Do you agree with these KJVO statments?

See my earlier post...Your argument is illogical, because it assumes what is true and then argues its truth without support. You simply assume the KJB is "the" word of God for all English speaking people and then argue the premise. That is fallacious logic. God being a God of perfect logic would not use illogical argument. Now either make a logical argument or step back and consider what using illogical argumentation means if God would not use illogical arguments to support what is true.

 

The 'Word of God' is my 1964 Thompson Chain Reference KJV. I love the 'Word of God' and you cannot give me anything else. I have copies of the NIV, NASB, etc., but they collect dust on my self. The tear stains, underlined scriptures, personal notes, hand written dates, etc. in my 1964 Thompson Chain Reference KJV bring to my rememberance the awesome times that I have had with my God. If your Bible is not doing that for you, regardless of the version, then I recommend a little more seeking on your part. Sorry that I did not participate in the poll, and please do not take offense to my post.

God bless...

 

Amen, Bro. Williemakeit!

I get that from my old NIV Student Bible. It is never far from reach though I use other versions for daily reading and other study.

 

Yes I can, where the KJV translators were faithful to the original language Scriptures, I am for the the translation. Where they blundered I am against them.

What is not their fault is that the English language being dynamic, the syntax, grammar and vocabulary has changed over the centuries. That is fixable by a revision for each generation until the Lord returns.

If I am anything I am a HYPOCRITE and not a HYPOCRATE.

Furthermore your statement my "compromise with error is evident" cannot hold water because "is evident" implies "evidence", Now, since we do not have the autographs there is no conclusive evidence either way as to which (traditional vs crtical) is correct. In fact if they did exist we would not be having this conversation as the truth would indeed be "evident".

Therefore it is not evidence but my conviction that the traditional texts are the more accurate. A conviction is a conviction and not evidence.

If you are a district attorney and appear in court and are asked by the judge "do you have evidence that so-and-so murdered such-and-such" and you say "No, but it is my conviction that so-and-so murdered such-and-such", guess what? So-and-so walks away a free man.

Therefore you are wrong in saying that I am a hypocrite (concerning this matter, I am indeed a hypocrite in other matters but not this one).

HankD

 

Well, pardon us while we play the grand piano!

Michelle, you haven't proven there is a one version only position taught by the Bible in ANY version. You have a lot of nerve calling people hypocrites when you insult their intelligence, their service to God, their salvation, etc. You also haven't proven which version of the KJV is the correct one...I mean, there were so many corrections from the initial version to the versions of the KJV that most use today...so wouldn't that there just disprove your point???? I mean, they did change it and all. Or is it one of those "if I would understand, I would understand" type things again?

AVL1984

 

<<<<With index finger over lips>>>> Sssshhhhhhh.... Don't want Michelle to see that she is wrong, because then she might understand. Michelle said in another thread that ALL the versions before the KJV that were used in the KJV and ALL of the versions (updates of the KJV) are the Word of God. Somehow, this sounds fishy. Could it be that she's avoiding giving an answer that would prove her beliefs incorrect???? Just a thought!

AVL1984

 

I believe the KJB is God's Word for the English speaking people. I also believe that the ESV,NASB,RSV,& several other english translations are God's Word to the english speaking people. So I answered the 1st question yes I do think that the KJB (1611 and it's many updates)is/are God's Word to the english speaking people.
As for some defenders of the KJVO school ,they remmind me of some of the propganda that the chinese communist government used to put out over the tty when I was in the military. Lots of words no substance,Things are'nt so just because you say so.Facts are facts, some people can be influenced by facts some cannot.When a person chooses to ignore facts the best you can do is ignore them, you will never pound any sense into them.

 

Michelle, the secret is to stir up the nest and get away before you get stung.

Unfortunately, most modern day Christians refuse to see that the KJV is the right Bible for all ages. To stay around and answer these foolish arguments is futile.

 

For ALL ages? Really? Would that include the past as well?

Joseph Botwinick

 

Did God really speak English.

I am all sold out to Jesus and for God and His word. But it is man that chose to alter the scripture and translate it so that the English speaking world could understand God's message in their mother tongue of English. But that does not make it the inerrant inspired version authenticated and inspired by God.

 

Stir up the nest with conspiracy theories! Repeat the same KJVO lies over and over. Slander the Word of the Most High as found in translations other than the KJV! Distort the facts about the AV1611! Yes, stir up those of us that know about the history of the bible, make us mad when you distort the truth about how we got our English bibles!

When asked to present evidence run for the hills!

Once again, present the scripture and end the bible version debate. You are avoiding my questions.

KJVOism has no scripture to support it. You have no scripture to support your statements.

