Did God Bow To King James?

[Refreshed]

Originally posted by BrianT:
Maybe the KJV is only "the word of God" in certain timezones.

Wow, do you think so? (feigning dismay).

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Refreshed:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BrianT:
Maybe the KJV is only "the word of God" in certain timezones.

Wow, do you think so? (feigning dismay). </font>[/QUOTE]If a Bible cannot be God's word if it is copyrighted, then that's the only logical conclusion.

 

[Refreshed]

Originally posted by BrianT:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Refreshed:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BrianT:
Maybe the KJV is only "the word of God" in certain timezones.

Wow, do you think so? (feigning dismay). </font>[/QUOTE]If a Bible cannot be God's word if it is copyrighted, then that's the only logical conclusion. </font>[/QUOTE]Oh, by the way, I actually agreed with you on something. Check out the cloning thread.

The KJV IS copyrighted, silly, in a sense via the Crown of England, apparently. It is merely a matter of free distribution versus narrowly defined distribution (to protect profits and intellectual property).

When was the last time we did what the Crown of England told us to do anyway? The late 1700's? Down with England's copyright law, and King George too! (a little humor in this debate won't be frowned upon, will it?)

 

[AV Defender]

The KJV is PUBLIC DOMAIN copy it as many times as you want(2 Tim 2:9);you cant say that about the ecumenical clap-trap of modern versions.

[ December 11, 2002, 01:36 PM: Message edited by: JYD ]

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by JYD:
The KJV is PUBLIC DOMAIN copy it as many times as you want(2 Tim 2:9);you cant say that about the ecumenical clap-trap of modern versions.

Darby's (1890), Webster's (1820), the ASV (1901), the BBE (1964), YLT (1898), the Hebrew Names Version, Weymouth (1913), WEB, and the Revised Webster's Bible (1995) are just a few of the modern English Bibles that are public domain.

Edit: not that I consider any of these to be "ecumenical clap-trap"

[ December 11, 2002, 02:21 PM: Message edited by: BrianT ]

 

[ChristianCynic]

Originally posted by tyndale1946:
The KJV is here because it was meant to be here and Geneva was not and man had nothing to do with it

Those are some of the ***** words I have seen from you yet. The Geneva Bible IS here-- it does exist for anyone to read who can read English. And man had plenty to do with that translation or any translation.

Edited to remove insult.

[ December 12, 2002, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: PreachtheWord ]

 

[tyndale1946]

Christian Cynic the name is Brother Glen... Not bud and besides this bud is wiser!

... Brother Glen Of The Primitive Baptist Brethren

 

[swordsman]

Why is so many trying to bash the KJV.
When God has another "version" that bears the fruit that the AV has, then you may have something.
In my opinion if everyone used the KJV the church would be much stronger.

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by swordsman:
Why is so many trying to bash the KJV.

Being factual about the KJV is not bashing it. And opposing KJV-onlyism is not opposing the KJV.

When God has another "version" that bears the fruit that the AV has, then you may have something.

Paper doesn't bear fruit, people do.

In my opinion if everyone used the KJV the church would be much stronger.

In my opinion, if everyone used their Bible, regardless of version, the church would be much stronger.

 

[AV Defender]

Originally posted by BrianT:

Darby's (1890), Webster's (1820), the ASV (1901), the BBE (1964), YLT (1898), the Hebrew Names Version, Weymouth (1913), WEB, and the Revised Webster's Bible (1995) are just a few of the modern English Bibles that are public domain.

Edit: not that I consider any of these to be "ecumenical clap-trap" [/QUOTE]



All of which are BANKRUPT.

[ December 11, 2002, 03:09 PM: Message edited by: JYD ]

 

[BrianT]

JYD, just because you were proven wrong about other Bibles being public domain, doesn't mean you should resort to making up slander.

 

[AV Defender]

The ESV is nothing but a re-write of the bankrupt RSV;prove me wrong..

[ December 11, 2002, 03:14 PM: Message edited by: JYD ]

 

[swordsman]

Originally posted by BrianTaper doesn't bear fruit, people do.


It is not the paper, The KJV is the Word of God in the English language, The Holy Spirit works with the Word and through the Word to produce fruit in and through people.
New versions...where is the fruit?

[ December 11, 2002, 04:07 PM: Message edited by: swordsman ]

 

[BrianT]

You don't see any fruit today? You don't see the 20th century as the largest missionary work since the beginning of the church? You don't see churches and Bible schools growing in numbers, both here and abroad? You don't see more Christians in the world than ever before?

 

[Bible-belted]

Originally posted by BrianT:
You don't see any fruit today? You don't see the 20th century as the largest missionary work since the beginning of the church? You don't see churches and Bible schools growing in numbers, both here and abroad? You don't see more Christians in the world than ever before?

Perhaps swordsman is simply noting the decline of pharisaic, narrowminded, anti-intelectual zealotry?

If that is the "fruit" that swordsman would like to see, then may I suggest he look no further than the fig tree Jesus cursed?

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by swordsman:
Why is so many trying to bash the KJV.

Why are so many trying to bash the KJV?? What did I miss. Can you please point out the post where someone is bashing the KJV?? Or perhaps define "bashing" for us so that we know what you are talking about.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by JYD:
The ESV is nothing but a re-write of the bankrupt RSV;prove me wrong..

I think you would first have to prove that the RSV was bankrupt. Of course then, you would be disagreeing with the Holy Spirit and the KJV translators who said that the very meanest translation is the word of God. "Bankrupt" is an inappropriate term to use for God's inspired word. Restraint coupled with factual and reasonable argumentation would be the better approach to this discussion.

 

[Ransom]

JYD said:

The ESV is nothing but a re-write of the bankrupt RSV;prove me wrong..

Which RSV is the bankrupt one?

Actually, it's funny seeing someone from the KJV camp using the word "bankrupt," a word that most naturally fits between the words "intellectually" and "KJV-onlyists."

[ December 11, 2002, 05:08 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

[ChristianCynic]

Originally posted by swordsman:

It is not the paper, The KJV is the Word of God in the English language,

Fie!

The Holy Spirit works with the Word and through the Word to produce fruit in and through people.

The Holy Spirit does not need you or your Anglican Bible to produce anything.

New versions...where is the fruit?

In the produce section. Or do you want the oldest fruit they got?

 

[swordsman]

To all of the above who are too many to mention:

Bashing...bad choice of words

Fruit in 20th century, oh yes, so many christians.
Name one nation that has increased in morality, holiness, Godliness. No wait... name one state...no, NO,NO , ONE CITY!

Cynic,I see the Holy Spirit has used the AV a lot more than your 200+ versions combined.

Call it what you will we are to be the salt and the light, and the church today is anything but.

[ December 11, 2002, 08:25 PM: Message edited by: swordsman ]