-
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!
Did God Bow To King James?
- Thread starter tyndale1946
- Start date
Hi Ransom;
Quote from you;
_____________________________________________________________
As for Texe "Conspiracy Boy" Marrs, he "reported" on a taping of the John Ankerberg Show that NASB translator Don Wilkins "lost his voice" and strongly implied that it was a judgment from God. Conspiracy Boy was not there. James White, on the other hand, was there and saw things quite differently:
______________________________________________________________
My reply;
James White in my opinion reminds me of the Sadducees an all knowing criticizer of anyone who opposes him.A man who without question has an Ego problem.
The reason he opposes the KJB is because he sees the KJB robbing him of his part of the royalties.this is why the Scribe/Sadducee was there. He's probably one of who is responsible for the NASB.They Just can't stand some thing that is good and priced reasonably that the average guy can afford.
______________________________________________________________
Quote your statement about Samuel Gipp;
_______________________________________________________________
If Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D. was working from the primary source, he couldn't have missed the tone of the letter as his (selective) quotation is interwoven with very negative statements about the Roman church. Conclusion: Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D. lied.
________________________________________________________________
My Reply;
First of all I happen to be one who believes that Satan has a conspiracy to over throw the Church and Government. The Bible says so. Don't you believe the same thing?.Are you denying the conspiracy of Satan. I can't believe what I'm reading that someone who is as well educated as you could be so ignorant of the fact that the Catholic Church is not Christian and in my opinion they deserve all the negative publicity they can get.I have no use for Child molesters in black robes telling me which road to take.I also have no desire to have any part with those who would protect Child Molesters.In other words you can have ecumenism.I will never compromise my faith for unity,especially with something so corrupt as the Catholic Church.So much about your negative statements.I for one have not read Gipps book and can't really say yea or nay about it.So to refute it I can't .But to call some one a liar.... when all you have is someone else's word for what really was in this letter. Wow is this Proof of the hatred against those who use the KJB.Your judgment of these people is biased by you obvious love for the roman Church and the ("Sadducee like") James White.You should read the Book By Dave Hunt "A Woman Rides The Beast" you know! just to see if it lines up with scripture. Then see if God reveals anything to you.
Romanbear
Peace
[ December 13, 2002, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: romanbear ]
Quote from you;
_____________________________________________________________
As for Texe "Conspiracy Boy" Marrs, he "reported" on a taping of the John Ankerberg Show that NASB translator Don Wilkins "lost his voice" and strongly implied that it was a judgment from God. Conspiracy Boy was not there. James White, on the other hand, was there and saw things quite differently:
______________________________________________________________
My reply;
James White in my opinion reminds me of the Sadducees an all knowing criticizer of anyone who opposes him.A man who without question has an Ego problem.
The reason he opposes the KJB is because he sees the KJB robbing him of his part of the royalties.this is why the Scribe/Sadducee was there. He's probably one of who is responsible for the NASB.They Just can't stand some thing that is good and priced reasonably that the average guy can afford.______________________________________________________________
Quote your statement about Samuel Gipp;
_______________________________________________________________
If Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D. was working from the primary source, he couldn't have missed the tone of the letter as his (selective) quotation is interwoven with very negative statements about the Roman church. Conclusion: Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D. lied.
________________________________________________________________
My Reply;
First of all I happen to be one who believes that Satan has a conspiracy to over throw the Church and Government. The Bible says so. Don't you believe the same thing?.Are you denying the conspiracy of Satan. I can't believe what I'm reading that someone who is as well educated as you could be so ignorant of the fact that the Catholic Church is not Christian and in my opinion they deserve all the negative publicity they can get.I have no use for Child molesters in black robes telling me which road to take.I also have no desire to have any part with those who would protect Child Molesters.In other words you can have ecumenism.I will never compromise my faith for unity,especially with something so corrupt as the Catholic Church.So much about your negative statements.I for one have not read Gipps book and can't really say yea or nay about it.So to refute it I can't .But to call some one a liar.... when all you have is someone else's word for what really was in this letter. Wow is this Proof of the hatred against those who use the KJB.Your judgment of these people is biased by you obvious love for the roman Church and the ("Sadducee like") James White.You should read the Book By Dave Hunt "A Woman Rides The Beast" you know! just to see if it lines up with scripture. Then see if God reveals anything to you.
Romanbear
Peace
[ December 13, 2002, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: romanbear ]
Hi Bryan T;
Yes I read it and you still don't see my point. My opinion is my opinion and not necessarily fact. which is what started this new disscussion on an old thread.So tell me. Why would you who uses a number of versions have a KJV only site don't you think you are miss leading people about your self.You did tell me that you use different versions didn't you?
