Did God Bow To King James?

Please, grow up! What a question.

Edited to remove insult.

[ December 12, 2002, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: PreachtheWord ]

 

Yes, bashing was abad choice of words.

Like it or no, new christians ARE considered fruit in the Bible. You try to deny one kind of biblical fruit by asserting the absence of another. You do so while asserting the superiority of the JKV in numbers of converts! Inconsistent! And irrelevant! The KJV has quite a headstart after all.

But let's turn that around: with allthose centuries the KJV has still fialed to bring the world (evn if we think only of the English speaking world) to Christ? Wheres the fruit?

or again: The great spread of liberalism happened on the watch of the KJV. If thatisn't eveidence of its weakness I don't know what is.

Obviously those are not serious arguments. Neither are the anti-MV arguments being advanced.

BTW, if you ever get to see a "Transformations" video you will see the evidence you speak of. Maybe not in America, but that is irrelevant.

 

Brian T;
You shouldn't talk about slander you slandered me by calling me a liar.Are you the accuser of the bretheran,You never apollogize you just go on like nothing happen.You still haven't proven me a liar yet.But I see this doesn't stop you from accusing others.You are one who accuses without cause
Romanbear
Peace

 

All published works, including Bibles, that are currently under copyright, will eventually fall into public domain. So the fact that the KJV is under public domain is irrelevant to whether it's God's "official" English translation.

That is, of course, strictly a matter of opinion.

 

Romanbear, JYD said no other Bibles are public domain. I listed several that were, and instead of dealing with that fact, he accused them of something that wasn't true.

Previously, *you* accused others of directing hate towards KJV users (why is YOUR "accusing" not something bad?). I said that was not true, and I asked you to provide specific examples. You then replied "oh, on other boards, not here". I again asked you provide specific examples. Unless I have missed it somewhere, you have not yet done this. Until you do, I have no proof that your accusations are even true. As soon as I see evidence of hatred towards KJV users in this or any other version discussion board, I will apologize for saying your statement was not true.

 

Brian T;
You called me the liar with out evidence. You prove I'm a liar. I don't have to prove my innocence to you.what are your suffering from delusions of grandeur .Your not Christ so your not my judge. You said what I said was an out right lie you are the accuser you prove it.Or apologize
Romanbear

 

Brian T ;
I think you had better go back and read my original post before we go on so here it is
__________________________________________
You will note in the second paragraph I clearly said "in my opinion".This is what happens when you take things out of context.But what's it to you, your to busy trying to make others look like fools to care. Besides I'm only showing proof you are the liar.
________________________________________________
Hi everyone;
I found the title of this post insulting to those who use the KJB. I don't believe any version is God, but God's word is His word.and Jn 1:1 is true.Granny is correct that what we have here is famine of God's word.Because His true word is lost among the many.In Rev. 22:18 Duet. 4:2 andProverbs 30:6 the Bible warns against adding and taking away from the word of God. Yet we are overwhelmed by new versions all claiming to better than the last and all different.
Those who Believe that these are new translations of scripture are being lied to. They are mans new versions and are not new and better translations. We have so many versions that the only purpose of having so many is confusion.Even the newer versions are confusion. When read along side of each other.We all know who is the master of confusion.Personally I believe that Satan himself is responsible.There are those who believe that new versions are sent from God to help them understand scripture. It's sad that those who believe this are so hateful toward the people who use the KJB. Have you wondered why?
They want you to overlook the fact that the KJB has been the main instrument that has led most people to Christ in the last 400 years. They want you to overlook the fact that since the newer versions have been on the market there is less reverance for God.The churches have been weakened because of confusion.There is more divison in the Church over which version is right. They want you to believe that you and I don't have the intelligence to understand The KJB. When you go to the Christian book store and ask the clerk about a Bible they direct you to a newer version because, there commission is higher for selling the newer versions.These who promote the newer versions are here at Baptist board and they want to lead you away from truth. They want to make it seem that those who use the KJB are a bunch of fanatics who believe the KJB is God and that we are terribly misled. That we who use the KJB are ignorant and seriouly lacking in intelligents.While they are so smart that they can tell you what the Bible says.We don't need the truth because we can trust them to give it to us.
In my personal opinion these people should be ashamed of using the same tactics of the politicians by defaming the KJB users, so they can get you to use the new versions.I believe that they want to make sure that you are as misled as they are.It's amazing that they pullout big words in there conversation to make themselves look more intelligent and more important. May I remind you that the disciples were not theologians. they were a variety of men all with different backgrounds and education.The gospel is given to the poor and the poor in Christ's day were not very well educated.The gospel was given to the sinners not the Sadducees.The rich on the other hand on almost every occasion turned away from truth thinking them selves to intelligent to believe such nonsense as we.
Is the KJB the most accurate?I can't answer that question because, I honestly don't know anymore.But if you will look at the fruits of the KJB, then I would say it's fruits speak for it.Which is a lot more than I can say for any newer version. Can we be Christian and use a newer version?Yes you can and many do.And just as many are misled. All because, of political type defaming of what we had in the first place.We should not allow the newer version people to bury the KJB. To create a famine of God's word.
We should all buy a good dictionary and strive not to be so lazy to use it. Your going to have to use it for the newer versions too. They are not any easier to understand than the KJB.I myself find that when I strive to understand something I'm reading, I know it more fully than if I just scan over it real fast.
May God help us all
To fully understand.
Romanbear
Peace

