Is someone who believes in one version of the Bible unbiblical ?

[saturneptune]

I am very thankful for those who understand the Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, and can give us today a means to understand Scripture.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Cutter, If you care to, you can go back and read many really nasty debates on this subject (bible versions section), with KJVO's condemning others for reading another version, calling them "perversions".

.

No, sorry - that word will not be found there - it is always snipped

 

[Amy.G]

deleted post due to lack of reading comprehension on my part.

 

[charles_creech78]

1ti 4:9 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. 1ti 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. 1ti 4:11 These things command and teach. 1ti 4:12 Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity. 1ti 4:13 Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.1ti 4:14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. 1ti 4:15 Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all. 1ti 4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee 1jo 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man TEACH you: but as the same anointing TEACHETH you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. I did not say it was wrong for what you believe in. This is what I believe in and that is where I stand. If that make me unbiblical then so be it. By bible show me that I am. If the bibles are not so diffrent then mine then way are you getting upset with what I believe in. I am just standing with what I believe God has given me.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

If the bibles are not so diffrent then mine then way are you getting upset with what I believe in. I

Is anyone upset with Charles for using the KJV?

I highly doubt it, and there is no evidence here that anyone thinks you are wrong for using your KJV.

 

[TCGreek]

I think I speak for everyone saying that we all cherish the KJV. That is not the question of this thread.

You have spoken for me. Heaven, I believe, is already filled of believers who only knew and used the KJV.

 

[saturneptune]

You have spoken for me. Heaven, I believe, is already filled of believers who only knew and used the KJV.

The KJV is a great version. I use NKJV and NIV to study sometimes.

There are two issues here. The KJVO crowd has a mindset of all other versions are not accurate. The people who think that other versions are as good, as far as I can tell, have never thought the KJV was in wrong or held to any single version.

 

[EdSutton]

You have spoken for me.

Personally, I let no one speak for me, except me. And my wife said I had her full permission to say this! :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

[preachinjesus]

I appreciate the KJV since I grew up hearing it used (even though my home church pastor has switched to the NASB.)

Again, for what it's worth, there are no other versions than the Hebrew, Aramiac, and Greek...everything else is a translation.

 

[4boys4joys]

I started this thread with the intention of discussing a statement I read in another thread that said it was unBiblical to not believe in more than one version of the Bible. It turned into a KJVO thread. Is everyone assuming that this was the underlying defense of another KJVO, or simply a question about anyone who uses only one translation of the Bible regardless of which one it is.

It has been said that there is no emphasis put upon KJVO, but obviously there is. If the statement that it is unBiblical to only read one version is true, then why is it that when someone says (which has been said on this thread ) that they only read the NKJV and ESV no one presents any debate as to why they are just as unBiblical as the KJVO crowd. Examples of why the KJV cannot be the only true translation are given, but none are given as to why the NKJV, NASB etc.. are not the only trasnlations given. Are we assuming that the ones who hold to one version that is not KJV are never judgmental, and how could we prove such a statement.

The KJVO crowd is varied on it's opinions and they way they handle those who have a different view, just like those who are not KJVO. As someone who is KJV preferred I have had things said to me that where unkind as well. Is this more waranted because my choice is in the minority or has a bad reputation..NO.

The only members of this board who have ever been asked to classify themselves with a number and definition have been those who have said they are KJVO. Where are the distinctions and number brands for those who are not. And why aren't they seen as a 1,2,3 or 4 like the KJV's are asked to do. For clarification so you can see what needs to be called out when you post to them ? Why aren't there ALL Version type 1,2,3,4 and the like or NASB 1,2 and the like. There are more than 5 types just as there are in other beliefs on this subject. Please show me those who hold other views on scripture having to classify and I can retract this statement.

I would also hope that some who keep stating opinion as fact will see that what they see scripture reflect is opinion and they can keep stating it as fact but it is not to some people and that should be respected, just as respected that you believe that as fact and choose to believe something else.

Does this thread prove that one crowd is more judgmental than the other,no. I think it proves we all have strong opinions based on heartfelt convictions that we will take wtih us to the grave.Lets not let them be the cause of why we end up there.:laugh:

 

[4boys4joys]

I was responding to your statement that both are equally unbiblical.

That's not my merely my opinion. It is a conclusion drawn directly from the text of scripture.

I gave an example previously in this thread where Jesus reads from a place on a scroll of scripture, and he calls it scripture, and it is a different version than our Old Testament. I don't know how anyone can read that account and check the same passage in our OT and deny that it is possible for two different versions to both be scripture. If two different versions can't both be scripture, then either Jesus was wrong in calling what he read scripture, or our OT text is not scripture.


They keep affirming it as fact because it is a fact that scripture quotes texts that are different than ours and calls them scripture.


Then they are ignoring the clear witness of scripture that at least some different wording outside of the text they prefer is indeed scripture. It is not biblical to rule out what scripture allows for.


Not unless you want to unbiblically rule out what scripture allows for.


Deciding what version you think is best or what version you prefer to read is a matter of personal choice. Ruling out other versions as scripture simply because they differ from your favored one is unbiblical.


It is a clear biblical fact that it is possible for differing texts to both be scripture. That is not based on merely opinion, but taken directly from biblical examples. Denying that is going against scripture.

I did not say they were both equally anything. I asked if saying that someone is unBiblical or saying that someone was perverse for reading a version other than there own was the same type of judgment ?

You still have not answered my question. I understand that you see this as fact but some do not it is as simple as that. Denying what you think is proven is unBiblical to you but not to others and that will never change. I would never say that you are denying scripture for what you believe I would just say we do not agree. Who is being more judgemental here ? I have never said that you were wrong but apparently you think I am and have not held back in expressing that.

