King James Bible

My problem here is that Justin may not honestly know the unreliability of these sources. Perhaps we could point out where they err instead of saying simply that he is using poor sources.

 

And just what are you teaching? Faith? Humility? Kindness? Patience?

 

Gentlemen,

May we remember that we are dealing with a young man here. We will have plenty of opportunity to express out views and opinions later. For now, lets give facts and helpful advice to a fella who may never have heard any other point of view.

 

Melton is a dubious source at best.

 

If these are you best reasons Justin you might strongly consider expanding your research and looking at other points of view while asking the Holy Spirit for direction.

 

I hope you can find that time, Sir. Meanwhile, may I suggest you get a copy of the AV 1611...the REAL KJV? I believe it's around $30 at most Bible stores and some Wal-Marts. It's an invaluable study tool for any serious English-reading Bible student, and for those who believe the KJVO myth.

Here's an example: Melton uses Psalm 12:6-7 as "proof verses" for God's preservation of His word. This is deceptive of him, and here's why: In the AV 1611, there's a marginal note for V7's first them. This note reads, "Heb. him, I. euery one of them". The AV translators knew V7 refers to the PEOPLE in the first 5 verses of Ps. 12. And while it seems odd that the context would hop back & forth as it does, please remember that David wrote this as a SONG, in the Hebrew of C. 1000 BC, & we know how our modern English songs change subjects so often for the sake of rhyme & rhythm.

Melton's premise is absurd because he seeks to make a point by twisting a Scripture, in light of the fact that there are many other Scriptures which PLAINLY state God preserves His word. And even if his premise were right, he still has the monumental problem of presenting evidence that it applies to the KJV alone.

Wanna know where Melton got that premise? Here ya go! In 1930, a SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST official, Dr. Benjamin Wilkinson, published a book, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, which contained the "Ps. 12:6-7 thingie" & many other errors. This book became the basis for a whole new genre of "religious writings" hawking the KJVO doctrine. This became the "Wilkinson-Ray-Ruckman-Fuller Party Line" from which the likes of Gail Riplinger, Sam Gipp, and yes, MELTON, got their ideas.

Now i wouldn't expect you to absorb all that in a day, things which took me YEARS to discover, but I hope to get you thinling about it with that one little example of typical "KJVOthink". And remember, every Christian here believes the KJV is a valid Bible version, but very few believe it's the ONLY valid English BV.

And remember, you are completely free to use the KJV alone without having the dead bird of KJVO hanging around your neck.

 

I hope I've done that with the well-known "Ps. 12:6-7 thingie" while pointing out that 90% of all KJVO ideas have come from Wilkinson's Our Authorized Bible Vindicated. Why should CHRISTIANS accept a SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST'S ideas?

 

The 1611 KJV is also available online at http://www.studylight.org and probably at some other Bible web sites. And the original KJV can be of great value in seeing where the KJVs most frequently used have changed since the original was published. There are differences in the various KJV editions despite the false argument that they are all the same. If I weren't at work I would do some comparisons, but my break is almost over and I have bills to pay...

 

Another thing, Peperoni...Just ask a KJVO to prove the KJVO doctrine BY SCRIPTURE. They'll either go, "well......duh.....lemme think....." or quote some of the "preservation" Scriptures. Then, ask'em just where or how those Scriptures apply only to the KJV in English.

As Scripture is our highest written authority, any doctrine ABOUT Scripture MUST BE SUPPORTED by Scripture to be true. Otherwise, we'd be placing that doctrine ABOVE SCRIPTURE in authority. Since there's no Scriptural support for KJVO, it cannot be true.

Please note that none of us are trying to place any doubt upon the validity of the KJV nor trying to discourage its use; we are proclaiming the TRUTH that the KJV is NOT the ONLY valid English-language Bible version. In your Christian life, you're gonna encounter many great IFBs who don't use the KJV only, or not use it at all. I hope you really find time to see just how spurious the KJVO claims are.

