extreme KJV-only book--Concealed from Christians

[Logos1560]

Rov, G. John. Concealed from Christians for the Glory of God: The 1611 KJV The King James
Bible Authorized Version. Lulu, 2019. 241 pages

In my opinion, this new book advocating KJV-only teaching is one of the most extreme that I have
read. The author makes extreme accusations against anyone that does not accept KJV-only claims.
The back cover accuses Christians that are not KJV-only of being "in the darkness of Deism."

G. John Rov asserted: "If you are still working out the English translation of the Bible by flip flopping between Bible translations or sourcing which English words are truly conveying the Hebrew or Greek, you are in unbelief" (p. 193).

In his preface, G. John Rov made this claim about his book: "First, this book strictly uses the King James Bible's own self-disclosure and nothing else" (p. x). He also claimed: "Third, this book is a spiritual book for spiritual men," in effect suggesting that any believer that does not agree with his opinions in this book is not spiritual.

G. John Rov claimed: "We can say, in some unexplainable way to us, that the Bible is a book that turned into a person and that Jesus is a person who turned into a book" (p. 13).

G. John Rov claimed: "as we mature, despite concealment, we see the actual Jesus and the actual Bible in the 1611 King James Version" (p. 47).

Rov asserted that the KJV is "God's only begotten Bible" (p. 50). See also p. 239.

Rov asserted: "English, as the destination language for the matured Bible, is a divine language" (p. 144).

On the front cover and also on page 151, Rov offered the following as one of his proofs for his KJV-only reasoning:

Luke 4:4
+
Matt. 4:4
+
Deut. 8:3
_____________
= 16 11

 

[InTheLight]

Glad to see you only respond to threads about KJV-onlyism and don't continually keep starting them. [/sarcasm]

 

[Salty]

On the front cover and also on page 151, Rov offered the following as one of his proofs for his KJV-only reasoning:

Luke 4:4
+
Matt. 4:4
+
Deut. 8:3
_____________
= 16 11

Well this is proof enough for me!!!


But than again I like to use this

Matt 4:4 + Mark 4: 4 + Luke 4:4 + John 4:4 = 1616

So what happened in 1616
The first non-aristocratic, free public school in Europe is opened in Frascati, Italy. (15. September 1616)

 

[Yeshua1]

Rov, G. John. Concealed from Christians for the Glory of God: The 1611 KJV The King James
Bible Authorized Version. Lulu, 2019. 241 pages

In my opinion, this new book advocating KJV-only teaching is one of the most extreme that I have
read. The author makes extreme accusations against anyone that does not accept KJV-only claims.
The back cover accuses Christians that are not KJV-only of being "in the darkness of Deism."

G. John Rov asserted: "If you are still working out the English translation of the Bible by flip flopping between Bible translations or sourcing which English words are truly conveying the Hebrew or Greek, you are in unbelief" (p. 193).

In his preface, G. John Rov made this claim about his book: "First, this book strictly uses the King James Bible's own self-disclosure and nothing else" (p. x). He also claimed: "Third, this book is a spiritual book for spiritual men," in effect suggesting that any believer that does not agree with his opinions in this book is not spiritual.

G. John Rov claimed: "We can say, in some unexplainable way to us, that the Bible is a book that turned into a person and that Jesus is a person who turned into a book" (p. 13).

G. John Rov claimed: "as we mature, despite concealment, we see the actual Jesus and the actual Bible in the 1611 King James Version" (p. 47).

Rov asserted that the KJV is "God's only begotten Bible" (p. 50). See also p. 239.

Rov asserted: "English, as the destination language for the matured Bible, is a divine language" (p. 144).

On the front cover and also on page 151, Rov offered the following as one of his proofs for his KJV-only reasoning:

Luke 4:4
+
Matt. 4:4
+
Deut. 8:3
_____________
= 16 11

Is he saying that the Logos of John was really the kjv itself?

 

[Yeshua1]

Glad to see you only respond to threads about KJV-onlyism and don't continually keep starting them. [/sarcasm]

well. called to expose darkness!

 

[Salty]

Is he saying that the Logos of John was really the kjv itself?

Of course
Didn't you know that that the Apostles were given special goggles after they dug up the KJV that was prepared by 'God back in 60 AD which he hid in 35 AD?, so they could translate into Greek

Well, it worked for the Mormons

 

[Yeshua1]

Of course
Didn't you know that that the Apostles were given special goggles after they dug up the KJV that was prepared by 'God back in 60 AD which he hid in 35 AD?, so they could translate into Greek

Well, it worked for the Mormons

So Moses got the Hebrew glasses, and they got the Koine Greek ones?

 

[Logos1560]

There is no bibliography listing the sources used for the writing of this KJV-only book.

