ECT WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT KJV-ONLY THINKING ??

[DAN P]

Hi to all and there are many believers who say that the English KJV is inspired ??

KJV-ONLY , say that there are no errors in the KJV , is that true ?

If you believe this , WHY and how will you prove IT ??

One reason I ask is because , we will have this problem in our assembly , so what say you ??

dan p

 

[Bright Raven]

It is a farce. I just finished reading doctoral thesis on the subject

 

[Danoh]

Hi to all and there are many believers who say that the English KJV is inspired ??

KJV-ONLY , say that there are no errors in the KJV , is that true ?

If you believe this , WHY and how will you prove IT ??

One reason I ask is because , we will have this problem in our assembly , so what say you ??

dan p

You've been harping on that myth of yours for decades now.

Very few KJVO ACTS 9 MADs hold it is an inspired translation.

VERY FEW...

Acts 9 / 28 Hybrid MADs might, you'll have to ask them.

But then again, said Hybrids also repeatedly demonstrate their having failed to properly parse the words in the passages they base their many errors on.

Meaning, though some of them might hold to the KJV as the only translation either Inspired or Preserved by God, out the window they throw its built-in, and thus Preserved, word parsings.

Speaking of parsing words - you have got to be one of the worst individuals where parsing plain old everyday North American English is concerned, that I have run across in quite some time.

THAT is why you so very often conclude "a translation mistake in the KJV - time for another" badly parsed post by you.

And then there are many NON KJVO MADs, be they Acts 9 or Hybrid.

And what I have found over the years is that it has largely been the NON KJVO Acts 9 MADs who have spread the false charge you have been asserting, for decades now, DP.

Which is amusing, because out of the many Acts 9 KJVO MADS I have known over the years, not a one has held what you and your kind continually assert about them on this issue.

If anyhting, being that many Acts 9 KJVO MADs are Cessasionist - in contrast to many NON KJVO Acts 9 MADS, one would think the latter of the two would be the ones asserting an Inspired, Error-Free translation, or what have you.

Instead, it is many within the latter of those two, who are ever asserting that is the belief of Acts 9 KJVO MADs.

As is very often the case with you, DP - your assertions look right only when one takes your words absent of the whole of a matter.

And you very often demonstrate you have completely failed to get what someone actually said.

VERY often.

So, no surprise you continue to believe that KJVO MADs, or what have you, hold that the KKV is an Inspired translation, etc.

Hang it up already, you are basically spreading a lie.

And for what?

Because you just have to start one more post, after just one more post, after just one more post ad infinitum?

Rest assurred, you will fail to get this post.

Proving you haven't any business at your chosen task.

Take this how you will.

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[Tambora]

KJV is my favorite.
I love it.
Don't pay any attention to what the Pseudo-MADs here say.

 

[DAN P]

You've been harping on that myth of yours for decades now.

Very few KJVO ACTS 9 MADs hold it is an inspired translation.

VERY FEW...

Acts 9 / 28 Hybrid MADs might, you'll have to ask them.

But then again, said Hybrids also repeatedly demonstrate their having failed to properly parse the words in the passages they base their many errors on.

Meaning, though some of them might hold to the KJV as the only translation either Inspired or Preserved by God, out the window they throw its built-in, and thus Preserved, word parsings.

Speaking of parsing words - you have got to be one of the worst individuals where parsing plain old everyday North American English is concerned, that I have run across in quite some time.

THAT is why you so very often conclude "a translation mistake in the KJV - time for another" badly parsed post by you.

And then there are many NON KJVO MADs, be they Acts 9 or Hybrid.

And what I have found over the years is that it has largely been the NON KJVO Acts 9 MADs who have spread the false charge you have been asserting, for decades now, DP.

Which is amusing, because out of the many Acts 9 KJVO MADS I have known over the years, not a one has held what you and your kind continually assert about them on this issue.

