|
|
Post by watchman on Apr 22, 2009 12:08:17 GMT -5
God is able to preserve His Word, and the KJV is the infallible Word of God.
|
|
|
|
Post by cradlecathlic27 on Apr 22, 2009 12:26:20 GMT -5
lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Apr 22, 2009 12:35:37 GMT -5
God is able to preserve His Word, and the KJV is the infallible Word of God. He never said that the KJV is the infallible Word of God! That's your personal opinion  In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Apr 22, 2009 12:38:18 GMT -5
If that were true, is there an infallible Bible for other languages besides English?
I really want to know your opinion on this.
teresa
|
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on Apr 22, 2009 13:20:22 GMT -5
IDK, is there a KJV for other languages? If so, then yes.
But, that is one reason I believe the KJV is the preserved Word of God...He preserved HIs Word in the #1 language of the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Apr 22, 2009 13:57:41 GMT -5
well, it's kind of a toss up.
You are right, English is the most widely spoken, but Manarin Chinese is the most used language in numbers.
Fewer people use English as their first language AKA "mother tongue" (compared to Chinese).
It's hard to say how many people can actually read English, probably a lot less than the numbers for spoken English.
If American continues to lose ground as a "world leader" then the use of English will presumably go down as well. China definitely stands out as a potential for the next-in-line world leader. If that happens, Chinese would definitely be the most influential language. But who knows?
Latin used to be the most influential language, but not any more (with the exception of legal usage and scientific usage). It's hard to say what will become of the English language.
|
|
|
|
Post by watchman on Apr 22, 2009 14:17:21 GMT -5
If that were true, is there an infallible Bible for other languages besides English? I really want to know your opinion on this. teresa Sure I believe the Bibles translated in other languages are infallible. |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Apr 22, 2009 19:43:09 GMT -5
Don't the EO's also have an ancient copy of The Bible too? I know you guys have the oldest manuscripts, right? Sorry for not responding sooner. I wanted to verified my information with my Priest. He got backed to me an hour ago. The Codex Sinaiticus was originally kept at the Orthodox monastery of St. Catherine in Sinai. They only have a small portion of it now, the rest has been divided up between three institutions for preservation and study. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Apr 23, 2009 8:51:06 GMT -5
Ok, so you believe that all translations are infallible or just some? I'm sorry I misunderstood you. I thought you believed that only the KJV was infallible. I'm sorry.
It makes more sense if you believe that other translations are also infallible.
i think that in a very true sense, most translations are infallible because God speaks infallibly through them. Even when words change meaning with time, or even if the printer makes a mistake. But there are probably some translations that are so bad that it would be hard to know.
peace
|
|
|
|
Post by watchman on Apr 23, 2009 11:12:51 GMT -5
Ok, so you believe that all translations are infallible or just some? I'm sorry I misunderstood you. I thought you believed that only the KJV was infallible. I'm sorry. It makes more sense if you believe that other translations are also infallible. i think that in a very true sense, most translations are infallible because God speaks infallibly through them. Even when words change meaning with time, or even if the printer makes a mistake. But there are probably some translations that are so bad that it would be hard to know. peace I do not think all translations are infallible, I believe some of the new translations have been purposely distorted, but there of some that are infallible. For me I stick to KJV or the NKJV, but there are some other good translation in English and other languages. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 23, 2009 13:15:02 GMT -5
Don't the EO's also have an ancient copy of The Bible too? I know you guys have the oldest manuscripts, right? Sorry for not responding sooner. I wanted to verified my information with my Priest. He got backed to me an hour ago. The Codex Sinaiticus was originally kept at the Orthodox monastery of St. Catherine in Sinai. They only have a small portion of it now, the rest has been divided up between three institutions for preservation and study. In IC.XC, Ramon Isn't it outrageously cool to be able to say that as a Christian body? That you actually have authentic scriptural manuscripts? Nobody but us (The Catholic Church...including Roman Rite/Orthodox) can say that. It's not about taking any kind of vane pride in it, but it's just so reassuring that we have the most authentic scriptures available to mankind.  |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Apr 23, 2009 14:55:18 GMT -5
Sorry for not responding sooner. I wanted to verified my information with my Priest. He got backed to me an hour ago. The Codex Sinaiticus was originally kept at the Orthodox monastery of St. Catherine in Sinai. They only have a small portion of it now, the rest has been divided up between three institutions for preservation and study. In IC.XC, Ramon Isn't it outrageously cool to be able to say that as a Christian body? That you actually have authentic scriptural manuscripts? Nobody but us (The Catholic Church...including Roman Rite/Orthodox) can say that. It's not about taking any kind of vane pride in it, but it's just so reassuring that we have the most authentic scriptures available to mankind. Yea, it is cool! And wasn't we the ones who told the Early Christians which books should be honor among the Scared Scriptures and which ones was not? The Early Church canonized the Holy Bible under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 23, 2009 15:16:37 GMT -5
Isn't it outrageously cool to be able to say that as a Christian body? That you actually have authentic scriptural manuscripts? Nobody but us (The Catholic Church...including Roman Rite/Orthodox) can say that. It's not about taking any kind of vane pride in it, but it's just so reassuring that we have the most authentic scriptures available to mankind. Yea, it is cool! And wasn't we the ones who told the Early Christians which books should be honor among the Scared Scriptures and which ones was not? The Early Church canonized the Holy Bible under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. In IC.XC, Ramon Preach it bro! /images/scan0005.jpg) |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Apr 24, 2009 16:35:40 GMT -5
How do you know which ones are infallible and which ones aren't?
teresa
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwimac on Jan 29, 2012 22:02:56 GMT -5
All translations from one language to another will have errors simply because words and phrases in one language often will NOT translate into another. An example: the French Phrase "Oh, la la" literally means "Oh, that that!" All translators pick and choose HOW they will translate because they know this simple truth. Languages differ.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jan 30, 2012 9:50:13 GMT -5
All translations from one language to another will have errors simply because words and phrases in one language often will NOT translate into another. An example: the French Phrase "Oh, la la" literally means "Oh, that that!" All translators pick and choose HOW they will translate because they know this simple truth. Languages differ. Correct, but The KJV made 15 "changes" to traditional scripture. They even deleted books from the original KJV (which had 80 books that King James considered canonical). |
|
|
|
Post by kiwimac on Jan 31, 2012 9:26:44 GMT -5
The KJV translators did not consider the Deuterocanonical books scripture. They considered them useful for instruction. The Anglican 39 Articles makes that quite clear.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Mar 27, 2012 21:33:15 GMT -5
The KJV translators did not consider the Deuterocanonical books scripture. They considered them useful for instruction. The Anglican 39 Articles makes that quite clear. They chose to follow The Pharisees' Canon instead of The Christian Canon. |
|
