Alleged Double Standard of KJVO's

Now you're questioning God's word choice? Theos is not the same as kurios, or do we need to go through the NT and show all the examples where kurios doesn't mean God and where theos doesn't mean Lord? [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]No, I'm questioning YOUR word choice, uh, in case you weren't aware, you're NOT GOD!

In the context of Acts 19:20, kurios and theos both fit, there is no discrepency. I almost figured you were smart enough to step back and say something like this, "Well, you see there? Mv's are equal with the KJB and are God's words." But nah, you're not that smart. You're TOO SMART to consider context to have anything to do with the Bible, we all know that!

 

While they both "fit," one can argue that ALL of the modern versions also fit. The point is that the Scrivener's text is different from the text that the KJV translators used. It's another double standard that KJVO's use.

Sarcasm, again. I ask where this kind of behavior can be found as approved by God within the body of Christ. If it cannot, it must be sinful. Why do you continue to act in such a manner? Is it worth being sarcastic and acting unlike Christ in order for you to hold on to your doctrine? (Two honest questions, and I hope to receive an honest and unsarcastic answer.)

 

No it isn't, it's just your concoction and irrelevent. The KJB translators knew either way that this instance of "theos" is used to define "God", remember? It was God's Word that had the positive effect, that which caused growth. "Kurios" has the same negative conotations as "theos" either way, so the KJB translators are well endowed from Heaven above to render the context accurately, you should finally just admit it.

1.
a. It aggrevates the "fool" out of you.

b. It brings out the immature side of your character in how you respond.

2.
a. You do the same exact thing and ask for it in return.

b. Satire is not best understood by the arrogant, they cannot come to terms with the use of it. They are bewildered by the failure on their behalf to recognize that which is hidden underneath their own crusty shell.

I sincerely believe Truth is established by the opportunity to reason in one's own self with the Lord when provoked to think on how they come across. Nathan was led of the Lord to give the king that particular scenario to allow David to see himself, though not satiricle, but allegorical.

Please don't claim to know Greek and fail to see many note-worthy Greek philosophers used satire to get their point across. If so, blame me on them, please don't accuse Christ for what you find to be unattractive in my behaviour, I am what I am by the grace of God, nothing more, nothing less. I will not conform to your image of Christ, I can only be conform to God's image of Christ.

Jesus allowed men to be enveloped by His parables. if one were to pervert His use of such, they could conclude He was lying to present Truth, so in turn that too would be sarcastic. Are you willing to take that into the same light and consider it to be true? I would hope not, so don't be so demanding, you just might one day like me.

BTW, How is it you know the KJB text is any different than that of Scrivener's? How do you know the KJB translators didn't have that MSS in their posession? Proof? Or just suspicion?

Also,you asked three questions, you just failed to put a question mark behind the first.

 

Double Standard #129

A. It is evil that heretics use the MVs

B. It is not evil that heretics use the KJB

Double Standarad #130

A. MVites should stop heretics from using the MV

B. there is no way KJBites can keep wierd
folk from using the KJB

 

Now you're saying that the KJV was divinely inspired? You seem to say that the KJV translators corrected the Greek; please say that you don't. The accurate rendering would be Lord for kurios, not God.

In other words, you cannot find in SCriptures where sarcasm is beneficial to the body of Christ. In your evasion, you show just how against the Word you really are. Your actions don't aggravate me, but the question is begged, "Where is aggravation found in Scripture?" And please don't even go to claiming someone else posts immature things, or do we have to bring up rsr's collection again?

Where have I been sarcastic towards anyone?

As was shown earlier, your posts are not filled with satire. It's not witty enough. They are filled with malicious sarcasm which has no place in the body of Christ.

This is a bizarre sentence. Care to clarify?

He spoke through a parable, not sarcasm.

Just because Greeks engaged in a behavior does not make it worthy of the body of Christ. And your posts are sarcastic - not satirical. I don't think you really understand satire. Read some of Jonathan Swift to understand good satire.

It is to be hoped that you continue to grow in grace then, because sarcasm canont be found in Christ. In essence, you are saying that God is responsible for your sinful behavior. Take responsibility for your own errors.

Then start conforming and stop using sarcasm.

You're not Christ, and you're not speaking in parables. Stop the Messianic complex.

Nah, I don't want to resort to sarcasm when I don't have an answer for others who have valid arguments against my KJV. I just don't.

Do some research. You'll be amazed at what you find, although I am not sure that you will change your tune.

Leave the sarcasm at home. Please tell me you don't speak to your family as you do to those on the bulletin board. May your words here be written as you would speak to God. If you would not speak to God or your family members in this way, then edit it to conform to good manners and good sense. Just some advice.

 

I really couldn't care less, I just hate a double standard. The modern version proponents seem quite vocal about their bible of choice being disrespected and I think that should work both ways.

There is quite a difference between calling a man a liar (which the bible says all are, especially when he is slightly loose with the truth) and calling the word of God "stale." But, thanks for the rewording, anyway.

 

Okay! I admit I like to fan the flame. There are two KJVO's that I enjoy getting under their skin. Care to quess, who? Their displayed names sounds like Pretext and Silly.

 

I would guess that "Pretext" is Precepts but I can't find anyone whose screen name sounds like "Silly." Who do you mean?

 

willie, aka Will K. (although in his case it ain't workin' )

 

Oh! Okay. I don't think of him as "Willie" but as "Will." I tend not to mess around with peoples screen names too much.

 

Hi Jim W, I brought the page to the top, it might only stay here 2-3 seconds, but start from page one. Case Closed: Verdict of KJVO's: Guilty as Charged. Alas there's hope

 

I need it close by for a project
i'm working upon.