Influence of the BB on your use of the KJV

KJV 1 Samuel 16:7
...the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance,
but the LORD looketh on the heart.

HankD

 

Siegfried:C'mon, robycop3, Al Gore invented the internet like 50 years ago! How old are you?

Old enuff ta know true from false.

Algore also invented viruses; only he called them GERMS.

Wonder if Lieberman(or Hillary) invented CHADS??

 

Williemakeit:How did you get all that from the poll choices?

The pole choices are just one ray from the large "light" of the issue.


I read the questions and I am still trying to figure out how to answer.

Your right. I had long-ago decided the issue for myself, based upon lack of evidence, ESPECIALLY SCRIPTURAL, supporting the KJVO myth, and the mountain of evidence AGAINST it. No guesswork or fairy tales...just good, ole-fashioned FACTS.

The last choice was to call seigfried an idiot, and I would never do that.

HE made the poll.


If the Versions debates from the KJVOs are so painful for you, and leave you so bitter, then why not just let it lie?

It's not at all painful to attack a false doctrine about God's word. It's a Christian D-U-T-Y to expose false doctrines for what they really are, and to CONDEMN them. The ONLY valid excuses for KJVO are PERSONAL PREFERENCE, or that there's no other BV available.

 

Askjo said:

I am listening and say nothing.

If only.

 

GB,

This is Michelle's husband Jim. I really don't have much of an opinion on the subject - but certainly don't support your views over hers. I think Michelle's views are faith based and that it pains her to see modern versions weakening her scripture. On the debate itself - I think it's sad to see a bunch of people trying to turn an argument of faith into one of scholarship (and generally doing a pretty poor job on the scholarship front BTW)

Jim

 

Amen

 

GB, you see here. I told you!

Jim, I respect you! Jim, please take care of your wonderful wife and comfort her.

 

Jim, your wife's faith is built on misguided truthseekers.

It would be better to have faith in God's word. Incidentally, that would be the NASB 1995 update or the ESV slimline.

 

As for the effect the BaptistBoard's war room...er..um...Bible versions/translations forum...has had on my use of the KJV, suffice it to say that it has been negative.

I respect the KJV as a trasnlation of the word of God. But, everytime I open the KJV or read a reference from it, my skin wants to crawl. Why? Because I know realize that some people worship the created instead of the Creator. Many rabid KJVO set the KJV up as an idol, and the very thought repulses me.

I still use the KJV, but nowhere near as much as I used to.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

In April of 1998 I wrote this on another venue:

 

It isn't the modern versions that are weakening one's faith. It is disobedience to God that does. Just read James 1:22. The early Christians did not even have a Bible. The apostles only had the OT. Jesus only had the OT also. Paul only had the OT too. Many Christians around the world do not even own a Bible or only have a very small portion. Yet they continue to give their lives for Christ. Why? Obedience. The arguing over what translation to read does nothing to win people to Christ and disciple them. The weakening faith has nothing to do with the Bible. Bibles have nothing to do with evangelism. Obedience does though.

James teaches that faith is found in real people walking with God. Real faith is not a statement but a life lived for Christ in absolute obedience. Real found is found in one who is a doer. So if one has not made any disciples then he is effect disobedient.

Hebrews 11:6 says, "And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him."

Hebrew 13:7 says, “Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith.”

Without faith in Christ you cannot please God. It's that simple. It's not faith in any translation or anyone else, but God. It is an impossibility to know God just by reading the Bible. That person can know about God and not know Him. We an only know God by obedience. Obedience is the only way He gives the depth of knowing Him.

One’s faith is shown on the disciples he produces. It is not measured by the translation of the Bible he reads or the church he attends.

Blaming the lack of faith on a translation is like telling Petere when he denied Christ that his problem was in the translation he read.

So you are saying where it is written, “You of little faith!” that the problem lies in the translation they read?

Try and convince me that in: Matt 6:30; Matt 8:26; Matt 14:31; Matt 16:8 and Luke 12:28 that the problem is the translation they read.

 

Not to long after I began going to a Pentecostal church, a chap gave me some literature to read about King James Version Onlyism and why it is correct. I believed it and went out and bought a KJV Bible and went along with it for about six months.

God soon showed me however that it was an added on False Doctrine to the church, the words that I felt He was telling me was that it was the same as adding another yoke to a believer and that if I did that then I would be fully responsable for it.

Resultingly I gave up the idea and commited it to further study which led me to see how the KJVO sect originates in Gnostiscm. A subject we have done a few times here already.

 

At least they didn't ditch the Reformation Receptus for the North-African/Jesuit forgeries of the Gnostics and Philosophers.

At least he knew to reject the "oldest and best";and he did produce the manuscripts that no Catholic would touch;then and now.

Unlike the "revisers" that sat down in 1880 to oust the KJB with the Alexandrian/Jesuit forgeries.Then lied to justify the 30,000 changes the "oldest and best" thingies made to the KJB as genuine "revision" of the reformation text.

At least the KJB translators KNEW it wasn't Scripture and placed it BETWEEN the testaments..But lo and behold,the North African/Jesuit forgeries had(has)the Apocrypha in BOTH testaments as HOLY WRIT.

Not so..We just put "scholarship" and mens opinions in it's place;second to the Bible.I dont consider myself a "scholar" but rather,a student.

 

That is one of the scariest statements I've read. Now I know where Michelle gets it from. </font>[/QUOTE]This Faith/Scholarship thing has been
documented alreadly:

---004 - Believing the KJV is the written word of God is an act of faith. Believing an MV is the written word of God is an act of doubt.

Source at this site, on this page:
http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/4/1411.html?

 

That is one of the scariest statements I've read. Now I know where Michelle gets it from.

Faith in what? Anglican Church translators? Catholic document synthesizers like Erasmus? A version that has needed thousands of revisions? The apocrypha?

The concept of "scholarship" may be foreign to the only sect, but it ought not so to be. It is NOT a matter of faith in a translation (absurd) but study and understanding and evaluating and rightly dividing the Word of God -- not an English translation of it. </font>[/QUOTE]Somehow they have forgotten Acts 24:16, " Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so."

Don't you know the English translation is there to correct the source--the Greek text--the God inspired version?

 

Don't forget about advanced revelation (for instance when the KJV translators were "inspired" (according to one KJVO spokesman) to change "passover-pascha" into "easter-ishtar" after 16 centuries of the former meaning). BTW, said spokesman finding almost 200 other KJV "advanced-revelations" which he alone was able to discover.

These bizarre doctrine point out to me that as good as the KJV translation is it has it's weaknesses.

Why torture reason and logic as some here on the BB do, to produce an argument which is in reality a convoluted puzzle which ultimately must end with the doctrine that in 1611 the errors that the KJV translators made were "inspired" errors (which doctrine BTW at one time, I quoted directly from this individual's book)? Again he alone able to discover these "advanced revelations"'

Many KJVO distance themselves from him but they inadvertently lend support to him when trying to rationalize these "advanced revelations" such as the transformation of "passover-pascha" into the name of a Pagan goddess. Totally unaware that the ONLY argument he gives for this KJV choice of word(s) is that of "advanced revelation".

So, in answer to the original post, no the BB has not influenced my use of the KJV, just my view of the KJVO folks.

HankD