Is the Anti KJVO Movement making a difference?

[Terry_Herrington]

Originally posted by KJVBibleThumper:
Just out of curiosity, to all of you anti-KJV people out there I want to pose a question. Dont dodge, or evade just straight out tell me the answer without any ands, buts, nors, or fors.
We know that in Ephesians 6 it lists our spiritual armor, the only offensive thing on there is the "sword of the Spirit" that is the "word of God" if we do not have the perfect, inerrent, infallible Word of God that we can hold in our hands and proclaim from the pulpits as most of you claim then we DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO ATTACK WITH!!
We are in the positin of a man that has a butter knife as his only offensive weapon!! I personally think that God would have given us a sword dont you?
In Christ,
KJVBibleThumper

AMEN!

It is amazing how these "modern day Christians" will attack anyone who stands for God's Holy Bible, the KJV for pages. Then when someone calls them on it, they all of a sudden are in love with the good ole KJV. Can you spell hypocrisy?

 

[gb93433]

"This is very easy for you all to say, yet YOU DON'T REALLY BELIEVE THIS.

"I do not need to read into anyones heart, to which only God can do."

Then quit judging people. Your words are loaded with presumption. Nobody could even presume to know so much about a person except God. It is one thing to say something is your opinion but quite another to state something as a fact as you have done.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by GeneMBridges:
I believe God has preserved His Word/s in/by the KJV and other MV's , like the NASB.

You know that many MVs disagree each other. An example: 4,000+ words in the NASB; 6,500+ words in the NIV; 2,000+ words in the NKJV. How much do you believe NASB and NIV are the Words of God during their disagreement 2,500+ times? How much do you believe NKJV and the NIV are the Words of God during disagreeing each other 4,500+ times? How much did God PRESERVE His words in these MVs?

 

[Terry_Herrington]

Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by James Newman:
Is Homosexuality condemned in the bible?

The NIV changed from it to different words. </font>[/QUOTE]That's because one of the workers on the NIV was a pervert. What do you expect?

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Terry_Herrington:


It is amazing how these "modern day Christians" will attack anyone who stands for God's Holy Bible, the KJV for pages. Then when someone calls them on it, they all of a sudden are in love with the good ole KJV. Can you spell hypocrisy?

How does that fit in with love your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength? I cannot think of one time where the Bible says we are to love the Bible or any translation. But it does say we are to love God. In the NT and OT times only about one to two percent of the people could even read and a Bible was very expensive if you could afford one.

 

[Terry_Herrington]

Originally posted by GeneMBridges:
How do you know which parts are the Word of God in the NASB and those which are not?

That's easy. The parts that agree with the KJV are the Word of God; the parts that disagree with the KJV are not the Word of God.

 

[GeneMBridges]

Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GeneMBridges:
I believe God has preserved His Word/s in/by the KJV and other MV's , like the NASB.

You know that many MVs disagree each other. An example: 4,000+ words in the NASB; 6,500+ words in the NIV; 2,000+ words in the NKJV. How much do you believe NASB and NIV are the Words of God during their disagreement 2,500+ times? How much do you believe NKJV and the NIV are the Words of God during disagreeing each other 4,500+ times? How much did God PRESERVE His words in these MVs? </font>[/QUOTE]You do know that the various KJB's disagree with each other too. Again, you are arguing the premise...circular logic gets you nowhere.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Terry_Herrington:
That's because one of the workers on the NIV was a pervert. What do you expect?

I hear the KJV is mailed
by the same mailer that mails porn

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Terry_Herrington:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GeneMBridges:
How do you know which parts are the Word of God in the NASB and those which are not?

That's easy. The parts that agree with the KJV are the Word of God; the parts that disagree with the KJV are not the Word of God. </font>[/QUOTE]The KJV left out two words from Gen 12:1 from the MT. What happened? It is the sixth word in the MT.

 

[Terry_Herrington]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
The Shield of Faith is an offensive weapon.

Ed, a shield is a defensive weapon. It is used to stop an attack. Soldiers don't normally attack with a shield, they attack with a sword.

 

[GeneMBridges]

Originally posted by Terry_Herrington:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by James Newman:
Is Homosexuality condemned in the bible?

The NIV changed from it to different words. </font>[/QUOTE]That's because one of the workers on the NIV was a pervert. What do you expect? </font>[/QUOTE]Oh, yeah, that's right, the lesbian whose was only a consultant,not a translator, and none of whose work was included. I see yet another lie from the KJVO's...

 

[GeneMBridges]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Terry_Herrington:
That's because one of the workers on the NIV was a pervert. What do you expect?

I hear the KJV is mailed
by the same mailer that mails porn </font>[/QUOTE]Well said, Ed. Just goes to show the double standard of the KJVO cultists.

 

[Terry_Herrington]

Originally posted by gb93433:

The KJV left out two words from Gen 12:1 from the MT. What happened?

Evidently, the MT added two words, but you can believe anything you want to. I will stick with the KJV, God's Word for the English-speaking people!

 

[GeneMBridges]

That is outright heresy, Terry.

You just said the MT, which was written in Hebrew before the KJV was a gleam in the eye of the translators ADDED text! That's called, umm, let's see..."advanced revelation" according to the Ruckmanite definition.

Axiom: The sum can NEVER be greater than its parts.

 

[michelle]

--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
The Shield of Faith is an offensive weapon.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quoted by Terry:

Ed, a shield is a defensive weapon. It is used to stop an attack. Soldiers don't normally attack with a shield, they attack with a sword.

--------------------------------------------------


Amen!!! Very good point Terry.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[GeneMBridges]

Originally posted by Terry_Herrington:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by James Newman:
Is Homosexuality condemned in the bible?

The NIV changed from it to different words. </font>[/QUOTE]That's because one of the workers on the NIV was a pervert. What do you expect? </font>[/QUOTE]Oh, yeah, and let's not forget that the KJV translators were all paedobaptists, a great many of them were still steeped in Roman Catholic theology and served a church that was begun for the sole purpose of approving Henry VIII first divorce.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by GeneMBridges:
How do MV's "omit, change, or add" to the Word of God any differently than the KJV?

The Bible (KJV) answers your question: 2 Cor. 2:17 "For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ."

 

[GeneMBridges]

Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GeneMBridges:
How do MV's "omit, change, or add" to the Word of God any differently than the KJV?

The Bible (KJV) answers your question: 2 Cor. 2:17 "For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ." </font>[/QUOTE]This has nothing to do with translations, Askjo. Paul is speaking about the false teachers who were peddling the gospel for personal gain, e.g. money.
The word used for "corrupt" is Kapeleuo It means "to sell or retail, peddle for money."

Are you trying to say that the NASB translators are not to be trusted because they were paid.
Hmmm, I happen to have a degree in history, specifically British Cultural, Religious, and Social Development. The KJB translators were also paid.

Try again.

[ October 15, 2004, 12:01 AM: Message edited by: GeneMBridges ]

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by michelle:
--------------------------------------------------
Michelle, is the NASB the Word of God? Yes or No.

--------------------------------------------------


The NASB only contains part of the words of God, and has shown that it has ALTERED the words of God. Therefore, I must and do REJECT it as the pure words of God that God has promised and warn against it.

Amen! I agree!

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by C4K:
As you have NEVER provided scriptural support for your belief. Your continuous "cut and paste" passages have NOTHING to do with the version debate.

The point is to deny. To deny is to ignore the Scriptures.