KJV-only author critiques other KJV-only authors

[Logos1560]

Rick, you put on a pious front of pretending you are a Bible believer .

Do you improperly try to attack my honesty and Bible beliefs?

You do not actually refute my statements that you try to distort and misrepresent as you attack your own created straw man distortions. You fail to prove that I am supposedly pretending when I state my beliefs and when I present scriptural truths.

You choose to believe something that your unidentified KJV edition does not state and something that you do not prove to be true. Your believing something does not make it true and does not make it scriptural. You have not proven your KJV-only assertions from the Scriptures, including even from your one preferred English translation. The KJV warns believers that they can deceive themselves, and they can deceive themselves by believing claims and assertions that are not true.

The KJV does not state nor teach that the word of God is bound to the textual criticism decisions, Bible-revision decisions, and translation decisions of one exclusive group of Church of England critics in 1611. The KJV does not state nor teach that God shows partiality to one exclusive group of Church of England critics in 1611.

Why do you avoid admitting the truth that your human KJV-only opinions are not Bible beliefs?

The KJV is the word of God translated into English in the same sense as the pre-1611 English Bibles such as the 1560 Geneva Bible are the word of God translated into English. It is a fact that the 1611 KJV does not provide an English rendering for every preserved original-language word of Scripture. Your unidentified post-1900 KJV edition likely has over 150 words added that were not in the 1611 edition and likely omits some words that were found in the 1611 edition. Your present KJV edition does not even preserve every word exactly the same as the 1611 edition, and it especially does not preserve every specific, exact word given by inspiration of God to the prophets and apostles.

 

[Yeshua1]

Rick, you put on a pious front of pretending you are a Bible believer who firmly believes "The words given by inspiration of God to the prophets and apostles were and are 100% absolutely pure and those words did not need to go through any human purifying process of textual criticism.", and yet you have repeatedly refused to give us the proof of your pious profession and SHOW US A COPY of these "pure, preserved words" you profess to believe in.

And, you NEVER will show them to us. Why? Because you really do not believe such a thing exists as a complete and inerrant words of God Bible in ANY language you can show us. You are just too dishonest to admit what is obvious to anyone who is paying attention to what you are actually saying.


So, once again you have dodged my two questions. You have not shown us this complete and inerrant Bible you apparently want people to think you believe in, and you have not given us one provable error in the King James Bible.

The Holy Spirit is an It? Easter? 2 Persons mentions in Great God and savior?

 

[Will J. Kinney]

The Kjv version has known errors and mistakes in it, and which Kjv is the perfect one then? 1611, 1769, 1873?

Hey, Yeshua 1. You forgot to answer my question? Here it is again in case you missed it.
You don't have the originals to show us. At this point you don't even have a copy of both the Hebrew and "the" Greek Bible that you can show us that you really believe is the complete and inerrant words of God. Right? IF you do, then can you give us a link to where we can see this original languages bible you think is the inerrant and complete words of God?

And while you are at it, how about you post this Number One error or mistake that you think were in any of those King James Bibles?

There was the correction of printing errors and later on the updating of the spelling of many words, but the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts never changed. This is in sharp contrast to versions like the NKJV, ESV, NASB, NIV, Holman, etc. that continue to deliberately change the Hebrew and Greek and their translations from one edition to the next.

As I told you before, if you want the perfect, complete and inerrant Bible you need to get yourself any Cambridge printing of the King James Bible you can get at any bookstore.

 

[Yeshua1]

Hey, Yeshua 1. You forgot to answer my question? Here it is again in case you missed it.
You don't have the originals to show us. At this point you don't even have a copy of both the Hebrew and "the" Greek Bible that you can show us that you really believe is the complete and inerrant words of God. Right? IF you do, then can you give us a link to where we can see this original languages bible you think is the inerrant and complete words of God?

And while you are at it, how about you post this Number One error or mistake that you think were in any of those King James Bibles?

There was the correction of printing errors and later on the updating of the spelling of many words, but the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts never changed. This is in sharp contrast to versions like the NKJV, ESV, NASB, NIV, Holman, etc. that continue to deliberately change the Hebrew and Greek and their translations from one edition to the next.

