Questions for KJVOs

[charlie parker]

Pastor KevinR said>>"The infallible English"? please don't say you believe that the AV translators were prophets, when in fact the were Anglican interpreters.
BTW, which English is infallible? that of the AV1611? KJV1769? etc (and they are different, or there wouldn't be the 1769 edition to begin with). Sounds like a Ruckmanite to me <<<

No I dont believe they were Prophets, I believe that God breathed upon their product and it brought in the Philedelphia church age, the church that "kept my word" whereas the mv's ushered in ww1, ww2, Korea, Vietnam, alternate lifestyles, overflowing prisons, Jim Jones, Father Divine, Jessy Jackson, Al Sharpton, Hillery and her worse half, cancer wards, aids, and preachers that dont believe that "THE BIBLE" is availible in "A" book anywhere on this Earth.
Charlie

 

[charlie parker]

Scott wrote>>>
You can't have it both ways. Sorry Charley. Either a scholars beliefs matter when it comes to their work on evaluating the original language texts and/or translating them or it doesn't.<<<
______________________________________________
Come on Scott, before a "scholar" can evaluate "the original language texts" he must have access to them, No one alive today has ever seen them, The gk texts underlying mv's aare not the "original text languages" they are Helenistic, Classical, gk. Its like me evaluating soil samples from Venus via a Flash Gordon comic book.
Charlie

 

[charlie parker]

Scott asked>>Oh, and by the way, what was the religion of the originator of the textus receptus? <<<

The above question is really a statement implying that Gods word was translated from a gk text produced by an RC monk, This fable, like "OOOhhh---, didnt you knowwww???, James 1 was a homosexual"
is threadworn to the degree that it is laughable to a bible believer that has enough education to repeat the English alphabet, The primary text underlying the AV was NOT Erasmus, It was Beza's
text. But then, who dosent know this? You see different words are spelled differently, like, Beza is not Erasssmus, and Edition is not Revision.
Charlie

 

[Jim Ward]

Originally posted by charlie parker:
No I dont believe they were Prophets, I believe that God breathed upon their product and it brought in the Philedelphia church age, the church that "kept my word" whereas the mv's ushered in ww1, ww2, Korea, Vietnam, alternate lifestyles, overflowing prisons, Jim Jones, Father Divine, Jessy Jackson, Al Sharpton, Hillery and her worse half, cancer wards, aids, and preachers that dont believe that "THE BIBLE" is availible in "A" book anywhere on this Earth.
Charlie

Thanks Charlie. I honestly hadn't made the connection to all the wars and stuff that you pointed out we have had since mvism, and the attack from within has happened upon the very words of Almighty God.

We keep getting all these "new" versions and things keep getting worse and worse, and yet it's those who "defend" these new versions that seem so clueless about this.


Jim

 

[Dr. Bob]

As Moderator here I jump all over folks who call each other "heretics". But as a bible believing Baptist I cannot allow "heretical" teaching to spread falsely across the BB.

Jesus Christ is God. You cannot divorce His humanity from his deity. To do so is called the "Aryan Heresy" and is false. The "man" Christ Jesus is the "God" Christ Jesus.

And while I'm at it, the belief that the English clears up/corrects the Greek is also heresy. It demands inspiration of someone other than the writers of Scripture. This is called the "Mormon Syndrome", and is typical of cults like them that demand THEIR writings amplify, clear up, correct or add to the inspired Word of God.

Not looking for a "stake" to burn anyone, but cannot allow such statements to stand. We are here to share and learn and grow, not to allow patently false doctrine to pass as legitimate.

 

[ScottEmerson]

post hoc ergo proper hoc is still a logical fallacy. One could say that the wars, false teachers, cancer wards, AIDS, and so on came because someone invented an automobile. It's that stupid automobile's fault everything is so corrupted, not the MV's. (It sounds just as silly when we blame the MV's.)

I will say that because of the MV's, I have personally seen many, many people come to know Christ. There is a definite correlation there, as they heard the verses and believed in Christ. What Charlie is advocating has no logical of inferable connection. I wonder if he would be so kind as to prove me wrong, and show how if there had been no MV's the things listed would not have happened. In the absence of such evidence, we may dismiss it as empty rhetoric and throw it out with the rest of the KJVO garbage.

