KJVO Lies

[LarryN]

Originally posted by Pastor KevinR:
I am curious Michelle. If you've answered this elsewhere, please direct me...
If God has preserved (pickled) His Word for us as English speaking people in the KJV (whether 1611 or 1769), wouldn't that by default make Him to be a respecter of persons? i.e. why would He do so for our language, and not every language? I don't see God as so inconsistent. That's why Christians by and large see Him as preserving His Word in the very languages He chose to inspire; Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

Righto, Pastor KevinR!

KJVOism is IMHO merely another form of ethnocentrism that is evidence of a person's limited-scope Biblical worldview- and in this regard it's no better than heretical British Israelism.

 

[Lacy Evans]

If God has preserved (pickled) His Word for us in missing Greek autographs, wouldn't that by default make Him to be a respecter of persons? i.e. why would He do so for that language, and not every language? I don't see God as so inconsistent. That's why Christians by and large see Him as preserving His Word in the universal language of the modern era which He chose to inspire; English!

Autograph-Onlyism is IMHO merely another form of ethnocentrism that is evidence of a person's limited-scope Biblical worldview- and in this regard it's no better than heretical British Israelism.

Lacy

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

---------------
That's why Christians by and large see Him as preserving His Word in the universal language of the modern era which He chose to inspire; English!
----------------

Only native English speaking Christians see it that way.

God only preserves His Word in English?!? Surely you don't mean that my brother.

 

[Pastor KevinR]

Originally posted by LarryN:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Pastor KevinR:
I am curious Michelle. If you've answered this elsewhere, please direct me...
If God has preserved (pickled) His Word for us as English speaking people in the KJV (whether 1611 or 1769), wouldn't that by default make Him to be a respecter of persons? i.e. why would He do so for our language, and not every language? I don't see God as so inconsistent. That's why Christians by and large see Him as preserving His Word in the very languages He chose to inspire; Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

Righto, Pastor KevinR!

KJVOism is IMHO merely another form of ethnocentrism that is evidence of a person's limited-scope Biblical worldview- and in this regard it's no better than heretical British Israelism. </font>[/QUOTE]I know of two KJVO colleges (IFB) which sponsor trips to the Holy Land, and "the land of the King James Bible: England" and no, I'm not kiddin'!

 

[LarryN]

God only preserves His Word in English?!? Surely you don't mean that my brother.

Sadly, that's exactly what many KJVO's believe, deep-down. That is why many KJVO's advocate that new translations of the Bible in non-english languages be translated straight from the KJV, rather than from the Hebrew or Greek. But I haven't encountered many with the fortitude to admit it directly, due to the obvious ramifications.

That's why you'll probably receive a reply with lots of heming & hawing, but without an outright 'NO'. That is, if you receive a reply at all.

 

[Pastor KevinR]

Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
That's why Christians by and large see Him as preserving His Word in the universal language of the modern era which He chose to inspire; English!

Lacy

Are you serious?

 

[Lacy Evans]

Here's a Portugese KJVO site.

http://solascriptura-tt.org/Bibliologia-PreservacaoTT/

(Note: THE BIG LIE is credited to Herb Evans, wrong "Evans"!)

I personally know many Filipino KJVOs, some who barely speak English. I correspond with a native KJVO pastor in Kathmandu, Nepal.

pchand1979@hotmail.com

It's not just native English Speakers. Seriously

Lacy

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

There is a Portugese KJV?
If it is in Portugese it is different from the English KJV so they are not the same - which can I trust?

 

[Lacy Evans]

It is the English KJV. As opposed to the Greek autographs.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

So all peoples of the world must learn English to get the Word of God?!?

 

[Lacy Evans]

A bird in the hand. As opposed to 5000 pterodactyls in the bush.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

I take it that means yes?
No one has God's Word unless they know English?

 

[Lacy Evans]

So all peoples of the world must learn Greek to get the Word of God?!?

I'm not trying to be smart but I don't understand why that would be an issue?

 

[Lacy Evans]

If the autographs are the only inspired scripture, then not only do we all have to learn Greek to get the "perfect" Word of God, then we would also have to have the autographs themself. Is that preservation of scriptures?

Lacy

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Ok, let me rephrase this.

Which must people do to get the Word of God?
A) Learn English
B) Translate from the KJV.
C) Translate from Hebrew and Greek sources

 

[TC]

There would not be a KJV (or any other Bible) if there were no Hebrew,Aramaic, and Greek sources. The answer is the same today as in 1611 - translate from the original language sources. Just my 2 cents.

