FYI: Good Defense of the KJV site

Lady, why did God wait until 1611 to preserve his word?

When you can answer that question, please tell me why the KJV corrected what was God's word prior to the KJV.

Apparently ignorance IS a virtue.

 

Well, this site doesn't seem so bad. Bro Will Kinney has written an essay for it. It at least attempts to address issues. Now I didn't say I agree with 'em!

 

In about two minutes I found this lie there:

"There have been several editions of the KJV, most recently the 1769 edition, which is in common use today."

The KJV1873 is later than the 1769 and is
in common use today. I have a copy
in TODAY'S PARALLEL BIBLE along with
other good English Bibles like:
NASB, NIV, and NASB.

 

What all did you say this 1873 edition contains?

 

You never did tell me what your alleged
KJV1762 says or how you can tell if you
have one.

Ruth 3:15d (KJV1873):
... and he went into the city.

 

FYI, here's a site that refutes everything on that KJVO site:

http://lionofjudah.tribulationforces.com/false/kjvo.html

 

That was an excellent site.

 

Yeah I did, you just missed it, but here goes again:

The Cambridge 1762 reads "she".

Naomi was in Bethlehem. Naomi is Ruth's mother-in-law. Ruth is a "she". Ruth was laiden with barley by Boaz. Ruth went to her mother-in-law's house with the barley Boaz gave her. Bethlehem is a city. Bethlehem is the city where Naomi was. Ruth went to Bethlehem to see Naomi.

Simply put, when you read the Book of Ruth you can't help but come to the knowledge of the Truth.

 

An excellent site for Will K and others who need rescuing.

 

Speaking of the last phrase
in Ruth 3:15:
Precepts: //The Cambridge 1762 reads "she".//
The KJV1769 reads "she".
So the KJV1873 is NOT the KJV1769.
So the KJV1873 is not the KJV1762.

Precepts: "Simply put, when you read the Book of Ruth you
can't help but come to the knowledge of the Truth."

Amen, Brother Prescepts.
ANd the Book of Ruth can be read in the 3 or 4
common KJVs, the NIV, the nKJV, the NASB ...

Jesus doesn't limit God to one and only
one version; why should I?

 

So Precepts, are you saying that the 1873 KJV is not right?
If so, then how do you uphold the 1611, since it agrees with the 1873 (even in the marginal notes)

Which KJB is the right one?

Even if it was just printors errors, an error is an error. no excuse.

BTW Ed, I also love my "Today's Parallel Bible"
I put it in a bible cover and that's what I carry.

But I think you made a mistake, (or possibly a printer's error )
It contains the 1873 KJB, NIV, NASB, and the NLT
YOu said it contained 2 NASBs.

I would suggest anyone looking for a Bible to get "Today's Parallel Bible"

 

FYI:Typical Alexandrian "Sect" propaganda....

 

So, i have three KJVs and don't have the one that
is the word of God? This is JUST LIKE those
who teach me all the bibles we have
are errant casuse only the original autographs
are inerrant.

Sorry Bros & Sises, I have over a
dozen copies of the inerrant preserved
word of God for the 21st century right
on my computer desk (more in my library).

Amen, Brother Tinytim -- Preach it!

You roll Bro!
May all God's best blessings be upon Bro.
Tinytim this Lord's Day and unto his family
and unto his ministry. Amen.

 

FYI:Typical Alexandrian "Sect" propaganda.... </font>[/QUOTE]All right, let's see you refute its points-with FACT & SCRIPTURE, not propaganda.