Bible Believers????

[Phillip]

Don't most of you think that when a KJVO claims that they are a "Bible Believer" that they are making the wrong assumption that MVers are "NOT Bible Believers?"

To me this feels like a personal insult.

Am I wrong?

If I say something is a "myth" (from either side) I am referring to the subject, not the person.

I quote from a KJVO poster on another subject thread.

"When you see posts from a Bible believer, you see a post from one with a conviction,"

Am I reading this wrong in assuming he is referring ONLY to KJVO members?

 

[Anti-Alexandrian]

Don't most of you think that when a KJVO claims that they are a "Bible Believer" that they are making the wrong assumption that MVers are "NOT Bible Believers?"

No...Problem is,"MVer's" dont know WHICH "bible" (200+ conflicting authorities) to believe....

To me this feels like a personal insult.

Dont be so thinned-skinned.

Am I wrong?

Yes...That is if you think Alexandrian "bibles" are the word of God..

 

[Phillip]

Originally posted by Anti-Alexandrian:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

Dont be so thinned-skinned.

Am I wrong?

Yes...That is if you think Alexandrian "bibles" are the word of God.. </font>[/QUOTE]Thank you for answering my question. You are admitting making personal attacks and indicating that we do not believe the Bible because we do not accept your myth. No amount of skin can protect from an insult against God's Word.

I could say something to the effect that you are no completely understanding the Word because you do not speak the same language, but I don't know that. As in, it is your belief that the KJV is the only true Word of God in English, that is only your opinion, you cannot show me where it says that in scripture. So therefore, I consider that you are telling me that I am a non-Bible believer. That crosses the line of personal attack. Does that make sense to you?

 

[Phillip]

Originally posted by Anti-Alexandrian:

No...Problem is,"MVer's" dont know WHICH "bible" (200+ conflicting authorities) to believe....

This is off the subject somewhat, but in answer to your remark, I wonder just how many conflicting authorities we have when we look at every single revision of the KJV 1611 to today?

How many authorities were there before the King James appeared on the scene....about 80% of time from Jesus' day until today? My My looking at it that way, the KJV is a Modern Version.

 

[Trotter]

My My looking at it that way, the KJV is a Modern Version.

How very true. When the KJV arrived on the scene, it met with the same 'righteous indignation' that the modern versions have, and continue to do.

And, yes Phillip, when a KJVO speaks about himself or others as a "Bible believer", he is implying (though not very subtle) that those who do not bow to the KJV does not believe the bible. Can we say 'Malarkey"?

Problem is,"MVer's" dont know WHICH "bible" (200+ conflicting authorities) to believe....

A_A, there are a lot of translations out there. I don't know for sure that there are 200+ (although half of those would be different editions of the KJV ), but there are a lot of them, and not all of them are good ones. But as far as WHICH "bible" we believe, I know my own answer.

I look to several (KJV included), along with the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts (again, several, not just the TR). Does that cause confusion and conflict? Contrary to what you have been fed, No, it doesn't. Truth be known, it brings clarity and understanding.

My pastor uses the KJV. I carry the NKJV. Does that cause a problem when he is preaching? NO, because they are very similar. And what differences there are serve to bring the passage into focus.

But I have a question for those who are KJVO? Have you ever actually read in any of the other translations? I mean, besides the stuff that Ripplinger and Ruckman print in their propaganda to try to show how the MV's have prostituted the 'Word of God'. Have you actually read them? Studied them? Used them? I would be interested to know.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

[gb93433]

A close friend of mine once attended a KJVO church and also attended a Christian school most of his early years. One thing he told me was that he realized that when he heard sermons in school they didn't bash other people. He heard the same sermons without all the bashing. Eventually he became convinced that KJVO's were misled. It happened over a period of time with positive experiences with those who were not KJVO and who were evangelistic. He has changed for the better and his view of evangelism is much more of a personal responsibility rather than just knocking on doors as a church.

 

[tinytim]

The rudeness and insults of the KJVOs is one reason i decided to investigate the belief.

It's amazing how many "Bible believers" seem to ignore the part about loving your brother. I wonder if they don't love their brother, how they can love God.

They certainly show no love when attacking other Bible believers by foolishly insulting them.

The words "I am a Bible believer because I use a KJB, and you are not because you don't"
is filled with satanic, sinful pride.

The phrase causes division (Satan's tool)
And is on outright attack against faithful men and women that believes that God has preserved his words.

To slander a Bible and then say you are a Bible believer is being untruthful.

No wonder the lost make fun of self-righteous Christians.

