1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Why I am KJV Only (Page 21)

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by skanwmatos, Apr 15, 2004.

Top Posters
Page 7 of 7
  1. Pastor KevinR

    Pastor KevinR New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2001
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aren't you claiming inspiration for the KJV?
     
    #121 Pastor KevinR, Apr 27, 2004
  2. Pastor KevinR

    Pastor KevinR New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2001
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is the humanity perfect? You accuse me for supporting the KJV inspiration, do you? </font>[/QUOTE]See my previous post. It sure appears to be a contradiction to me. :eek:
     
    #122 Pastor KevinR, Apr 27, 2004
  3. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Did I say "only"? </font>[/QUOTE]No, and that's why I said you left it out.

    If that wasn't your REAL meaning, then please tell us what other versions you believe are the inspired, inerrant WOG in English.
     
    #123 robycop3, Apr 27, 2004
  4. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aren't you claiming inspiration for the KJV? </font>[/QUOTE]
    Double sentences that you confused are different meaning.

    1. The KJV is inspired. To say this is to say it is Ruckman's position.

    2. The KJV is the inspired, preserved Word of God. To say this is to reject Ruckman's idea on the inspiration.
     
    #124 Askjo, Apr 27, 2004
  5. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    So what is the difference?
     
    #125 gb93433, Apr 28, 2004
  6. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    So what is the difference? </font>[/QUOTE]Therefore the difference is not the same. [​IMG]
     
    #126 Askjo, Apr 28, 2004
  7. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    I saw that. How does a revision/change equate to an error?
     
    #127 skanwmatos, Apr 28, 2004
  8. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    It may or may not. Personally I am in favor of making a version more readable and understandable as long as it faithfully translates the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.

    I was trying to point out that those who believe the KJV is the inspired word of God have a lot of trouble identifying the inspired version. God's word does not change but the KJV did many times. Which version is the inspired version?
     
    #128 gb93433, Apr 28, 2004
  9. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    The question was: Errors in the KJV? Show me!
     
    #129 skanwmatos, Apr 28, 2004
  10. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You could list 100 changes in the KJV revision and the "onlies" will always say "typical printer's error" for every one.

    They cannot, yea will not, admit that there was "error" involved. Just mistakes, dropped letters (or words or sentences or verses) etc.

    What would you call the list (from the website quoted above) that shows these "corrections"? You don't "correct" the truth -- you correct error.
     
    #130 Dr. Bob, Apr 28, 2004
  11. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    They are changes. But that does not imply there are errors of either fact or of translation. In most cases they are correction of printer's errors. In other places they are changes to clarify meaning. Often they are simply the substitute of synonyms to more completely convey the meaning of the original. But changes do not equate to errors, unless, of course, you are a radical KJVO who believes that any change is an error. Have you converted too? Do you bow toward Pensacola now?
     
    #131 skanwmatos, Apr 28, 2004
  12. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    whomever: " ... the Stronger Strong's edited by Kohlenberger and Swanson."

    Got mine today down at the Bible Book store.
    On sale today for $9.95 plus the usual
    assortment of taxes.

    While i was there, i bought a $15.00, plain
    Jane English Standard Version (ESV).
    All it has is translator notes and text.
    No center cross references at all.
     
    #132 Ed Edwards, May 7, 2004
  13. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for telling me the price Ed. Now that I just got mine. Of course, it probably wasn't worth a drive to OKC. :rolleyes:

    I think you will enjoy the ESV. If you like to study. I know Skan doesn't like it too much, but my guess is that it has to do with the underlying documents more than the actual translation itself, but I cannot speak for him and his feelings.

    I know there is a stigma because the ESV derived from the RSV, but from what I have seen the weak spots in the RSV have been retranslated and corrected.

    Personally, I like it. I think the first think you will do is question some of the verses (particularly in the N.T.). Don't let this stop you until you compare it with the Greek.
     
    #133 Phillip, May 7, 2004
  14. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    The KJVo crowd ought to like you now. They can't stand marginal notes. It destroyed the perfectly good NKJV for them; so you have a perfect MV. ...nothing to cause confusion. [​IMG]
     
    #134 Phillip, May 7, 2004
  15. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    I saw that. How does a revision/change equate to an error? </font>[/QUOTE]I doesn't. What I was pointing out for those who are KJVO is which KJV do they decide is the preserved text according to their definition of preserved?
     
    #135 gb93433, May 7, 2004
  16. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    The KJVo crowd ought to like you now. They can't stand marginal notes. It destroyed the perfectly good NKJV for them; so you have a perfect MV. ...nothing to cause confusion. [​IMG] </font>[/QUOTE]Amen, Brother Phillip -- Preach it ! [​IMG]

    Psalms 12:6 (The New Revised Standard Version)
    The promises of the Lord are promises that are pure,
    silver refined in a furnace on the
    ground, purified seven times

    1. Tyndale's of 1526
    2. KJV of 1611
    3. RSV of 1885
    4. ASV of 1901
    5. RSV of 1952
    6. RSV of 1971
    7. ESV of 2001

    [​IMG]
     
    #136 Ed Edwards, May 7, 2004
  17. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
     
    #137 Askjo, May 8, 2004
  18. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
     
    #138 Ed Edwards, May 8, 2004
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 7 of 7
Loading...