Ed's Catalogue of KJVO Doubles

Man, I hear it so much that I wish I could go away some place nice and never hear it again! I hear it in my sleep. I wonder what the average life expectancy of an 8th grade teacher is?

Lacy

 

I would never admit that such a bitter enemy of the KJVO movement made me fall out of my chair laughing. So just forget it OK?

Lacy

 

Yeah, I was just messing with you some. I hope you realize that I was joking. Probably about eight years exactly. haha You can call me stupid. You can call me dumb, but you sure can't call me smart. And that are da truth, the whole truth and nuthin' but the truth.

 

I'm afraid spell-check has rendered your 8th grade teacher inept at spelling.

Eye before he except after my?

Lacy

 

Don't ask me. I was one of those guys who slept through the first through eight grades; then I woke up and realized I needed that stuff.

 

Ya mean dere's more ta life than tackling a man who's got a football & is dressed dif'rent from me?

 

Yes there is a lot more to life: Make SURE that if YOU happen to get a ball, that you run in the right direction. If you go the other way, you get beat up by the guys dressed like you!

 

Here are a few, to keep the catalogue fed:

For the Onlyist, any revision is anathema.

But the title page of the 1611 (not the 1769) acknowledges its revision of prior versions!


The KJV is the standard by which all other Bibles must be judged.

But the KJV is based on the work done in other Bibles (Luther, Tyndale, Geneva)


Onlyism claims the KJV is the result of Biblical Preservation.

But it denies the same principle to Bibles coming before and after 1611. Not to mention: the revisions leading up to the 1769 (so much for preservation).

Furthermore, there has yet to be an Onlyist who has the guts to point to any one single Bible predating 1611 that served as the repository of God's "Perfect Preserved Words" before the AV arrived on the scene, much less compare the KJV to this Bible to see if their particular parameters of Preservation (nice alliteration, eh?) passes the muster.

jth

Your friendly neighborhood reader of Reformation Bibles.

 

Here's a few more I have observed (classify them as you will):

1. The scholarship of the KJV translators far surpassed that of anyone who ever worked on a modern version. But when something the translators wrote in their preface or a footnote supports the reading of a MV, then their words are "merely man's opinion."

2. Even though the sunburst design on the KJV's original title page is also a common motif on Mormon temples and other occult art, it gets a pass. But the Celtic "triquetra" knot on the spine of the NKJV is "satanic" because it is also a common Wiccan/occult symbol.

3. The NIV is not to be trusted because of the involvement of Virginia Mollenkott on the translation committee. But Virginia Mollenkott herself is courted by KJV-onlyists as a reliable source of information about the translation of the NIV.

 

Unless of course it supports KJVOism such as the presence of 1 John 5:7 (not that I disagree that the Comma is authoritative but that it's another KJVO double-think).

HankD

 

Unless of course it supports KJVOism such as the presence of 1 John 5:7

And don't forget "lucifer" at Isa. 14:12.