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!

KJVO, which of these have you read?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by TC, Sep 9, 2004.

?
  1. ASV 1901

    75.0%
  2. NASB

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. NKJV

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. HCSB

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. NLT

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  6. RSV/NRSV

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. NIV

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  8. WEB

    16.7%
  9. Other

    8.3%
  10. None of the above

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. TC

    TC Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,244
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Eleven voters so far. Thanks.

    results:

    ASV 1901: 45% (5)
    NASB: 73% (8)
    NKJV: 73% (8)
    HCSB: 9% (1)
    NLT: 18% (2)
    RSV/NRSV: 45% (5)
    NIV: 64% (7)
    WEB: 0% (0)
    Other: 73% (8)
    None of the above: 9% (1)
     
  2. TC

    TC Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,244
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This is a poll for the purpose of gathering information. Knock off the KJVO vs. MV stuff here. It is not needed.
     
  3. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0

    It is the doctrine that you espouse that is false, not the label.

    Yet you still have failed to give me one single scriptural verse that supports your claim. If your claim is scriptural, then you must certainly be able to give me scriptural support. Lacking scriptural support, you claim is clearly false doctrine.

    Absolutely. Your belief in regards to the KJVO, though well-meaning and sincere, is a clear example of calling good evil and evil good. The fact that so many people like you are falling into the trap of the single-translation-only doctrine is a testament to the fact that people need to become more knowledgeable of scripture.
     
  4. Plain ol' Ralph

    Plain ol' Ralph New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Messages:
    686
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I want to know what God has to say to me, I read the AV 1611, if i want to know what man thinks God said, I would have to read other versions, but why waste precious time? [​IMG]
     
  5. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    Every word. Hence the question: "Which MV's have you read word for word.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    And I responded to your above question. To which others responded to what I had said. Tell them to "knock it off". I will respect you and your request, and won't post anymore in your thread, as I have not read any other version word for word. My point to you in relation to your initial question and reason for the poll, was/is we do not need to read them all word for word, to be able to see that they cannot be trusted, nor are they the accurate words of God in our language. The reason I had made this point to you, was because you made it very clear your reason for the poll which is:

    --------------------------------------------------
    Some KJVO's put down MV's at the same time they claim they never read them. So, I would like to know what MV's you have read word for word for yourself.
    --------------------------------------------------


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  6. mioque

    mioque New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Plain ol' Ralph
    "I read the AV 1611"
    ''
    You do? Plenty of people that read the 1769 update of the AV 1611 around here, but you would be the first KJVO on this board that actually reads the AV 1611.
     
  7. Plain ol' Ralph

    Plain ol' Ralph New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Messages:
    686
    Likes Received:
    0
    I find it very intriguing to see where our English language has been updated in spelling and how the form of literature was in type of yesteryear.

    I know the AV 1611 is in Germain type, but the best thing is that the AV 1611 still says the same thing, contrary to some updates, but not including the Cambridge 1762 edition, which follows exactly the 1611, of course excepting the spelling updates.

    I also find it enhances the reading as it causes the reader to examine the Word much closer than the newer editions.

    I guess I'm just weird, but I'm saved weird as I may be!!

    I sense the Kindred Spirit with you, Sister Michelle, thank you for your stand!
     
  8. GrannyGumbo

    GrannyGumbo <img src ="/Granny.gif">

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank God for you, Plain ol'Ralph, that you can see what I see in sister Michelle!
     
  9. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you Bro. Plain ol Ralph, and Sister Granny for your compliments and kind words towards me. I very much appreciated/needed them. May we continue to glorify our Lord Jesus Christ always.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  10. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I see the same thing. It is called false doctrine. We're called as Christians to stand firmly against false doctrine. What is false doctrine? Doctrine that cannot be supported by scripture. Michelle's position cannot be supported by scripture. It is therefore false doctrine.
     
  11. GrannyGumbo

    GrannyGumbo <img src ="/Granny.gif">

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Michelle is not a false doctrine, nor is she any of the other many mean things she's been called. And just s'pose what we believe about our Holy Bibles is false, (which it isn't), but just say it is, (but it's not), what's the harm of us loving and believing by faith, we truly have God's very words in our hand? Who have we hurt? After all, everyone here says they LOVE that blessed old Book. But if the ones who don't hold to this are wrong, aye-yi-yi, I sure wouldn't wanna be in your shoes! Besides, there's only ONE Bible. So what's the fuss?
     
  12. natters

    natters New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    GrannyGumbo said "Besides, there's only ONE Bible"

    No there isn't. I have several myself. Some are even older than the KJV.
     
  13. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0

    If she can't support her doctrine with scripture, it's false doctrine.