One day some so-called Christians will stand before God and say "looky, looky what we did. We didn't let women wear pants, we never went to the movies, we never played rummy, or listened to CCM, we always wore a suit when we went to church, and always preached KJVOism."

God may say to them, "but you never knew my son, For if you had, you would have shown love instead of hate to the world. For how can you say you love Jesus, and them hate the world around you. If you would have truly experienced Grace, you would have freely given it away! Now depart!"

KJVOism is built on foolish English/American pride. It's next of kin is racism.

 

[Jim Ward]

Originally posted by Phillip:
Don't most of you think that when a KJVO claims that they are a "Bible Believer" that they are making the wrong assumption that MVers are "NOT Bible Believers?"

To me this feels like a personal insult.

Am I wrong?

If I say something is a "myth" (from either side) I am referring to the subject, not the person.

I quote from a KJVO poster on another subject thread.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
"When you see posts from a Bible believer, you see a post from one with a conviction,"

Am I reading this wrong in assuming he is referring ONLY to KJVO members? </font>[/QUOTE]Let's make it simple Phillip. Which Bible do you believe each and every word of? The only answer you can give that would be correct will be to give us the name of the one Bible you believe each and every word of. To say "NASB and NKJV and NIV (Or any such like thing) only proves that you are not a Bible believer.

Funny how with some people the truth is seen as an insult, but that's how life is.

What you read was clearly stated. A Bible beleiver has a conviction, the mv crowd has only personal preference, which explains why so many of their preachers will quote from several bibles in a single sermon. Gotta find that one that pleases them for each instance.

Insults here? Not at all, just truth that some people don't like.


Jim

 

[Jim Ward]

Originally posted by Phillip:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Anti-Alexandrian:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

Dont be so thinned-skinned.

Am I wrong?

Yes...That is if you think Alexandrian "bibles" are the word of God.. </font>[/QUOTE]Thank you for answering my question. You are admitting making personal attacks and indicating that we do not believe the Bible because we do not accept your myth. No amount of skin can protect from an insult against God's Word.

I could say something to the effect that you are no completely understanding the Word because you do not speak the same language, but I don't know that. As in, it is your belief that the KJV is the only true Word of God in English, that is only your opinion, you cannot show me where it says that in scripture. So therefore, I consider that you are telling me that I am a non-Bible believer. That crosses the line of personal attack. Does that make sense to you?

</font>[/QUOTE]Phillip, please show us the documented proof of where a Bible believer has insulted the word of God. Not where one has exposed an error on those pretend bibles you mvers hold so dear, but the very, inspired and preserved word of God. Everytime one of your brethren attempts to point out something that feel is an error in the KJV, they have insulted and attacked the word of God. I notice you say nothing to them about this. Why the double standard? Don't answer that because we all know that it's SOP for the mv "defenders".


Since you are an mver based on your own statements, then yes it's true, you are not a Bible beleiver. Simple truth, but I know you hate seeing it shown to you. I happen to care enough to keep posting it though.


Jim

 

[Jim Ward]

Tim, yet you have no problem with the rudeness and insults and false witness bearing from those who "defend" the mv's?

Insanity, it's insanity.

What about all the double standards the mv side shows? It's been ok on this board for those who "defend" the mv's to refer to Bible beleivers as being in a cult or being cultists, but when one of us says the same thing about your side, we are met with public correction. or when one of your side feels we are being insulting or rude, we are met again with public correction, but your side is given free reign to be as rude as they want with no correction coming forth. Personally I don't care because these actions only help prove how false the mv view is and just what it is that the mv defenders love instead of truth.

As for the causing of division, I've seen more division caused by mv's and false doctrine then I've seen caused by the KJV and by correct doctrine.

Yes it's no wonder why the world makes fun of mainstream "Christianity" because they can see through the facade and see how false it is. How man centere and man pleasing it has become. Sadly, those who are involved in this do not see it, but instead attack the brethren who take a stand for truth, who actually believe the Bible and take seriously the commands given in it for us.

As for the rest of your post, it's so pathetic and ful of pride that I'll not wasre my time on replying, but will watch as the double standardism will result in ther ebeing no corerection given to you, knowing that if a Bible believer posted those words towrds the mv side, "correction" would be spewing forth.


As for you having stated that you are not a wilfull liar in a different thread, you just proved your own words false.


