What Happens if you are Not KJB only?

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by Will J. Kinney:
Baptist in Richmond, I certainly hope for your sake as well as for others that you are not a pastor or in a leadership position anywhere in the church. You modern version promoters seem to have so little reverence for the words of God. Apparently you didn't bother to look through much of the lists I have posted on my site about all the instances where the NASB, NIV have rejected the Hebrew texts, and the ESV, which you promote, is often worse than these two bogus bibles.

Ah, when all else fails, one can always resort to contumely......

You will recall that I only reference the ESV as it is the only Version you specifically listed that I actually own. Please show me where I "promote" the ESV in my statements.

Moreover, with respect to the "modern version promoters" showing little reverence to the Word of God, I hear the folks in the KJVO camp describe the NIV, ESV, et al with such contemptuous words as "blasphemous," "corrupted," and "Satanic" in origin. Is that reverence?

It appears to me and other King James Bible believers that you guys have gone off to some seminary where you paid good money to have your brains scrambled and your faith in an inspired, inerrant Bible stolen. You have come out on the other side promoting idiocy in the name of advanced scholarship, and since you no longer can even think straight, you want us to join you in not believing any Bible or any text on God's green earth is the inerrant, preserved words of God. May God have mercy on the poor people you guys try to indoctrinate with your foolishness and mind numbing mumbo jumbo.

Let's try this again:
I challenge you to show me, using the Scripture, the Biblical justification for the complete rejection of all other English Versions of God's Holy Word. Note that I challenged you to show the Biblical justification for your position: this is not accomplished by attacking other Versions of God's Holy Word. Additionally, making juvenile personal attacks does not lend any validity to your assertions.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
Well, I think I have gotten to the point of wasting my time.

An interesting point worth noting is that you initiated this dialog based on my comments that were directed at another person.....

No KJVO has ever claimed the Apocrypha was canonical. You say the 1611 fails their test, but refuse to see that they have never made the inclusion of non-canonical material a test.

Really? Perhaps that is due to the fact that they aren't actually using the 1611 Authorised Version they extol, such as websites with names like av1611.org.

You are still erecting straw man arguments, engaging a double standard, and assigning to them that which you know they do not believe.

Again, this is nonsensical. I did not apply any double standard. As a matter of fact, I did not apply a standard at all.

You sound as bad as Ruckman claiming every modern version uses is a member of the "Alexandrian Cult!"

Indeed.
Kindly show me where I demonstrate Ruckman's intolerance for any Version of God's Holy Word.

 

[Will J. Kinney]

Baptist, you post: "Moreover, with respect to the "modern version promoters" showing little reverence to the Word of God, I hear the folks in the KJVO camp describe the NIV, ESV, et al with such contemptuous words as "blasphemous," "corrupted," and "Satanic" in origin. Is that reverence?"

Yes, Baptist, actually it is a reverence for God's words. The niv, esv, nasb etc. are perversions of God's true words and we call 'em as we see 'em.

Psalms 119:128 "Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way."


-Baptist continues:----------------------------------------------
Let's try this again:
I challenge you to show me, using the Scripture, the Biblical justification for the complete rejection of all other English Versions of God's Holy Word. Note that I challenged you to show the Biblical justification for your position: this is not accomplished by attacking other Versions of God's Holy Word"

Baptist, need I remind you that the point I originally brought up and with which you initially agreed was when the Lord referred to no jot nor tittle would in any wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled, that this was in reference to the Hebrew Scriptures.

Therefore if any version purporting to be the true Bible rejects the Hebrew scriptures and either makes up their own, or uses some extraneous source in the O.T. it is therefore disqualified from the list of possible true Bibles. In view of this, emphatically and demonstrably the NASB, NIV, ESV, RSV are not the true words of God.

Will Kinney

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by Will J. Kinney:
Yes, Baptist, actually it is a reverence for God's words. The niv, esv, nasb etc. are perversions of God's true words and we call 'em as we see 'em.

You call that reverence? Isn't it interesting that a derogatory statement about another Version of God's Holy Word indicates one's reverence for God's Holy Word?

Baptist, need I remind you that the point I originally brought up and with which you initially agreed was when the Lord referred to no jot nor tittle would in any wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled, that this was in reference to the Hebrew Scriptures.

