KJBOism?

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 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 Peter 1:20-21)

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

 

And just for information, the Message is a translation. Most call it a paraphrase, but the Websters 1828 Dictionary defines paraphrase as 'translation with latitude.'

The changes from the original 1611 were to correct grammatical errors and punctuation. They did not add to the Word as Bibles of today do, nor did they remove key words, verses, passages, etc.

 

Only the originals are inspired . The Bibles we have now are striving to be faithful translations of the original . Some are better than others .

 

Which originals? There are no originals.
How do you know these translations are translations of the originals? Every time a story is re-told, it is something different.

 

SFiC , do you know that the King James Bible uses the dynamic theory of translation at times ? What about all those " God forbids " ? According to your standard , that is adding to the word of God and possibly detracting from it as well . Those passages should have rendered something more faithful to the original such as " May it never be ! " Or " Certainly not ! " instead .

 

Now YOU are paraphrasing, Rippon! Now there's the problem--just by saying "These passages should have rendered, you are changing the ORIGINAL intent.

 

This is amazing. I am sure after I show the ignorance of these posts, it will simply be ignored by the KJVO, so I'll post it for the benefit of any lurkers who wish to know the truth.

from standing firm

I dont follow, and neither does anyone else able to define the term LOGIC. People claim that translations since the KJV, such as the NASB for starters, are more accurate because they are, and rather than discuss this from an issue of hard evidence and plain reason, people like you avoid the issue, and argue in a circle. When that doesnt work, you make statements like this one above. It is completely asinine to claim that one MUST think a TRANSLATION is inspired in order to feel it is more accurate than ANOTHER TRANSLATION. I stand for the NASB, and others here stand for many others, even some for the KJV, even though they know they arent inspired. You have ZERO PROOF that it is, and you have been asked for it repeatedly. You quote Timothy all day long, with ZERO evidence that "all scripture" means the KJV and no other translation. Its a shell game; a charade, a desperate attempt to support legalism in hopes no one calls you out. Its foolish to claim that these acts of dishonesty are anything close to defending the Word of God. The hypocrisy is not in defending another translation over the KJV, its in making the claims you have and having NOTHING to support it.

GREAT. I think the AUTHOR would have been a better source, but in order to defend a myth, one will use almost any line they can find! Do you even have a clue what Andrew Peterson had to say about his work? Can you answer that question without libel?

What do you consider "key words" and who made you the authority on what can and cant be removed from the KJV and it still be perfect? If one NEW WORD was added or one WORD taken away, can both reading still be perfect? I am certain you will not answer this honestly, so anyone lurking take note: there is a reason why he will not answer this question. Ill tell you after he fails to answer.

from Linda64

Interesting, since you clearly have no clue what the greek here actually means. God forbid is a horrid translation, if in fact it can even be called that. The word GOD is simply not there. You advocate adding the name of God into the word when it is not there? Once again, I am sure you wont answer this honestly, so Ill just inform anyone lurking that there is a reason you wont answer it, and that will be revealed after you dont answer it.

 

A month ago I would have called any man who claimed this were possible to be a lunatic, but it appears to be true: William, you are making less sense than when you started.

 

Linda I was gonna say that also HAHA you beat me to it. SFC understands what we are doing to Christianity as a whole by having MV's and believing everything and nothing.
We must have a Absolute Foundation without that all can be doubted by the lost. If the people that are suppose to have all the answer don't even have some of the answers whats that say about the people sent to spread the Gospel. It means we cant spread what we don't have. There was a time perhaps 50 years ago when a Preacher was respected but, not now because we don't have preachers that have a foundation.

What does one say to the lost when they ask what is the Word of God and that person is a MV'er ??? I can say without any doubt in my mind with 100% absolute authority and confidence that the KJV 1611 is Gods Word and you know God has never ever ever once not backed me on this statement. No matter what someone brings to the table I can put on the WHOLE armor of God.

 

AMEN WILLIAM AMEN AMEN AMEN AND AMEN

 

The book of Revelation is clear on what will happen to ppl that remove anything from the Book!

Can I get an Amen !!!!!

 

Can you give chapter and verse to back that up???? Timothy didn't have the "originals" in his lap when Paul penned 2 Timothy 3:15-16.

Splain!!!

 

Diggin in da Word said:

it is awful funny that no doubt on the authenticity of the inerrancy of the KJV came about until other versions that removed the blood, the deity of Christ, the virgin birth, the mercyseat, sodomy and other key verses in our faith were introduced.

It's awfully sad that KJV-onlyists think the only way to "defend" God's Word is to violate God's Word by lying about it. KJV-onlyism is about as "Christian" as the conspiracy theory in The Da Vinci Code, frankly.

 

Diggin in da Word said:

But show me the word sodomite in these english versions, show me the mercyseat in these versions, show me John 5:4 in many of these.... ya won't find them.

Oh boo hoo hoo. The modern Bibles don't have Diggem's pet words in 'em! How sad!

Fortunately, in the Real World, the accuracy of the Word of God in translation is not decided by the maudlin sentimentality of KJVers.

 

Misunderstood KJV scriptures #52:

2Pe 1:20 (KJV1611 Edition):
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture
is of any priuate Interpretation:

2Pe 1:20 (KJV1769 Edition):
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture
is of any private interpretation.

In 1611 private Interpretation mean 'individual purpose'.
So in 1611 This scripture mean that each prophecy of
the Bible is for all, not just for one person.

Today this scripture is misunderstood to mean
no indiviudal can understand Scripture by themselves.
This is totally un-Baptist understainding
totally dismantling the Doctrines of the Priesthood of
the Believer and Soul Competency