What Happens if you are Not KJB only?

Dr. Bob writes:"you start with a faulty premise - that if we do not believe the KJV is the only Bible then we don't have one "


Well, Dr. Bob, then tell us all if there is any text, be it Hebrew or Greek, or any Bible in any language on the face of this earth that you believe in 100% that you would not change or alter in any way. What is this Bible called so we can all rush out and get a copy?


Dr. Bob continues:."And I feel genuinely sorry for you. You are leading others into error and will be so held accountable for your many words."

You know, Dr. Bob, I don't really feel sorry for you, but I do feel sorry for the people you are leading astray, and likewise believe that we will all be held accountable for the things we say. I guess we will just have to wait till we stand before the judgment seat of Christ to find out if either one of us will hear the words "Well done, thou good and faithful servant" or not.

Will K

 

The original Geneva Bible of 1557 reads "entending after Easter to bringe him forth to the people" in Acts 12:4. You must be reading one of the later revisions of the Geneva Bible.

Hi Skanwmatos, Wow! That is cool. I didn't know that. Do you have any documentation for that? I would really like to have it if you do. I have a 1599 copy, and I also have read that the original Geneva contained the Apocryha as well. What do you know about that?

Thanks for the help,

Will K

 

Will,
The only real question I have for you is:
Why do you waste your time with this group of reprobates?
Marty


Hi brother Marty, you ask an interesting question. From what I have read at this board, I don't think everyone here is a reprobate. There are some who do believe the King James Holy Bible is the inerrant, preserved words of God; there are some who are considering the issue with an open mind, and then we have those who, in my opinion, are deceiving others because they themselves have been deceived when they went eagerly away to some seminary and paid good money to have some unctuous professor rob them of both their money and their faith in an inspired Bible.

Besides, I learn things from the biblical relativists. In fact, many of my articles have been written after I learn of some new fanciful attack on the Book of books.

God is still the God of all mercy, and maybe He will use something I have to say to open the understanding of another brother or sister in the faith and renew the joy of having an inspired Bible we can hold in our hands and believe with all our hearts.

Until circumstances dictate otherwise or God apparently leads in another way, I will probably continue to drop in from time to time and share my thoughts on the Bible version issue.

God bless,

Will K

 

Archy says: It's customary when quoting someone in print either to cite the entire quotation or to indicate with ellipses (...) that something has been omitted. Failure to do so is at best shoddy research and at worst dishonesty and misrepresentation of the facts.

Oh wow, Arch, I now see the error of my ways. Shame on me. Mea culpa. How could I have been so slanderously obtuse? Why, any fool can easily see that I totally misrepresented what you believe by deleting the most essential part of your argument, can't they?

Will K

 

Baptist in R says: "The post that started this entire thread did not provide any justification for the rejection of all Bibles other than the Authorised Version. The Scriptural Passages quoted in the thread do not support the notion that there is only one English Translation of God's Holy Word."

Hi Baptist, Does Matthew 5:18 where the Lord speaks of not one jot or tittle will pass from the law refer to the Old Testament being written in Hebrew? It is my understanding that the oracles of God (O.T.) were committed to the Jews (see Romans 3). Then it seems reasonalbe to conclude that if any version rejects the Hebrew scriptures or adds verses to them, or deletes or assumes some portions in the Hebrew texts have been lost, and translate according to these views, then this would disqualify the NIV, NASB, ESV as being God's true words. Your comments?


Baptist>>>Furthermore, I followed the links to the author's website, which did not offer any support for the belief in KJV-Onlyism. (you must have poor comprehension skills) I am curious as to what the author's copy of the Authorised Version says in Ecclesiasticus 8:20.


My copy of the AV says nothing there. So what is the tricky part?

Will K

 

Larry asks: "Just curious, where did you get the idea that God translated his words into another language? Did you get this idea out of the Bible?"


Hi Larry, Yes, I did. Did you read the article about Can a Translation be Inspired? The Bible is full of examples of where God translated His words into another language. If the Bible is our rule for faith and practice, then the Bible itself teaches that God can and does translate His words into other languages.

Will K

 

Kevin says: "I'd rather hear "Well done good and faithful servant" I wonder if those who don't speak English want to hear "Well done, thou ..."

That was really a substantial and well thought out comment, Kevin. I'm reasonably certain you too would rather hear "Well done THOU good and faithful servant", than "Depart from Me ye cursed", right?

By the way, you are an educated guy. Do you know the difference between "thee" and "ye" and why the KJB is actually more accurate for using these terms than the generic "you"? Can you explain for us the difference between these two (thee -ye) in 40 words or less? Did you also know that the NASB continued to use Thee, thy, and thou up through their 1977 editions, and that other modern Bible still use these more accurate terms?

Will K

 

Hi skanwmatos, thanks for the info about the Geneva bible.

Will K

 

Kevin posts: "Anyone here KJV"B" Only in 1610? It appears to me,and I do not want to misrepresent the KJVO view, but where was God's Word before 1610?"


Gee, Kevin, I never heard that question before. Now you really have me stumped.

Did you by any chance read the article I wrote about Where was the word of God before 1611? Would you care to give us a better answer to both where it was before 1611 and where it is now? Let's see how You do with this one.


Kevin continues: My point is simply this: if the AV translators could compare the former translations and revise them, why can't we? Why can't we follow the advise of the AV translators and revise, the "Originals" as they called them? (even if you ignore W/H?) "

Kevin, I do not defend the KJB translators, their Preface, or their theology, though I do agree with quite a bit of it. They did not "revise the Originals", nor did they ever say they had, to my knowledge.

I know they were scholars as well as dedicated believing Christians, but my point is that God in His providence used those men as His chosen vessels to give us His pure, infallible words.

Why does it seem so hard for you biblical relativists to believe that God would have used fallible, sinful men to preserve His words for us? Aren't your modern day scholars supposedly trying to go through the same process of examining the evidence, selecting the proper texts, and giving the correct translation? (though they fail miserably)

God has already gone through this "scholarly process" and completed the work of having His pure words translated into the English language. I can tell anyone where they are found today. Can you? Do you think God's true words are "out there somewhere in the manuscripts", or are your faculties so unhinged that you would say something so inane as one of the bigshots at this board - "There are almost as many different versions of the Bible as there are different types of people-but we are all created by the same God, and all of our Bibles are written by the same Holy Spirit."?


"all our Bibles are written by the same Holy Spirit"!!??!! Boy, this Holy Spirit must really be confused. He can't seem to make up His mind as to what God said or didn't say, and He keeps contradicting Himself.

Is all your vast education leading you to promote the idea that "all our Bibles are written by the same Holy Spirit", but I can correct or alter them anytime I feel they are wrong?

And you fellows think the KJB Only position is weird! The irony is overwhelming.

Will K