• 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 King James Version onlyism mistake.

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Where is it? I would like a shot at defending it.

The word of God today may be in the same places where it was in 1610.

The Scriptures were not first given in 1611, and they were not regiven by inspiration in 1611.

The fact remains that the 1611 KJV is an English Bible translation in the same sense (univocally) that the pre-1611 English Bibles are and in the same sense (univocally) that post-1611 English Bible translations such as the NKJV are.

The Scriptures do not state nor teach that the word of God is bound to the textual criticism decisions, Bible revision decisions, and translation decisions of one exclusive group of Church of England critics/interpreters in 1611.
 

JD731

Well-Known Member
The word of God today may be in the same places where it was in 1610.

The Scriptures were not first given in 1611, and they were not regiven by inspiration in 1611.

The fact remains that the 1611 KJV is an English Bible translation in the same sense (univocally) that the pre-1611 English Bibles are and in the same sense (univocally) that post-1611 English Bible translations such as the NKJV are.

The Scriptures do not state nor teach that the word of God is bound to the textual criticism decisions, Bible revision decisions, and translation decisions of one exclusive group of Church of England critics/interpreters in 1611.


I did not ask where the word of God might be, I asked where it is. If all Christians and scholars, in 1610 and now agrees, then I am all in. If not, then I have a decision to make based on what God says about his words, and I am somewhat dependent upon the guidance of the Spirit who dwells in me and who prompted Jesus to say, sanctify them through thy truth; THY (God's) word is truth."

If you do not believe that it is on you.
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I did not ask where the word of God might be, I asked where it is..

Because of the fact that the word of God was not first given in 1611 and was not regiven by inspiration in 1611, the proper standard for the making of Bible translations including the KJV had to exist before 1611, and it remains the standard today.

Likely all Christians and sound Bible scholars would agree that the preserved Scriptures in the original languages are the proper standard and greater authority for the making and trying of all Bible translations with the exception of KJV-only advocates who may deceive themselves by believing assertions concerning the KJV that are not true.

The Holy Spirit of truth does not guide believers to deceive themselves by believing assertions for the KJV that are not true and that are not scriptural.
 

JD731

Well-Known Member
Because of the fact that the word of God was not first given in 1611 and was not regiven by inspiration in 1611, the proper standard for the making of Bible translations including the KJV had to exist before 1611, and it remains the standard today.

Likely all Christians and sound Bible scholars would agree that the preserved Scriptures in the original languages are the proper standard and greater authority for the making and trying of all Bible translations with the exception of KJV-only advocates who may deceive themselves by believing assertions concerning the KJV that are not true.

The Holy Spirit of truth does not guide believers to deceive themselves by believing assertions for the KJV that are not true and that are not scriptural.

For some reason you are not hearing my question or you are just ignoring it. I will remind you what the op says and what I responded to.

The King James Onlyism's mistake is defending the KJV for KJV rather than defending the true word of God which is the real issue.

Now, the author of the op is assuming that the "true word of God" is in existence somewhere and that we all agree. You even suggest that it was in existence before 1611. The author wants us all to defend it together and thinks KJV only believers are not defending the word of God.

If everyone agrees what the true word of God is at this present time in history and what it was in 1610 AD and if it is the same, then I want to know what it is and where it is because I want to get in on defending it along with you fellows.

Now, where is it?
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
... If everyone agrees what the true word of God is at this present time in history and what it was in 1610 AD and if it is the same, then I want to know what it is and where it is because I want to get in on defending it along with you fellows.

No. The mistake is to think only the KJV is the true word of God.

So JD -
Just to clarify -
A. do you believe that the KJ-1611 is the perfect word of God?
B. If so, Where do we find that in Scripture
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
For some reason you are not hearing my question or you are just ignoring it.

You are not hearing the sound answer that you have been given.

The proper standard and greater authority for the making and trying of Bible translations is found in the same place today as it was before 1611--in the multiple, varying original-language manuscripts and printed texts. Any errors in those multiple, varying sources are not the word of God, but the correct preserved original-language words in them are the word of God.

The KJV itself is based on use of inconsistent textual criticism or inconsistent textual measures in picking and choosing from multiple, imperfect original-language texts and a few times from non-original-language sources. If that is wrong, that makes the KJV wrong.
 

JD731

Well-Known Member
So JD -
Just to clarify -
A. do you believe that the KJ-1611 is the perfect word of God?
B. If so, Where do we find that in Scripture

Question A - Yes
Question B - Psalm 19:7

The word of God is not just the perfect law. It is also the testimonies of God. It is the commandments, many of which were not written in the law. For instance, Paul the preacher to the gentiles said to them in Athens, Greece, these words;

Ac 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

There are statutes, precepts, and judgements and all put together teach us the ways of God.

Here is a testimony of God concerning how he saves sinners from the penalty of their sins. (Remember in Ps 19 God said the testimonies of God are sure, making wise the simple).

1Co 2:1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.

When God testifies of the "mysteries" that he reveals through Paul, it is "his" testimony and our understanding of these mysteries are dependent on the words that God has used to make them known.

