Used to be...

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by SendMe, Apr 8, 2005.

  1. SendMe

    SendMe
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thought that maybe this belonged here... maybe. I would have put it in the general discussion forum, but it would have started a debate where debates are probably not allowed.

    I used to be KJV only, but now, after having been exposed to other resources, I am coming to the conclusion that the KJV nor any other translation is inspired, but only the original text is inspired.

    Next year we get into this more in depth here at the college... perhaps I can post some of my notes then.

    My family sees me as a herectic since I have renounced the KJV onlyism, my parents are pretty dogmatic, and as is usual so are my siblings.

    Well... that's me. Let the flaming begin.

    Matthew
     
  2. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    The word of God is not bound to the interpretations/translating of Church of England scholars in 1611.

    A consistent and scriptural view of Bible translation would be true both before and after 1611. A consistent and scriptural view of Bible translation would also be true and valid both for translations into other languages besides English as well as English.

    All the verses that KJV-only advocates misunderstand or misuse to promote their man-made view were also in the earlier pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV was a revision. If the verses were interpreted before 1611 as KJV-only advocates want to use them, then the 1611 KJV should never have been made.
     
  3. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,574
    Likes Received:
    10
    God has caused/allowed many translations of His word in many languages to be made. Plainly, God wants His word to be readily available in readable form in virtually every written language in current use. He is NOT keeping His word hidden.

    God deals with TRUTH ANF FACT, while the man-made KJVO myth deals in guesswork, imagination, fishing stories, and, sometimes, OUTRIGHT DISHONESTY.

    There's only ONE legitimate reason to be KJVO...PERSONAL PREFERENCE. All others are false.

    Matthew, the KJV is but one version of God's word, and if GOD wanted His word confined to just one version, isn't He more than powerful enough to have kept any other version from being made? Feel free to use the version or versions to which the HOLY SPIRIT guides you. After all it's GOD'S word, not man's.
     
  4. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    You're experience is similar to mine SendMe.

    Hang in there and love them anyway. Be kind while standing on conviction and maybe God will use your testimony with them.

    One of the KJVO dangers I see among fundamentalists is that they confuse what is traditional with what is conservative/biblical/fundamental.

    In a just closed thread, someone accused me of being a hypocrite since he saw posts where I said that tatoos were usually a case of following worldly fads and also where I had opposed KJVOnlyism. He said I was contentious but wouldn't give specifics.

    Without assuming this particular person's motives, this seems to be a common malady with KJVO's. They assume that KJVOnlyism is fundamentalism/conservatism. So, anyone who doesn't share their beliefs must be a liberal Bible hater. The fact is that KJVOnlyism is a relatively recent manifestation.

    We, not KJVO's, are the conservative fundamentalists on this issue.
     
  5. 4His_glory

    4His_glory
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,884
    Likes Received:
    0
    I used to be KJVO as well, thank God for His grace in leading you out of that myth. Hang in there, God will bless. Perhaps through your spirit of love for you family, they to will realize the fallacy of KJVOism.
     
  6. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Welcome to the Baptist Board, brother SendMe!!

    Go over here and be the 249th voter
    (the first 200 votes are in the first two
    polls):
    Inerrancy Poll #3
     
  7. SendMe

    SendMe
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    Voted! Inerrant in the original autographs of course.

    Matthew
     
  8. WallyGator

    WallyGator
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    4,180
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bless You, Matthew,
    I too was KJVO in my younger years! But praise the Lord, I can now use and enjoy other versions.
    Thanks for the post.
    WallyGator
     
  9. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    SendMe, You are probably beginning to see a common thread. You will find many people here who were formerly KJVO.
     
  10. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of course.
    You are allowed to vote in the wrong slot [​IMG]

    (I'm for "6. inerrant in all faithful English translations " [​IMG]
     
  11. Slambo

    Slambo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    197
    Likes Received:
    0
    Does that mean your exempting the scholarship of necromancers W&H??
     