Therefore if any version purporting to be the true Bible rejects the Hebrew scriptures and either makes up their own, or uses some extraneous source in the O.T. it is therefore disqualified from the list of possible true Bibles. In view of this, emphatically and demonstrably the NASB, NIV, ESV, RSV are not the true words of God.

One more time:
I challenge you to show me the Biblical justification for the complete rejection of all other English Versions of God's Holy Word. Using the "jot and tittle" argument, you just disqualified the MT upon which the AV is based.

 

[PreachKJB]

Is there a 'DOCTOR' in the house?

Hi Will, it's me PreachIt!!

You have referred to the 'DOCTOR'S' statement several times, he seems not to be able to respond directly to his blasphemous statement about the Holy Spirit, wonder why, being so edjucated, a scholarly and all...

To review,

Will said...

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.


So the Holy Ghost furthers these lies and contradictions 'DOCTOR"?


Is the Jesus Christ in your bible the one who lied in John 7:8 NASB, ESV? The KJB, NIV, RV, and NKJV say: "Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up YET unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come"...verse 10 "But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret." But the NASB, ESV have Jesus saying: "I do NOT GO up to this feast... But when His brothers had gone up to the feast, then He Himself also went up".

Did the Lord Jesus Christ need a blood sacrifice to be cleansed from sin in Luke 2:22 as the NASB, NIV teach? Both these versions read: "when the days of THEIR purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished", as opposed to the KJB, NKJV, Geneva bibles which have "when the days of HER purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished". The only O.T. reference for this sin offering to make an atonements is found in Leviticus 12:6-8 where only the woman offered the sin offering for her purification.


Can God be deceived as the NASB teaches in Ps. 78:36? The NASB says the children of Israel DECEIVED GOD with their mouths, but the NKJV, KJB, NIV, RV, ASV all say they "flattered" God with their mouths and lied unto Him. You can flatter God by saying nice things about Him but not letting Him control your behavior, but you certainly cannot deceive Him.


Proverbs 14:5 tells us: "A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies."

There are many lies found in the new bible versions and it is the accumulation of such lies that reveal them to be false witnesses to the whole truth of God. One such lie is found in 2 Samuel 14:14.

The context is when Absalom had slain Amnon because he raped his sister Tamar. Absalom fled to Geshur and was there for three years, yet the soul of king David longed for his son Absalom. Joab decides to put words in the mouth of a wise woman from Tekoah and he sends her to speak to the king.

In the course of their conversation the woman finally tells king David in 2 Samuel 14: 13 -14: "the king doth speak this thing as one which is faulty, in that the king doth not fetch home again his banished. For we must needs die, and are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again; NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON: yet doth he devise means, that his banished be not expelled from him."

The meaning is pretty straightforward. We all must die and God does not respect any person or show partiality to one more than another in this regard.

Other Bible versions that read as the King James Bible are the Geneva Bible of 1599, the Jewish Publication Society of America's 1917 translation, Young's "literal" translation, Daniel Webster's 1833 translation, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras, the KJV 21st Century version and the Third Millenium Bible.

However when we get to the New KJV, the NIV and the NASB instead of "neither doth God respect any person" they read "YET GOD DOES NOT TAKE AWAY LIFE". This is a lie and a contradiction.

Just two chapters before this event we read of the child born to David in his adulterous affair with Bathseba that "the LORD struck the child, and it was very sick" and on the seventh day it died. 2 Samuel 12:15. In Deuteronomy 32:39 God Himself says: "I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand." In Genesis 38:7 and 10 we read of two wicked sons of Judah, Er and Onan "and the LORD SLEW him", and "wherefore he slew him also." I Samuel 2:6 tells us: "The LORD killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up." And 2 Samuel 6:7 says: "And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah. and God smote him there for his error: and there he died by the ark of God."


God obviously does indeed take away life, and the NKJV, NIV and NASB are all in error here in 2 Samuel 14:14 where they say that He doesn't take away life.