I wonder if there was not some direct or indirect influence from Peter Ruckman's writings on this author.

Part or even much of this author's arguments for the KJV involve a form of numerology along with a form of mysticism.

 

[Logos1560]

G. John Rov wrote: "The total word count that Jesus spoke in this Luke four passage as the opener, divider, and closer of the finished Bible is a grand total of 'sixty-six words' in the King James Bible. Again, we see one word spoken for each of the 'sixty-six books' of the finished King James Bible. With these words, Jesus was declaring the authority and fulfillment of the words of Isaiah in Himself and the King James Bible" (p. 128).

 

[Yeshua1]

G. John Rov wrote: "The total word count that Jesus spoke in this Luke four passage as the opener, divider, and closer of the finished Bible is a grand total of 'sixty-six words' in the King James Bible. Again, we see one word spoken for each of the 'sixty-six books' of the finished King James Bible. With these words, Jesus was declaring the authority and fulfillment of the words of Isaiah in Himself and the King James Bible" (p. 128).

Sounds very similar to how Mormons, JW, and Sda get their theology as being in the Bible!

 

[Salty]

G. John Rov wrote: "The total word count that Jesus spoke in this Luke four passage as the opener, divider, and closer of the finished Bible is a grand total of 'sixty-six words' in the King James Bible. Again, we see one word spoken for each of the 'sixty-six books' of the finished King James Bible. With these words, Jesus was declaring the authority and fulfillment of the words of Isaiah in Himself and the King James Bible" (p. 128).

I wonder if it comes out to 66 words in every lanuage - ????

 

[Logos1560]

G. John Rov asserted: "These 176 verses should be perceived spiritually in this way:

1611 or 16 x 11 = 176 verses of Psalm 119.

The 1611 King James Bible Authorized Version was being testified to all the way back even out of the writer of the 176 verses (16 x 11) of Psalm 119, King David, 'a prophet (Acts 2:30)'" (p. 153).

 

[Yeshua1]

G. John Rov asserted: "These 176 verses should be perceived spiritually in this way:

1611 or 16 x 11 = 176 verses of Psalm 119.

The 1611 King James Bible Authorized Version was being testified to all the way back even out of the writer of the 176 verses (16 x 11) of Psalm 119, King David, 'a prophet (Acts 2:30)'" (p. 153).

Does it work for the 1769 edition of KJV also?

 

[Logos1560]

G. John Rov asserts: "1611 = 9 (1+6+1+1), King James = 9 letters, Holy Bible = 9 letters, together = 999, which is the ultimate expression in the Bible for bearing 'fruit." The term 'be fruitful' appears exactly 9 times in the King James Bible" (p. 166).

 

[Yeshua1]

G. John Rov asserts: "1611 = 9 (1+6+1+1), King James = 9 letters, Holy Bible = 9 letters, together = 999, which is the ultimate expression in the Bible for bearing 'fruit." The term 'be fruitful' appears exactly 9 times in the King James Bible" (p. 166).

In the 1769 edition also?

 

[Logos1560]

In the 1769 edition also?

Clearly his claim would not work with "1769" since 1+7+6+9 = 23, not 9.

 

[baptistmemes]

Oh please, you cherry picked all the weakest parts of the book and not, say, explore the more meatier parts such as the Isaiah 66 chapter's correspondence with each book of the Bible in order.

You call for sources, when you literally say the author uses the KJV's self-disclosure. In other words, the Bible is the source of the author.

 

[Logos1560]

You call for sources, when you literally say the author uses the KJV's self-disclosure. In other words, the Bible is the source of the author.

Are you perhaps suggesting that this man is using the fallacy of circular reasoning and the fallacy of begging the question?
What does reasoning in a circle prove?

This human author is not using the actual Scriptures given by inspiration of God to the prophets and apostles as his source. Instead he is using one imperfect English translation in 1611. The 1611 KJV is not the seventh English Bible translation as John Rov claimed on p. 115.

This author is somewhat uninformed and misinformed concerning important actual facts concerning the many varying editions of the KJV.
Does he discuss and explain the actual errors in the 1611 edition of the KJV that needed to be corrected in later revised editions of the KJV? Does he discuss and explain the actual new error introduced in the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV that remained in most Oxford and Cambridge editions of the KJV for over 100 years? Does he discuss the 2,000 changes made to the 1611 edition in most post-1900 KJV editions including the over 150 whole words that were added that were not in the 1611 edition and the whole words found in the 1611 edition that are omitted in present KJV editions?

 

[Godisgracious1031]

I would agree he is wrong on the Bible is Jesus. Yes, there is mathematics amazement, check out Truth is Christ on YouTube. The 1611 did have printing errors, Acryop was there for historical and information on how to deal with Cathokics

 

[rsr]

Zombie thread is being closed after 3½ years of burial.