I'll miss you guys

Oh, Mr.Curtis! I am truly so sad to see you leave, but I think I do understand---all too well!

This place needs more MEN who will NOT be shy about standing for TRUTH & I have appreciated your input. I get discouraged when I see how fast this world is changing & how far some believers are drifting from where God would have us to be.

Keep fighting the good fight of faith and stand fast and continue speaking up for that which is right! May the Lord richly bless you and protect you is my prayer. A cyber-friend(granny/Pat)

 

Does this mean you won't be posting any more posts ridiculing the non-KJVOs on this board???

I think the problem here is not one of ridicule. I think the problem is one of biblical support and theological teaching. You assume that when someone shows one of the weaknesses of the KJVOnly position, that they are ridiculing those who use them. But then you assume that you can make bold, unfounded statements about the spiritual lives and spiritual understanding of someone who uses a modern version. The fact remains that as of today, not one person of your persuasion has offered even one verse of Scriptures supporting their stance.

It is sad to see you leave, because there is much to be learned. I am convinced that if you would sit down and study through some of these issues biblically, your stance would change in a heartbeat (not to a MV but to a non-KJVOnly position). But I am also convinced that most people of your persuasion never will do that.

 

Where did God tell us where he wants us on this Bible version issue? Please settle it once and for all. Give us the verse where God identified the version we should be using. When will we get to Scripture?

 

I haven't found any Non-KJVers giving any scripture to back up their stance, either.

Have you Granny?

 

Sorry to see you go, Mr. Curtis. I wish you'd stay and take Pastor Larry's words to heart that he posted above.

That's exactly what we have here. The truth is that KJV-Onlyism is a recent mad-made tradition, in opposition to orthodoxy throughout church history, and without any scriptural support. The truth is that if "only" the KJV is the word of God, then the word of God by definition could not have existed before 1611. The truth is that even the KJV has undergone editorial changes since it was first published. Why do you not stand for these truths? You continue to avoid answering simple, direct questions, offering nothing new to the discussion and simply repeating your own opinion and spiritually insulting all who disagree with you.

If you want people to stand for the "truth" of KJV-onlyism, you have to explain to them how it can be the "truth"! That means answering questions.

What exactly do you think our stance is?

Brian

 

Hey Gayla! ya know what? I was just thinking the same thing this morning. Also, going over the different 'topis' of late, it looks to me like "we're" not the ones doing the bashing or with a problem of indecision....interesting observation, ain't it? "So much the more."

 

Mr. Curtis, I'm going to miss you! I always looked forward to seeing you post. I always knew you were going to take a stand for what is right, and I really apreciate that.
Granny's right. We need more men like you who are willing to stand for the truth and for what is right. Thankyou for your contribution to this board and to me and others. You have been a blessing to me.
May God's wonderful grace and blessings abound with you, Brother Curtis,
In Our Saviour, Abby

 

Mr Curtis,
I would dissuade you from going. The nature of these mb's are debate. We are all going to disagree and have others disagree with our position. Even ridicule and sarcasm. My question is - why does this bother you?

My main read is, also the KJV, but any rational man would admit that it has some problems - as do all versions. As has been pointed out, it can't be the only word of God or the word didn't exist until 1611.
Also, if it were the only word, how would thousands of people get saved using these other versions?
I read the KJV. I started off with it and am comfortable with it. However, like most professed Bible scholars, I have every other version, also, for comparison, plus the Hebrew and Greek lexicons and dozens of commentaries.
Can man exist on KJV alone? Most assuredly - and has. My Bible study sure wouldn't be the same.

Peace in all you do and get that degree!!

 

The reason is because Scripture does not address which version we use. That is why it is a matter of choice within the theological framework defined by Scripture.

Scripture teaches that Scripture is inspired and inerrant in the original autographa. Scripture teaches that direct revelation ceased after the first century. Therefore, all copies subsequent cannot be guaranteed perfection. Scripture gives clear indication that versions other than the KJV are considered the Word of God, even versions that do not match the KJV. Scripture gives indication that the Word of God was not always available. Therefore the charge that the "hidden manuscripts" found in the 1800s hid God's word from the people is a baseless charge.

Therefore we assert that any faithful translation of the original language texts can and should be considered the Word of God and authoritative for life.

Our stance is that doctrine should be defined from Scripture. Where Scripture does not speak, we should not be dogmatic but should rather give liberty. Since Scripture nowhere addresses the version that we use, liberty within the theological framework is the rule.

