KJBOism?

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by robycop3:
Actually, the USA was founded largely by CHRISTIANS. The first English bible known to have been brought to what's now the USA was the GENEVA BIBLE. The first new version to be made in what's now the USA was Eliot's Algonquian-Language Bible, by John Eliot, 1661.

There are more Jews living in the USA than in any other nation, including Israel. There are more Jews in the US govt. than in any other nation, including Israel. That's why we have several different Bible versions in English in this land...There are more Christians per capita than in any other significant nation.

MY theory has equal weight with YOURS, Mr. Correa. And, unlike YOURS, MINE is supported by SCRIPTURE. Israel is still God's peculiar people, whom He's gonna bless, despite themselves, not because they deserve it, but to SHOW HIS POWER, and show His word stands. And there are more known Israelis(Jews) here than anywhere else.

OTOH, there's NO Scripture that can be applied to only the KJV, or any other one version in ANY language, alone.

Sorry, Mr. Correa, your guess was incorrect...No kewpie doll today.

No Mr. Rob your incorrect read Psalms 49:20 and there are no excuses and thats all you are giving me not scripture! Kewpile doll time!

 

[Bro Tony]

And it goes on and on and still not one verse from any version of the Bible that declares that the KJV is God's only word. It seems clear that there are those who intend to add to the Scripture and then judge their brothers and sisters not by the Scripture, but by what they have added. Dangerous ground almost to the point of claiming self-deification and authority.

Sad,

Bro Tony

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by robycop3:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by william s. correa:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dr. Bob:
What in the world is a KJB? A Russian secret police officer? What would HE be doing in Japan?

KING JAMES BIBLE </font>[/QUOTE]I think he means King James VERSION.(KJV) </font>[/QUOTE]No I mean King Kames Bible, Just like Die Bilble and the Holy Bible, Bible time,sweet hour of prayer, Biblia,Biblios:Not Versions, But Revisions of the Word of God,Copies handed down from the 1st century,not out of some monestery where they beat themselves into submission in order to justify themselves ,but from the true worshpers of the true Living God, not some fictitious figment of some ones immagination.

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by DesiderioDomini:
THis thread is like an icepick to the temple.

your temple is an Igloo? no wonder your so cold

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by Joseph M. Smith:
But there are modern translations which DO go back beyond the AV to struggle again with manuscript evidence, textual variants, the meaning of words, as well as what communicates. Granted that bias can slip in to modern translations -- C. H. Dodd's realized eschatology in the NEV comes to mind. What assures us that bias did not slip into the KJV?

Personally I use the NRSV with a great deal of confidence. And I also operate on the maxim that one never makes doctrine out of an isolated Scripture verse, particularly one that is obscure or disputed.

You dont Know? My BiBle says you can Know! KJB

 

[robycop3]

No Mr. Rob your incorrect read Psalms 49:20 [/i]

Psalm 49:20, KJV: "Man that is in honour, and understandeth not, is like the beasts that perish."

Please tell me how THIS VERSE applies to KJVOism whatsoever, let alone, to the KJV alone. Methinks you're shooting in the dark again.

and there are no excuses and thats all you are giving me not scripture! Kewpile doll time!

MY POINT EXACTLY!

There are NO scriptures in the KJV supporting KJVOism. I need no Scripture to state KJVOism is false due to its lack of Scriptural support. The 'burden of proof' lies with the KJVO to support his doctrine with Scripture, and NOT with we Freedom Readers who reject it for lack of such Scripture. Just admit it, Mr. Correa...You're just GUESSING.

However, if ya wanna be KJVO without the baggage of the KJVO myth, by all means do so. There are many such members here.

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by Bro Tony:
And it goes on and on and still not one verse from any version of the Bible that declares that the KJV is God's only word. It seems clear that there are those who intend to add to the Scripture and then judge their brothers and sisters not by the Scripture, but by what they have added. Dangerous ground almost to the point of claiming self-deification and authority.

