Prefer the KJV?

At least this is honesty..."kjv...I feel its more accurate... others...just don't feel right." That is the essence of this KJV Only. All this argumentation about manuscripts is an evasion of what the whole issue is about.

 

Maybe but he is presented as someone who has something to say on the versions/textual criticism issue, not on theology in general.... then a bunch of titles and degrees are listed in an attempt to make him look authoritative and educated. They made his education and its relevance the issue, not me. I doubt that these six men and the resources they can access from Anchor Baptist Church are sufficient to make this man an expert on this topic.

I have been to Pisgah Forest. I have an aunt that lives there. It is not much more than a wide place in the road on the way to Brevard.

My criticism here is not meant as a general indictment of preachers that are trained in small, local church sponsored Bible schools. I am familiar with several that do a very good job... but they aren't equipped, nor is it their aim, to train academic scholars. Their object, and what they do pretty well, is to train pastors that cannot go to seminary.

You don't? Both quantity and quality are factors. A small, marginally qualified staff simply cannot have the depth nor breadth of ability that a well trained larger staff has.

It is never wise to stereotype a man by the college he graduated from. Are you willing to affirm that each graduate of your alma-mater is exactly like you, or that you are exactly like them? </font>[/QUOTE] Of course not but that isn't my point. My point is that H-A is known less for excellence in education than it is for promoting its unique brand of pseudo-fundamentalism that emphasizes KJVO, easy believism, and phariseeism.

That said, I know a Hyles grad that was a very good pastor. He repented from their false teachings and made use of what he could.

And you are totally unqualified to make this assumption. The Corinthians thought Paul was unqualified to be an Apostle. Boy were they wrong.</font>[/QUOTE]I have read Paul... and sir, this man is no Paul.

When you start putting a bunch of letters after your name they should mean something, don't you think? I could be wrong. Which is why I said "appear". But it is extraordinarily unlikely that a doctorate received from a small church sponsored school in a tiny NC mtn town puts him in a class of experts comparable to say Dallas Theological Seminary.

[ January 16, 2003, 12:51 AM: Message edited by: Scott J ]

 

Give me a Bible believing preacher from nowhere USA that didn't go to bible college and I'll show you a preacher that could out preach, out teach, out soul win ,out anything anyone of Dallas's grads.Honestly I wish churches that do not believe the KING JAMES BIBLE is the one true perfect word of God would take Baptist out of their name.

 

I totally believe in 'untrained' preachers. However, I think to claim that every untrained preacher is better that every trained preacher ignore the whole issue of spiritual gifting.

But what really shocked me was your second statement.
Do you really believe that the Baptist movement is irrelevant in China, India, Russia, the Middle East, Japan and the majority of Africa, South America and Europe?

 

Neal,
I prefer the KJV, simply because that is what I am used to. Also, the Church I attend has in its by-laws that only the KJV can be used in teaching and preaching. Of course, I am not KJVOnly. In my studies I use the Amplified, NLB, NASB, NIV, NKJV. But as long as I am a member of the Church I attend, I will preach and teach from the KJV.
But I am not KJVonly.

Kenneth

 

Nice try at diversion. This seems to be a common KJVO tactic- to claim that they are somehow more zealous for God and more burdened for the souls of the lost. I disagree with this conclusion but neither of us could ever prove our position. You would have to know these claims are unprovable so it follows that you are just trying to evade the real issue and start an argument. The only thing I think we know for a fact is that most of the people saved in any time period were not led to Christ by KJVO's.

Now, back to the issue. Even if I agreed that you were right (which I don't), that would have nothing at all to do with the ability to speak intelligently and authoritatively on the the doctrine of the Bible or textual criticism.

I think you have this backwards. Since KJVOnlyism is a recent aberration from fundamental Baptist beliefs... and since its origin is with an Seventh Day Adventist... and since it denies the historical fundamental doctrine of the Bible... and since its source text was made by an unrepentant RC... and since the leaders of its translation committee were guilty of persecuting Baptist... and since Baptists at the time of its release rejected it as the English pope's (King James) Bible in favor of the Geneva... and since they only accepted it after the state Church of England made it a crime to print, bind, or distribute any other version within the empire... and since the battle cry of American Baptists in the Revolution was "No KING but Jesus!"... I think it is the KJVO's that should consider whether they fit in as Baptists.

