We all have our preference, but that's not what this thread is stating. The thread is stating that only the KJV can be held up as the inspired word of God.
I find that thinking very silly.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Holy King James Bible is our authority and guiding principle.
- Thread starter rockytopva
- Start date
I find that thinking very silly.
Yes, as OP states to us any other Bible not really one to use!
The Nineteenth-century British evangelist, Rodney (Gypsy) Smith once said, “There are five Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and the Christian, but most people never read the first four.”
There are many interpretations to the first four, and every Christian seems unique as well. I prefer the scripture begun in the KJV, and don't mind someone referring to some other translation during the message.
That is fine, you are changing from what first posting was!
I must admit, especially after reading the responses, that I don't totally agree with the statement, "The Holy King James Bible is our authority and guiding principle." I say that as I have always had a Strongs Concordance with me looking up the Greek or Hebrew word. It would be more honest of me to say that the Strongs Concordance is more of the authority here.
I also benefit from the Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon site.
37818
Well-Known Member
Peter Ruckman.
the KJVO myth has absolutely NO Scriptural support, & besides that, many of its man-made points are wrong, such as "The KJV is perfect". We've discussed several of its goofs & booboos on this site.
And remember the thread I started about the KJV's being a "Model T" version? Well, that fact is still true. The KJV was made for the British Anglicans of the 17th C, and God has caused newer translations to be made for today's English-users. (As well as translations in other languages for other peoples.)
A story I've told before: I had a neighbor who was a doctor from South Korea, & he was no master of the English language, and was also a new Christian. He asked me if he could borrow a Bible til his Korean-language copy arrived . Without thinking, I handed him a KJV.
A coupla days later, he called me & said he was greatly distressed by the passage "suffer little children". I explained what it meant, & quickly brought him a copy of the NKJV, which does not have the KJV's archaisms.
If one feels more-comfortable with the KJV than with any other version fine, long as one doesn't believe or spread the pack of lies of the KJVO myth.
And remember the thread I started about the KJV's being a "Model T" version? Well, that fact is still true. The KJV was made for the British Anglicans of the 17th C, and God has caused newer translations to be made for today's English-users. (As well as translations in other languages for other peoples.)
A story I've told before: I had a neighbor who was a doctor from South Korea, & he was no master of the English language, and was also a new Christian. He asked me if he could borrow a Bible til his Korean-language copy arrived . Without thinking, I handed him a KJV.
A coupla days later, he called me & said he was greatly distressed by the passage "suffer little children". I explained what it meant, & quickly brought him a copy of the NKJV, which does not have the KJV's archaisms.
If one feels more-comfortable with the KJV than with any other version fine, long as one doesn't believe or spread the pack of lies of the KJVO myth.
And that female author about Satanic editions!
I taught a year of Sunday School as a teenager with the Freewill Baptist and they presented me with a KJV Open Bible all signed by the members upon my departure. I would buy a second KJV Open Bible and that shows signs of wear. It soon became obvious that the Strongs Exhaustive Concordance would be beneficial. My second favorite bible aide is the complete work of John Bunyan in three volumes.
No problem with Kjv or the Open Bible, just a problem if you were the Pastor and made sure Only Kjv were allowed to be brought in!
I do take notice of the bible version but don't ever remember saying anything about it. I will make a facial gesture according to my judgement. Remembering especially....
If thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.- Romans 14:15
Not only did the Freewill Baptist present me with the bible, but also with spirituality. The most spiritual service I have ever benefited from was attending a Freewill Baptist foot washing. I hated the thoughts of going and almost didn’t. They had regular service with communion afterwards and then broke out the basins. They would wash the feet, pray over you, then dry them, an emotional service and there was a wonderful clean spiritual sensation afterwards. After such lessons from the Freewill Baptist I would hope that I would be of such spirit to edify rather than to destroy.
Last edited:
Do I still need to carry a rooster with me while I travel to protect myself from cockatrices?
If I happen to capture and kill one, what is the best way to cook a cockatrice?
I want to ride a unicorn. Where can a find one?
One other thing - Which KJV is the right one?
If you've got a KJV, its the right one!... If it doesn't say The King James Version, it's the wrong one
... It's simple Simon, don't complicate it!... Brother Glen
If you've got a KJV, its the right one!... If it doesn't say The King James Version, it's the wrong one
Actually most of the editions of the KJV printed before 1881 did not say King James Version on them so are you in effect condemning almost 300 years of KJV editions as being wrong ones? It was sometimes referred to as King James' translation, but it was not printed on most of the title pages or covers for a long period of time. Are your assumptions based on post-1900 editions of the KJV as you ignore almost 300 years of editions?
KJV-only advocates often seem to oversimplify and overgeneralize to the point that their claims become factually incorrect.
They will ignore and avoid simple verifiable facts about the many varying editions of the KJV. They avoid the fact that the varying editions of the KJV in the 1600's differ in many places from the varying editions of the KJV in the 1700's. Even all the editions in the 1600's were not identical and likely differences with each other could be found in most of them. They will avoid the fact of actual proven errors in KJV editions including errors in the 1611 edition and in the 1769 Oxford edition.
Well over 100 actual differences could be pointed out in thirty or more present post-1900 KJV editions without even including their 2,000 differences with 1611 reprint editions.
Can KJV-only advocates present some simple verifiable facts and clear scriptural truths to support their unproven KJV-only assumptions?
Last edited:
If you've got a KJV, its the right one!... If it doesn't say The King James Version, it's the wrong one
Hmm, my KJV I’m holding says
Exodus 20:14
Thou shalt commit adultery.
You have a lot of practice with this, so how do you commit adultery?
Where should I start?
I can remember when the Freewill Baptist church presented me with the KJV Open Bible that family, friends, and fellow Christians glorified God as if I had obtained something of great worth.
Could they not have done the same with an ESV, NASB, NIV, NLT , or some other version?
My church provides each 3rd grade child with a personal Bible. They are encouraged to use this Bible as they attend various ministry programs throughout the week. All my children still have their Bibles on even though they are older. It is a great connection to the community of faith.