Evaluating the Rules of "Best" Text

Askjo believes, so I'm NOT the only one. I have yet to see any good scriptural reason to believe something just because EVERYONE ELSE believes it. I base it on the same authority that says we believe in a 66 book canon. You accept that without much grumbling. If my name was Luther or Calvin or something and I died like 700 years ago, this wouldn't seem so strange, would it.

 

No, I believe the word absolutely was preserved. Maybe you just didn't have a copy of it.

 

James said "Askjo believes, so I'm NOT the only one."

Askjo, is this true? Do you believe God didn't preserve his words prior to 1611, but "resurrected" them in 1611?

James said "I base it on the same authority that says we believe in a 66 book canon."

No you don't. The authority of the church is why we believe in the canon. The church does not teach in this "resurrection" of the Bible idea of yours.

AGAIN, how do you know it was resurrected in the KJV and not some other translation, already in existence or yet to come? What do you base this on?

 

Who is 'the Church'? Are you suggesting that since we are baptists, we need to take a vote? Or does the Pope get to decide which bible is correct?

 

James, how do you know it was resurrected in the KJV and not some other translation, already in existence or yet to come? What do you base this on?

Answer my question, and I'll answer yours.

 

I'm taking that one on faith, brother. Unlike some people, I do believe that God rewards those that dilligently seek Him. If God decides I need to stop believing in the KJV, He will be the one to reveal it to me. He may do it through you, but your going to need to come up with a better argument than 'everyone else believes this other thing here'. Biblically speaking, thats the last argument you want to use.

 

Amen brother! Preach it!

 

James said "I'm taking that one on faith, brother."

Yes, I know - but what's that faith based on? Where does this idea come from, and why should you have faith in it?

James said "If God decides I need to stop believing in the KJV, He will be the one to reveal it to me."

This is NOT about believing the KJV, this is about believing something ABOUT the KJV. And maybe he's TRYING to reveal it to you, but you're not listening.

James said "He may do it through you, but your going to need to come up with a better argument than 'everyone else believes this other thing here'."

That is not my argument. But still, when you're alone against the world in your view about something, it's usually a good idea to have a SOLID reason as to why you believe something, one that can be explained when someone asks you what exhorts you to have this faith and by what authority you accept it.

 

James, thank you for your consistent support of the KJV.

Trying to get many people here to understand what you say is like throwing a rock at a hornet's nest; all it does is stir up the hornets.

 

Terry, you're thanking James for his support of the KJV? His support is dependent on his idea that God's word was unavailable for 1600 years, and "resurrected" in 1611 - and he believes this without one shred of reason to, scriptural or otherwise.

But as long as you both drive the same color of car, who cares about any of his other views, right?

 

Let me ask you this, natters. The bible says that in the last days people are going to be beheaded for the witness of Jesus Christ, and for the word of God.

Revelation 20:4
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Which bible are you willing to die for?

The mark of the beast is coming, and I as well as many others, believe it will be a micro chip, as we see RFID has become the most likely candidate for such a technology.

Revelation 13 (KJV)
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

Why is it that almost evry other version (and arguably EVERY popular version) says ON their right hand or ON their forehead?

Revelation 13 (NIV)
16He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead,

Revelation 13 (NASB)
16 And he causes all, (1) the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a (2) mark on their right hand or on their forehead,

Revelation 13 (the Message )
16It forced all people, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to have a mark on the right hand or forehead.

Revelation 13 (Amplified Bible)
16Also he compels all [alike], both small and great, both the rich and the poor, both free and slave, to be marked with an inscription [[1] stamped] on their right hands or on their foreheads,

Revelation 13 (NLT)
16He required everyone--great and small, rich and poor, slave and free--to be given a mark on the right hand or on the forehead.

Revelation 13 (NKJV)
16He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads,

And on and on... If you believe there will be a literal antichrist, there will be a mark. Is this mark going to be a barcode tattoo that says '666' across the forehead, like some of these cheesey TBN end time movies would suggest?

 

James, that has nothing to do with my question.

 

It has everything to do with my answer.

 

No, it doesn't. Here, let me repeat the question: How do you know it was resurrected in the KJV and not some other translation, already in existence or yet to come? What do you base this on? What exhorts you to have this faith?

 

I can't be any more clear natters. We are in the end times, I firmly believe this. If people are going to die in the end times for the word of God, I want to know I'm dying for the correct word of God. What if someone says to me 'You can't honestly expect me to believe that God doesn't like homosexuals? Why, your a Homosexual Offender, just like it says right here in my New Revised Message for Gay Man Study Edition! Why thats hate speech, and hate speech is punishable by Beheading here in the Gay Republic of New Texas!' Should I say back to him 'Well, any bible is good enough, forgive me my homosexual brother and please allow me to keep my skull on my neck bone.' or should I say 'Thus Saith the Lord!
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind!'

 

We must not forget that views on manuscripts have changed since the advent of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Dating to the time of Christ, and being very intact, the DSS writings generally support the oldest copies of the MSS over the newer TR. However, regardless of what later texts the DSS support, there can be no arguement that the DSS should be given precedence over later manuscripts.

 

James said "I can't be any more clear natters. We are in the end times, I firmly believe this. If people are going to die in the end times for the word of God, I wan't to know I'm dying for the correct word of God."

This doesn't explain why the KJV, and not another version, is the word of God resurrected. You are not explaining how you came to this knowledge, you are explaining why such knowledge would be good to have. So, again, try and answer the question I'm asking, and not another question that I'm not asking.

 

And as soon as someone here says their Bible is in Dutch, German, Spanish, or Arabic, that throws a wrench into the whole "correct word of God" issue. There is NO TRANSLATION that can scripturally claim to be the sole authoritative version over and to the exclusion of others. That view is not scripturally supportable, not scripturally verifiable, and not scripturally doctrinal.

Although, interestingly, scripture does tell us that the end times will be evidenced by false doctrines. Single-translation-onlyism is BY FAR the most prevalent, most damaging, and most deceiving false doctrine of this era.

 

If your Dutch bible agrees with my bible, then I suppose you have the perfect word of God in Dutch. Are you making the same argument... If God doesn't preserve His word in EVERY LANGUAGE then He's not being fair? Anyway, I need to go home. You guys argue with yourselves for a while

 

Does it matter? If I came to the knowledge that Christ was the son of God, but I didn't get there the same way you did, does that invalidate my belief?