In 2 Peter 3:12 the KJB correctly says we are "looking for and HASTING UNTO the coming of the day of God". The date is already fixed in God's timetable and nothing we can do will make it come any faster. It is we who in our fleeting lives are fast moving towards that day. However the NKJV, NIV, NASB all teach that we can "speed" or "hasten" the coming of the day of God. This contradicts numerous other Scriptures and is a false doctrine. See my more complete article on this verse here: http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/hastingunto.html


Psalm 10:4 describes a wicked man: "The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God; GOD IS NOT IN ALL HIS THOUGHTS." In other words, in everything this man thinks, God never enters the picture. The NKJV, NIV agree with the KJV. But the NAS has "All his thoughts are 'There is no God.'" Not even the staunchest atheist walks around all day long thinking; "there is no god, there is no god, there is no god." This is a false and preposterous statement in the NASB.

Ephesians 5:13 says along with the NKJV, NIV,ASV, Darby, Geneva and Spanish: "But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light; for WHATSOEVER DOTH MAKE MANIFEST IS LIGHT." In other words, the light of God's truth shows things for what they really are. It tells us what sin and unrighteousness are by exposing them. The NAS would have us believe "everything that becomes visible is light," Oh, really?

1 Corinthians 8:4 "we know that an idol is nothing in the world" - this is the meaning found in the NIV, NKJV too. However the NASB says: "there is no such thing as an idol in the world". No idols in the world, huh?


These are just a few of the problems you have if you think God is the one guiding and directing the modern versionists. This God seems to be a bit confused and muddled in his thinking. He can't seem to make up his mind as to what he said or meant.

AND AGAIN Will Kenney ADRESSES THIS STATEMENT posted January 08, 2004 13:39

Dr. Bob posts: "KJVO #5 position is that God somehow, someway, and for what reason is beyond me, guided, superintended, inspired, enlightened XYZ in 1611 and THAT is the authority to day by which we judge truth.
No wonder people like Ruckman get laughed at. "

Well Bob, at least the KJB believer sees the providential hand of God at work in history to have kept His promises to preserve His infallible words. We at least don't come up with this gem of distilled wisdom:

"we are truly blessed to have so many choices when buying our Bibles. 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."

So all these conflicting "bibles" are all inspired by the same Holy Spirit, huh? This Holy Spirit you speak of is really confused, don't ya think? Boy, and you think our position is ridiculous!

Will K

DOCTOR are you absolutely SURE the Holy Spirit authors lies, error, contradiction, and

confusion?

Have a 'good day' 'DOCTOR'

Est 8:17 And in every province, and in every city, whithersoever the king's commandment and his decree came, the Jews had

joy and gladness,

a feast

and a 'good day'.

And many of the people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon them.

In His service, Craig

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by Will J. Kinney:
The NKJV does not always follow the same Hebrew and Greek texts as the Authorized 1611 King James Bible.

Trying to stick to just one thing at a time, Will, could you give me an example where the NKJV follows a different underlying text than the KJV? Thanks.

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by Baptist in Richmond:
An interesting point worth noting is that you initiated this dialog based on my comments that were directed at another person.....

I apologize for butting into a private conversation. I thought the Baptist Board was an open forum. Could you please point out the threads I am not allowed to respond to so I can avoid making the same error again? Thank you.

Perhaps that is due to the fact that they aren't actually using the 1611 Authorized Version they extol, such as websites with names like av1611.org.

Completely beside the point.

Again, this is nonsensical. I did not apply any double standard. As a matter of fact, I did not apply a standard at all.

Yes, you did. You clearly said the AV of 1611 failed the test. The problem was that the test was not their test, it was your test.

Indeed. Kindly show me where I demonstrate Ruckman's intolerance for any Version of God's Holy Word.

Now you are, once again, being disingenuous. I didn't say you were intolerant of other versions. I said your applying a false test to them was as bad as Ruckman applying the false test of KJVOism to orthodoxy and claiming all those who don't use the KJV exclusively are members of the Alexandrian cult.

 

[Charles Meadows]

Craig,

Are you accusing Dr Bob Griffin of having made a blasphemous statement against the Holy Spirit??

That is not called for (not to mention WRONG).

I am also a "doctor" - and your comments border on offensive. Do you suggest that education is counterproductive?

 

[PreachKJB]

You'll find that information, and a whole lot more, here...

http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/articles.html

Dare you to read 'em all...

In His service, Craig

 

[PreachKJB]

Meadows,

Do you suggest that education is counterproductive?

It doesn't seem to be helping you understand what I wrote, read it again, that may help!