If anyhting, being that many Acts 9 KJVO MADs are Cessasionist - in contrast to many NON KJVO Acts 9 MADS, one would think the latter of the two would be the ones asserting an Inspired, Error-Free translation, or what have you.

Instead, it is many within the latter of those two, who are ever asserting that is the belief of Acts 9 KJVO MADs.

As is very often the case with you, DP - your assertions look right only when one takes your words absent of the whole of a matter.

And you very often demonstrate you have completely failed to get what someone actually said.

VERY often.

So, no surprise you continue to believe that KJVO MADs, or what have you, hold that the KKV is an Inspired translation, etc.

Hang it up already, you are basically spreading a lie.

And for what?

Because you just have to start one more post, after just one more post, after just one more post ad infinitum?

Rest assurred, you will fail to get this post.

Proving you haven't any business at your chosen task.

Take this how you will.

Rom. 5:6-8.

Hi Danoh , delete

dan p

 

[john w]

Hi to all and there are many believers who say that the English KJV is inspired ??

KJV-ONLY , say that there are no errors in the KJV , is that true ?

If you believe this , WHY and how will you prove IT ??

Prove:

-"Originals-Only-ism"

-"Errors-Only-ism"


-"Any versions Only-ism"


-That the scriptures, by its own testimony, can have errors, and still be considered, "is given by inspiration" scripture

-The "originals" had no errors."how will you prove IT'=your words.


="Here is a bunch of error filled "versions," and I will compare them, with each other, employ them, to correct other error filled versions/translations, to arrive at "perfection?" Is that it? Cannot be done.

Tell, all of us:

-Your infallible source authority, for correcting any alleged "version," translation, of the word of God

-Where we can get a copy of the preserved, true, perfect, pure, sure, right, sound(by definition) scriptures. Does it have a name?

-How would you know, you had "the originals," or the true, perfect, pure, sure, right, sound(by definition) scriptures, even if someone told you they/you had it, in your hands?

-The chapter, verse, that asserts that a translation cannot be "is given by inspiration."

-Your definition of "bible believer."


No side stepping, humanism, "IMO," speculation. These are simple questions.



Bible believer, not bible corrector/mystic/agnostic....


Saint John W...


Unpack it for us.

 

[john w]

KJV is my favorite.
I love it.
Don't pay any attention to what the Pseudo-MADs here say.

"Preferring," liking a "the bible," presupposes an authority over it.


And I "like" ice cream, "religion," in contrast to believing that Christianity is the only solution to mankind's dire solution. And? And I "prefer" not taking medicine for my ailment? And?

"Preferring" the KJB does not make it veracity, as many "prefer" the book od Mormon, the JW's "bible," the Koran.....

 

[Tambora]

Hi Danoh , and you and I are the ONLY ones who have spoken about the KJV - ONLY problem !!

And this the first OP I have ever done !!

You can check out a debate on it in our Battle Royale Forum.

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ed-Scripture-on-Earth-Today-Battle-Royale-XIV

 

[Tambora]

"Preferring" the KJB does not make it veracity,

Yeppers.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Hi to all and there are many believers who say that the English KJV is inspired ??

KJV-ONLY , say that there are no errors in the KJV , is that true ?

If you believe this , WHY and how will you prove IT ??

One reason I ask is because , we will have this problem in our assembly , so what say you ??

dan p

You can check out a debate on it in our Battle Royale Forum.

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ed-Scripture-on-Earth-Today-Battle-Royale-XIV

That, and http://kgov.com/kjo

 

[Danoh]

Hi Danoh , and you and I are the ONLY ones who have spoken about the KJV - ONLY problem !!

And this the first OP I have ever done !!

And close to San Diego , there is and assembly that is dispensational KJV-ONLY body and some close to us in Los Angeles !!

And of course in Chicago !!

Only the Originals are inspired and TRANSLATIONS are not !!

They seem to say the the English translation is inspired and if only the KJV is inspired , so what about those who can not speak English OR has God Inspired a translation especially for them also ??

