KJVO Sect's Hatred of LXX

perhaps because

a) it differs from the preserved hebrew masoretic text of the kjv.
b) it appears to be quoted in the preserved TR greek text.

which would leave us with the conundrum of two contradictory preserved texts of the old testament, if it predates the TR.

i don't know the answer. i do, however trust the bible God has put in our hands, his promises of preservation, and distrust the godless rationalism and worship of worldy wisdom that has led the majority of christians astray after corrupted texts.

it's nice to have a bible i can read and be free to simply follow what it plainly says. i think that's what god intended.

 

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Can I ask you a question? What is the difference between a "King James Version Only" person and a person who uses the King James Version only? It would seem that they would be the same except for the contempt in which the name KJVO is always used.

I only use the KJV presently, but I've used others and intend on reading all the versions of the Bible that my monolinguistic mind can handle...that should take me the rest of my life.

You're not making this thread out what I said before are you? Because I never thought of myself as being part of the group that some people hate on this board.

 

A person who uses the King James Version only is simply that. Choosing to use a specific version/translation that he/she is comfortable with. OTOH, a "King James Version Only" person is one who asserts that the KJV is the only acceptible translation for all humankind.

WS, you're not a KJV-Onlyist. You simply choose to use one specific version that you're spiritually comfortable with. Nuthun' wrong widdat.

 

perhaps it's too much to admit that their claim that the LXX was a myth is itself, well, a myth!

at the Chick.com site alone are 11 articles containing the word "Septuagint"--

1. Did Peter quote the Septuagint?
When referencing Isaiah (I Peter 1:24-25), many believe Peter is quoting the "Septuagint" Old Testament. Is he really?


2. What about the Septuagint?
The history of the Septuagint shows it to be an attempt to replace the preserved text of the Bible with a corrupt Alexandrian text, including the Apocrypha.


3. What is the Septuagint?
From 'The Answer Book' by Samuel Gipp.


4. FAQ's Concerning Bible Versions
Bible Versions Information Center featuring 'freqently asked questions'. Access online information about Bible Versions available through Chick Publications' web site.


5. Was the Sinaiticus really in a wastebasket? What's your proof?
Yes, it was. It was deposited with lots of other paper, in the desire to burn it and bring warmth to the monastery.


6. Are the Hebrew and Greek behind the New King James the same as that for the King James Bible?
The NKJV is not a revision of the King James Bible at all. The Greek and Hebrew behind the NKJV are the same as for the modern perversions.


7. Answers To Your Bible Version Questions - by David W. Daniels
Did God preserve His words?


8. How did God preserve His words to this day?
God preserved copies of His words down through time, using four main languages He chose for that purpose.


9. "Answers To My Jehovah's Witness Friends" - Chapter 10
The Name "Jehovah"


10. Should the italicized words in the KJV be removed?
From 'The Answer Book' by Samuel Gipp.


11. Can I read the NIV and still be saved?
I know no person who gauges Christianity (salvation, I mean) by which Bible he reads.

looking at the article "What is the Septuagint," i see 3 points about "Who is pushing the Septuagint":

1. Roman Catholic need it.

2. Ecumenical Textual Critics Need It.

3. We Don't Need It.

now see why they HATE the LXX?

 

Many people called many defenders of the KJV, "KJV only," "KJV onlyism" and "KJV onlyists." However you look at the word, "only." Look it up in a dictionary. There are 3 groups of KJV defenders.

1. The KJV only refers to that the KJV is superior to the Hebrew and Greek texts because the KJV defenders said that the KJV corrected them.

2. The KJV only refers to that there is no translation in Russian, Spainish, Japanese or any other language in the world. This means that any foreigners from their own country out of the USA MUST read the English Bible, the KJV.

3. The KJV only refers to the Hebrew (including Aramaic) and Greek texts that underline the KJV. The KJV is the most accurate translation available in English language today. This view does not use "only" in the literal sense of
"solely and exclusively." Non-English speaking people use accurate translations in their own language.

Which are you?

 

I have in my files a very lengthy article by Dr. Kirk DiVeitro called, Did Jesus and the Apostles Quote from the Septuagint (LXX)?.

Here is Dr. DiVeitro's own statement concerning the importance of this issue to his movement:

So there you have it.

Andy

 

aefting quotes Kirk DiVietro:

If Jesus and the writers of Scripture accepted it as authoritative Scripture then the plenary, verbal inspiration of Scripture is irrelevant. . . . [and] the doctrine of preservation is a sham.

