Question – What is your FINAL Authority?

[natters]

The KJV is a revision of the Bishops' Bible. The Bishops' Bible has "in water" in Matt 3:11 - the KJV translators could have left it this way, but they deliberately chose to change it to "with water".

 

[HankD]

Because Phillip (and this is my opinion FWIW) Most of professing Protestant Christianity practices pado-baptism by sprinkling (Episcopalian, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, etc).

"In" water would be just a little too strong for non-baptists baby sprinklers and they would probably avoid the translation.

The irony of it all is that the RCC Bibles use "IN" because they translate from the Vulgate which (in this case) follows the Greek en in Matthew 3:11:

Vulgate
Matthew 3:11 ego quidem vos baptizo in aqua in paenitentiam qui autem post me venturus est fortior me est cuius non sum dignus calciamenta portare ipse vos baptizabit in Spiritu Sancto et igni

Douay-Rheims
Matthew 3:11 I indeed baptize you in water unto penance, but he that shall come after me, is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire.

Of course then they go and ruin it with the "unto penance"!

HankD

 

[robycop3]

AV Bunyan: Really - can you prove from the scriptures that the baptism John did was not a sprinkling in the gospels since in the OT there were washings?

Matthew 3:16.

So - you are saying the word "bisphop" is wrong in Timothy because you want to assoicate the word "bishop" with Rome? My - that is some kind of reasoning.

Not actually wrong...but quite biased, following Bancroft's 14 commands of translation.

Those poor ole Anglican translators - don't you just feel sorry for them for having to compromise so much.

If it really affected them, I'd feel quite sorry for them, having "supporters" as you KJVOs, with their selective believing of them where it suits the KJVO myth, disbelieving them where their writings go against the myth.

 

[robycop3]

Speaking of final authority...

WHICH EDITION of the KJV do you KJVOs hold as YOUR final authority? IT CAN ONLY BE ONE, as by your own stated standards, GOD WROTE ONLY ONE BIBLE, and things that are different are not the same. If you have a perfect edition, any other edition with one letter of one word differing from that PERFECT one must be LESS than perfect.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

As far as I know we only have one member who has the courage to pin down one definite version, and he claim the 1769 Oxford. Right or wrong, at least he has an answer for a question no one else will answer.

 

[robycop3]

Then all the others must be wrong.

 

[LRL71]

robycop3,

Well, well. If all others are wrong, then how can the KJV-onlyist 'prove' that his 1769 Oxford KJV is the 'only' inspired, inerrant, infallible, and perfectly providentially preserved (mmmm.... PICKLES

)????

Omigosh did I ever start another thread....

 

[manchester]

Originally posted by robycop3:
Speaking of final authority...

WHICH EDITION of the KJV do you KJVOs hold as YOUR final authority? IT CAN ONLY BE ONE, as by your own stated standards, GOD WROTE ONLY ONE BIBLE, and things that are different are not the same. If you have a perfect edition, any other edition with one letter of one word differing from that PERFECT one must be LESS than perfect.

But Roby, they don't care which edition. They take things that are different and treat them as the same, and don't even care to have God's true Word. You can't make KJVO's want to have God's Word if they don't even care.

 

[robycop3]

It's called,"The Great KJVO Double Standard". The entire KJVO myth was founded on a set of double standards & has been operating on them since the gitgo.

Plainly, they've done that thing they accuse US of doing...setting up their own final authority. Why any CHRISTIAN wants to follow a myth which was founded by a cult official and has been steeped in dishonesty ever since is beyond me...