• 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!

a good study bible

JonC

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Jordan Kurecki said:
http://www.roapm.com/store/#!/Bonded-Leather-Bible-5th-Edition-BROWN/p/45188113/category=8846043



This study bible is written from a Independent, Fundamental, Separatist, Dispensational, Non-Cal, King James Only viewpoint.


I highly recommend this!
Click to expand...

When you say "King James Only" do you mean that they prefer the KJV as being the most accurate (TR) or that they believe the KJV to be a special inspiration of God?

I have not looked up the authors yet, and you may perhaps save me the trouble. (Maybe this is being lazy on my part....but I'm having to take 8 pills...antibiotics....daily for the next 2 weeks and really am having trouble researching at the moment as "side effects" have me running from my chair quite often :rolleyes:).
 
JonC

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Dr. Ron Gearis is listed as the author (of the commentary...not the Bible :smilewinkgrin:).

Like you, Jordan, I hesitate to purchase a "study Bible." I prefer to have a Bible. But if I were, I would want several contributors (a committee) rather than relying on one or two people. That said, do you have a bio on Gearis? I can't find one online.

Thanks....and thanks for your recommendation of a study Bible as well.
 
A

annsni

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
JonC said:
Dr. Ron Gearis is listed as the author (of the commentary...not the Bible :smilewinkgrin:).

Like you, Jordan, I hesitate to purchase a "study Bible." I prefer to have a Bible. But if I were, I would want several contributors (a committee) rather than relying on one or two people. That said, do you have a bio on Gearis? I can't find one online.

Thanks....and thanks for your recommendation of a study Bible as well.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, I found a post on Baptist Board about his passing 9 years ago.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=33480
 
T

tyndale1946

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
J

Jordan Kurecki

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
JonC said:
When you say "King James Only" do you mean that they prefer the KJV as being the most accurate (TR) or that they believe the KJV to be a special inspiration of God?

I have not looked up the authors yet, and you may perhaps save me the trouble. (Maybe this is being lazy on my part....but I'm having to take 8 pills...antibiotics....daily for the next 2 weeks and really am having trouble researching at the moment as "side effects" have me running from my chair quite often :rolleyes:).
Click to expand...

I would say neither of the two options,we and they do not believe that the KJV is advanced revelation, but we also believe it to be more than just the most accurate translation, basically we believe that God perfectly preserved his word through the translation of the KJV. we believe the KJV as we use today, to be perfect and without error.

so the key is we believe the KJV to be a perfect preservation of God's words for english speaking people, but we do not think it is more inspired than the Original Greek or Hebrew Revelations God gave to the holy men of old.

hope that helps you.
 
J

Jordan Kurecki

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
JonC said:
Dr. Ron Gearis is listed as the author (of the commentary...not the Bible :smilewinkgrin:).

Like you, Jordan, I hesitate to purchase a "study Bible." I prefer to have a Bible. But if I were, I would want several contributors (a committee) rather than relying on one or two people. That said, do you have a bio on Gearis? I can't find one online.

Thanks....and thanks for your recommendation of a study Bible as well.
Click to expand...

he is only the executive editor.

I found a critical review of the study bible:

http://calciumboy.webs.com/roasb.htm
 
R

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jordan Kurecki said:
we believe that God perfectly preserved his word through the translation of the KJV. we believe the KJV as we use today, to be perfect and without error.
Click to expand...
In various editions before, like 1611, 1612 and all the way to Thomas Paris modifying the text and Benjamin Blayney really altering it --the KJV reading public of those times did not have a perfect translation?
so the key is we believe the KJV to be a perfect preservation of God's words for english speaking people,
Click to expand...
Who is your go-to person for your KJVO position?

Since the English language, though dominant in the world, is not the only language in which the Bible has been translated --Do you have any absolutist stance for other languages and their Bible translations?
 
J

Jordan Kurecki

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Rippon said:
In various editions before, like 1611, 1612 and all the way to Thomas Paris modifying the text and Benjamin Blayney really altering it --the KJV reading public of those times did not have a perfect translation?

Who is your go-to person for your KJVO position?

Since the English language, though dominant in the world, is not the only language in which the Bible has been translated --Do you have any absolutist stance for other languages and their Bible translations?
Click to expand...

I believe the revisions to be simple corrections of printing errors.

my go to person would probably be David Cloud.

I do not have any absolute position on foreign langauge bibles.
 
L

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jordan Kurecki said:
I believe the revisions to be simple corrections of printing errors.

my go to person would probably be David Cloud.
Click to expand...

What you believe may be mere assumption and factually incorrect.

