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!

AV Revision

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Precepts, Feb 9, 2004.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 3
  1. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well then , Cranston, I'm glad you finally discovered I don't claim to be KJVO, yall label me that, but I don't define myself to be "worshipping a version", "worshipping a queer king","propigating false doctrine", "reproaching God and His Word", etc., etc., etc.

    Stay on the topic of the "1762" edition by Thomas Paris and leave your hobby-crippled-horse tied in the barn. ;)
     
    #21 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
  2. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks Dr. Bob, I stand admonished [​IMG] and , hey! I'm still smiling! [​IMG] ;)
     
    #22 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
  3. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "Oh, I wonder,wonder who, ta toom

    Who...Who wrote the book of lo-o-ve"?
    -The Monotones

    The answer-GOD, of course! He caused it to be put to pen and writing surfaces in many editions and versions.

    "Ple-e-ease, love me for-ever!
    Do-o-nt forsake me ever!"-Cathy & the Roommates

    Jesus Christ: "I will, and I won't!"
     
    #23 robycop3, Feb 10, 2004
  4. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    QS, I believe Ed is actually asking you, WHICH EDITION of the AV/KJV is the "official" one. Since YOU brought up the subject of editing/revision of the AV, this should be easy for you.
     
    #24 robycop3, Feb 10, 2004
  5. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    But I see you badmouthing most other BVs while boosting the KJV alone. If it looks like mud, smells like mud...

    And you've never seen me accuse you of versionolarty, etc.

    As for the 1762 Paris edition...Are you saying that it's "the official" English Bible, to the exclusion of any others?
     
    #25 robycop3, Feb 10, 2004
  6. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes and by the number of posts you have made since December 2003 guess who's the leader of the pack?

    HankD     </font>[/QUOTE]By number of posts, you are, but I'm fast catchingup! But as far as Bibles, the AV 1611 KJB/ "IMPROVED" 1762 Cambridge spelling and punctuation to bring to date, w/o change, is still by far the One well in the lead, and uh, can't lose, it's God's Book!

    You know, Hank, I was at a campmeeting a couple of years ago and the issue had arisen between the 1762 Cambridge and the 1769 Oxford, we "KJVO's" had rather sport with the silliness of the issue and just keep standing, instead of ,uh, wallering.

    I guess yall can now give me a new label, since yall are so crafty in the practice; "1762 Cambridge AV 1611 KJB 'onlist" :rolleyes: :eek: :D ;) [​IMG] [​IMG] :cool: [​IMG]
     
    #26 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
  7. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Cranston, you all know good and well, all a man has to do to get yall's dander up is merely say, "AV 1611 KJB", "Psalms 12:6,7", "Byzantine MSS", etc., etc. Hummmph! looks like hypersensitivity to me! [​IMG]
     
    #27 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
  8. mioque

    mioque New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    QuickeningSpirit
    The 1769 KJB revision is decidedly more common nowadays than the 1762.
     
    #28 mioque, Feb 10, 2004
  9. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Next thing we know you'll invent the mophead quartet version by "In the begining God created "love,love me do" :rolleyes:

    How can you equate the Love of God with emotional and sexual lyrics that helped degenerate society?
     
    #29 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
  10. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    So were apricots and oranges in the region of Samaria. Publishers choice of the 1769 over the 1762. Some of us go a little deeper than just KJB, but then what looks deeper to man is actually moving upward with God.
     
    #30 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
  11. Fraser

    Fraser New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would like to say, I prefer The 1769 K.J.V. Alot of the spelling has been corrected.
    I beleive its God inspired Word! I also dont but limitations on God, through our newer versions.
    I compare them all, and use the one, that best suits the text.By doing this Iam learning at a faster pace. If I sounded like I was putting down any Bible prior, I ask for forgiveness!
    If we didnt have our bibles, we would ALL be lost. Thank God! He loves us!
    Even tho through history, some of the corruption, that was present,God managed to deliver His Word to us.
     
    #31 Fraser, Feb 10, 2004
  12. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wait a minute, I almost agree with travelsong here, was Adam lost? I understand he didn't have a written Bible, but really can't be certain he didn't, but that assumes he had to have a Bible from, uh, somewhere! Like God for instance?

    [​IMG]
     
    #32 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
  13. Fraser

    Fraser New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can we please keep to the topic!
    I dont recall, creation as the topic.
    Why dont you start a thread on Creation.
     
    #33 Fraser, Feb 10, 2004
  14. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    If Adam and Eve both had the same Bible, they wouldn't have had babies, but then where would we be?

    I just wonder if anyone can come up with legitimate information concerning the 1762 and why Paris thought to proliferate his edition?

    Whatsamatta? Not "divisive enough" for you?

    If you stopped and thought for a change, you would have seen what I was talking about, right on topic!

    C'mon now, there has to be some "notable" differences between two editions, namedly the 1762 and the 1769.

    Or is there?
     
    #34 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
  15. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Not me QS, I just purchased a 1611 First Edition Facsimile which I take to Church with me along with my 1769 Edition (along with selected MV passages). I also believe the Byzantine MSS to be superior to all other MSS families and I believe the Scrivener 1894/5 Edition of the TR to be the lastest and greatest refinement of the Greek NT.

    Also I believe Psalm 12:6-7 speaks of the preservation of His Word.

    OBTW, I'm not KJVO and I don't pretend not to be.

    Also. I don't call my brothers and sisters who disagree with me "scorning, lying, crooked prophets" and "Bible correctors" as many KJVO do.

    http://www.angelfire.com/nt/baptist/HerbEvans/HE_ScorningLyingCrookedProphets.htm

    BTW, the author of this website has put to scorn and mocked the very translators of the KJB because they themselves (KJB translators) were "Bible Correctors" (according to the definition of such by the author) as witnessed by the various editions and revisions they (KJV translators) and the committees and men which followed them made.

    All of which tools and methods the KJV translators used and elaborated upon in the lengthy introduction of their magnificent work.

    OBTW, they used the "expert opinions" of such scholars as St. Jerome and and St. Augustine and said as much in their intro.

    KJVO and KJVO wannabees keep using the very arguments that they get hanged upon themselves.

    HankD
     
    #35 HankD, Feb 10, 2004
  16. Fraser

    Fraser New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Quicking Spirit.
    you tell me the answers? I have all ready done my homework! and I find you very rude.
    Considering we are suppose to be a family of Christ. But I Love you in Christ, And Forgive you in Christ!
     
    #36 Fraser, Feb 10, 2004
  17. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Uh, Hank? This is taken from the ruckmanesque/anti-ruckman site you gave. It seems more this guy incites the fence-straddling so many lolly today. But I did notice his statement here is somewhat confusion. I admit stopping at this point, more than halfway into his document. I usually skip alot of the "fluff" and get down to the final point. I usually don't consider anyone like this guy too credible, but I will honour your reference.
     
    #37 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
  18. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    O.K., Brother, I love you too! But get back on topic, like you're not rude? :rolleyes:
     
    #38 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
  19. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Thank you QS.

    BTW what do you mean by anti-ruckman, this fellow is at least KJVO

    See how he answers to the defining question of the KJVO error.

    My emphasis.

    There it is emboldened surrounded by double-think double-speak.

    HankD

    [ February 10, 2004, 04:02 PM: Message edited by: HankD ]
     
    #39 HankD, Feb 10, 2004
  20. Precepts

    Precepts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hank, I looked further into his site, he seems pretty credible, but that one document just seemed a little contradictory, I'm good at that myself sometimes, in fact I beginning to think about turning pro.

    [​IMG]
     
    #40 Precepts, Feb 10, 2004
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 3
Loading...