I can at least show 2 errors in Translation , 1 Tim 1:4 and Rom 1:4 !!

Eph 3:9 to you !!

dan p

D, you ought to know by now that going by what any one "seems to say" is no basis for building one's conclusions on as to what they had meant.

You might try asking each individual what he or she means by KJVO.

And the fact of the matter is that the KJVO position held by Acts 9 KJVO MADs is not the same as the KJVO position held by most NON MAD KJVOS.

It is largely NON MAD KJVOs (mostly Baptists like nut cases, Ruckman and Riplinger and their huge, huge followings) who hold that the KJB is an inspired translation.

Here is a more specific problem...

Elsewhere on here, you once wasted a good post on deaf ears about the correct understanding of the parsing in Acts 28:28.

You were right. And your post was ignored.

At the same time, the KJV's parsing of that passage is the same - when understood from the viewpoint that said translation is in 500 year old EARLY Modern English usage.

Clearly, both you and the deaf ears you posted that to, were both looking at it not only even LATER Early Modern BRITTISH English in the KJV, but rather, through our LATER NORTH AMERICAN Modern English.

Thus, their failure to see your point, but also, your erroneous conclusion the KJV translated the sense of that passage incoreectly.

And then there is the impact of local parsing of words customs on one's understanding of any word.

The entire Pentecostal movement is based on that kind of an impact on one's understanding.

Anyway, as translated in the KJV, the passage READS.

Acts 28:28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God IS sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.

But OFTEN in the KJV, HOW a passage READS and WHAT it means by HOW it reads, are NOT the SAME.

This is also the case in the Greek, though.

The difference being that with the Greek one has resources that help idenitify the parsing of each word.

As a result, in that case, your Greek parsing rightly led you to conclude that the SENSE of "is sent" in that passage is in the sense of "has been sent."

But Luke has long since already established that "has been sent" is the actual sense of that; as has Paul in his writings.

In other words, overall narrative and scope are also a part of what goes into the parsing of any word or words.

Case in point, in light of the overall narrative and scope in which Luke wrote Luke in, what does "is" mean in the following passage?

John 5:2 Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.

It also means "was" doesn't it?

For it no longer exists as it once did.

In fact, former Mid-Acts-er, Bullinger himself, points out this very principle about the importance of the Overall Scope, etc., in his great, great Bible study principles book " How to Enjoy the Bible."

Which he then proceeds to violate here and there, in said nevertheless still a great Bible study principles book.

No surprise he ended up Acts 28.

And I've sat in on many a lesson where the entire time, the emphasis was on The Geek and how it supposedly corrects this or that word in the KJV translation.

Just about in every case, the correction was simply hot air.

The actual case having been simply the teacher's consistent failure to understand the English of the KJV; which does not always follow much later English rules of communicating intended sense through words.

Because the KJV is not only in a 500 year old EARLY Modern English, but in a 500 year old EARLY Modern BRITTISH English.

Just as today's Greek is somewhat different in rules than the Greek of two thousand years ago.

And then there is the issue of the rules of translation the KJV is rightly based on; which is why some of its passages often appear to read as if written backwards, and or disjointed from a much clearer word order sequence and or structure.

And then there is the fact that people down South often parse various words differently than people in the North do, and so on.

This also impacts what each person concludes he or she has actually understood.

One might as well call this thread "That's not what I'd meant..."

For that has been the case with men throughout recorded history.

John 11:11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. 11:12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 11:13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 11:14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

The whole issue remains fascinating.

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[Danoh]

"Preferring," liking a "the bible," presupposes an authority over it.


And I "like" ice cream, "religion," in contrast to believing that Christianity is the only solution to mankind's dire solution. And? And I "prefer" not taking medicine for my ailment? And?

"Preferring" the KJB does not make it veracity, as many "prefer" the book od Mormon, the JW's "bible," the Koran.....