 

I apologize. There's no need for this hostility, so let's try and deal with this more peaceably.

Let's move on a bit: you said "There are those who believe that new versions are sent from God to help them understand scripture. It's sad that those who believe this are so hateful toward the people who use the KJB." I say those believe that are NOT hateful to those who use the KJV. You may be able to find one extremist among thosands of new version supporters, but I have been involved in this debate for years with hundreds of peopele, and have NEVER (NEVER!) seen hatred towards those who use the KJV. So, even though I apologize for my strong words, I still believe your comments about "those who believe this are so hateful" is entirely untrue. I have yet to see you provide any evidence that supports your accusation.

> You will note in the second paragraph I clearly
> said "in my opinion". This is what happens when
> you take things out of context.

Um, WHAT??? The only time you used the word "opinion" in that post was when you said "In my personal opinion these people should be ashamed of using the same tactics of the politicians by defaming the KJB users". You never said anything about "opinion" in your comments about supporters of new versions hating KJV users.

> Besides I'm only showing proof you are the liar.

Um, where have I lied? Are you wanting to be the "accuser" now? OK, have at it. I'm too tired for this silliness.

 

Dear Romanbear and BrianT,
Children, it greaves me so to see you strive. Has much learning made thee mad?

Ephesians 4:32
And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.

It's just a debate.
Heidi

 

Brian T;
First you apologize then you say my opinion is untrue. Someones opinion can be mistaken but cannot be decietful as in a lie about fact.
I wouldn't have the opinion if I thought it to be wrong.
I accept your apology and yes we can now move on.
Romanbear
Peace

 

There is a big difference between being deceitful and being wrong. I think you are "wrong", and I apologized for making sound like I thought you were "deceitful". I am simply trying to get you to explain *why* you have that opinion. Surely if those who support new versions hated those that use the KJV, it would be relatively easy to provide an example or two. If you can't provide a single example, why do you have that opinion?

 

Hi Brian;
Before I start let me say that Both sides of the Bible version controverse have slandered each other.
Here in Denver where I live, there is a book store called Joshua's. It's where I go when there is something just coming out that I just got to have. A few years ago.I made the unfortunate mistake of asking a clerk about a book by Gail Riplinger "The New Age Versions". The man right away started telling me that I shouldn't read this trash the woman is a demon right out of hell.Then told me that There wasn't any woman that knew squat about the KJV.He said the KJV was out dated and if I had one I should burn it.I let the man rattle on for 20 minutes trying to be nice and figure what the man seemed to be mad about.He told me that King James was a homosexual and no homosexual could have any love for God because he was an abomination to God.He said that the KJV was as corrupt as the man who made it and everyone who used it is misled by him.

After I read Gails book I realized why he was mad Gail does the same thing to some woman who was suppose to help in the translation of the NIV.
Later at a site at msn groups I met a man who used the NIV exclusively. We debated about the authority of the KJV. I'm not sure but, the way you write you remind me of him.Maybe you've been there but the man Hates the KJV and is a strong supporter of the NIV.He is convinced that the NIV is the only Bible there is and he also told me King James was a Homosexual.
King James Has been dead for a very long time and it wasn't until after his death that some guy claimed that he was a homosexual this is not so. No one knows if someone is a homosexual unless the person admitted it or they slept with them.You say no one says anything bad about the KJB your wrong why don't you check out some of the statements that have been on KJV only sites I suppose there all liars.
But don't take my word for it people like Dr Samuel Gipp,Pastor James Knox, Bible Baptist church Florida,Texe mars Author,
Dr William Grady. Dr Roy Branson. All have had the same type of encounters.The only reason any of these men's reputations may be questionable is because of there stance on the KJV. and them being criticized for there beliefs.There are King James only sites on the internet you should go hang out at one for a few weeks you'll see what I mean all you have to do is read.Newer version people come to these all the time to debate and stir things up.
Is this enough for you.
Here on this site I read some post where people have said the KJV is corrupt that the Geneva was the only real word of God.If you think about it you will no doubt remember some your self.You your self told me about a site that promotes the Tyndale Bible this site calls the KJB a lie. have you been there?.
Romanbear
Peace

 

This is a subjective opinion, not a factual one. Therefore, it has absolutely no relevance.

