[garcia]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

Thanks, I do not want you guys think i am not hearing what you guys telling me. thank you! I am reading everything like i said before im still growing and searching the truth Amen!

[Jedediah]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

Yes Amen God word is powerful and it protects us form the devil. I just want you to know that I read more the Hebrew and Greek bible than the English versions bibles I read the translations just to compare what I Have read, in the Hebrew and Greek.

I have to get to the church to let the kids in for our Youth Fellowship lock-in, so I don't have time to provide you with a lengthy reproval of your errors concerning the Bible. However, I will provide you with a useful discussion on the use of the original Greek and Hebrew over the KJV 1611 from my colleague. I trust you will find this edifying.

Can a translation be as good as the originals?

QUESTION: The King James Bible is a mere translation from Greek to English. A translation can't be as good as the originals, can it?

ANSWER: A translation cannot only be "as good" as the originals, but better.

EXPLANATION: 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, ITS "practice" will have more authority than any "mere human" opinion.

1. The first translation mentioned in scripture is found in II Samuel 3:7-10.

7 "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?
8 Then was Abner very wroth for the words of Ish-bosheth, 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?
9 So do God to Abner, and more also, except, as the LORD hath sworn to David, even so I do to him;
10 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. (Remember the law of first mentions.)

2. The second translation spoken of 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.

3. The third translation found in the Bible is located 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 mentioned in our final authority in 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.

It should be noted here that the perplexed translators of both the New American Standard Version and the New International Version, when faced with this glaring contradiction of their own personal prejudice, could not bring themselves to allow the word "translation" in any of the above mentioned passages.

Which will you follow, the Bible or men?

[garcia]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

Yes Amen God word is powerful and it protects us form the devil. I just want you to know that I read more the Hebrew and Greek bible than the English versions bibles I read the translations just to compare what I Have read, in the Hebrew and Greek.

[Meek and Humble]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

I believe im saved, i believe in our Lord and savor, he paid for my sins. No man tells me if i am save or not or i am going to hell or not only God is my Judge. I stopped eating the fruit from the tree knowledge of good and evil.I eat the fruit from the tree of life. AMEN!
thanks for all your comments! GOD bless You all AMEN

Can Someone Get Saved Using Another Version?

[garcia]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

I believe im saved, i believe in our Lord and savor, he paid for my sins. No man tells me if i am save or not or i am going to hell or not only God is my Judge. I stopped eating the fruit from the tree knowledge of good and evil.I eat the fruit from the tree of life. AMEN!
thanks for all your comments! GOD bless You all AMEN

[garcia]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

read the link

[garcia]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

nope don't want any body to do my homework just want to know his opinion

[Jedediah]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

You can't be bothered to read his links, can you

Typical socialist. He expects us to do his homework for him.

[BelieverInGod]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

why you say that? why only kJV

You can't be bothered to read his links, can you

[garcia]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

why you say that? why only kJV

[Meek and Humble]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

You don't go to hell by rejecting the kjv bible you go to hell by rejecting Jesus Christ. you should know that and I am not rejecting the kjv i read all the translation that is why i comment on it. brother! I have found so far that all of them give the same message. there are some crazy bible out there that add and subtract from gods word that i do not read. i am all ways seeking the truth that is What GOD wants us to do Amen.

No. The King James Bible is the ONLY Bible you can read.

The KJV Only Controversy

[garcia]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

You don't go to hell by rejecting the kjv bible you go to hell by rejecting Jesus Christ. you should know that and I am not rejecting the kjv i read all the translation that is why i comment on it. brother! I have found so far that all of them give the same message. there are some crazy bible out there that add and subtract from gods word that i do not read. i am all ways seeking the truth that is What GOD wants us to do Amen.

[Meek and Humble]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

why say whales and not monsters, why did the translators choose to us whales? from what I know during that time they did not know about the dinos. yet and the only monster they knew where whales so they amused that the Hebrew bible was talking about whales.

By all means, reject the KJV. You are the one who will go to hell, not me.

KJB is God's Perfect Word

[garcia]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

why say whales and not monsters, why did the translators choose to us whales? from what I know during that time they did not know about the dinos. yet and the only monster they knew where whales so they amused that the Hebrew bible was talking about whales.

[Meek and Humble]

Re: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" - not Biblic

Thank I will read it, I commenting on the the things i know know, I am still growing AMEN but what I am trying to say is that there is some errors in the King James Version not somthing so big that will effect the hole bible. for example Genesis 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth. In the Hebrew bible it does not say Created great whales (they can be included) its "the Monsters" this makes some people not think that dinosaurs where created with man.

No, that's not true. There are NO mistakes in the King James Bible.

http://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_61.asp