lack of Scriptural support

--------------------------------------------------
have. Repeatedly. Emphatically. Just not to a single, exclusive translation, for not even scripture itself does so nor exhorts me to. To do so is to go beyond what scripture says.
--------------------------------------------------

Really? You have? So you condone the omittions in the modern versions, and the alterations of truth in them, even at the expense of the scriptural warnings against them, and the promises God has made concerning his words? You HAVE NOT applied this truth to this issue. YOu only think you have, when it is quite revealing you have not, nor do you seem to believe what the scriptures have said and reveal.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Yes, I do. Just as I condone the omittions and alterations in the KJV when compared to the Bibles before it. God's word is not bound so a single, exclusive translation.

I HAVE. When you understand, you will understand. Prayerfully ponder on the truth of the passages you posted in Wycliffe's and the Geneva and the Bishop's and maybe the Lord will grant you wisdom.

 

Yet you won't post/repost your explanations and " am not going there again. Typical.

You have belittled brethren since you've been back, Michelle, saying that they have "compromised the truth yet you haven't proven they have. I think you need to study what the Bible says on false accusations, especially against the brethren.

You have yet to show one iota of evidence for KJ...V...as in VERSION...Onlyism. The KJV doesn't show this, nor do the NIV, NASB, ASV, etc. Also, again, please, with all of the revisions in the KJ VERSION since 1611, which one is the pure, word for word, perfect Word of God? We're still waiting for the proof of which is which and what is what.

 

So, 'splain something to me. If you say this applies to "perfect words" in a "perfect English translation" for all generations, I have two simple questions:

1) Why do the 1611 KJV and the 1769 KJV differ.

2) and I've asked you this 100 times and YOU cannot answer it because you don't have an answer: What was God's perfect English Bible in 1580? (And don't give me any of this business that you weren't there so how would you know; if you give an excuse like that look deep into your heart and see if you are being honest with yourself AND us.) So, what is the answer to this, Please?

 

Oh yes you do have a double standard. I showed you a passage of Scripture in the KJV which left out some very important words in the translation to English which at least 2 MVs kept intact.

So the KJV translators are also guilty of additions/deletions. You apparently ignored it or have no answer.

I have other examples but I won't take the time (unless you respond) you ignore my technical questions and only come back with ad hominems and accusations of compromise. So why bother?

Apparently you have taken over the role of God Himself who alone can know the heart of any man and requires no evidence.

Show me proof from my words and the address of the note that proves I am a compromiser.

No translation is perfect. The KJV translators both witnessed to this fact and proved it by a series of textual corrections.

No apograph is perfect. The KJV translators proved this by their marginal notes in the first few edition/revsions.

FWIW, I have perfect peace before God concerning the KJVO issue.

HankD

 

Sometimes I definitely get that feeling.

HankD

 

Amen, Brother Robycop3 -- Preach it!

 

Robycop3,

Would you settle for KJVOs admitting hat they haold to their position out of personal conviction?

It is painfully obvious that the KJVO stand does not have a scriptural foundation. But are those who claim to be KJVO (or don't, saying that it is a man-made label ) willing to admit that it boils down to their personal choice?

In Christ,
Trotter

 

As I told another brother in a PM,
I admit there are apparent problems with my stand.
However, "Though He slay me, yet will I trust Him".
I may not be able to explain my position to you guys to your satisfaction, and I may appear to be holding onto an unreasonalbe position in your eyes.
I have stated a number of times here. If YOU don't believe it then fine. It neither affects me nor discourages me. I will still trust that my God has given me a perfect Book in spite of ALL the loudly proclaimed apparent problems.
Whenever I approach the Scriptures, I hold this ONE thought in my heart.
GOD IS ALWAYS RIGHT. WHEN I ENCOUNTER AN APPARENT PROBLEM, THE PROBLEM LIES IN MY UNDERSTANDING. GOD IS ALWYAS RIGHT.
Trotter, brother, I appreciate your willingnes to be gracious and concede that this IS a conviction issue. Nothing more.
Some folks have sincere convictions that ladies should never wear pants, and they can produce Scripture for it. Other folks declare that those Scripture do not apply and are being misinterpreted. Yet the "no-pants" folks tenaciously hold on. Not much difference here.
I'll once more offer a thought for you fellers.
I believe my old KJV is like a AK 47 assault rifle. I am in combat. Fightin' a good fight. If you are in my foxhole, please don't try to destroy my weapon. Just point YOURS at our common enemy, won't you? Even if you must use a .45 cal, or a .22 or even a slingshot. OK?

In HIS service;
Jim

 

No one is trying to destroy your weapon, Jim. Or even trying to to discredit it.

What is being attempted is to show that there are other guns that are out there that work the same. Some might shoot further, some shorter, hold less ammo, hold more, look different, have different stocks, but they are guns, too. And there is nothing in ANY manual that says everyone must use your AK-47, or that the AK-47 is the only true gun in the world.

Love you, my brother. Please understand that no one is attacking the KJV. Just trying to clear out some of the smoke and falsities.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

I won't bother changing all of your "KJVOs" to "Autograph Onlys" this time but you get my point. Sometimes, Roby, I think you like the sound your boot makes when you kick scarecrows.

Lacy

 

I fully understand what you are attempting brother. I think it is a waste of time. I am just as guilty of wasting time on non-essentials as the next guy, so please don't misunderstand me here, k?
Anyway, I suggest that time is better spent in refuting deadlier things. Like doctrines which have a direct affect on ones soul, salvation, or walk with Christ.
I realize there are many in the KJVo camp who have made this a hobby horse. They are to be confronted and corrected. Not on what Bible they see as the perfect one, but rather on what they are spending their time on. I am in full agreement with you that they should not go around stomping of other folks' toes in the name of their own hobby horse. OTOH, perhaps the other side of the camp should be equally blamed for riding that horse as well. All of us have much more important things to do, don't we?

In HIS service;
Jim

 

You're just jealous Jim that you're not in the 1000 posts club!

Lacy

 

You only have one thousand, Lacy? Gee, you're still a newbie!

In Christ,
Trotter