66 Book Onlyism

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Lacy Evans, Mar 30, 2004.

  1. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is taken from a booklet called, "The Common Man's defense of the King James Bible" by Joey Faust.
    http://www.kingdombaptist.org/article448.cfm

     
  2. Glory Bound

    Glory Bound
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Messages:
    354
    Likes Received:
    0
    It seems to me that Joey Faust is confusing the determination of the books with the determination of the WORDS in the books. Obviously the books were written prior to the 17th century. Therefore the words were set in place long before the KJV was ever dreamed of.

    I don't see a connection between which books make up the canon and the KJV.
     
  3. uhdum

    uhdum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    0
    It appears an attempt is being made to justify the glorification of the 17th century as the time when God "made all things new" by FINALLY giving us a perfect Bible and apparently FINALLY settling on a canon of Scripture. You are right, however... there isn't a connection.

    God bless!
     
  4. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think he (or I for that matter) is (am)confused at all. The canon was set (at least in God's mind) prior to the 17th century too. Lost truth can be restored. Books, when lost, can be ressurected from broken walls. Hilkiah found it in the rubble of a dilapidated temple and a deteriorated worship system.

    2Ki 22:8 And Hilkiah the high priest said unto Shaphan the scribe, I have found the book of the law in the house of the LORD. And Hilkiah gave the book to Shaphan, and he read it.

    Where was the perfect "BOOK of the law" before Hilkiah?

    God preserves by ressurection. That is the only Biblical method. Preservation by atrophy is non-Biblical. Dry bones scatter, dry bones are miraculously restored and re-antimated. Israel is scattered, the nation is raised back up.

    Isa 49:6
    And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel:


    Christ himself dies, Christ himself ressurrects. The "original" ten-commandment autographs are smashed by an angry Moses and God writes them again. Jeremiah's roll (autograph) is destroyed by King Jehoiakim and God writes it again.

    2Co 13:1
    This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

    Lacy
     
  5. Tangent

    Tangent
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2004
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not an expert, but didn't the Geneva Bible (and perhaps other 16th century translations) have the same 66 books?
     
  6. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    The 66 books Old Testament canon has been around for at least 15 centuries prior to the 17th century. It's also the Jewish canon after all.
     
  7. LarryN

    LarryN
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    0
    As early as 390 A.D., Jerome wanted to omit the Apocrypha from the canon, leaving only the canonical 66 books (39 O.T., 27 N.T.).

    In 397 A.D., Athanasius headed the council which officially 1st declared that only the 66 were canonical (although the Catholic Church didn't accept this).

    In early English translations, the same 80 books (incl. the 14 of the Apocrypha) were included in all. These same 80 books were all in Wycliff's (1384), Coverdale's (1535), the Matthew's Bible (1537), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva Bible (1560), the Bishop's Bible (1568), and the KJV (1611).
     
  8. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not sure. But 50 or 60 years would not make a difference to my argument. When both of these Bibles were already in use, Godly men were still debating the Canon.

    In 1647, the Westminster Confession of Faith listed the exact 66 Books (with no additions in Daniel or Jeremiah) now recognized by conservative, fundamental Christians.

    My point is that the 66 book canon is closed. (And this is a truth we all hold) But its "closed-ness" is a "new" truth in relation to it's relatively recent (re)acceptance and (re)recognition by Christianity at large.

    Where was the "perfect Canon" before 1647?

    Lacy
     
  9. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hit "edit"!

    Lacy
     
  10. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes and there is actually some misinformation posted here. One of the means to used by the CoE promoters of the KJV to rid themselves of the Geneva was to make it illegal to print a Bible in England without the Apocrypha. A black market developed where the Geneva was imported from Holland having been printed without the Apocrypha... which the KJV contained by law.

    If you find the thread I started concerning the dominance of the KJV and follow the links I gave you will find documentation to support what I posted above.
     
  11. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the Jewish OT, Ezra and Nehemiah were one book, First and Second Kings were one book, First and Second Chronicles were one book, First and Second Samuel were one book.

    What are you trying to get at, Lacy? Maybe if you would let everyone in on the secret, it would make more sense.

    In Christ,
    Trotter
     
  12. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Lacy, I've had direct electronic dialogue with Pastor Faust before, that lasted several months. And while I respect him as a true man of God and pray for his success in leading others to Christ, he's no different from any other KJVO in that he simply cannot provide the first shred of tangible evidence-let alone any empirical proof-that would lend any credence whatsoever to the KJVO myth. He cannot explain why every valid BV made before and after 1611 is different from any others and is still considered valid. He cannot explain why we should believe a doctrine about Scripture that's not FOUND in Scripture. He cannot prove that only the KJV is right & that the rendering of any verse or passage that differs from that of the KJV is wrong.

