The reason I am KJBO

[TCassidy]

So, Jim do you still have that first printing copy that the translators personally autograph for you :laugh: :smilewinkgrin:

I have a first edition, first printing 1611. Unsigned, of course.

 

[Baptist4life]

Notice that he did not say "the KJV is untrustworthy". Instead he merely implied that *he* couldn't trust the KJV. Additionally, its possible that not even exactly what he meant to imply, but was instead just giving the logical reverse of the OPs statement.

Regardless, construing this as a derogatory statement about the KJV would be imprecise at best.

Not buying that.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Not buying that.

So report it and let the moderator (C4K) decide- that's what I do. Worst thing that happens is it gets edited.

 

[Salty]

So report it and let the moderator (C4K) decide- that's what I do. Worst thing that happens is it gets edited.

What, it doesent go to the sub-committe first?:laugh:

 

[dwmoeller1]

Not buying that.

The first part is a logical assessment. Is it unsound?

The second part was my opinion and I can totally get your "not buying it". That would have to be confirmed or denied by the author.

 

[Jim1999]

Originally Posted by Salty
So, Jim do you still have that first printing copy that the translators personally autograph for you :laugh: :smilewinkgrin:
-----------------------------------------------

that Salty is a riot, isn't he........lol

I do still use my 1945 copy,,and I signed it,,lol

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Rippon]

My Bible has many, many corrections noted including words that have completely reversed meaning since 1611, ...

I have mentioned this in the past,Jim you need to see a printer and have those corrections that you made put into the text of your JKJV! (Jim's KJV).You could be the next Thomas Paris, Benjamin Blayney or Noah Webster.

 

[gb93433]

I am waiting for any Bible to accurately translate the fourth word in the Greek text of Mt. 10:11. It is the word a]n
-----------------------------------------------

Haven't a clue what you are saying, but if you read te same text in all three gospels you will get the message in any translation.....including the KJVersion.......if it is the word "city" you are trying to write in Greek.

It is a particle that does not translate.

 

[Rippon]

It is a particle that does not translate.

But earlier you said you were waiting for a Bible to accurately translate the word. What are you trying to say? Double-speak is your speciality.

 

[Jim1999]

Bang on, Rippon.....I think he reads something and thinks it's clever to repeat it...then harps on it.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[gb93433]

But earlier you said you were waiting for a Bible to accurately translate the word.

Exactly. I get a bang out of those who think their Bible is a word for word translation. The point is that what I am waiting for cannot be done.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

The reason I am not KJVO is because I need a Bible I can trust.

I rarely give reason for moderatorial decisions, but I am going to make an exception here.

This statement is no more an attack on the King James Translation than the OP is an attack on all other translations.

Stilllearning says that he uses the King James because he only trusts that translation. That means that he cannot trust any other translation. Tom here says he does not use the King James because he cannot trust it.

Both posters have said that they don't use versions they cannot trust.

Moderating integrity requires that I either leave both viewpoints or delete both. I cannot let one stand and not the other.

Any posts about this decision should directed to me personally through PM. Any public responses are off topic and will be deleted.

 

[Trotter]

why in the world would I trust my eternity, to some theologian or scholar, to tell me what God’s Word really says.

Which you are BTW.

Well, the KJV, has been tested by the fire of time and attack, for hundreds of years.
[correction bolded]

Being old doesn't mean diddly. The Vulgate is even older and has withstood as much if not more. Seems your bucket has a hole in it.

I need a Bible that I can trust, to tell me the truth about myself, that I won’t even tell myself.

Me too. I just prefer one that I don't have to translate into modern English before I can make use of it.

 

[Mexdeaf]

I rarely give reason for moderatorial decisions, but I am going to make an exception here.

This statement is no more an attack on the King James Translation than the OP is an attack on all other translations.

Stilllearning says that he uses the King James because he only trusts that translation. That means that he cannot trust any other translation. Tom here says he does not use the King James because he cannot trust it.

Both posters have said that they don't use versions they cannot trust.

Moderating integrity requires that I either leave both viewpoints or delete both. I cannot let one stand and not the other.

Any posts about this decision should directed to me personally through PM. Any public responses are off topic and will be deleted.

Wisdom of Solomon!

 

[TomVols]

I know you're a moderator, but is not that a derogatory statement about a version of the Bible? I thought that was against forum rules?

I was not saying anything about the KJV, just KJVO. And I was illustrating the point. Why wouldn't the OP be a violation as well?

C4K, again, I wasn't saying anything derogatory about the KJV. I said I was not KJVO because of my desire to trust the Word of God. KJVO denies us this. Had I said "the reason I don't use the KJV ......." then you'd have a point. That said, that kind of thing is said repeatedly without punishment.

The main point: those of us who are not KJVO trust the Word of God and it is fallacious for the OP to suggest otherwise.

 

[TomVols]

Notice that he did not say "the KJV is untrustworthy". Instead he merely implied that *he* couldn't trust the KJV. Additionally, its possible that not even exactly what he meant to imply, but was instead just giving the logical reverse of the OPs statement.

Regardless, construing this as a derogatory statement about the KJV would be imprecise at best.

Well said. Thanks.

 

[gb93433]

If God’s Word tells me that I can’t even trust my own heart, why in the world would I trust my eternity, to some theologian or scholar, to tell me what God’s Word really says.

My salvation is not dependent on any Bible. My trust is in Jesus Christ. There is a reason for the gift of teaching and having teachers in the church.

 

[Baptist4life]

I was not saying anything about the KJV, just KJVO. And I was illustrating the point. Why wouldn't the OP be a violation as well?

C4K, again, I wasn't saying anything derogatory about the KJV. I said I was not KJVO because of my desire to trust the Word of God. KJVO denies us this. Had I said "the reason I don't use the KJV ......." then you'd have a point. That said, that kind of thing is said repeatedly without punishment.

The main point: those of us who are not KJVO trust the Word of God and it is fallacious for the OP to suggest otherwise.

I guess I was reading it wrong. My apologies.

 

[Jim1999]

I have never heard Tom Vols speak ill of anyone let alone the King James Version of the Bible, and I should be greatly astonished if he did.

I think some people tend to read into posts what they want to read.

Cheers to you, Tom, and bless,

Jim

 

[stilllearning]

Hi gb93433

I am worried for you, because you said........

“My salvation is not dependent on any Bible. My trust is in Jesus Christ. There is a reason for the gift of teaching and having teachers in the church.”

Certainly you did not mean this.

If it wasn’t for the Bible, none of us would even know who Jesus is!