KJB1611reader
Active Member
First, I wish to share this link that talks about Stephanus and others confirming 1 John 5:7 in codexes.
-
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!
Is it okay to use the NKJV?
- Thread starter Guido
- Start date
I did not claim that God lost it. Perhaps your own KJV-only reasoning/teaching seems to suggest that God failed to preserve the same exact original-language words of Scripture He gave by inspiration to the prophets and apostles well enough for them to remain the standard and greater authority for the making and trying of all Bible translations before 1611, in 1611, and after 1611. The KJV translators themselves maintained that the preserved Scriptures in the original languages were the standard and authority for the making and trying of all Bible translations, and I agree with them. I believe a consistent view of preservation that would be true before 1611, in 1611, and after 1611 instead of an inconsistent modern non-scriptural KJV-only view.
The preserved Scriptures in the original languages today are found in the same multiple, varying original-language manuscript copies of Scripture as they were before 1611. God's promises concerning preservation did not change in 1611 or in 1769 or in 1900 [PCE] as KJV-only reasoning inconsistently implies.
Layman
Active Member
It would seem that Shawn has been banned. I guess he will be keeping his opinions to himself from now on.
No they do not . That is false witness. Mark the person who told you that as unreliable.
Thank you for your kind evaluation of me.
This collection of various readings in the margin distinguished Estienne's third edition as the first Greek text with a critical apparatus, and greatly enhanced the reputation of the text. It was thought by many that Estienne had edited his text directly from these manuscripts, and indeed Estienne's preface promotes this idea. But in more than a hundred places all of Estienne's manuscripts are cited together for readings which differ from the text, and in several places the text follows Erasmus alone against all known manuscripts. It may also be observed that in the one place above all others where the various readings were likely to be consulted, that is, in 1 John 5:7, an error in the placement of brackets led readers to believe that all seven of the manuscripts collated by Estienne for the General Epistles included most of the disputed clause relative to the three heavenly witnesses, when in fact none of them contained the clause at all.
"You" is intended to be a plural, including all who take the prevalent position of producing more and better Bibles. You are probably a nice enough guy for those who know you personally but the opinions we express defines our views of God.
For context, the year 1901 seemed to be a transition year for Christianity in the West. The first of a long line of American and English language Bibles began to be published with the ASV. The same year the modern Pentecostal movement was birthed in Topeka Kansas from members of main line denominations and after a season of great revival in the West.
That was the beginning of new Bibles and new denominations. The Pentecostals even developed a paraphrased version of themselves called the modern Charismatic movement where anything goes and there are no parameters . Considering Bible prophecy and the devices of the adversary that we should not be ignorant of, it is hard for me to believe there was not a powerful designer behind all of this.
Corruption is everywhere. There are no coincidences. but a real spiritual war. You must take sides.
Mt 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
You are blaming all that on a Bible translation? Pretty sure those Pentecostals were using KJVs.
I don’t see why not
No, I was dealing with a "transition" that was notable within Western Christianity from 1901. This transition led to a plethora of English translations and likewise of new Christian denominations and divisions. but it took time. Certainly the Pentecostals and Charismatics are not KJV only today. Those groups are a product of that transition and have their own apostles and prophets who add to the word of God.
Now Conan, there are parallels recorded in scriptures. God in his providence is guiding history to a conclusion that fulfills all his promises to men and angels, thus glorifying himself. He does this without violating the free will of men to choose to be or not to be in his favor when that is finally accomplished. The things done by wicked men that God allows is a test for our benefit to see if we will follow God or man. He has already given us the answer that when he comes few will be saved.
It is as important to learn the ways of God as to know the words of God.
De 28:9 The LORD shall establish thee an holy people unto himself, as he hath sworn unto thee, if thou shalt keep the commandments of the LORD thy God, and walk in his ways.
Heb 3:10 Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways.
Thanks for the question.
Modern non-scriptural KJV-only teaching adds to the word of God or by eisegesis reads into verses KJV-only opinions that they do not teach.
Matthew Verschuur is a Pentecostal KJV-only preacher who is behind KJV-only claims for a claimed Pure Cambridge Edition of the KJV. He connects Pentecostalism with his claims for the KJV.
David O’Steen wrote: “The main controversy concerns what has become known as the Pure Cambridge Edition (PCE). It is a Cambridge text from 1900, determined to be the purest edition by Matthew Verschuur, a Pentecostal preacher from Australia” (Study Notes, p. 104).
This revised KJV edition is the one supposedly protected or guarded by the elders [Craig Savige, Samantha Savige, Matthew Verschuur] of the Pentecostal Victory Faith Centre in Australia. Matthew Verschuur claimed: “As for variations in the Pure Cambridge Edition, these have also been settled and resolved by the Elders of Victory Faith Centre in their apostolic office of the guardianship of the Pure Cambridge Edition” (Revelation of the Pure Word). Craig Savige wrote: “It is no coincidence that this prophecy [by Pentecostal John G. Lake in 1914] came just after the final edition of the King James Bible—the Pure Cambridge Edition—had come” (King James Bible Only Position). Concerning this edition, Matthew Verschuur asserted: “Its appearance with the rise of Pentecostalism, especially Smith Wigglesworth (1907) is no accident” (Revelation of the Pure Word). Matthew Verschuur declared: “It was divine providence that revealed that God’s chosen standard was the Pure Cambridge Edition” (God’s Chosen Edition). In his conclusion, Matthew Verschuur claimed: “The Pure Cambridge Edition is correct to the very letter, and it is fully God’s will in English” (Pure Cambridge Edition). Matthew Verschuur asserted: “The Pure Cambridge Edition can always be shown to be correct” (God’s Chosen Edition). These quotations are from unpaged books or articles posted at Matthew Verschuur’s web site.
What has that got to do with anything? There are hundreds of sects and denominations of Pentecostals and Charismatics. My main purpose for bringing them up is because of the point concerning the historic transition in the Christian religion in 1901. What I said is true even if every one of them took a KJV only position. They do not believe the words any more than you believe them. These groups are an addition to the visible church but denominationally they are bundles of tares in the field.