Just Don’t Call It the “word of God”

They do not disagree with eachother!! I dare you to prove it.

 

What do you do when the modern translations disagree with each other? The same thing you do when the pre-1611 English translations disagree with each other; or when the different editions/revisions of the KJV disagree with each other; or even when the KJV disagrees with the Greek or Hebrew text from which it was translated -- you go to the "final authority," namely, the original language text. </font>[/QUOTE]Leaving the so called "revisions" out of it. Which text do you use? If you are talking about a Greek text for example, there are more then 60 of them.

 

Ummm, shall we examine the total posts by KJVO vs. total posts by anti-KJV?
And the accusation of calling us a cult is so farfetched as to be laughable.
Lets examine what a cult is:
1.They have a central body that makes decisions for all members. Most KJVOs are very independent and can disagree with eachother about many other things. Ill bet GrannyGumbo and I could find something to disagree about, maybe she thinks all churches should have pink carpet and I think they should have purple.
We are united by our love and respect for the KJV, Gods inspired, preserved, perfect Word.

2. Most cults fear that their deciples will investigate the oppositions beliefs and be converted, because of that they ban books and materials that dont support their views.
(Its funny that some Bible colleges have started to ban books that support the KJVO stand. Maybe you are accusing the wrong people of being a cult...)
I am sitting here in my dads office surrounded by THOUSANDS of books that support or dont support my views. I have looked at many of them because im not afraid to see the oppositions beliefs.
So much for the old but unreliable "cult" accusation...

And who is this "certain person" you are slandering? Is it me? Or is it Michelle? Or is it Anti-Alexandrian? Or is it some other vehemently pro-KJV person?

 

But which one is Gods preserved Word,inerrent, infallible,and error-free? </font>[/QUOTE]Were the KJV translators infallible?

Did God inspire men who were not prophets, Apostles, or holy men of old?

Did God inspire men who believed in many false doctrines including baptismal regeneration?

Did God give His perfect word to men who hated Baptist doctrines and practices and used the authority of the king to try and snuff our forebearers out? </font>[/QUOTE]Huh? If you are talking about the KJV translators youve been into some weird books! </font>[/QUOTE]You evaded the question. And yes, I am talking about the translators and their church during their life times.

All of these scholars assented to the 39 Articles of religion that you can look up for yourself on the internet. It affirms infant baptism and baptismal regeneration.

The first settlers in the US left England because of religious oppression in the 1620's... who do you think the oppressors were?

I know you would rather think of the translators as a bunch of pew jumpin' IFB's... but they simply weren't.

The last Englishman to be burned at the stake was a Baptist named Wightman. The charges against him were basically every heresy that might have been commonly known at the time, some of which contradicted each other. Basically, to one degree or another, they trumped up charges against him. His descendents contributed to the establishment of Baptists in America.

He was burned in 1612 under the authority of King James and Archbishop George Abbot. http://www.fact-index.com/e/ed/edward_wightman.html

Abbot was a leading participant in the KJV translation. http://www.fact-index.com/a/ar/archbishop_george_abbot.html

There is plenty more if you simply care to do the research. Certainly not all of the translators took direct part in persecution but some did. And the others... did nothing.

 

KJVBT:I believe ill let Gipp speak for me on this one as he puts it much better then I can.
Ill start a thread on it in a few days.

I wouldn't depend on The Gipper to speak for me...that's about equivalent to having Jim Bakker speak for all televangelists.

Wanna see some of his "answers" torpedoed? Lemme refer you to a closed thread, "the Gipper shoulda stuck to football" on P.3 of the archives. It's long, but I believe you can read the first 3 pages to get the gist of it.

