-
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!
Satan’s lie, of King James Onlyism
- Thread starter stilllearning
- Start date
- Status
Yes, Better to use an electric dryer where no one can see it.
I learned this the hard way.
HankD
pilgrim2009
New Member
William Grady said it well
The problem with the KJO crowd is that they don't recognize that most of us have no problem with the KJV.
Harold Garvey
New Member
The Bible admonishes us to turn away from profane babblers, go figure this one out from your favorite version.:type:
What ignorance to think that ignoring some one equals ignorance.
I have found the KJV to be the most reliable over any other version. I suppose that makes me an "RKJVO":laugh:
I will admit other versions cause me to study more, but I always end up with the most reliable.
You bunch of bulliers have your fun, but my placing some on the ignore list makes my BB experience much more peaceful and the Bible does say "Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God". I wonder what people call the others? What catagory should we fall in? My ignore list hewlps me to be at peace with otherwise contentious people.:godisgood:
Harold Garvey
New Member
It was your underwear with the skid marls that offended anyone.:laugh:
Harold Garvey
New Member
If that were totally true then you wouldn't get so upset with those who stick with the KJV as the most reliable.
I have to say your arguement lacks comprehensible consideration in the event that you constantly are labeling people who stick with the KJV with this slant called "KJO" against their person. This is very telling of the spirit behind this.
We read aloud verse by verse in our minstry with w reward to thise who are willing to stand up and read. For clarity purposes we only use the KJV. Some bring in other versions and we're all trying to follow along with the reading, not figure out which is best or what manuscripts the version came from. Our purpose is to familiarize new converts with the Scriptures, not confound their chances of memorizing the Bible. Introduction of other versions into the mix complicates this time and causes us to spend some of our alotted time to explain to the young what the Bible is actually saying.
Reliability takes precedence here, preference is for a person to decide on their own and to themselves.
pilgrim2009
New Member
With permission to duplicate up to 3000 words for non-commericial,non-salable or non-financial purposes from Final Authority A Christians Guide to the King James Bible by DR William Grady ex-Roman Catholic of 20 years I shall from page 195 last paragraph.
I am glad you have no problem with the KJV Bible and you should have no problem with this comment from the book above.
DR William Grady says:
Last edited by a moderator:
Harold Garvey
New Member
Harold Garvey
New Member
I was just witnessing to a sodomite that kept ranting and raving saying the same repetitons accusing Christians of being hateful and saying "DOWN WITH HATEFUL CHRISTIANS". I agreed with him and said anyone who comes across hateful is not behaving as a Christian should. He then railed upon me with the same ranting and raving. After a few moments of giving him both sides of the same truth about the end results of sodomy and what the Lord says about it he could take no more, he left.
Did I rant and rave? Nope. I just kept proclaiming the same truth and he kept egtting madder and madder. Insanity has a way of entrapping a man into thinking that doing the same thing and expecting a different result.
Sometimes, no, all the time, when one rants and raves they do more harm to their cause then those that disgree with them.
Did I rant and rave? Nope. I just kept proclaiming the same truth and he kept egtting madder and madder. Insanity has a way of entrapping a man into thinking that doing the same thing and expecting a different result.
Sometimes, no, all the time, when one rants and raves they do more harm to their cause then those that disgree with them.
ccrobinson
Active Member
Harold Garvey said:
You ignore people, but call yourself a peacemaker? Ridiculous.
Harold - Here's a blog article that you might find interesting:
http://www.challies.com/archives/articles/sharing-the-gospel-in-the-gay-village.php
pilgrim2009
New Member
Well no but there is technology in space to see your house.It is earth google if one has your address but the public is limited to what they can see because it gets blurry.Now if you are in the government they have the ability to do this.
I believe there are some real conspiracies and some are dreamed up.
God bless you.
Steven.
pilgrim2009
New Member
My final Authority is seated in the heavenlies and he doesn't use the KJV.
pilgrim2009
New Member
Corruption.
This is a very interesting article source at bottom.The title of this thread should be reversed.
The Vaticanus (B):
The use of recent technology, such as the vidicon camera, reveals that the Vaticanus has been altered by at least two hands, one being as late as the 12th century. The Vaticanus agrees with the Textus Receptus only about 50% of the time. It differs from the Majority Greek in nearly 8,000 places, amounting to about one change per verse. It omits several thousand key words from the Gospels, nearly 1000 complete sentences, and 500 clauses. It adds approximately 500 words, substitutes or modifies nearly 2000 and transposes word order in about 2000 places. It has nearly 600 readings that do not occur in any other manuscript. These affect almost 1000 words.
