Featured What I post I wrote.

Ooooh, 777

I like it. :thumbsup:

 

Last time I went to the dentist he made a mold of my teeth. He pressed upward on my jaw with the mold in my mouth, it felt like razor blades cutting into my gums. I consider myself a pretty tough guy, but I was moaning loudly.

He stops and asks, "Does that hurt?"

I wanted to punch the guy, I think he was enjoying torturing me. :laugh:

 

No, they are dispensers of His wrath.

 

While I'm sure Questdriven will answer, I'll add my $0.02 worth-
While I was never KJVO, I did seek to see if it was true or not. I'll sum up what I found to convince me beyond a doubt that it's FALSE.

1.) NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT WHATSOEVER. Since all the intel we have of God comes from Scripture, something as important as His limiting himself to just one English version shoulda been plain in Scripture by clear implication. However, there's not the slightest hint of such a limit whatsoever.

2.) KJVO'S CULTIC, DISHONEST BEGINNING. The current KJVO myth is derived from 7TH DAY ADVENTIST official Dr. Ben Wilkinson's 1930 book, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated. This book was plagiarized albeit apparently legally, by one J. J. Ray in 1955 with his God Wrote Only One Bible. While ray copied much of Wilkinson's book verbatim, he does NOT acknowledge Wilkinson whatsoever! While this mighta been legal, it's still DISHONEST, not all a CHRISTIAN act. And in 1970, Dr. D. O. Fuller published Which Bible?, which copied off both Wilkinson and Ray. While F at least acknowledges W, he was careful NOT to mention W's CULT AFFILIATION. This is also DISHONEST. And W's book is fulla goofs, which both Ray and F copied, such as the false "Psalm 12:6-7 thingie".

While Ruckman's Bible Babel was published in 1964, and Manuscript Evidence in 1970, his boox didn't attract much attention until the boox by Ray and Fuller became popular, aided by the power of modern media.

So we see the current KJVO myth was founded from a CULT OFFICIAL'S book, by dishonest methods. Such a thing CANNOT be from GOD!

 

This is a bit of a tough question to answer. I think it was a number of things, first off, that helped me get to where I would consider the possibility that I was wrong.

I began to get a little frustrated with the church I grew up in. I'll try not to go into details in the interest of not making this post longer than necessary, but suffice to say I was not getting spiritually fed at my church. The sermons had come to be little more than repeats of the same things that the pastor had been saying for years, and repeats of the same KJO arguments, or how rock was evil and God couldn't use it, or how unGodly the churches around us were, etc.
I don't want to say anything decidedly bad about the church although I am tempted to. But the people there are good, kind, and helpful. For my mom it's her place of worship and she apparently gets spiritually fed there. How can I bash that? I wouldn't recommend it to people, but it works for the people who keep on going there, obviously.


I don't remember exactly when I began to question the KJO stance, but I think it started a few months before this. It surfaced after I began considering leaving the church. I began to consider the arguments the pastor used for his KJO statements and find what I feel were giant holes.
I talked to other believers about this on a Christian forum and tried to learn more about both sides of the KJO argument from them. I did Google searches on documents by Bible scholars and learned the arguments against KJO.

I came to these conclusions:
-If the issue of what version to use is so important that it becomes a salvation issue (according to my old pastor), then why does the Bible not warn us about this more specifically? The verse in Revelations that he used to support his case, the context does not appear to be about what he was making it to be about.
-The available manuscripts have fewer differences between themselves than the manuscripts for Homer's Odyssey. Most of them are minor, and none really affect doctrine. How does this contradict the idea of God preserving His word?
-Perhaps God let us lose the original manuscripts because some would actually commit idolatry by worshiping them if they still existed.
-The Textus Receptus manuscripts don't even completely agree with each other, so how can KJOs be sure that no errors exist in the KJV? In fact, it can be argued that there are some minor errors there.
-Those working on the KJV stated belief that even the poorest translation would still contain God's word.
-In comparing different scriptures to each other, I have yet to find the blatant contradictions that I had been taught from childhood to exist.
-The missing verses in modern versions are missing for a good reason: the Alexandrian manuscripts don't have them. But this does not mean that the doctrines they had are suddenly missing in the modern versions. No doctrine is stated in one verse alone. The Bible backs itself up. While one verse about Jesus' blood may be missing the modern versions, there are others not missing. So the accusations made against them over this are blatantly false.
-I can find nothing about this claim I've heard thrown around all my life that the Alexandrian manuscripts came from a cult. And even if it is true, if these manuscripts agree with the TR 95% with no major differences, then how is that a problem?