 

[skanwmatos]

A better explanation is post hoc ergo propter hoc, i.e., KJV!

All the terrible things which have happened in western Christendom have happened after the translating of the KJV, therefore, "after this therefore because of this."

All the terrible denominational divisions - post KJV.

All the false teachings, Modernism, Liberalism, New Evangelicalism, Charismatism, Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc., all post KJV.

Darwinism. Post KJV.

 

[charlie parker]

Dr Bob Griffin wrote>>And while I'm at it, the belief that the English clears up/corrects the Greek is also heresy. It demands inspiration of someone other than the writers of Scripture. This is called the "Mormon Syndrome", and is typical of cults like them that demand THEIR writings amplify, clear up, correct or add to the inspired Word of God<<<<

It is my contention that the AV is the word of God, in English, I have a copy in my possession, No one on this list or their teacher has in their possession a copy of THE gk text of holy Scripture, So, I say that my copy of holy Srripture in English can correct a copy of gk scripture that no one has or has ever seen. The Problem with critics of Gods word is that it is sealed to them"Isaiah 29:11  And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:"

Charlie

 

[charlie parker]

ScottEmerson wrote in part>>>I wonder if he would be so kind as to prove me wrong, and show how if there had been no MV's the things listed would not have happened. In the absence of such evidence, we may dismiss it as empty rhetoric and throw it out with the rest of the KJVO garbage.
--------------------------------------------------
I can most certainly prove it, But, It would be promices of God to a nation that will "keep my word" found in a King James Bible so I wont go there, I will say that when the Philladelphia church attempted to "hand over" Gods word,which they had kept, to the Laodecian church, Welll, we know what happened.
Charlie

 

[charlie parker]

Jim Ward wrote>>We keep getting all these "new" versions and things keep getting worse and worse, and yet it's those who "defend" these new versions that seem so clueless about this.<<<

Amen Brother, All we can do is "cry aloud and spare not" and "2 Samuel 10:12  Be of good courage, and let us play the men for our people, and for the cities of our God: and the LORD do that which seemeth him good."

Charlie

 

[charlie parker]

When I see a "sheep" smileing and teeth sparkleing, I try to see the molars, to check them out, and see if there are any splintered "sheep" bones between his teeth, It just might not be a sheep----
Charlie

 

[Dr. Bob]

Originally posted by charlie parker:
It is my contention that the AV is the word of God, in English

We know that. What we are all waiting for is one ounce of proof.

 

[charlie parker]

Dr. Bob griffin wrote >>>And while I'm at it, the belief that the English clears up/corrects the Greek is also heresy. It demands inspiration of someone other than the writers of Scripture. This is called the "Mormon Syndrome", and is typical of cults like them that demand THEIR writings amplify, clear up, correct or add to the inspired Word of God.<<<

I must admit that Ive never been called an heretic in a more christian-like way before, however, I fail to see why it would bother a bible believeing moderator to speak plainly to an heretic, It didnt bother our Lord and Saviour to call heretics blind fools, which of course, they were, You said that you are waiting for one ounce of proof that the AV is the word of God in english, I post it here again, of course it leaves no room for debate so it is rejected out of hand "Matthew 7:20  Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." It is my sincere beliefe that when America voted to become a nation of drunks in the 1930's that God drew the line on America, and it is the few believers that love the word of God, the one they hold in their hands, the one that led them to salvation, the one that Spurgeon said that he would "kneel down to" the one that James said has the power to save your souls, Its that english bible Im speaking of,
that is delaying His wrath. I regreted for years that I quit high school at the beginning of the 10th grade, but that regret ceased after I started encountering the products of "higher learning" especially "christian higher learning" The few friends I have that went to christian collages or seminary came out of them believing THE bible in spite of their education, not because of it. my nephew left GA believing one book, he returned ridiculing that book. To me,personally, the highth of hypocricy is to claim that the "thee's" and "thou's" dont belong in the bible and then stand up in church and with all the piety and sincerety of a great horned owl sing "How Great Thou Art" and "My Jesus, How I Love Thou" and Have Thine Own Way"

Charlie

 

[robycop3]

Charlie, the thees and thous belonged in the AV 1611 because they were still a part of the vernacular of the day, same as "you" belongs in modern Bibles. A crank starter belongs on a Model T while an electric starter belongs on my 2003 Taurus. Different times, different equipment.