Linguistic scholars have observed that the Vaticanus is classical and Platonic Greek, not the Koine Greek of the New Testament. Codicologists note that the Vaticanus was written on vellum scrolls (skin obtained from animals not yet born), and not papyrus codices, as were used among "the early Christians." The Vaticanus omits crucial parts of Mark and Luke. Theologians question its lack of use by anyone for 1300 years, then its "sudden" discovery in the Vatican in 1481. Protestant researches have never been permitted to examine the actual manuscript and work only from copies provided by the Vatican.
The Sinaiticus (Aleph):
The Sinaiticus, was so poorly executed that seven different hands of "textual critics" can be discerned as they tried to impose their views on this already corrupt manuscript. They twisted it like a nose of wax to meet their purposes at the time. It is no wonder that it was discarded, finally found in a wastebasket fourteen centuries after it was executed. Because of its blatant omissions and alterations, it lapsed into a wastebasket in a monastery, where it was "discovered" by Constantine von Tischendorf in the mid 1800's. It was kept by the Russian government from 1859-1933. Eastern Germany and Russia still retain parts of it. The fact that some pages were written on sheepskin and some on goatskin is a telling sign of its part Christian, part Heathen character.
There are 9000 changes from the Majority Text, amounting to one difference in every verse. It omits 4000 words from the Gospels, adds 1000, reposits 2000 and alters another 1000. It has approximately 1500 readings that appear in no other manuscript, this affects nearly 3000 words.
Not only do the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus manuscripts disagree with the Majority of manuscripts, but they do not agree with each other! The 8000 changes in Vaticanus and the 9000 changes in Sinaiticus are not the same changes. When their changes are added together, they alter the Majority Text in 13,000 places. This is two changes for every verse. Together they omit 4000 words, add 2000, transpose 3500, and modify 2000.
The Majority text
It is true that several thousand manuscripts have been discovered since 1611, some of which were dated between 350-380 A.D. whereas the Received Text's five manuscripts were from the 10th to 15th centuries. However, of the several thousand manuscripts discovered since 1611, the great majority (90-95%) agree with the Received Text.
The Majority Text is also known as the Received Text, Textus Receptus, Traditional Text, Universal Text, Byzantine Text, and other names. The Majority Text has passed down through time copied by people who fear God and believe the ultimate authority of His word. History shows that the Majority Text has the strongest claim of being the authentic representation of the original manuscripts.
The Majority Text is based on the vast majority (90-95%) of the 5000+ Greek manuscripts in existence. That is why it is also called the Majority Text.
The Majority Text is not mutilated with deletions, additions and amendments, as is the Minority Text.
The Majority Text agrees with the earliest versions of the Bible: Peshitta (AD150) Old Latin Vulgate (AD157), the Italic Bible (AD157) etc. These Bibles were produced some 200 years before the minority Egyptian codices favored by the Roman Church.
The Majority Text agrees with the vast majority of the 86,000+ citations from scripture by the early church fathers.
The Majority Text is untainted with Egyptian philosophy and unbelief.
The Majority Text strongly upholds the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith: the creation account in Genesis, the divinity of Jesus Christ, the virgin birth, the Saviour's miracles, his bodily resurrection, and the cleansing power of his blood! The Minority Text denies all these things.
We can have the confident assurance that the Word of God as it is found in the Majority Text New Testament is a trustworthy representation of the text as originally given. For the most part, the Majority Text follows the Greek manuscripts which were in widespread use for centuries. God continued to preserve His New Testament by guiding His people to use a text which, although in a printed form, nevertheless is God's Holy Word from eternity. May Christians reject the modern Greek texts and the versions which follow them, and use the Majority Text Greek New Testament which God has blessed for many centuries!
Where can you find the most accurate rendition of the Majority Text?
The Answer
As far as the New Testament books are concerned, we should use the Interlinear Greek English New Testament, because it is a transcription, not a translation.
There's a big difference between a transcription and a translation. A transcription is done word for word as close to the original as possible. But as soon as you start translating to a bible, you are interjection your own knowledge and your own opinions. That's why there's so much confusion when people start talking about, "Well what bible translation do I get?" Well, really you don't want any of them, what you really want is a transcription. A word for word transcription into the English language.
