George Antonios
Well-Known Member
Your blood-bought, God-breathed, Pope-breaking, Liberty-giving, Christ-glorifying, King James Bible.
-
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 Bible is Preserved in Japanese
- Thread starter John of Japan
- Start date
Your blood-bought, God-breathed, Pope-breaking, Liberty-giving, Christ-glorifying, King James Bible.
SavedByGrace
Well-Known Member
whaterver you say
George Antonios
Well-Known Member
sounds like you have lost it!!!
Ecclesiastes 7:6 For as the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of the fool: this also is vanity.
So your answer is going to depend on what he says? He asked a question - just answer it.
SavedByGrace
Well-Known Member
you still need to PROVE that the 27 Books of the NT are "Inspired" by the Lord! don't avoid it
SavedByGrace
Well-Known Member
So I'm sure you can show me what exactly these versions are teaching that is making America going down the drain.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
"pope breaking" king james bible that was rejected by the pilgrims for being to anglican. Yeah ok
Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
Ahh yes the classic "can't argue so resort to name calling". Just wait in a second he is gonna say he doesn't wanna waste times arguing with morons or something along the lines of that and then leave thinking he showed us something and debate us in his mind in the shower.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
George Antonios
Well-Known Member
You guys are so rabidly anti-KJB you can't actually listen to a KJVO and listen to the words he's saying.
I have repeatedly, on this board, said that I cannot prove KJVO from the Bible.
You're all fighting out in left-field of where I am.
What I've said, and say now again, is that I cannot prove KJVO from the Bible, however, for sundry reasons, which I am sure you scorn in your superior intellect, I believe it to be perfect.
Now my question to you all is:
Alright, I'm silly for believing the KJV is perfect, now which one do you believe is perfect then? None. You all fall back on a position of "invincible ignorance" whereby you believe something to be perfect that doesn't even exist. Who's the greater fool? The whole point of believing the Bible is to obey it. It's not a theological position to be held in vain separate from reality. What use is faith in original autographs when you can't read them to obey them? None. By the way, when you guys make a theological point in the forum, you all quote from a non-original autograph, which you yourself declare to be imperfect and non-inspired... Again I ask, who's the greater fool?
I have repeatedly, on this board, said that I cannot prove KJVO from the Bible.
You're all fighting out in left-field of where I am.
What I've said, and say now again, is that I cannot prove KJVO from the Bible, however, for sundry reasons, which I am sure you scorn in your superior intellect, I believe it to be perfect.
Now my question to you all is:
Alright, I'm silly for believing the KJV is perfect, now which one do you believe is perfect then? None. You all fall back on a position of "invincible ignorance" whereby you believe something to be perfect that doesn't even exist. Who's the greater fool? The whole point of believing the Bible is to obey it. It's not a theological position to be held in vain separate from reality. What use is faith in original autographs when you can't read them to obey them? None. By the way, when you guys make a theological point in the forum, you all quote from a non-original autograph, which you yourself declare to be imperfect and non-inspired... Again I ask, who's the greater fool?
Last edited:
Here's more proof of my OP. The first known Christian missionary to the Japanese was a Nestorian named Olopun (阿罗本), who won the Empress to Christ but did not translate the Bible. But then along came Francis Xavier in the 16th century (before the KJV), and did an awesome job. But he was Catholic, someone says, but so was Erasmus, and that didn't stop the TR! But I digress.
Anyway, Xavier called the Japanese "the best people yet discovered." (Just try telling a Samurai warrior the Japanese are NOT the best people ever.) So it is obvious that, according to God's servant Xavier, the Japanese people were destined to produce the Motoyaku. My logic is impeccable. Just try to disprove it.
Anyway, Xavier called the Japanese "the best people yet discovered." (Just try telling a Samurai warrior the Japanese are NOT the best people ever.) So it is obvious that, according to God's servant Xavier, the Japanese people were destined to produce the Motoyaku. My logic is impeccable. Just try to disprove it.
SavedByGrace
Well-Known Member
but the KJV far outlived the Geneva Bible in use. Probably the most used translation in the world!
George Antonios
Well-Known Member
Here's more proof of my OP. The first known Christian missionary to the Japanese was a Nestorian named Olopun (阿罗本), who won the Empress to Christ but did not translate the Bible. But then along came Francis Xavier in the 16th century (before the KJV), and did an awesome job. But he was Catholic, someone says, but so was Erasmus, and that didn't stop the TR! But I digress.
Anyway, Xavier called the Japanese "the best people yet discovered." (Just try telling a Samurai warrior the Japanese are NOT the best people ever.) So it is obvious that, according to God's servant Xavier, the Japanese people were destined to produce the Motoyaku. My logic is impeccable. Just try to disprove it.
That issue just gnaws at your conscience.
SavedByGrace
Well-Known Member
was a humanist.
SavedByGrace
Well-Known Member
coming from a Roman Catholic, enough said!
It outlived the geneva because king james literally banned the use of the geneva. Also so what it's the most used translation? If in 100 years the NIV was the by far the most used. Kjvo would state that the majority is wrong, and the perfect version has to be part of the remnant aka the kjv. Also Latin Vulgate was used longer than the king james but that doesn't make it any more right or wrong.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
Okay, you guys who are arguing about the KJV, just stop it. This thread is about the 元訳 (Motoyaku).
SavedByGrace
Well-Known Member
The NIV is not a real translation, more of a paraphrase and mish-mash!