Dean Burgon Quote

Many of these books "were hundreds of years old and difficult to read",hmm. The KJV fits that description.

It still is not clear from your posts why there must be a singular Bible translation in every language. So in your view the Lord can't manage to have several translations in the very same language like he did from say 1526-1611 or so?

 

The test of faith has absolutely nothing to do with the man-made philosophy of KJVOism.

 

...........

 

I can't wait until you get the experience of being a pastor and walk a while in "our" shoes.

I had a bad day yesterday. Forgive me for being a frail man.

 

So it was man, and not God, who established the rules. Let me ask you this: why don't I see one single instruction on how to carry out this important work in scripture? I mean, if you are correct, this has to be one of the most important duties of a child of God. The bible is, after all, that which tells us about Jesus Christ and how to worship Him. It tells us how to baptize, it tells us how to hold communion, it tells us how to run the church. Yet it says nothing of this textual criticism. God, who told us how to do everything else important, apparently left the details of this important work for man to figure out.

 

No sir. You said God commanded us in His word to remove the errors that creep in by copying it. I sincerely would like to know which scripture tells me this. Obviously this would be extremely important and something I'd need to know. Give me one scripture that instructs me that I am to remove error from God's word.

While you are hunting for that I'll give you one scripture to chew on:

2 Timothy 2:15 - "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

Preachers have been pointing this out for years and years, and they are right: it didn't say rightly dividing truth from error. It says rightly dividing the word of truth. Apparently there are no errors in God's word. Of course, this is supported by other scriptures. For instance, Jesus said unto the Father in John 17, "thy word is truth." Proverbs 30 says, "every word of God is pure." Jesus said in Matthew 4:4 that man is to live by "every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." NT writers based arguments sometimes on a single word. I don't see a single shred of evidence that would lead me to believe that God's word has any errors in it. In fact, I see abundant evidence that suggests the contrary, that God's word is pure and free from errors.

I'm still interested to see this bible verse that tells me that I am to remove errors from God's word.

 

What arrogance! I've got one for you:

It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man.

 

Point me to one single scripture that tells me that there is error in the bible. I keep asking for this and have yet to see one.

Also, I would like a scripture that tells me I am to guard God's word against being corrupted. Now, I'm not talking about defending God's word against those that would misuse it. You are telling me that I am charged with keeping God's written word from being corrupted by searching out errors and removing them. Where does God command me to do this?

Surely, if you are correct, it will be stated clearly in the word of God. And if I am neglecting such important commands, I need correction. Please, point me to these important scriptures.

 

While you are searching for the scriptures that command me to pull out the errors that are in the scriptures, I am going to point to some verses that seem to teach that there aren't errors in the scriptures. I've quoted one already, but I'll produce some more.

Psalm 12:6 - "The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times."

Proverbs 30:5 - "Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him."

Matthew 4:4 - "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."

Apparently the bible is telling me that every single individual word is pure. It is also telling me that every single individual word is important because I am to live by them. Also notice that Jesus said it is written, not it was written. In other words, the scriptures in those days accurately stated what was originally written by Moses. Jesus, apparently, didn't believe that error had crept into the word of God.

Then I notice that every single NT writer has the same opinion about the word of God, that it is not only authoritative, but that it is also accurately preserved and free from error. Paul argues from a single word and the tense of a single word. So does Jesus. Jesus asked the Sadducees, "have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." Jesus not only bases His argument on the tense of the word "am" (if it said "was" His whole point collapses), but He also states that the written word they had at their disposal accurately states this. The view He held on the written copies of scripture in that day is also held by every NT writer and apostle. I have yet to find one shred of evidence that the bible has any errors in it that need to be removed. Instead the bible seems to be telling me to view it as accurately preserved in all points and to believe it even down to individual words and their tenses.

 

To answer that question we must consider something:

God promised to preserve His word and told His people that every single word in the bible was important. Really, we must conclude from this that God's people would have such a bible in all ages. Not all of God's people, but at least some. By the way, this is one reason I reject the extreme notion that the KJV represents the final stop in the evolution of God's word, that it is somehow an improvement on what came before. That's nonsense. God has either provided a preserved copy of His bible to His people in all ages, or they haven't been able to study and feast on every word of God.

Now, the problem with the texts commonly called the "critical texts" is that they weren't in use for a long period of time. Some people consider them more reliable because they are physically older. I don't consider this a decisive argument as we cannot ascertain from their age which is more accurate. The critical point to me is their use by Christians in all ages. That is one reason I don't accept the critical texts.

What has historically been accepted by God's people? There is a key question.