Non-KJBO lies

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

So what do Spanish speakers, French speakers. Germand speakers do? Must they learn English? All of those languages are different from English. How do we know which language to trust?!?

Maybe God actually has inspired the tranlators of the Louis II French Bible and we don't really have the true Bible in English?

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by C4K:
So what do Spanish speakers, French speakers. Germand speakers do? Must they learn English? All of those languages are different from English. How do we know which language to trust?!?

Why is it so easy to trust a non-extant Greek autograph in which there is absolutely no way to EVER verify or test. Why is that easier than trusting a single Book that rocked the world like no other book has even come close to doing.

KJV Matthew 7:15-16, 20
15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

That is not very subjective, unless we revise history.

Maybe God actually has inspired the tranlators of the Louis II French Bible and we don't really have the true Bible in English?

It is possible. According to God's word, how would we know?

Lacy

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

So you admit that you MAY not have God's inspired Word?

 

[LarryN]

RaptureReady wrote:

And don't say we refer back to the original source because you know very well, THERE ARE NRIGINALS, so you cannot be 100% correct.

And of course KJVO's can go today and examine the original work of the Translation Committee to verify that each & every word in the KJV held in their hand is correct.

Wait, do you mean to say that the originals of the KJV aren't known to exist for comparison?............

 

[GrannyGumbo]

That boy must be stubborn as a mule if he stands up to you GrannyGumbo. I wonder where he got dat?

"He got it from his pa, who is from Missouri!

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by C4K:
So you admit that you MAY not have God's inspired Word?

Isn't that the MV position in a nutshell?

James White (King James Only Controversy p. 36):

"All of these things [scribal errors] contributed to the simple fact that there is not a single handwritten manuscript of the Bible, in Greek or Hebrew, that does not contain, somewhere, an error, an oversight, a mistake. To err is human."

We either do or we don't.

KJV Matthew 11:3-6
3 And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?
4 Jesus answered and said unto them, Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see:

FRUIT, not man's wisdom, not man's puny intervention. FRUIT was the criteris for evaluating the validity of Christ, His prophets, and His Word.

5 The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them.
6 And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

I must say I amazed at the openness with which you admit that in your opinion no one has the Bible except English speakers.

Since faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God that mean that only English speakers can be saved?

 

[natters]

RaptureReady said "Come on folks, God gave us a brain between those two ears we got, well..., yeah, all of us have a brain. Use common sense here, having more than one bible is confusing."

The KJV was not the first Bible. People had Bibles before the KJV came along. They had the preserved word of God, and the KJV came along and was different from what they already had. Common sense, as you said.

 

[natters]

Lacy said "Isn't that the MV position in a nutshell?"

No, absolutely not.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
Isn't that the MV position in a nutshell?

First, your claim of an "MV" position is a false one, since the people you refer to (like myself) don't hold any translation as being more inspired than another, be it the KJV, NIV, Geneva, or Darby.

Second, no, it is not the "MV" position in a nutshell. It's the version-onlyist false witness of the "MV" position in a nutshell.

The notion that God came out with a "new" Bible after the original manuscripts were written is blatant heresy and rather Mormonesque.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by C4K:
I must say I amazed at the openness with which you admit that in your opinion no one has the Bible except English speakers.

Since faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God that mean that only English speakers can be saved?

I never admitted any such thing. Everyone on the earth has access to the Bible because it is extant! If the autograph-only position is true then anyone who holds it by default admits that not only do non-English speakers not have the Bible, but neither does ANYONE else! The only "perfect Bible" (Autographs) are lost.

Lacy

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Well, does someone have to know English to get saved?

"Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" and the Word of God is only in English.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by Johnv:
First, your claim of an "MV" position is a false one, since the people you refer to (like myself) don't hold any translation as being more inspired than another, be it the KJV, NIV, Geneva, or Darby.

Second, no, it is not the "MV" position in a nutshell. It's the version-onlyist false witness of the "MV" position in a nutshell.

Do you or do you not agree with James White that there is NO perfect Bible, anywhere without one single mistake? After all. "To err is human."

Lacy

 

[Lacy Evans]

Does someone have to know Ancient Greek to get saved?

"Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" and the Word of God is only in Greek.

<edited at poster's request>

[ August 06, 2004, 03:57 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

[Pastor KevinR]

Is it better for non English speakers to learn to read the KJV, in older English than the very reliable Original languages which God chose to inspire His Word in?
I know the claim as been made that we do not have the Originals, to which I agree! However, we have with very high accuracy the readings of the Originals. If it was good enough for the KJV translators, it's good enough for me.

 

[Pastor KevinR]

<Deleted by moderator. Post was in reply to a corrected post above and did not fit after the correction was made.>

[ August 06, 2004, 03:58 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

[Pastor KevinR]

Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
Do you or do you not agree with James White that there is NO perfect Bible, anywhere without one single mistake?

Lacy

of course the Word of God is perfect. It was also perfect in 1610. Where exactly was the Word of God in English before the KJV? The perfect Word existed before 1611, as well as after. "Forever settled"

 

[LarryN]

Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Johnv:
First, your claim of an "MV" position is a false one, since the people you refer to (like myself) don't hold any translation as being more inspired than another, be it the KJV, NIV, Geneva, or Darby.

Second, no, it is not the "MV" position in a nutshell. It's the version-onlyist false witness of the "MV" position in a nutshell.

Do you or do you not agree with James White that there is NO perfect Bible, anywhere without one single mistake? After all. "To err is human."

Lacy </font>[/QUOTE]well, I don't believe that fallible humans are capable of producing a perfect, flawless translation. To me, to believe otherwise is to place one's faith in the creation (man), rather than in the Creator.

Does the idea of no man-made translation being perfect imperil your faith? If so, why?

BTW, of course God's Word is perfect. It has been "forever settled in Heaven".

 

[RaptureReady]

Originally posted by C4K:
Well, does someone have to know English to get saved?

See, here is another common sense answer, No.

I do believe that there are Bibles out there that are from the TR. These are also God's word, but I don't know for sure if they contain the Old Testament or not. Either way, if they are translated from the TR, and agree 100% with the KJB, which is from the TR, then it is the word of God.

 

[natters]

RaptureReady said "I do believe that there are Bibles out there that are from the TR. These are also God's word, but I don't know for sure if they contain the Old Testament or not. Either way, if they are translated from the TR, and agree 100% with the KJB, which is from the TR, then it is the word of God."

But NONE "agree 100% with the KJB". Not even the TR agrees 100% with the KJV. So how can the be God's word, and how can God's word be in anything except English?