Evaluating the Rules of "Best" Text

Askjo said "Are you incapable to answer my question?"

No. I'd respond to it, but won't because of your DOUBT/UNBELIEF.

 

Sounds like a clear case of preservation envy to me. If he could use anglicans to do it, surely he would use a bunch of specially trained baptists!

Numbers 12
2 And they said, Hath the LORD indeed spoken only by Moses? hath he not spoken also by us? And the LORD heard it.
10 And the cloud departed from off the tabernacle; and, behold, Miriam became leprous, white as snow: and Aaron looked upon Miriam, and, behold, she was leprous.

 

James, I agree with you.

Natters, James's point is obvious that it is your human reasoning - logic over faith.

 

You did not answer my question: WHICH?

Your answer to my question is to point off. I asked you this, but you answered other somewhere because your answer never arrived at my point.

 

Askjo,
You have yet to answer my questions. You could start off by simply answering us instead of the KJVO question to answer questions game and then cry when we refuse to play your game.

I'm still waiting on you to answer my many of the quations that several posters have asked you. I guess I should not hold my breath too long.

Is your faith built around scriptures or a man made myths?

 

James,

You can call it having faith over logic. But, KJVO's are famous for saying that you must have every one every one of God's words to live by every one of God's words. Yet, you claim here that only christians after 1611 had every one of them. Your position is indefencible according to most other KJVO's.

 

James said "Sounds like a clear case of preservation envy to me. If he could use anglicans to do it, surely he would use a bunch of specially trained baptists!"

How do you know he used Anglicans to do it?

Askjo said "Natters, James's point is obvious that it is your human reasoning - logic over faith."

I have faith that God's word was available throughout history. Why does James not have faith about this? I have faith God's preserved word was available in English in 1610 - do you have this faith?

Askjo said "You did not answer my question: WHICH?"

The answer is BOTH. Do you know what a false dichotomy is?

 

Your confusing my position with the one in your head. I don't call it faith over logic. Logic would demand that I believe God over anything else. That would be the most logical thing I could do. What you call 'logic' the bible calls a vain philosophy. Unless God reveals this 12 step process of divining His word IN His word, we are just the blind leading the blind. We know nothing outside of Him.

 

How should I know that He is using you to do it?

 

James said "How should I know that He is using you to do it?"

To do what? What are you talking about?

I'm just asking you how do you know the KJV is "the Bible" that was resurrected? How do you know it's not another translation? How do you know it's even been resurrected yet?

 

Then why don't you simply do that and stop going one step further by putting words into His mouth?

He never said nor implied that a translation would be perfectly worded to the exclusion of all other translations in that language. He never said that any human effort at copying much less collating would result in a perfect facsimile of the originals. What He obviously did do in His providence is errors in copying while preserving the "word" or message that He inspired through the perfect word choices in the originals.

What you call faith the Bible calls "feigned words."

 

Nope, you claim the KJV is correct when in it God promises to preserve His word for all generations. Then you say that God didn't preserve His word for those before 1611 - when the KJV came out. Your logic is illogical, and goes against what God said in black and white. IMO your credibility is going down fast. Proven by your attacks of others with nothing of substance to say.

Funny thing is, the KJV translators used methods of textual criticism when translating the KJV. They didn't do the work in a vacuum and the KJV just didn't fall into their hands from the sky.

 

I believe that God said he would preserve His word. I believe that God will do what He said. If God preserved His word in ANY language, then He could preserve it in English. If He preserved it in English, it can certainly be the King James bible. I have seen the fruit of the King James bible, and I have seen the fruit of the multiple versions. I can't make you see what I see. You see the same scriptures I see and believe something else, so one of us is wrong. I know who I think it is, and you know who you think it is.

I can testify to the fact that the Holy Spirit has worked mightily in my life through the King James bible. I can testify that it is sufficient for all things relating to life and Godliness. If you want to believe the same thing about another version, go ahead. If you want to believe that there is no word of God today, go ahead. Just do not expect me to accept another versions rendering over the King James, the King James is not broken.

 

Amen! James, I agree.

 

Then why don't you simply do that and stop going one step further by putting words into His mouth?

He never said nor implied that a translation would be perfectly worded to the exclusion of all other translations in that language. He never said that any human effort at copying much less collating would result in a perfect facsimile of the originals. What He obviously did do in His providence is errors in copying while preserving the "word" or message that He inspired through the perfect word choices in the originals.

What you call faith the Bible calls "feigned words." </font>[/QUOTE]Did he ever imply that the Messiah would have to suffer? How come the Jews don't see it?

 

James said "I believe that God said he would preserve His word."

I believe that too, but why do you believe that?

James said "If God preserved His word in ANY language, then He could preserve it in English. If He preserved it in English, it can certainly be the King James bible."

Sure. Just as it can certainly be any other version as well.

James said "I have seen the fruit of the King James bible"

Bibles don't produce fruit. People do.

James said "I can testify to the fact that the Holy Spirit has worked mightily in my life through the King James bible."

Wonderful!

James said "If you want to believe that there is no word of God today, go ahead."

We don't believe that.

 

Psalm 12
6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
7.5 And it will never be apparently lost either, because that wouldn't be fair, even if you did keep them and just put them out of reach for a while and then resurrected them in English. Thus saith the scholar!

 

Amen! I second. James, you and I believe that the KJV is the inspired, preserved Word of God. Praise the Lord! You and I are in common, namely Consistently Christians.

 

James said "Thus saith the scholar!"

Actually, I think you meant "Thus saith EVERYONE except me!" Again, how do you know it was resurrected in the KJV and not some other translation, already in existence or yet to come? What do you base this on?

 

Askjo said "Amen! I second. James, you and I believe that the KJV is the inspired, preserved Word of God. Praise the Lord! You and I are in common, namely Consistently Christians."

Askjo, James believes the word of God was not preserved for about 1600 years. Do you believe that there was no word of God available to the church for 80% of church history? Just how "consistent" are you with James? I have faith God preserved his word throughout history. Why does James not have this faith?