The Berry's Interlinear is the most accurate. It has the Greek text, and under each Greek word is the English equivalent. It also has the King James Version text in the columns on the same page, so you can compare the differences side by side. Be aware, there are Interlinear bibles based upon the Minority Text (based upon mainly 2 out of the 5,000 manuscripts found) which are corrupted, so make sure you get the Berry's edition.
"Interlinear Greek-English New Testament" (King James Version) with a Greek-English Lexicon and New Testament Synonyms, by George Ricker Berry, published by Baker Books. Originally published by Handy Book Company, Reading Pennsylvania, 1897.
(copied)
Also I just found someone - 2/26/2006 - with enough intelligence to agree with facts.
Revelation 22:14
"do his commandments" has been altered to "wash their robes," or similar wording, by the DR (adding "in the blood of the Lamb"-see Part 1 of this work), RV, Ne, NIV, NKJV marg., RSV, GN, LB, AMP, NASV, NEB, NWT, JB.
Again the TBS (58), Article 38 "Revelation 22:14 have provided an excellent resume of the evidence.
In favour of the modern textual critics are Aleph (4th cent.), A (5th cent.), about 15 cursives including 104 and 1006 (11th cent.), 2053 (12th) and 2020 (15th), the Coptic (Sahidic), Ethiopic and Latin Vulgate versions of the 4th-6th centuries and 5 Old Latin copies of the 9th-l3th centuries. The following fathers also support the modern reading: Athanasius (373 AD), Fulgentius (533 AD), Apringius (551 AD), Primasius (552 AD), a 6th century Ambrose and Haymo (841 AD).
The manuscripts which read "do his commandments" consist of the vast majority, including uncial 046, cursives 1, 82, 94, 1611, 1854, 1859, 2042, 2065, 2073, 2138, 2329, 2432 and more than 150 others. Also supporting the AV1611 are the Coptic (Bohairic) 3/4th cent.; the Harkelian and Philoxenian Syriac (6/7th cent.) and the Armenian (5th cent.) versions. Fathers in support of the AV1611 include Tertullian (220 AD), Cyprian (258 AD), Tyconius (380 AD), Andrew (614 AD) and Arethas (914 AD).
Obviously the weight of evidence vindicates the AV1611 reading, which is supported by Berry's Greek text.
Revelation 22:19
"book of life" has been altered to "tree(s) of life" by the RV, Ne, NIV, NKJV marg., RSV, GN, LB, AMP, NASV, NEB, NWT, JB.
Hills (3) p 202, (38) p 198, indicates that the AV1611 reading is found only in one or two Greek manuscripts, including Codex 141. All the remaining Greek manuscripts read with the modern textual critics, although Ruckman (57) Revelation p 606, refers to the modern reading as a non-existent "Alexandrian Conjecture." Hills stateS that the AV1611 reading is supported by the Latin Vulgate, including a very old manuscript designated F, the Bohairic version, Ambrose (397 AD) and the commentaries of Primasius (6th cent.) and Haymo (9th cent.).
Ruckman, however, (21) p 70, states that the reading "book of life" is found in the Bibles of the Waldenses, Albigenses and Gothic Christians (2nd-4th cent.). Thus, like the Johannine Comma, it merited its place in the Textus Receptus and hence in the Book of books-the AV1611.
Source: http://www.kjbible.net/emtv.htm
This is a very interesting article source at bottom.The title of this thread should be reversed.
The Vaticanus (B):
The use of recent technology, such as the vidicon camera, reveals that the Vaticanus has been altered by at least two hands, one being as late as the 12th century. The Vaticanus agrees with the Textus Receptus only about 50% of the time. It differs from the Majority Greek in nearly 8,000 places, amounting to about one change per verse. It omits several thousand key words from the Gospels, nearly 1000 complete sentences, and 500 clauses. It adds approximately 500 words, substitutes or modifies nearly 2000 and transposes word order in about 2000 places. It has nearly 600 readings that do not occur in any other manuscript. These affect almost 1000 words.
Linguistic scholars have observed that the Vaticanus is classical and Platonic Greek, not the Koine Greek of the New Testament. Codicologists note that the Vaticanus was written on vellum scrolls (skin obtained from animals not yet born), and not papyrus codices, as were used among "the early Christians." The Vaticanus omits crucial parts of Mark and Luke. Theologians question its lack of use by anyone for 1300 years, then its "sudden" discovery in the Vatican in 1481. Protestant researches have never been permitted to examine the actual manuscript and work only from copies provided by the Vatican.