 

The truth is that even the KJV has undergone editorial changes since it was first published[BrianT]

Greetings,BrianT~is "editorial" the same as doctrinal?

The 'ancestors' that brought me the KJBible I've used for many many years were not corrupted. I do not have to worry about whole verses being left out(without any explanations)as in your so-called "MVs", or that there is major doctrine completely obliterated, nor do I worry about subtle attacks on the deity of our Lord and other basic doctrines. I do not have to lay it down and pick up 'another' in order to be "in unison". I do not sit around & rack my brains trying to figure out what should or should not be part of the words of the text, especially with so many MVs differing in so many places.

The purity of the text itself MUST be preserved and I believe this to be the KJBible. It stands supreme as the "unchanging" Word of the living God. These "debates" are not just simple spats, because there is an agenda and I am certain who is behind this drive to destroy our sure foundation. "Get thee behind me, satan"! LUKE 4:8(KJV) [Is that in YOUR bible]?

[ July 16, 2002, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: GrannyGumbo ]

 

The question we have been trying to get you to answer is "How do you know this?"

Why and Why? On what scriptural basis do you hold this?

Then why has it changed?

Yes it is and it has nothing to do with translations of Scripture.

 

Curtis, I know you've been thinking about leaving for a while and I hope you don't.

Perhaps you'd be better off enjoying BaptistBoard but just leaving the KJVO debate behind.

I feel very passionately about some of the things that come up here, but I choose not to get into it because these issues usually generate more heat than light and cause a lot of hurt feelings (such as in your case) without resolving anything.

It's worked well for me and I've learned a lot about holding my tongue in real life, too.

Why not try that instead? That way you can have the best of both worlds.

 

Usually not. But a change is a change.

There is always explanations. And good ones. You don't have to agree with the explanations, but please cease the misrepresentation.

For example?

Do you mean like when you compare Rom 9:5 between the NIV and KJV? Or Jude 1:25? Or others?

Yes, we know what you "believe". We *don't* know *why* you believe it, because you simply refuse to tell us.

The KJV has been available for less than 20% of church history. How would someone living in the other 80% agree with KJV-onlyism?

Except for editorial changes, font changes and spelling changes.

Yes, it's in my Bible. But again you imply we are being led by Satan just because we ask you to explain your view???? Please. Do you think I'm just supposed to believe something someone tells me, when they offer absolutely no explanation or support for their view? Do you call that "study"? Do you think that is a good method by which to gain a solid understanding of a doctrine? C'mon Granny - what you're telling us to do is exactly opposite of what scripture tells us to do concerning accepting doctrines. So who exactly is it that is attacking the "sure foundation"????

 

Bro. Curtis, I would not recommend leaving because of a minor misunderstanding among brethren. The KJVO issue is really a non-issue. It has nothing to do with salvation, it is an in-house debate - nothing else. Smoke_Eater was right when he elluded to the fact that when you are on a discussion board you have to separate the issue from the person, and if you can't then pass on to a greener pasture. And you know that there are a lot of other forums here on the BB where the atmosphere is not as explosive.

Besides, even if you want to leave the BB, what do you think how long could you stay away? I know I would miss you, and I hope you feel the same about us all. So, why don't you take a step back and refocus your overview of things. You may just see a different picture.

[ July 16, 2002, 01:20 PM: Message edited by: Barnabas ]

 

However Pastor Larry,

remember BrianT brought it to our attention that Jesus quoted from the Septuagint which then became part of the NT Scripture, thereby putting His stamp of approval on the Septuagint Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures (at least the Isaiah passage). And in the case of the Isaiah passage which He read it varied somewhat from the Masora.

So then, as you say, the Lord puts His stamp of approval on a faithful translation (at least of this passage of Isaiah). This general principle is found in the Scripture by the example of the Lord.

HankD

 

Mr Curtis said...

If you think thats bad, you should read the ridicule which flames forth from the radical KJVO regime against the MV supporters.

Wear your asbestos suit!

HankD

[ July 16, 2002, 01:40 PM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

Another reason to stay, related to that one: the Bible versions forum here is one of the *least* explosive Bible version forums out there. I'm really thankful for how calm and rational most of the discussions here are.

 

Bye Curtis, hope they don't challenge anything you think while getting your degree.