"Prefer" had also been endless KJV corrector: Stam's word for his preference of the KJV "as the best translation."

It had been his way of harmonizing before men his assertion on one hand, of the many supposed errors in the KJV, with his assertion, on the other, that he believed in the Word of God.

Quite a slippery slope he'd had going on there.

At the same time, what any individual might personally mean by the word "prefer" has to be qualified by each said individual.

Personally, I prefer the KJV myself.

But for me, I say that from the viewpoint that at this time, I have not yet settled on whether or not the KJV is or is not a completely error-free translation - being that this issue is as huge as EVERY single word in the Bible, and then some, Matt. 4:4.

Can anyone really say they have settled this issue to that extent?

Let alone, in light of what men were doing even in Paul's day, and have done since, to the Mystery, to this very day, whether ignorantly or intentionally - despite the very fact that Scripture crystal clearly asserts it is God's will that "all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery" Eph. 3.

At this point I remain, Rom. 14:5 about it.

Allows for greater clarity on this issue - as it does on all issues.

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[DAN P]

Hi to all and there are many believers who say that the English KJV is inspired ??

KJV-ONLY , say that there are no errors in the KJV , is that true ?

If you believe this , WHY and how will you prove IT ??

One reason I ask is because , we will have this problem in our assembly , so what say you ??

Prove:

"Originals-Only-ism"

"Errors-Only-ism


-Any versions Only-ism


-That the scriptures, by its own testimony, can have errors, and still be considered, "is given by inspiration" scripture



Tell, all of us:

-Your infallible source authority, for correcting any alleged "version," translation, of the word of God

-Where we can get a copy of the preserved, true, perfect, pure, sure, right, sound(by definition) scriptures. Does it have a name?

-How would you know, you had "the originals," the true, perfect, pure, sure, right, sound(by definition) scriptures.

-The chapter, verse, that asserts that a translation cannot be "is given by inspiration."

-Your definition of "bible believer."


No side stepping, humanism, "IMO," speculation. These are simple questions.



Bible believer, not bible corrector/mystic/agnostic....


Saint John W...


Unpack it for us.

Hi and whether for me or against me , as far as KJV-ONLY , those who believe in KJV-ONLY have to believe in DOUBLE INSPIRATION and there are about 160 bible translations , so which one's are inspired !

The ones that are KJV-ONLY are dispensationalists that I know and some that that I have heard about !!

Any one that checks my 2 examples will see , 1 Tim 1:4 and Rom 1:4 with the Greek text are in error !!

I grew up with the KJV and that is all I use , but I am not KJV-ONLY as I look at the Greek text every day !!

But Scofield Reference bible is Acts 2 , and I am Acts 9 !!

dan p

 

[Danoh]

Hi and whether for me or against me , as far as KJV-ONLY , those who believe in KJV-ONLY have to believe in DOUBLE INSPIRATION and there are about 160 bible translations , so which one's are inspired ! ...

Again you promote this myth of yours.

:chuckle:

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[john w]

Only the Originals are inspired and TRANSLATIONS are not !!

You lied. No scripture asserts "Only the Originals are inspired."Scripture always refers to "copies."

Why did you lie? Tell us that the Lord Jesus Christ read from "the Originals," here:


Luke 4 KJV

16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.

17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.

21 And he began to say unto them, This day is [U]this scripture [/U]fulfilled in your ears.

Save it-you lied.


And tell us that the "Ethiopia eunuch," in Acts 8, carried wit him, "The Originals, when he read from Isiah, "The place of the scripture.."

26 And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert.

27 And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship,

28 Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.

29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.

30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?

31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:

33 In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.

34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?

35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.


Go ahead. Go ahead and try to bamboozle members of the boc, talking them out of their faith in the book, with this "Originals Only-ism" SCAM, which, by definition, makes the promise/doctrine, of the PRESERVATION of the scriptures, quite superfluous, meaningless, and makes the LORD God, as much of an idiot as you, in this assertion of yours.