All the 2,000 changes made to the 1611 edition of the KJV in later editions have not been demonstrated to be "simple corrections of printing errors.

David Cloud was dependent upon the incomplete, faulty research of D. A. Waite concerning editions of the KJV so he is not an reliable source concerning them.
 
Sapper Woody

Sapper Woody

Well-Known Member
I heard Dr Ron Gearis preach several times as a teen. He was also the director of the Rock of Ages prison ministry. He was a no-nonsense, tell it like it is preacher. But he was loving and caring at the same time.



He used to lean over the pulpit, and say, "Look me in the God given eyeball!" He'd say that to emphasize a point.
 
L

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jordan Kurecki said:
This study bible is written from a Independent, Fundamental, Separatist, Dispensational, Non-Cal, King James Only viewpoint.
Click to expand...

The KJV edition in the 2008 Rock of Ages Study Bible and the study notes were taken from the earlier 2003 New Pilgrim Bible printed by Oxford University Press. One general editor and reviser of the study notes was Jerry Rockwell.

Its KJV text was evidently prepared on a computer, and the person or persons typing it up introduced twenty or more new variations and errors into it. This same KJV text is also found in 2002 and 2003 editions of the KJV printed by Barbour and in the 2009 Strand Study Bible compiled by Brad Strand. I have checked the KJV text in both the second edition and fourth edition of the Rock of Ages Study Bible.

For example, at Genesis 50:23, its KJV text has "son Manasseh," omitting "of." At Leviticus 17:8, it has "burnt-offering of sacrifice" instead of "burnt offering or sacrifice."

I shared with the editor the variations in its KJV text, and the editor planned to correct the errors found in it in the next edition that is to be printed.
 
R

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jordan Kurecki said:
I do not have any absolute position on foreign langauge bibles.
Click to expand...
It would seem your KJVO position is as important to you as an article of Faith. Is that true? You believe that all English speaking Christians should hold to your understanding that the KJV alone is the translation --perfect, as you have claimed. Well, if you hold to that belief so tenaciously then you must believe that God has ordained a singular Bible translation for every language on the face of the earth.
 
McCree79

McCree79

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jordan Kurecki said:
I would say neither of the two options,we and they do not believe that the KJV is advanced revelation, but we also believe it to be more than just the most accurate translation, basically we believe that God perfectly preserved his word through the translation of the KJV. we believe the KJV as we use today, to be perfect and without error.

so the key is we believe the KJV to be a perfect preservation of God's words for english speaking people, but we do not think it is more inspired than the Original Greek or Hebrew Revelations God gave to the holy men of old.

hope that helps you.
Click to expand...
Where do you turn when the Greek and KJV(TR) do not agree? Such as 1 John 5:7? The only Greek text to have that rendering, as far as I know, where all written in the 1500's.
 
J

Jordan Kurecki

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
McCree79 said:
Where do you turn when the Greek and KJV(TR) do not agree? Such as 1 John 5:7? The only Greek text to have that rendering, as far as I know, where all written in the 1500's.
Click to expand...

"

"Majority text" or "minority readings"


It is also fallacious and hypocritical to suggest that just because the reading found in 1 John 5:7 is not "in the majority of texts" that it therefore cannot be legitimate, when the very men who are behind the ever-changing modern critical text admit that the true reading may be found in a few or even one manuscript.


Westcott and Hort, the very men who introduced the Critical Text methods found in the RV, ASV, NASB, NIV, themselves said: "A few documents are not, by reason of their paucity, appreciably less likely to be right than a multitude opposed to them" (Introduction to the Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament, 1881, p. 45)


J. K. Elliott, a modern textual critic comments on transcriptional probabilities: "By using criteria such as the above the critic may reach a conclusion in discussing textual variants and be able to say which variant is the original reading. However, it is legitimate to ask: can a reading be accepted as genuine if it is supported by only one ms.? There is no reason why an original reading should not have been preserved in only one ms. but obviously a reading can be accepted with greater confidence, when it has stronger support."



Even Kurt Aland says: "Theoretically, the original readings can be hidden in a single mss. thus standing alone against the rest of tradition," and Tasker has a similar comment: "The possibility must be left open that in some cases the true reading may have been preserved in only a few witnesses or even in a single relatively late witness." - The Effect of Recent Textual Criticism upon New Testament Studies," The Background of the New Testament and its Eschatology, ed. W. D. Davies and D. Daube (Cambridge: The Cambridge University Press, 1956)


Sure, there are a few minority readings in the King James Bible, but for every one in the KJB there are at least 20 minority readings found in the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV and that is no exaggeration"

http://www.brandplucked.webs.com/1john57.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top