Your KJVO myth is false.

He will NEVER stop using that argument...
I'm not exactly KJVO, but I hate seeing the deranged abuses of folks like Robycop.

Even if KJVO's do answer an argument he makes...he will simply lay low for 6 months or so, and then they'll rehash it as though no one has ever answered them before.
For instance, Robycop has been sufficiently answered with his "Easter" argument in Acts 12:4....in not only this forum, but also others he participates in.

Even if he grants that it isn't erroneous there....he'll reintroduce the argument against the KJV in another forum 2 days later...in case no one was watching:

Realize one thing:
Some folks are simply the anti-Ruckmans....
Equally as deranged, equally as intractable, and equally as impervious to reason.
Roby is the counter-part to Ruckman....
Intractable, unteachable, and impervious to reason.
Never believe for one second he isn't hostile to the KJV....
He is.
He'll always deny it, but he spends every waking second finding some reason to undermine it in some way.
Some folks Absolutely DO hate the KJV.

I'm not KJVO....I used to be...
But, I've seen how folks like Roby and Logos are for a decade or more on multiple forums, they dedicate every pathetic second of their pathetic misspent lives to pointing out possible minor errors or imperfections in the KJV.....
Most folks who aren't KJVO don't hate the KJV, they might use it often, and respect it.....even if they aren't KJVO.

I am now one such person.
But Roby....he cannot be reasoned with, and his mind is closed.
I would say the same is true with Logos.

They will scream like banshees until the cows come home that they don't hate the KJV...but, their actions, and the countless hours they spend pointing out any possible errors either real or imagined speaks for them. Their actions betray them.

It isn't worth your time.............

Even if God himself came down in a three-piece suit, shook his hand and said that that particular argument is invalid....

Robycop would lay low for 2 weeks, and try it again...
That's who he is, he cannot be reasoned with, don't bother asking.

 

The King James Version is all I ever read. It is the version the Holy Spirit led me to and I cannot read any other.

 

And that is good enough for the likes of most reasonable people.

Some (not a majority or even most) genuinely want to dedicate their lives to destroying the KJV...
Robycop is one such person.

I think Logos is also one such person as well.

 

Stating that, "the Holy Spirit led you to" a version of the Bible is a bit much, and when people go there, it is an attempt to squelch all argument.

The Holy Spirit leads me to Christ and His work, not translations.

 

I don't doubt you at all.
I said "some", I don't even mean many or most, only a few and not a lot at that.

 

How can you separate Christ the living word from the written word? You are making a separation that I do not believe is possible.

 

Personally - No problem with KJVO doctrine as long as it doesn't include the two grievous errors of 1) Secondary Inspiration: The KJV translation committee were inspired of God in their choice of the words of translation as were the prophets and apostles. 2) Advanced Revelation:

Ruckman’s belief in advanced revelations in the KJV | Ruckmanism.org

I love the KJV. I use it as well as the NKJV and NIV in that order. Also I like the RSV (1952) and that would be my primary choice if it were based upon the TR (Scrivener).

 

What in the world is a "flexible" language? I don't recognize this term from either linguistics or translation studies.

I have compared almost all of the KJV NT to the original Greek, and have found it to be an excellent translation, word for word (in the proper meaning of this term) and literal.

What's wrong with that?

I have also compared all of the NT of Young's Literal Translation to the original Greek, and found it to be a very poor translation, overly dependent on translating words by concordance, and overly dependent on the word order of the original language rather than the target language.

 

It is not the language itself that is 'inspired', but the Holy men who spake:

2 Peter 1:21 KJB - For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

2 Timothy 3:16 KJB - All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Acts 1:16 KJB - Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.​

You are skipping past [deliberately avoiding] my point, and not answering my questions, since it would reveal to you the truth.

Answer my questions, and you will have your answer from scripture itself, instead of from your preconceived ideas.