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by PreachKJB:
One such lie is found in 2 Samuel 14:14. . . . In the course of their conversation the woman finally tells king David in 2 Samuel 14: 13 -14: "the king doth speak this thing as one which is faulty, in that the king doth not fetch home again his banished. For we must needs die, and are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again; NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON: yet doth he devise means, that his banished be not expelled from him."
. . . Other Bible versions that read as the King James Bible are the Geneva Bible of 1599, . . . However when we get to the New KJV, the NIV and the NASB instead of "neither doth God respect any person" they read "YET GOD DOES NOT TAKE AWAY LIFE". This is a lie and a contradiction.

Just a couple comments. The confusion is not based on a difference in Hebrew texts. The meaning of the Hebrew is ambiguous. The most literal rending would read, "God does not take a soul away." So, either reading would give us the same general sense. God is not a respecter of persons so he does not take a soul (or life) away.

Secondly, the Geneva bible reads "neither doeth God spare any person." You are claiming that is "like the KJV" but in my opinion it seems to be closer to the other versions rendering.

 

[Charles Meadows]

Yep,

I read it.

The reference to a "blasphemous statement against the Holy Spirit" is WRONG.

Your link contains some interesting material...
I read one article on it which misidentified the Hebrew word it was dealing with. I did not go any farther.

 

[PreachKJB]

Mr Meadows

Of course you didn't go any further.

Such as these lies and contradictions...

Is the Jesus Christ in your bible the one who lied in John 7:8 NASB, ESV? The KJB, NIV, RV, and NKJV say: "Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up YET unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come"...verse 10 "But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret." But the NASB, ESV have Jesus saying: "I do NOT GO up to this feast... But when His brothers had gone up to the feast, then He Himself also went up".

Did the Lord Jesus Christ need a blood sacrifice to be cleansed from sin in Luke 2:22 as the NASB, NIV teach? Both these versions read: "when the days of THEIR purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished", as opposed to the KJB, NKJV, Geneva bibles which have "when the days of HER purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished". The only O.T. reference for this sin offering to make an atonements is found in Leviticus 12:6-8 where only the woman offered the sin offering for her purification.


Can God be deceived as the NASB teaches in Ps. 78:36? The NASB says the children of Israel DECEIVED GOD with their mouths, but the NKJV, KJB, NIV, RV, ASV all say they "flattered" God with their mouths and lied unto Him. You can flatter God by saying nice things about Him but not letting Him control your behavior, but you certainly cannot deceive Him.


The Holy Spirit DOESN'T Author Lies nor Contradictions, such as these three of THOUSANDS in the mv's, and I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I mean, and that's why you choose to go no further.

Your 'biblical ecumenist' buddy 'DOCTOR' knows too!

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by PreachKJB:
Mr Meadows

Of course you didn't go any further.

Such as these lies and contradictions...

Is the Jesus Christ in your bible the one who lied in John 7:8 NASB, ESV? The KJB, NIV, RV, and NKJV say: "Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up YET unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come"...verse 10 "But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret." But the NASB, ESV have Jesus saying: "I do NOT GO up to this feast... But when His brothers had gone up to the feast, then He Himself also went up".

I don't see your point. My NASU 95 reads, "Go up to the feast yourselves; I do not go up to this feast because My time has not yet fully come." 9 Having said these things to them, He stayed in Galilee. 10 But when His brothers had gone up to the feast, then He Himself also went up, not publicly, but as if, in secret.


Did the Lord Jesus Christ need a blood sacrifice to be cleansed from sin in Luke 2:22 as the NASB, NIV teach? Both these versions read: "when the days of THEIR purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished", as opposed to the KJB, NKJV, Geneva bibles which have "when the days of HER purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished". The only O.T. reference for this sin offering to make an atonements is found in Leviticus 12:6-8 where only the woman offered the sin offering for her purification.


Can God be deceived as the NASB teaches in Ps. 78:36? The NASB says the children of Israel DECEIVED GOD with their mouths, but the NKJV, KJB, NIV, RV, ASV all say they "flattered" God with their mouths and lied unto Him. You can flatter God by saying nice things about Him but not letting Him control your behavior, but you certainly cannot deceive Him.

Is not flattery a form of deceit? The MT has in the Hebrew "deceived" for the Piel form of the verb.

Just because you don't like the way it is phrased does not mean it is wrong.

How about: Exodus 7:3, NASU "But I will harden Pharaoh's heart that I may multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt."

