Influence of the BB on your use of the KJV

MEANWHILE BACK AT THE RANCH...

This board has helped me to appreciate the KJV and the AV 1611 for what they are...good, solid, accurate BVs...and reinforced my belief that KJVO is just a man-made myth. There's generally a more erudite class of KJVOs here, but they can't come any closer to sustaining their myth than the less-informed ones can. KJVO was, and remains, a humbug to me.

 

Lack of ability? You do the same because I asked you just one question that you are incapable to answer my question.

Allergic to the truth? I see, you wear goat to cover yourself in sheep field because you are on wrong side where I stand. </font>[/QUOTE]I have stated clearly why I will not answer your question. Apparently you cannot comprehend, or didn't really ever learn how to read AND comprehend. I'm not playing your game, askjo. This will be my last response to you until YOU post the proof asked so many times of you by myself and others.

So, now back to the topic at hand. (LOL...I just read Dr. Bobs response to askjo about his rabbit trails....Sorry Dr. Bob)

 

At least they didn't ditch the Reformation Receptus for the North-African/Jesuit forgeries of the Gnostics and Philosophers. </font>[/QUOTE]King James Version Onlyism is the biggest infection of Gnostiscm known in the churches today. Gnostiscm has been used to attack the church from the second century and possibly even before. It is a downright shame that people do not recognise Gnosticm for what it is.

Gnostics teach that there is further Revelation after the Cross of Calvary. KJVO teaches that God gave further revelation to the churches in 1611.

Gnosticm teaches that the scripture is inaccurate and can not be relied upon without there interpretation. KJVO teaches that scripture prior to 1611 is innacurate and can only be interpreted by the translators of the KJV in 1611 and those that revised it later on.

Gnostiscm taught that the word was hidden, KJVO teaches that is a correct assumption of what happened prior to 1611.

KJVOism attempts to mask there new revelation to suggest that God only restored what was lost. Yet in doing so teach that the people were lost prior to 1611. Yet the scripture teaches John 1:5 "His life is the light that shines through the Darkness and the Darkness can NEVER extinguish it.

 

I wonder if they had a burning in the bosom experience too?

 

He only had a few manuscripts to work with. Did he use the majority text method too?

What were his reasons for tossing it out?

 

Sometime read http://www.aomin.org/ruckcor.html
You will get an accurate taste of their leader.

 

Really? What are the earliest Greek mss that contain I John 5:7-8 as they appear in the KJV/TR? How many are there?

I am not asking for trumped up quotes or old Latin translations or any other diversion.

You claim that the TR "began with the early apostolic period" so I am simply asking you to show us that the "TR" was "copied and recopied by the churches".

BTW, TR does not equal "traditional texts".

The TR is a unique collation begun and revised by Erasmus then later revised by other scholars. It has its origin in the 1500's, not the "early apostolic period."

 

You gotta chill, go2church. I am not KJVO, but I do use it exclusively for my bible-reading pleasure. I approach everything from a personal perspective. I know some that are KJVO that have added tremendous value to the Christian community. I also know someone that took the NIV 'True Love Waits' Bible and applied its truths to her life. I am so proud to be her father. She is now in a Bible College (yes, a KJVO Bible College). I understand the viewpoint against the KJV extremists that insist that one must be saved only from the KJV, or that the KJV is the 'only' Word of God; however, I am not yet ready to condemn any of them to hell, especially the ones that I have personally met. I haven't personally met anyone that says you can only get saved from the KJV, but believe that I have met the majority of others.

Please do not get into reading my mind before we have had a chance to sit down together over some donuts and coffee. My wife is pretty good at it, but she and I have sat down over donuts and coffee quite often. Of course, she cannot eat as many donuts as me.

God bless.

 

williemakeit, my wife and I were members of a church here in Murfreesboro that taught that if you weren't saved through the ministry of the KJV you needed to question your salvation. We had some acquaintances who were attending that service and they both were there in executive styled pantsuits (women) and had their NIV's with them. They were treated disrespectfully by the pastor and his family and others in the church. The pastors message that morning was on "the pure Word". He sure didn't show it was pure when he practically stated that those using other versions weren't saved/needed to question their salvation. Typical of a Hyles/Malone type preacher.

 

Wearin' a bow tie is the sign of a REAL Bible lover. Any who do not wear one are deceived. Every translator of the AV1611 wore bow ties, not long fore-and-hand ties.

Remember, ALL men wore bow ties until the MODERN era (1900) with all those bible revising. There is a definite link.

All the great revivals under Moody, Edwards, Whitefield, Spurgeon came with a preacher WEARING A BOW TIE.

Glad you are under conviction, Willie. Get out the OLD tie, turn back to the OLD ways. Simple. Good enough for hundreds of years. </font>[/QUOTE]I'm not really sure how good I would look in a bowtie, although I must admit that I am the handsome, manly type (at least my wife is always telling me, and I would never question her judgement). With my birthday coming up, I may ask the kids for a couple.

 

Seems hard to stay on the trail here.

This board has opened my eyes to a real problem of KJV Onlyism. I had no idea it was so rampant and spreading through Baptist churches the way it is, until I see the militant style of the KJVO group. They fight based on nothing but faith, but faith in what?

I have no problem if a person who believes in KJV preferred, or textus receptus preferred. But, the bottom line is, there is no scriptural truth to their beliefs. They would rather spend more time slamming new translations than spreading the gospel.

That is what I have learned from the BB and it is scary.

Uh, this is the same as "Phillip" which is my middle name, I used an old log-in. Sorry! I will try to relog back in under the name I always use.

 

91% of voters are either unchanged in their belief that the KJV is not the only English Bible or less convinced in the validity of the KJV as the only English Bible.

 

Okay, I'm back, with the right log-in. C4K, I would guess that this is very much like the political elections which are highly polarized, only those on the fence may make a change, which is a small minority.