1. 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!

KJBOism?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by william s. correa, May 6, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Linda64

    Linda64 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (2 Peter 1:20-21)

    All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
     
  2. standingfirminChrist

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    3
    And just for information, the Message is a translation. Most call it a paraphrase, but the Websters 1828 Dictionary defines paraphrase as 'translation with latitude.'

    The changes from the original 1611 were to correct grammatical errors and punctuation. They did not add to the Word as Bibles of today do, nor did they remove key words, verses, passages, etc.
     
  3. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Only the originals are inspired . The Bibles we have now are striving to be faithful translations of the original . Some are better than others .
     
  4. Linda64

    Linda64 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Which originals? There are no originals.
    How do you know these translations are translations of the originals? Every time a story is re-told, it is something different.
     
  5. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    SFiC , do you know that the King James Bible uses the dynamic theory of translation at times ? What about all those " God forbids " ? According to your standard , that is adding to the word of God and possibly detracting from it as well . Those passages should have rendered something more faithful to the original such as " May it never be ! " Or " Certainly not ! " instead .
     
  6. Linda64

    Linda64 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Now YOU are paraphrasing, Rippon! Now there's the problem--just by saying "These passages should have rendered, you are changing the ORIGINAL intent.
     
  7. DesiderioDomini

    DesiderioDomini New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is amazing. I am sure after I show the ignorance of these posts, it will simply be ignored by the KJVO, so I'll post it for the benefit of any lurkers who wish to know the truth.

    from standing firm
    I dont follow, and neither does anyone else able to define the term LOGIC. People claim that translations since the KJV, such as the NASB for starters, are more accurate because they are, and rather than discuss this from an issue of hard evidence and plain reason, people like you avoid the issue, and argue in a circle. When that doesnt work, you make statements like this one above. It is completely asinine to claim that one MUST think a TRANSLATION is inspired in order to feel it is more accurate than ANOTHER TRANSLATION. I stand for the NASB, and others here stand for many others, even some for the KJV, even though they know they arent inspired. You have ZERO PROOF that it is, and you have been asked for it repeatedly. You quote Timothy all day long, with ZERO evidence that "all scripture" means the KJV and no other translation. Its a shell game; a charade, a desperate attempt to support legalism in hopes no one calls you out. Its foolish to claim that these acts of dishonesty are anything close to defending the Word of God. The hypocrisy is not in defending another translation over the KJV, its in making the claims you have and having NOTHING to support it.

    GREAT. I think the AUTHOR would have been a better source, but in order to defend a myth, one will use almost any line they can find! Do you even have a clue what Andrew Peterson had to say about his work? Can you answer that question without libel?

    What do you consider "key words" and who made you the authority on what can and cant be removed from the KJV and it still be perfect? If one NEW WORD was added or one WORD taken away, can both reading still be perfect? I am certain you will not answer this honestly, so anyone lurking take note: there is a reason why he will not answer this question. Ill tell you after he fails to answer.

    from Linda64

    Interesting, since you clearly have no clue what the greek here actually means. God forbid is a horrid translation, if in fact it can even be called that. The word GOD is simply not there. You advocate adding the name of God into the word when it is not there? Once again, I am sure you wont answer this honestly, so Ill just inform anyone lurking that there is a reason you wont answer it, and that will be revealed after you dont answer it.
     
  8. william s. correa

    william s. correa New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like that you changed KJOism to KJVOnlyists souds like "Lobyists" for the Lord, The isms is what i Have a Problem with: too much drama, and not enough action no wonder God didnt send Paaul to Asia at first God Knew it would have been more than he could bear! With all those Isms and False doctorines!
     
  9. william s. correa

    william s. correa New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    0
    I dont follow, and neither does anyone else able to define the term LOGIC. People claim that translations since the KJV, such as the NASB for starters, are more accurate because they are, and rather than discuss this from an issue of hard evidence and plain reason, people like you avoid the issue, and argue in a circle. When that doesnt work, you make statements like this one above. It is completely asinine to claim that one MUST think a TRANSLATION is inspired in order to feel it is more accurate than ANOTHER TRANSLATION. I stand for the NASB, and others here stand for many others, even some for the KJV, even though they know they arent inspired. You have ZERO PROOF that it is, and you have been asked for it repeatedly. You quote Timothy all day long, with ZERO evidence that "all scripture" means the KJV and no other translation. Its a shell game; a charade, a desperate attempt to support legalism in hopes no one calls you out. Its foolish to claim that these acts of dishonesty are anything close to defending the Word of God. The hypocrisy is not in defending another translation over the KJV, its in making the claims you have and having NOTHING to support it.

    GREAT. I think the AUTHOR would have been a better source, but in order to defend a myth, one will use almost any line they can find! Do you even have a clue what Andrew Peterson had to say about his work? Can you answer that question without libel?