Now, you claim to be a God called preacher of his word and I have read much of your commentaries and so I can say, if I had to bet the farm, that you cannot articulate these mysteries, even though it is what this age and the New Testament is all about. Here is what a preacher is called upon to do.

1Co 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. (the mysteries are of God)
2 Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.

The reason men do not know the mysteries of God is because they do not believe the words. Many people, no, most people on this very forum do not believe in the church and it's status with God and it's predestination to glorification when all those in it will receive the new body at it's "gathering," known by some as it's rapture to heaven. Why don't they understand it? Because they do not believe the words. This, BTW, is the reason they accept any new translation and even paraphrases, because they do not assign much worth to the words and think it is okay to handle them any way they please.

Here is an example or two of a mystery you likely have no knowledge of and probably do not believe.

1Co 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible (the dead in Christ) must put on incorruption, and this mortal (the living who are in Christ when he comes) must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
57 But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Who was he writing this to:
1Co 1:1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,
2 Unto the church of God (this don't help much because most do not have a clue what the church is) which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:

This same mystery is taught in 1 Thess 4 and Ephesians 1. The reason the self righteous people here will not believe these truths is because they no longer have the words of God or they will not believe them if they do. When the KJV was traded in for 100 different translations it opened the door for the wolves to come in. It ushered in the great apostasy and it rode in on a Reformed horse.
 

JD731

Well-Known Member
You are not hearing the sound answer that you have been given.

The proper standard and greater authority for the making and trying of Bible translations is found in the same place today as it was before 1611--in the multiple, varying original-language manuscripts and printed texts. Any errors in those multiple, varying sources are not the word of God, but the correct preserved original-language words in them are the word of God.

The KJV itself is based on use of inconsistent textual criticism or inconsistent textual measures in picking and choosing from multiple, imperfect original-language texts and a few times from non-original-language sources. If that is wrong, that makes the KJV wrong.


You are playing the hypocrite. There is no consensus among men about which manuscripts are the "true word of God." You have said in the past that you do not accept the critical texts and yet most new translations are translated from them. The man in his op was speaking of the "true" word of God. That is what I want to defend.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
Question A - Yes
Question B - Psalm 19:7 ...

Thank you for that clarification.

However, I dont think I properly asked the part B question

Where does the Bible say that the King James version is the Perfect word of God
 

JD731

Well-Known Member

The King James Onlyism's mistake is defending the KJV for KJV rather than defending the true word of God which is the real issue.

A word of God with errors cannot be the "true" word of God, or I have missed something.

God says "every word of God is pure." Then he says, "God cannot lie."

Do you disagree with those statements?
 

JD731

Well-Known Member
Thank you for that clarification.

However, I dont think I properly asked the part B question

Where does the Bible say that the King James version is the Perfect word of God

You tell me where God has commissioned men and some women to translate manuscripts with obvious errors in them 100 times in the same language, which is your doctrine, while paraphrasing and editing with dynamic equivalence for good measure, and I will answer your question.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
IF you dont want to answer my question - then fine
When you remain silent, you have spoken
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
A word of God with errors cannot be the "true" word of God, or I have missed something.

God says "every word of God is pure." Then he says, "God cannot lie."

According to your own assertions, the 1611 edition of the KJV cannot be the true word of God since it had some errors.
According to your own assertions, the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV cannot be the true word of God since it had some errors.

According to your own assertions, the printed original-language texts on which the KJV is based cannot be the true word of God since they had some errors including some introduced by printers, some introduced by their textual editors, and some followed from copying errors in their imperfect, underlying original-language manuscripts.

In some cases, you are defending errors followed or introduced by men in the KJV.

Psalm 19:7 does not say that the 1611 KJV is perfect. You demonstrate that you believe something that is not true concerning the many varying editions of the KJV.
 
Last edited:

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You tell me where God has commissioned men and some women to translate manuscripts with obvious errors in them 100 times in the same language, which is your doctrine, while paraphrasing and editing with dynamic equivalence for good measure,

You are creating a strawman misrepresentation that is not the view of those to whom you direct your demand. You are incorrectly claiming something to be the doctrine of others that is not what they teach. You provide no direct quotations that demonstrates that they teach what you claim.

A consistent just application of your own stated reasoning would condemn the KJV since its Church of England makers translated from imperfect original-language texts that were not the true word of God according to your own assertions.

There is some paraphrasing and editing with dynamic equivalence for good measure in the KJV.

You do not apply the same exact measures/standards to the textual criticism decisions, Bible revision decisions, and translation decisions in the KJV that you inconsistently and hypocritically apply to other Bible translations.
 

37818

Well-Known Member
A word of God with errors cannot be the "true" word of God, or I have missed something.

God says "every word of God is pure." Then he says, "God cannot lie."

Do you disagree with those statements?
God's word is pure. But your view of God's written word as given to man, being handled by man, is to discard it all because of errors of man.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
You do understand that your conclusion applies with even more force to yourself? Somehow, I doubt that you do.

I have no ideal what you are asking/saying
other then you do not want to answer my question

Thus Until you choose to answer my question, I see no reason for
my continued participation with you on this subject.
 
Top