Rose42

Quite the opposite. What's sad is you fail to see it was men who translated the KJV so by using your 'logic' it too is an insult to God because it has had many changes. Your assertion that the KJV is the only worthy translation is unbiblical and illogical.



You are sadly mistaken. And to compare the Bible to Shakespeare is patently ridiculous.

I've heard all this before and it holds no water - not among most mature Christians. What you're saying is akin to claiming Britain's English is superior to American English. A ridiculous assertion.

You really should rethink your position and I hope no one is swayed into thinking the KJV is the only worthy translation. That couldn't be further from the truth though it does not mean one can't be saved if they only rely on the KJV. That would also be a ridiculous assertion.

olegig Loc: Texas panhandle

You are the one saying the old English should be replaced so the simple question follows should Shakespeare also be re-written?

A man can be saved by hearing the preaching of another man who is lost. There are many preachers/teachers who do not believe in the resurrection, but I bet they still have converts.

Why does everyone argue, argue, argue, but completely ignore the question of Num 14:30 vs Heb 3:16?
Do you really believe God would ok the use of a book with such a glaring error?
I'm sure by now you have searched every popular modern version. Did you find one that does not disagree with itself?

Your very good at stating glowing platitudes, but when asked to get down to the nitty-griddy of things ignorance abounds.

At first I saw a little hope in you being opened minded, but seems something privately transpired that slammed it shut. Now your just repeating what others have told you.
Seems yet again a waste of time.

My hope is the question of authority hangs in your mind.
Good day

Rose42

A straw man. One has nothing to do with the other nor is it important if people don’t understand Shakespeare.



What “glaring error”? Have you not read other translations? Are you really hanging your hat on a non existent error? Seriously????



The ones I use and a few others don’t disagree. Have you ever checked?



You’ve not been able to show that the KJV is the best translation. Not even close.



My authority is God alone. I have little patience for the KJV only opinion (not truth) because that controversy is wholly contrived.

olegig Loc: Texas panhandle

Golly Rose42 you make it hard to resist your sweet replies.

Rose42 "The ones I use and a few others don’t disagree. Have you ever checked? "

Not one of you will enter the land I swore with uplifted hand to make your home, except Caleb son of Jephunneh and Joshua son of Nun. Numbers 14:30 NIV
Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? Hebrews 3:16 - NIV
By no means will you come into the land where I swore to settle you, except for Caleb the son of Jephunneh and Joshua the son of Nun. Numbers 14:30 NASB
For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?
Hebrews 3:16 NASB

Yes, I just checked again and sadly "all" still means all even in modern language. Both above say in Numbers Joshua and Caleb followed Moses out of Egypt and both say in Hebrews that neither went into the promised land.
I can help you with your research and reading if you wish by showing that both were indeed in the promised land.
Your wish is my command regarding these hard to read passages.

Rose42 "A straw man. One has nothing to do with the other nor is it important if people don’t understand Shakespeare. "
Glad you brought up the straw man thing, leads me to feel you know what it is since your the one who brought it up with your hard to read old English thing.

Rose42 "You’ve not been able to show that the KJV is the best translation. Not even close."

Haven't said the KJB is the best just showed all others are trash.
I can hear it now Rose42 saying to God: "Hey God, you know that book of yours you gave us in English that we call the word of God, it is wrong! God you were lying to us."

Rose42 "My authority is God alone. I have little patience for the KJV only opinion (not truth) because that controversy is wholly contrived."
Well finally we have something in agreement. Yes it is wholly contrived, contrived by those who have put their authority in the scholar's ability to stay up to date, be modern in a language of better understand.
As soon as anyone might pick out and say this such and such modern version is the inspired word of God holy scholarship terror would rain down upon them.

Rose42

No you certainly did NOT show others were “trash”. Not even close. What it looks like is you don’t understand what you’re reading.

Read Verse 31 not just 30 in Numbers 14. Your whole premise is false.

You’ve failed to make your case.

You lack discernment in this matter.

olegig Loc: Texas panhandle

Careful now Rose42 your spirit of kindness maybe clouding your words.
30 Not one of you will enter the land I swore with uplifted hand to make your home, except Caleb son of Jephunneh and Joshua son of Nun.
31 As for your children that you said would be taken as plunder, I will bring them in to enjoy the land you have rejected. Numbers 14:30-31NIV
Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? Hebrews 3:16 NIV

We know Moses led everyone (all) including Caleb, Joshua, as well as many others and their children out of Egypt.
We also know when they heard of the giants there was rebellion that sent them wandering for 40 yrs.
We also know God does not children responsible.
So who entered the Promised Land?
Was it ALL as stated in the modern versions or was it:

For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.
Hebrews 3:16 KJV

I'll leave it up to you to decide.