    What do you consider "key words" and who made you the authority on what can and cant be removed from the KJV and it still be perfect? If one NEW WORD was added or one WORD taken away, can both reading still be perfect? I am certain you will not answer this honestly, so anyone lurking take note: there is a reason why he will not answer this question. Ill tell you after he fails to answer.

    from Linda64

    Interesting, since you clearly have no clue what the greek here actually means. God forbid is a horrid translation, if in fact it can even be called that. The word GOD is simply not there. You advocate adding the name of God into the word when it is not there? Once again, I am sure you wont answer this honestly, so Ill just inform anyone lurking that there is a reason you wont answer it, and that will be revealed after you dont answer it.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Maybe thats why you posts only last 1 or 2 pages
     
  10. william s. correa

    william s. correa New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    0
    Qoute the Geneva Bible and re qoute the KJB if they are the same then we dont need to argue but if they are not then "HOUSTON WE HAVE A PROBLEM"
     
  11. william s. correa

    william s. correa New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    0
    You dont need to Know Greek to Know the Word of God, All you need is to be SAVED, The KJB is By FAR the BEST TRANSLATION EVER, So there is no need to Know or have to learn any other language to try and dis prove the Infallability of th KJB if you want to Kick against the Pricks, and be stubborn Go ahead, but the cattle prod will win every time!
     
  12. william s. correa

    william s. correa New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who has the Originals? No one the KJB is the Best Copy and a Copy is not Changed, Ommitted,Added to,Manipulated to suit some ones Gender preference, Politically Correct, But indeed is the Copy from the received text RIPPON! Why is there no Calvary in the NIV? Different Gospel?
     
  13. DesiderioDomini

    DesiderioDomini New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    0
    A month ago I would have called any man who claimed this were possible to be a lunatic, but it appears to be true: William, you are making less sense than when you started.
     
  14. Rev. Lowery

    Rev. Lowery New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    0
    Linda I was gonna say that also HAHA you beat me to it. SFC understands what we are doing to Christianity as a whole by having MV's and believing everything and nothing.
    We must have a Absolute Foundation without that all can be doubted by the lost. If the people that are suppose to have all the answer don't even have some of the answers whats that say about the people sent to spread the Gospel. It means we cant spread what we don't have. There was a time perhaps 50 years ago when a Preacher was respected but, not now because we don't have preachers that have a foundation.

    What does one say to the lost when they ask what is the Word of God and that person is a MV'er ??? I can say without any doubt in my mind with 100% absolute authority and confidence that the KJV 1611 is Gods Word and you know God has never ever ever once not backed me on this statement. No matter what someone brings to the table I can put on the WHOLE armor of God.
     
  15. Rev. Lowery

    Rev. Lowery New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    0
    AMEN WILLIAM AMEN AMEN AMEN AND AMEN
     
  16. Rev. Lowery

    Rev. Lowery New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    0
    The book of Revelation is clear on what will happen to ppl that remove anything from the Book!

    Can I get an Amen !!!!!
     
  17. Anti-Alexandrian

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can you give chapter and verse to back that up???? Timothy didn't have the "originals" in his lap when Paul penned 2 Timothy 3:15-16.

    Splain!!!
     
  18. Ransom

    Ransom Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    1
    Diggin in da Word said:

    it is awful funny that no doubt on the authenticity of the inerrancy of the KJV came about until other versions that removed the blood, the deity of Christ, the virgin birth, the mercyseat, sodomy and other key verses in our faith were introduced.

    It's awfully sad that KJV-onlyists think the only way to "defend" God's Word is to violate God's Word by lying about it. KJV-onlyism is about as "Christian" as the conspiracy theory in The Da Vinci Code, frankly.
     
  19. Ransom

    Ransom Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    1
    Diggin in da Word said:

    But show me the word sodomite in these english versions, show me the mercyseat in these versions, show me John 5:4 in many of these.... ya won't find them.

    Oh boo hoo hoo. The modern Bibles don't have Diggem's pet words in 'em! How sad!

    Fortunately, in the Real World, the accuracy of the Word of God in translation is not decided by the maudlin sentimentality of KJVers.
     
  20. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Misunderstood KJV scriptures #52:

    2Pe 1:20 (KJV1611 Edition):
    Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture
    is of any priuate Interpretation:

    2Pe 1:20 (KJV1769 Edition):
    Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture
    is of any private interpretation.

    In 1611 private Interpretation mean 'individual purpose'.
    So in 1611 This scripture mean that each prophecy of
    the Bible is for all, not just for one person.

    Today this scripture is misunderstood to mean
    no indiviudal can understand Scripture by themselves.
    This is totally un-Baptist understainding
    totally dismantling the Doctrines of the Priesthood of
    the Believer and Soul Competency :(
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...