When did you stop believing?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Pete Richert, Jan 6, 2004.

  1. Pete Richert

    Pete Richert
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    0
    While certainly not exhaustive of all KJVO positions, it seems to me on this board and others where KJVO is defended, that KJVO assumes that if you are not KJVO that you at one point STOPPED believing in God's inspired word or STOPPED believing in the KJV. Is it assumed they we all come from the KJVO position or were all raised on it and then later turned from the church. To me, to ask when I stopped believing the Bible was inspired and could be fully trusted makes me stratch my head; I have always belived this, everyday that I was reading my NASB. I have pretty much read cover to cover most popular English versions (except the NKJV), and I am never stumbling over contradictions, and differences, and gender language, and etc, but instead am convicted of sin, amazed by God's grace and mercy, awed by His coming judgement (of myself included :confused: ), astounded by His past and future promises of redemption, floored by any glimps of His love, amazed at His power, and ultimatly and finnally convinced of my own worthiness, inability, and total depedence on the God who is. Is there not enough in the Bible to marvel over then how many times the word blood is in it.
     
  2. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    There's the difference, if you had been reading the KJB, you would have said "unworthiness" :eek:

    Just poking fun, I understand what you meant, but something to consider. [​IMG]
     
  3. Pete Richert

    Pete Richert
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not sure from your final statement whether you are serious or not. You say "just poking fun" but then "something to consider". Is it not your serious contention that my grammatical mistake would not have surficed had I only read the KJV, is it?

    As is clear from this or any post, grammer and spelling are not my strong point.
     
  4. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,118
    Likes Received:
    319
    Stopped believing?

    I was saved while reading a Douay-Rheims and having been a cradle Catholic I went back to the Church of Rome.

    To make very long story short I left the Church of Rome after about 2 years of reading the Bible and talking with priests of several orders including the Jesuits.

    In the mean time I purchased several different Bibles, one of them a KJV. It was several years later that I heard of this thing called KJVO and was somewhat concerned that anyone could believe such a thing about a translation.

    I looked into it and asked the Lord for wisdom and came to the conclusion that it was nonsense.

    I have never for a moment after that day in my barracks when my life was turned upside down stopped believing in Jesus Christ, God come in the flesh, not for a micro-second.

    What else matters?

    HankD
     
  5. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I never believed in a single translation "only" position of any kind, and to date have yet to find biblical support for such.
     
  6. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Until you believe the scripture that's in the Bible, you'll never find biblical support.
     
  7. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Until you believe the scripture that's in the Bible, you'll never find biblical support. </font>[/QUOTE]If there's Scriptural support for KJVO, by all means, please post it!

    I have never been KJVO-I was steered to Jesus by reading the NASB and hearing it preached. I soon found out that most Christians had a fave BV, but I didn't hear about KJVO till 1982, almost getting into a physical fight about it, after which I investigated the subject with as unbiased eye as possible. I concluded it is hooey after finding absolutely NO Scriptural support for it, even in the KJV itself, and learning what fakers most KJVO authors were. Since then, I've seen it's a doctrine made entirely by men [snip], and deserves to be fought against by every sincere Christian, Baptist or other.

    [ January 07, 2004, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: Pastor_Bob ]
     
  8. Emily

    Emily
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    0
    THey have TONS of scriptures to back up the KJV-only position..

    Its just too bad that none of them mention KJV, 1611, Erasmus, textus receptus, Majority text, or anything like that..

    They are all completely and totally out of context and have nothing to do with bible versions.

    Version idolatry is my pet peeve.
     
  9. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    As is mine, Emily, but some days I feel like Don Quixote tilting at windmills!
     
  10. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    As is mine, Emily, but some days I feel like Don Quixote tilting at windmills! </font>[/QUOTE]DQ was ALSO tilting at DEAD, MAN-MADE OBJECTS...
     
  11. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  12. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    :confused: The scripture in the Bible says nothing supporting the idea of a single translation "only" position of any kind. It's not in the KJV, not in the NIV, not in the RSV, and, most importantly, not in the TR or LXX.
     
  13. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    I have offered Scriptural and historical reasons why I believe the Word of God has been preserved in the Traditional Text. Would you, Johnv, please share Scriptural and historical reasons to support your quote above?
     
  14. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please define "traditional text".
     
  15. er1001

    er1001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2003
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    0
    The translation issue has really been a free-for-all up this way !!!!I would say all the KJV only preachers I have questioned say if you really want to preach hard against sin and promote real tough standards in the church they must have the KJV.The other crowd say the need easier translations as folks nowadays aren't able to understand KING JAMES english.Its nice when all church members carry same book as the pastor [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  16. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    I USED to feel that way, but no longer. I preach from the NKJV, but translate all texts from the Greek (use Stephanus AND UBS Greek).

    Members have NIV, NASB, ESV, KJV. Many have wonderful interlinear Greek/English New Testaments. It is awesome to have so many different English word choices, phrasing - we often ask "what word choice" their version has.

    BTW, in preaching from the KJV, I was continually having to "teach" what the word really meant. (Illus: Conversation = life style; let = hinder). No longer. The modern versions and even the New KJV have better word choices.

    So it keeps me on my toes. I can't just throw out "This is what the KJV says" or even "This is what the Greek says". I have people who are studying and understanding the Word of God!

    What a concept!
     
  17. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    Never mind; you proved my point.
     
  18. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your point excapes many. Perhaps you would humor me and tell me what you mean by traditional text. There are may who refer to the KJV as the traditional text. Others refer to the TR as the traditional text. It's important that we are singing from the same hymnal.
     
  19. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    John, it seems pretty obvious to me the term "Traditional Text" refers to the text historically received as authoritative by the churches and translated by the Reformers into the great Reformation bibles that broke the yoke of Rome. My understanding is that the Traditional Greek Text was in constant and universal usage from about the 7th century until the mid 19th century.
     
  20. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks. That is indeed my understanding. I can certainly understand the belief (and can support a person's belief) that the Traditional Text is authoritative over other texts. There is no biblical support, however, to support the idea that only one specific translation from the traditional text is authoritative over other translations of the same text.
     

Share This Page

Loading...