Romanbear
Peace
[ December 13, 2002, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: romanbear ]
Yes I read it and you still don't see my point. My opinion is my opinion and not necessarily fact. which is what started this new disscussion on an old thread.So tell me. Why would you who uses a number of versions have a KJV only site don't you think you are miss leading people about your self.You did tell me that you use different versions didn't you?
Romanbear
Peace
[ December 13, 2002, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: romanbear ]
Care to backup your accusations with facts? In a previous post you wrote:Originally posted by romanbear:
My reply;
James White in my opinion reminds me of the Sadducees an all knowing criticizer of anyone who opposes him.A man who without question has an Ego problem.
I believe everyone is obligated to back up there accusations.
What you wrote about James White is a bunch of hogwash. I think he is clear, fair and very gracious to those who oppose him. I don't necessairly agree with him on everything..but I have alot of respect for him and the way he presents his views.
Proof: Listen to the debate link above
Proof: Read his "King James Only Controvery Book"
-kman
romanbear:
Dr. White is rather accessible on IRC and has dealings with a wide variety of people who disagree with him for a variety of reasons.
I have seen him discuss things with various people and is respectful of people but has this hang-up for empty arguments.
Nor does he oppose the KJV, but rather the KJVO crowd.
How well do you know him to make those kinds of conclusions about his character? Do you know what he does besides debating KJOism?
Charlie
Dr. White is rather accessible on IRC and has dealings with a wide variety of people who disagree with him for a variety of reasons.
I have seen him discuss things with various people and is respectful of people but has this hang-up for empty arguments.
Nor does he oppose the KJV, but rather the KJVO crowd.
How well do you know him to make those kinds of conclusions about his character? Do you know what he does besides debating KJOism?
Charlie
Hi Kman;
First my opinion is not an accusation it's a comment about what I think of a man named James White.
What part of this word don't you understand;
A definition for you via The dictionary
Opinion.
OPINION, n. opin'yon. [L. opinio, from opinor, to thing, Gr., L. suppono.]
1. The judgment which the mind forms of any proposition, statement, theory or event, the truth or falsehood of which is supported by a degree of evidence that renders it probably, but does not produce absolute knowledge or certainty. It has been a received opinion that all matter is comprised in four elements. This opinion is proved by many discoveries to be false. From circumstances we form opinions respecting future events.
Romanbear
Peace
First my opinion is not an accusation it's a comment about what I think of a man named James White.
What part of this word don't you understand;
A definition for you via The dictionary
Opinion.
OPINION, n. opin'yon. [L. opinio, from opinor, to thing, Gr., L. suppono.]
1. The judgment which the mind forms of any proposition, statement, theory or event, the truth or falsehood of which is supported by a degree of evidence that renders it probably, but does not produce absolute knowledge or certainty. It has been a received opinion that all matter is comprised in four elements. This opinion is proved by many discoveries to be false. From circumstances we form opinions respecting future events.
Romanbear
Peace
*My* point is that your opinion is just plain wrong. Like I said before, you might be able to find one out of thousands who hates KJV users, but new version supporters in general do NOT hate KJV users. Most new version supporters are themselves KJV users as well.Originally posted by romanbear:
Hi Bryan T;
Yes I read it and you still don't see my point. My opinion is my opinion and not necessarily fact.
I don't have a site *promoting* KJV-onlyism, I have a site that *exposes errors* of KJV-onlyism.
Hi Charlie;
What I know of the man is a debate that I have seen on television in which in my opinion he ran rather biasly not allowing people to speak there mind.He also I think is a professor at the Grand canyon colleg in Arizona.I've read one of his books and in my opinion found him to be anti KJB in that he promotes the use of newer versions. and down plays the KJB
This is only my opinion and is in no way an accusation.I hope no one tells me I have no right to an opinion.
Romanbear
Peace
Romanbear
Peace
What I know of the man is a debate that I have seen on television in which in my opinion he ran rather biasly not allowing people to speak there mind.He also I think is a professor at the Grand canyon colleg in Arizona.I've read one of his books and in my opinion found him to be anti KJB in that he promotes the use of newer versions. and down plays the KJB
This is only my opinion and is in no way an accusation.I hope no one tells me I have no right to an opinion.
