My Biblical "One-Versionism" stance. That would be KJV.

I am sure it was an oversight which we all have done. Now back to the discussion.

Bro Tony

 

AVL,

What were the "perfect"ly acceptable versions? [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]As is typical with many KJVO's, you've avoided the question, or tried to answer with a question. Games again??? What a pity, but I wouldn't expect less. Very typical of someone who has no answer.

There are a long list of perfectly acceptable versions (and YOU are taking my terminology out of context, which again is a typical KJVO tactic) before the KJV. I will not do your homework in listing the Bibles that the KJV translators used to assist in translating. You're playing games, and I've already told you in another thread that I'm not playing your games.

AVL1984

 

Boy, talk abut taking a verse out of context. The full texts of 19-21 are as follows:

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 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.

In context, what we're being told here is that Scripture came about not by the prophet's own interpretation, but by those prophets being moved by the Holy Spirit.

To make the claim that this verse supports single-versionism one must twist scripture so much that the intended message is practically ignored.

So let's try this again. Please show me scriptural support for single-translation-onlyism.

 

Apparently not what it means in the KJV!

Ludicrous!

AVL1984 </font>[/QUOTE]AVL,

I am sorry to see that you have not a good word to say. I think you should take a minute to pray, get your heart humble and then respond. I will take my own advice and do my best in this area also! </font>[/QUOTE]I do believe you need to take your own advice, mj. My heart is right, and my answers direct. As far as humble goes, may I respectfully inquire &lt;attack deleted&gt;.

AVL1984

[ September 11, 2004, 01:37 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

My my my! Who said it doesn't matter when we read the Bible? I've not said it, and I don't believe anyone else here has said it either.

AVL1984

 

mjwegs42 said "Two people chose to laugh at taking the Bible in context."

No, that's not why I laughed.

 

I'd like e-mail notification.
Thank you.

 

mj, I don't see two people laughing at taking the Bible in context. I see two people pointing out that you seem to take it out of context and that this point is laughable when you say we ought to keep things in context. Intellect hasn't left the topic at all. But, then again, neither has the ignorance that many KJVO's bring to the table.

AVL1984

 

There should be a checkbox below the posts in one of the frames that says "email notification". This will notify you when there is a response in the thread.

AVL1984

 

There should be a checkbox below the posts in one of the frames that says "email notification". This will notify you when there is a response in the thread.

AVL1984

 

Thank you Dr. Bob for being so gracious in explaining. I find that I have not been so gracious to mj in explaining this. I appreciate it. And I also apologize to mj for not being a little more gracious in my posting.

AVL1984

 

mj,

The problem is, the scripture you posted does not support one version onlyism. There were many versions before the KJV, and many of these versions assisted the KJV translators in their translation. These versions were also the Word of God, preserved, acceptable for use, and blessed of Him. Scriptures nowhere support the notion that God would preserve His Word in one English version.

AVL1984