KJB Defenders

pretty one-sided, and not much truth there at all.

For a balanced approach, see The Conspiracy Behind the New Bible Translations?
Why I Do Not Believe the King James Translation Is the Best Version Available Today
Why So Many Versions?
and the multiple articles at King James Only Resource Center

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: Chris Temple ]

 

Also, see The King James Version Debate by D.A. Carson and The King James Only Controversy by James White

 

TomVols said:

Also, see The King James Version Debate by D.A. Carson and The King James Only Controversy by James White

And One Bible Only?, eds. Roy E. Beacham and Kevin T. Bauder (Kregel, 2001) for a more recent, specifically Fundamentalist response to this specifically Fundamentalist controversy.

 

Ransom,
I knew there was a newer work out but couldn't remember it. I haven't read this one yet. I look forward to doing so.

 

TomVols said:

Ransom,
I knew there was a newer work out but couldn't remember it. I haven't read this one yet. I look forward to doing so.

I was also vaguely aware of it (KJV-only materials don't typically penetrate the border into Canada unless, like White or Carson, they're carried by a major publisher), but was pleasantly surprised to find it one day in one of the local Christian bookstores (ironically, the Charismatic-friendly, Jesus-junk-loaded, "every wind of doctrine" one).

It's quite good - a collection of essays on various relevant topics by the faculty of Central Baptist Theological Seminary. There's a FAQ in the appendix that I found especially good - better than the one in White's book, as good as that is.

 

Thanks Ransom. I'll definitely put it on my "Want List" and check it out.

 

Psalm145 3,

I would be willing to send you a copy of The King James Only Controversy by James
White and One Bible Only?, eds. Roy E. Beacham and Kevin T. Bauder if you would
read them. I just ask that you give these a chance. (Acts 17:11)

I will also send you a taped copy of James White in a debate with D.A. Waite. I have read D.A. Waite's book and must say that this was a very interesting discussion. James White was exceptionally good in his answers to this issue. And there is a surprise guest who will show his true colors.

I will also send a copy of a debate between James White and G.A. Riplinger. I would
highly recommend you take a listen to this. It will expose the truth behind the so called
"New Age Versions" and G.A. Riplinger.

I also have a copy of him discussing this issue on "The Bible Answer Man Show" with
Hank Hanegraaff as he interacts with live callers.

For anyone who would want to listen to these debates you can listen to these debates and more, including a debate with Thomas Holland, concerning the deity of Christ in the MV's http://aomin.org/

Unfortunately right now his audio server is down and has been for a few weeks. He says
he is working on getting another set up. I will keep checking his homepage and let you
know when it is back up.

Psalms 145 3 if you are interested, and I pray you are, send me a private e-mail with your mailing address. [email protected]

[ February 09, 2002: Message edited by: Chet ]

 

"It Looks Like We're not in Kansas anymore"
as Grandpa once said, If it Ain't broke
don't fix it, the kjb's reputation clearly
makes it stand out from all others, it is
clearly the most Hated Book of the Laodicean
Church, their Scholars, Publishers, Preachers
and Preacher-etts all push the other Versions
it has become very Profitable for them to do
so, The kjb is a Spiritual book and must be
Spiritually Discerned to be Understood, see
1 Cor. 2:10-16 kjv, Todays Laodicean Congreg-
ation can no Longer Understand it, thus they
must find one that gives them Comfort in their lack of Understanding, I couldn't Under
stand it, Until I got Born Again, so I will
stick with a proven Sword.

 

Tim the Baptist said:

"It Looks Like We're not in Kansas anymore"

I never was, actually.

[the KJV] is clearly the most Hated Book of the Laodicean Church,

Why would a church in Turkey be worried about an English Bible?

Or are you referring to that fabled "Church age" that some people have inferred by allegorizing the third chapter of Revelation?

Either way, who cares?

their Scholars, Publishers, Preachers
and Preacher-etts all push the other Versions
it has become very Profitable for them to do
so,

I rather doubt my pastor is getting royalties from Zondervan. He's probably too busy preaching the Word to worry about picayune debates from the fringes of Fundamentalism.

 

Welcome to a fellow East Tennessean, but let's stick to the facts and avoid the ad-hominems.

 

Ouch.... Facts?????? Facts will put you on the fringes of Fundamentalism
and we wouldn't want to be Fundamental in our
believe or doctrine, no way man, let me join
the Baskin-Robbins Baptist Church, whats the
flavor of the Month,lol lol lol, just kidding
okay Ransom, Calm down, I come in Peace,
I'm sorry Forgive me, Please...... Okay
TomVol, He's Canadian, Whats your excuse...

 

Tim the Baptist said:

okay Ransom, Calm down, I come in Peace, I'm sorry

Hmmmm. Implicitly accusing pastors (and, by association, my own) and others of having ulterior commercial motives, lacking understanding, lacking spiritual discernment, and being effeminate, merely because their pew Bible isn't the same as yours, is a very funny way of "coming in peace."

