What other Doctrines does KJV Only violate

Maybe you should stop being a blind leader of what you perceive as another's blindness. That would make you a hypocrite, would it not?

 

My wife and I attend/are members of an SBC-affiliated church, and they use the Holman Christian Standard Bible. I was RAISED KJVO, and was a KJVO believer for many years...I know all the ins and outs of the argument, and they're NOT PLAUSIBLE, nor are they backed by Scripture anywhere. The Holman isn't my favorite translation, but, I've seen many come to the Lord with out church using it. Personally, I still PREFER the KJV, and use it in my preaching/teaching, and even have repurchased my old website and am trying to re-establish it back online with KJV as the preferred Bible. But, does this mean I believe it's the ONLY translation available and useable by the English-speaking people? God forbid!

 

What doctrines and words do you think I am twisting? Do you accept that Israel is being commanded in Acts 2:38 to be baptized in water in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins as a condition for receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost from God? Do not tell me how smart you are until you can answer this question correctly according to what is written.

 

Who was Peter speaking to? The Jews. They had to leave Judaism...Want to get into hermeneutics? Maybe you should stop playing on your daddy's computer and go watch cartoons.

 

Can you be a little more vague, please? Try hard. There might be some room for it.

 

Typical dodge. Nice try, though. You've tried to side-step PROVING your assertions of anything you've posted. UGH!

 

God gave the New Testament to us in Greek later half of the first century AD. 2nd 3rd century people translated the New Testament into Syraic, Latin and Coptic languages. The following centuries believers further translated in Gothic, Armenian, Georgian and other languages. People also revised already existing translations for better or for worse. The Anglo Saxons translated the Gospels 10th century or so from the Latin translation attributed to Jerome. John Wycliffe and or his followers translated the Bible from the Latin into middle English and continued to revise them to make them better. Then, beyond any dispute, William Tyndale translated, and published the New Testament in early modern english in 1526. Then in 1530 the first 5 books of Moses from the original Hebrew. Later on he revised the New Testament 2 more times. Although there are intervening Bible's from here to the King James Version, this is the Bible that they mostly copied their Bible from. Coverdales, Matthews, the Great Bible, Geneva, Bishops, Roman Catholic Rheims. The KJV made use of all these Bibles. God has alway had more than one version. He has many Versions.

 

I am puzzled. What does any of this have to do with whether you believe that Acts 2:38 gives Israel a condition of baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins for receiving God's gift of the Holy Ghost that he had just poured out on them from heaven? It is what the text says in the KJV, and though I certainly do not know this, I do suspect that all those versions that you mentioned above say the same thing. It is too simple to get wrong.

Now, I have a question for you. What difference does it make if you have a copy of all those versions and you could read every one of them. Would that make you accept that God is giving this baptism condition in Acts 2:38 or would you still have the same idea about it. So, what does it matter what translation or manuscript you don't believe?

Now, I have used Acts 2:38 as an example but there are many passages that you have your own ideas about. I doubt you will be moved on any of them. Jesus said to religious men who did not believe his words, "ye are gods."

1. There is safety in believing the words but you must be sure you have them.​

 

It's strange that this question on Acts 2:38 usually comes from a CoC, Nazarene, or some other sect of Christianity that "requires" baptism as a condition for salvation. If one carefully researches in Scripture, there are very few passages that mention baptism along with salvation. This passage gives the first requirement for salvation...REPENT. That's all that's needed. One cannot sufficiently attempt to create a doctrine where baptism is a condition of salvation, even with this passage. Maybe you should try again.

 

I asked you a question first, which you haven't answered. "Can you **PROVE** I lied in a previous post. Let's settle that question first, & I'll the3n answer yours.
Here are the dispensations I believe3 in:
The pre-Exodus one.
The Exodus to the coming of Jesus.
From Jesus' instituting the New Covenant through now.
The one after His return.
New heavens & earth.

Now, please answer my above question, or admit YOU lied, not I.

 

robycop3 said: ↑
IMHO, the KJVO myth does not violate any Biblical DOCTRINES, but it DOES violate the Biblical command not to lie.

I am not lying although you accused me of lying which caused me to say you were lying about me lying. I really don't care if you accuse me of lying because I am guiltless but you can put it out but you can't take it. It looks like you are incensed about having others do to you what you do to them.

Anyway, this is the last I plan to deal with it.

 

In post # 55, you wrote :

And I asked you for **PROOF** I was lying. YOU HAVE COMPLETELY FAILED TO RESPOND TO THAT SIMPLE REQUEST ! Instead, you've done nothing but cast red herrings when I've requested a response. If you can't supply the requested proof, that makes YOU a liar.

There are many other readers here who see what a sham you've been so far. I hope a moderator steps in to tell you to either post your proof or admit to the readership that you were wrong.& apologize to me & the whole board.

 

Here is the deal. I can prove that God required baptism for those of Israel in the beginning of his NT age because of his peculiar relationship with them over centuries, but I can prove it only if you will believe the words. You have proven to me that your idea of salvation does not match God's idea of salvation and so you will not believe his words in Acts 2:38. Anything else that requires believing words that could correct your understanding would be fruitless because of your initial attitude and unbelief.

Now, I can prove the Samaritans were both baptized in water by Phillip, a prophet, and that they had definitely repented, but still did not receive the Holy Ghost until the apostles, Peter and John, were sent from Jerusalem to affirm their testimony and lay hands on those who truly had repented and were baptized. Then these Samaritans received the Holy Ghost and were regenerated by his presence in their bodies.To understand that Jesus Christ included these Samaritans as his own covenanted people you should read John 4 and the conversation of Jesus with the woman at the well. I warn you though, if you will not believe the words you read it will be a fruitless trip to go there.

