What are the KJOists going to do?

Glad to hear it.

Now, try using your own words instead of some one else's.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

I used the NASB for many years until I find obvious evidence then I turn to use the KJV hereafter. The NASB is not word of God.

 

I used the NASB for many years until I find obvious evidence then I turn to use the KJV hereafter. The NASB is not word of God. </font>[/QUOTE] Thank you, Omniscient Judge

 

Brothers,this is my first post.I have been an spectator for some time now.I enjoy the debate,and the challenges that arise to go to Gods word and prove things. Christ in me bearing wittness of the truth.I use the King James.I am not that old or educated,The Holy Spirit in me bears wittness of the truthes of this book.Iam interested in this topic,because it affects allof us that want to be used by our Good Lord,to spread the gospel.ICor.Chap3 Good Read!

 

I agree.

 

Amen brother, good to have ya.

 

Welcome to the forum.

It is wise to listen before speaking. Well done.

Amen! Truth is found in God's word. But it must be pointed out that the bible is silent on the version issue. It is not a matter of doctrine, to be settled from the bible, but a matter of scholarship, to be settled by the historic and manuscript evidence.

The Holy Spirit does bear witness that we are the children of God, and He will also lead us into the truth of His word if we will humble ourselves before Him.

So do I.

I am not all that old, in my 40s, and not all that well educated, with an M.Div. and just finishing up my Th. M.

Amen! The word of God is Truth!

Nobody on this list believes the KJV is not the word of God, but the area of contention is when some here deny that other versions are the word of God. There is no doubt that some versions are better than others, and in my opinion, the KJV is the best of the lot, but that does not mean the other versions are "perversions" as some on here refer to them. I have great respect for the KJV, but do not disparage other versions, nor those who use them. That is the area of contention.

The true test of a bible is this: Is it "able to make thee wise unto salvation?" If so, then it is the "holy scriptures." So, the question is, can people get saved reading other versions or hearing others versions preached? If so, then the bible (KJV) says those other versions are "the holy scriptures" (2 Timothy 3:15).

 

So if a milk carton has scripture on it, the carton is Holy? I agree that most of the MVs contain enough scripture for a person to be saved. But, I don't believe they are the Holy Bible.

 

The carton is not holy, the Scriptures are Holy.

Then you disagree with the KJV which says that the bible verses which are able to make thee wise unto salvation are "the holy scriptures" (2 Timothy 3:15).

 

Homebound, are you saying that God's Word is only the Word of God if it's bound in calfskin and printed on gilt-edged pages? If so, you've made the mistake of confusing the Message with the medium.

The Bible is God's Word; the Holy Bible; regardless of whether it's bound in leather, stored in bytes on a CD-ROM, etched in glass, or yes- even if it's printed on the side of a milk carton.

If the Roman's Road (KJV, to satisfy you) were printed on the side of a milk carton, couldn't a person be saved from it?

As Skan said- it's the Scripture that is Holy, not what it's printed on.

 

Homebound:So if a milk carton has scripture on it, the carton is Holy? I agree that most of the MVs contain enough scripture for a person to be saved. But, I don't believe they are the Holy Bible.

I don't know anyone who takes a milk carton to church or pours milk from his Bible. But any Scripture is just as holy and authentic whether it's written in a book designated as a Bible or spelled out in a bowl of alphabet soup.

 

When I say Holy, I mean Holy, complete. A milk carton is not the complete word of God.

 

I don't disagree with anything the KJB says. The thing is, you must known the holy scriptures to recognize them and why do we have all these versions saying something different, how will you known what is scripture and what is not?

 

Homebound, this raises a question in my mind. I know of many pastors who regularly carry a pocket New Testament in their inside suit-jacket pocket (it's easy to pull it out & lead someone through the plan of salvation). Is a pocket New Testament therefore not the Holy Word of God, since (without the Old Testament) it is not complete?

 

Homebound, this raises a question in my mind. I know of many pastors who regularly carry a pocket New Testament in their inside suit-jacket pocket (it's easy to pull it out & lead someone through the plan of salvation). Is a pocket New Testament therefore not the Holy Word of God, since (without the Old Testament) it is not complete? </font>[/QUOTE]I see your point. If something like a tract for instance leads a person to Jesus, then it must contain scripture. Point taken.

 

By the same premise, most of the currently-used KJV editions aren't complete, as they don't contain the Apocrypha, the preface "from the Translators to the Reader", nor the "List of Holy Days".

 

HomeBound,

There is somethig that you really need to understand. If I say, "I had a flat tire," but my wife says, "He had a blow out," we have said the same thing.

Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
2 Timothy 2:14-16 KJV

Remind them of these things, charging them before the Lord not to strive about words to no profit, to the ruin of the hearers. Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness.
2 Timothy 2:14-16 NKJV

Remind them of these things, and charge them before God not to quarrel about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers. Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. But avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness,
2 Timothy 2:14-16 ESV

Three translations, but all give the same message. Get it?

In Christ,
Trotter

 

If I hear "he had a flat tire", all I think is "simply a tire that went flat & no problem", but if I hear "he had a blow-out", all sorts of things come to mind, like, did he lose control, did he stop in time, etc. A flat can be fixed, a blow-out can't. It may seem to mean the exact same thing, but there is a difference.

 

Not when we're talking about the same event. We have a difference of perspective, but the actual event was the one and the same. And, yeah, "flat tire" and "blow out" wasn't the best illustration, but it actually happened that way...she had everybady thinking we were almost killed, but it was a back tire and no big deal.

The point is that, while different translations say things differently, they are still talking about the same things. Like the differences of the accounts of events between the Gospels. Same events, different authors. Same events, different perspectives.

Just because it does not say "King James Version" on the cover does not mean that it is not the word of God.

In Christ,
Trotter