What doctrines are wrong . . .

A point which I have already refuted (citing language evolution).

Yet another KJVO lie that is easily refuted. The NKJV and MKJV are not paraphrases in the slightest. In fact, the MKJV translates the KJV's source texts in the exact same manner as the KJV. The only difference is that it translates into 21st century English instead of 17th century English.

 

POR:Since the KJB is accurate,

Except where proven INaccurate...


all the others are "paraphrases"

So, the NIV, NASB, and even the NWT are all KJV paraphrases? Yeah, right...


Time you. and many,many others learn that.

Time we also learn the earth is flat & that the moon is made of cheese?


So the "doctrine", as you call it, is true, right, necessary.

Yerp...If ya live in Fantasyland!

 

WRONG ahnk!! No wonder you're so confused about the Bible, you're trying to use a modern dictionary to translate an age old conglomeration of FACT.

Brass is the purer form of bronze, Unicorn is a rhinoceros like creature that inhabited Turkey, and behemoth is the largest creature ever known to man.

 

A point which I have already refuted (citing language evolution).

Yet another KJVO lie that is easily refuted. The NKJV and MKJV are not paraphrases in the slightest. In fact, the MKJV translates the KJV's source texts in the exact same manner as the KJV. The only difference is that it translates into 21st century English instead of 17th century English. </font>[/QUOTE]Oh, I see now yall are evolutionists. Hmmmm? Wonder where the defintion of APOSTACY fits in here?

 

I do suppose this IS your ministry, huh? Anti-Word of God "ministry" Hmmm?

You haven't proven a thang, except your identity.

[attack snipped]

[ November 17, 2004, 08:03 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob ]

 

"Yall" are not evolutionists. In fact, John and I have had several pointed debates on that subject.

Several other non-KJVO's are creationists as well.

 

I wasn't aware that I was an evolutionist, but in any case, this is a clear case of the KJVO apostate calling the kettle black.

 

I believe it was YOU who insists that a dictionary will clear up any KJVO questions. Now, when I prove your point wrong, you "accuse" me of doing what you said we should be doing. Typical KJVO false doctrine doublespeak.

Your ignorance abounds.

Brass is a copper/zinc alloy. Bronze is a copper/tin alloy. Your claim is patently false. Brass is a 16th century invention. Bronze goes back thousands of years.

The Hebrew word r'em (translated by the KJV as unicorn) is a wild bull, or wild ox.

The Hebrew word behmowth (transliterated in the KJV as behemoth) means "water ox", which is what they called the animal we know as the hippopotamus.

 

Plain ol' Ralph said "Brass is the purer form of bronze"

Brass is an alloy of copper and zinc.

Bronze is an alloy copper and tin.

Brass does not occur naturally, and is a relatively recent man-made alloy. You could not dig it out of hills, either now nor in the past (Deut 8:9, KJV) as you could copper or bronze.

 

Of course. Since the KJV contains no errors, and if there is evidence that the KJV contains errors, then the evidence must be wrong, because the KJV contains no errors.

Got it.

I think that we who love the KJV need to take a stand against this type of KJVOist circular reasoning, since it only results in confusion, in false doctrine, and in degredation and mockery of the KJV, not to mention other reliable translations. In other words, KJVOism does what it accuses non-KJVOists of doing.

 

The Living Bible, Paraphased
Rom. 8:28. And we know that all that happens to us is working for our good if we love God and are fitting into his plans.
29. For from the very beginning God decided that those who came to him--and all along he knew who would--should become like his Son, so that his Son would be the First, with many brothers.
30. And having chosen us, he called us to come to him; and when we came, he declared us ``not guilty,'' filled us with Christ's goodness, gave us right standing with himself, and promised us his glory.

New American Standard Bible, 1995
Rom. 8:28. And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.
29. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;
30. and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

 

Some might say there is a doctrinal difference between "the only begotten Son" and "the only begotten God" (Jn. 1:18).

Yours,

Bluefalcon

 

Well - just to clear up some metallurgical confusion

Brass and Bronze were both used at the same time - tho bronze was preferred since the method of achieving zinc to create the brass was not foolproof - and thus bronze was easier to use

I quote the brass page
http://www.brass.org/history.htm

but if that aint enough hit Encyclopedia Britannia

 

Oh Phillip! Such bad hermeneutics. This is what we in the CNM (Church of the Narrow Minded) call “Wizard of Oz” theology. The streets are of an asphalt of gold, you heretic!

You are following the “Yellow Brick Road” to your doom.

Now, where’d I lay my stright jacket?

 

Of course. Since the KJV contains no errors, and if there is evidence that the KJV contains errors, then the evidence must be wrong, because the KJV contains no errors.

Got it.

I think that we who love the KJV need to take a stand against this type of KJVOist circular reasoning, since it only results in confusion, in false doctrine, and in degredation and mockery of the KJV, not to mention other reliable translations. In other words, KJVOism does what it accuses non-KJVOists of doing. </font>[/QUOTE]Since democratic injustice over-rides the Word of God by majority here, I suppose yall are right. to scorn

 

Oh, BTW, with "circular reasoning" one tends to end up right back where God started him, contrary to where the doctrines of men send him.

Hmmm? Yall might be onto sumthin here. "circular reasoning" Right smack dab in the middle of God's Will!!

 

Can you cite a specific person here that believes that the LB or any other paraphrase carries the same weight and authority as direct translations?

If not, please burn that straw man and actually engage in factual debate. </font>[/QUOTE]Oh, so pick and choose tactics at work? Uh, jus cause some one says it's a "bible" don mean it tis'

 

Yet another refusal of PoR to address a point made to him, How typical. You're not in the minority because of any injustice, you're in the minoruty because your KJVO assertions are not scripturally supportable. This despite being asked numerous times for scriptural support. Doctrine without scriptural support is false doctrine. There is no way you can skirt that issue. None.

Yet another example of the KJVO pot calling the kettle black. PoR, this thread is three pages long, and filled with numerous points addressed to you, which you have refused to reply to. You pick and choose, and then accuse others of the exact same thing you do.

Typical KJVO false doctrine doublespeak.