Do the MV's Violate the Fundamentals/Doctrines of the faith?

Askjo said "Tell me about that. Go ahead! I want to see that."

I already did. Compare Acts 24:24, Romans 8:34, Gal 5:24, Eph 3:6, Col 4:12, Rom 8:11, Matt 16:1, John 19:17, Acts 9:22, Heb 7:24, etc., etc., etc. These are just some of the verses where the KJV does not have the name of Jesus where the MVs do.

 

Askjo: "I agree with A-A. The EARLIEST Church father Ignatius in 1st Century: He quoted,
quote: God was in the flesh."

Actually very much *incorrect*, Askjo. You continue to rely upon incorrect source material, choosingt to believe or "agree with" whatever parts you happen to prefer.

Contrary to what is posted on a lot of KJVO sites, Ignatius did *not* quote 1Tm 3:16 at *any* time.
Rather, (as many *proper* sources will state -- sometimes it might do KJVO defenders well to actually *read* the primary sources to see if such quotations appear at all), Ignatius testified that Jesus Christ indeed was a human manifestation of God in the flesh (= hypostatic union); but he did so *only* by the following statements (which are the *closest* Ignatius comes to 1Tm 3:16, and in no way is any of them an actual quote or allusion to 1Tim 3:16:

"There is one God, who has manifested Himself by Jesus Christ His Son, who is His eternal Word, not proceeding forth from silence, and who in all things pleased Him that sent Him." (Magnesians)

"There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then impossible, even Jesus Christ our Lord." (Ephesians)

"Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was Jesus Christ, who was descended from David, and was also of Mary; who was truly born, and did eat and drink. He was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate; He was truly crucified and [truly] died, in the sight of beings in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth. He was also truly raised from the dead, His Father quickening Him, even as after the same manner His Father will so raise up us who believe in Him by Christ Jesus, apart from whom we do not possess the true life." (Trallians)

All of this, while doctrinally correct and testifying to the hypostatic union, stands *far* from any actual quote or allusion to 1Tm 3:16.

But to show the duplicity of typical KJVO manner of citation, note the following textual gymnastics as practiced by KJVO supporter Thomas Holland <http://members.aol.com/DrTHolland/Chapter3.html>:

"The KJV makes a clear proclamation concerning the deity of Jesus Christ. Ignatius apparently used a text that reflected the reading found in the KJV. He writes, "There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh" (Ephesians 7:1) and "God Himself being manifested in human form" (Ephesians 19:1). Ignatius uses the Greek words for God (theos) and for flesh (sarki) in the first citation, and a form of the Greek word for manifest (phanerosas) in the second. This would agree with the Greek found in the Traditional Text."

In other words, the *only* way that Holland can make Ignmatius "testify" to the Byzantine/TR/KJV reading of 1Tm 3:16 is to *piece together portions* of *two distinct* quotations, taken from two *separate* letters of Ignatius! This is simply playing fast and loose with the facts, and is unworthy (though sadly not untypical) of any KJVO defense.

Another bruised and weak reed bites the dust....

 

AVL1984 said:

I see the KJVO's are still making the same old baseless straw man arguments, but aren't willing to back up much of, or any of what they say with proof. I'm finding this more and more typical of the "Onlyist" sect of the KJV users.

Yeah, it seems like the KJV-onlyist method of persuasion is to wait (they hope) long enough for people to have forgotten the last time they posted their falsehoods, then try again.

Unfortunately for them, our memory spans are a lot longer. I can still remember the particulars of some of the KJV-only arguments and personalities that hung out on Fidonet 10 years ago and more.

The KJV-onlyists, on the other hand, have such a short memory that by the time they read a pronoun on the page, they've forgotten who its antecedent was in the previous verse or two! This amnesia is blamed on the Scriptures and called "corruption."

 

--------------------------------------------------
How does this make one think Jesus is not the Son of God? It is clear the demoniacs were talking to Jesus when the demons said "Son of God." It is a powerful account of his power over demons.
--------------------------------------------------

It weakens the strong testimony, and has changed the true word of God. The scriptures have indicated in this verse, that even the devils recognized Jesus Christ as the Son of God.


Matthew 8

29. And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?


They have taken away from the word of God, and taken out the name of our precious Lord and Saviour in this verse, to which weakens this strong testimony that God has given to us in this verse. I cannot understand, why so many justify such things. This only proves the scriptures have been tampered with. Do many think that the devil would be so bold, as to make it very obvious? If so, then many could not be decieved. Think with the mind of Christ. Be as wise as serpents, but as harmless as doves. The overall omittions and alterations are very dangerous, no matter how many other times they have added the name of Jesus where it wasn't preserved there, to only take it away where it is supposed to be. These are God's words we are talking about here. How would you like it, if someone took what you wrote and deleted from it, or changed or twisted the meaning, or weakened your points? I do not think you would like it too much. Why then is it okay for others to do with the very words of God?


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

This thread is in violation of BV/T Forum Guideline #6.

There are far to many attacks on the KJV-Onlyist instead of KJO-Onlyism there is a distinct difference. KJVOs are people; KJVOism is a creed.