Do you believe in the scriptures being Infallable?

[Internet Theologian]

...I hope it's not Psalm 12.

 

[TCassidy]

Probably a dumb question, but I'm trying to recall where God has promised to preserve his word "for the use of all His people in every generation."

I believe it, but can you point me to the scripture(s) that make this explicit promise?

Psalm 100:5 For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations.

John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Psalm 100:5 For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations.

John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

Not terribly strong proof texts.

I think we can make the argument from God's character and His demonstrated desire to communicate with humankind, but I'd love to have something more explicit.

Thanks!

 

[SovereignGrace]

I do not believe there any And yes I am KJO

Uh huh...pegged the OP from the start...a KJVO witch hunt.

Until about two years ago I was in that cult. Please come out from them. I am begging you...

 

[JonC]

Uh huh...pegged the OP from the start...a KJVO witch hunt.

Until about two years ago I was in that cult. Please come out from them. I am begging you...

What opened your eyes to the realization you were believing a lie?

 

[SovereignGrace]

What opened your eyes to the realization you were believing a lie?

TBH...

When I had gotten into it with DarrellC and made myself look foolish under my 'convicted1' username, I made this username and started posting with the NIV when I was still KJVO/P(used it to try to throw ppl off my trail as I was embarrassed by my actions)...I wasn't entirely in the 'O' group, but thought other versions NOT KJV were inferior. I began reading the NIV(though I had one and thought it was pretty good...still thought it was not in the KJV's league). I then began reading the YLT and it was good, too. Then began reading the NASB, and it was good, too. I am now reading through Romans with my ESV, and it is good as well. The KJV I onced solely read barely gets time now.

NIV
NASB
YLT
ESV
KJV

That is how I place them in regards to my usability...

 

[SovereignGrace]

So I guess I went from KJVO to KJVP and now to KJVR...'R' means rarely, Brother Jon.

 

[Internet Theologian]

TBH...

When I had gotten into it with DarrellC and made myself look foolish under my 'convicted1' username, I made this username and started posting with the NIV when I was still KJVO/P(used it to try to throw ppl off my trail as I was embarrassed by my actions)...I wasn't entirely in the 'O' group, but thought other versions NOT KJV were inferior. I began reading the NIV(though I had one and thought it was pretty good...still thought it was not in the KJV's league). I then began reading the YLT and it was good, too. Then began reading the NASB, and it was good, too. I am now reading through Romans with my ESV, and it is good as well. The KJV I onced solely read barely gets time now.

NIV
NASB
YLT
ESV
KJV

That is how I place them in regards to my usability...

You have to read another version 1611 times as penance for being a former KJVO.

 

[TCassidy]

I presently use the WEB and EMTV bibles in electronic format (both Byzantine/Majority Text based). I would love to find a printed, bound WEB bible, but as far as I know it is only published in electronic format.

I think the EMTV NT is now available in print, but I would prefer a complete bible.

I am eagerly awaiting an English translation of the Robinson/Pierpont Byzantine Greek New Testament. Maybe an edited version of the NASB (as the WEB, above, is an edited version of the ASV corrected using the Byzantine/Majority text, or the ESV is an edited version of the RSV, but using the Alexandrian/Critical text - it would have been better if the Byzantine/Majority text had been used).

I am quite gratified to see that we now have several Byzantine/Majority text based English bibles available. At one time, not all that long ago, we had only one, the KJV. Then the NKJV followed, but they abandoned the original intent to base it on the Byzantine/Majority text and, instead, used the TR as its base. Now we finally have some better choices. Progress is good.

 

[SovereignGrace]

You have to read another version 1611 times as penance for being a former KJVO.

That's better than 1769 times.

 

[JonC]

TBH...

When I had gotten into it with DarrellC and made myself look foolish under my 'convicted1' username, I made this username and started posting with the NIV when I was still KJVO/P(used it to try to throw ppl off my trail as I was embarrassed by my actions)...I wasn't entirely in the 'O' group, but thought other versions NOT KJV were inferior. I began reading the NIV(though I had one and thought it was pretty good...still thought it was not in the KJV's league). I then began reading the YLT and it was good, too. Then began reading the NASB, and it was good, too. I am now reading through Romans with my ESV, and it is good as well. The KJV I onced solely read barely gets time now.

NIV
NASB
YLT
ESV
KJV

That is how I place them in regards to my usability...

Thanks for the explanation. I was just curious as in my experience few caught up in the KJO heresy move out of it (those I know seem to become more deeply entrenched when challenged).

I think it good to remember that these translations are...well...translations.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Thanks for the explanation. I was just curious as in my experience few caught up in the KJO heresy move out of it (those I know seem to become more deeply entrenched when challenged).

I think it good to remember that these translations are...well...translations.

For some reason, those in the KJVO cult don't seem to know...or realize...what the 'V' means in KJV...

 

[HankD]

What opened your eyes to the realization you were believing a lie?

I am not SovereignGrace but was a KJVO people until I went off to Bible College.

So, yes the KJVO folks did say I would loose my faith if I went to an Alexandrian Bible College rather than their own (Peter Ruckman's) Pensacola Bible Institute.

I am a graduate of Calvary University in KCMO - definitely Alexandrian but it is accredited with real degrees and they accepted my GI bill payments.

Well I lost my faith not in God but in a man - Peter Ruckman - deceased.

Peter was a rough but brilliant man, no doubt a brother in the Lord but with some serious flaws (IMO).
He is/was somewhat known as the Father of KJVOism.

Long story short
My admiration of him crumbled after two doctrines (amongst others) which he promoted concerning the 1611 KJV Bible (The AV - The Authorized Bible which he liked to call it).

I'll give URLs to a site which will give quotes from his books and publications.