 

--------------------------------------------------
Stir up the nest with conspiracy theories! Repeat the same KJVO lies over and over. Slander the Word of the Most High as found in translations other than the KJV! Distort the facts about the AV1611! Yes, stir up those of us that know about the history of the bible, make us mad when you distort the truth about how we got our English bibles
--------------------------------------------------


The only ones guilty of slandering the words of God, are those versions that have altered it and those who condone and justify them with human reasoning and logic. It is also those who say that the KJB has errors, when indeed it does not, only to justify the alterations that are evident in the mv's. God does not call us to attack the truth to compromise with error.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

For ALL ages? Really? Would that include the past as well?

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]Michelle,

Do you believe the KJV is the only right Bible for all ages? And would that include all past ages as well?

Joseph Botwinick

 

--------------------------------------------------
KJVOism has no scripture to support it. You have no scripture to support your statements.
--------------------------------------------------


The scriptural support for our belief has been abundantly given to you all. Many deny, reject, or say we are taking the scriptures out of context. I can't help you there. Only God can. However, if you take the KJB and open it up, and read from Genesis 1 - Revelation 22:21, and open up one of the mv's from Genesis 1 - Revelation 22:21 and compare the two honestly and with love for the truth and the word of God, it will be quite apparent that the mv's have ALTERED the scriptures. There is the support you are looking for, but you need to open your eyes first, and swallow pride, compromise and excuses and understand and love the truth revealed within.

Not one of you, have EVER given scriptural support that God allows in HIS word of truth - alterations. In fact, God has said the opposite, throughout the entire scriptures themselves. If God allowed the scriptures to become altered, and that He had not the power to preserve them and providentially provide them error free in a translation, then one would be opened up to deception. God does not lie, therefore, His word of truth does not lie. You think God has allowed humans to alter his word of truth, and then not do anything to fix it? You have a very strange understanding of God and his concern over his own words of truth, and love and concern for his saints. Has God allowed alterations to his words of truth? Absolutely yes, as it is very apparent in the mv's and only God knows why. However, He does not expect any of us to condone or justify such a thing. But just the same, God also provided the scriptures for us
alteration free, and we will have NO EXCUSE to condone those things that he allowed to alter them.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

--------------------------------------------------
Michelle,

Do you believe the KJV is the only right Bible for all ages? And would that include all past ages as well?

Joseph Botwinick
--------------------------------------------------


The scriptures within the KJB, have existed in the churches from the time of the apostles, and also since the time that God had given his word of truth to the prophets of the Old testament, up until this very day, and for all eternity, and in many different languages - error/alterattion free.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Oh, yes, Michelle...I guess the Apostles quoted from the King James Version of the Bible. That would be a nice trick since for one the Bible was not complete, and for two King James hadn't even commissioned the version yet....LOL! What joke!

AVL1984

 

Uh, you mean to tell me there wasn't "human reasoning" to commission the KJV? Michelle, that is not only untrue, but the epitomy of dishonesty. The KJV translators even said it was to avoid "Popish Influences", yet they seem to have kept Anglican influences....hmmm...and that's not human reasoning??? Who's the blind one here? It's not those who are using the MV's.

AVL1984

 

Almost your entire argument is based upon several judgmental assumptions on your part.

1. “compare the two honestly”. By innuendo you imply that we are not behaving honestly.
2. “with love for the truth and the word of God”. By innuendo you imply that we are dishonest.
And do not love the truth.
3. “you need to open your eyes first, and swallow pride”. By innuendo you imply that we are blind and prideful.

Your ultimate arguments are almost always based upon judgments that only God can make.

1 Samuel 16:7 “...man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart”.

Not true, you have been shown two places in the NT Scripture where OT Scripture is quoted with alterations. There are several more of these OT citations that follow the Septuagint Greek version of the OT rather than the Hebrew Masora (Traditional Text). In the event of a translation God permits different wording and that is EVIDENT, the altered citations being the evidence.

HankD

 

One more time michelle, the KJV itself was "altered" several hundred times by the Church of England who owns the copyright to the King Kames Version of the Bible (with the Apocrypha) along with the Book of Common prayer.

Example:

AV1611 Matthew 16:16 "...Thou art Christ..."
AV1769 Matthew 16:16 "...Thou art the Christ..."

This is indeed evident (has existing historical evidence) by comparing the two editions of the KJB.

Using your logic concerning the MV's compared to the KJV (1611 or 1769?) and applying that logic to the different revisions of the KJV itself proves that one of the King James editions of the Bible is not the "perfect" Word (or words) of God even using language denounced by the KJVO as "new-age" such as terms like "the Christ". Can/will you tell us which, the 1611 or the 1769 is the "perfect" word(s) of God and will you denounce the other along with the differing MV's?

Things which are different are not the same.

HankD