It's wild-eyed rhetoric of this kind that discredits KJV-onlyism almost as surely as its faulty arguments.

[ February 11, 2002: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ransom:
It's wild-eyed rhetoric of this kind that discredits KJV-onlyism almost as surely as its faulty arguments.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As well as one's Christian testimony.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> we wouldn't want to be Fundamental in our
believe or doctrine <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I prefer the OLD definition of fundamentals, not the new version that floats around many so called self proclaimed fundamentalists who bring insult to the very name.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Okay
TomVol, He's Canadian, Whats your excuse <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hey, I'm from East Tennessee...I don't need an excuse

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tim the Baptist:
Ouch.... Facts?????? Facts will put you on the fringes of Fundamentalism
and we wouldn't want to be Fundamental in our
believe or doctrine, no way man, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No facts won't put you on the fringes of fundamentalism. But the lack of facts clearly puts KJVOnlyism outside of any legitimate definition of "fundamentalism."

It is not a doctrine drawn from scripture. It is not a doctrine drawn from the Bible evidences. It is not a doctrine drawn from the history of fundamental Christianity.

KJVOnlyism is a man-made, feeling-based, false doctrine that hinders the gospel. It originated within the last 100-150 years as a reaction in favor to tradition and against scholarship. It preys on people who fearfully and irrationally reject everything new or people who willfully reject the facts when they are shown to them.

KJVO is not a fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith but an unbiblical addition to it.

 

Scott, although I agree with your time frame for KJVOism, and the type of people it tends to attract, I believe its roots may not be as bad as you suggest. I believe KJVOism began with a very real concern for the demise of the Byzantine textform in favor of the Alexandrian textform, which many scholars of that day, as well as today, believe to be the superior textform and to best represent the autographa. I agree the discussion has been so warped by a very vocal minority that it is almost beyound recognition, but there is still a rational basis for the discussion. As a great old man (Arno Winiger) said at the FBF meeting in Denver in about 1989 or 1990, "Some people today are asking "which bible" and I believe that to be a legitimate question?" I agree with the gentleman in question. The issue of English versions is one that ought to be disucssed, but, in an orderly and rational way.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Thomas Cassidy:
I believe its roots may not be as bad as you suggest. I believe KJVOism began with a very real concern for the demise of the Byzantine textform in favor of the Alexandrian textform,...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I have only seen two explainations for the origin of KJVO. The one widely presented that it originated with a 7th Day Adventist and the one you have forwarded concerning those of the 19th century who were referred to in a quote by advocates of the CT by a word a can't recall. Just from what I have seen, read, heard, and experienced, I would tend to believe that most of the horsepower from this movement was not provided by those favoring the BT or TR. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I agree the discussion has been so warped by a very vocal minority that it is almost beyound recognition, but there is still a rational basis for the discussion. As a great old man (Arno Winiger) said at the FBF meeting in Denver in about 1989 or 1990, "Some people today are asking "which bible" and I believe that to be a legitimate question?" I agree with the gentleman in question. The issue of English versions is one that ought to be disucssed, but, in an orderly and rational way. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I agree with this. It is definitely a legitimate discussion but, when the issue is rationally discussed, most people tend to move away from the TR. I would personally like to see more weight given to the BT...move the CT closer to the MT so to speak.

I really have no problem with your point of view...I don't completely agree but I do respect your convictions. My problem is with those who believe that God some how superintended the KJV or even the TR to make it the perfect equivalent to the originals. These groups usually feel complete justification in condemning all of us who do not agree with them...I think you are kind of on the fringe as far as they are concerned...you MIGHT be close enough to KJVO to make it into heaven

. They need someone to give them scholarly reasoning but would like to ignore you when you won't go all the way with them.

 

I never Realized that believing the a.v. as Gods word, Would cause such a Thunderation
of Disdain, I am sorry that you have had a
bad experience in the reading and or study of
the a.v., I also ask forgivness in respect to
my earlier offensive communication, sorry, I
would like to study on your point of view, so
to assimilate into the mainstream of religion
and come out of the dark ages, I need your
help, what version or versions should I use
in my daily readings?, what books would you
recommend I read to help Liberate me from
fundamentalism? please help me break the bonds of oldtime Religion, I have always believed the a.v. as the word of God, if its
not, then I need to change what I believe and
Preach,Teach, so I to can be informed and Conformed to the Mainstream Baptist Thinking,
Help!

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I never Realized that believing the a.v. as Gods word, Would cause such a Thunderation
of Disdain <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Believing the KJV is a translation of God's Word is not the problem. I don't think Dr. Cassidy nor I would allow that. It's summarily dismissing other translations as being translations of God's Word (and using ad-hominems in the process) that will get the ire of other fundamentalists/conservatives on this board.