What took so long?

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Terry_Herrington, Feb 5, 2003.

  1. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    This question is for the KJV only crowd.

    How is it that it only took God six days to create the entire world, yet it took Him until 1611 AD to create a perfect bible, according to this doctrine? Kind of illogical isn't it?
     
  2. Faith Fact Feeling

    Faith Fact Feeling
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2003
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    0
    You know what's more illogical? Your feeling that he still hasn't created one.
     
  3. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ah, so you agree your view is illogical, just slighly less so because the number of years since Christ is 20% less?

    So if it took God 1611 years to create one, what's so bad about thinking he took 1901 or 1978 or 2005 years instead?
     
  4. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    At my age (60 this year) my
    main form of exercise is JUMPING
    TO CONCLUSIONS [​IMG]

    Here is my conclusion:
    God had to wait for the Church of
    England to be formed before he
    could provide His Word for our generation.
    Note that it is the same Anglican
    church which persecuted our Baptist
    forebearers.

    I'll be satisfied with my Final Authority:
    the New King James Bible (nKJB).
    At least there were some Baptists among
    the translators of the nKJB.
    Not to mention that none of the translators
    of the nKJB were active persecuters of
    the Baptists.

    Praise Jesus, the Living Word of God,
    for the inerrant Written Word of God
    in the English Language for these last
    days: the New King James Bible (nKJB).
     
  5. Faith Fact Feeling

    Faith Fact Feeling
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2003
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    0
    Funny, and I thought he had the earth finished in just 3 days. Must be some new MV translation your reading.
     
  6. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,144
    Likes Received:
    321
    Uh, wait a minute Terry, did you mean the perfect 1611AD original or the perfect 1769AD revision?

    With or without Apocrypha and marginal notes?

    Cambridge or Oxford Version?

    HankD
     
  7. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    Hank,
    I guess even all the time up until 1611 was not enough time for God to complete this bible.

    What is really supprising is how long the church has continued to use this outdated version of the scripture. The KJV should have been put out to pasture many years ago.

    My experience has shown that churches which refuse to leave this old worn out workhorse (the KJV) are outdated and usually in the process of dying.

    Meanwhile, churches that recognize the need to throw out this antique version and adopt a modern version of the bible are fresh and vibrant and have the ability to actually reach today's people with God's message.
     
  8. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen, Brother Terry Herrington -- Preach it!
    [​IMG]
     
  9. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Terry, your experience is fine for you but this statement is no more valid, and maybe less so, than claims by KJVO's that anyone who uses an MV is a Godless liberal.

    The use of this version or that is far less important than to what extent the teachings of the Word are being applied. Both the best and worst churches I have ever attended used the KJV.
     
  10. AV Defender

    AV Defender
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the 200+ "bibles"(ad nauseam) since 1881 has not gotten rid of the Monarch of the Books, the KJB, what makes you think the next one will do it?? or even the next two after that??
     
  11. Steve K.

    Steve K.
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Hey Terry I've been around some of those MV using churches you mentioned and what a joke.They try to manufacture the presence of God to make you think he's there.Weak and sappy at best.Of course some people thrive on fluff.It's a comedy to hear some guy stand up and try to justify using an mv.I've heard them and it reminds me of finger nails on the chalk board.I think what it might be is that mv users despise the MANLY tone of the KJV.The mv users I have met at least the men that I know that use the mv's are very feminine.Not the crowd I want to run with.
     
  12. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who wants to get rid of it?!?
     
  13. Steve K.

    Steve K.
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Read Terry's post and answer your own question Brian.
     
  14. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    You mean they look like this???:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  15. Steve K.

    Steve K.
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    No not exactly .The mv users look and act way more feminine than that.
     
  16. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    BrianT said:

    You mean they look like this???

    Nice dress!
     
  17. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Certianly not me or any male MV user that I know. I know MV users who have had Div 1A college athletic scholarships, who exercise and work out on a regular basis, who are as tough and manly as anybody you will ever want to meet. This is a stupid line of argumentation to suggest that manliness or masculinity is determined by the version you use. It shows that when you can't support your argument biblically, you continue to make up stuff, each time worse than before.
     
  18. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    Somehow Steve, you don't seem like the feminine type. Why stick with a bible written for a feminine monarch?
     
  19. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    KING JAMES AV 1611 said:

    I think what it might be is that mv users despise the MANLY tone of the KJV.

    Ah, so we're back to "advancing moronic arguments" mode.

    What comes next? Spamming? Or popping your fingertips out of your ears just long enough to claim you haven't been refuted yet?
     
  20. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Steve? Is that you questioning someone's manhood? Why are you submitting to the authority of the divinely inspired Gail Riplinger :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :eek: in violation of I Tim 2:12? The biblical man wouldn't do such a thing, would he?
     

Share This Page

Loading...