Scripture to support KJVOism please

They cannot provide what does not exist!!!

Bro Tony

 

Guess who.

HankD

 

Actually it is in the apocrypha they took out.

 

You guys need to first provide very specific scriptures for a 66 book bible.

 

James Newman,

You are correct in suggesting that there are doctrines close to the heart of many Baptists that are not explicitly taught in the Bible. You are also correct that the doctrine of the closed Canon is one of those doctrines. Is it fair, in view of these facts, to insist that KJOism cannot be true because it is not explicitly taught in the Bible?

The KJO sect bases its argument on Scriptures that they believe teach that the KJV is the very Word of God, and that all other translations are something other than the Word of God. Therefore it is only fair to ask if this teaching is merely inferred rather than expressly taught. Many KJOists argue that it is explicitly taught in the Scriptures, and we ask them to post the Scriptures where it is explicitly taught.

However, if you admit that the Bible does not explicitly teach that the KJV is the very Word of God, but the teaching is merely inferred, then it is not fair to ask you to post the Scriptures where it is explicitly taught.

However, because it is nothing but a personal inference, it is wrong to teach it as a doctrine. After all, we are human and subject to making wrong inferences. As you very well know, very recently, in another thread, you made a whole series of inferences that you later learned were incorrect. Your inference that the KJV is the very Word of God, and that all other translations are something other than the Word of God, is another incorrect inference.

Although you base your doctrine on an incorrect inference, we base our doctrine on hundreds of thousands of facts. Your doctrine is rooted in ignorance; our doctrine is rooted in the character of God as revealed in the Bible.

 

We've asked that question umpteen times...and with no viable answers. I think we all know there's no Scripture directly supporting the KJVO myth since all Scripture had been presented by God many centuries earlier. But for the doctrine of KJVOism to be more than just a man-made myth, it needs SOME Scriptural support since it's about Scripture, our highest written authority.

The KJVO must provide SCRIPTURAL evidence that God has confined Himself to just one version, and Scriptural criteria for what that one version should contain. Otherwise, the KJVO doctrine remains a man-made myth, and NO other point of argument by the KJVOs has any meaning, including the questioning of the number of books in the Canon. That's just another KJVO smokescreen they use to try to cover their lack of evidence supporting their myth.

 

Wow, the silence from KJVO's in here is deafening! I wonder why that would be?

 

You don't suppose they have given up on us infidels?

HankD

 

I suppose you guys haven't heard of the term 'overkill' ?

You know, when you've got your enemy all beat up, dead ten times over, and you pull them up and beat them up some more, and then wonder, why the heck isn't he fighting back ?

To borrow a famous candidate's wife's words and put it a little more mildly, 'zip it already', ya'll.

 

NEVER!

Don't be a girlie-man PINOY

HankD

 

James Newman said:

You guys need to first provide very specific scriptures for a 66 book bible.

How interesting. I have seen this tactic before: there are apologists for a certain group who, faced with a question concerning the sufficiency of scripture to establish doctrine, invariably respond with skepticism concerning the side issue of canonicity.

Does this remind you of anyone? I wonder if perhaps we have a wolf in the fold.

 

James Newman said "You guys need to first provide very specific scriptures for a 66 book bible."

No, we need an authority for the position on canon. That authority is the church in general - to oppose it would be to oppose the church in general. What authority, scriptural or ecclesiastical, do you have for KJV-onlyism? You have none. You have no authority whatsoever for this doctrine of yours. Creating and accepting doctrine without supporting authority results in chaos, heresy, and confusion. God is not the author of these things.

 

I've also asked many a KJVO over the years, "What or who is your authority to proclaim the KJVO myth?"

If they answer at all, they say, "God".

I then ask, "where or when did God give His authorization to such a myth about His word?"

End of discussion


KJVOs, if you can't provide a Biblical basis for KJVO, then it simply remains a man-made myth, and all further discussions are useless, as you'd be trying to build a structure roof first, completely without a foundation. Now, are any of you gonna answer David J's question or not? If ya can't find any, then please be adult enough to admit it.

 

Yes,we know...Lord knows that is all you can contribute is the same thing every time you post,over and over,and OVER.You are just inches away from becoming a TROLL!!

I've been refraining from posting for QUITE some time now and just recently starting droping back in some just to observe.....


If scripture is you're ultimate authority,then why not show us where it says the KJV is NOT the final authority.

 

AV Defender,

The onus of proof really has to be on the KJVO. I would not assert that the KJV is inferior or mistaken-laden. I view the KJV and most MVs with equal respect. Thus I'm not claiming "mine is better then yours"! Your position is that the KJV is the ONLY bible, even though many other translations exist. As such the two positions are not equal in assertion. You make a claim which excludes many "bibles" - so I think the burden of proof is on your side!

 

God gave His Words to Adam; the Satan gave the false Words of God to Eve.

God gave you one Bible, the KJV for your mother tongue as read Romans 16:26; W/H gave you false Words of God namely modern versions as read 2 Cor. 2:17 (KJV).

 

Well of people only believe the KJV 1611, then at least they believe a Bible. With so much out there that people can believe and disbelieve. At least they believe in the Word of God. I believe it to be the truth but I also believe my NIV as well. I think they compliment each other quite well. One is a Fine shakesperian work the other an average everyday language. It depends if i'm moving to study or read.

Either way I love and cherish both of them and I keep them side by side ...

 

It's somewhere near where it says the NKJV, ESV, NIV, etc is NOT the final authority.
KJVO is purely speculative, and built on conjecture. (albiet, we know the KJVO's love God's Word [as found in the KJV ])