It's certainly not a black and white issue, though. I can see why people believe it. My own parents were staunch KJOs. It was a point of contention between my mom and I for a little while. I never got the chance to discuss it with my dad. He died before I got the chance.
I don't anymore, though, and it certainly does not affect my salvation if it turns out I'm wrong.

 

Ann, why do you care what your friends believe? If you believe the King James Bible is the word of God, then what is the harm?

Just because they may not like the Bible you use, so what?

 

There is harm in the advocating of a man-made tradition or teaching as supposedly being a doctrine of God when it has not been shown to be taught in the Scriptures.

There is harm in the improper arguments [fallacies] and the divers measures that are used to advocate a KJV-only theory. The use of unrighteous divers measures is contrary to the Scriptures.

 

Some KJOs are very pushy and some respect differences in belief. People act like people with faults no matter what they believe.
The problem is puting doctrinal beliefs before love.

 

What do you care? Why is this your obsession?

You know, one of the greatest arguments for King James only is the great number of people who hate the King James. Oh, you will say you do not hate the King James, only the "only doctrine" but you always attack the King James. You have posted LOOOOOOOOONG lists of every little change made in the King James since 1611. You collect every quotation from ANYONE who hates the King James.

There is something seriously wrong with you dude. You are obsessed.

If there is anything that really proves to me the King James is the Word of God, it is YOU.

 

You know, I can't speak for others, but I know from experience it's easy to get so caught up in something that you begin to loathe it and obsess over it in some way.
I had something like a grudge against my childhood church for a while due to the frustrations I went through over wanting to leave it, and unfortunately some of those feelings still show up now and then.

Now, I'm not saying this is the case with Logos1560. I know nothing about him, and I won't presume to. Even if I did, God willing I wouldn't be so rude as to throw it in his face.
However, that could be one reason why people vehemently against the KJV exist. That, or scholarly disputes over which version is more accurate, I imagine.

I'm not a KJO, but I do still use the KJV and consider it an excellent translation. It's just not the only translation I will own or use anymore. I suspect those that are against the KJV are just more vocal.

 

You are as confused on this issue as you are about Calvinism.

Logos prefers the KJV. He certainly doesn't hate it. He has a problem with KJVism. So do I. It is false teaching. The KJV is certainly the Word of God. But not in the singular sense. The NIV,ESV,NASB,HCSB and many others are also the Word of God. None of them are the only representation of God's Word in the English language.

There is no other movement afoot claiming any other version is the Only Word of God. Only KJVO folks make that absurd claim.

And you fibbed when you said he only quotes those who hate the KJV. If you haven't noticed, a lot of his sources are from KJVO personalities.

You really have a comprehension problem there Winman.

 

A few years ago when I joined the BB this argument was even at that time in full armor and battling.

One constituent on one side sent a full page of the statement "you are all going to hell" over and over and over again.

Brethren we have allowed satan to have his way.
He has cleverly and in a cunning manner duped us into thinking that we need to defend God and His works.

But the fruit of this "debate" is spoken of in the scripture:

James 3

14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.
15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish.
16 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.
17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.
18 And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.​

NIV James 3

14 But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth.
15 Such "wisdom" does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, of the devil.
16 For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.
17 But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere.
18 Peacemakers who sow in peace raise a harvest of righteousness.​

2 Timothy 2
24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.​

Titus 3:1
Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,
2 To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men.
3 For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another.

​

 

Again, so what? Why do you care what they believe?

They might be Democrats too!

 

He could sure fool me. When a fellow collects every negative remark ever made against the KJB, I get the strong impression he hates it. When a fellow makes lists like this;

OK, I know OBSESSION when I see it, and this is it!

 

I wouldn't use that word myself winman.

He has a passion for accuracy. He is of the school and mind frame (IMO) of the Church of England translation committee.

The history of refinement by the Church of England to thoroughly refine the text of the AD1611 First Edition IMO is a credit for which they are long overdue in spite of our differences as Baptists.

They have given us one of (if not THE) best and accurate translations of the Traditional Texts (Greek and Hebrew) of the bible because of their meticulous work.

Yes, the English is "behind the times" but an NKJV and a good dictionary with historic words solves that problem.

HankD