As I told you before, if you want the perfect, complete and inerrant Bible you need to get yourself any Cambridge printing of the King James Bible you can get at any bookstore.

I do not need to have a perfect translation to have the Bible! Does your kjv correct the hebrew and Greek texts then?

 

[37818]

The Holy Spirit is an It?

Literal.

Easter?

Most Baptist churches still call that time Easter.

2 Persons mentions in Great God and savior?

No, ". . . the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; . . ." ". . . επιφανειαν της δοξης του μεγαλου θεου και σωτηρος ιησου χριστου. . . ."

 

[Yeshua1]

Literal.
Most Baptist churches still call that time Easter.

No, ". . . the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; . . ." ". . . επιφανειαν της δοξης του μεγαλου θεου και σωτηρος ιησου χριστου. . . ."

The Kjv translated it as referring to 2 separate Persons!

 

[37818]

The Kjv translated it as referring to 2 separate Persons!

Only in a literal foot note adding the second of.

 

[Will J. Kinney]

I do not need to have a perfect translation to have the Bible! Does your kjv correct the hebrew and Greek texts then?

Yeshua 1. Sir, you do not have any copy of "the" Hebrew and much less of "the" Greek that you can show us that you really believe is the complete and inerrant words of God.

Remember, you believe in that "Phantom" bible called "the originals" which you have never seen; never read; couldn't read if you had them, and that you know do not exist.

The KJB correctly translated the specific Hebrew and Greek texts that underlie this masterpiece.

Versions like the ESV (especially), NASB, NIV, NET, etc. often reject the Hebrew readings and add hundreds of words to them. I can prove this if you want to see the examples.

And your "the" Greek is constantly changing from one new edition to the next in the UBS/Nestle-Aland Vatican supervised Critical text.

 

[Will J. Kinney]

The Kjv translated it as referring to 2 separate Persons!

In reference to Titus 2:13 which is absolutely true in the KJB and it follows the Greek text while many modern version re-arrange the Greek text.

James White it totally wrong in his criticism of this verse and so is Yeshua 1.


There is a great truth revealed in the KJB that is missed in many modern versions like the NKJV, NASB, NIV, ESV.


For those who wish to know why the KJB got it right, as it always does, see my article on Titus 2:13. Jesus is the great God of everybody, but he is OUR Saviour.


James White and his criticism of Titus 2:13 in the King James Bible

https://brandplucked.webs.com/jameswhitetitus213.htm

 

[Will J. Kinney]

Literal.
Most Baptist churches still call that time Easter.


Many criticize the word Easter in Acts 12:4, but they are wrong and the KJB is right. The Greek word paska means two things. Passover AND Easter. Look it up in any Greek dictionary. And there is a good reason why it is only translated as Easter in Acts 12:4.

The King James Bible is absolutely correct in Acts 12:4 with Easter and here is why -
Another King James Bible Believer

 

[Logos1560]

There was the correction of printing errors and later on the updating of the spelling of many words, but the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts never changed.

You fail to prove your opinions to be true. Perhaps you merely assume your opinions by use of fallacies such as begging the question. You make empty, unsupported claims that you do not prove to be true.

You have not proven that all the actual errors in the 1611 edition of the KJV were the fault of the printers. Some of them were kept uncorrected from the 1602 edition of the Bishops' Bible so that the KJV translators could have been responsible for not correcting them or at least for not making sure that they were corrected. Some of the errors from the 1602 Bishops' Bible remained uncorrected in KJV editions for several years, which could suggest that the KJV translators had not noticed them.
If the KJV translators had actually corrected them and the printer had failed to follow the correction, the KJV translators should have noticed it in the 1611 edition and could have had the printer correct them in the very next edition.

You never name and identify what those supposed "underlying Hebrew and Greek texts" were. Sometimes the KJV follows other sources such as the Latin Vulgate. Sometimes later editions of the KJV in effect changed the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts of the 1611 edition when changes were made to the 1611. The 1769 Oxford edition introduced a textual change to the 1611 edition. Since a different Hebrew word would underlie "LORD" [Jehovah] than would underlie "Lord" [Adonai], all the changes between these two in KJV editions could be considered changing the underlying Hebrew text of those editions.