Joshua 8:32 KJV

And he wrote there upon the stones a copy of the law of Moses, which he wrote in the presence of the children of Israel


Proverbs 25:1 KJV

These are also proverbs of Solomon, which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied out.



Tell us, "Originals Only-ist" scammers, were the "original" 10 commandments, "written with the finger of God...",





Exodus 31:18 KJV

And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.



Deuteronomy 9:10 KJV

And the Lord delivered unto me two tables of stone written with the finger of God; and on them was written according to all the words, which the Lord spake with you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly.

...broken by Moses....

Exodus 32 KJV19 And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount.


...no longer valid, as "the originals" were destroyed-the "originals" had been broken (Ex. 32:19 KJB).

Exodus 34 KJV

1 And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest.

27 And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.

28 And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.


Are the second 10, "like unto the first," not scripture? Well?




Survey Deuteronomy 10:1-5 KJV....

At that time the Lord said unto me, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first, and come up unto me into the mount, and make thee an ark of wood.

2 And I will write on the tables the words that were in the first tables which thou brakest, and thou shalt put them in the ark.

3 And I made an ark of shittim wood, and hewed two tables of stone like unto the first, and went up into the mount, having the two tables in mine hand.

4 And he wrote on the tables, according to the first writing, the ten commandments, which the Lord spake unto you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the Lord gave them unto me.

5 And I turned myself and came down from the mount, and put the tables in the ark which I had made; and there they be, as the Lord commanded me.


Moses went on to repeat to the people that it was God who had twice written the "original" 10 commandments. And the Lord God is cited as the author of scripture, not Moses, who wrote the 10 Commandments both times, the second set being copies-scripture.


Shuck this "originals ONLY" scam, Dan. KNOCK IT OFF.

 

[Danoh]

JohnW, its obvious that eunuch in Acts 8 snuck into that Synagogue in Luke 4 and "borrowed" their COPY of Isaiah.

:chuckle:

Rom. 5:6-8

 

[john w]

Hi and whether for me or against me , as far as KJV-ONLY , those who believe in KJV-ONLY have to believe in DOUBLE INSPIRATION and there are about 160 bible translations , so which one's are inspired !

The ones that are KJV-ONLY are dispensationalists that I know and some that that I have heard about !!

Any one that checks my 2 examples will see , 1 Tim 1:4 and Rom 1:4 with the Greek text are in error !!

I grew up with the KJV and that is all I use , but I am not KJV-ONLY as I look at the Greek text every day !!

But Scofield Reference bible is Acts 2 , and I am Acts 9 !!

dan p

Learn how to quote. Non responsive, evasion:

Prove:

"Originals-Only-ism"

"Errors-Only-ism


-Any versions Only-ism


-That the scriptures, by its own testimony, can have errors, and still be considered, "is given by inspiration" scripture



Tell, all of us:

-Your infallible source authority, for correcting any alleged "version," translation, of the word of God

-Where we can get a copy of the preserved, true, perfect, pure, sure, right, sound(by definition) scriptures. Does it have a name?

-How would you know, you had "the originals," the true, perfect, pure, sure, right, sound(by definition) scriptures.

-The chapter, verse, that asserts that a translation cannot be "is given by inspiration."

-Your definition of "bible believer."


No side stepping, humanism, "IMO," speculation. These are simple questions.



Bible believer, not bible corrector/mystic/agnostic....


Saint John W...


Unpack it for us.

Any one that checks my 2 examples will see , 1 Tim 1:4 and Rom 1:4 with the Greek text are in error !!

="Here is a bunch of error filled "versions," and I will compare them, with each other, employ them, to correct other error filled versions/translations, to arrive at "perfection?" Is that it? Cannot be done.

I look at the Greek text every day !!

You lied, again-no such thing as "the Greek."


Prove that "the originals" were not "double inspired."

