Please provide scriptural support for KJVOism.

[Mexdeaf]

You rightly point out the outstanding academic qualifications of the AV translators and from all I've ever read about them they were outstanding and highly skilled not only in Greek and Hebrew but also in the English of their day. The overriding truth in that is that God was in control of them,just as He was in control of the "original" penman (some of whom weren't "academics" at all).

I believe that Scripture itself would disagree with you-

2 Peter 1:20,21

Knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

There is no mention of translators here. Preservation of God's Word in translations - yes. Inspiration of said translations - no.

 

[HankD]

Hank,
You must have been posting your reply while I was responding to gb's post and after reading it I feel it necessary to add a few more thoughts in regard to the "Greek and Hebrew" issue. I do not wish to be in the slightest way disrespectful toward those who have devoted themselves to the study of the original languages. I do respect them and admire anyone who is willing and able to master them or even gain a minimal understanding of them. You rightly point out the outstanding academic qualifications of the AV translators and from all I've ever read about them they were outstanding and highly skilled not only in Greek and Hebrew but also in the English of their day. The overriding truth in that is that God was in control of them,just as He was in control of the "original" penman (some of whom weren't "academics" at all).That said,the point we definitely differ on is that I DO believe that the KJV IS the "end of the line" for God's translated Word in the english-speaking world. I think I've now said all I really need to say on the matter for now. As it stands I think I may owe Johnv an apology for inadvertently "hijacking" his thread. Sorry John....though as I stated in my 1st post in this thread, I readily admit that there is NO VERSE in the KJV or any other "version" or translation that states "THIS IS THE ONE". I just believe that God's written Word has to be Perfect (like It's Author)....or it is NOT His Word. If your Bible has errors and mistakes in it then it is no better than the Koran or any other religious writing. That is my humble opinion....and always will be.

Blessings,
Greg Perry Sr.:type:

Thank you Gregory for your always straight forward answers. I hope you are willing to (as they say) to "agree to disagree".

I also can find not one Scripture either in the Greek, Hebrew or the 1769 Elizabethan-Jacobean KJV English translation which supports your theory.

However I see it as a faith conviction on your part.

The one element which contradicts your statement:

The overriding truth in that is that God was in control of them, just as He was in control of the "original" penman (some of whom weren't "academics" at all).That said,the point we definitely differ on is that I DO believe that the KJV IS the "end of the line" for God's translated Word in the english-speaking world.

If your conviction is indeed the truth, then of necessity that means the Church of England is the true Church of Jesus Christ on earth as no other church has been granted this apostolic right (although others claim the same) with that same control He gifted the apostles and prophets. The Scripture themselves, and the KJV translators themselves bearing witness that only these have that authority.

Since you are posting in a Baptist only Forum, you are by self testimony a Baptist who presumably does not believe in apostolic succession and therefore have separated yourself from the one true and apostolic Church, the Church of England who still has authority into perpetuity (including the Apocrypha and the Common Book of Prayer) over the "Authorised Version" of the Holy Bible.

Apostolic Succession is a Church of England doctrine and the basis of the fact that they call the KJV the "Authorised Version" of the Bible.

To be true to your theory you should cease to be a Baptist and align yourself with the Church of England.


HankD

 

[Trotter]

I don't know why Ruckman and others are so dogmatic about it.

As for why ruckman and the others are so rabid id easy to answer. The KJVO camp is their breadticket, pure and simple. Without all the furor and all they would have nothing.

That doesn't answer for those here, though.

 

[robycop3]

As for why ruckman and the others are so rabid id easy to answer. The KJVO camp is their breadticket, pure and simple. Without all the furor and all they would have nothing.

That doesn't answer for those here, though.

And some of'em might hafta actually GOTA WORK to earn a paycheck!

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Merging two similar threads that were blending anyway

 

[gb93433]

As for why ruckman and the others are so rabid is easy to answer. The KJVO camp is their breadticket, pure and simple. Without all the furor and all they would have nothing.

If people continue to be deceived by both the lies and lives of those people then there will always be a market for propaganda like that.

 

[Johnv]

One would think that, after 11 pages, there would be at least one post with scriptural support for KJVOism.