 

[Logos1560]

Yeshua 1. Sir, you do not have any copy of "the" Hebrew and much less of "the" Greek that you can show us that you really believe is the complete and inerrant words of God.

Neither did the KJV translators according to your own assertions in your own posts. Do you in effect suggest that the KJV translators translated from a "Phantom" Bible that you do not name and identify?

If the Church of England makers of the KJV could have "the complete and inerrant words of God" in multiple varying editions of the Hebrew and Greek texts, believers today can have them the same way. Thus, your accusation that they do not have them would have to be false unless you also claim that the KJV translators did not actually have them when they used multiple, textually-varying editions of the Hebrew and Greek texts.

Do you bear false witness with your unproven allegation that believers cannot have "the complete and inerrant words of God" in multiple, varying editions of the Hebrew and Greek texts? Are your accusations unrighteous judgments based on use of unjust divers measures [double standards] since you do not apply the same exact standards/measures to the KJV translators?

 

[Logos1560]

Will Kinney wrote that “an educated guess would be that God preserved His perfect words in the Old Latin Bibles” (Flaming Torch, April-June, 2003, p. 18).

Do you have a copy of that "Phantom" Old Latin Bible with God's perfect words and whose Old Testament was translated from an edition of the Greek Septuagint?

Do the Scriptures somewhere teach that God would preserve His perfect words in Latin?

 

[Yeshua1]

Yeshua 1. Sir, you do not have any copy of "the" Hebrew and much less of "the" Greek that you can show us that you really believe is the complete and inerrant words of God.

Remember, you believe in that "Phantom" bible called "the originals" which you have never seen; never read; couldn't read if you had them, and that you know do not exist.

The KJB correctly translated the specific Hebrew and Greek texts that underlie this masterpiece.

Versions like the ESV (especially), NASB, NIV, NET, etc. often reject the Hebrew readings and add hundreds of words to them. I can prove this if you want to see the examples.

And your "the" Greek is constantly changing from one new edition to the next in the UBS/Nestle-Aland Vatican supervised Critical text.

The Kjv also "added words" that were not found in the greek text!

 

[Yeshua1]

In reference to Titus 2:13 which is absolutely true in the KJB and it follows the Greek text while many modern version re-arrange the Greek text.

James White it totally wrong in his criticism of this verse and so is Yeshua 1.


There is a great truth revealed in the KJB that is missed in many modern versions like the NKJV, NASB, NIV, ESV.


For those who wish to know why the KJB got it right, as it always does, see my article on Titus 2:13. Jesus is the great God of everybody, but he is OUR Saviour.


James White and his criticism of Titus 2:13 in the King James Bible

Another King James Bible Believer

The Kjv mistranslated that verse!

 

[Logos1560]

As for the changes in the KJB, there was the change from Gothic to Roman type, the correction of printing errors and the updating in spelling.

And, finally, No, Rick, I do not believe there are any errors in the King James Bible.
.

How could there be correction of errors in the KJB when you say that you believe that there are no errors in the KJB?

Do you in effect contradict yourself? Do you suggest that you believe something that you know is not true since you know that there were errors in the KJV? An error is still an error regardless of whether it was made by copiers, printers, editors, or translators. It would be erroneous reasoning to try to suggest that an error made by a printer is not an error. Furthermore, you have not proven that all the actual errors in the 1611 edition of the KJV were the fault of the printer. In which edition in what year do you claim that all the errors were first removed?

 

[George Antonios]

The Holy Spirit is an It? Easter? 2 Persons mentions in Great God and savior?

Easter is old German for "resurrection".

 

[George Antonios]

The perfect Bible issue (I did not say KJV) is not a head issue, it's a heart issue.
It's naturalistic philosophy VS faith in the power of God.
That's why we will never meet.

 

[Yeshua1]

The perfect Bible issue (I did not say KJV) is not a head issue, it's a heart issue.
It's naturalistic philosophy VS faith in the power of God.
That's why we will never meet.

Can there be a perfect translation apart from the Kjv though?

 

[Yeshua1]

The perfect Bible issue (I did not say KJV) is not a head issue, it's a heart issue.
It's naturalistic philosophy VS faith in the power of God.
That's why we will never meet.

Do we need a perfect bible in order to have the real Gospel and real Jesus though?