Quote:
Originally Posted by andreas.karlssson
The one God wrote? that KJV is translated from? :O
|
The KJV 1611 is not only as good as the original manuscripts, it is better!
There are three "translations" spoken of in the Bible. In all three cases, the translation referred to is better than the original. Since we accept the Bible as our
final authority in all matters of faith and practice, the Bible's "practice" will have more authority than any "mere human" opinion.
The first "translation" found in Scripture is found in
II Samuel 3:7-10:
And Saul had a concubine, whose name was Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah: and Ishbosheth said to Abner, Wherefore hast thou gone in unto my father's concubine? Then was Abner very wroth for the words of Ishbosheth, and said, Am I a dog's head, which against Judah do shew kindness this day unto the house of Saul thy father, to his brethren, and to his friends, and have not delivered thee into the hand of David, that thou chargest me to day with a fault concerning this woman?
So do God to Abner, and more also, except, as the LORD hath sworn to David, even so I do to him;
To translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan even to Beersheba.
After the death of King Saul in
I Samuel 31, Abner, who had been the captain of Saul's army installed Ishbosheth as King instead of David (
II Samuel 12:8,9). Later Ishbosheth and Abner had a falling out. Abner, in anger, announces to Ishbosheth that he is going to "translate" the Kingdom of Israel from Ishbosheth to David.
It is obvious by Abner's statement of
II Samuel 3:9 that the LORD wanted David to be king over all twelve tribes of Israel. Therefore, the "translation" of the kingdom of Israel to David was
BETTER than the "original" state which has a split kingdom with David rightly ruling over one portion and Ishbosheth wrongly ruling over the other section.
The second "translation" found in Scripture is found in
Colossians 1:13:
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
Here the "translation" spoken of is the conversion of a lost sinner to a new life in Jesus Christ. No one in their right mind could even
pretend that this translation is not a massive improvement over the "original" condition.
The third "translation" found in Scripture is found in
Hebrews 11:5:
By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.
The word "translate" only appears five times in scripture. Once in
II Samuel, once in
Colossians and the remaining three times here in
Hebrews 11:5.
A Christian with even a shallow knowledge of the Bible is familiar with the story of Enoch from
Genesis 5. Enoch walked with God and is known to have pleased God. He was a prophet (
Judges 14) and a man of faith. God saw fit to
physically take Enoch to Heaven so that he would not have to experience death. This individual action is a miniature version of what Christians call "The Rapture," mentioned in
I Corinthians 15,
I Thessalonians 4,
Titus 2 and various other places in the Bible. Since the word "Rapture" appears nowhere in Scripture, a more proper name for this future occurrence might be "The Blessed Hope" (
Titus) or "The Catching Up" (
I Thessalonians) of "Our Translation" (
Hebrews).
It is obvious that Enoch's translation was an improvement over his original condition.
Thus we see that every "translation" in our
final authority on
all matters is an improvement over the original.
If you are a simple Bible believer you will have no trouble accepting this. If you worship education or just hate to be wrong, you will reject this Bible Fact as easily as you have rejected
every Bible Fact that you couldn't agree with.
Now which will you follow son, the Bible or men?