• 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 KJB VS the usual suspects

Status
Not open for further replies.

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I'll tell you what the real reason is most of you reject the KJVO position.
Most likely some admittedly over-zealous and therefore possibly offensive KJVO guy early on in his Christian experience ruffled your older sanctified, more intellectual, feathers. So you blew up like an indignant peacock.
And now you live-out that experience and militate against the KJVO because pride forces you to do so as you're committed now.
Some of you would be amenable to the position and see its merits, but you'll die snubbing it rather than correct your over-reaction to that KJVO-nutcase's over-zeal; not to mention all the flack you'll know you'll face since you yourself dished it out.
Main reason that I am against KJVO is that it cannot by proved by either the Bible nor textually!
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No. Those who hold the KJOnly possition are taking a stand against the division caused by so called modern versions with a myriad supposed corrections to God's word.
No Modern version though , such as Nkjv, esv, and the Nas, are intentionally seeking to corrupt or pervert the Bible, as KJVO assert!
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Your repeating of your false allegation does not make it supposedly become true. You continue to bear false witness in disobedience to the Scriptures. KJV-only advocates do not obey clear commands in the one imperfect English translation that they claim to accept and defend.
The KJVO use as the measuring line the TR and the KJV, so everything else to them would automatically be bogus!
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
That is what you are doing, casting the truth asided. I do not read where you defend the correct readings of our English translations of God's word. Against the one Easter reading for Passover is the best it seems that you can do.
Or the Holy Spirit as an It, or when the Kjv did not agree with peter and paul that they were calling Jesus our great God and savior?
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
There are many varying editions or revisions of the KJV, including likely over twenty present varying editions of the KJV. There are even at least two new varying editions published by different publishers that introduced two new sets of variations when some printers switched to printing a computer-based text of the KJV beginning around the 1980's.

I know of no publisher that prints a post-1900 edition of the KJV that is 100% identical to the 1769 Oxford edition except for the 2017 reprint of that edition by the Bible Museum. There would be around 400 differences between the 1769 Oxford edition and most typical post-1900 KJV editions.
was not the 1873 Cambridge edition of the Kjv considered to be the "fixed" edition now?
 

37818

Well-Known Member
No Modern version though , such as Nkjv, esv, and the Nas, are intentionally seeking to corrupt or pervert the Bible, as KJVO assert!
The KJO may very well be wrong in there assertions, but so are your laxity as to caring as to the correct text or translation of the text.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
The KJO may very well be wrong in there assertions, but so are your laxity as to caring as to the correct text or translation of the text.

If the KJO crowd are wrong - then there is no leg to stand on that the KJV is the only perfect translation/edition.

Either the KJV is perfect - or it is not.
Mind you - even if it not perfect - does not mean that it is not a good translation.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The KJO may very well be wrong in there assertions, but so are your laxity as to caring as to the correct text or translation of the text.
Believe that the TR/CT/MT would agree around 95% of the time, and the differences between then affect no doctrines, same way between bible translation!
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
If the KJO crowd are wrong - then there is no leg to stand on that the KJV is the only perfect translation/edition.

Either the KJV is perfect - or it is not.
Mind you - even if it not perfect - does not mean that it is not a good translation.
KJVO elevated the KJV to same position as Islam does Koran, as being eternal and perfect, almost like God Himself!
 

37818

Well-Known Member
Or the Holy Spirit as an It, or when the Kjv did not agree with peter and paul that they were calling Jesus our great God and savior?
The Spirit itself is in old English, is litrerally corect and a person. Romans 8:16.
Titus 2:13, "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; . . ." KJV, Paul. I think you are confused.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The Spirit itself is in old English, is litrerally corect and a person. Romans 8:16.
Titus 2:13, "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; . . ." KJV, Paul. I think you are confused.
Kjv has in mind 2 persons there, but meant that Jesus was both God and Savior!
 

37818

Well-Known Member
If the KJO crowd are wrong - then there is no leg to stand on that the KJV is the only perfect translation/edition.

Either the KJV is perfect - or it is not.
Mind you - even if it not perfect - does not mean that it is not a good translation.
Believe that the TR/CT/MT would agree around 95% of the time, and the differences between then affect no doctrines, same way between bible translation!
So according to you it is ok to change God's word.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top