-
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!
Final Authority before 1611?
- Thread starter Cix
- Start date
They can't answer your questions, because it would refute thier position. Frankly I'm getting a little tired of people spewing out this KJVonly HERESY. It's kind of like talking to a Jehovah's Witness, you can present the facts all day to them and they will just stare at you like a deer in the headlights reverting back to thier incorrect doctrine.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
What "facts"???? Present the "facts" so I can critique them. </font>[/QUOTE]That is what this whole Forum is about.
There are too many facts to present them all
in each Topic (let alone each post)>
Michelle:Because maybe it was God's idea to improve in their language what they already had.
As maybe it is today.
You will have to ask God this. I do know, that what God provided for them at that time was their final authority and they would have known it.
But they differ from the KJV. Looks as if God knows a little more than you.
As for our final authority today, we know that it is the KJB.
No, we DON'T know it; you're GUESSING it is.
God did NOT retire in 1611.
As maybe it is today.
You will have to ask God this. I do know, that what God provided for them at that time was their final authority and they would have known it.
But they differ from the KJV. Looks as if God knows a little more than you.
As for our final authority today, we know that it is the KJB.
No, we DON'T know it; you're GUESSING it is.
God did NOT retire in 1611.
Michelle:That is fine until one starts to TWIST that analogy from it's origional meaning and try to paint a different picture than what was intended so as to try to destroy the character and intent of the one who origionally gave the analogy.
Actually, he was showing points about the line of English Bibles that cannot be compared to a human genealogy. For example, I inherited the genes that determined my race, hair & eye color, teeth alignment and hardness,& other physical characteristics, from Mom & Dad. There's nothing they or I could do to change this. But my PERSONALITY was consciously influenced by them, and the othe people around me. A human being is created by GOD; a Bible translation is created by PEOPLE.
This is the relevence and the unreasonable response on your part, to which I was adressing and responding to. You may not like her analogy, or you may see it in a different way, but you implied something nasty of her (ever so subtely) to destroy her character and her point.
Know what "Bah! Humbug!" means?
I'm sure Granny is the very same person she was yesterday.
As for kinfolk...the first Robys(Robies) in my genealogy were British highwaymen(No, not Roby Hood) and some of my mother's (Thompsons) were mercenary soldiers and plunderers, kinda like Hagar The Horrible. Now, does THAT make ME like THEM? I believe every family on earth has had some "black sheep".
Even though we are influenced by those who raised us as children, we begin to make our own choices as we grow older. Remember Charles Manson? He grew up about a hundred miles from here, and he came from a family that prolly hadn't had a member in jail for four generations. He mad his own choices; his FAMILY didn't make him into what he is.
Same with Bible translations. Using the AV as an example, the "genes" were the manuscripts being translated, & the 14 commands the translators had to follow. The "choices" were those the translators made when several renderings were possible of one word or phrase.
The flaw in the analogy only came in when you twisted the angalogy and attempted to slander her.
Anything against your KJVO myth is labeled by you as something bad.
But you say you're not KJVO. In that case, what other specific version(s) do you recommend?
And where's the post by me where I say I'm "autograph-only"?
THIS AINT GONNA SINPLY VANISH, MICHELLE!!
Actually, he was showing points about the line of English Bibles that cannot be compared to a human genealogy. For example, I inherited the genes that determined my race, hair & eye color, teeth alignment and hardness,& other physical characteristics, from Mom & Dad. There's nothing they or I could do to change this. But my PERSONALITY was consciously influenced by them, and the othe people around me. A human being is created by GOD; a Bible translation is created by PEOPLE.
This is the relevence and the unreasonable response on your part, to which I was adressing and responding to. You may not like her analogy, or you may see it in a different way, but you implied something nasty of her (ever so subtely) to destroy her character and her point.
Know what "Bah! Humbug!" means?
I'm sure Granny is the very same person she was yesterday.
As for kinfolk...the first Robys(Robies) in my genealogy were British highwaymen(No, not Roby Hood) and some of my mother's (Thompsons) were mercenary soldiers and plunderers, kinda like Hagar The Horrible. Now, does THAT make ME like THEM? I believe every family on earth has had some "black sheep".
Even though we are influenced by those who raised us as children, we begin to make our own choices as we grow older. Remember Charles Manson? He grew up about a hundred miles from here, and he came from a family that prolly hadn't had a member in jail for four generations. He mad his own choices; his FAMILY didn't make him into what he is.
Same with Bible translations. Using the AV as an example, the "genes" were the manuscripts being translated, & the 14 commands the translators had to follow. The "choices" were those the translators made when several renderings were possible of one word or phrase.
