While I have my views regarding the accuracy of the King James Version, I realize that this is a red herring. I am fully versed in the KJV. Even within the translation, the question comes back to what Paul asked in
1 Corinthians 12:29:
The obvious answer is "no". Therefore when all are invited/allowed to prophesy two chapters later, it must mean that not all who are invited/allowed to prophesy can be considered prophets, in the way Paul meant his rhetorical question in 12:29.
It is your right to believe as you wish, but ask yourself:
What qualifies you to make the above claim? How do you know that these
not-so "ancient translators truly knew what the Greek to English translation should be"?
None of them were filled with the Holy Spirit. Some of them weren't even experts in Koine Greek. In their preface, the KJV translators even admit to not giving a perfectly literal, word for word translation. They also admit to not being able to perfectly translate every passage, hence why the 1611 version had over 8,000 margin notes.
See here:
and
Source:
http://www.kjvbibles.com/kjpreface.htm
You are crying foul about everyone who undertakes to understand the Greek text, because they aren't "expert" enough in your opinion, and yet, you AREN'T expert enough to make a judgment call about the Greek text, either.
The Greek text includes,
UNDER INSPIRATION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT words that translate as "and", "if" or "the", and it does make a major difference in how the inspired text should be read and understood.
The King James Version is replete with these translated prepositions. Prepositions are words that modify nouns, whose grammatical duty is to literally "preach" meaning to the reader. To disregard them or as you have done, blatantly say they have no meaning in the understanding of the text is to undermine the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures.
You really want to go there?
Besides, if "The "and" or "if" or "the" etc. is irrelevant to the meaning of what the passage is telling us" then the KJV translators had no inspiration operating upon them to translate each preposition the way they did. They could translate each
kai,
gar,
ho,
tou,
eis,
epi, and etc. any way they wanted, without changing the meaning since the meaning is "irrelevant".
So has every other word, obviously, for better or for worse. Take "office of a bishop" in
1 Timothy 3:1. "office of" is not in
italics and yet, the phrase isn't in the Greek text upon which the King James Version of the Bible is based.
So why isn't "office of" in
italics?
What about banking on the actual Greek text upon which the KJV is based?
I am not against the "whole church" prophesying. Where did I say I was? I've only indicated that prophesying doesn't automatically a prophet make.
Not so, friend. I am not against everyone prophesying. I am against the idea that prophesying makes everyone an automatic prophet.
There's only one accuser of the brethren, Sean. We will be judged by every idle word we speak. Half-baked accusations against a saint not based in reality might cost you down the road.
Threaded Mode
