The KJV itself is against KJVO!

And the words of the Lord are flawless , like silver refined in a furnace of clay , purified seven times . O Lord , you will keep us safe and protect us from such people forever . ( NIV )

So am I to believe that only translations of the NIV are being referenced here ?! : The NIV , NIrV , NIVI , TNIV etc. ?

 

You are free to believe what you will. However, I know no one who claims that this verse speaks specifically of the KJV.

 

But they use that verse as a defense of KJV onlyism. What else are we to take that to mean?

 

You better do some research then. There are many that claim tht the KJV IS 7-times purified- I just did a web search on 'seven times purified KJV' and a bunch of references popped up.

 

OK, so let's hear YOUR version?:laugh:

 

Now IF it said the words are perfectly flawless I might agree with that perspective it offers, but it says only "flawless", that could be applied in any area.

That is why I'll stay with the reading "pure words", although meaning flawless, yet flawlessly perfect and pure words.

The understanding of the purifying of God's word is man's accomplishment to render that word into an offering that is pure from all other inferences of malgnity intrioduced by corrupt and unholy men.

The simplistic idealology that God's word needed to be purifed before it was pure from it's inception is STUPIDITY in its purest form!:godisgood:

 

In any from of any language man uses, that God's word is pure and upon close inspection, those versions are identified as being impure when discrepencies are exposed within their content.

All accusations against the KJB have been shown to only exist in the figment of the imagination and augmented by those trying to promote an intellectual understanding of God's word, which is contrary to the spiritual aspect due to the natural man cannot discern spiritual things.

God almost always does things which go contrary to a man's witty invention.:godisgood:

 

Salamander, would you say that the evidence that Archbishop Richard Bancroft or another prelate made 14 changes in the text of the 1611 edition of the KJV from KJV translator Miles Smith was a "figment of the imagination?"

Do you claim that there were no errors of any kind [regardless of who supposedly made them--translators, editors, or printers] in the 1611 edition of the KJV?

Do you claim that there were no errors in the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV?

 

I guess that nobody had God's word before 1611. Amazing story that some tell.

I wonder what they did before English came along?

 

I'm sorry, that is a bit of a stretch, my friend.

 

Is this interpretation 'binding'?

Ed

 

Only deniable by your use of corrupt resources.

 

"Errors" in intent? Or is that "errors" in type?

Definition of one's hobbyhorse often proves its rider doesn't have a tight grip on the reigns.

 

Keep guessing and one day you'll find another MV to boast about.

 

Sure, let's see your validations please.

Let's see where you say the text of Psalm 12 jumps from people to words back to people again. The effort is simply fruitless on your behalf. Why? Because some of us KNOW God isn't confused.