Featured Baptist churches that claim to use the "King James Bible AV 1611"

Thats what I have, the hand size executive series Scofield. With shipping about $65.00 Very nice Bible!

 

Greg, I copy the post and divide it with [ q u o t e ] and [ / q u o t e ], deleting the parts to which I'm not responding. However, U did a good, clear job of "quoting-unquoting" above. (I spaced the words above so the 'quote' function wouldn't activate.)

 

Good one robycop3 I'd like to add that if you make the lead 'quote' like this:[QUOTE = robycop3] (minus the spaces of course) it will attribute that quote to a person and then will not be just a 'quote'.

If you type this, minus the spaces between the brackets, it will show up as it does below: [ QUOTE=robycop3 ] This quote is not actually from robycop3... [/ quote ]

If you type this, minus the spaces between the brackets, it will show up as it does below: [ QUOTE ] This quote is not actually from robycop3... [/ quote ]

 

Gregory Perry Sr:

And many others feel the same about THEIR fave versions. Can U prove them wrong?

So do I, given the facts that the KJVO has NOTHING FROM GOD supporting his position that the KJV has proven goofs in it, same as any other English translation, as translations are God's perfect word handled by imperfect men.

That's their own fault, not that of their chosen bible versions. Need I make a list of cults and charlatan "ministries" that use only the KJV?

Again, that's THEIR OWN FAULT, for not **STUDYING** whatever bible version(s) they choose. Now, U mighta heard of Cornelius Stam's "Berean Bible Society" and "Grace Theology" that insists that only paul received the true Gospel from Jesus, and that Peter preached "another Gospel". This is a KJVO outfit. If they had STUDIED their KJVs, its members woulda seen that whole 'ministry' is phony as a $3 bill and is basing their hooey on a deliberate misinterp of Galatians 2:7. Now, this garbage is not the KJV's fault, any more than the false ecumenical movement spearheaded by the RCC is any other Bible version's fault. Again, the prob is LACKA BIBLE STUDY, AND BELIEVING DELIBERATE MISINTERPS OF CERTAIN SCRIPTURES.

But U admit your KJVO belief is on shaky ground, to put it mildly. And again, U are trying to get someone to believe a doctrine U CANNOT PROVE. I need NO evidence to reject it, even though that evidence is abounding.

The MAN-MADE origin of KJVO is quite plain. Its current edition came from a CULTIC source, that source being 7TH DAY ADVENTIST official Dr. Ben Wilkinson's 1930 book, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated. Virtually every contemporary KJVO author draws from that one book, which is as fulla goofs as the contestants' answers on Celebrity Jeopardy. That's two immediate strikes against the KJVO myth. But again, the clincher is its TOTAL LACKA SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT. There's simply NOT the slightest quark of the least implication in the KJV itself supporting KJVO!

I suggest U read the preface,"To The Reader", found in the AV 1611, but conveniently left outta the current KJV editions. Such a reading has opened the eyes of many a KJVO to the error of their position.

Remember, you can still use only the KJV as a matter of personal preference without wearing that dead, stinky bird of the KJVO myth around your neck.