1. 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!

Ed's Catalogue of KJVO Doubles

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Ed Edwards, Mar 5, 2004.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 9
  1. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you for your contributions to the Double
    Standards List:

    ---005 - In the KJV things that are the same are diferent. With MVs things that are not the same are different.

    ---006 - "KJV" must always be capitalized, while "mv" must never be capitalized.

    ---101 - the MV's come from Alexandria, which is Egypt, which is always evil and a type of sin and bad (contrasted to the Byzantine Catholic texts from Syria). Of course, JESUS came from Egypt after being saved from Herod there, and never even went to Syria, but . . .

    --502 - There are 5000 minor changes (spelling) and about 150 major changes (entire words and phrases) in a typical KJV1769 Oxford or 1762 Cambridge revision from the AV1611. But those changes don't count. Yet an MV "must" be bad because THEY change the words from sacred AV1611.

    [​IMG]
     
    #21 Ed Edwards, Mar 11, 2004
  2. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    ---007 - Anti-KJVOs enjoy bashing those who stand for the preserved word of God; KJVOs enjoy instructing others in righteousness.
     
    #22 Ed Edwards, Mar 11, 2004
  3. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    ---008 - Anything good that happened 1701-1900 is due to the positive influence of the KJB.Anything bad that happened 1901-2004 is due to the negative influence of the KJB. Corrollary: nothing bad happened 1701-1900 and nothing good happened after 1901 :(

    ---503 - Revisions/editions to the KJV are done to correct printing errors and spelling changes due to the English language being perfected. Now English is so corrupted no version of the Bible can be enhansed.

    --709 - (Thank you Robycop3) KJVOs point out faults they perceive exist in other versions while totally ignoring the fact that those same "faults" exist in the KJV. Some examples:
    -
    709A - Modern translations refer to Joseph as being Christ?s ?father? (Lk 2:33) and Mary and Joseph as being Christ?s ?parents? (Lk 2:43)."
    -
    So does the KJV. See Lk 2:48,27,41
    -
    709B - The NASB refers to Christ as being ?offspring? (Lk 1:35).
    -
    So does the KJV. See Rev 22:16
    -
    709c - The KJV exalts Christ more than the modern versions.
    -
    John 1:18 - NIV, NASB call Christ God, but the KJV doesn?t
    Titus 2:13; 2 Pe 1:1 - NIV, NASB call Christ God but the KJV speaks of Christ and God as being two different people
    Rom 1:3 - KJV says that Christ was ?made? (created?)
    Lk 1:35 - KJV calls Christ a ?thing?. Every other valid version I've ever read calls Him "Holy One" or Holy Child", not a holy "thing".

    [​IMG]
     
    #23 Ed Edwards, Mar 11, 2004
  4. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    --710 - Only God can be worshiped in the MVs but the KJV says that Neb worshipped Daniel? (Dan 2:46)
     
    #24 Ed Edwards, Mar 11, 2004
  5. uhdum

    uhdum New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmm, two you might think about (reword if necessary):

    - People who are "against the KJV" may think they are reading new versions to understand them better and because of the more recent manuscripts, but they really do so because the KJV "puts them in their place, such as saying 'hell' instead of hades'" rather than because of the old english, manuscripts, etc. (I heard that one on here the other day. People who are against mv's, on the other hand, have seen the light and are the only ones not deceived.

    Another one: Any passage in the KJV claiming to refer to God's perfectly preserving His Word is talking about the KJV... the same does not hold true for the passage in any other version (including ones pre-KJV).
     
    #25 uhdum, Mar 11, 2004
  6. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,401
    Likes Received:
    555
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Good one, uhdum.

    And Genesis 1:1-Revelation 22 are the Word of God if in the KJV, but are NOT the Word of God if in a Modern Version.
     
    #26 Dr. Bob, Mar 11, 2004
  7. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you Brother Uhdum and
    Brother Dr. Bob Griffin. Your contributions
    have been entered into the Data Base:

    ---010 - Genesis 1:1-Revelation 22 are the Word of God if in the KJV, but are NOT the Word of God if in a Modern Version.

    ---011 - Any passage in the KJV claiming to refer to God's perfectly preserving His Word is talking about the KJV... the same does not hold true for the passage in any other version (including ones pre-KJV).

    ---012 - People who are "against the KJV" may think they are reading new versions to understand them better and because of the more recent manuscripts, but they really do so because the KJV "puts them in their place, such as saying 'hell' instead of hades'" rather than because of the old english, manuscripts, etc.. People who are against mv's, on the other hand, have seen the light and are the only ones not deceived.
     
    #27 Ed Edwards, Mar 11, 2004
  8. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,396
    Likes Received:
    672
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Lemme tell ya about a classic! I was discussing some of Will Kinney's comparisons with him & others a few months ago in
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/versions/

    a now-unmoderated group which has gone to pot. Will criticized some MVs(Message #1643in the Yahoo group in the URL above) for using the word "potsherd", which means a shard of pottery, in Jeremiah 19:2. The word there translated "east" in the KJV & a few other versions is "charcuwth", which literally means 'potsherd'. Therefore, calling that gate the POTSHERD gate is literally correct. However, in Nehemiah, the KJV renders "ashpoth" as "dung", one of its literal meanings, for the South gate of Jerusalem.