I can verify these because I (at one time) had free access to these publications which in later years were no longer offered to all but trusted devotees.

Later these quotes were gleaned from those of us who had sided with the "Alexandrians".

Remarks like "He never said that", "I never said that" were offered as a defense mechanism.
Again, I tell you that this site offers exactly what he taught as I had access to these publications before they were pulled and like myself these were made public with legally documented citations including here at the BB.

1) Double Inspiration - That the 1611AV Elizabethan English (as he called it) is inspired, and that it corrects the Greek and Hebrew.

2) Advanced Revelation - That the AV contains advanced revelations not found in the Greek and Hebrew.

http://www.ruckmanism.org/doubleinspiration
http://www.ruckmanism.org/advancedrevelation

I still trust the KJV and NKJV over any of the W&H works and derivations thereof but I don't doubt the honesty and trustworthiness of W&H in their efforts to distill out the true NT text.

To this day I prefer the TR derived works (Scrivener 1894 Greek New Testament) over derivations based upon the older uncials: Alexandrinus, Vaticanus and Siniaticus .

Yes, I use modern translations primarily because of the up to date and more acceptable Standard Modern Era English.

The "Straw that Broke the Camels Back" for me was the knowledge of the inclusion of the Apocrypha in the AV (a shock for me, a former Catholic) and the unresolved dispute over which King James Version is the "real" one - Oxford or Cambridge (They have differences - very minor but differences nonetheless)
"Things which are different are not the same". KJVO mantra.

To my knowledge Peter never gave an answer to "which KJV?" other than - the one I have in my hand -.

To be forthright it was an emotional time for me when he died.

HankD

 

[Internet Theologian]

I am not SovereignGrace but was a KJVO people until I went off to Bible College.

So, yes the KJVO folks did say I would loose my faith if I went to an Alexandrian Bible College rather than his own Pensacola Bible Institute.

I am a graduate of Calvary University in KCMO - definitely Alexandrian but it is accredited with real degrees and they accepted my GI bill payments.

Well I lost my faith not in God but in a man - Peter Ruckman - deceased.

Peter was a rough but brilliant man, no doubt a brother in the Lord but with some serious flaws (IMO).
He is/was somewhat known as the Father of KJVOism.

Long story short
My admiration of him crumbled after two doctrines (amongst others) which he promoted concerning the 1611 KJV Bible (The AV - The Authorized Bible which he liked to call it).

I'll give URLs to a site which will give quotes from his books and publications.

I can verify these because I (at one time) had free access to these publications which in later years were no longer offered to all but trusted devotees.

Later these quotes were gleaned from those of us who had sided with the "Alexandrians".

Remarks like "He never said that", "I never said that" were offered as a defense mechanism.
Again, I tell you that this site offers exactly what he taught as I had access to these publications before they were pulled and like myself these were made public with legally documented citations including here at the BB.

1) Double Inspiration - That the 1611AV Elizabethan English (as he called it) is inspired, and that it corrects the Greek and Hebrew.

2) Advanced Revelation - That the AV contains advanced revelations not found in the Greek and Hebrew.

http://www.ruckmanism.org/doubleinspiration
http://www.ruckmanism.org/advancedrevelation

I still trust the KJV and NKJV over any of the W&H works and derivations thereof but I don't doubt the honesty and trustworthiness of W&H in their efforts to distill out the true NT text.

To this day I prefer the TR derived works (Scrivener 1894 Greek New Testament) over derivations based upon the older uncials: Alexandrinus, Vaticanus and Siniaticus .

Yes, I use modern translations primarily because of the up to date and more acceptable Standard Modern Era English.

The "Straw that Broke the Camels Back" for me was the knowledge of the inclusion of the Apocrypha in the AV (a shock for me, a former Catholic) and the unresolved dispute over which King James Version is the "real" one - Oxford or Cambridge (They have differences - very minor but differences nonetheless)
"Things which are different are not the same". KJVO mantra.

To my knowledge Peter never gave an answer to "which KJV?" other than - the one I have in my hand -.

HankD

Thanks for sharing that Hank.

 

[evenifigoalone]

I'm a former KJO as well.

I believe the Bible is infallible in it's teaching, it absolutely is our guide. There are translation errors and errors from copying manuscript to manuscript, but none that affect important doctrine.
I remember reading how the manuscripts agree in 95% - 99% of cases, a far better rate than even the known manuscripts of works such as the Odysee and Illiad.

 

[John I Morris]

In all that they affirm and state, or is it just in the sreas of theology, as there are errors regarding dsay history and in stories of the OT especially?

If God is perfect and His Word was not given by man, but holy men of God were moved by the Holy Ghost to write. I think that Gods Word is all without error and as complete as it ever will be..

 

[HankD]

If God is perfect and His Word was not given by man, but holy men of God were moved by the Holy Ghost to write. I think that Gods Word is all without error and as complete as it ever will be..

Hi John,

It's not God's fault that scribes were sloppy, sleepy, inattentive,clumsy, etc... when copying the original manuscripts.

It is man's fault. Every thing we touch we defile even to cooperating with God to preserve His word.

HankD

 

[MB]

Hi yesua;
What would be the point in believing in any Bible if you think it has errors in it?
MB

 

[MB]

INFAL'LIBLENESS, n. [from infallible.] The quality of being incapable of error or mistake; entire exemption from liability to error; inerrability. No human being can justly lay claim to infallibility. This is an attribute of God only.

Perhaps you could tell me what Bible text
In any language you believe is infallible? What text do you believe is without any error or mistakes and that has entire exemption from errors?

The original manuscripts and the proof is they were directed by God Him Self.
MB

 

[TCassidy]

Hi yesua;
What would be the point in believing in any Bible if you think it has errors in it?
MB

Why do you believe the bible has errors in it?