The flaw in the analogy only came in when you twisted the angalogy and attempted to slander her.
Anything against your KJVO myth is labeled by you as something bad.
But you say you're not KJVO. In that case, what other specific version(s) do you recommend?
And where's the post by me where I say I'm "autograph-only"?
THIS AINT GONNA SINPLY VANISH, MICHELLE!!
dAVID j:What! No KJVO can show me the perfect bible that 100% agrees with the KJV before 1611! How odd! And I thought that Psalm 12:6-7 by KJVO interpretation would prove that the words of the KJV have always existed perfectly intact.
Good luck in getting any truthful answer from any KJVO about that little fact, David! Shoot, I can't even get them to believe their own fave BV's marginal note on Ps.12:7..."Heb. him, I. euery one of them" nor the Geneva Bible's rendering, "...thou shalt preserve HIM...".
Good luck in getting any truthful answer from any KJVO about that little fact, David! Shoot, I can't even get them to believe their own fave BV's marginal note on Ps.12:7..."Heb. him, I. euery one of them" nor the Geneva Bible's rendering, "...thou shalt preserve HIM...".
Her analogy does not make sense. "kin" does not explain how a "final authority" is chosen, nor why it is replaced. Period.
--------------------------------------------------
Michelle:Yes it does. Church (family) HISTORY.
Please show us PROOF this history ended in 1611.
--------------------------------------------------
Michelle:Yes it does. Church (family) HISTORY.
Please show us PROOF this history ended in 1611.
And what Bible did Paul use as HIS final authority?
--------------------------------------------------
Michelle:The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the KJB.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NASB.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NIV.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NKJV.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the GENEVA BIBLE.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the TYNDALE'S BIBLE.
--------------------------------------------------
Michelle:The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the KJB.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NASB.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NIV.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NKJV.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the GENEVA BIBLE.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the TYNDALE'S BIBLE.
I made this statement:
Since the KJVO (and look-alikes) tell us that “things which are different are not the same”, why is it that no one here on the BB can tell us which Revision/Edition (Cambridge, Oxford, Nelson (1611-1853)) of the KJV is the "perfect" one.
BTW is “things which are different are not the same” one of the non-essentials you are talking about?
HankD
Response:
OK my apologies for generalizing, so let me qualify this a bit:
Since the KJVO (and look-alikes) tell us that “things which are different are not the same”, why is it that no one here on the BB can tell us which Revision/Edition (Cambridge, Oxford, Nelson (1611-1853)) of the KJV is the "perfect" one.
BTW is “things which are different are not the same” one of the non-essentials you are talking about?
HankD
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
To be fair, one of them has. Bro Lacy Evans claims it is the Oxford 1769.
http://www.kingdombaptist.org/article428.cfm
DAVID j:I see that my posts are being ignored! Come on KJVOist! Answer my questions!
Please don't hold your breath waiting, David! You may grow quite cyanotic!
I've been at this for over 22 years, and have had 22 years on silence, spin, attempts to change the subject, and outright LIES from the KJVOs.
They can't even get by the basic fact that their myth has absolutely NO Scriptural support! NONE!
Since Scripture is our highest written authority, any theory ABOUT Scripture MUST BE SUPPORTED by Scripture, plain and simple. The KJVO myth cannot pass this simple but absolute test.
Their non-answers simply show they're clueless. But I keep on asking, to remind everyone else just how clueless the myth and its advocates are, when they see the KJVO responses, or lack thereof.
Please don't hold your breath waiting, David! You may grow quite cyanotic!
I've been at this for over 22 years, and have had 22 years on silence, spin, attempts to change the subject, and outright LIES from the KJVOs.
They can't even get by the basic fact that their myth has absolutely NO Scriptural support! NONE!
Since Scripture is our highest written authority, any theory ABOUT Scripture MUST BE SUPPORTED by Scripture, plain and simple. The KJVO myth cannot pass this simple but absolute test.
Their non-answers simply show they're clueless. But I keep on asking, to remind everyone else just how clueless the myth and its advocates are, when they see the KJVO responses, or lack thereof.
--------------------------------------------------
a Bible translation is created by PEOPLE.
--------------------------------------------------
Bible = the perfect words of God; scripture; the whole councel of God; without error
scripture = created by and given by God; preserved accurately in copies and in use/living throughout history and within the churches without error.
translation = the converting of the accurate copies of scriptures (words of God) into the prospective language accurately under the providence of God, without error.
Bible translation = the scriptures; the word of God accurately in the prospective language, without error - perfectly.
