amazing KJV-only claims

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Logos1560, Apr 14, 2005.

  1. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Len Smith, a KJV-only author, wrote: "The Textus Receptus is a corrupt family of rotten Bible remnants because of the errors it contains" (THE AGE OF REASON: THE MODERN BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY,
    chapter D22, p. 3). [theswordbearer.org]

    Len Smith wrote: "But the real reason we know that the Authorized King James Version did not come from the Textus Receptus is because the King James does not agree with any manuscript in the Textus Receptus. In fact, the KJV has readings in it that do not appear in any manuscript in any family on earth" (D22, p. 3).

    Len Smith wrote: "The King James is not a faithful, accurate, scholarly translation of the Textus Receptus or any manuscript on earth" (D22, p. 7).

    Len Smith wrote: "And, like the original book of Malachi, the King James is an original autograph because it is not a translation (as men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, suppose) because it doesn't agree with any ERROR manuscript in any family. It is a unique original" (D22, p. 21).
     
  2. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    He has at least found a way to deal with the contradictions and fatal factual flaws in KJVOnlyism.

    He's wrong but his position is more defensible than those who recognize mss and other translations as being scripture and still claim word perfection for the KJV when it disagrees with them.
     
  3. yabba

    yabba
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    0
    :eek: Whoa...don't know what else to really say.
     
  4. TC

    TC
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    10
    Yes, he just wrote them out of existance.

    Not really. Instead, he has just opened up a can of worms. By his claims, the canon was not closed until 1611, er, 1613, er, 1615, er, 1652, er, 1665, er, 1762, er, 1769, er 1873, or has it been closed? He claims mean that the CoE KJV translators were authourized to be writers of Holy Scripture even though no Bible says that they were. His claim means that no previous generation has had the perfect Word of God destroying any belief in preservation. IMO, he has just as many problems as any other KJVO - maybe even more. :eek:
     
  5. David Michael Harris

    David Michael Harris
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,362
    Likes Received:
    1
    I guess some people go over the top with regard to somethings, people like that its better not to get in to discussion with. [​IMG]

    I use the NRSV at the moment but I have several versions also W&Horts Greek NT with their textual commentary and Vines Expository Dictionary of Bible words, together with the Interpreters Bible and Dictionary of the Bible. I think I have enough to study with [​IMG]

    David
    <°)))><
     
  6. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Does ANYONE besides his publisher take Mr. Smith seriously?
     
  7. mcgyver

    mcgyver
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    0
    Probably.....and that's the scary part :confused:
     
  8. David J

    David J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    They take G(god) A(and) Riplinger seriously so why not take this guy?

    How does someone like Len Smith sleep at night? Such falsehoods should never be made about any faithful translation of the bible.

    Then again a doctrine that has no scripture to support it is always open to myths and new revelations!

    Sounds like Len Smith created some new doctrines to support his claims!

    Just as a side question does Smith deny the Eternal Sonship of Christ? Not to hijack the thread but it seems that some extremist KJVOist deny Jesus His Eternal Sonship and attack the Trinity thus saying the Father had no Son until Christ became man. I have discovered that this heresy runs deep within some (not all) KJVO circles along with believing the lie that people in the Tribulation will work for salvation.
     
  9. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Same as any KJVO attempting to defend his/her stuff, Mr. Smith indeed mad up some doctrine on the fly. Seems to be a cash cow for some!
    ______________________________________

    WRF Enterprises Bulletin ad:

    FOR SALE: KJVO DOCTRINES, NEW OR USED!

    Be the first on your block to write a new KJVO book! For a modest fee, we will supply you with any and all doctrines tried and proven to have made many another KJVO book a success!

    Look at the success stories of Gail Riplinger and other current KJVO authors! YOU can be among them by using our doctrines in YOUR book! If necessary, we'll invent....er....supply you with NEVER-BEFORE-USED KJVO doctrines to help your book sell!

    Many of our doctrines have been selling books since 1930! Now, with the power of modern mass media behind your work, along with our doctrines, YOU can write your own success story and write in the amount of your own paycheck! Hurry, hurry, HURRY before someone else beats you to the punch!

    Our fees are modest, and our conditions are simple...Just don't question the veracity of our doctrines nor question their source...just pay us our modest fee to receive YOUR copy of our doctrines and full permission to use them in your own literary work, even to the point of modifying them enough so that they seem new!

    For price quotes and purchase orders, please call us at

    1 - 900 - G-U-L-L-I-B-L-E

    and launch your rocket to KJVO-writing success TODAY!

    The WRF Society, Esq.


    Fine Print: WRF = W ilkinson-R ay-F uller
     
  10. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Boy am I glad I'am not writing a book. You guys are ruthless! [​IMG]

    I got my hands full dealing with just my Bible. Good thing I find it unneccessary to write a book. It's getting kinda like all them "Rapture" guys isn't it? Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye, et al.

    Sad day for the body. [​IMG]
    In HIS service;
    Jim
     
  11. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Some of us got our hands full refuting a myth and a series of false doctrines built around a certain version of the Bible.

    As the US Marines say, "Semper Fidelis".
     
  12. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Here is another example of Len Smith's KJV-only claims.

    Len Smith wrote: "If the KJV says, 'He looked up into the blue' and another version say, 'He looked up into the sky' the word sky is wrong because God Almighty wanted it to say blue. Blue may or may not be necessary to complete a trail of breadcrumbs when doing a word study, but it's never right under any circumstances to change any of God's words" (AGE OF REASON, D22, p. 16).

    I wonder how Len Smith explains the fact that later editors changed several words in the 1611 edition of the KJV.
     
  13. David J

    David J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    Which KJV does he say is perfect?

    Things that are different are not the same and he has just laid a foundation in which not one word in the KJV can be changed.

    There is no excuse for Mr. Smith's dishonesty and ignorance. Somebody should "edumacate" um good LOL!
     
  14. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,147
    Likes Received:
    322
    Oh my, it appears that the KJV translators (or whatever) themselves by their own testimony are of "corrupt minds" and "destitute of truth".
    Two excerpts (among many) from THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER Preface to the King James Version 1611.


    HankD
     
  15. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Just goes to show it doesn't necessarily take a pecan tree to produce a NUT.
     
  16. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    You better get off the state tree of Texas, Buddy! :D

    Lacy
     
  17. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Why? They lost the war.
     
  18. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    Often its easier to remain ignorant thinking you have the truth than to study and know the truth.
     
  19. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    And sometimes, even when you're not so ignorant, it's better to salvage a relationship by understanding and honoring a man's liberty to choose which Bible he reads and just how "inspired" he believes it is.

    I have dear sweet friends on both sides of the KJVO fence and I cherish each one. (Even the ones who are wrong!) ;)

    Lacy
     
  20. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Perhaps one reason the KJV-only issue is so
    divisive is because many KJV-only advocates refuse to honor the Christian liberty of other believers to choose which Bible they read and even smear them with various seemingly harsh and inaccurate labels.
     

Share This Page

Loading...