The KJV bible is the only bible that is worth reading.

[tim-from-pa]

There's one person not into mathematics I see. I'm sure all these statistically small chances are just "coincidence".

Being an engineer and mathematician myself I can say with quite certainty the "bible code" is junk science. Similar "codes" have been developed from long novels such as War and Peace. Besides, if you really are a student of scripture, you will find that it's not in God's nature to "hide" things from us in cryptic codes. On the contrary, he speaks out to us in no uncertain terms against things like "bible code". It's little more than a modern day form of fortune telling except you use a computer and a ELS matrix array instead of a crystal ball.

OK.... I have a few things to reply to here. First of all, I have a minor in math, but am humble enough to let the bible codes rest in experts such as Eliyahu Rips and Doron Witztum. I know when probabilities are too complex for me to calculate, even though I had a perfect score in my (calculus based) statics final. The likes of which answered the "War and Peace" point. They laid a very precise groundwork for the "window" of codes to appear in which "War and Peace" did not fit. The problem is that skeptics took the attitude to disprove the codes and with that bias went out to prove their view.

Besides, if you really are a student of scripture, you will find that it's not in God's nature to "hide" things from us in cryptic codes.

Show me where scripture says this. The scripture says that some things are hidden. Maybe God does not want some people, those who believe nothing is hidden, to know everything and does not deem them worthy to know.

On the contrary, he speaks out to us in no uncertain terms against things like "bible code". It's little more than a modern day form of fortune telling except you use a computer and a ELS matrix array instead of a crystal ball.

OK., I'll bite. What's your scripture reference?

The bible code is like an algorithm like computer programming--- something that a person like you I would supposedly relate to quite well. I may be wrong, of course.

 

[tim-from-pa]

One other thing.

I suppose nobody will answer point #3 of my previous post?

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=35650#p428726

That's what I thought.

 

[samuel]

Armour of God wrote:
better manuscript evidence has been discovered in the last 150 years that the original authors of KJV did not have access to during their writing.

Oh but they DID. Erasmus was offered them by the Catholic Church, and refused the offer. That was long before the KJV translators, they had knowledge of them also and refused to use them.

 

[wavy]

I find it interesting that KJV was translated at the third overturn of the Throne of David (c.f. Ezek 21:27 KJV) as the throne of David was transferred to the British lineage of Kings and this same translation became the benchmark and foundation of the English speaking world. After all, is there any other translation we argue about as much as the KJV? That seems to me that the KJV is KING not to mention the most English enduring translation. I find this an interesting "coincidence".

I see nothing here but unsupported conjecture. There's nothing to answer.

Thanks,
Eric

 

[Armor of God]

Show me where scripture says this. The scripture says that some things are hidden. Maybe God does not want some people, those who believe nothing is hidden, to know everything and does not deem them worthy to know.

Sure, let me explain a few things. When there are references to "hidden" things in scripture it's talking about things the unsaved human cannot know unless he/she accepts Jesus Christ and has reveled to them by the holy spirit. These revelations come through diligent study of scripture, opening and renewing one's mind to God's will, also prayers for guidance and understanding. Examples include:

Mat 13:44 "The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and covered up. Then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.
1Co 2:7 But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory.
Col 2:2-3 that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God's mystery, which is Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

If you continue to doubt my interpenetration, go to some well known theologian commentator's like Matthew Henry, John Gill, et al, and they will all say the same thing when discussing "hidden" things in the bible.

The bible code is like an algorithm like computer programming

I think the temptation by many people is to think "Well, it's based on the bible, and it's using modern technology, therefore it must be true."

It's not true at all. It's attempting to take scripture and re-define it in a way that's not intended by God. Why would God "hide" truth we need to understand good and evil, heaven and hell, sin and redemption, and then hold us accountable for all eternity because we failed to act upon that information?

You need to look at what the people pushing "bible code" are trying to do. They are attempting to use it to predict the future. God warns strongly against false prophets.

2Pe 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.
Mat 24:24 For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.
2Ti 4:3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions,
Rev 22:18-19 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

Hope these explanations help you.

