Is there anyone

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by DesiderioDomini, Feb 28, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DesiderioDomini

    DesiderioDomini
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who would like to try and answer a question that Mrs. Woogie did not? I dont want anyone thinking that I singled someone out to make a point. Therefore, if you wish, QUOTE the question and its direct answer here in this thread.

    I will expect the same attitude that we exhibited. We were respectful and honest.
     
  2. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    I would liked to have seen her try to address the simple, stark fact that there is absolutely NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for KJVO found in the KJV itself, let alone any other valid version. This fact alone makes all other pro-KJVO arguments moot.
     
  3. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Speaking of the KJV Mrs.Woogie says: //Also, since the last edition
    was not printed until 1769, ... //

    Authorized editions of the KJV are still being printed in the
    United Kingdom at Cambridge and probably Oxford. What is true
    about 'last edition' and the KJV1769 Edition is:
    The KJV1769 Edition is the last edition of the KJV which is
    considered valid by some (40-45%) Independent Fundamental
    Baptists (IFBs).
     
  4. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    The KJVO issue is ascriptural - there is nothing in scriptures regarding it at all.
     
  5. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good point Ed. I have tried and tried to explain that Authorized Version was a statement placed on Bible's printed under the PERMISSION of the crown and had nothing else to do with the background texts or even the translation itself.

    It was nothing more than like a stamp Microsoft places on its software boxes indicating that you have bought a genuine product produced under the permission of Microsoft.

    A type of notice saying that THIS particular printing has the permission of the crown. Very similar to a copyright notice; which still 'somewhat' exists in England.
     
  6. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    In ENGLISH, yes, but please look up the meaning of the Hebrew 'apher', translated 'ashes' by the KJV in 1 kings 20:38 and 'bandage' by the NASB, same verse. I believe Mrs. Woggie would then agree that 'bandage' is the better definition.

    We might do the same thing with 1 Kings 20:41.
     
  7. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    In ENGLISH, yes, but please look up the meaning of the Hebrew 'apher', translated 'ashes' by the KJV in 1 kings 20:38 and 'bandage' by the NASB, same verse. I believe Mrs. Woggie would then agree that 'bandage' is the better definition.

    We might do the same thing with 1 Kings 20:41.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Agree? Here? One person with another? You never know, but I wouldn't count on it. After all, this still IS the Baptist Board! :rolleyes: [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
    Ed [​IMG]
     
  8. DesiderioDomini

    DesiderioDomini
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    0
    so, shall I take from the absense of any KJVO comment on this thread that the KJVO community is admitting that it is incapable of answering these questions?

    If that is so, then it is clear that KJVO is UNTRUE if it is expected from anyone besides YOURSELF. Any claim that the KJV is the only translation we should use has been completely without merit in several open debates now.

    I appreciate the kindness and honesty of Mrs. Woogie, and she, but more importantly all the others, have proven our case. The claim of KJVO simply cannot be supported by facts.

    If anyone objects, I will ask that they take up my challenge, and address the questions at hand. I will open a new thread for anyone who wishes to do so.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...