Did God retire in 1611, or does He still oversee His word and provide it in the languages He causes to be used?

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by robycop3:
Charlie, the thees and thous belonged in the AV 1611 because they were still a part of the vernacular of the day,

No, they weren't. Just read "To The Reader" to see that "thee" "thou" and "ye" were not in common use in 1611. The translators used them to more accurately translate the Greek pronouns which distinguish between the singular and plural, and subjective and object.

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by robycop3:
Charlie, the thees and thous belonged in the AV 1611 because they were still a part of the vernacular of the day, same as "you" belongs in modern Bibles. A crank starter belongs on a Model T while an electric starter belongs on my 2003 Taurus. Different times, different equipment.

Did God retire in 1611, or does He still oversee His word and provide it in the languages He causes to be used?

These are still, IMHO, reverential and appropriate pronouns for addressing Deity. In our irreverent society, it is perhaps good to keep special pronouns for God. When praying aloud, I often use "Thee" and "Thou" in sincere reverence without pretentiousness or false piety. We are all too familiar in our attitude toward God. After all, He did make specific prohibition (Ex. 20:7) against using His name lightly and flippantly. The use of a special pronoun may just remind us that we are speaking to God. Whereas it may be a small thing, it is a good thing.

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob Griffin:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by charlie parker:
It is my contention that the AV is the word of God, in English

We know that. What we are all waiting for is one ounce of proof. </font>[/QUOTE]So, would you contend that the AV is not the Word of God and it is not in English?

 

[robycop3]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by robycop3:
Charlie, the thees and thous belonged in the AV 1611 because they were still a part of the vernacular of the day,

No, they weren't. Just read "To The Reader" to see that "thee" "thou" and "ye" were not in common use in 1611. The translators used them to more accurately translate the Greek pronouns which distinguish between the singular and plural, and subjective and object. </font>[/QUOTE]But in reading other works contemporary with the AV, such as those of Milton, one sees the old pronouns used frequently, as well as in Shakespeare's works, which didn't predate the AV by much. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say they were going out of use , but nor entirely abandoned , by 1611?

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by charlie parker:
Dr Bob Griffin wrote&gt;&gt;And while I'm at it, the belief that the English clears up/corrects the Greek is also heresy. It demands inspiration of someone other than the writers of Scripture. This is called the "Mormon Syndrome", and is typical of cults like them that demand THEIR writings amplify, clear up, correct or add to the inspired Word of God&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;

It is my contention that the AV is the word of God, in English, I have a copy in my possession, No one on this list or their teacher has in their possession a copy of THE gk text of holy Scripture, So, I say that my copy of holy Srripture in English can correct a copy of gk scripture that no one has or has ever seen. The Problem with critics of Gods word is that it is sealed to them"Isaiah 29:11  And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:"

Charlie

Charlie, I can accept that the KJV is the Word of God but I can't see how it can correct something that doesn't exist. Please elaborate.

 

[robycop3]

Paidagogos:These are still, IMHO, reverential and appropriate pronouns for addressing Deity. In our irreverent society, it is perhaps good to keep special pronouns for God. When praying aloud, I often use "Thee" and "Thou" in sincere reverence without pretentiousness or false piety. We are all too familiar in our attitude toward God. After all, He did make specific prohibition (Ex. 20:7) against using His name lightly and flippantly. The use of a special pronoun may just remind us that we are speaking to God. Whereas it may be a small thing, it is a good thing.

Those are quite good points, Paid. My mom & dad do the same thing, and they've never used the KJV or any other older BV too much. However, we respect the views of those who believe differently, that think using thee & thou in prayer is acting as if God can't understand you otherwise.