 

If you read my post you would see that I specified"Give Me".You take what you want but it has been my experience that grads from those BIG NAME schools you talk so highly of are not what I am looking for. The men I have come in contact with from the big schools seem feminine and that is very unappealing to me{in a man}.The women from the big schools that I have come in contact with are bossy and tend to be heady.I do not find that appealing at all.Just so you know this is from my personal observance of people I know who prefer new versions. The genders seem to be confused about their role.Once agaim lest someone should mistake my post for something it is not this is my personal belief from years of observation.

 

Read them post and answer your questions from there. Don't twist words.

 

Little story. If you go back to English Christian commentaries of the Victorian era the Amillenial Baptists and the Millenial Brethren were duking it out big time, both claiming that the opposing view was heavily influenced by Catholic sympathizers. Both groups loathed the Catholics and thus this was the ultimate insult and 'proof' of the abhorance of the opposing view.

Meanwhile the Oxford movement took over the Church of England then influenced the rest of the protestant church until eventually the Baptist Union entered an ecumenical alliance with the Catholics .

The moral is this. If we start on the 'reading the NASB makes you effeminate' line (with the obvious counter that KJVOnly people need to make 'bold' statements to bolster their masculinity) then it won't be too long before the minister and his boyfried are both preaching from the pulpit.....

Now if -I- may offer a suggestion: many of the people I have met from contemporary, large colleges tend to have 'politically correct' and 'non-contentious' views. Or at least they have learnt to express themselves that way.

However I don't think that has anything to do with translation or their own personal sexuality.

DAB

 

The post is self explainatory.It is my opinion after being saved for 28 years and dealing with people who use KJV and People who use other versions.I have nothing to hide ,remember I wrote the post.You are free to have an opinion and I am free to think you are wrong.

 

OK... but if it was really your intent to talk to yourself, why did you post it publicly?

I have absolutely no problem believing that you are not looking for someone with a sound, theological education.

Why do you think that is? Where have you come in contact with them at? Care to name name's? What schools did they come from?

That's interesting. I have found just the opposite.

You need to expand your horizons. The best, most biblical opinions I have read have been from non-KJVO's.

 

Steve K. said:

Honestly I wish churches that do not believe the KING JAMES BIBLE is the one true perfect word of God would take Baptist out of their name.[/QB]

On the contrary, if anybody should, it is the KJV-only churches that ought to take "Baptist" out of their name for adding their traditions to the Word of God rather than stand for the faith once delivered to the saints (i.e. in the first century, not the seventeenth).

 

Honestly I wish churches that do not believe the KING JAMES BIBLE is the one true perfect word of God would take Baptist out of their name.

KJV-onlyism is not, and never has been, a requirement of being Baptist.

[ January 16, 2003, 05:55 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

I love it when the Holy Spirit starts to convict people and I can see them squirm. Just the sight of KING JAMES BIBLE eats at folks who will not accept it as the perfect word of God.

 

quote;Now if -I- may offer a suggestion: many of the people I have met from contemporary, large colleges tend to have 'politically correct' and 'non-contentious' views. Or at least they have learnt to express themselves that way.

Ha ha aah huh haw haw ha oh sorry I think I just got hit with a powder puff. Jesus my saviour was not concerned with the correctness that the MV users that I KNOW are so I'll stick with him.

 

I would think what ever bible you use should feel right to you. Rember the Word of God is YOUR sword. You need to be able to use it correctly. It's a tool in your hand. You don't go to a tool box looking for a tape measure and pull out a chain saw.You choose a tool you feel will accomplish the task at hand. The bible is a PERSONAL instument I'm not going to get a hang up on what the other Ambassador of Christ is using. Also of point if there's anything wrong with the other versions I'll leave that in Christ's hands.. Rev. 22:19 He is still on the throne and still large and in charge. I trust in Him to take care of things as He always has. As a side note ..when Bill wouldn't pick up a bible, Any Version I was able to plant a seed with the Left Behind Series which has some verses ,but not alot by any means. The Lord still felt thoses verses deserved watering as much as the verses I used from my bible.
So maybe we need to just pray we plant a seed that the Lord can use no matter which bible we use .
Jeanne

[ January 16, 2003, 10:06 PM: Message edited by: Living by Faith ]