 

[wavy]

Perhaps I am stupid or unintelligent, but I have always liked the text in which the King James Version was written. Though it has been a long time since I have done some actual study on the written word and history of translations....King James Version, from what I understood was one of the oldest and perhaps closest to the actual written Hebrew or Greek texts that were originally written. So should this be a reflection of my intelligence or lack therof...so be it.

I will not lie though....it really irks me how because I do not have someone's views has that I have no clue what I am talking about... but to each their own.

May God Bless You

Danielle

Sorry if my post offended you. It wasn't directed towards you at all. Still, the KJV translation is nowhere near the 'closest to the actual written Hebrew or Greek texts'. There have been great improvements in Hebrew/Greek linguistics and lexicography as well as modern light from the discovery and use of superior (older, more reliable) mss. evidence for our newer English versions since the KJV was translated. It's decent but sub-par.

This is no secret in biblical scholarship. Those arguing otherwise are dogmatic, fringe clusters on the academic map.


Thanks,
Eric

 

[tim-from-pa]

I see nothing here but unsupported conjecture. There's nothing to answer.

I meant the historical part when the KJV just so happened to be translated. It's more than mere conjecture as there are myriads of scripture regarding the throne of David. However, to say much more about this subject here will start derailing the thread onto another topic regarding this enduring earthly monarchy to this very day. However, the main point was that the KJV translation was made the same time that a prominent and prophetic event occurred to the People of the Book. I find such "coincidences" interesting, If there was nothing to this so-called flawed translation, why is there this perceived unreasonable attempt to hold onto it? Those against the KJV translations in favor of the newer and improved ones seem to me to be the Johnny-come-latelies many of them not associated with the People of the Book.

 

[PrimeRoot]

Master's Voice

Greetings EVERYONE.

The most hienous tragedy

would be that someone failed to pick up

WHATEVER translation of HOLY SCRIPTURE they have

and read it, and having read

to LET THE HOLY SPIRIT preach to their prayerful heart.

Be it russian, greek, or some partially finished Wycliffe work...

. ..the word of God will not return void. Isaiah 55:11

The sole reason I use NASB online, is the superior cross references.

Cheers Mes Ami ! !

!

 

[Nick]

Re: Master's Voice

Greetings EVERYONE.

The most hienous tragedy

would be that someone failed to pick up

WHATEVER translation of HOLY SCRIPTURE they have

and read it, and having read

to LET THE HOLY SPIRIT preach to their prayerful heart.

Be it russian, greek, or some partially finished Wycliffe work...

. ..the word of God will not return void. Isaiah 55:11

The sole reason I use NASB online, is the superior cross references.

Cheers Mes Ami ! !

!

The word of God is the word of God. Simple

 

[Sinthesis]

I see nothing here but unsupported conjecture. There's nothing to answer.

I meant the historical part when the KJV just so happened to be translated. It's more than mere conjecture as there are myriads of scripture regarding the throne of David. However, to say much more about this subject here will start derailing the thread onto another topic regarding this enduring earthly monarchy to this very day. However, the main point was that the KJV translation was made the same time that a prominent and prophetic event occurred to the People of the Book. I find such "coincidences" interesting, If there was nothing to this so-called flawed translation, why is there this perceived unreasonable attempt to hold onto it? Those against the KJV translations in favor of the newer and improved ones seem to me to be the Johnny-come-latelies many of them not associated with the People of the Book.

Wonderful! The Throne of David is occupied by an 82 year old woman?

I'd love for someone to search the 'Bible codes' for messages such as:
'Bible codes are false'
'Fools search for codes'
'Codes obscure the truth'
Etc...

 

[tim-from-pa]

Wonderful! The Throne of David is occupied by an 82 year old woman?

If that's who God wants to place there, then so be it. But I guess I'm the opposite of you. If I'd meet that 82-year-old woman, I'd do so with tears in my eyes, humility and non-arrogance while bowing low just as the Lord wants us to do for Him as well.

That's the problem with this generation these days (when they lack what I'd do) and everyone wonders why the world is going south. I doubt if a swinging 50-pound bag of rocks hitting them on the side of the head will get them to see the light.

But I won't derail this thread with the relationship between the KJV and the promises to Israel, and the eternal throne of David. After all, Israel encompasses about 1/4 of the world's population, and nobody sees that. Just wait--- there's a big surprise coming.