KJS "And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt."

Exodus 8:15, NASU "But when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and did not listen to them, as the Lord had said."

KJS "But when Pharaoh saw that there was respite, he hardened his heart, and hearkened not unto them; as the LORD had said."

Did he harden his heart of did God do it. The text is correct. Just because we don't like the wording does not mean that it is not correct.


The Holy Spirit DOESN'T Author Lies nor Contradictions, such as these three of THOUSANDS in the mv's, and I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I mean, and that's why you choose to go no further.

Your 'biblical ecumenist' buddy 'DOCTOR' knows too!

That is another reason why I don't haggle over translations but have sought to study the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Thay solves a lot of the translation issues.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
I apologize for butting into a private conversation. I thought the Baptist Board was an open forum. Could you please point out the threads I am not allowed to respond to so I can avoid making the same error again? Thank you.

Ah, yes: now begins the patronizing sarcasm. You said that your conversation with me was "wasting [your] time." I merely pointed out that you initiated this conversation. If our dialog is indeed a waste of time, then why do you keep posing questions to me?

>>Perhaps that is due to the fact that they
>>aren't actually using the 1611 Authorized
>>Version they extol, such as websites with
>>names like av1611.org.

Completely beside the point.

Really?
So holding up a Version of God's Holy Word as the ONLY source of God's Word, despite the fact that they are not even using that particular Version, is "beside the point." Thank you for amplifying that for us.

Yes, you did. You clearly said the AV of 1611 failed the test. The problem was that the test was not their test, it was your test.

Perhaps you should go back to the initial post in this thread, and note the author. Remember: I am "Baptist in Richmond."

Now you are, once again, being disingenuous. I didn't say you were intolerant of other versions. I said your applying a false test to them was as bad as Ruckman applying the false test of KJVOism to orthodoxy and claiming all those who don't use the KJV exclusively are members of the Alexandrian cult.

One more time: go back to the initial post in this thread, and note the author.
For some unknown reason, the origin of the test in question perpetually evades you. I did not pose the initial statements in this thread.

 

[skanwmatos]

Well, so much for honesty in this discussion.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
Well, so much for honesty in this discussion.

"Wouldn't it be better to try to teach these nice people, our brothers and sisters in Christ, the truth rather than just heaping scorn and ridicule on them?

 

[PreachKJB]

**Just because you don't like the way it is phrased does not mean it is wrong.**

A lie, is a lie, is a lie, is a lie...

Art thou truly brain dead, or just deceived?
Just because of the way it is phrased, it's a LIE, the one example calls Jesus a LIAR, because of the way it is PHRASED!

Wake up people, try a little discernment, read with a bit of comprehension rather than attitude.

You will be held accountable for reading and AGREEING that Jesus is a liar, don't you THINK?

Or do you really think, as your resident 'DOCTOR' does that all is well in Multi Modern Version land?

In His service, Craig

 

[Charles Meadows]

Here comes the same old discussion again!

Let me ask a question - it's not meant to be patronizing.

How did you (Craig, and other KJVO) initially come to believe that the KJV is the standard against which other versions are judged? Really. I've heard all the arguments time and time again on both sides. But seriously how do "know" that the KVJ (in English) is God's perfect word. Don't quote Psalm 12 or Psalm 30 here - in YOUR words why must this be so.

I'm very pro KJV as my prior posts show. But I cannot believe the stance that it is the only version. And people like Ruckman and Riplinger (who are NOT scholars) only show the weakness of that position.

So, if you please, without railing out about "DOCTORS", ecumenism, or blasphemy - tell me why I (or anyone) should believe that the English KJV (and the underlying manuscripts) trump all else.

 

[Will J. Kinney]

Hi brother skanwmatos, you asked about where the NKJV does not always follow the same TR as the KJB. I have been slowly doing a progressive study of this on my own and am not yet done with it, but another brother posted some of the examples I have found so far at his site.

Rather than posting the whole thing here, you can see what I had several months ago at this site. I since have found a few more. The nkjv is not nearly as bad as the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV stuff, but it is by no means just an update of the KJB. This I can easily prove. The NKJV has changed the meanings of hundreds of verses and is wrong on many counts. I consider it to be just another false witness to the truth.

Here is the site about the TR and the nkjv.

http://www.avdefense.com/nkjvnotkjb.html

God bless,

Will K