    As for the canon, he seems to have forgotten that the AV 1611 contained the Apocrypha. Whether the AV translators considered them Scripture or not doesn't really matter; they considered them important enough to be placed between the covers of their new translation.

    As for "lost truths", all the Scriptures were widely known before the AV was made. In fact, the English had them in the forms of the Geneva Bible and the previous English versions. The KJV was merely a new translation, same as those which followed.
     
  13. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    robycop3

    That is the kindest post I believe I have ever seen you make. Wow! Thank you! More Bile-less MV posting. Perhaps my fellow KJVOers should take notes and learn!

    My point is not that the KJV had the right 66 books and the others did not. What I am saying is this: Why can't the cannon of words be closed? The cannon of books wasn't settled (Perfectly) until the late 1600s. Those 66 books brought forth much fruit. the 1700s and 1800s was a time like no other in history from a theological/doctrinal standpoint, and from a practical (holiness) standpoint. You have to go back to the 1st century (When, I believe, we had a perfect Bible in the common language of the world - Greek.) to see anything that comes close.

    The doctrine that the Word is only inspired in the autographs is simply not Biblical. "Scripture" is the thing that was given and "Scripture" is always copies, translations, etc.
     
  14. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Lacy Evans:My point is not that the KJV had the right 66 books and the others did not. What I am saying is this: Why can't the cannon of words be closed? The cannon of books wasn't settled (Perfectly) until the late 1600s.

    The Geneva Bible has the same 80 books as the AV 1611, and its first edition was completed in 1560.

    Why can't the canon of words be closed? Because every language in extensive common use is constantly changing. My dad used the word "catarrh" when he was young to indicate a non-specific respiratory infection, but he no longer uses that word. I just wrote a post about the KJV's using "reins" for kidneys, a definition of "reins no longer in use. The AV 1611 was Good News for 17th Century man.


    Those 66 books brought forth much fruit. the 1700s and 1800s was a time like no other in history from a theological/doctrinal standpoint, and from a practical (holiness) standpoint. You have to go back to the 1st century (When, I believe, we had a perfect Bible in the common language of the world - Greek.) to see anything that comes close.

    Yup-that's right! More cults sprang up in America(Mormons, Millerites, SDA, JW, Christian Science, to name a few)in the 1800s than in any other period of American or world history. And many of them used/use the KJV.

    And the common language of the world in early AD times was not Greek, except in Greece & some parts of the Roman Empire.

    Did Moses write in Greek, or evenin Hebrew? Did Paul write(or have transcribed) exclusively in Greek, especially to the churches in Asia Minor? Or to the Latin-speaking Romans?

    And the Great Reformation began C.1517 & was practically over by 1611.

    And the valid versions following the AV 1611 have those same 66 books..duh..

    The doctrine that the Word is only inspired in the autographs is simply not Biblical. "Scripture" is the thing that was given and "Scripture" is always copies, translations, etc.

    I believe people sometimes confuse "inspiration" with "command" or "influence". God TOLD Moses to write down His laws. He TOLD Jeremiah to dictate to Baruch & Baruch to write. He TOLD John what to write & what not to write(the 7 thunders) on Patmos. Now, while He CAUSED men to write Kings, Chronicles, & the other historical books of the Bible, there's no evidence that He directly dictated to them what to write. In fact, both Kings & Chronicles indicate that there were other books of Kings & Chronicles written that God did NOT choose to become Scripture.

    The KJVO exhibits yet another facet of his/her DOUBLE STANDARD with the "Inspired Copies Of Scripture" argument. He hollers that Timothy had copies of the Scriptures since childhood & that they certainly weren't the "originals" But do we know if they were EXACT COPIES of the originals or not? Newp! And there's the much-discussed differences between Isaiah 42:7-8 & Isaiah 61:1-3 as compared with what JESUS READ ALOUD in Luke 4:16-21. Evidently the canon of words wasn't closed to their AUTHOR. And the KJVO hollers that the KJV is just as inspired as were the originals or Timothy's copies. BUT HERE'S THE DOUBLE STANDARD-THE KJVO CANNOT PROVE EXCLUSIVE INSPIRATION FOR THE KJV, but he proclaims it anyway, even though he doesn't have one scintilla of Scripture to support his myth. the TRUTH is, that the KJV is no more "inspired" than is any other valid translation.
     

Share This Page

Loading...