Romanbear
Peace
Romanbear
Peace
romanbear said:
James White in my opinion reminds me of the Sadducees an all knowing criticizer of anyone who opposes him. A man who without question has an Ego problem.
I'm happy for your opinion.
But James White's ego is not the issue.
The issue is, why should I believe a wild-eyed tale by Conspiracy Boy, who wasn't there, over a reasonable explanation of a perfectly normal occurrence, given by James white, who was? James White doesn't have to be "all knowing"; I will take the word of an eyewitness over hearsay.
Why did Conspiracy Boy lie that he said "Revelation one one one" (hahaha!) given that you can rewind the tape and hear him say something else? It was a perfectly understandable slip of the tongue. What did he have to lose by admitting a trivial mistake? Who is the "man who without question has an ego problem" here?
First of all I happen to be one who believes that Satan has a conspiracy to over throw the Church and Government.
Could be. What does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
Are you denying the conspiracy of Satan.
I don't know whether there's a "conspiracy of Satan" or not. I believe in evil. But what does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
I can't believe what I'm reading that someone who is as well educated as you could be so ignorant of the fact that the Catholic Church is not Christian
I believe it is a false church as well. But what does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
and in my opinion they deserve all the negative publicity they can get.
So you believe it is all right for Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D. to bear false witness because it makes the Catholic Church look bad?
I'm afraid you'll have to show me where the Bible exempts us from the Ninth Commandment in the cause of making our enemies look worse. Perhaps it is in one of those verses that the modern versions "omit."
Or are you one of those liberal types, like the radical feminists, who believes in the "noble lie"?
(Speaking of the Ten Commandments, I once heard one of Conspiracy Boy's radio programs where he was ranting about the Douay-Rheims translation of the Bible, claiming that the Catholics had taken the Second Commandment out of it. So I looked it up on the Net. Another blatant lie from Conspiracy Boy. The man is pathologically dishonest.)
I have no use for Child molesters in black robes telling me which road to take.
Good for you. But what does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
I also have no desire to have any part with those who would protect Child Molesters.
Great! But what does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
In other words you can have ecumenism.
Thank you very much. But what does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
I for one have not read Gipps book and can't really say yea or nay about it.
Weren't you and Refreshed taking umbrage just yesterday about being called ignorant? Looks to me like you not only are, you're proud of it.
So to refute it I can't .But to call some one a liar.... when all you have is someone else's word for what really was in this letter.
For your information, I was the author of that Web page I linked to. I found the letter as published in 1903 by Westcott's son at a local library, and copied it out personally. Unlike you, Conspiracy Boy, and Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D., I have actually gone and done my homework with the primary sources.
Wow is this Proof of the hatred against those who use the KJB. Your judgment of these people is biased by you obvious love for the roman Church and the ("Sadducee like") James White.
Hmmm. I guess ignorance really is bliss.
[ December 13, 2002, 05:19 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]
James White in my opinion reminds me of the Sadducees an all knowing criticizer of anyone who opposes him. A man who without question has an Ego problem.
I'm happy for your opinion.
But James White's ego is not the issue.
The issue is, why should I believe a wild-eyed tale by Conspiracy Boy, who wasn't there, over a reasonable explanation of a perfectly normal occurrence, given by James white, who was? James White doesn't have to be "all knowing"; I will take the word of an eyewitness over hearsay.
Why did Conspiracy Boy lie that he said "Revelation one one one" (hahaha!) given that you can rewind the tape and hear him say something else? It was a perfectly understandable slip of the tongue. What did he have to lose by admitting a trivial mistake? Who is the "man who without question has an ego problem" here?
First of all I happen to be one who believes that Satan has a conspiracy to over throw the Church and Government.
Could be. What does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
Are you denying the conspiracy of Satan.
I don't know whether there's a "conspiracy of Satan" or not. I believe in evil. But what does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
I can't believe what I'm reading that someone who is as well educated as you could be so ignorant of the fact that the Catholic Church is not Christian
I believe it is a false church as well. But what does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
and in my opinion they deserve all the negative publicity they can get.
So you believe it is all right for Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D. to bear false witness because it makes the Catholic Church look bad?
I'm afraid you'll have to show me where the Bible exempts us from the Ninth Commandment in the cause of making our enemies look worse. Perhaps it is in one of those verses that the modern versions "omit."
(Speaking of the Ten Commandments, I once heard one of Conspiracy Boy's radio programs where he was ranting about the Douay-Rheims translation of the Bible, claiming that the Catholics had taken the Second Commandment out of it. So I looked it up on the Net. Another blatant lie from Conspiracy Boy. The man is pathologically dishonest.)