 

[Paidion]

The burden of proof here seems not to lie in whether the AV text, or KJV translators were wrong. But to prove the Alexandrian text, and translators were right. That is always the burden of the new kid on the block, he must prove himself first.

It is the Byzantine text type from which the KJV translators drew that is the "new kid on the block".

The AV text was translated from manuscripts from the 6th and 7th centuries.

On the other hand, the Alexandrian text type used Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus , parchment manuscripts from around 350 A.D. Since the discovery of the Bodmer Papyri, ancient manuscripts from around 250 A.D. have been incorporated, such as Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75. Thus the Alexandrian text more closely resembles the original autographs.

On this basis, the ball must be passed back into the court of the supporters of the "Authorized" Text.

 

[samuel]

Those 6th and 7th century copies, were passed down form text much older than those Vaticanus and Sinaiticus pieces of junk.

 

[Paidion]

Yours seems to be an emotionally charged statement based on nothing other than what you wish to believe.

I suggest some serious research together with a mind which desires to seek after truth and reality.

 

[samuel]

Believe me, I have done some serious research. I just don't fall for a lot of phony bologna. You can keep your "better texts", I guess they will burn ok.

 

[Paidion]

And I am sure you will retain your belief in the King James Version as the "infallible Word of God", even the "ancient" text of I John 5:7 which was originally a scribe's note in the tenth century and added to the text by a later scribe.

By the way, which King James Version, do you believe in? The original 1611? Or one of the many revisions? If you believe in the original 1611 edition, then you doubtless accept the Apocrypha, since that was included in the original.

 

[samuel]

I am not sure which modern version, you would call infallible. The NASB, and the NIV both have different versions from one another, of 1st John 5: 7-8. So much for consistency!

As for a tenth century scribe, I don't know I wasn't there - were you?. Oh I guess you have seen a copy of the original manuscript, or what you have been told was it.

As for printings (not versions), I have the Oxford 1769, and 1885. As for the 1611 and the Apocrypha, that was placed between the Old, and New Testaments, and clearly it was indicated this was not part of the Holy Writ. Oh wait, my Grandmother had a 1611, I remember seeing the Apocrypha in there, and the note also. Man that thing was about a eight inches thick, a foot and a half wide, and nearly two feet tall. It must have weighed about 25 lbs, not your typical go to Church carry around. And the covering was something like 1/2 inch shelving board, beautifully carved, and stained gold and brown, wish I still had it. Oh I forgot to mention, it had some beautiful full page paintings, of the Lord, the Last Supper, the Crucifixion, and some others, I used just love to sit and look at those.

I do have the Apocrypha though, I would assume anyone who liked the modern versions, would just love that. Since it has so many consistencies with the current author.

 

[mananmater]

Josh said:


Thank you for your posts, you have to remember that the bible is put together specificly. And by the KJV version I'm talking about the 1611 version, and for those who say the older ones are more accurate it is the exact same thing, the KJV came from older documents. The bible was put together in a way that every word, sentence of it is relevent that composed by God, and every word in it was picked and nothing irrelevent is in it, everything in it is useful, that's why God told humans not to change it, and proof that it hasn't been changed is that what it says comes true. There's a reason the apocrypha is not in the bible, it is good historical documents, but was in attempt by men or women to add stuff to the bible that didn't work. So everything in the bible is specificly picked by God and not a thing else is in it. You have to live in the spirit to really see what the bible is explaining.

 

[mananmater]

Josh said:


Thank you for your posts, you have to remember that the bible is put together specificly. And by the KJV version I'm talking about the 1611 version, and for those who say the older ones are more accurate it is the exact same thing, the KJV came from older documents. The bible was put together in a way that every word, sentence of it is relevent that composed by God, and every word in it was picked and nothing irrelevent is in it, everything in it is useful, that's why God told humans not to change it, and proof that it hasn't been changed is that what it says comes true. There's a reason the apocrypha is not in the bible, it is good historical documents, but was in attempt by men or women to add stuff to the bible that didn't work. So everything in the bible is specificly picked by God and not a thing else is in it. You have to live in the spirit to really see what the bible is explaining.

 

[MISFIT]

I could not disagree more. The KJV is a pain to read, I don't speak Ye Olde English and I don't want to read it either.