 

[JudgeRightly]

You lied. No scripture asserts "Only the Originals are inspired."Scripture always refers to "copies."

Why did you lie? Tell us that the Lord Jesus Christ read from "the Originals," here:


Luke 4 KJV

16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.

17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.

21 And he began to say unto them, This day is [U]this scripture [/U]fulfilled in your ears.

Save it-you lied.


And tell us that the "Ethiopia eunuch," in Acts 8, carried wit him, "The Originals, when he read from Isiah, "The place of the scripture.."

26 And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert.

27 And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship,

28 Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.

29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.

30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?

31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:

33 In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.

34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?

35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.


Go ahead. Go ahead and try to bamboozle members of the boc, talking them out of their faith in the book, with this "Originals Only-ism" SCAM, which, by definition, makes the promise/doctrine, of the PRESERVATION of the scriptures, quite superfluous, meaningless, and makes the LORD God, as much of an idiot as you, in this assertion of yours.



Joshua 8:32 KJV

And he wrote there upon the stones a copy of the law of Moses, which he wrote in the presence of the children of Israel


Proverbs 25:1 KJV

These are also proverbs of Solomon, which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied out.



Tell us, "Originals Only-ist" scammers, were the "original" 10 commandments, "written with the finger of God...",





Exodus 31:18 KJV

And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.



Deuteronomy 9:10 KJV

And the Lord delivered unto me two tables of stone written with the finger of God; and on them was written according to all the words, which the Lord spake with you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly.

...broken by Moses....

Exodus 32 KJV19 And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount.


...no longer valid, as "the originals" were destroyed-the "originals" had been broken (Ex. 32:19 KJB).

Exodus 34 KJV

1 And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest.

27 And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.

28 And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.


Are the second 10, "like unto the first," not scripture? Well?




Survey Deuteronomy 10:1-5 KJV....

At that time the Lord said unto me, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first, and come up unto me into the mount, and make thee an ark of wood.

2 And I will write on the tables the words that were in the first tables which thou brakest, and thou shalt put them in the ark.

3 And I made an ark of shittim wood, and hewed two tables of stone like unto the first, and went up into the mount, having the two tables in mine hand.

4 And he wrote on the tables, according to the first writing, the ten commandments, which the Lord spake unto you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the Lord gave them unto me.

5 And I turned myself and came down from the mount, and put the tables in the ark which I had made; and there they be, as the Lord commanded me.


Moses went on to repeat to the people that it was God who had twice written the "original" 10 commandments. And the Lord God is cited as the author of scripture, not Moses, who wrote the 10 Commandments both times, the second set being copies-scripture.


Shuck this "originals ONLY" scam, Dan. KNOCK IT OFF.

I'm of the belief that only the originals were inspired by God, but that God was smart enough to write a book that could survive translations and updates in the languages.

The story itself has not changed, even if the words and wording has.

 

[john w]

JohnW, its obvious that eunuch in Acts 8 snuck into that Synagogue in Luke 4 and "borrowed" their COPY of Isaiah.

:chuckle:

Rom. 5:6-8

So, it was a copy, by definition, not "the originals."

 

[john w]

I'm of the belief that only the originals were inspired by God, but that God was smart enough to write a book that could survive translations and updates in the languages.

The story itself has not changed, even if the words and wording has.

No scripture asserts "originals only." You had to have alleged "scholars" in the late 1800's "teach" us that. "Originals onlyism" is a scam, makes the doctrine of preservation meaningless, superfluous, and is humanism, attributing the conveying, and subsequent preservation of the book, beholden to man, as the LORD God lost his masterpiece, as the overpowering elements of the wind, rain, heat, floods,cold, snow, ...overcame the LORD God, as he was just unable to preserve His scriptures, and we are left with a "theoretical," "desert mirage" "almost bible."

Yeh...that is really "scriptural." But, then again, you droids don't think scripture exists, as "all scripture WAS given, not IS given, by inspiration."