 

[LarryN]

Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
Here's a Portugese KJVO site.

http://solascriptura-tt.org/Bibliologia-PreservacaoTT/

(Note: THE BIG LIE is credited to Herb Evans, wrong "Evans"!)

I personally know many Filipino KJVOs, some who barely speak English. I correspond with a native KJVO pastor in Kathmandu, Nepal.

pchand1979@hotmail.com

It's not just native English Speakers. Seriously

Lacy

The Portugese site is a curious amalgam of Portugese and English analyses of the KJV. I'm especially surprised to see Cassidy's article, that while purporting to promote KJVOism, actually is critical of many of its most controversial underpinnings. Without knowing the background of this site, I'd be curious as to whether this site is actually from a native Portugese-speaker's perspective- or whether it's instead the work of a native English-speaking KJVO, perhaps serving as a missionary in Portugal (Brazil, perhaps?)- who's trying to promote KJVOism among the native populace.

Nepalese & Filipino KJVOs? Maybe I'm overly cynical- but is this perhaps simply a political move to ingratiate themselves with American KJVO $$ supporters? I'd like some more information.

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by C4K:
Ok, let me rephrase this.

Which must people do to get the Word of God?
A) Learn English
B) Translate from the KJV.
C) Translate from Hebrew and Greek sources

This question appears to deal with two separate issues. "A" would be a very viable and practical option for a Believer wanting to further his education. English is, after all, a very important world-wide language. (Another thread?)

"B" and "C" would seem to be choices as to what we should do to help them. If my choice were these:

A) Teach a person English: (Pretty easy if you ask me.)
B) Translate in his language from the KJV. (This could take years but would be worth it.)
C) Translate in his language from Greek and Hebrew

I would choose "A" and "B". But no-mater how "accurate" and "reliable" the translation, I'd still defer to the KJV for final authority.

As for "C", why? Can you prove that the body of Greek and Hebrew we have extant is closer to the autographs than the KJV? No you can't.

When God breathes on the scattered, dry bones, the end result is just as good as the original and much better than the sum of its dead, dry, scattered parts.

Lacy

 

[superdave]

Only one word to describe that, ok two Authorized version words

God forbid ("let it not be so", for you shakepearally challenged folks)

I had heard they existed, but never thought I would find such a rare species.

That position regarding translating the KJV into other languages instead of going to the multitude of reliable greek and hebrew sources available today is one of the scariest byproducts of the KJVO movement, and I fear that it is producing a multitude of inferior, mutilated translations being shipped to non-English speaking peoples.

Learn their language, learn Biblical languages, and do it the right way. The same advantages that have been given to us should be extended to those with other tongues. They should have a good conservative translation made responsibly from the original language sources.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Lacy Evans:
A) Teach a person English: (Pretty easy if you ask me.)

I've got news for ya: English is my second language. I and everyone over 25 in my family learned English as a second language. Elizabethan English is NOT my language. My language is American conversational English. I'm entitled to read a Bible in MY language. Also, the language most common in the world is Chinese, not English. However, the second largest world language is not Elisabethan English, but American business English (which differs slightly from Americal conversational English).

Oh, and your comment "pretty easy if you ask me" is selfrighteously and anglocentric. Why don't you try speaking Spanish? It's a native language to the US, and the second most common language in the US as well. Or, why not learn Greek and Hebrew, the native languages of Scripture? Pretty simple, if I ask you.

But no-mater how "accurate" and "reliable" the translation, I'd still defer to the KJV for final authority.

To do that, you'd be placing higher authority on the KJV than its source texts in places where they disagree. That's adding to scripture, whish is blatant heresy. Phrases like "God forbid" and "God save the King" do NOT supercede the source texts.

Have you ever played teh game "telephone", where one person tells another something, and they pass it on, etc? By the time it gets around the room, the original message is lost. To make a translation from another translation would have the same result. The most accurate method would be to make a translation from the same source texts that the KJV translators used.

As for "C" [Translate in his language from Greek and Hebrew], why? Can you prove that the body of Greek and Hebrew we have extant is closer to the autographs than the KJV? No you can't.

This has got to be one of the most &lt;reluctantly snipped because the word was in violated of the rules&gt; things I've heard on this board. See, you will insist that we "prove" this, yet I can prove that the TR is not as accurate to the texts of Jesus' time as earlier manuscripts. The Dead Sea Scrolls, which date to the time of Jesus, support OT texts of the Alexandrian manuscripts. Yet you will discard any proof that disagrees with an unprovable and unscriptural stance.

&lt;Moderator note: The word "heresy" stand in the first instance because adding to scripture is heresy.&gt;

[ August 06, 2004, 03:00 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]