1. 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!

KJV 3:Rev. 16:5

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by robycop3, May 27, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,396
    Likes Received:
    672
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What I doubt is the KJVO myth. That myth is something else you can't prove, any more than you can counter the "Rev. 16:5 thingie".
     
  2. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,604
    Likes Received:
    464
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I have noticed that you refuse to admit that you make and believe assertions that are not true and thus are incorrect. Examples have been given where sound evidence would prove that you believe assertions that are not true.
     
    #102 Logos1560, May 30, 2021
    Last edited: May 30, 2021
  3. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,396
    Likes Received:
    672
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I think it's only natural that Paul, writing to Greeks, would've written to them in Greek.

    Now, we don't know who first made copies of the originals, but they almost-certainly copied Greek into Greek.

    You're using English here (as am I, of course) because it's the language of your readership here, and I believe you'll continue to use it here, no matter how many other languages you know. I know only English, so, of course, that's what I use. And it's well-known that Greek was then the prevalent language in that part of the world. There's lots of evidence that Luke was a Greek, as well as Mark. Peter & John were Jews, And the ms. used to make the various TR editions were Greek.

    And, for the purpose here, the oldest-known ms. of Revelation are all Greek.
     
  4. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,396
    Likes Received:
    672
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Saying that God provided His word in English only in the KJV isn't a matter of faith, but of guesswork and thralldom to a Satanic, man-made false doctrine, an attempt by Satan to LIMIT GOD.
     
  5. rlvaughn

    rlvaughn Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2001
    Messages:
    10,544
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    Faith:
    Baptist
    All that said, still not one quark of evidence from the Scriptures themselves saying that the oldest surviving manuscripts are best.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. Alofa Atu

    Alofa Atu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2019
    Messages:
    2,077
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    What about the Syrian texts? and the Latin texts? and the Egyptian texts? etc?
     
  7. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,604
    Likes Received:
    464
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What are you claiming about them? Do you claim that one of those texts was perfect?
     
  8. Alofa Atu

    Alofa Atu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2019
    Messages:
    2,077
    Likes Received:
    81
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I claimed nothing. I am simply asking about the copies of the texts into those languages. Surely you do not believe that every single Greek copy came out perfectly, and that only the perfect copies remain in that language (Greek)?

    To answer you, wouldn't it depend on what texts you are referring to? The ones we have access to now, in tatters, or others which we do not have access to now, since then, or even having fallen apart since obtained?
     
  9. 1689Dave

    1689Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2018
    Messages:
    7,953
    Likes Received:
    708
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Consider that God has an elect people for salvation. But most are reprobate. He provides scripture for the elect. Why should it be for deaf ears?
     
  10. 1689Dave

    1689Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2018
    Messages:
    7,953
    Likes Received:
    708
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm KJV "mainly" but I also study from many other translations. So what's your beef?
     
  11. 1689Dave

    1689Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2018
    Messages:
    7,953
    Likes Received:
    708
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You assume I am KJV only. I study from many translations but so far, I prefer the KJV over the rest.
     
  12. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,604
    Likes Received:
    464
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Your statement below to which I responded is a typical KJV-only allegation that defends KJV-only claims as being a matter of faith and that suggests any believers who disagree with KJV-only claims prefer doubt. Why would you suggest or repeat a KJV-only allegation if you are not KJV-only?

    Do you acknowledge the fact that there are some inaccurate renderings in the KJV, that there are some biased pro-Church of England renderings, or some errors made by the KJV translators [not introduced by the printers]?

    Preferring the KJV is not actually being KJV-only, but your allegation and statement above displays typical KJV-only reasoning. There are some who may try to be KJV-only and not-KJV-only at the same time, but that is not in reality possible. KJV-only advocates may study from many translations, but they do not accept those translations as being the word of God in the same sense as they would claim for the KJV, and they may study them to find support for renderings in the KJV or to find fault with them.
     
    #112 Logos1560, May 31, 2021
    Last edited: May 31, 2021
  13. 1689Dave

    1689Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2018
    Messages:
    7,953
    Likes Received:
    708
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm not familiar with any of the charges made against the KJV except for the Johannine Comma. Firstly, I do not trust those making them. They cannot have saving faith if they doubt the integrity of scripture.
     
  14. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,604
    Likes Received:
    464
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Questioning or doubting biased pro-Church of England renderings in the KJV would not at all be the same thing as doubting the integrity of Scripture.
    Questioning or doubting misleading or inaccurate renderings in the KJV (that do not accurately present the meaning of the preserved original-language words of Scripture) would not at all be the same thing as doubting the integrity of Scripture.
    Questioning or doubting any words added by the KJV translators for which they had no original-language words of Scripture would not at all be the same thing as doubting the integrity of Scripture.
    Questioning whether it was correct for the KJV translators to omit providing an English renderings for some preserved original-language words of Scripture in their underlying texts would not at all be the same thing as doubting the integrity of Scripture.

    You seem to be questioning the salvation and faith of any believers who disagree with KJV-only reasoning, which is a KJV-only assertion of some KJV-only advocates.

    Are you suggesting that you do not trust any believer who is not KJV-only?
     
  15. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,604
    Likes Received:
    464
    Faith:
    Baptist
    How can you not be familiar with some of them if you read the posts at this forum?

    How can you not be familiar with the subject of this thread--about the following of a textual conjecture at Revelation 16:5 not found in preserved Greek NT manuscripts?
     
    #115 Logos1560, May 31, 2021
    Last edited: May 31, 2021
  16. 1689Dave

    1689Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2018
    Messages:
    7,953
    Likes Received:
    708
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I don't listen to those who attack scripture. They might know what it says, just as the Pharisees do. But they do not know what it means, just as the Pharisees do not.
     
  17. 1689Dave

    1689Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2018
    Messages:
    7,953
    Likes Received:
    708
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I avoid negative doubting people. I only read what I think is worthy of my time.
     
  18. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,396
    Likes Received:
    672
    Faith:
    Baptist
    of course not. That'd be like a Maytag factory worker saying "Maytag washers are best because they're Maytags." The original writers of Scripture didn't have anything with which to compare them. But Paul did write that if anyone taught any other "Gospel" besides what he & his companions had presented, let him be accursed.
     
  19. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,396
    Likes Received:
    672
    Faith:
    Baptist
    They were almost certainly translated from Greek ones.
     
  20. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,396
    Likes Received:
    672
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Calvinism is false.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...