"Is King James Onlyism Scriptural?"

[George Antonios]

Cannot claim any copies or translations outside time of the originals!

Evidently, you did not read the references. You think that Timothy's (a half-breed from Asia minor living 1500 years after Moses) scriptures (2Ti.3:15-16) were made in the time of Moses?

 

[George Antonios]

Why no answer though? Which TR is the right one, as their were several different copies used for TR!

BECAUSE I don't go by the TR. I never made that claim. You and @Logos are fighting a battle I'm not in. Are you guys reading my posts or just skimming?

 

[Yeshua1]

Evidently, you did not read the references. You think that Timothy's (a half-breed from Asia minor living 1500 years after Moses) scriptures (2Ti.3:15-16) were made in the time of Moses?

I think that the Apostles ALONE had divine inspiration granted them to be able to record down the NT to us!

 

[Yeshua1]

BECAUSE I don't go by the TR. I never made that claim. You and @Logos are fighting a battle I'm not in. Are you guys reading my posts or just skimming?

The Kjv hangs upon the TR as the basis of the translation being the perfect English one though!

 

[Logos1560]

. I can tell the difference between someone who disagrees with me but addresses my disagreement honestly, and someone who doesn't.

Do you improperly attack my honesty? I address my disagreement with your claims honestly. I soundly address your KJV-only claims, and I have not attacked you personally.

The Scriptures are the specific revealed, written words of God given by the miracle of inspiration to the prophets and apostles. According to the Scriptures, God revealed His Word to the prophets and apostles by the Holy Spirit (Eph. 3:5, 2 Pet. 1:21, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Rom. 15:4, 1 Cor. 2:10-13, Rom. 16:25-26, Heb. 1:1-2, Acts 1:2, Eph. 2:20, Acts 3:21, John 16:13, John 17:8, 14, John 3:34, 2 Sam. 23:2, Luke 24:25, 27, 44). The word of the LORD came to the prophets and apostles (1 Sam. 15:10, 2 Kings 20:4, Isa. 38:4, Jer. 1:4, Jer. 29:30, Ezek. 6:1, Dan. 9:2, Jonah 1:1, Zech. 7:8, Acts 3:21). A true prophet spoke from the mouth of the LORD (2 Chron. 36:12, Luke 1:70, Jer. 1:9, Acts 3:21, 2 Sam. 23:2, Deut. 18:22). The actual specific words that proceeded out of the mouth of God or that God breathed out are those original language words given by inspiration to the prophets and apostles (Matt. 4:4, Deut. 8:3). God’s Word is “the Scriptures of the prophets” (Rom. 16:26, Matt. 26:56). God gave His words or spoke by the mouth of the prophets (Luke 1:70, Jer. 1:9, Acts 1:16, Acts 3:21, Ps. 68:11, 2 Chron. 36:12). All Scripture was given by inspiration of God to those prophets and apostles (2 Tim. 3:16, 2 Pet. 1:21, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Eph. 3:5, Eph. 2:20, Jude 1:3). While 2 Timothy 3:16 may not directly mention the prophets and apostles, the parallel verse concerning inspiration (2 Pet. 1:21) clearly connected the miracle of inspiration to them when considered with other related verses. Comparing scripture with scripture, the holy men of God moved or borne along by the Holy Spirit in the miracle of inspiration were clearly the prophets and apostles (2 Pet. 1:21, Eph. 3:5, Eph. 2:20, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Rom. 16:26, Luke 1:70, Matt. 26:56). The exact same words that the psalmist wrote in Psalm 95 the Holy Spirit spoke or said (compare Ps. 95:7 with Hebrews 3:7). What Moses said to Pharaoh as the LORD told him (Exod. 9:13), the Scripture said (Rom. 9:17, Exod. 9:16).

The overall teaching of the Scriptures would indicate that there can be no new inspired works without living apostles or prophets (2 Peter 1:21, Eph. 3:3-5, Heb. 1:1-2, Luke 1:70, 24:27, 44-45, Acts 1:16, 3:21, 26:27, Matt. 2:5, Rom. 1:2, Rom. 16:25-26, Jer. 29:19, 2 Chron. 36:12, Dan. 9:10, Amos 3:7).

You have presented no consistent, sound case for suggesting that the miracle of inspiration of God should be connected to the Church of England makers of the KJV.

 

[Logos1560]

There's only one, as any man who has honestly checked into the matter knows.

I have honestly checked into the many varying editions of the KJV. They are not all the same. There is not one identical text of the KJV that is found in all editions of the KJV.

You are wrong to question the honesty of those who disagree with your opinions.

I have compared the 1611 edition of the KJV with a post-1900 edition, and I found and listed over 2,000 differences. I have compared the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV with a post-1900 edition. I have compiled facts from over 500 editions of the KJV printed from 1611 until today so I have honestly checked the evidence.

 

[George Antonios]

The Kjv hangs upon the TR as the basis of the translation being the perfect English one though!

True, but sometimes the KJB sometimes goes against the TR.

 

[George Antonios]

Do you improperly attack my honesty? I address my disagreement with your claims honestly. I soundly address your KJV-only claims, and I have not attacked you personally.

