tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post5257093897132870028..comments2024-03-27T19:50:47.426-05:00Comments on The Watchman's Bagpipes: King James Version Only?Glenn E. Chatfieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-66647642186039257192018-03-09T18:02:56.762-06:002018-03-09T18:02:56.762-06:00Carolyn,
Actually, Jesse's stuff is right on ...Carolyn,<br /><br />Actually, Jesse's stuff is right on and exactly what I have discovered in my decades of research on the topic.<br /><br />And who says the Egyptian manuscripts were corrupt? KJV Onlyiers just assert such because they compare all manuscripts to the very late T.R.<br /><br />I have looked into this quite in depth and it is you who are deceived by the KJVO cult.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-18341459470562089232018-03-09T17:31:36.267-06:002018-03-09T17:31:36.267-06:00Dear Glenn,
I know that Jesse's writing style...Dear Glenn,<br /><br />I know that Jesse's writing style may sound pretty scholarly on the surface, but his stuff is junk and ignorant. You should not allow cultists like him to rampage on your blogs; please abandon your modern translations also. It's worth all the while.The evidence all supports are position. I remember reading something of your's where you said that you loved to study history. Well don't you recall the corruption of the Egyptian manuscripts? Even the Old Testament proves that paganism came from that place. These modern translations are just wicked and vile. Please look up all this, my fried.<br /><br />-CarolynAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-17225576712660232872018-02-10T11:12:29.492-06:002018-02-10T11:12:29.492-06:00Anonymous,
All you did here was demonstrate your ...Anonymous,<br /><br />All you did here was demonstrate your complete ignorance.<br /><br />First, the passage you cite is in Revelation and is just about the book of Revelation, not the Bible. the Bible didn't exist as such when Revelation was written. CONTEXT.<br /><br />Secondly, KJV adds and subtracts a lot from what is found in earlier manuscripts that what KJV translators had to deal with.<br /><br />The KJV is just an English translation with no special approval or inspiration from God. You've let fanatic cult-type teachers deceive you with false teachings.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-15980938694437833782018-02-10T11:10:54.568-06:002018-02-10T11:10:54.568-06:00Exactly what part of “ANYONE WHO ADDS OR TAKES AWA...Exactly what part of “ANYONE WHO ADDS OR TAKES AWAY FROM THIS BOOK” DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND ? IT IS INDEED NO different than “WHICH PART OF THE WORD “NO” DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ???? I was at a loss as to why almost everyone was reading from every other so called new and improved versions of the bible. All Reading from any and every other version EXCEPT the true Old King James……Why Why why would you want to change God’s word to suit the brethren. It ought to be rather, The brethren adapting to the grand language of the Old King James not all changing the word to suit the brethren !!!! The old King James Version has the SALT. All the rest are simply put…without SALT. I am just shocked though I know Our King of King’s Christ Jesus says I should think it strange. Go ahead brethren. GO ON… explain away. Many others will be led astray by you and yours. I am grateful to God evermore I remain wide awake.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-44855088241118279582018-02-09T15:58:30.317-06:002018-02-09T15:58:30.317-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Jesse Albrechthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01349321905468957335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-70582745478014365112017-12-01T22:19:23.109-06:002017-12-01T22:19:23.109-06:00Glenn,
One insurmountable dilemma for the KJV onl...Glenn,<br /><br />One insurmountable dilemma for the KJV only position is that it demands the impossible: there are no KJV Spanish or Chinese Bibles!Jesse Albrechthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01349321905468957335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-44412730270653730222009-08-21T13:26:17.809-05:002009-08-21T13:26:17.809-05:00Glenn:
I agree with you about the use of the NIV ...Glenn:<br /><br />I agree with you about the use of the NIV and others as commentaries. The use of many versions and other tools is tremendously valuable as we study and dig for the literal truth of the passage.<br /><br />As you make very clear, one thing we need to avoid is the practice of selecting one English version as inspired and therefore rejecting all the others, such as the "KJV-Only" crowd does.<br /><br />Thanks for your great articles.Ron Livesayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10685550197231995860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-28983272629891133652009-08-21T12:49:06.217-05:002009-08-21T12:49:06.217-05:00The NIV makes a good commentary, though! Otherwis...The NIV makes a good commentary, though! Otherwise I will often cite it when desiring a more modern translation for ease of the reading public who are familiar with the NIV.<br /><br />When using modern Bibles with the eclectic underlying manuscripts, I have two favorites now: The ESV is the one I use for formal translation, while I really like the HSCB as a dynamic version - it is more formal than the NIV, and I have found my HSCB Apologetics Study Bible to be a wealth of information.<br /><br />My other primary Bible besides the KJV is the NKJV (MacArthur Study Bible version) bcause the Greek underlying texts are closer to the KJV's than the rest of the new Bibles.<br /><br />As long as we know the limitations of the particular Bible we use - be it textual or translational philosophy - it can be benficial to use many versions.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-32952618489319881252009-08-21T10:38:14.194-05:002009-08-21T10:38:14.194-05:00Marie;
It is sad that anyone would say you are not...Marie;<br />It is sad that anyone would say you are not saved because you use the NIV. The gospel message is there. <br /><br />That having been said, just be aware that the NIV is a "dynamic equivalent" translation rather than a literal one. I was using the NIV until certain passages just did not ring true - Micah 5:2 is a key one.<br /><br />I wrote a blog post on this topic: http://buffalonoise.blogspot.com/2009/04/why-i-quit-using-niv.htmlRon Livesayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10685550197231995860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-70437055440791012742009-08-17T06:20:25.868-05:002009-08-17T06:20:25.868-05:00To Corey,
I will not post your lengthy questionair...To Corey,<br />I will not post your lengthy questionaire because I stated that I will NOT entertain debate on this subject because I don't find it edifying or profitable. My post was to make a point that the KVJ Only stance is cultic and uselessly divisive.Glenn E. Chatfieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04117405535707961903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6043971967398769903.post-5354289020825478082009-07-27T15:37:20.755-05:002009-07-27T15:37:20.755-05:00I totally agree. Have nothing more to add. :) An o...I totally agree. Have nothing more to add. :) An old friend of mine out in Oregon thinks I'm not saved because I use the NIV.Mariehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15411152395819469453noreply@blogger.com