Jim

 

[tinytim]

Jim, You see the difference in our posts is that I didn't attack a person, but a false doctrine that cannot even be backed up with a KJV!
I used a hypothetical situation that could occur.
But if you want to correct me, blow the whistle on the post. If I did something wrong against Baptistboard rules I will repent. But before you do, read what our Lord and Savior has to say about the same type of people I described:

(Mat 7:21) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
(Mat 7:22) Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
(Mat 7:23) And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

reread my post. I never attacked anyone personally. But I will attack doctrines from Satan.

That is what is wrong with the current IFBers. (not historic, but current, psuedo, wanna be, fundamentalists) They were too afraid to stand up in the seventies and ask for scriptural proof for the KJVO myth.

For over 1900 years the church has flourished using different versions then in 1970 a sect comes along and creates a doctrine that is not even biblical. The original fundamentalists were not KJVO, Even John R Rice preached against the sin of KJVOism.

You stated, "As for the causing of division, I've seen more division caused by mv's and false doctrine then I've seen caused by the KJV and by correct doctrine."

I never said the KJV caused division. It's the people that worship the creation (KJV) more than the creator that causes division. KJVOism!!!
notice the "O" it is the troubling part of KJVO!
To be any ONLY versionist, and saying that it is wrong to use another is wrong, and unbiblical.

To ask someone to name a one and only bible That they feel is the one God wants us to use as an absolute standard is to ask that person to become an (onlyite) that is what is sinful.
God wrote his Bible in Hebrew and Greek, not ENGLISH!
The KJV is just a translation.

As for you calling me a liar, please show me where I lied.

All you have are opinions.

 

[Frogman]

Dear Brother Phillip,
I experienced this on the phone the other night. As you all know I am a Sovreign Grace Landmark Missionary Baptist (at least until I can think of some other adjective to set me apart from everybody else )

A few weeks ago now, my youngest brother expressed to me his faith in Christ in what imho is a genuine experience of Grace.

I have since been trying to get him to read what the Bible says about believer's baptism.

He rejects OSAS. He and my cousin went fishing in a local tournament on Saturday two weeks ago. The Friday evening prior to this, all people fishing in the tournament met in an 'assembly' and there was some sort of 'religious' service. He said afterward they had to fill out questionairres whether or not they had been saved. Not agreeing with the 'presentation' as he heard it; he and my cousin both answered no.

Later as he talked to me about this, he mentioned a local SBC church (no offense meant, please) which sponsored this event.

He was thinking about going there and visiting. I have been trying to encourage him in all his visitations to local churches (though in some biting my tongue very very very hard ).

I happen to know a family who are members of this particular church. Their daughter is friends with our daughter. One evening after talking with my brother I heard Hannah speaking to their daughter on the phone.

I asked her if I could speak to her dad. I told him about the fishing tournament, about my brother etc.

He became defensive and said that their church didn't put on this event, he had not heard anything of it, well, maybe, but this is the church the guys who led the 'worship' service gave as a 'link' to themselves... anyway.

I began discussing some things with him and told him how I had been encouraging my brother to visit them and at other places. I told him what I believed about the church and as George Jones said, THE RUSH WAS ON. (I know it is RACE, but in this case it was a RUSH).

He adamantly told me that at that church they were 'baptist' but they were first BIBLE BELIEVERS and denomination didn't mean anything.

Well, one of us is not a BIBLE BELIEVER and according to him, we know who that is...never mind that I have been encouraging my brother to visit and join by baptism where he is comfortable, against what I know the BIBLE teaches that I SHOULD BELIEVE, thereby making me a BIBLE BELIEVER.

Oh well.

Bro. Dallas

 

[robycop3]

"When you see posts from a Bible believer, you see a post from one with a conviction,"

Do they all have police records?

 

[robycop3]

Jim Ward:Let's make it simple Phillip. Which Bible do you believe each and every word of? The only answer you can give that would be correct will be to give us the name of the one Bible you believe each and every word of. To say "NASB and NKJV and NIV (Or any such like thing) only proves that you are not a Bible believer.

Jim, I know you sent this relly to Philip, but I'm gonna jump in and say it's wrong. You cannot even begin to prove it's right.

Funny how with some people the truth is seen as an insult, but that's how life is.

That's how KJVOism is. It's clearly been proven man-made and wrong, but many of those addicted to it just won't give it up.

What you read was clearly stated. A Bible beleiver has a conviction, the mv crowd has only personal preference, which explains why so many of their preachers will quote from several bibles in a single sermon. Gotta find that one that pleases them for each instance.

Actually, it's a matter of using the version that best conveys a certain verse(s) or passage(s). The KJVO has no more "conviction" than anyone else. The "conviction" thing is just another KJVO smokescreen its advocates try to use to bolster a myth they KNOW deep down inside is false.