I have no use for Child molesters in black robes telling me which road to take.
Good for you. But what does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
I also have no desire to have any part with those who would protect Child Molesters.
Great! But what does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
In other words you can have ecumenism.
Thank you very much. But what does this have to do with Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D.'s blatant lie about Westcott's beliefs?
I for one have not read Gipps book and can't really say yea or nay about it.
Weren't you and Refreshed taking umbrage just yesterday about being called ignorant? Looks to me like you not only are, you're proud of it.
So to refute it I can't .But to call some one a liar.... when all you have is someone else's word for what really was in this letter.
For your information, I was the author of that Web page I linked to. I found the letter as published in 1903 by Westcott's son at a local library, and copied it out personally. Unlike you, Conspiracy Boy, and Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D., I have actually gone and done my homework with the primary sources.
Wow is this Proof of the hatred against those who use the KJB. Your judgment of these people is biased by you obvious love for the roman Church and the ("Sadducee like") James White.
Hmmm. I guess ignorance really is bliss.
[ December 13, 2002, 05:19 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]
Based on what?!?! He is a strong debater who has his facts together. I heard his debate with Gail Riplinger. He was far more gracious than her obvious ignorance of the issues warranted. However he did confront her on some of her silliness such as her alphabet trick in which she combines NIV and NAS"V" to form "sin".Originally posted by romanbear:
My reply;
James White in my opinion reminds me of the Sadducees an all knowing criticizer of anyone who opposes him.A man who without question has an Ego problem.
You challenged me to provide examples of Marrs' and Gipp's dishonesty. I did and Ransom expounded on them. What is your proof that this is what Dr. White is doing? Your remarks are slanderous.
If I am not mistaken, Dr. White did make a contribution although I don't think it was in the translation work and I doubt that he gets a royalty. Do you have proof that he does or are you just spewing unsubstantiated accusations as a feeble defense?
I bought a NASB gift Bible for less than $7... I think the average guy who pays that much for the newspaper each month can cover it.
You're obviously not reading very carefully. The statement in question came from Wescott, not Gipp. This is the essence of Ransom's proof that Gipp lied about what Wescott believed.
Then why did you cite him as someone to trust? Do you know him personally? Have you listened to him speak extensively?
You said: "But don't take my word for it people like Dr Samuel Gipp,Pastor James Knox, Bible Baptist church Florida,Texe mars Author,
Dr William Grady. Dr Roy Branson. All have had the same type of encounters."
Without reading his books or knowing him or at least hearing much of his opinions, how do you know what kind of "people" he is?
Ransom cited Gipp's book and the direct quote from the person he slandered. How is that trusting someone else's word? Interesting accusation in that you just acknowledged that you hadn't read Gipp's books.
No. To say someone has lied is either true or false... it does not imply hatred. I love my children very much but that doesn't mean I accept it when they lie.
[ December 13, 2002, 05:31 PM: Message edited by: Scott J ]
Hi everyone ;
At what point did I lie an opinion is not a conformation of facts yet you tell what a wonderful fella James white is.Prove it.You can't because it's your opinion yet you keep asking me to prove it.
Brian T;
I have shown where you are a liar by calling me a liar falsely then you apollogise then call me a liar again in the same post,What your problem is Brian T is that you don't understand simple English.
Romanbear
Peace
At what point did I lie an opinion is not a conformation of facts yet you tell what a wonderful fella James white is.Prove it.You can't because it's your opinion yet you keep asking me to prove it.
Brian T;
I have shown where you are a liar by calling me a liar falsely then you apollogise then call me a liar again in the same post,What your problem is Brian T is that you don't understand simple English.
Romanbear
Peace
romanbear:
He is an elder at his Reformed Bapist church, teaches Sunday School. Among his other ministries is that he leads an evangelistic team to Utah each year for the mormom (LDS) conference.
My only discourse with him has been online in his Christian Apologetics chatroom.
He plainly states no opposition to the KJV, but does not think it is the most accurate translation.
Blessings to you this day,
Charlie
I will take your word for that. I did not see him on TV, but from what I know of him he is for discussin issues in the Academic Debate format.
Actually he is an Adjunct Professor at Golden Gate Theological Seminary's Arizona campus and is the Director of Alpha & Omega Minsitries aomin I do not know if he is still a professor at College of Christian Studies at Grand Canyon University, but I think not.
He is an elder at his Reformed Bapist church, teaches Sunday School. Among his other ministries is that he leads an evangelistic team to Utah each year for the mormom (LDS) conference.
