Joe Turner
New Member
Amen to that

Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
There is no one like that here, so your comments are meaningless.Originally posted by KJVONLY:
What causes Bible rejectors/correctors to HATE the acursed KJVO is that WE HAVE A FINAL AUTHORITY;we take God at his word, it is sad that some people DONT....
Name ONE!Originally posted by Will J. Kinney:
There are obvious theological errors in all the modern versions which show them to be false witnesses.
Will
Will, thank you for proving my point. I recently told Pastor Bob that you would dance around the question, and your lengthy post that had little to do with my question was basically what I was expecting.Originally posted by Will J. Kinney:
Hi Brian, you asked a very common question.
Will, where was the perfectly preserved, infallible inerrant, "final authority" "word of God" in 1605? Why did the KJV correct it?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please excuse the length of my response, but I think you will find it of interest.
God bless
Where was the word of God before 1611 and where is it today?
......They don't know where it was before 1611 either......
My question to you is why did the translators of the MV's feel the need to "correct" the KJV?(the RSV preface STATES that the KJV is full of GRAVE errors.) Bible correctors acuse the KJV translators of"adding to the word of God" but how can they justify the "removing" of verses & parts of verses(Jeremiah chap 36) in the *better* bibles?? The problem of the word of God in 1605 is simple;the Geneva bible. The Geneva bible came from the same text the KJV came from;just like the MV's come from the CORRUPT North African text(s) prepared by Gnostics & Philosphers(Origen & CO.) Of course, if a person don't believe we NEVER had or will have God's word, that could be a problem to them.My question is HAVE WE ever or will we ever have the WORD of GOD??? Then it would seem that the Bible rejectors/correctors are doing a little "two stepping" themselves..Originally posted by BrianT:
If the perfect infallible inerrant word of God existed in 1605, the KJV should not have corrected it.
My question to you is why did the translators of the MV's feel the need to "correct" the KJV?(the RSV preface STATES that the KJV is full of GRAVE errors.)Originally posted by KJVONLY:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BrianT:
If the perfect infallible inerrant word of God existed in 1605, the KJV should not have corrected it.
Because of textual evidence. Stop pretending you don't know this. Just like the KJV "removes" half of Psa 145:13, part of Acts 4:25, half of Jude 1:25, etc.Bible correctors acuse the KJV translators of"adding to the word of God" but how can they justify the "removing" of verses & parts of verses(Jeremiah chap 36) in the *better* bibles??
Ah! Finally someone *tries* to answer the original question! Unfortunately, this answer is in conflict with KJV-onlyism, because the Geneva and the KJV are not the same. If the Geneva was "the word of God" as KJV-onlyists define it, then the KJV should not have "corrected" it! If the "pure words" already existed, why change it??? Your answer is correct, but it also disproves KJV-onlism!!!!The problem of the word of God in 1605 is simple;the Geneva bible. The Geneva bible came from the same text the KJV came from
For the umpteenth time, YES WE HAVE THE WORD OF GOD. Some famouse Bible "rejectors/correctors" said: "Now to the latter we answer; that we do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession,...containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God."My question is HAVE WE ever or will we ever have the WORD of GOD??? Then it would seem that the Bible rejectors/correctors are doing a little "two stepping" themselves..
KJVONLY, maybe you are not understanding the point. Here, let's talk specifics:Originally posted by KJVONLY:
The Geneva & the KJV are from the same textual line,like begats like;