    Therefore it's OK for the KJV to depart from the literal meanings in places, but NOT OK for other versions to do likewise-but yet, it's OK for the KJV to be inconsistent in departing from literal meanings as in Jeremiah 19:2, while in the Onlyists' minds the MVs aren't allowed to.

    I don't think there's a more clear example of a KJVO who posts on this board using a double standard than this one. I posted the URL so anyone wishing to see proof of my statement can do so. That discussion begins at message # 1643, & you can follow the thread far as you wish.

    Ed, you may have a special number for this one if you read it.
     
    #28 robycop3, Mar 11, 2004
  9. Pete

    Pete New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2002
    Messages:
    4,345
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why doth they not verily speaketh in KJV Englishe?
     
    #29 Pete, Mar 12, 2004
  10. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you Brother Robycop3, now it is:

    ---711 - It is alright for the KJV call the gate "east" over the MVs "potsherd"; but it is bad, bad, bad when the MVs call the gate "south" over the KJV's "dung"; the Hebrew term "charcuwth" means east or potsherd, the Hebrew term "ashpoth" means south or dung.

    [​IMG]
     
    #30 Ed Edwards, Mar 12, 2004
  11. russell55

    russell55 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,424
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here's a new one (I think!):

    Double standard

    If you believe that more than one version is the word of God, then even though you can give scriptural evidence of more than one version being the word of God, your final authority is your own self.

    BUT....

    If you believe that the only word of God in the English language is the KJV, then even though you can give absolutely no scriptural evidence of that, your final authority is the Spirit.
     
    #31 russell55, Mar 20, 2004
  12. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    We shall add your delightful contribultion
    as 014. Thank you.

    I used to have a friend.
    We carpooled together until he retired.
    He met for lunch monthly with
    the full-gospel business men.
    His favorite expression wasn't
    "Preach it Bro!" as me, but was:
    "that will blow your socks off".

    Thank you Sister Russell 55 for blowing
    my socks off! That is exactly a double
    standard if see out of KJV-only persons.
    Remember not all KJVOites are cut from
    the same batch of dough.

    [​IMG]
     
    #32 Ed Edwards, Mar 20, 2004
  13. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    ---711 - You can say all manner of evil falsely against an MV without getting God's attention; but just say a word that might be construed as slightly unkind against one of the many KJVs and God will probably zap you with a bolt of lightning.

    [​IMG]
     
    #33 Ed Edwards, Mar 20, 2004
  14. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    ---802 - You can say all manner of evil falsely against Westcott and Hort and still be saved by grace; but if you say anything against Riplinger or Ruckman, even God's truth, then you will be zapped with a bolt of lightning.

    [​IMG]
     
    #34 Ed Edwards, Mar 20, 2004
  15. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,550
    Likes Received:
    15
    Kind of reminds me of the time my brother in law who (was not a believer at the time) stopped a local preacher for doing 45 in a 25. The preacher told him that God would punish him for stopping a preacher. He asked the preacher, "I wonder what God would think if you hit a child and had to spend some time in jail for speeding?"
     
    #35 gb93433, Mar 20, 2004
  16. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    ---015 - It is alright for the KJBO to ignore that there have always been a proliferation of translations even the "meanest" of which are the Word of God (according to the KJB translators) so they can concentrate on "the book of the month club" [​IMG]
     
    #36 Ed Edwards, Mar 20, 2004
  17. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,550
    Likes Received:
    15
    It takes a lot more faith than God gives to believe in ignorance. The scripture says I only need the faith of a mustard seed to move mountains. But to believe that a translation is exatly equivalent to the original text takes a lot of trust in ignorance?

    Recently I saw the demise of a local KJVO church because of all the internal strife and corruption. It is no more. It is gone.

    I am so often reminded of Hebrews 13:7, "Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith."

    The proof of anyone's theology lies in their works which stems from their faith. When I look at a leader I look to see who his disciples are and how he lives out his faith. I want to see proof of his faith in acordance with scripture.
     
    #37 gb93433, Mar 20, 2004
  18. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    ---201 - The logo "Authorized Version" on a KJV means that it
    has been authorized by God Almighty; such a non-textual
    inscription on any non-KJV is an abomination.

    [​IMG]
     
    #38 Ed Edwards, Mar 20, 2004
  19. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    ---105 - some KJVOs attack the persons involved in production of other Bibles (Westcott and Hort, NIV committee memebers, etc) as if that therefore discredits their work, when they are unwilling to recognize/admit/discuss the KJV translators, Erasmus, etc., who in most instances were much more "shocking" in their beliefs and actions.
     
    #39 Ed Edwards, Mar 20, 2004
  20. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen, brother gb93433 - Preach it! [​IMG]
     
    #40 Ed Edwards, Mar 20, 2004
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 9
Loading...