Those authors such as Riplinger and Ruckman depend upon selling their boox to keep themselves livin' large. They're sensationalists; the truth be darned for the sake of book sales. My best advice is to CHECK OUT THEIR CLAIMS FOR YOURSELF, and not rely upon what someone else says, including me! And I hope ya start with the "Ps. 12:6-7 thingie" I posted earlier. That's FACT, not opinion!

 

Absolutely true.

You will find that one of the favorite tactics of the KJVO crowd is to imply or outright say that the opponents of KJVO hate the KJV when nothing could be further from the truth.

 

Excellent point - I, for one, am an ardent user of the KJV. It is all I preach and teach out of.

 

Keith M Use of "Myth" Count
Post 24 = 12
Post 26 = 5
Post 29 = 1
Post 35 = 2
Post 36 = 2
Post 37 = 0
Post 38 = 5
Post 40 = 1
Post 49 = 0
Total = 28

I have grown a rather tough skin when it comes to name-calling and ridicule of my beliefs and the beliefs of my brethren. However, as much as the MV'rs don't appreciate when folks call their Bibles "perversions", (which I have avoided in deference to their sensibilities) I don't care for my stand on the KJV being the preserved Word of God as being called a "myth" and I certainly don't care for it being used 28 times in the same thread.

Not really advocating for any action here...just highlighting a pattern.

 

A late,great Baptist preacher/teacher of the past, Dr. J. Vernon Mc Gee(1904-1988) preached/taught exclusively from the KJV. However, he often stated that he was NOT KJVO, but used only the KJV in public because that was the version with which he'd grown up, & was most familiar to him. In his 5-year verse-by-verse bible study, he used the KJV, but often said, "A BETTER rendering of this verse is....." or "The MODERN ENGLISH equivalent is.......".

 

Keith most likely picked up the term from ME, Rufus, as I use it without hesitation. And why? Because it's TRUE. I am speaking of the myth that the KJV is the ONLY valid English Bible version.

If you can prove otherwise, then by all means, have at it. Can you provide any EVIDENCE upon which Peperoni can base his KJVO?


Otherwise, it remains a myth, the opinions and guesswork of a few men, completely devoid of any SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT.

 

The topic of this thread is to help Justin with this views. There is a thread running on the evidences for a one version only view. Let us stick to that.



Now, on a personal, non-moderator note. No one here says that there is a preserved KJV "myth." The term "myth" is used to describe the theory that there is only one version today. This theory is what is being encountered by Justin.

However - if Justin is not able to soon give us his own views and answer some of the questions, this thread will be closed as the topic has been discussed ad naseum.

 

Uh, Rufus, as has already been pointed out to you, I did not say that the belief that the KJV is the preserved word of God is a myth. Was this a deliberate misrepresentation on your part, or merely a case where you just didn't investigate the truth of what you were saying before you spoke? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you spoke in haste without checking out the veracity of your claim. The alternative is that you deliberately misrepresented what was said. I merely pointed out the fact that the belief that the KJV is the only preserved word of God is a myth. Of course the KJV is the preserved word of God, but so is the NKJV, the NASB, the NIV, etc. There is no foundation anywhere in Scripture for the belief that God is so weak that He can only preserve His word in a single English Bible translation. Yet that is exactly what the KJVO myth implies - that God is weak and that His ability to preserve His word can only encompass one single Bible translation. That, sir, is a myth which errantly questions God's ability to preserve His word. I'll say it again - the myth is not the belief that the KJV is God's preserved word. The myth is the belief that the KJV is the only Bible version that is God's preserved word.

Justin, this is just another example of the false accusations the KJVO myth supporters use to try to focus attention away from their errant claims. I have not seen a single post on this board which says the KJV is not the preserved word of God. That is just another falsehood made up by supporters of the KJVO myth. Are you beginning to see that the KJVO myth and the tactics of misrepresentation that go along with it are totally wrong? Think about it - anything that is claimed to be truth should have biblical support and it should be honest, both of which are severely lacking from the KJVO myth.

There's that word again - 10 more times. But it points to the truth that the KJVO concept is wrong in every way - it is truly a myth. Oops, there's #11.