Correction on the KJV Position

[franklinmonroe]

Quote:

The first I know of who took a KJV position on this issue was Seventh Day Adventist Benjamin C. Wilkinson, whose book Our Authorized Version Vindicated (1930) John Of Japan​

John of Japan this is the view that came from the book “From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man” Yes Wilkinson defended the text but there were plenty of men before him .Unfortunately the authors left out:

Henery John Todd 1765-1845 A vindication of Our Authorized Translation and translators of the Bible 1819
John Jebb 1775-1883
John Dowling 1807-78
Trinitarian Bible Society of England Formed in 1831 in defense of the received text and the KJV

"WE MUST NOT PERMIT OUR JUDGMENT TO BE OVERAWED BY GREAT NAMES IN THE REALM OF BIBLICAL "SCHOLARSHIP" WHEN IT IS SO CLEARLY EVIDENT THAT THE DISTINGUISHED SCHOLARS OF THE PRESENT CENTURY ARE MERELY REPRODUCING THE CASE PRESENTED BY RATIONALISTS DURING THE LAST TWO HUNDRED YEARS" (if the foundations be destroyed, TBS Article No. 14

William Aberhart 1878-1943
Philip Mauro 1859-1952-

Ehud

You imply by your first statement immediately following John of Japan's quote that there were "men before" Wilkinson that "took a KJV position". Basically, you disagreed with JoJ that Wilkinson was first to write about the KJVO doctrine.

I tried to find Article No. 14 on the Trinitarian Bible Society's website, but I don't think it is there. (Perhaps you could supply a link to it.) I did find a citation of Article No. 14 on David Cloud's copyrighted website (wayoflife.org), which you quote in part (and I believe Cloud expects that proper credit be given, if that was your source).

But the neglected final sentence of the Cloud citation makes it EVEN MORE clear that these good men were writing to publicly defend the integrity of the scriptural text against a "skeptical crusade" (the Rationalism Movement which began more-or-less in the late 1700s with German Johann Semler) that was attempting to reduce the Bible's status to that of an "ordinary" human book. These authors did not specifically have in mind the establishment of any English translation as being superior to another.

So, the fact these Christian men wrote to defend the Scriptures (yes, most commonly that would have been the 'Authorized Version' in English) has not shown that they "took a KJVO position"; if they didn't claim the KJVO position, then they weren't "left out" because they weren't "before" Wilkinson in that 'doctrine'. These authors lend valuable arguments to the issue, but that alone does not prove they were KJVO in belief.

 

[Askjo]

Yea, hath God said, "Thou shalt be KJVO"? Chapter & verse, please. If none, we must dismiss it as man-made & untrue. THAT should be the revising of the KJVO position.

Did He say that? Please show me where one word, "KJVO" in the Bible. Or do you use God in vain?

 

[HankD]

Some blatherings...

I remember several years ago when a KJVO person made an attack on the entire BB.

He filled up several pages of text repeating in upper case "you are all going to hell".

We are blessed not to have that kind of infantile behavior here at the BB anymore.

But why oh why do we drag up this herd of dead horses and beat them over and over again?

Why can't we be "tolerant" (EEK!, there I used the "T" word) enough to accept the fact that everyone here wants the same thing?

The purest and most accurate translation possible in our native tongue.

The best vocabulary, grammar and syntax to grasp to the greatest extent possible the exact nuance of the original language words.

This, from the best original manuscript copies available.

The last one is the rub, we don't have the originals.
We can make educated propositions as to which are the best copies.

But, it's a fact, for some reason God has not preserved them.

And it really doesn't matter whether God allowed it to happen or made a "decree" to destroy them. They are gone.

Does anyone here doubt that God could have preserved them directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles had He wanted to?

If we have a problem with this, isn't God the one to whom our complaints should be directed?

If we all heed and love our Bibles, we'll all come away with the same fruit of the Spirit.


HankD

 

[EdSutton]

Some blatherings...

I think I will get back into this thread, even though Ehud apparenly has no intention of answering my post.

I remember several years ago when a KJVO person made an attack on the entire BB.

He filled up several pages of text repeating in upper case "you are all going to hell".

We are blessed not to have that kind of infantile behavior here at the BB anymore.

But why oh why do we drag up this herd of dead horses and beat them over and over again?

This is a veternarian working on a horse with a special horse tool.

The horse is much better now.

Why can't we be "tolerant" (EEK!, there I used the "T" word) enough to accept the fact that everyone here wants the same thing?

The purest and most accurate translation possible in our native tongue.

The best vocabulary, grammar and syntax to grasp to the greatest extent possible the exact nuance of the original language words.

This, from the best original manuscript copies available.

The last one is the rub, we don't have the originals.
We can make educated propositions as to which are the best copies.

But, it's a fact, for some reason God has not preserved them.

And it really doesn't matter whether God allowed it to happen or made a "decree" to destroy them. They are gone.

Does anyone here doubt that God could have preserved them directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles had He wanted to?

If we have a problem with this, isn't God the one to whom our complaints should be directed?

If we all heed and love our Bibles, we'll all come away with the same fruit of the Spirit.


HankD

IMO, BB Member HankD should not be allowed to post in this forum.

The reason he should not be allowed here, is his posts are making way to much sense about the topic, at hand. :thumbs:

>

Now, I probably need to make a trip to the "Emergency Room" so I can get medical assistace in removing my tongue from my cheek.

For some unknown reason, it seems to be stuck there.

Ed

 

[HankD]

Don't forget your horse Ed...


HankD

 

[Ed Edwards]

Here is a horse of another color by another Ed:

http://deephousepage.com/smilies/deadhorse.gif

 

[HankD]

Here is a horse of another color by another Ed:

http://deephousepage.com/smilies/deadhorse.gif

And now that we've run out of Ed's (or have we?) have we run the "dead horse" horse into the ground?

A horse is a horse of course.

But...

Psalm 33:17 An horse is a vain thing for safety: neither shall he deliver any by his great strength.​

HankD

 

[Ed Edwards]

Of course a horse is a horse.
Unless, of course, that horse is the Wonderful, Fantastic, First Class

MR ED!

-

 

[robycop3]

Did He say that? Please show me where one word, "KJVO" in the Bible. Or do you use God in vain?

Why are ya asking ME? I asked YOU. Well, DID God say, "Thou shalt be KJVO"? If He didn't, we must conclude that MAN started KJVO & therefore it's untrue.

 

[Salamander]

God doesn't preserve the perishable parchments,papyri, scrolls, or even the ink they were written with, but He has preserved His word or he isn't God.

One must remember, the physical Originals were written upon that which falls under the curse of degeneration. His word never degenerates. Only words of men degenerate, and those words degenerate men.:godisgood:

 

[Rippon]

One must remember, the physical Originals were written upon that which falls under the curse of degeneration. His word never degenerates. Only words of men degenerate, and those words degenerate men.:godisgood:

Praise the Lord that we are washed by the cleansing of God's word.His Word is available in a multitude of translations.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

I think we have run the course of this discussion.