The Sinaiticus (Aleph):
The Sinaiticus, was so poorly executed that seven different hands of "textual critics" can be discerned as they tried to impose their views on this already corrupt manuscript. They twisted it like a nose of wax to meet their purposes at the time. It is no wonder that it was discarded, finally found in a wastebasket fourteen centuries after it was executed. Because of its blatant omissions and alterations, it lapsed into a wastebasket in a monastery, where it was "discovered" by Constantine von Tischendorf in the mid 1800's. It was kept by the Russian government from 1859-1933. Eastern Germany and Russia still retain parts of it. The fact that some pages were written on sheepskin and some on goatskin is a telling sign of its part Christian, part Heathen character.
There are 9000 changes from the Majority Text, amounting to one difference in every verse. It omits 4000 words from the Gospels, adds 1000, reposits 2000 and alters another 1000. It has approximately 1500 readings that appear in no other manuscript, this affects nearly 3000 words.
Not only do the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus manuscripts disagree with the Majority of manuscripts, but they do not agree with each other! The 8000 changes in Vaticanus and the 9000 changes in Sinaiticus are not the same changes. When their changes are added together, they alter the Majority Text in 13,000 places. This is two changes for every verse. Together they omit 4000 words, add 2000, transpose 3500, and modify 2000.
The Majority text
It is true that several thousand manuscripts have been discovered since 1611, some of which were dated between 350-380 A.D. whereas the Received Text's five manuscripts were from the 10th to 15th centuries. However, of the several thousand manuscripts discovered since 1611, the great majority (90-95%) agree with the Received Text.
The Majority Text is also known as the Received Text, Textus Receptus, Traditional Text, Universal Text, Byzantine Text, and other names. The Majority Text has passed down through time copied by people who fear God and believe the ultimate authority of His word. History shows that the Majority Text has the strongest claim of being the authentic representation of the original manuscripts.
The Majority Text is based on the vast majority (90-95%) of the 5000+ Greek manuscripts in existence. That is why it is also called the Majority Text.
The Majority Text is not mutilated with deletions, additions and amendments, as is the Minority Text.
The Majority Text agrees with the earliest versions of the Bible: Peshitta (AD150) Old Latin Vulgate (AD157), the Italic Bible (AD157) etc. These Bibles were produced some 200 years before the minority Egyptian codices favored by the Roman Church.
The Majority Text agrees with the vast majority of the 86,000+ citations from scripture by the early church fathers.
The Majority Text is untainted with Egyptian philosophy and unbelief.
The Majority Text strongly upholds the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith: the creation account in Genesis, the divinity of Jesus Christ, the virgin birth, the Saviour's miracles, his bodily resurrection, and the cleansing power of his blood! The Minority Text denies all these things.
We can have the confident assurance that the Word of God as it is found in the Majority Text New Testament is a trustworthy representation of the text as originally given. For the most part, the Majority Text follows the Greek manuscripts which were in widespread use for centuries. God continued to preserve His New Testament by guiding His people to use a text which, although in a printed form, nevertheless is God's Holy Word from eternity. May Christians reject the modern Greek texts and the versions which follow them, and use the Majority Text Greek New Testament which God has blessed for many centuries!
Where can you find the most accurate rendition of the Majority Text?
The Answer
As far as the New Testament books are concerned, we should use the Interlinear Greek English New Testament, because it is a transcription, not a translation.
There's a big difference between a transcription and a translation. A transcription is done word for word as close to the original as possible. But as soon as you start translating to a bible, you are interjection your own knowledge and your own opinions. That's why there's so much confusion when people start talking about, "Well what bible translation do I get?" Well, really you don't want any of them, what you really want is a transcription. A word for word transcription into the English language.
The Berry's Interlinear is the most accurate. It has the Greek text, and under each Greek word is the English equivalent. It also has the King James Version text in the columns on the same page, so you can compare the differences side by side. Be aware, there are Interlinear bibles based upon the Minority Text (based upon mainly 2 out of the 5,000 manuscripts found) which are corrupted, so make sure you get the Berry's edition.
"Interlinear Greek-English New Testament" (King James Version) with a Greek-English Lexicon and New Testament Synonyms, by George Ricker Berry, published by Baker Books. Originally published by Handy Book Company, Reading Pennsylvania, 1897.
(copied)
Also I just found someone - 2/26/2006 - with enough intelligence to agree with facts.
Revelation 22:14
"do his commandments" has been altered to "wash their robes," or similar wording, by the DR (adding "in the blood of the Lamb"-see Part 1 of this work), RV, Ne, NIV, NKJV marg., RSV, GN, LB, AMP, NASV, NEB, NWT, JB.
