Featured Do you see A Difference between Inerrancy/Infallibility?

^^^^ Baloney....right back at ya! First , explain to me how two Bibles, one that contains a passage of Scripture, another that doesn't contain that passage of Scripture, can BE THE SAME!!!


Second, I have seen that very issue cause DOUBT, CONFUSION, AND MISTRUST in ALL Bibles! So, there is VERY MUCH a comparison! Just because you don't like it, doesn't change it. Furthermore, I believe that Christians on internet forums ARGUING about KJVO causes MORE DIVISION than anything! Think about that. With that said, and BECAUSE of that, I'm done.

 

Why do you ask? If I answered you, you will not listen to me. You are a person who constantly starts threads to divide people. You are not here to learn, you are here to sow discord among fellow Christians. You are the type of person God says he hates in scripture.

Pro 6:16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

You start numerous threads over and over again with the sole objective of sowing discord among brethren. Of course you will deny, but EVERYONE here knows what I am saying is true.

Anybody who listens to you is a fool.

 

Again you misrepresent and distort the views of believers in the Scriptures and in preservation just because they disagree with your KJV-only opinions. I believe all the promises of God concerning the Scriptures.

Those promises clearly concern the specific, exact original language words that God gave by inspiration to the prophets and apostles.

A claimed preservation of different words in a different language would not be a preserving of the specific words that God gave to the prophets and apostles.

If you opened up a jar and it had something different in it that the exact thing or things that you put in it, would you call that preserved?

Are KJV-only advocates dodging the scriptural truths and principles presented in this thread that conflict with their man-made KJV-only theory?

 

You do not believe the scriptures are preserved, you believe they have all been corrupted. If I opened a jar of peach preserves and they were corrupt and moldy, would you call that preserved?

Where are they if they are preserved? I am willing to bet you cannot produce a single word of scripture that was penned by a prophet or apostle.

You say the originals are preserved? Then produce them.

Nonsense, many scholars believe Jesus himself read from a translation, and he called them scripture.

It is the same words simply translated to another language. A cat is a cat whether you say "Cat" or "Gato". What nonsense you argue.

No.

 

What happened to the scriptures God wrote with his finger for Moses?

Exo 32:19 And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount.

Did the two tablets that God wrote the Ten Commandments on with his very finger last forever? NO. Moses had to make a copy. Man has had to make copies ever since. The materials scriptures are written upon are not indestructible, they wear out in time and the scriptures have to be copied. I have owned many Bibles in my life and many have fallen apart from age and use.

He wanted us to have inerrant Bibles as well, Jesus said man is to live by EVERY word that proceeds from the mouth of God, not just "some" of them.

I have no idea what you are talking about here.

 

The Bible cannot both contain and omit the last 12 verses of Mark chapter 16. Anybody who believes that is an idiot.

Perhaps YOU would act that way, but many thousands (if not millions) of Christians believe the KJB is the preserved and inerrant word of God and we do not act this way at all.

 

There you go. You do not know which parts of the Bible should be there, and which parts shouldn't be there. We not only do not have the original 16th chapter of Mark, we do not have the original book of Mark, or Matthew, or Luke, or John, or any New or Old Testament book. So according to your way of thinking, the entire Bible is just speculation. For all we know (according to you), the whole Bible is lost forever, nobody has any idea of what the word of God is.

You are not intelligent enough to realize that if the scriptures are not inerrant and preserved, then they are meaningless. If you are correct, you do not know if even one single verse of scripture is true. It is all speculation.

But, as I said, you are not smart enough to see how foolish your view is. And the irony is, guys like you think you are smarter than us simple folks that believe God has preserved his word. The laugh is on you.

 

Are you contradicting yourself unless you were supposedly denying preservation when you indicated that the preserved original language manuscripts were not perfect or inerrant?

What entitles you to try to put words in my mouth that I did not say? I do believe that the Scriptures have been preserved regardless of your false accusations and bearing false witness against me.

In the thread entitled "Source material for the KJV,

 

I simply showed how imperfect texts could be used to determine a perfect text. Of the 3000 + extant Greek manuscripts, only 1800 contained Mark 16. So, around 1200 were not complete. This doesn't mean they weren't inerrant, but they weren't complete. Of those that did include Mark 16, all but 3 included the last 12 verses. So, most of these texts were inerrant, but a few weren't. Nevertheless, the translators were able to determine that the last 12 verses should be there, also having much support from other documents (ECF, etc...).

Now, you know what I am saying is true, and you know this is the method that was used to determine what was scripture and what was not many times. So imperfect text can be used to provide for a perfect text.

 

You did not show any such thing. You merely assume or speculate that, but assuming or asserting something is not showing that it is true.

You do not explain by what process it could supposedly happen or did not demonstrate that it actually was achieved according to that unidentified process.

You keep trying to put words in my mouth that I have not and did not state. I do not know that your claims are true as you incorrectly and improperly try to claim that I supposedly know. You have presented no sound, proper evidence for your subjective KJV-only claims.

I have presented sound evidence and scriptural truths that show that your assumptions, opinions, or reasoning are faulty.

 

You have presented evidence to support your view, but that does not mean you are correct.

It is like a trial, if you were to listen to the prosecution attorney, you would convict every time, because he presents only that evidence that supports him or her.

But let the defense attorney get up and present his case and you may be convinced the defendant is innocent.

So, just because you have submitted evidence to support your view does not mean you are correct.

Years ago I did a lot of reading on this subject and I read good arguments from both sides. I realized this cannot be answered by scholarship.

I believe God preserved his word by faith. Don't tell me you have faith in the word of God, YOU DO NOT. You are a skeptic and a doubter plain and simple.

You spend all your time attacking the word of God, if you loved it you wouldn't do that. It is that simple. Actions speak louder than words.

I am not going to keep arguing with you, you can keep your long lists of dates and versions that you copy and paste, and your collected statements that support your view. I am going to keep believing God preserved his word DESPITE YOU. Life is too short to waste my time arguing with you.

 

Winman, I didn't see a reply from you yet.

 

Another lie from someone that claims to be a believer. Everyone here believes God has preserved his word. to say otherwise is to lie. Let's keep the discussion above lying about each other.

I'm still waiting for you to answer my question. btw

 

The KJV was translated from manuscripts, some of which had verses and some of which did not.

The translators made judgments as to what to include and what not to.

The "missing verses" you refer to are in most MV's although they may be footnoted.

Nothing's missing here except common sense.

 

Your bogus false accusations, personal attacks, and smears that bear false witness and that are contrary to what the Scriptures teach undermine your claims. Your posts reveal that you disobey the Scriptures that you claim to believe.

Disagreeing with the opinions of men [KJV-only advocates such as you] is not attacking the word of God as you falsely claim. Your throwing out accusations does not make them true. You show yourself to be blind to the truth.

You close your eyes to the truth or stick your head in the sand, refusing to learn and refusing to correct your false claims and accusation.