Is this not the very specific bias that KJVO's are accused of and does it make it OK because you are of a different opinion ?

If I did say that saying someone was unBiblical and saying someone was perverse for the Bible they choose where both unBiblical please show me where and I be more than happy to apologize. I only said they were equally as judgmental and my OPINION has not changed in regard to this.

 

[Amy.G]

4boys4joys,
I must not understand your question, because it seems to me that it has been answered repeatedly, yet you say it has not.
Here is my answer.

It is not unbiblical to read the KJV only.
It is not unbiblical to read the NKJV only.
It is not unbiblical to read the NASB only.
It is not unbiblical to read the ESV only
It is not unbiblical to read the NIV, NLT, RSV, Amplified, TNIV, ect, ect, ect. only.

What is unbiblical is to say that the version you prefer is the only version inspired by God and all other versions are not God's word.

All versions are translations, including the KJV.

 

[russell55]

I did not say they were both equally anything.

Okay. I thought you were suggesting that by the nature of your question.

If I did say that saying someone was unBiblical and saying someone was perverse for the Bible they choose

Aha, here's where I think the confusion lies. No one on this thread, least of all me, is saying someone is unbiblical or perverse for the bible they choose. The choice of version is indeed a matter of preferrence. The Bible doesn't say "Use this particular version and no other", so we can hardly call someone unbiblical for their choice of version.

What is unbiblical is espousing this particular dogmatic statement: All versions other than the one I use cannot be scripture.

That's a statement that cannot be supported with scripture and that goes against the witness of scripture. Therefore, it can rightly be called unbiblical to hold to that dogma.

And by the way, I don't think it's wrong to make judgments of right and wrong as long as we are making our judgments based on the witness of scripture.

 

[Brother Bob]

What is biblical about any version???????????

 

[charles_creech78]

Does it make me a bad person if I only read the KJV and not any other ones. I have never had a filling to pick up another book and read into it. I have a book and it says the Holy Bible on it. It happens to be a KJV. Till God puts it on my heart then I will stick to what I have. I do not put other Tranlations down. I love my 1611 edition KJV bible and I just fill I got all my anwers in it. If you count me being wrong with this then so be it. I don't need to answer to any of you. I stick with the old because the old is better.

 

[4boys4joys]

4boys4joys,
I must not understand your question, because it seems to me that it has been answered repeatedly, yet you say it has not.
Here is my answer.

It is not unbiblical to read the KJV only.
It is not unbiblical to read the NKJV only.
It is not unbiblical to read the NASB only.
It is not unbiblical to read the ESV only
It is not unbiblical to read the NIV, NLT, RSV, Amplified, TNIV, ect, ect, ect. only.

What is unbiblical is to say that the version you prefer is the only version inspired by God and all other versions are not God's word.

All versions are translations, including the KJV.

I did not say mt OP question was not answered I was refering to one poster in a discussion that we where having about a specific question. I agree with you and posts similar. :thumbs:

 

[4boys4joys]

Okay. I thought you were suggesting that by the nature of your question.


Aha, here's where I think the confusion lies. No one on this thread, least of all me, is saying someone is unbiblical or perverse for the bible they choose. The choice of version is indeed a matter of preferrence. The Bible doesn't say "Use this particular version and no other", so we can hardly call someone unbiblical for their choice of version.

What is unbiblical is espousing this particular dogmatic statement: All versions other than the one I use cannot be scripture.

That's a statement that cannot be supported with scripture and that goes against the witness of scripture. Therefore, it can rightly be called unbiblical to hold to that dogma.

And by the way, I don't think it's wrong to make judgments of right and wrong as long as we are making our judgments based on the witness of scripture.

I sensed from your earlier posts that you where saying someone was unBiblical based on the language of your answer. Instead of saying it was your opinion you said it is unBiblical which to me is being stated as fact.

There was no underlying tone of believing that no other Bible cannot be scripture. Like I said it turned into a KJV thread yet the OP was not worded that way.

It is not wrong to make judgments on right or wrong as it is done with scripture. That tricky part is there are so many views of scripture and that is where debates like this begin.

We actually agree on alot more than you think.

 

[dan e.]

Does it make me a bad person if I only read the KJV and not any other ones. I have never had a filling to pick up another book and read into it. I have a book and it says the Holy Bible on it. It happens to be a KJV. Till God puts it on my heart then I will stick to what I have. I do not put other Tranlations down. I love my 1611 edition KJV bible and I just fill I got all my anwers in it. If you count me being wrong with this then so be it. I don't need to answer to any of you. I stick with the old because the old is better.

Sounds good Charles. You do understand the problem with KJVO advocates, right? Nobody is saying that you are wrong in reading the KJV, or prefering the KJV, but .....wait a minute....what did you say?? Ha ha....you had made a perfectly fine post until your last comment. Therein lies the problem...."I stick to the old because the old is better". Is that a little hint of KJVOism in you??!!

*sigh*

 

[TCGreek]

The KJV is a great version. I use NKJV and NIV to study sometimes.

There are two issues here. The KJVO crowd has a mindset of all other versions are not accurate. The people who think that other versions are as good, as far as I can tell, have never thought the KJV was in wrong or held to any single version.

Quite true. Though I use the NASB, I still use the KJV from time to time. :thumbs:

 

[TCGreek]

Personally, I let no one speak for me, except me. And my wife said I had her full permission to say this! :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

I love the irony. :laugh: