The "only" version?

I pretty much see it as an issue of authority.
God sits kings on their throne, and God sits down kings from their throne.
As King James I was head of both church and state the issue of authority.
The King James Version is the authorized version for the English-speaking people.
Yes, there was the Great Bible, the Bishops Bible - each of these 'authorized' in their own right.
But the King James Version has endured over 400 years this past 2011.

There is only One Person in whom both Church and State reside: Jesus Christ.

But lets be clear....before Christ returns God will use the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets to reveal to His Chosen People Israel their Messiah and Lord.

God will not use Christian theology, He will not use Calvin's Institutes, or "accept Jesus into your heart" heresy, He will not say to anyone, "God loves you."

Nor will He use the KJV.

The Originals will be found.

 

In James White's book The King James Only Controversy I ran across something interesting.

He quoted John 6:47 in the KJV :
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. (bold print emphasized by KJVO'ers)

And then he quoted from the NIV:
Truly, truly, I say unto you, he who believes has eternal life.

Dr. White then quotes from the ever calm and dispassionate D.A. Waite:

"This is, perhaps, one of the CLEAREST theological errors in these three versions. To make salvation only a matter of 'believing' rather than solely, as Christ said in this verse, 'believing on Me,' is truly 'ANOTHER GOSPEL' !If you were trying to lead someone to Christ with the NIV or NASV, using this verse, they could 'believe' in anything and still have 'everlasting life' --whether in Santa Claus, in the Easter Bunny, in the Tooth Fairy, in Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer, or in any of the false world religions! This is SERIOUS THEOLOGICAL PERVERSION! This is certainly a matter of doctrine and theology." (Waite, Defending the King James Bible, 158)

 

Because the Spirit did not give them the gift of scripture inspiration.

 

Dear Mr. Waite,

I've read your comment regarding a SERIOUS THEOLOGICAL PERVERSION at John 6:47

It seems you have missed the context and made a serious error as well. Now go back and read John 6:35, and John 6:40.

Give my love to Gail R.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

If you have his (White's) book (page 218) White shows clearly the person they should be believing in is Jesus Christ.

John 6:35 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst.

John 6:40 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”

The KJVO mindset (not all of them) lacks any real power of observation except for their subjectivism. I often think of Ben Shapiro when I see this type of nonreason. "Feelings are not facts". We all feel joy when we talk with our Savior. Feelings are still not facts.

 

Do you ignore some facts including some from the KJV?

Even the KJV demonstrates that the Hebrew word for the Passover was sometimes used for more than just the one day of the Passover. The meaning of the Hebrew word expanded to include sometimes the seven days of unleavened bread according to Ezekiel 45:21 in the KJV ["ye shall have the Passover, a feast of seven days"].

According to the KJV, Luke under inspiration of the Holy Spirit used the Greek word for the Passover for the feast of unleavened bread. Luke 22:1 Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.

You have not demonstrated that Luke could not use the same word at Acts 12:4 with the same meaning as he used it at Luke 22:1.

Perhaps you are unaware of the fact that there is historical evidence from the 1600's that all the KJV translators did not confirm and advocate the rendering "Easter" at Acts 12:4. That historical evidence indicates that the KJV translators may have actually put the rendering "the Passover" in their text at Acts 12:4 in agreement with the 1560 Geneva Bible, but a later Church of England prelate changed the rendering to "Easter."

 

Is that an exhaustive list, or representative?

 

Regardless of which greek text one prefers, they would have the word of the lord to us in one of thoe texts, and English transations done off any of them would be the word of the Lord to us in English also!

 

They were also not inspired more than other translators !

 

The English translations such as the kjv/Nkjv/Esv/Nas/Csb/Niv are all of the English word of the lord unto us now!

 

The Holy spirit will not confirm to any of us that the kjv is the only translation to trust and use, as that is not the truth, and He is the very Spirit of truth!

 

Generic, as there are other valid english translations!
Yes, even your Niv would be included!

 

Those "experts" that called the Alexandrian text as being stanaic/corrupted/perversions of the Bible were not 'led by the Spirit: in their pronouncments though!

Few of the KJVO txtual "experts" are really versed into what goes into the translation process!

 

The Nas in fact testifies more to the Lord jesus as being very God than even the Kjv did!

 

Please give an example.

 

The 4 times the Kjv translated "IT" for the Holy Spirit, and the times when the made the great God and savior as referring to 2 seperate persons, but actually both refers to Jesus Himself!

 

Please, at least, give one of those four references you are referring to. Thanks.

 

Romans 8:16
Romans 8:26
Matthew 10:20
1 Peter 1:11

 

How does correctly translating the Greek neuter regarding the Spirit in the Greek being neuter as "it" have anything to do with the Lord Jesus and His deity?