All these things are done by, and provided by God, not man.
Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
a Bible translation is created by PEOPLE.
--------------------------------------------------
Bible = the perfect words of God; scripture; the whole councel of God; without error
scripture = created by and given by God; preserved accurately in copies and in use/living throughout history and within the churches without error.
translation = the converting of the accurate copies of scriptures (words of God) into the prospective language accurately under the providence of God, without error.
Bible translation = the scriptures; the word of God accurately in the prospective language, without error - perfectly.
All these things are done by, and provided by God, not man.
Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
--------------------------------------------------
Please show us PROOF this history ended in 1611.
--------------------------------------------------
The word of God is the word of God. It does not change, nor has been lost. The faithful have always had the word of God, and always will. Today you find God's word in our language perfectly/without error in the KJB of today. The history continues, and will always continue with the faithful who know God's word, not only in their hearts and words, but their lives also.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Please show us PROOF this history ended in 1611.
--------------------------------------------------
The word of God is the word of God. It does not change, nor has been lost. The faithful have always had the word of God, and always will. Today you find God's word in our language perfectly/without error in the KJB of today. The history continues, and will always continue with the faithful who know God's word, not only in their hearts and words, but their lives also.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
--------------------------------------------------
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NASB.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NIV.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NKJV.
--------------------------------------------------
All incorrect. All of these versions are based upon corrupt texts and methods. These are all <Bible attack clipped> Bibles.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
[ August 20, 2004, 12:35 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NASB.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NIV.
The same scriptures that God has provided for generations, even until this day, to which is provided and evidenced in our Holy Bible, to which is called the NKJV.
--------------------------------------------------
All incorrect. All of these versions are based upon corrupt texts and methods. These are all <Bible attack clipped> Bibles.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
[ August 20, 2004, 12:35 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]
--------------------------------------------------
Since the KJVO (and look-alikes) tell us that “things which are different are not the same”, why is it that no one here on the BB can tell us which Revision/Edition (Cambridge, Oxford, Nelson (1611-1853)) of the KJV is the "perfect" one.
--------------------------------------------------
They are all God's perfect words. There is only one that is perfectly and accurately rendered. They are all the same, as grammar/language changes, printing, spelling, punctuation and typeface changes do not necessatate nor reflect changes of God's word and are not different from them. Why do you not understand this? These were human errors, or language technicalities that God in his providence fixed/improved, but do not change, nor affected the pure word of God in those days. The mv's have CHANGED or ALTERED the word of God, either purposefully or because of corruptions in underlying texts OR BOTH, which affect the pure word of God. These are different and are indeed truly changes/alterations of the pure words of God.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Since the KJVO (and look-alikes) tell us that “things which are different are not the same”, why is it that no one here on the BB can tell us which Revision/Edition (Cambridge, Oxford, Nelson (1611-1853)) of the KJV is the "perfect" one.
--------------------------------------------------
They are all God's perfect words. There is only one that is perfectly and accurately rendered. They are all the same, as grammar/language changes, printing, spelling, punctuation and typeface changes do not necessatate nor reflect changes of God's word and are not different from them. Why do you not understand this? These were human errors, or language technicalities that God in his providence fixed/improved, but do not change, nor affected the pure word of God in those days. The mv's have CHANGED or ALTERED the word of God, either purposefully or because of corruptions in underlying texts OR BOTH, which affect the pure word of God. These are different and are indeed truly changes/alterations of the pure words of God.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
you can present the facts all day to them and they will just stare at you like a deer in the headlights reverting back to thier incorrect doctrine.
Slambo:What "facts"???? Present the "facts" so I can critique them.
1.) The KJVO myth was started in 1930 by an official of A KNOWN CULT, the SDA. This myth is ENTIRELY MAN-MADE.
2.) The KJVO myth has ABSOLUTELY NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT. This alone makes everything else moot.
3.) No two English BVs are alike. Thus, if Psalm 12:7 is about God's words, that's another thing that proves the KJVO myth false.
4.) By comparing Luke 4:16-21 in the KJV with Isaiah 42:7 and Isaiah 61:3, we see JESUS READ ALOUD from a version of Isaiah different from that which is translated into the KJV.
5.) While the KJV is an excellent translation, as are several others, it is NOT perfect, as we've proven here in several topics.
6.) Most KJVO arguments are absolutely STUPID! Examples: "The NIV denies the Deity of Jesus by calling Joseph His father in Luke 2:43" or the "copyrights" issue.
