Questions KJVOs Can't Answer.

Good questions, Skan!

 

They can give answers. They will be the same answers we have seen all along.

 

And they will be rejected by the Bible critics just as well.All of this "cut and paste" malarkey grows old...Come up with somthing original can ya?!

All of those foolish questions have been answered time after time after time.

 

Well, I for one have been reading this debate since January. I have seen these questions asked many times, but have never seen them answered directly. It would be refreshing to read an answer, absent attacks on the people who asked them. Just answer the question, if your answer is true it will stand and that would settle the issues inquired about.

 

Listen to the answers at http://www.ankerberg.org/TV/ankjasrd.html

Then scroll down to WHICH ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE IS THE BEST and listen to the scholars on both sides speak for themselves.

 

I have been asking these types of questions since I got out of the cultic type of KJVOism. I would love for some KJVO to answer this.

The only thing that I have read from the KJVO Camp concerning these types of questions are double standards, all out lies(refer to Gipp, Riplinger and Ruckman's garbage), silence, or answers that are not really answers.

Come on guys, give it a try!

In Christ,
David J.

 

D. A. Waite refuted WHICH ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE IS THE BEST. You need to get a book, "Foes of the King James Bible Refuted" by D. A. Waite.

 

They will have to study the issues first. When they do they will realize how much they have been lied to and deceived. We need to pray for them. They will distrust those who have lied to them and will be in a land of nothingness until they find better fellowship.

A few years ago a man I began to meet with left a Christian cultish group and he had a hard time. His children were ostracized and the children of the others were told not associate with his children. Thankfully he is doing very well today.

 

Did you listen to the debate on the internet?

 

Q - Where was the word of God prior to 1611?

A – Where it’s always been. Ps 119:89 “For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.” As far as an English translation of God's Word, the Word of God was represented by earlier translations that were true to the majority of extant manuscripts.


Q - What Hebrew word is translated "heaven" in Genesis 1:1 in the KJV and is the Hebrew singular, dual, or plural?

A – Shamayim/singular


Q - If the NKJV is wrong to not translate "logos" in Matthew 5:37 is the KJV equally wrong for not translating "logos" in Hebrews 5:11?

A – Unless I misunderstand the question, the King James Version does translate “logos” in Hebrews 5:11.


Q - From which Greek text is the NKJV New Testament text translated?

A – It is basically the same text as the King James Version. It is the Greek text of Erasmus as popularized and slightly modified by Stephanus and Beza.


Q - If the KJV has not been changed since 1611, other than to correct printer's errors and typos, why does Genesis 8:13 read "one" in the 1611 and "first" in the 1769? Or change "fourescore yeere" to "eightieth year?" Or change "God" to "LORD" in 2 Chronicles 28:11? Or "children" to "men" in Ezra 2:22? Or "God" to "LORD" in Isaiah 49:13? Or change "amongst" to "among" 36 times? Or "Apollo" to "Apollos" twice? Or "lift" to "lifted" 50 times? And "hand" to "hands" twice, and "hands" to "hand" once? And "helps in governments" to "helps, governments" in 1 Corinthians 12:28? And "the Lord" to "his Lord" in John 15:20? Or "the Lord" to "our Lord" in 2 Thess 2:14?

A – There were many changes made throughout the history of the King James Version. Each change was made with the objective of improving the translation and making it more closely reflect the originals. Each edition brought closer the final goal of having a authentic, corrected Bible.

 

Did you listen to the debate on the internet? </font>[/QUOTE]I have the transcript from them and read it. I saw it on TV in 1995. I disagree with MVs advocates because they answered FALSELY!

James White said: Well, it's an amazing act of grace that God has deemed it proper to communicate with man who gave His word to inspired prophets and apostles."

D. A. Waite refuted James White by saying: "This is theological error. .... How could men be somehow 'breathed out' by God?" Dr. Waite explained more about that in his book.

James White said: "we, as Christian scholars today,.."

Dr. Waite said: "James White considers himself a scholar. ... I do not think he is very scholarly to call the prophets and apostles "inspired" instead of the Words of God. Inspiration refers to words, not men." Waite explained more about "scholars" in his book.

That's enough. Get a book and read it.

 

What? No answers, Askjo?

 

No one wants to play your Alexadrian games..You have no final authority and you want others to sink to your level..Get a life!!

 

Did you listen to the debate on the internet? </font>[/QUOTE]I have the transcript from them and read it. I saw it on TV in 1995. I disagree with MVs advocates because they answered FALSELY!

</font>[/QUOTE]What did they say that was wrong and that you would agree with Riplinger on?

What are your thoughts about Gail Riplinger's substance, if you call it that?

What you wrote earlier is nothing of substance. Give me the entire quote in its context. I hope you are not being like Riplinger and trying to build a case based on quotes out of context and prooftexting. You noticed that several on the panel accused her of not telling the truth.