Once again...the 1610 English scriptural authority was...?

Are you as wimpy when you are trying to get into
a better parking stall as you are when it comes to witnessing?

 

Ho hum...

Name calling, statments about parking stalls ( :confused: )...

Still no answers....

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

 

KJVO:kjbo see Matthew 12:34b even in the Anglican Version.

 

Either the perfect word of God existed in English before 1611, or it didn't.

If it did, then the KJV was unnecessary because the English speaking people *already* had the perfect word of God.

If it didn't, then God failed to preserve His perfect word for the English speaking people before 1611.

So logic impales the KJVO advocate on the horns of a dilemma: either the KJV was uneccessary or God failed.

 

psr.2, why can't you just answer the original question? Why do you have to be like you're being?

 

Might I ask whom you are to be passing judgement on anyone? :eek: It doesn't seem to me that God died and put you in charge. :eek: :eek: You might want to take your own advice, friend.

AVL1984

 

It is???? Then tell me, why the differences in the Cambridge and the Oxford editions? Which one is the VERY WORDS OF GOD???? Also, does that include the words in italics, parenthesis, etc? You know...we're not supposed to add or take away according to the KJVO's!

AVL1984

 

I hate to say it, but it would be better for you to quit posting and leave us to question whether or not you are a foolish person than to keep posting and remove all doubt.
:rolleyes:
AVL1984

 

Because he/she is apparently incapable of carrying on an adult conversation. Trying to deflect the issues and trying to hijack a thread is proof of such.

AVL1984

 

What does that have to do with the KJV debate?!?!?!

 

Once again we find robycop with his version bickering. Have you had a chance to look at that scripture I asked you to discuus about three months ago?

Probably, but I've had a lot going on the last 3 months and don't remember the specific thread. If you care to repeat it, go ahead so we can prove you wrong once again.


No I didn't think so you are too busy trying to save the world from the KJB.

Actually, from the false KJVO myth and other false "isms" which is the main work Jesus has called me to do.


How long has it been since you personally lead a soul to Christ?

Two days ago, at work.
Do you spend more time here on this board than witnessing to lost people about the Saviour?

No, I spend surprisingly little time on these boards. Since the purveyors of bunk repeat the same ole chants over & over, I pretty well have the replies memorized, & can type'em pretty quickly

AND, BTW...Who made YOU the judge of how I spend my time?


Sure you do because you and others like you feel so powerful behind your keyboard.

Actually, that's none of your business...but if that's all you have to talk about, here...

|^|^|^|^|^|^|^|^|^|

There's your very own gossip fence.


Why not go down to the grocery store nearest you and give a tract to the 90 lb. girl behind the counter.

Done it more than a few times...what have YOU done for God lately? I can guess you've done some things AGAINST Him by spreading the KJVO lie.


While you're at it tell her what Jesus Christ did for you.
That would be out of the question huh? Too confrontational for you?

Just 2 weeks ago, I had to take over 2 hours "deprogramming" a neighbor stuck in two false doctrines...salvation by works AND KJVO.


Better take a minute to see just what the Great Commission was. It wasn't to spend all your time here.

And it CERTAINLY wasn't to be spreading a false doctrine made by a known cult official.

 

psr.2, if you continue your mindless rants, your stay here will be very short. Care to answer the question this topic is about...WHERE WAS THE WORD OF GOD IN ENGLISH IN 1610 AND EARLIER?

 

PSR.2:Are you as wimpy when you are trying to get into
a better parking stall as you are when it comes to witnessing?

BUT...Do YOU know the difference between witnessing and ACCOSTING? Do you try to tactfully steer a conversation toward JESUS, or do you simply get in someone's face in the MOSLEM manner?

Now...Where was the word of God in English in 1610 and earlier?

 

psr.2:I have shown you the stupidity of that question and yet you have wrapped all of your faith in it and are wearing it like a banner.
Typical for a KJV OPPOSER.

