who came down from the heaven the Son of Adam.-the scriptures
http://www.eliyah.com/thescriptures/
which is "similar to the bible in basic english"
http://www.greeknewtestament.com/B43C003.htm
HelpMe said:and i wouldn't need to answer as i'm sincerely disinterested in your unnecessarily overly judgemental approach to this matter.
HelpMe said:i honestly disagree.
you could say all of it was written in greek depending on which ancient manuscripts you use as evidence, so no.No*s said:I'm well aware of that. However, you're aware that most of the NT was written in Greek, right? So, knowledge of the Greek language is a requirement.
if the majority appeals to you for it's being the majority, then so be it.No*s said:Unless, of course, you can overturn the consensus of 2000 years of teaching and the near-universal consensus of scholarship, most of the NT was written in Greek, and it is quite possible that all of it was.
the most important person was left out.No*s said:Unless your word, and that of the Pe****ta guys, outweigh this testimony, Greek will remain a requirement as far as I'm concerned, and likely, for nearly everyone on this board.
so is latin.No*s said:I can, and I will, ask about Greek. It is directly applicable to the subject at hand.
more with the early church fathers?not gonna happen.No*s said:Translate the first paragraph of St. Ignatius' epistle to the Magnesians into Aramaic.
more greek?not gonna happen.No*s said:Translate the preceding sentance and this one into Hellenistic Greek.
and your opinions don't validate it.No*s said:Frankly, because Greek is relevant. Your opinions don't lesson Greek's importance in this matter.
yes, it's just one verse for now.No*s said:It's just one verse and one phrase. If you can't do it, just say so.
HelpMe said:if you think i'm going to explain why i prefer which translation of each verse, you've surely lost your mind or totally mistaken me for someone with either different beliefs from me or with too much time.
oral tradition.niqqudim.No*s said:What was it that Hebrew first gained in order to denote vowel sounds?
start by eliminating what you deem unworthy of much more time, for me i need some sort of true name version, you can imagine how diminished that list is now can't you?No*s said:That's just fine. But...how do you judge the "Best" if you aren't familiar with all the contenders...
An example of brillianly performing a wholly unnecessary task.No*s said:I believe my point has been made now for anybody reading.