Er, no, but these doctrines as defined by KJV-onlyists are.

 

It would be hard to hate somthing that does not exist.What most Bible-believers hate is the lie behind such a story and the men that are mentioned in Romans 16:18. The problem is,that if they WERE such a thing as a B.C. Septuagint,it would have(and the JEWS that allegedly compiled it)violated the ENTIRE Hebrew Old Testament law from Numbers to Malichi.Emphasis on Jeremiah 42:13-22 and 44:25-26.Unless you subscribe to "Let us do evil, that good may come?"

 

This is who I am::

And I'm not just spirtually comfortable with it, I'm physically comfortable with it. I know my Bible like the back of my hand.

and this is the theology of the church I am a member of:

I would like to add that I was saved with the Living Bible, and my former church used the N.I.V. so....I'm not coming from a completely limited point of view on versions.

Although my church is firm on the King James Version being the better version for the English Speaking People for reasons that I've already stated elsewhere. I will continue to look to history to see for myself how much of what I've been taught is true. I am open to the possibilities that I may not have all the facts yet.

 

And these four are? Hebrew, Greek, Latin and Syriac/Aramaic? If not, why not? (My guess is the KJVOs include English, probably at the expense of Latin.)

Haruo

 

Personally I like the KJV--and preach only from it--my church members like the NIV and others--I encourage them to buy a KJV to better stay up with me as I go from verse to verse through my sermon text. I wish they'd all get them a KJV and bring it to church--'course I can't hold a gun on um and force them to--although at times I'd like to see if they'd notice if I did!! I doubt they'd notice if I fired off a rocket or a hand granade!! I like to think my KJV preachin' is better at gettin' and keepin' their attention than a hand granade! What do ya'll think!!??

When I started preaching 15 years ago--I just fell in love with the KJV--its a whole lot richer in the King's English than I am!!

I like to look at the KJV like being married to my wife! I consider some ladies as my friends--some on this board--but its my wife that I'm madly in love with and am married to--that still doesn't keep me from talkin' to other women, though!! See what I mean! I love the KJV but that doesn't keep me from readin' others if I so choose! Did all that come out clear??!!

Blackbird

 

AV defender said,

"It would be hard to hate something that does not exist."

Yes the LXX did exist before the New Testament was written.

However, the problem is that if the KJVonlyist ever admit it they expose their false doctrine for what it is, a fable.

 

Personally I like the KJV--and preach only from it--my church members like the NIV and others--I encourage them to buy a KJV to better stay up with me as I go from verse to verse through my sermon text. I wish they'd all get them a KJV and bring it to church--'course I can't hold a gun on um and force them to--although at times I'd like to see if they'd notice if I did!! I doubt they'd notice if I fired off a rocket or a hand granade!! I like to think my KJV preachin' is better at gettin' and keepin' their attention than a hand granade! What do ya'll think!!??

I think if your congregation is so inattentive to this wonderful Anglican Version only that you preach from, your preaching from that one only matters nothing.

When I started preaching 15 years ago--I just fell in love with the KJV--its a whole lot richer in the King's English than I am!!

You should be more concerned with King Jesus' message than with King James' book.

I like to look at the KJV like being married to my wife!

Oh, is it that kind of intimate companion on a dark night?

I consider some ladies as my friends--some on this board--but its my wife that I'm madly in love with and am married to--that still doesn't keep me from talkin' to other women, though!! See what I mean!

Not quite; unless you do something with that binding of papers that would be downright weird.

 

AV defender said,
"It would be hard to hate something that does not exist."
I held a fragment of a non-existant BC LXX in my hands. (actually I held the 2 glass plates it was wedged between in my hands, but you get the idea)

 

According to AV Defender's logic, you must not exist either.

 

AV Defender said:

It would be hard to hate somthing that does not exist.

I have been accused many times of hating "God's perfect, inerrant preserved word in the English Language, the King James Bible."

I have never been shown a "perfect, inerrant" one. It's hard to hate something that does not exist.

 

Nooooo! Get a book, "Forever Settled" by Jack Moorman, however you can look at it on the website here: THE GREEK SEPTUAGINT

 

Nooooo! Get a book, "Forever Settled" by Jack Moorman, however you can look at it on the website here: THE GREEK SEPTUAGINT </font>[/QUOTE]Are you kidding? This website is totally biased toward the KJVonly position.