But YOU answer a legitimate question with a brainless rant that has nothing to do with the question...TYPICAL KJVO

 

--------------------------------------------------
Now...Where was the word of God in English in 1610 and earlier?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This question isn't being answered because it is irrelevent to this issue of today. The question should rather be: "Where is God's word today in English". Then you would have abundant answers. You see, we did not live then, we live now. Do you understand yet robycop?

And to your statement that you have proven the KJBO side wrong. You couldn't be further from the truth. The truth cannot be proven wrong, as it is the truth.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

C4K:What does that have to do with the KJV debate?!?!?!

Thank you for trying to get the discussion back on topic. Now, perhaps someone, especially a KJVO, will answer the question, asked by Cix last week...WHERE WAS THE WORD OF GOD IN ENGLISH IN 1610 AND EARLIER?

I gave MY answer in the initial post of this topic...If the KJVOs don't wanna answer the question, perhaps they'd like to discuss my answer.

FAILURE TO ANSWER IS A BIG NAIL IN THE KJVONLYISM COFFIN!

 

There you go again.

Playing the irrelevant card. Honestly michelle get some new material rather than the same old evasive ploy.

The question is totally relevant to the KJVO position because of their interpretation of Psalm 12 (which is also my interpretation BTW) and that the Word (or words) of God being preserved by God for each generation as our final authority.

My belief is that He did preserve it, every jot and tittle, in the form of the Traditional Texts of the Greek (TR) and Hebrew (Masora) which is both scriptural and reasonable.

Where then or what is the “preserved” words of God in the English language in 1610.

There are possibly thousands of people reading these posts. If you cannot answer the inquiry then you will lose all credibility in spite of your “irrelevant” mantra, in fact the more evasive you become the more people will realize that in reality you have no answer to this question revolving around the pivotal doctrine of your interpretation of Psalm 12.

My answer fits the both the question and Psalm 12 perfectly, therefore people will respond positively to it rather than yours which apparently is none existant.

HankD

[ August 23, 2004, 10:42 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

michelle said:

This question isn't being answered because it is irrelevent to this issue of today.

Or, put another way, because the lunatics set the rules for the asylum.

 

--------------------------------------------------
What was it? Why was it revised, replaced, etc.?

MY answer...Every valid English Bible made before 1611. And they were revised/replaced according to the beliefs of those in power at a given time.
--------------------------------------------------


Please refer to the preface of the King James Bible. They make it very clear why THEY decided to make a new one. In short, they looked to the Hebrew and the Greek. The Bibles prior to the 1611 translation, were all the people had at that time and those people believed and had the word of God perfectly in that time. As God gradually provided his words for the English speaking people, through various translators, as He so willed and saw fit. They were the very words of God for those people, and at that time, but eventually many felt there were corruptions in it(conviction of the Holy Spirit?)and desired a new translation. God provided a better and more accurate translation with the 1611, to which he has preserved unto this very day. God is not doing a new thing, and reversing what he already provided. God is not taking away verses of scripture, from what He provided accurately 400 years ago. This is not how God works, as is evidenced in History. His word is refined, not destroyed, nor taken away, unless of course it is by the devils doing. We today, do not have an excuse.

I have answered you, and this is not the first time I have either. So please, stop false accusing many of not answering your questions. You just don't like the answer, or you disagree with it. Either way, I have answered this.

Now you can answer this question, where can one find the word of God perfectly in our own language today? If you cannot, please give scriptural support for this belief.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Michelle said "Now you can answer this question, where can one find the word of God perfectly in our own language today?"

Do you not understand? That question is based on a premise - a premise that God perfectly preserves his word in a word-for-word perfect manner. That premise is based on an interpretation of certain scriptures. Those scriptures did not change meaning in 1611 (God's eternal truth is unchanging). Thus, the reason we ask "Where was the word of God in English in 1610 and earlier?" is not simply for historical interest, but to expose the fundamental faulty assumptions of your premise - if your premise is true today, it had to be true in 1610 as well. If it was not true in 1610, it is not true today, for God's promise was fulfilled in 1610 despite your premise being false - thus your whole premise, and approach to this issue, is wrong.