 

[Thermodynamics]

One would think that, after 11 pages, there would be at least one post with scriptural support for KJVOism.

Which of course begs the question, is there any? I think the answer is obvious.

 

[robycop3]

Which of course begs the question, is there any? I think the answer is obvious.

I agree with TD's above answer. this is the main reasin I completely reject KJVO...it's purely an INVENTION OF MAN.

Now, while I agree that the KJV is an excellent version, it is NOT "the version to end all English versions". It is simply one of the better versions in the line of English versions. As GOD has allowed/caused the language to change, He has updated the translation of His word accordingly.

And for years, the KJVOs have tried to work in substitutes for Scripture to support their doctrine. As each of these substitutes is exposed as false, they scramble to make up new ones, & after so long, they attempt to recycle some of the first ones. The simple TRUTH is, THERE'S NO VALID SUBSTITUTE FOR SCRIPTURE, so the KJVOs simply chase their own tails & end up back on Square One.

Again, JohnV, I have asked for Scriptural support for KJVO for many years, & have received an amazing assortment of answers, from Psalm 12:6-7(a notion taken from Wilkinson's book...and just WHERE does it mention KJVO??????????) to simply, DUH-HH!

 

[robycop3]

Well, it appears that the KJVOs have GIVEN UP, but just cannot bring themselves to admit there's NO Scriptural support for KJVO.

 

[Refreshed]

Well, it appears that the KJVOs have GIVEN UP, but just cannot bring themselves to admit there's NO Scriptural support for KJVO.

This is an honest request and not a concession. Please state your position on bible versions and provide scriptural evidence to back it up. I want to see if we're playing on a level playing field.

 

[Harold Garvey]

This is an honest request and not a concession. Please state your position on bible versions and provide scriptural evidence to back it up. I want to see if we're playing on a level playing field.

All the marbles will always roll into their trap because the playing field in slanted in that direction.

They can ask for Scriptural support. When we ask they will always revert back to the KJV Letter to the Reader.:laugh:

 

[annsni]

All the marbles will always roll into their trap because the playing field in slanted in that direction.

They can ask for Scriptural support. When we ask they will always revert back to the KJV Letter to the Reader.:laugh:

And you revert to......






*crickets*

 

[Baptist4life]

I suppose one could ask "Show me Scriptural evidence for all these versions out there today." I can concede that a more modern language version might be more convenient to the average person, and I think that base has been covered, but I see no need for the many, many different versions today.

 

[Refreshed]

I suppose one could ask "Show me Scriptural evidence for all these versions out there today." I can concede that a more modern language version might be more convenient to the average person, and I think that base has been covered, but I see no need for the many, many different versions today.

Why concede that? That is not a scriptural reason.

 

[Refreshed]

And you revert to......






*crickets*

I simply wanted to know scriptural evidence for your position, since it differs from mine and I was wondering if we were being held to a different standard. Do you have scriptural evidence for your position on Bible versions?

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

The truth is that the Bible is silent on the issue of versions and translations.

There is no Biblical Doctrine of Translationism.

 

[Trotter]

I suppose one could ask "Show me Scriptural evidence for all these versions out there today." I can concede that a more modern language version might be more convenient to the average person, and I think that base has been covered, but I see no need for the many, many different versions today.

No one argues that there is scriptural support for modern versions, but we are told that KJVO is scriptural. Slight difference.

No need? Then why aren't we all using horse and buggy? It was good enough for my great-grandpa, after all. Why aren't we all using oil lamps? Why aren't we all digging holes to go potty?

The old gives way to the new. While sometimes the new is not better (Edsel, anyone?), it does advance what was before. The KJV is still great, but it is frozen in place in the early 17th century no matter how many times it has been corrected or how many revisions it has seen. We are now in the 21st century. Christ's message has not changed,; it is the same as it was in the first century, and is the same in the KJV, ESV, NASB, or many others.

 

[Refreshed]

No one argues that there is scriptural support for modern versions

Interesting...why are you so dogmatic about it? For the sake of "progress?"

 

[Refreshed]

The truth is that the Bible is silent on the issue of versions and translations.

There is no Biblical Doctrine of Translationism.

Another honest question. The dogmatism against the KJVO stand is then justified how?