Again the TBS (58), Article 38 "Revelation 22:14 have provided an excellent resume of the evidence.
In favour of the modern textual critics are Aleph (4th cent.), A (5th cent.), about 15 cursives including 104 and 1006 (11th cent.), 2053 (12th) and 2020 (15th), the Coptic (Sahidic), Ethiopic and Latin Vulgate versions of the 4th-6th centuries and 5 Old Latin copies of the 9th-l3th centuries. The following fathers also support the modern reading: Athanasius (373 AD), Fulgentius (533 AD), Apringius (551 AD), Primasius (552 AD), a 6th century Ambrose and Haymo (841 AD).
The manuscripts which read "do his commandments" consist of the vast majority, including uncial 046, cursives 1, 82, 94, 1611, 1854, 1859, 2042, 2065, 2073, 2138, 2329, 2432 and more than 150 others. Also supporting the AV1611 are the Coptic (Bohairic) 3/4th cent.; the Harkelian and Philoxenian Syriac (6/7th cent.) and the Armenian (5th cent.) versions. Fathers in support of the AV1611 include Tertullian (220 AD), Cyprian (258 AD), Tyconius (380 AD), Andrew (614 AD) and Arethas (914 AD).
Obviously the weight of evidence vindicates the AV1611 reading, which is supported by Berry's Greek text.
Revelation 22:19
"book of life" has been altered to "tree(s) of life" by the RV, Ne, NIV, NKJV marg., RSV, GN, LB, AMP, NASV, NEB, NWT, JB.
Hills (3) p 202, (38) p 198, indicates that the AV1611 reading is found only in one or two Greek manuscripts, including Codex 141. All the remaining Greek manuscripts read with the modern textual critics, although Ruckman (57) Revelation p 606, refers to the modern reading as a non-existent "Alexandrian Conjecture." Hills stateS that the AV1611 reading is supported by the Latin Vulgate, including a very old manuscript designated F, the Bohairic version, Ambrose (397 AD) and the commentaries of Primasius (6th cent.) and Haymo (9th cent.).
Ruckman, however, (21) p 70, states that the reading "book of life" is found in the Bibles of the Waldenses, Albigenses and Gothic Christians (2nd-4th cent.). Thus, like the Johannine Comma, it merited its place in the Textus Receptus and hence in the Book of books-the AV1611.
Source: http://www.kjbible.net/emtv.htm
RE: Final Authority.
The KJV translators declared the following as final authority in the KJV Prologue speaking of those who had previously translated the Scriptures:
As to the KJV Cambridge Edition(s) being someone's final authority, there is only one's faith which dictates that proposition. Not even the Church of England was KJVO according to the translator's themselves.
Neither did they consider their work flawless as the Church of England spent nearly two centuries (to their credit) making corrections to the English text (From the original language texts).
HankD
The KJV translators declared the following as final authority in the KJV Prologue speaking of those who had previously translated the Scriptures:
As to the KJV Cambridge Edition(s) being someone's final authority, there is only one's faith which dictates that proposition. Not even the Church of England was KJVO according to the translator's themselves.
Neither did they consider their work flawless as the Church of England spent nearly two centuries (to their credit) making corrections to the English text (From the original language texts).
HankD
King James Onlyism- of Satan's Lie
" King James Onlyism - of Satan's Lie "
BTW, you might want to find a better reason (and citation) to confute the Majority text with the Textus Receptus (considering the two actually differ in more than 1800 places, including more than 1000 translatable places, according to such as the late Professor Zane Hodges, the late Dr. Arthur Farstad, the late Mr. William G. Pierpont, Dr. Daniel Wallace, and Dr. Maurice Robinson) than Rev. 19:11.
[Edited to add] FTR, I do advocate the Majority Text of the New Testament. :thumbs:
Ed
Well, if you insist.
" King James Onlyism - of Satan's Lie "
BTW, you might want to find a better reason (and citation) to confute the Majority text with the Textus Receptus (considering the two actually differ in more than 1800 places, including more than 1000 translatable places, according to such as the late Professor Zane Hodges, the late Dr. Arthur Farstad, the late Mr. William G. Pierpont, Dr. Daniel Wallace, and Dr. Maurice Robinson) than Rev. 19:11.
[Edited to add] FTR, I do advocate the Majority Text of the New Testament. :thumbs:
Ed
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status