My only discourse with him has been online in his Christian Apologetics chatroom.
He plainly states no opposition to the KJV, but does not think it is the most accurate translation.
Blessings to you this day,
Charlie
No, I didn't. Technically, I didn't say *you* were a liar: I said that your *comment* was a lie. I then apologized for my strong language. I did not "call you a liar again", I simply said your comment was wrong. Which it is. Because NONE of the new version supporters I know or have ever met hate KJV users. Are we not allowed to say someone is wrong? A falsehood is false whether someone intended to deceive or not. Even if it was just their totally unsupported "opinion", it can still be wrong, and since my evidence indicates you are wrong, I say you are wrong. Something is true, or it is false. What you said is false, even if you claim it is just your "opinion". And there is no need for me to apologize to you for disagreeing with your opinion.
BTW, you got upset when you claimed I said you were a "liar", something for which you wanted an apology. However, now you seem to have no qualms about using such language on me. Should I demand an apology from you? Or should I just shrug my shoulders and chalk up another example of a KJV-onlyist's hypocritical double-standard? *shrug*
Another falsehood. Whether you intended to deceive or not, I cannot judge, but the comment as it stands is incorrect. The proof is that you wrote that comment in "simple English", and not only did I understand it, but was able to respond in English as well.
Brian T;
proof you called me a liar after you apollogized;
Copy of your post.After this post your talking to thin air
BrianT
1000 Posts Club
Member # 3044
posted December 12, 2002 05:53 PM
----------------------------------------------
I apologize. There's no need for this hostility, so let's try and deal with this more peaceably.
Let's move on a bit: you said "There are those who believe that new versions are sent from God to help them understand scripture. It's sad that those who believe this are so hateful toward the people who use the KJB." I say those believe that are NOT hateful to those who use the KJV. You may be able to find one extremist among thosands of new version supporters, but I have been involved in this debate for years with hundreds of peopele, and have NEVER (NEVER!) seen hatred towards those who use the KJV. So, even though I apologize for my strong words, I still believe your comments about "those who believe this are so hateful" is entirely untrue. I have yet to see you provide any evidence that supports your accusation.
> You will note in the second paragraph I clearly
> said "in my opinion". This is what happens when
> you take things out of context.
Um, WHAT??? The only time you used the word "opinion" in that post was when you said "In my personal opinion these people should be ashamed of using the same tactics of the politicians by defaming the KJB users". You never said anything about "opinion" in your comments about supporters of new versions hating KJV users.
> Besides I'm only showing proof you are the liar.
Um, where have I lied? Are you wanting to be the "accuser" now? OK, have at it. I'm too tired for this silliness.
_________________________________________________
And you say you aren't a liar.I have proved my point. I'll know better next time not to converse with Liars.
May God open your eyes to truth;
Romanbear
[ December 13, 2002, 06:18 PM: Message edited by: romanbear ]
proof you called me a liar after you apollogized;
Copy of your post.After this post your talking to thin air
BrianT
1000 Posts Club
Member # 3044
posted December 12, 2002 05:53 PM
----------------------------------------------
I apologize. There's no need for this hostility, so let's try and deal with this more peaceably.
Let's move on a bit: you said "There are those who believe that new versions are sent from God to help them understand scripture. It's sad that those who believe this are so hateful toward the people who use the KJB." I say those believe that are NOT hateful to those who use the KJV. You may be able to find one extremist among thosands of new version supporters, but I have been involved in this debate for years with hundreds of peopele, and have NEVER (NEVER!) seen hatred towards those who use the KJV. So, even though I apologize for my strong words, I still believe your comments about "those who believe this are so hateful" is entirely untrue. I have yet to see you provide any evidence that supports your accusation.
> You will note in the second paragraph I clearly
> said "in my opinion". This is what happens when
> you take things out of context.
Um, WHAT??? The only time you used the word "opinion" in that post was when you said "In my personal opinion these people should be ashamed of using the same tactics of the politicians by defaming the KJB users". You never said anything about "opinion" in your comments about supporters of new versions hating KJV users.
> Besides I'm only showing proof you are the liar.
Um, where have I lied? Are you wanting to be the "accuser" now? OK, have at it. I'm too tired for this silliness.
_________________________________________________
And you say you aren't a liar.I have proved my point. I'll know better next time not to converse with Liars.
May God open your eyes to truth;
Romanbear
[ December 13, 2002, 06:18 PM: Message edited by: romanbear ]