error regarding preservation

What a glaring exposition of the foolishness of those who believe that the KJV is "inspired" and "corrects the [extant] Greek".

We actually have the audacity to believe,

that prior to the KJV, God did not preserved His Word (perfectly-without error) for each generation, (The same way that Non-KJVers have always believed and still believe about every Bible that ever existed on earth),

that prior to the KJV no-one had access to "pure" (in an absolute sense)words, (The same as Non-kjvers believe about all "generations" since the disappearance of the autographs),

that all the church prior to the KJV had was "corrupted copies" (The same as Non-KJVers believe about the times before, during and since the KJV. . .like right now!


In addition to being in error regarding the doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture, they (MVers) are also in error regarding the doctrine of the preservation of Scripture in that they really don't believe God preserves things like words.


Lacy

 

KJVOism taken at face value is what Charles Surrett said it is.

KJVOism is at constant war with itself because of the many loop holes and double standards. Every KJVO claim can be turned around and used on the KJV (which ever KJV that they claim is perfect) making the KJV suspect.

KJVO Ex Cathedra is strong within the KJVO Camp. Without Ex Cathedra how do KJVOist explain KJVOism?

Ex Cathedra and Ruckman's heresy of Advanced Revelations basically is one in the same being children of the same error filled doctrines.

 

I have read "Which Greek Text?" and find it to be very balanced and also a good explanantion of how many of us believe in the KJV camp. I am not KJVO, but I am KJV preferred. This book, I think is a great attempt at promoting our view (the KJV preferred), and also quiet the "heretic" rhetoric from the KJVO crowd toward the "MV" crowd and vice-versa. If you haven't read it, and are interested in the issue, it is a short read and cheap.

just my $0.02

Chad

By the way, Surrett's view of the preservation issue is a good logical argument.

 

I misread something...sorry.

 

Dr. Surret's book is fairest book from the KJV preffered camp that exists. In fact it is the only KJV preffered book that I know of. I don't agree with everything in the book, but I sincerly appreciate the gracious spirit that is manifest within. I would expect that from Charles Surret though, I know him personally.

 

What a facetious remark. The "Greek" wouldn't need correcting if it weren't correctable, that is THAT corrupt Greek that NEEDS to be corrected back to it's original Greek.

You people really do need to learn the truth in this matter.

 

Frank Betz: What a facetious remark. The "Greek" wouldn't need correcting if it weren't correctable, that is THAT corrupt Greek that NEEDS to be corrected back to it's original Greek.

And how do you KNOW the Greek needs correcting?

Apparently you're KJVO...and your poster-boy, Dean John Burgon, said that the Textus Receptus needed a thorough revision, citing some 120 issues in Matthew alone.

You people really do need to learn the truth in this matter.

We HAVE...and the truth, in the matter here before us is, that the KJVO myth is based upon horse-feather and chicken-teeth "evidence".

 

And since there are no original autographs remaining, how can you presume to say the Greek needs correcting?

We have, Frank! Why don't you try to learn the truth? After all, a total lack of understanding of the truth is what spawned the KJVO movement in the first place.

 

Look at it THIS way, Keith...No one would becoma a Mor(m)on or Jehovah False Witness if they'd known their actual history before they heard their schlock and propaganda. No Christian would become KJVO if they'd actually studied KJVO's sordid history.

 

And NO Christian would accept the Alexandrian forgeries if they'd studied Church history...But rather,choose to remain ignorant to the truth.

 

But rather,choose to remain ignorant to the truth.

KJVOism summed up completely.

 

Isaiah wrote:
Isaiah 49:6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

 

Are you claiming that the preserving of a remnant in Israel or the restoration of Israel is the exact parallel to the preservation of the Scriptures? </font>[/QUOTE]What I believe is taught by Scripture is that God preserves things by resurrecting them.

Eze 34 proves that God's "preservation" of Israel is a process, and that any destruction, scattering, or captivity in no way inhibits God's preservation.

God promised, in Luke 21:18, that not a hair on John Huss' head would perish (preservation). Huss was burned at the stake. What happened to his hair? What happened to the promise? God will raise it back up.

Lacy

 

By your premise, Lacy, you shouldn't be KJVO. The 400-yr-old KJV has fallen behind times, and the newer versions are a "resurrection" of the WOG.