Apostasy and Modern English Bible Versions

The statement has been made, it is your responsibility to prove your innocense, unless of course you are admitting your guilt? But in this realm of apostates, I won't expect much.

 

Anyone who fabricates a "witty invention" to create an atmosphere for such guiole CANNOT be considered anything else, and your association places you in the same catagory. Those who "play" by that same invention are aslo in the same.

 

Cute Frank - the "realm of apostates" is a wonderful, edifying statement which is sure to build up your brothers in Christ.

So you do deny me the right of innocent till proven guilty. May everyone see that Frank has no evidence for his unfounded charge.

So I guess we can return to the topic at hand since that rabbit trail has been dealt with.

 

Oh? So you have nothing to show?

 

Frank wrote: "and Larry a dichtomy first has to be false to be considered a false dichtomy."

My point exactly. By (you) claiming that any tolerance of MV's is a defacto attack on the KJV, you are creating & fostering a false dichotomy.

Get it now?

 

C4K

Moderator
Member # 7160

posted May 28, 2005 11:58 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am trying a new softer, gentler approach

Although if the KJV does come back in to the discussion the post will be deleted without notice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 11831 | From: Eire | Registered: Oct 2003 | IP: Logged |

Uh-hummm!

Something wrong with the Bible being a in the discussion about the Bible?

 

No more comments my dear brother in Christ. Let our comments stand on their merits and let us return this thread to the topic at hand.

 

The discussion deals emphatically with apostasy. I said the moderators are liberals who go agaisnt the KJB, I gave you RECENT proof. You have truned tail and run to the hiding place of threatening by a moderator: another practice of a liberal.

 

Context my friend, that thread had nothing to do with the KJV. It was about a choice between two other versions. If that is the best you can do to come up with an attack it is clear to all that you are grasping at straws.

 

Anyone who fabricates a "witty invention" to create an atmosphere for such guiole CANNOT be considered anything else, and your association places you in the same catagory. Those who "play" by that same invention are aslo in the same. </font>[/QUOTE]I see. So you are saying that my repudiation of KJVOism makes me a liberal.

If that be so, than I guess you're free to call me a liberal.

 

Dr. Bob
Administrator
Member # 52

posted May 05, 2005 02:18 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a MAJOR problem here.

Some go to the Greek and see a number of good choices of English words/phrases to translate the Greek. In the "good old days", translators even put a number of choices in the margins, showing there was not "one right" translation.

Sadly, some go the AV1611 (or revision thereof) and claim THAT is the only correct word.

PRINCIPLE: We must go to the Greek as the final authority of what is a good/bad English word, not to ANY translation of man.

To claim perfection in an English translation is as ludicrous as claiming the Pope's words were perfect. Both would take the inspiring power of God - and it surely doesn't rest on man today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 25005 | From: Casper, WY USA | Registered: Jun 2000 | IP: Logged |



By estimation, no Bible in English is inspired , according to Dr. Bob, but then he is attacking all English translations, including the KJB.

 

Larry, I, as a conservative, having every freedom deemed to me by the Creator to call you a liberal.

C4K, no discussion about the Bible in English can omit the KJB, else you're only discussing commentaries, labeled as versions. That is why you demand the KJB be referred to as the "KJV" for version. Thus "KJV" is in itself an attack on the KJB.

Not "grasping at straws" just picking needles out of the haystack.

 

I could go on, but this is truly a waste of redeemable time, only becuase you will never admit your apostasies

 

More baseless charges I see - can you show me where I demanded the use of KJV as opposed to KJB?

Thank you for making the merits of your arguements so clear for all to see.

 

Frank, just out of curiosity, what is your opinion of the following individuals:

1. Peter Ruckman

2. Gail Riplinger

 

I wonder how some folks would respond if a poster said that KJVOism is apostacy? I would guess that they would demand an edit.

This thread has left its topic, but has merit in that it has shown the depths and logic of some of the arguments.

 

Final: modern versions promote apsotasy,"KJVO" is the apostates attempt to demoralize conservatives

 

Now I'm not only a "liberal" according to Frank, but since I've used the term "KJVO" in this thread- now I'm also an "apostate".

Frank, I'm glad you were around to point those things out to me!

 

It appears that apostacy, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder .

 

I am KJVo #4 by Dr. B's definition.

As such, it pains me to see the absurdities of Frank's arguments.

For my brethren on the MV side; I see NOW why it is that you are so vehemently opposed to fellers' claims such as I have witnessed in this thread.

Be it known to all; I won't back down from my conviction that the KJV is the perfect Bible for English speaking folks today.

Be it also known that I won't point my gun at a fellow brother in the trenches who is shooting at the same enemy of our souls as I am.

Some choose a .22 cal and some choose a 400 Weatherby but hopefully ALL are shooting at the SAME enemy!!!

This "apostacy" charge smacks of PSR in Florida!

In HIS service;
Jim