• 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!

AV 1611 KJV Holy Bible

Status
Not open for further replies.

makahiya117

New Member
You'll have to forgive the folks who refused to yield to governmental pressure and stuck with the Geneva Bible instead. It was at least 85.6% perfect! :)



KJV The words of the LORD are pure words:
as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them
from this generation for ever.

The Lord preserved his words.
Inspiration, predestination, providence and preservation continued throughout final canonization
(books and words) and publication of scripture.

The Record Theory independently answers the questions of final authority
and final canonization (books and words). The dynamic Purified Text Theory
supports the Record Theory, demonstrated categorically and conclusively
in the manuscript evidence, bible canonization, bible doctrine,
billions of bibles and computational linguistics.






.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mak: Since none of the English translations of the Bible line up 100% with the KJV: Why are they acceptable to you? You believe that the KJV is perfect. I guess you think that English versions before the KJV were prototypes of the eventual perfect model. So how much deviation from perfect is allowed?Is a version which differs from the KJV 12 % of the time still acceptable? How about a differential of 15%? Do you see what I'm driving at? Was God trying to improve things and eventually came up with the best after some trial and error?
 

makahiya117

New Member
Mak: Since none of the English translations of the Bible line up 100% with the KJV: Why are they acceptable to you? You believe that the KJV is perfect. I guess you think that English versions before the KJV were prototypes of the eventual perfect model. So how much deviation from perfect is allowed?Is a version which differs from the KJV 12 % of the time still acceptable? How about a differential of 15%? Do you see what I'm driving at? Was God trying to improve things and eventually came up with the best after some trial and error?


What I post I wrote.

Hey, thanks for your question.

Here, I'll repeat myself, one time.

KJV The words of the LORD are pure words:
as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them
from this generation for ever.

The Lord preserved his words.
Inspiration, predestination, providence and preservation continued throughout final canonization
(books and words) and publication of scripture.

The Record Theory independently answers the questions of final authority
and final canonization (books and words). The dynamic Purified Text Theory
supports the Record Theory, demonstrated categorically and conclusively
in the manuscript evidence, bible canonization, bible doctrine,
billions of bibles and computational linguistics.






.
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
What I post I wrote.

Hey, thanks for your questions.

Here, I'll repeat myself, one time.

We have heard your mantra ad infinitum. Are you incapable of answering direct,specific questions?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

makahiya117

New Member
You're funny. Thanks for the laugh.

Think about my statements for a while.

Write your theory of final authority and final canonization,

and post it. I'll read it.

KJV Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

makahiya117

New Member
Mak: Since none of the English translations of the Bible line up 100% with the KJV: Why are they acceptable to you? You believe that the KJV is perfect. I guess you think that English versions before the KJV were prototypes of the eventual perfect model. So how much deviation from perfect is allowed?Is a version which differs from the KJV 12 % of the time still acceptable? How about a differential of 15%? Do you see what I'm driving at? Was God trying to improve things and eventually came up with the best after some trial and error?

Thank you for your question.

You do not understand the Purified Text Theory.

-----------

KJV The words of the LORD are pure words:
as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them
from this generation for ever.

The Lord preserved his words.
Inspiration, predestination, providence and preservation continued throughout final canonization (books and words) and publication of scripture.

The Record Theory independently answers the questions of final authority
and final canonization (books and words). The dynamic Purified Text Theory
supports the Record Theory, demonstrated categorically and conclusively
in the manuscript evidence, bible canonization, bible doctrine,
billions of bibles and computational linguistics.
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You do not understand the Purified Text Theory.

Perhaps your posts show that you do not understand your own theory or at least that you are unable or are unwilling to explain it clearly. Repeating the same unproven claims over and over does not make them become true.

You have presented no positive, consistent, sound, scriptural case for your opinions.
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
"We have heard your mantra ad infinitum."


Hey, I like that line! It applies to a lot of people!

So you wish to endorse the nonsense that Mak's pushing? You think it's fine reasoning? That does not bode well for you B4L.
 

Baptist4life

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So you wish to endorse the nonsense that Mak's pushing? You think it's fine reasoning? That does not bode well for you B4L.

I'm not endorsing anyone or anything! I was just trying to be humorous. God did give you a sense of humor, didn't He? Well, wait, after reading your posts on here, I believe I know the answer. :laugh:


FYI, NO, I do not agree with Mak, whatever his name is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top