Then, there were the 12 apostles of John, whose story was told in Acts 19:1-7. The date of this encounrter would have been in AD 59 just before Paul was imprisoned. It was at this late date that these Jews needed to be baptized in water and have the apostle Paul lay hands on them to receive the Holy Ghost. It was just a fact of life for these 12 Jews in AD 59, whether anyone will accept the words or whether they will not. I accept what I read in my KJV as being the truth of God. Why would I doubt his words.

Further, the apostle Paul while he was still Saul did not receive the Holy Ghost on the Damascus Road when he repented and was converted to Christ. By his own testimony he said he was told by the man in Damascus named Ananias what he was to do. This is what Ananias said to him and it is consistent with what al the Jews who repented had done up til now. You can refuse to use logic and reason on this testimony as well as the others you will not believe.

Acts 22:6 And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me.
7 And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
8 And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest.
9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.
10 And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.
11 And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus.
12 And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, 13 Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.
14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.
15 For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.
16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

I will not post another comment to you if you show up here denying the words of the scriptures as you have done so far. It is offensive.The scriptures cannot teach you and if they do not mean what they say then who do I think I am to teach you? It makes no sense for men who present themselves as believers spend their time arguing against plain words that are logical and makes sense and are reasonable to believe.

 

Your long diatribe here doesn't help you any. I could have ripped your "thesis' to shreds, but, why waste good time on someone who has no reasoning skills? The Bible tells us about wasting time with fools.

 

Remember the thief on the cross whom Jesus saved although he couldn't be baptized. It's his BELIEF and CALLING UPON JESUS TO SAVE HIM which led Jesus to save him, despite his being unable to be baptized.

 

No you cannot and do not believe the words. You read into the text what you want the text to mean.

 

That does not change what the words say about how men receive the Holy Ghost, AFTER Jesus is raised again from the dead. Neither the thief on the cross or John the Baptist were saved by receiving the Holy Ghost, who is life, thus being made a member of the NT church. The gospel of Jesus Christ is founded upon the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This following and instructive passage applied to the thief on the cross and John the Baptist and all others during the ministry of Jesus Christ on the earth. Read it here:

37 In the last day, that great [day] of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified)

Please try this verse on for size:
Joh 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

Joh 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

27 John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven.
28 Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him.
29 He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.

These men did not die during the dispensation of the Spirit. they were justified during the ministry of Jesus Christ by believing he is the promised Messiah and the Son of God. God made provision for believers who were alive after this to receive the Holy Ghost by commissioning the apostles with the same authority as Jesus himself. We are told this in John 20. This is the reason that apostles must authorize the giving of the Holy Ghost to the converts. This is a transition time and God made baptism a condition for his people Israel. Gentiles were not ministered to during the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ, for obvious reasons.See note A



Here is what men during the days of Jesus must believe and all Judah had this preached to them during these 3.5 years.

Joh 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

The church of Jesus Christ has it's own resurrection. The trinitarian signature is on the resurrection like everything else God does. The OT saints were raised after Jesus led captivity captive. This is 1) the firstfruits of the resurrection. Next the main harvest will be raised 2) the gathering and translation of the body of Christ, the church. And finally those saved ones who perish during the tribulation, 3) the gleanings.One resurrection, the first resurrection, in three parts.

Note A -
Joh 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
20 And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his] hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord.
21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

How would that be possible for men to know the heart and motive of another man? Check this.

Acts 8:12 But when they (the Samaritans) believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:

WHY?

15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

ALERT: WORDS HAVE MEANING.

You men who do not believe words please read these again. This is not inconsistent with how God is dealing with his people Israel before this and after. I have proven it by quoting words.

Check Simon out.
9 But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:
10 To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.
11 And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.
12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.

He believed and he was baptized.

17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,

The reaction of Peter.

20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.
21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.
22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.

The formula for Israel to receive the Holy Ghost had been given already and while Simon met all the conditions for receiving the Holy Ghost, he lacked one. Repentance. It was the first one.

Ac 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Phillip, a prophet, did not have this binding and loosing authority that Peter, an apostle, had been given in John 20.

Later, in Acts 19:1-7, the 12 disciples of John will have lacked the condition of being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and therefore these justified men under the law were ignorant of the NT blessings. Paul, an apostle fixed that.

No one can be taught the word who refuses to believe the words of God.

 

Looks like you're doing a lot of "cut-and-paste" here. Are these your own words? If not, why are you not giving proper credit to those you're using? Long diatribes prove nothing, and they certainly don't seem to be adding up with Scripture, but, rather seem to be something you want to apply your own beliefs to. You keep coming back to Acts 2:38, but you have yet to properly exegete passage Sad...truly sad.

 

these words are my own. I actually study the scriptures and believe the words, something I am encouraging you to do.

....and just for the record, you have not even attempted to refute what I have said on any of those texts. I am accusing you, not of rejecting my words, but rejecting God's words and supplanting them with your own ideas.

 

Because you accuse, it does not mean that you prove what you claim to be true. At times you may be the one supplanting God's words with your own ideas that you read into them unless you claim to be an infallible/perfect interpreter.

The translated words in the KJV are not actually the directly-inspired, original-language words of God given to the prophets and apostles. Words in the KJV can be incorrect because they may at times be errors introduced by printers, words added by translators, or inaccurate renderings of translators. You also do not know the original-language words omitted by the makers of the KJV in translating [words for which they put no English rendering in the text although they sometimes put an English word for those words in their 1611 marginal notes that are not found in most post-1900 KJV editions].