Insults here? Not at all, just truth that some people don't like.

Yes-the truth that KJVO is wrong.

 

[Orvie]

Jim, is the God of 1611 and after the same as 1610 and before? Your posts imply He just didn't get things right until 1611. What was good enough in 1610, is good enough for you and I in 2004.

 

[RaptureReady]

Originally posted by Orvie:
Jim, is the God of 1611 and after the same as 1610 and before? Your posts imply He just didn't get things right until 1611. What was good enough in 1610, is good enough for you and I in 2004.

Then why don't you believe it instead of what you have today?

 

[Orvie]

Originally posted by HomeBound:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Orvie:
Jim, is the God of 1611 and after the same as 1610 and before? Your posts imply He just didn't get things right until 1611. What was good enough in 1610, is good enough for you and I in 2004.

Then why don't you believe it instead of what you have today? </font>[/QUOTE]I believe what was translated from it, just as the AV translators did.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Jim Ward:
Which Bible do you believe each and every word of?

Which speeding law do you believe each and every word of? Is the law suddenly not the law when you pass from one state into another simply because two states have different wording in their statutes?

The only answer you can give that would be correct will be to give us the name of the one Bible you believe each and every word of. To say "NASB and NKJV and NIV (Or any such like thing) only proves that you are not a Bible believer..

Which ONE law against murder are you willing to submit to? To say NC's, SC's, CO's, WY's, and AZ's only proves that you don't believe murder is illegal.

Funny how with some people the truth is seen as an insult, but that's how life is.

I don't consider the truth an insult... however, I do consider bald faced lies about what I believe to be an insult.

What you read was clearly stated. A Bible beleiver has a conviction, the mv crowd has only personal preference,

I answered this inane contention in another thread. Feel free to respond if you have any substance with which to respond.

which explains why so many of their preachers will quote from several bibles in a single sermon. Gotta find that one that pleases them for each instance.

Pleases? You simply don't know what you are talking about. A godly preacher will use different translations to help the hearer understand the scripture just like a KJVO preacher will paraphrase a verse from the KJV... the preacher using MV's is just more honest about what he is doing and humble enough to acknowledge the works of those that God has given the gift of translating.

Insults here? Not at all, just truth that some people don't like.

If you say that KJVO = Bible believer then you are the one who doesn't like the truth. The Bible (KJV) never, I say again NEVER, gives proof to the idea of KJVO.

 

[Tangent]

Not to sound either pious or self-centered, but I couldn't care less whether others consider me a Bible-believer or not. God knows the truth. If some people enjoy feeling superior or exclusive based on their translation preference, there is nothing I can do to stop them.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Jim Ward:
Phillip, please show us the documented proof of where a Bible believer has insulted the word of God. Not where one has exposed an error on those pretend bibles you mvers hold so dear, but the very, inspired and preserved word of God.

You just provided your own proof by calling many legitimate translations of God's Word "pretend bibles" without one shred of evidence to support your contention.

Everytime one of your brethren attempts to point out something that feel is an error in the KJV, they have insulted and attacked the word of God.

No. We have simply pointed out that the KJV translators were exactly what they claimed to be... imperfect. If there were anyone claiming that he NIV were the only God approved version, I assure you that I would oppose them even more vigorously.

I notice you say nothing to them about this. Why the double standard?

Because they don't claim that any of the MV's is perfect since they are all translation works of fallible men- just like the KJV.

Don't answer that because we all know that it's SOP for the mv "defenders".

Any standard I would apply to evaluating the KJV, I would likewise be willing to apply to any other translation. I hold one standard: the evidence given that what a version says is what God said in the originals.

In the places where there is uncertainty, I agree with the KJV translators who said that fear was to be preferred to boldness in claiming clarity on something God has left unclear.

Since you are an mver based on your own statements, then yes it's true, you are not a Bible beleiver. Simple truth, but I know you hate seeing it shown to you.

I am a Bible believer so if you want me to believe KJVOnlyism then you will have to show me the scripture for it and sufficiently answer scriptural examples (KJV) that validate other versions of God's Word and demonstrate that the KJV is not perfect.

I happen to care enough to keep posting it though.

If you care enough to accuse someone of not being a Bible believer then please care enough to show us from the scriptures how we err. Short of that, show us proof from historical fact using biblical principles of consistency that prove KJVOnlyism.

The fact is that it is the KJVO who doesn't believe the Bible. They refuse to believe that it says enough concerning Bible versions so by their own authority they use their own imaginations to add what they think the Bible should have said.