KJVO and Missions

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Salty, Sep 18, 2014.

  1. Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You mean the 1769 Benjamin Blayney version.
     
  2. Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    38,982
    Likes Received:
    2,615
    Faith:
    Baptist
    trying to think of an excuse for the mixup :tongue3: :smilewinkgrin:
     
  3. robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Here in America, you have the right to be wrong.

    Can you show us any SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT FOR the KJVO myth? I have previously posted the man-made, cultic, dishonest origin of the current edition of KJVO, which no KJVO has denied. But no KJVO can show us ANYTHING FROM GOD justifying KJVO. Thus, why should any Baptist believe it?
     
  4. Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    By the term "Bible" you mean Bible translation.

    Some countries do not have multiple translations to choose from.
    Hmm...
    So would you consider a translation based on the CT to be the Word of God? Would you consider the faith of believing reads to be somewhat defective because of their Bible version?

    What about people from other countries who can read and understand English as a second or third language. Would it be a priority of yours to convince them to have a TR-based Bible translation --or even the KJV itself. If so, why?
    _______________________________________________________

    Returning to the subject of KJV Onlyism in countries in which English is the native language.

    All TR-based translations in English are not identical, as you should know. There is variation. How much deviation from the 1769 Blayney version would you be willing to accept (or 'countenance' in KJV-speak)? Do you consider the Blayney edition the final perfected form of the KJV -- or do you think the KJV can be improved?
     
  5. franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    For those that might know: In what ways has KJVOism had a negative effect on mission efforts? Can you think of any positive effects that KJVOism has had towards missions?
     
  6. Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    38,982
    Likes Received:
    2,615
    Faith:
    Baptist
    If the priority of a KJO is to prove the KJV to his new flock - that I would see as a negative.
     
  7. Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist


    You are assuming here though that the KJVO position has the correct view on just which passages should have been seen as being in the originals though, and what if that view is wrong?

    And would you say that the scholars who translated versions such as the 1984 Niv and the Nasb were inferior to those who did the 1611 Kjv?

    That they did not have better access to sources and tech, and in understand the culture and the original languages today?

    or did the Oxford scholars have "inspiration" from God to allow them to translate into English a perect text?
     
  8. Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    That would basically mean that his take would be that the Holy Spirit can ONLY use the Kjv to speak to sinners and saints, as He is limited, and cannot work through any other version!