Rose42

I have decided and I also see you are not understanding what you read in Hebrews or you are just picking one verse out of a section in an effort to misconstrue its meaning and start a meaningless argument.

Perhaps you could get some help from a commentary

olegig Loc: Texas panhandle

If I have misconstrued the accepted meaning of "all" please give me and the reading audience what you feel is the correct meaning of "all."
I see you don't feel I understand the Heb verse, but to have that feeling you must have your interpretation to compare.
Don't you think it time you stop telling us I'm wrong and attempt to PROVE it by telling us what you feel is correct?

So far as the need of a commentary, the problem with commentaries is they are not perfect as exampled by this passage in question from the niv of man's commentary.

One verse? Yes that is but one verse. If you really believe in your heart we have the word of God in English today in the niv, perhaps you might tell us why you feel it ok for your god to fall short of perfection.
Please give reason for your god being perfect at Acts 8:36-38 niv when he taught salvation through water baptism.

One verse? How many mistakes does it take to convince you of imperfection? Not saying any particular version is perfect, just saying all modern versions are NOT.

So far as commentaries, they are only man's comments on what a verse or passage means.
I am asking for your commentary.

Rose42

A commentary might help you understand what you can’t seem to. If you read the next few verses its pretty clear your “problem” doesn’t exist except in your imagination.

I never said any one version was perfect or superior. Its only you claiming - falsely - that your preferred version is superior.

Also I don’t use the NIV which you seem fixated on for some reason. You should look into how it was translated and why it was done the way it was.

Once again you have failed to make your case.

olegig Loc: Texas panhandle

Ok, which version do you prefer?
Please post Heb 3:16 from your preferred version so we can see how it handles that teaching.
I do see your need of a commentary because the modern versions change so many words the chain of reference is totally lost.
The niv is the one found in most church pews. It's sales are the highest because of the wholesale purchase to furnish these pews. No particularly fixated on it, but it does seem to the leader of the pack.

Again which version do you prefer?

Rose42

So you don’t know why people use the NIV. Okay. Is not the gospel more important than your NON EXISTENT issue?

Again I tell you - READ. The meaning is clear after you read the next few verses. You are simply being wilfully obtuse.

There. Is. No. Conflict. Period.

olegig Loc: Texas panhandle

Now, now Rose42 don't get your feathers ruffled, your already red enough. Or maybe your one of those other colored roses?

At your telling instruction I did READ, in the niv and see no more light shed on the issue.
Perhaps you might give us a little insight as to what the passage is saying.
I mean your quick to give a piece of your tongue, so put your brain in gear and pleasure us with your thoughts.

Oh, maybe the trouble is we are not reading the same thing, a common road block in any Bible study group.
Why are you hesitant to tell us your preferred version?

Rose42

My feathers aren’t ruffled but I am baffled by the willful misuse of scripture on your part. Why is the question. Not to mention you are using two verses out of
context in your attempt to prove something that isn’t even true

I’m not hesitant to say I use the Esv, NASB, Lexham English, NKJV and KJV. Each has its advantages.

You read with a closed mind which is why you can’t see it. Try again. Read v 19 carefully this time.

olegig Loc: Texas panhandle

I totally agree they could not enter in because of unbelief, but I'm afraid in your haste to sling a few arrows, you have totally misunderstood the meaning of my bring it to light.
The question never has been why those who didn't enter in were not permitted to do so.

The issue is that all the modern versions say NO ONE who followed Moses out of Egypt was permitted to enter when in fact those self-same modern versions confirm, within themselves, that Caleb and Joshua both left with Moses in Numbers and confirm they both entered in the book of Joshua.

For who were those who heard and yet rebelled? Was it not all those who left Egypt led by Moses?
Hebrews 3:16 ESV
For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?
Hebrews 3:16 NASB
For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses?
Hebrews 3:16 NKJV
Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt?
Hebrews 3:16 NIV

For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.
Hebrews 3:16 KJV

The KJB as seen above is the only one that teaches NOT everyone who came out of Egypt provoke God with their unbelief, the only one.

olegig Loc: Texas panhandle

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
Luke 12:51 KJV

Do you suppose that I came to give peace on earth? I tell you, not at all, but rather division.
Luke 12:51 NKJV

Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition, knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned.
Titus 3:10-11 NKJV

In the first two verses above we see Jesus saying one reason He came to earth was to give division, however in the third verse we are told a divisive man is a sinner.
Is this one of your advantages? That Jesus is made a sinner?

Reject a divisive person after a first and second warning, knowing that such a person has deviated from what is right and is sinning, being self-condemned.
Titus 3:10-11 NASB

As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.
Titus 3:10-11 ESV

In the two passages above we see those versions also make Jesus a sinner.
Ok, you can say human error, but why in the same place? Just like the Heb 3:16 thing. Why in the same place?
I still grant you can blame it on human error, but you cannot call them the word of God.