Sad,

Bro Tony

I'm not Sad! I got the Joy ,Joy ,Joy, Joy deep down in my Heart unspeakeable Joy!

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by robycop3:
No Mr. Rob your incorrect read Psalms 49:20 [/i]

Psalm 49:20, KJV: "Man that is in honour, and understandeth not, is like the beasts that perish."

Please tell me how THIS VERSE applies to KJVOism whatsoever, let alone, to the KJV alone. Methinks you're shooting in the dark again.

and there are no excuses and thats all you are giving me not scripture! Kewpile doll time!

MY POINT EXACTLY!

There are NO scriptures in the KJV supporting KJVOism. I need no Scripture to state KJVOism is false due to its lack of Scriptural support. The 'burden of proof' lies with the KJVO to support his doctrine with Scripture, and NOT with we Freedom Readers who reject it for lack of such Scripture. Just admit it, Mr. Correa...You're just GUESSING.

However, if ya wanna be KJVO without the baggage of the KJVO myth, by all means do so. There are many such members here.

You took the words right out of my mouth there is no such thing as KJVism and you cant give me Scripture to back it up!Next!

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by Rev. Lowery:
Keith they cant all be Gods word because only the KJV is absolute in its translation. Sure it as been updated but never has anything been removed like ohhh say the deity of Christ ohhhhh and my favorite is the way The Message translates Romans 1:27 it leaves room for Homosexuals to do what they will if they love each other where as the KJV does not. I could go on with the doctrinal errors in the NIV, NASB, ETC. ETC. ETC. but I want brother cause you know in your heart that they are wrong. See ppl want to think God is fallible so they dont have to do what he say's. What better way to do that then to say his word is not infallible and absolute 100% correct, AV 1611 FTW!!!

Amen,and Amen

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by rbell:
funny...

You make a claim, apparently, of "diminished lordship" as some places in modern versions "remove" Christ, Lord, etc. But if you're going to be consistent, notice that in Jude 25, a Christological emphasis is ADDED. Would a translation that seeks to "diminish the deity of Christ" do that? Would a godless translation ADD the word Christ in Colossians 2:9?

Colossians 1:14 is a parallel passage to Ephesians 1:7--in which "the blood was not removed." Could it be that the early MSS have it in one passage but not another? If the NIV were truly a corrupt version, would they not remove the word "blood" from the parallel passage as well?

Also...I fail to see how any of these scriptures change a single facet of my theology.

I better quit. My arms are sore from tearing down strawmen.

Open our Eyes Lord We want to see Jesus, Open Our Hearts Lord. The AV 1611 is the proof! Amen

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by Keith M:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Rev. Lowery:
Keith they cant all be Gods word because only the KJV is absolute in its translation.

Nice try, Rev., but ya got it all wrong! It is belief in this myth that has led you down a road of deep error. As I said before, the KJV is no more the word of God than the NKJV, the NASB or the ESV. Please give us scriptural backing for your fantastic claim, Rev., and we will all believe the KJVO theory just as you do. Until you (or anyone else) can scripturally support the KJVO idea, then it remains just what it is - an absolute myth. </font>[/QUOTE]Are you a Scientist? Do you have A Phd? Can you Diss the KJB and not be Guilty of Blasphamy? Are you a Scholar? Or a Master? Have you been to Calvary?Well I'm not A Scientist,or do I have a Phd,I will not Diss the KJB,I'm no Scholar or Master But I have Been To the Cross of Calvary and Jesus with His Blood washed "ALL" my sins away! Somebody say Amen!

 

[robycop3]

Rev. Lowery, all your "differences" have been dealt with earlier, as a scan of the archives should reveal to you, but one in particular merits comment...
Luke 2:33

"And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him."

The King James credits Mary with being the mother of Jesus, but does NOT refer to Joseph as His father. However, many new versions imply that Joseph WAS the father of Jesus by changing out the word "Joseph" with the word "father."

