How many KJVO's are left at the BB?

Please, prove that anyone is compromising with error. Prove the error. You can't. You're using circular reasoning. Round and round and round she goes, where she stops, nobody knows.

AVL1984

 

16. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17. Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Indeed.

Might I remind everyone that this is not a KJVO posting board.

The KJVO folks have come here and have had their daily tantrum, kicking, shouting and accusing.

The result; Strife, division and personal judgments against one another.

Regardless the message, the resulting fruit says it all or at least most of it.

James 3:16-17.
For where envying and strife [is], there [is] confusion and every evil work.
But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, [and] easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.

Indeed.

HankD

 

--------------------------------------------------
Your reasoning is circular and the scriptures don't support what you're spouting, unless of course you take them out of context as you do. So, please, again, I've asked for proof, yet you post none. Typical.
--------------------------------------------------


You continue to say I take things out of context. I am not the only one who understands these scriptures, in this context. And you have never shown me or anyone else that indeed we have taken these out of context. If you just say so, doesn't make it so. Can the blind see if they haven't yet been given sight? You have yet to give any scriptural support to the contrary. This is because you cannot.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

We have shown you using the KJV that passover and the feast of unleavened bread is the same ( Ezekiel 45:21, Luke 22:1). Yet, you refuse to believe the KJV - instead you cling to the writings of men. So, who is trying to please who?

 

Michelle, you keep insisting that your brothers and sisters in the Lord "haven't been given sight" because they do not hold to your warped view of the Bible versions. This is silly on your part. Adequate proof has been given on many threads, yet you, with your circular reasoning have given no proof of your stance, whereas you have summarily dismissed any proof given by those who hold to the MV position.

AVL1984

 

--------------------------------------------------
The problem with your "add to" "take away" argument is that the KJV translators did the very same thing, yet you refuse to acknowledge that. How sad. How hypocritical.
--------------------------------------------------

No they did not. MV use different underlying texts, to which are corrupt, and have added to, and taken away from the pure words of God. You all dismiss this FACT and all the evidence of it. The KJB is translated accurately into our very English language from the scriptures in those other langauges. God has preserved them in our language from then until this very day. Anything today contrary to them, or altered from them is a corruption. As I gave above, the Lord has said that the churches are the ground and pillar of truth. His words are not only found in the churches but preserved in the churches.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Here we go again.

On page seven - will give you all till 4.00 PM CDT to finish upp your statements.

 

--------------------------------------------------
Might I remind everyone that this is not a KJVO --posting board.
--------------------------------------------------

NO this is a BIBLE VERSION DEBATE FORUM.


--------------------------------------------------
The KJVO folks have come here and have had their daily tantrum, kicking, shouting and accusing.
--------------------------------------------------


Oh, Hank, I did not realize you have been given the ability to see people through their computer screens to make this determination. Wow, what amazing abilities you have. To bad your abilities did not show you the truth, to keep you from saying such untrue things.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

You haven't proven any error. You only state that it is not the KJV and therefore wrong. However, the KJV added and took away words from already existing English Bible version. By what authority did they do that? By what authority do say it is ok for the KJV translators to have done that, but it is wrong to do today? Where is it in scripture?

 

Yes, Michelle, they did. And adequate proof has been posted in every thread where this has been raised. Yet you summarily dismissed it as false, though the proof was posted clearly. Nobody has ever disagreed that the church is the ground and pillar of the truth, but to use circular reasoning instead of acknowledging the truth just makes you look plain silly. The MV's use a different underlying text, and nobody is denying that. However, they are stating that the MV's teach the same thing, and I've posted several passages of the NIV and NASB over the past several days, and you have not refuted one iota of it. They do, indeed, teach the same fundamentals and principles that the KJV teaches. One version onlyism is not only divisive, but is cultic in nature, leading to attacks on God's own word in other translations. You should be ashamed of yourself for attacking God's Word in other forms when you won't even acknowledge the faults of the KJV. Shame on you!

AVL11984

 

In the words of another:

HankD

 

--------------------------------------------------
We have shown you using the KJV that passover and the feast of unleavened bread is the same ( Ezekiel 45:21, Luke 22:1). Yet, you refuse to believe the KJV - instead you cling to the writings of men. So, who is trying to please who?
--------------------------------------------------

And you have given much more sciptural support to the contrary. Nowhere in scripture, does God ever NOT make a distinction between the Passover and the days of unleavened bread. There is a reason for this also, which many of you do not seem to realize. My suggestion to you, is that you try to really understand what Passover is, and means, and then the same with the days of unleavened bread. Then you just might understand in context and truth. Go look at the thread that robycop started about Gipp. Many disagree in their interpretations, however this does not prove the word Easter is wrong.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Round and round and round she goes, where she stops, nobody knows.

AVL1984

 

--------------------------------------------------
You haven't proven any error. You only state that it is not the KJV and therefore wrong. However, the KJV added and took away words from already existing English Bible version. By what authority did they do that? By what authority do say it is ok for the KJV translators to have done that, but it is wrong to do today? Where is it in scripture?
--------------------------------------------------

Oh, so you lived all the way back then, to have a true and honest sense of what occured and have all the facts concerning it? Wow, what amazing abilities modern man today seem to have.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

The same could be applied to your opinion of the truth, Michelle.

AVL1984

 

Whee. Page 8. And we're starting the Passover discussion AGAIN.

Michelle said "Nowhere in scripture, does God ever NOT make a distinction between the Passover and the days of unleavened bread."

That is incorrect, as has been shown to you in black and white, straight from the KJV, multiple times. But I hope the moderators close this thread before we get back into that again.

 

Michelle, you have often refered to the verse above (Psalm 12:6) as a basis for King James Version Onlyism. I've presented this verse as it appears in three different translations, including the KJV. To me, it would appear that the teaching of the verse is for any practical purpose identical in all three translations.

Tell me then, why do you believe that this verse is truth when (and only when) it speaks in and of the KJV? Why would it not be true, for example, in the NASB- and in that instance, therefore speaking of the NASB?

(For my fellow non-KJVO's, No, I haven't lost sight of this verse's context: For the sake of this question, I'm treating this verse in the context & understanding that KJVO's believe & place it in.)

 

--------------------------------------------------
Round and round and round she goes, where she stops, nobody knows.

--------------------------------------------------

Does a top need to be spun by a spinner, if it is to spin? Or does it spin on its own?


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

You know what - this doesn't need another 2 1/2 hours.