I am not sure about others but this was also the stated purpose of the NASB translators... who were conservative evangelicals... and stand in distinction to all other translation committees in that each person who worked on it signed a statement affirming inerrancy.

Probably. They were only about a generation removed from leaving Rome in 1611. They stood out from other Protestants by establishing their monarch as the earthly head of the Church. The head of the KJV translation committee, Bishop Andrewes, preached that the Eucharist was both sacrament and sacrifice.

... and as opposed to Anglicans today or even in 1880, they persecuted Baptists and other dissenters.

 

I am only familiar with these two. The reason their reputations are in question is because they have spoken and written false statements, been shown their errors, and refused to recant.

In Tex Marres case, he out and out lied about an incident on Ankerberg's show and refused to apologize or acknowledge his sin.

 

Yes, but they dropped the ball using corrupt text(s).

 

Hi Scott J;
I believe everyone is obligated to back up there accusations.Would you explain your comments by giving us examples of what Texe Mars and Samuel Gipp lied about.You should be aware that the KJV only sites has Radio archives of conversations on the air with John Ankerberg and Texe Mars.You can go there if you like I'll PM you the address if you want.
Romanbear
Peace

 

This clerk should not have said some of the things he did. But I don't see where he hated users of the KJV.

Preference for one version over another is not hatred towards people who use that other version.

My discussion with you is NOT about the KJV. We were discussing your claim that supporters of new versions hate KJV users. I have checked the "KJV-only" sites. I have one myself, and a few years ago started and ran what is perhaps the busiest KJV-only discussion board on the internet. Yes, things got heated quite often, and slander was not uncommon, but a sweeping generalization that supporters of new versions hate KJV-users is simply untrue.

You have discussed people attacking KJV-onlyism, and even their preference of other versions, but you have not provided examples of hatred of people towards people, except maybe that clerk that called Riplinger a demon (but that is a single person discussing another single person, not new users hating KJV users in general).

 

This is an unproven assertion and one that is widely rejected by those who have studied the subject in depth. BTW, the texts they used came from a study of both families of mss as well as the versions and church fathers. It is based on a sound analysis of what was probably in the originals and what was not. Erasmus used a handful of incomplete, late mss to produce his texts. As such, it includes text that has little or no Greek support.

While you may not agree with the methods of those involved in producing the various versions of the CT, they were not haphazard in their approach and their conclusions are supported by evidence.

 

Marres claimed that a scholarly opponent of KJVOnlyism was muted by God during the filming of a TV program on the subject. The claim was unsubstantiated, proven wrong, and Marres confronted. He refused to recant and continued to spread this lie.

I have one of Gipps books. He knowingly distorts the position of his opponents for the express purpose of arguing against positions he can beat rather than arguing against the real positions of his opponents.

 

romanbear said:

I believe everyone is obligated to back up there accusations.Would you explain your comments by giving us examples of what Texe Mars and Samuel Gipp lied about.

Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D., deliberately lies about the theological positions of his opponents to make them appear worse than they are. For example, in his book An Understandable History of the Bible he claims that Westcott and Hort were closet Catholics and that Westcott was a devotee of the Virgin Mary. As proof he cites excerpts from a letter of Westcott.

However, as this page shows, the complete letter actually says the very opposite: Westcott was opposed to the "Romish Church," its "error," and its emblems ("I wish it had been a cross," he says of a crucifix he observed).

If Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D. was working from the primary source, he couldn't have missed the tone of the letter as his (selective) quotation is interwoven with very negative statements about the Roman church. Conclusion: Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D. lied.

As for Texe "Conspiracy Boy" Marrs, he "reported" on a taping of the John Ankerberg Show that NASB translator Don Wilkins "lost his voice" and strongly implied that it was a judgment from God. Conspiracy Boy was not there. James White, on the other hand, was there and saw things quite differently:

The View from Marrs

In this article, White also mentions a very silly lie Conspiracy Boy made on the radio during White's debate with D. A. Waite. You can hear not only the debate, but Conspiracy Boy making a buffoon of himself when he calls the show, in this RealAudio file:

White vs. Waite on KIXL (Conspiracy Boy's call starts approx. 50 minutes in; he goes on a foolish bender starting at approx. 54 min. after White asks why he calls him a "devil" in some correspondence, during which he transparently lies about his erroneous citation of Rev. 1:1.)

Verdict: Samuel C. Gipp, Th. D. and Conspiracy Boy are deliberate liars. There's no way around it.

[ December 13, 2002, 12:33 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]