This deserves comment because it's one of, maybe *THE* most abysmally-IGNORANT mantras chanted by the KJVO authors. You might note these verses in the KJV's Luke 2:

27And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,

41Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.

48And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

Evidently, Terry Watkins & a coupla others who cited Luke 2:33 & 2:43 hadn't read their KJVs too closely before making their incorrect comments. YOU, Sir, are without excuse to further support this stuff now that your own KJV has supplied you with the truth. The KJV also correctly calls Josepf His father.

Was Joseph Jesus' father? Biologically, no, but legally, yes, by both Roman & Jewish law, as he was married to Mary before Jesus was born. And who acted as His earthly father during His childhood?

It's ridiculous points as this one is, that makes the KJVO myth so non-believable. It's no more than a desperate ploy by the KJVOs to try to find ANYTHING to attack other versions.

 

[robycop3]

Mr. Correa:You took the words right out of my mouth there is no such thing as KJVism and you cant give me Scripture to back it up!Next!

OK, here's yer next...

If it looks like a rose, smells like a rose, feels like a rose....

You appear to believe that the KJV is the ONLY valid English Bible version there is. You use many of the same excuses that others who believe likewise do. Therefore, you're a KJVO. And enough people believe likewise to have created KJVOism.

And as I said, it's the KJVO who must make his case with Scripture.

Next...

 

[robycop3]

Rev. Lowery:So your next question is how do we know the Bible is exact Rev. Lowery? That's known as this little thing called Faith and believing that God is true to his promises.

But faith that the KJV ALONE is exact(and the ONLY valid English Bible version) is BLIND FAITH, otherwise known as GUESSWORK. It's not BIBLICAL faith.

From the KJV: Hebrews 11:1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Where is the SUBSTANCE of KJVO, namely Scriptural support? And where is the EVIDENCE, besides a whole passel of GUESSWORK?

 

[Anti-Alexandrian]

Same place the support for Alexandrianism is found:Endsville

 

[dcorbett]

My Pastor, Dr Larry Chappell, says that the KJV is the MOST ACCURATE of translations. Why not use the MOST ACCURATE? It was good enough for my Mom and Dad, and it is certainly readable at the 4th grade level, so all those excuses of making it more "palatable" by re-writing it are worthless in my opinion.

KJV here til I die and go to Heaven!!!

 

[Ed Edwards]

I love the KJV so much I use three
different KJVs every weeks (and have several
others I only check every year or so):

1. KJV1611 Edition
2. KJV1769 Edition
3. KJV1873 Edition (may be the same
as came out in 1850)

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by robycop3:
Mr. Correa:You took the words right out of my mouth there is no such thing as KJVism and you cant give me Scripture to back it up!Next!

OK, here's yer next...

If it looks like a rose, smells like a rose, feels like a rose....

You appear to believe that the KJV is the ONLY valid English Bible version there is. You use many of the same excuses that others who believe likewise do. Therefore, you're a KJVO. And enough people believe likewise to have created KJVOism.

And as I said, it's the KJVO who must make his case with Scripture.

Next...

Oh how sweet and its not even valentines day! Why do you kick against the Pricks? Repent and turn to the true and Living God! Havent they tried to Pump imbalming fluid into that dead Alexandrian scroll to keep it afloat long enough for the rapture to occur and then there will be no one but That Roaring Lion actually devouring the Lost because they beleived a"LIE"!

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by dcorbett:
My Pastor, Dr Larry Chappell, says that the KJV is the MOST ACCURATE of translations. Why not use the MOST ACCURATE? It was good enough for my Mom and Dad, and it is certainly readable at the 4th grade level, so all those excuses of making it more "palatable" by re-writing it are worthless in my opinion.

KJV here til I die and go to Heaven!!!

Amen

 

[william s. correa]

(Gal. 4:7)
(KJV) "...thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ."
There's you proof!