    The false doctrine is NOT that a person chooses to use only a KJV (or any other version, for that matter). That is perfectly acceptible, and if you, GG, choose to rely solely the KJV as scripture, I support you, and will defend anyone vehemently if they try to take you KJV away from you. The false doctrine is the assertion that ONLY the KJV is to be the SOLE AUTHORITATIVE translation of scripture for ALL PEOPLE. Since that assertion is without scriptural support, then it goes beyond the boundaries of personal spiritual conviction, and crosses the line of false doctrine.
    People who adhere to false doctrine hurt themselves, mostly.
     
  14. mioque

    mioque New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Michelle is not a false doctrine"
    ''
    [​IMG] I think everybody around here will agree with you on that.
     
  15. AVL1984

    AVL1984 <img src=../ubb/avl1984.jpg>

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    7,504
    Likes Received:
    62
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Granny Gumbo, Michelle definitely is not a false doctrine, and nobody is trying to make her or you or anyone else leave the KJV as their version of choice/authority. But calling people who don't hold to her position of kjVERSION Onlyism "deceived", "unable to understand", questioning their salvation, their intelligence or their service to the Lord is just plain wrong and totally uncalled for. :( When she tries to present her points, she does not do so well at all, much to her own shame. As I have stated here many times, I'm KJV preferred and I defend both the KJV and the MV's. Why? Because I have studied the materials, the attacks and counter attacks, and see the both sides intentionally and unintentionally misrepresent each other on many things. Yet when people do present evidence against the KJV it is always summarily dismissed by KJVO's and never researched or acknowledged as the truth that it is. :rolleyes:
    As stated, I have nothing against Michelle or you or anyone that uses the KJV or the MV's. They are all my brothers and sisters in the Lord if they are saved. [​IMG] To try and say that people who use the MV's are unsaved, unintelligent or unGodly and decieved, though , is just not true, and ANYONE who says it is the truth should be ashamed of themselves whether it would be me, you or Michelle or anyone else. :eek:

    AVL1984
     
  16. GrannyGumbo

    GrannyGumbo <img src ="/Granny.gif">

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would rather have someone tell me, out of love, I'm 'deceived' or 'unable to understand', than to have the ugly things hurled the way many here have done to her.

    A dumb ol'housewife, whose only spent 40 married years raising babies, tending to the mister, etc, can understand her points perfectly. The only shame I see, is the attacks against her/us.

    How do you seperate the person from the thing? Did God burn the sodomy...or the sodomite? To hate KJVO is to hate the one who truly believes, by faith, that what he holds in his hand is God's very words.

    When many of you come against her, it raises my hackles, but I do not know how to combat it, so I start praying as hard as I know how. You know, instead of attacking her, if you'd just treat her the way you treat me, could mean all the difference in the world.

    Peace [​IMG]
     
  17. AVL1984

    AVL1984 <img src=../ubb/avl1984.jpg>

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    7,504
    Likes Received:
    62
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Many have tried to treat her with the same dignity. It could be that in her presentation of her case, she has been abrasive, offensive and attacking. I wouldn't consider you dumb in the least, Granny. Having been in the position of a KJVO for many years (over 30) I can understand her position. But, I can also see where she needs to improve her ability to present her case without such vitrol and misrepresentation of others. Those who use the MV's are not deceived. Their chosen version of the Bible teaches just as clearly the doctrines taught in the KJV, and the fundamentals of the Christian faith as well. To say these people are deceived is not only an untruth, but is divisive. For them to present evidence against the KJV as being the only word of God is justified, as there were other perfectly good versions of the Word of God before that are just as equally the Word of God as the KJV. In fact, I know of many who use the Bishops Bible instead of the KJV. I see the shame of her attacks and vitrol accusing others of being misled, not able to understand, deceived, etc. because it is untrue. On top of that, they are not presented by her in the spirit of love. No one wants her to stop using the MV's, but those who use them want her to quit lying about them and their spiritual condition as if she were God. She is not, nor does she know their hearts. You have had more grace in your presentation most of the time, and therefore, you have earned the respect of many, myself included. As for us, you know where I stand. I've stated it many times, and I know where you stand. I have no problem with that, and believe that we have come to an understanding. God continue to bless you, sister. [​IMG]

    AVL1984
     
  18. TC

    TC Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,244
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Since this is now left its original intent as an information gathering poll and is degrading into just another KJVO vs. MV argument with personal attacks and all, I ask this thread be closed.
     
  19. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What granny probably means is, whether it's written in 'ye olde King Jamesh' or 'listen, ya'll, this is it, I mean, this is what da Lawd sez', it's pretty much the same thing. It's God's word.
     
  20. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    This topic is closed at the request of the author.
     
Loading...