 

I have never seen a version that was translated properly and accurately from its source texts that contradicts or confuses me, sorry. There are differences in the underlying texts, but they do not affect the truth of the Gospel. If you choose to throw out parts of God's word, you may. I choose to be very certain that even the words and thoughts conveyed by the revisers of the KJV i use every day (1789) are the most accurate representation of the intent of the author, and with the testimony of many witnesses, I have a more sure word of truth than any single version could possibly claim. So, please stop blaspheming the word of God by denying its authority. God inspired without error his Words and has providentially preserved them for us in the overwhelming manuscript evidence that supports the KJV and all other MV's as well. I have confidence that I am studying the very word of God. I know that my NASB, NIV, ESV, KJV, are an accurate and responsible translation of the very Words of God, and its obvious to me that God has made this clear for all men to know. If only you understood than you would understand

 

Matthew 27:37-- And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Mark 15:26-- And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Luke 23:38--And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

John 19:19--And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Of the 4 different renderings of the sign on the cross, which one (if any) is the right one, while others disagree with the wording?

 

Check out the four accounts of finding the empty tomb. Difference in number of women, difference in angels/men at the site, and even a difference in when the stone was rolled away.

 

There is not a single post that is anti-KJV. There are, however, several posts that are anti-KJVO.

For example, I'm anti-KJVO, but I'm very much in favor of use of the KJV.

 

Matthew 27:37-- And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Mark 15:26-- And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Luke 23:38--And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

John 19:19--And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Of the 4 different renderings of the sign on the cross, which one (if any) is the right one, while others disagree with the wording? </font>[/QUOTE]They do not, did you catch the different languages used? In different languages you say the same thin in different ways. For a fuller answer id have to study on it.

 

There is not a single post that is anti-KJV. There are, however, several posts that are anti-KJVO.

For example, I'm anti-KJVO, but I'm very much in favor of use of the KJV. </font>[/QUOTE]It never ceases to amaze me how people who are anti-KJV rationalize it. There are so many differences between the new versions and the KJV it isnt funny! So unless you can believe multiple things at the same time you are anti-KJV.

 

I have never seen a version that was translated properly and accurately from its source texts that contradicts or confuses me, sorry. There are differences in the underlying texts, but they do not affect the truth of the Gospel. If you choose to throw out parts of God's word, you may. I choose to be very certain that even the words and thoughts conveyed by the revisers of the KJV i use every day (1789) are the most accurate representation of the intent of the author, and with the testimony of many witnesses, I have a more sure word of truth than any single version could possibly claim. So, please stop blaspheming the word of God by denying its authority. God inspired without error his Words and has providentially preserved them for us in the overwhelming manuscript evidence that supports the KJV and all other MV's as well. I have confidence that I am studying the very word of God. I know that my NASB, NIV, ESV, KJV, are an accurate and responsible translation of the very Words of God, and its obvious to me that God has made this clear for all men to know. If only you understood than you would understand </font>[/QUOTE]So you do believe that they contradict eachother? And yet you still believe that they are the Word of God? Fascinating. And who says that they are not translated properly? You?

 

What? The sign said what it said regardless of the language used. The Gospel accounts were not written in originally in different languages, the Gospel writers wrote what the sign said in the same language. It seems like you are advocating another one of the double standards of KJVO--Dynamic equivalence is acceptable in the KJV but not in the MV's.

Bro Tony

 

So, if you're not KJVO, you're anti-KJV? That's not only a false statement, but a false judgement.

The Dutch Pulpit Bible is not MV. The Geneva Bible is not MV. The Darby Bible is not MV. The Santa Biblia is not MV. I own and read all of them. Your contention is that they're not the word of God. Yet, I can read them, compare them to their source texts, and tell you with factual certainty that you're wrong.

 

If you had studied it in the first place, youd have noticed that all three Gospels were written in Greek. The different accounts of the signeage are all documented in Greek.

 

Ill study up on it okay? And consult with my pastor and youth leader.

 

Good idea. Maybe you should read some books on the Bible version debates also.

AVL1984

 

Why would I want to do that? Besides the fact that I am reading no less then 3 right now?

 

Why would I want to do that? Besides the fact that I am reading no less then 3 right now? </font>[/QUOTE]Other posters here have recommended Rick Norris's book, "Unbound Scriptures"- maybe ya oughtta check it out....