  12. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I reject and condemn your over-a-century-old
    slander on Christian brothers. :(
     
  13. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,574
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gents such as Slambo have no evidence to use to defend their position, so they respond with little one-liners directed at PEOPLE because they're without any excuse for their incorrect stand. However, there's no substitute for EVIDENCE, & the KJVOs are totally lacking in that dept.

    Matthew, CONGRATS upon seeing just how hollow and totally false the KJVO myth really is, and for DUMPING it!
     
  14. SendMe

    SendMe
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please be careful concerning this when addressing me... I still have loved ones very dear to me that have looked down on my decision for dropping their view. I've even had to leave my home church of about 5 years, this being only part of the reason, but a reason nonetheless.

    Matthew
     
  15. SendMe

    SendMe
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mr. Ed Edwards, are you suggesting that before the English translations we did not have a reliable Bible? Just curious... was the Word of God in hibernation all that time, and only after 1611 we have the Word of God among men? Please, explain your stand on this. What do we do concerning other languages? Do we translate the KJV into their language with little regard to the original text, because, by the way, it is the inspired version. But if it is only inspired as the English translation, then what Bible is inspired for Spanish, Romanian, French? Etc.? Also... which KJV are you referring to? 1611? 1700's? Which one? Are they both inspired? We do not have the 1611 in circulation today, it would be a headache to read.

    Hmmm.
    Matthew
     
  16. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    In HIS service;
    Jim

    (oops! After reading this when it posted, it looked like I was "sleeping in His service. NOT what was intended at all! [​IMG] edit)
     
  17. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,574
    Likes Received:
    10
    Send Me: Please be careful concerning this when addressing me... I still have loved ones very dear to me that have looked down on my decision for dropping their view.

    That's THEIR problem...You've dumped it.


    I've even had to leave my home church of about 5 years, this being only part of the reason, but a reason nonetheless.

    If a church places the KJVO myth as one of its main doctrines, I'd have moved on also, other reasons or not. One false doctrine is one too many for me.
     
  18. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,169
    Likes Received:
    323
    And what of King James and the scholarship of his "bishops" (successionists of the apostles) who persecuted and shed the blood of believers in the name of God and the Church of England?

    Once you start looking/comparing any human lives you start the slide down the proverbial "slippery slope".

    HankD
     
  19. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    SendMe: "Mr. Ed Edwards, are you suggesting that before the English translations we did not have a reliable Bible?"

    In no way. I suggest only that i am incompetent to judge
    a Bible not in a language i understand. So i cannot
    speak of Bibles in other languages. I presume from
    the Nature of God that He would provide innerrant Bibles
    in all major Languages. To that end i've contibuted
    before to major Bible societies.

    SendMe: "We do not have the 1611 in circulation today,
    it would be a headache to read."

    Your statement is not technically correct.
    Just a couple of months ago an electronic version of the KJV1611
    came on-line. http://www.e-sword.com/ is the place.
    You can pick your own fount and don't have to use
    Gothic letters, unless you like.
    In fact, i keep a copy of the Geneva and the KJV1611
    and the KJV1769 with Strong's Numbers on my computer's
    desk top at all times while the net is on.

    Also in the recent past Nelson published
    THE HOLY BIBLE, KING JAMES VERSION, 1611 Edition)
    a computer typeset (not photo
    copy of pages) copy of the KJV1611 Edition. Copies are
    still avialable for about $40 on E-bay.
    The Henderson similiar edition is still being published
    and you can find it for under $30.
    I only have the Nelson copy left; i gave the Henderson
    copy away, Ed's missionary duty to a KJVOest.

    Yes, i do have three paper copies of KJVs:
    KJV1611
    KJV1769
    KJV1873
    on my computer desk. The KJV1611 and KJV1873 both
    have the original translator footnotes in them each
    footnote of which blows the socks off the KJVO myth.
     
  20. SendMe

    SendMe
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you accept the Apocrypha?

    Matthew
     

Share This Page

Loading...