Do you agree with these KJVO statments?

Sounds like instruction on how to violate the rules of this board. This is one of the clearest definitions on how to flame that I have seen. This is a discussion board not a hit and run sight.

Bro Tony

 

No, Michelle, that simply isn't true at any level. Faith is inherently logical. Logic exists because God exists. Theism is the only inherently logical worldview. This has been supported by centuries of Christian theology drawn from the Scriptures you say you believe. Since God exists and logic exists and God is perfect, then we conclude that God is a God of perfect logic. Humans can use logic, but, you are correct only in that logic is only as good as the user. However, if you use illogical means, which you REPEATEDLY do, to prove your points, then you show your logic is not of God, because God, being a God of perfect logic would not condone or even use illogical means. Logic and faith are, therefore, inextricably intertwined, because faith requires information and information requires reason and reason feeds faith. Perfect faith is perfectly logical faith.

By resorting to emotionalism and experientialism ("the persecution complex you so manifestly express and the 'if you only understood, you'd understand; I can't help you, only God can", you show you are not logical. If you are not logical, your faith is based on your experience, and not on reason. That is nothing short of theological liberalism. The old, "I believe it because the Bible says it" might work where the Bible points to a specific thing like the existence of God, when talking to people that share our faith in christ, but it doesn't work when you say, "The KJB is the only word of God for English speaking people," because a. The Bible says no such thing, and b. The argument begs the question, e.g. is circular. Don't speak to us about human reason and the lack of necessity of logic, when, in fact, every positive presupposes a negative, and, to say that you must believe that illogical means proves your assertions, when God would not and, by His own nature CANNOT use such means, because He is a God of perfect logic Himself. God can not do or condone that which He can not do by His own nature. God is all powerful, but He still can't do things contrary to His nature, or do you believe God can create a rock He could not lift? If so, you're in very dangerous territory.

Logic is a tool, and it's use is confined to its users. Human beings, being flawed, are not perfectly logical. Logic can not save, only Jesus can save. However, that does not mean a person can not have faith or must not exercise faith apart from logic. However, here, we aren't discussing the existence of God, we're talking about the continued predilection of a very few that one particular version of the Bible is "the" Word of God to the exclusion of all others, which can not be logically asserted at ANY level. That's the rub, Michelle. It's not only the use of illogical means in some areas, it is the use of flawed logic at all levels that is necessary to support the assertion. Faith vs. reason is not and never has been an either/or proposition. It is a both/and proposition. If faith is faith that is not reasonable, it is not faith at all. It is just trust in experience, which has no ground in reality. Anything real can be reasoned to some extent. Faith doesn't fill in the gaps as much as it feeds reason and vice versa. If truth is real, then, it should be reasonable. The greater the truth, the higher the level of reasonability. Since reason can't support the assertion that the KJB is the "only" Bible for English speaking peoples, and nonlogical means must always be used to arrive at that conclusion, then that shows a very low level of truth (none) indeed.

[ September 26, 2004, 01:37 PM: Message edited by: GeneMBridges ]

 

For all ages? Then why didn't Jesus, Moses, Jeremiah, and Haggai quote from it?

 

Michelle:The scriptural support for our belief has been abundantly given to you all.

No, it HASN'T; All we've had is some Scriptures posted that don't relate to versionism at all, and your spin trying to convince someone those scriptures ARE about onlyism. OTOH, we've posted Scriptures from the KJV(also found in other Bibles) showing different narrations of the SAME EVENTS, proving to you and everyone else God isn't limited to just one version or even one narration of the events He chose to be related to us, making the narrators' words HIS words.


Many deny, reject, or say we are taking the scriptures out of context.

We don't just SAY it; we've PROVEN it. You show your intelligence by denying the plain, unmistakable PROOF.


I can't help you there. Only God can.

He HAS...and He has His help and facts available for YOU, TOO, if you'll quit hiding behind a false doctrine and smell the roses He's grown.


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.

You're completely wrong, as usual. All you're REALLY saying is "It aint the KJV so it's wrong. If you understand, you'll understand".

You've said you're not KJVO. Therefore, what other specific version(s) do you recommend?

You claim I'm a versionolator. Please cut and paste any post of mine where I've said such.

I TOLD YOU THIS ISN'T GONNA GO AWAY UNTIL YOU EITHER ANSWERED OR ADMITTED YOU WERE WRONG, MICHELLE...AND I MEANT IT! I don't think even the KJVOs believe a word you say any more.

Either answer or remain a (you-know-what).

 

You know there is a problem when even non-believers smell a rat with some of the KJVO attitude.

 

I never knew that. We can hear some newly found myth each day--enough to add to our heresy portfolio.

I always thought the KJV was translated from the original languages in 1611.

The MV's changed when there was many more manuscripts to look at rather than just a dozen or so.

 

Noted. We are working diligently to curtail the hijacking of every thread, even if it means deleting all her posts. </font>[/QUOTE]Amen, and thank you from most of us!

AVL1984

 

Sounds like instruction on how to violate the rules of this board. This is one of the clearest definitions on how to flame that I have seen. This is a discussion board not a hit and run sight.

Bro Tony </font>[/QUOTE]What I mean is that michell should make her statement and then avoid this endless arguing over the same material.

 

For all ages? Then why didn't Jesus, Moses, Jeremiah, and Haggai quote from it? </font>[/QUOTE]I believe you understand what I am saying, but you would rather make a foolish statement in an attempt to twist what I mean.

The KJV is the Bible God has put his stamp of approval on for the English-speaking people.

 

Terry,

Alright. But you know what would really be nice is if Michelle and the others would just deal openly and honestly concerning their beliefs. One cannot say the Bible teaches one version only when it does not. If a person prefers one version, that is fine, no problem. But the attacks against those who choose otherwise, and the Bible version they choose without any biblical basis is completely unchristian. Choose any version you like, I have no problem with that, I do have a problem with someone, with no biblical support, attack the Word of God in the version I read and calling it corrupt, new age, the work of the devil etc.

Bro Tony

 

For all ages? Then why didn't Jesus, Moses, Jeremiah, and Haggai quote from it? </font>[/QUOTE]I believe you understand what I am saying, but you would rather make a foolish statement in an attempt to twist what I mean.

The KJV is the Bible God has put his stamp of approval on for the English-speaking people. </font>[/QUOTE]Terry, several people have asked you to prove that God has put His stamp of approval on only the KJV, yet I don't recall seeing any evidence to support your claim being provided. Did God put his stamp of approval on the Bishops Bible and the Geneva Bible? Were they/are they the Word of God also???

AVL1984

 

Second!

 

Moderator Note

With the approval of the author of this thread, it will be closed when it reaches page five without further warning. It has indeed been hijacked from its original purpose.

[ September 27, 2004, 01:10 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

With the approval of the author of this thread, it will be closed when it reaches page five without further warning. It has indeed been hijacked from its original purpose.

Why bother waiting? Any time michelle posts to a thread, its horrible death is inevitable anyway. Put it out of its misery.