The reason I am KJBO

Not buying that.

 

So report it and let the moderator (C4K) decide- that's what I do. Worst thing that happens is it gets edited.

 

The first part is a logical assessment. Is it unsound?

The second part was my opinion and I can totally get your "not buying it". That would have to be confirmed or denied by the author.

 

Originally Posted by Salty
So, Jim do you still have that first printing copy that the translators personally autograph for you :laugh: :smilewinkgrin:
-----------------------------------------------

that Salty is a riot, isn't he........lol

I do still use my 1945 copy,,and I signed it,,lol

Cheers,

Jim

 

I have mentioned this in the past,Jim you need to see a printer and have those corrections that you made put into the text of your JKJV! (Jim's KJV).You could be the next Thomas Paris, Benjamin Blayney or Noah Webster.

 

It is a particle that does not translate.

 

But earlier you said you were waiting for a Bible to accurately translate the word. What are you trying to say? Double-speak is your speciality.

 

Bang on, Rippon.....I think he reads something and thinks it's clever to repeat it...then harps on it.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Exactly. I get a bang out of those who think their Bible is a word for word translation. The point is that what I am waiting for cannot be done.

 

I rarely give reason for moderatorial decisions, but I am going to make an exception here.

This statement is no more an attack on the King James Translation than the OP is an attack on all other translations.

Stilllearning says that he uses the King James because he only trusts that translation. That means that he cannot trust any other translation. Tom here says he does not use the King James because he cannot trust it.

Both posters have said that they don't use versions they cannot trust.

Moderating integrity requires that I either leave both viewpoints or delete both. I cannot let one stand and not the other.

Any posts about this decision should directed to me personally through PM. Any public responses are off topic and will be deleted.

 

Which you are BTW.

Being old doesn't mean diddly. The Vulgate is even older and has withstood as much if not more. Seems your bucket has a hole in it.

Me too. I just prefer one that I don't have to translate into modern English before I can make use of it.

 

Wisdom of Solomon!

 

I was not saying anything about the KJV, just KJVO. And I was illustrating the point. Why wouldn't the OP be a violation as well?

C4K, again, I wasn't saying anything derogatory about the KJV. I said I was not KJVO because of my desire to trust the Word of God. KJVO denies us this. Had I said "the reason I don't use the KJV ......." then you'd have a point. That said, that kind of thing is said repeatedly without punishment.

The main point: those of us who are not KJVO trust the Word of God and it is fallacious for the OP to suggest otherwise.

 

Well said. Thanks.

 

My salvation is not dependent on any Bible. My trust is in Jesus Christ. There is a reason for the gift of teaching and having teachers in the church.

 

I guess I was reading it wrong. My apologies.

 

I have never heard Tom Vols speak ill of anyone let alone the King James Version of the Bible, and I should be greatly astonished if he did.

I think some people tend to read into posts what they want to read.

Cheers to you, Tom, and bless,

Jim