Act 26:14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.​

No, you are avoiding the issue, again, by placing a strawman onto the floor and attacking it. You deliberately quote a Roman Catholic translation, which says "Aramaic" [that it might support their 'interpretation' in regards Matthew 16:18, which would alter the wording in regards petra an petros, which in 'aramaic' is simply 'kepha' [though they would need to look at the word 'shu'a' also], which actually hurts your position, since there is not a single mss in the Koine Greek which reads "aramaic", but reads "εβραιδι" [[h]ebraidi; from G1446, from H5667 [Eber]]:

Philippians 3:5 KJB - Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
​

It would be foolish to translate it "Aramaic" especially when in every other location, it is "Hebrew", it is basic translation 101 [and those who translated the Koine Greek word"εβραιδι" [[h]ebraidi; from G1446, from H5667 [Eber]] to "Aramic" deliberatley deceived and/or lied:

John 5:2 KJB - Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.

Acts 21:40 KJB - And when he had given him licence, Paul stood on the stairs, and beckoned with the hand unto the people. And when there was made a great silence, he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying,

Acts 22:2 KJB - (And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,)

Revelation 9:11 KJB - And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.

Revelation 16:16 KJB - And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.
​

Inspiration works upon the man:

"... The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God’s mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented. Men will often say such an expression is not like God. But God has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. The writers of the Bible were God’s penmen, not His pen. Look at the different writers. Ms24-1886, par. 9

It is not the words of the Bible that are inspired, but the men that were inspired. Inspiration acts not on the man's words or his expressions, but on the man himself, who under the influence of the Holy Ghost is imbued with thoughts. But the words and thoughts receive the impress of the individual mind. The divine mind is diffused. The divine mind and will is combined with the human mind and will; thus the utterances of the man are the Word of God. Ms24-1886, par. 10 ..." - Manuscript 24, 1886 - Ms 24, 1886 -- Ellen G. White Writings​

 

It is a strawman, foisted upon believers in the Bible, an actual book which is currently able to be held in my hand, the very preserved words of God, that we may appear to look foolish, when in fact, we believe what God said, while those who lay this falsity upon us are still looking for their bible in the dusty tomes of antiquity, hoping one day to figure out what God really said, each having a varied idea as to what specifically that was, based upon the mss traditions.

 

Yes, as per 2 Peter 1:21 KJB, and thus so also sister White:

Inspiration works upon the man:

"... The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God’s mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented. Men will often say such an expression is not like God. But God has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. The writers of the Bible were God’s penmen, not His pen. Look at the different writers. Ms24-1886, par. 9

It is not the words of the Bible that are inspired, but the men that were inspired. Inspiration acts not on the man's words or his expressions, but on the man himself, who under the influence of the Holy Ghost is imbued with thoughts. But the words and thoughts receive the impress of the individual mind. The divine mind is diffused. The divine mind and will is combined with the human mind and will; thus the utterances of the man are the Word of God. Ms24-1886, par. 10 ..." - Manuscript 24, 1886 - Ms 24, 1886 -- Ellen G. White Writings​

 

Well I agree to the first part but to the other part I question... I read it because that's what in was in our Christian home growing up... It was also in my church and everyone in the church that I know of read and studied from it... All the preachers I ever heard or quoted from, used it as their text... I know their was a large KJV that graced our pulpit... Do I desire to read any other?... For what reason?... I compare scripture with scripture, not translation with translation... I've been doing this for over 50 years but you don't need to read and study the KJV like me... Don't peg me in the KJVO camp either... I personally don't care what translation you read, study or quote from, but when I post scriptural quotes, it will be from the KJV!... Brother Glen

 

I usually use the NIV as my personal "go to" translation. However, anyone familiar in hermeneutics will know that it is always best to use at least two different translations accompanied with a good commentary. That way if you notice that the verses are different, you can turn to the commentary for further information.

 

Agreed. Which is why I never solely rely on a single translation (refer to post 56)

 

Ellen White was NO MORE inspired than I am to write down and record to us additional revelation from and of God!
That ceased when Apostle John passed away!

 

I tried to read the Bible growing up but would loose interest round about Leviticus. After the Holy Spirit came in I would end up reading the Bible entirely through seven times. If I pick up a bible to read I will immediately dislike it if it is not an authorized KJV.

 

That is your preference, but not the same for all believers!