• 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!

The Actual KJV 1611

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stratton7

Stratton7

Member
Yeshua1 said:
Inspiration did not continue from God after Originals were penned down!
Click to expand...
That’s not what I’m pointing out to you. I’m saying that when you say KJB translators had special revelation from God, you’re lumping people who hold to the KJB in one group. My point is that not “all” people think the KJB translators had special revelation from God. (E.g. I don’t, several people I know don’t, including a pastor and scholar don’t.) So please keep that in mind when you want to assume we’re all in this one category of double-inspiration. I do believe that it’s inspired though because of the perfect preservation of the correct Hebrew and Greek texts.
 
Y

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Stratton7 said:
That’s not what I’m pointing out to you. I’m saying that when you say KJB translators had special revelation from God, you’re lumping people who hold to the KJB in one group. My point is that not “all” people think the KJB translators had special revelation from God. (E.g. I don’t, several people I know don’t, including a pastor and scholar don’t.) So please keep that in mind when you want to assume we’re all in this one category of double-inspiration. I do believe that it’s inspired though because of the perfect preservation of the correct Hebrew and Greek texts.
Click to expand...
Understand, but inspiration still only applied to the originals!
 
robycop3

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Stratton7 said:
That’s not what I’m pointing out to you. I’m saying that when you say KJB translators had special revelation from God, you’re lumping people who hold to the KJB in one group. My point is that not “all” people think the KJB translators had special revelation from God. (E.g. I don’t, several people I know don’t, including a pastor and scholar don’t.) So please keep that in mind when you want to assume we’re all in this one category of double-inspiration. I do believe that it’s inspired though because of the perfect preservation of the correct Hebrew and Greek texts.
Click to expand...
What's a "KJB"? A new Congressional committee?
 
robycop3

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
rlvaughn said:
And yet you wrote: Best be more careful if you are going to holler every time someone writes King James Bible (KJB) that you don't judge others more harshly or by a different standard.
Click to expand...
Well, "LSB" isn't technically-correct, either.
 
robycop3

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Stratton7 said:
Ok so I’ll say the Geneva version, Tyndale version, Wycliffe version, etc.
:Whistling
Click to expand...
Feel free to say whatever you wish.

The prob I've seen, especially on other sites, is that some KJVOs say "KJB", implying the KJV is the ONLY valid English Bible version & therefore is THE English Bible. (Calling other just-as-valid versions "PERversions", etc.)
 
Salty

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
six hour warningEDT
This thread will be closed NLT 0301 am EDT Wed / 1201 AM PDT Wed
 
R

rlvaughn

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
robycop3 said:
Well, "LSB" isn't technically-correct, either.
Click to expand...
In all honesty, I must say I see your rants about the "KJB" as more of waving a red flag than attempting a consistent approach of being "technically correct" in how you speak of Bibles.
 
robycop3

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
rlvaughn said:
In all honesty, I must say I see your rants about the "KJB" as more of waving a red flag than attempting a consistent approach of being "technically correct" in how you speak of Bibles.
Click to expand...
I am opposed to all parts of the KJVO myth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top