7.) The AV translators were NOT "inspired", "providentially led", etc. They were human as you or I. Their preface "From the translators to the Reader", found in the AV 1611, but NOT in most later editions, is VERY telling...let alone their marginal notes, again, omitted in today's KJV editions.
Here are seven basic facts for you to critique, Slambo. If you can get by even the first two, you're to be congratulated.
Slambo:What "facts"???? Present the "facts" so I can critique them.
1.) The KJVO myth was started in 1930 by an official of A KNOWN CULT, the SDA. This myth is ENTIRELY MAN-MADE.
2.) The KJVO myth has ABSOLUTELY NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT. This alone makes everything else moot.
3.) No two English BVs are alike. Thus, if Psalm 12:7 is about God's words, that's another thing that proves the KJVO myth false.
4.) By comparing Luke 4:16-21 in the KJV with Isaiah 42:7 and Isaiah 61:3, we see JESUS READ ALOUD from a version of Isaiah different from that which is translated into the KJV.
5.) While the KJV is an excellent translation, as are several others, it is NOT perfect, as we've proven here in several topics.
6.) Most KJVO arguments are absolutely STUPID! Examples: "The NIV denies the Deity of Jesus by calling Joseph His father in Luke 2:43" or the "copyrights" issue.
7.) The AV translators were NOT "inspired", "providentially led", etc. They were human as you or I. Their preface "From the translators to the Reader", found in the AV 1611, but NOT in most later editions, is VERY telling...let alone their marginal notes, again, omitted in today's KJV editions.
Here are seven basic facts for you to critique, Slambo. If you can get by even the first two, you're to be congratulated.
--------------------------------------------------
I've been at this for over 22 years, and have had 22 years on silence, spin, attempts to change the subject, and outright LIES from the KJVOs.
--------------------------------------------------
Your problem is robycop, that you care not for the truth, and ignore it, deny it when you are faced with it. You have been answered, you CHOOSE not to see the truth, because your agenda seems to be to try to prove the truth a lie (which you will NEVER be able to do), slander those who bring you that truth, when in reality and truth you are blinded by the lie, and won't let the light of the truth shine in. It is called stubborness, and stiff-necked. Just as the Israelites of old were.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
I've been at this for over 22 years, and have had 22 years on silence, spin, attempts to change the subject, and outright LIES from the KJVOs.
--------------------------------------------------
Your problem is robycop, that you care not for the truth, and ignore it, deny it when you are faced with it. You have been answered, you CHOOSE not to see the truth, because your agenda seems to be to try to prove the truth a lie (which you will NEVER be able to do), slander those who bring you that truth, when in reality and truth you are blinded by the lie, and won't let the light of the truth shine in. It is called stubborness, and stiff-necked. Just as the Israelites of old were.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
--------------------------------------------------
Since Scripture is our highest written authority, any theory ABOUT Scripture MUST BE SUPPORTED by Scripture, plain and simple. The KJVO myth cannot pass this simple but absolute test.
--------------------------------------------------
Now you are lying. You have been provided abundant scriptural proof, and you deny it, because you refuse to see the truth in them. Just because you deny it, doesn't mean it hasn't been provided, nor does it mean that what was provided to you is wrong. You cannot prove the truth wrong. You are the one to misinterpret and twist the scriptures to deny the truth that is within them, in order to justify your false belief, that we cannot have God's word of truth without error. This is not biblical, and you have not ONE IOTA of scriptural proof that indicates God would allow errors in the scriptures. Not one! Nor will you find it, cause it is not there. The opposite of what you believe is there, to which you DENY when faced with it and the evidence of it, and falsely accuse others of misinterpreting the truth, when in reality this is what you are doing, to justify your compromise with error.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Since Scripture is our highest written authority, any theory ABOUT Scripture MUST BE SUPPORTED by Scripture, plain and simple. The KJVO myth cannot pass this simple but absolute test.
--------------------------------------------------
Now you are lying. You have been provided abundant scriptural proof, and you deny it, because you refuse to see the truth in them. Just because you deny it, doesn't mean it hasn't been provided, nor does it mean that what was provided to you is wrong. You cannot prove the truth wrong. You are the one to misinterpret and twist the scriptures to deny the truth that is within them, in order to justify your false belief, that we cannot have God's word of truth without error. This is not biblical, and you have not ONE IOTA of scriptural proof that indicates God would allow errors in the scriptures. Not one! Nor will you find it, cause it is not there. The opposite of what you believe is there, to which you DENY when faced with it and the evidence of it, and falsely accuse others of misinterpreting the truth, when in reality this is what you are doing, to justify your compromise with error.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle