Just Don’t Call It the “word of God”

Why don't you start off by reading a real AV1611? When I read the real AV1611 that was the beginning on me seeing that something was terrible wrong with KJVOism.

 

How many languages?-- 3. How many renderings of the sign?-- 4, none of which are exactly alike. Which one-- at least one-- is wrong?

In different languages you say the same thin in different ways.

Ain't it nice of you to say that! With or without the silly KJV language style, scripture can say the same thing.

For a fuller answer id have to study on it.

Yeah, try that for a change.

 

Why would I want to do that? Besides the fact that I am reading no less then 3 right now? </font>[/QUOTE]Make sure you're honest in your reading. Are you reading only one side of the issue like most KJVO's here?

AVL1984

 

You are learning!
Now we are getting somewhere!

 

No, you misunderstand, they do not contradict each other. They are translated properly, and they agree with their source texts. Some of the differences are a result of a process that you seem to understand, you say the same thing differently in different languages. The slight differences in the underlying manuscripts do not affect the truth contained within the word of God. It is clear what God has done, why don't you understand?

 

No, you misunderstand, they do not contradict each other. They are translated properly, and they agree with their source texts. Some of the differences are a result of a process that you seem to understand, you say the same thing differently in different languages. The slight differences in the underlying manuscripts do not affect the truth contained within the word of God. It is clear what God has done, why don't you understand? </font>[/QUOTE]Here we(groan) go again...

 

Why would I want to do that? Besides the fact that I am reading no less then 3 right now? </font>[/QUOTE]Make sure you're honest in your reading. Are you reading only one side of the issue like most KJVO's here?

AVL1984 </font>[/QUOTE]That is an unsubstantiated accusation born out by the fact that you havnt the foggiest idea if they are or not. And didnt you catch it when I said that I am surounded by thousands of books pro and anti KJV?

 

Please answer a qimple question:

If the KJV disagrees with, or inadequately translates, its source texts, do the source texts have authority over the KJV, or does the KJV have authority over the source texts? Keep in mind that the source texts that the KJV translators used are readily available today.

 

KJVBT,

You actually have books written by Christian authors that are anti KJV? Are you sure you might not want to restate that they are anti KJVO? If they are Christians and against the KJV I would like to know the name of the books and authors. Thanks.

Bro Tony

 

KJVBT,

You actually have books written by Christian authors that are anti KJV? Are you sure you might not want to restate that they are anti KJVO? If they are Christians and against the KJV I would like to know the name of the books and authors. Thanks.

Bro Tony </font>[/QUOTE]I have said before that I believe that if you are not 100% KJVO you are against it.
About the books I meant that I was surrounded by books that supported my views on all subjects or didnt. Not just on the KJV issue,sorry if I didnt make that clear.
There are books that are against the KJV but they are all over the office and in storage. If you want the names of them though ill provide you with as many as I can.

 

I would really appreciate that, but I really don't want books that are anti KJVO, I was wanting any books from Christians that are anti KJV. If you have them I would be interested. I don't view those who oppose KJVO as being against the KJV as it has been stated by many on this forum that they use almost exclusively the KJV while they are not KJVO.

Bro Tony

 

If you're not KJVO, then you're against the KJV? That's a completely false statement, and false judgement on those who are not KJVO.

 

I am supposed to believe that the King James Version is the only correct version or I am against it? Says who?

I am not against the King James Version at all.

If you want me to consider being KJVO, please let me know which version of the KJV is the most correct, giving evidence, so I can consider it.

 

KJVBibleThumper said:

It never ceases to amaze me how people who are anti-KJV rationalize it.

"Rationalize" is what you have to call telling the truth, since it is clearly a foreign concept to you.

There are so many differences between the new versions and the KJV it isnt funny!

On the contrary, this KJV-only macro is hilarious.



So unless you can believe multiple things at the same time you are anti-KJV.

I believe multiple things at the same time. The sky is blue. The grass is green. The NASB is God's Word and those who disagree can take a flying leap. It's easy!

 

OK, now we are being told that we don't really believe what we really believe.

Have to categorize that with:

"if you understood you would understand"

"things which are different are different because their differences are different" (or somesuch).

HankD

 

I love the literary and poetic allusion but unfortunently it has no bearing on the subject.
You say the NASB is Gods Word, right? Then would you be happy to be known as "NASBO"? If the answer is yes then you are the 2nd person here that I have met that is honest about this subject.
You provided NO proof that the differing bible versions are similar, instead all you did was crack smart aleck jokes about them. I have no problem with doing that if you post a good reason why they are the same and why we KJVO are a bunch of laughs!

 

Just because someone likes the NASB or prefers it, does not make that person NASBO. I don't know any NASBO people, or any NIVOs, or NKJVOs, or NLTOs. The "O" stands for "only" as in that is the "only" true word of God.

This is what the KJVO people are saying -- the KJV is the "only" true word of God and all other versions are corrupt and are not the word of God.

So when a KJVO says the NASB or NIV or NKJV is not the word of God, those who use those versions respond by saying, yes, my NASB, or my NIV, or my NKJV is the word of God.

The issue is that KJVO is saying only the KJV is the word of God. The attacks are coming from that direction. KJVO are telling me and others that our Bibles are not the word of God. We are NOT saying the KJV is not the word of God.

 

Pakistan has four provinces. Three of them have their own language. The other has about 12 tribal dialects, considered languages in themselves. The official language is Urdu, which is not any one of the provincial languages, but an entirely different language. The only Bible the Pakistanis have is an Urdu Bible, which translational-wise is about the equivalent of the Revised Standard Version. The Pakistanis are Urdu-Version-Only (UVO). Do they have the Word of God??

Now Afghanistan is a different story...
DHK

 

I'm not sure that he's trolling Dr. Bob. I noticed that he is young and inexperienced in the Bible versions debates. He states he is only 16 ( I believe that is correct..he stated he was studying for his drivers license exam). I chalk his cockyness up to his youth and inexperience.

AVL1984