The Scriptures are the specific revealed, written words of God given by the miracle of inspiration to the prophets and apostles. According to the Scriptures, God revealed His Word to the prophets and apostles by the Holy Spirit (Eph. 3:5, 2 Pet. 1:21, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Rom. 15:4, 1 Cor. 2:10-13, Rom. 16:25-26, Heb. 1:1-2, Acts 1:2, Eph. 2:20, Acts 3:21, John 16:13, John 17:8, 14, John 3:34, 2 Sam. 23:2, Luke 24:25, 27, 44). The word of the LORD came to the prophets and apostles (1 Sam. 15:10, 2 Kings 20:4, Isa. 38:4, Jer. 1:4, Jer. 29:30, Ezek. 6:1, Dan. 9:2, Jonah 1:1, Zech. 7:8, Acts 3:21). A true prophet spoke from the mouth of the LORD (2 Chron. 36:12, Luke 1:70, Jer. 1:9, Acts 3:21, 2 Sam. 23:2, Deut. 18:22). The actual specific words that proceeded out of the mouth of God or that God breathed out are those original language words given by inspiration to the prophets and apostles (Matt. 4:4, Deut. 8:3). God’s Word is “the Scriptures of the prophets” (Rom. 16:26, Matt. 26:56). God gave His words or spoke by the mouth of the prophets (Luke 1:70, Jer. 1:9, Acts 1:16, Acts 3:21, Ps. 68:11, 2 Chron. 36:12). All Scripture was given by inspiration of God to those prophets and apostles (2 Tim. 3:16, 2 Pet. 1:21, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Eph. 3:5, Eph. 2:20, Jude 1:3). While 2 Timothy 3:16 may not directly mention the prophets and apostles, the parallel verse concerning inspiration (2 Pet. 1:21) clearly connected the miracle of inspiration to them when considered with other related verses. Comparing scripture with scripture, the holy men of God moved or borne along by the Holy Spirit in the miracle of inspiration were clearly the prophets and apostles (2 Pet. 1:21, Eph. 3:5, Eph. 2:20, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Rom. 16:26, Luke 1:70, Matt. 26:56). The exact same words that the psalmist wrote in Psalm 95 the Holy Spirit spoke or said (compare Ps. 95:7 with Hebrews 3:7). What Moses said to Pharaoh as the LORD told him (Exod. 9:13), the Scripture said (Rom. 9:17, Exod. 9:16).

The overall teaching of the Scriptures would indicate that there can be no new inspired works without living apostles or prophets (2 Peter 1:21, Eph. 3:3-5, Heb. 1:1-2, Luke 1:70, 24:27, 44-45, Acts 1:16, 3:21, 26:27, Matt. 2:5, Rom. 1:2, Rom. 16:25-26, Jer. 29:19, 2 Chron. 36:12, Dan. 9:10, Amos 3:7).

You have presented no consistent, sound case for suggesting that the miracle of inspiration of God should be connected to the Church of England makers of the KJV.

Brother, you haven't read what I wrote. You're fighting on a battlefield alone. I'm not there.

 

[George Antonios]

I have honestly checked into the many varying editions of the KJV. They are not all the same. There is not one identical text of the KJV that is found in all editions of the KJV.

You are wrong to question the honesty of those who disagree with your opinions.

I have compared the 1611 edition of the KJV with a post-1900 edition, and I found and listed over 2,000 differences. I have compared the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV with a post-1900 edition. I have compiled facts from over 500 editions of the KJV printed from 1611 until today so I have honestly checked the evidence.

I've only questioned the honesty of one. Don't generalize.

You haven't specified the nature of those "differences" nor your methodology.

 

[church mouse guy]

You'd be more than welcome. Send me your email bc I'd like to run some of the evolutionists' objections by you.

Just message me here please.

 

[church mouse guy]

The KJV does have some outdated or archaic language in it. Some of the outdated or archaic spelling in the 1611 edition of the KJV was later updated, but all the archaic language in the KJV has not been updated in present KJV editions.

This issue has been around for 60 years that I know so most people are aware of what's what. That is the reason for so many translations, some of them horrible such as the 1952 RSV--much worse than the KJV. The older generation of non-Christians charged rightfully that their were so many versions with so many conflicting passages that they had changed Christianity and they did not want any part of it since no one knew what it was anymore. That is another reason that the KJV has lasted--it is stable and no more flawed than any other translation.

 

[Yeshua1]

True, but sometimes the KJB sometimes goes against the TR.

How can that be, as those holding to KJVO hold to God preserving the TR to be the inspired greek text to use?

 

[robycop3]

You may be "outdated", but the KJV certainly isn't. And there is no scriptural support for such a ludicrous claim. A child born in any generation has the same capacity to learn and the same access to the Holy Spirit.

The KJV IS outdated. it has an archaic language style & uses some words in manners no longer used.

 

[robycop3]

A) how do you define "valid"?

Following its sources closely.

B) how can you describe something as "inspired" and "outdated" at the same time?

Easy! It WAS inspired & is NOW outdated.

 

[robycop3]

There's only one, as any man who has honestly checked into the matter knows.

So, WHICH one ?
Oxford ?
Cambridge ?
1769 Blayney's ?
AV 1611 ?
Harper Collins Edition ?
Ayres & Spossiswoode Edition ?
Webster's Edition ?

Each is different from the others, so which one is "the one" ?

 

[robycop3]

True, but sometimes the KJB sometimes goes against the TR.

What's a "KJB" ? The Russian replacement for the KGB ?

 

[Yeshua1]

So, WHICH one ?
Oxford ?
Cambridge ?
1769 Blayney's ?
AV 1611 ?
Harper Collins Edition ?
Ayres & Spossiswoode Edition ?
Webster's Edition ?

Each is different from the others, so which one is "the one" ?

The purist would say 1611!

 

[robycop3]

Anyone else here read Mr. Kinney's article supposedly providing Scriptural support for the KJVO myth ? If so, have you seen any Scriptural support provided ?

 

[church mouse guy]

The KJV IS outdated. it has an archaic language style & uses some words in manners no longer used.

Is that the Model A line again?

 

[Logos1560]

Brother, you haven't read what I wrote.

I have read what you wrote in your posts. You do not seem to be reading what I post.

You have generalized in several of your posts, suggesting that all KJV-only advocates agree when they have some serious disagreements concerning how they try to justify their claims for the KJV.