The KJV...the "Model T Bible Version

What charges? You fail to prove your assertion to be true.

You do not quote and deal with any specific statement that I made concerning the KJV that you actually prove to be incorrect or wrong.

You present no verifiable, objective information that proves what I have stated concerning the KJV or concerning KJV-only reasoning to be wrong.

 

Even Byzantine Textform advocates (such as myself) have a very difficult time defending the Comma’s authenticity. It not a part of the Majority text either. It’s TR-specific and likely came from the Latin tradition.

 

Thank you, Origen. I prefer the Byzantine reading.

 

This thread is entitled that the KJV is a Model T. That's nuts.

 

That's what you say. This is not the first rodeo with Roby.

 

Actually, some of his pioneering translations will have made it all the way into the ESV. ESV, RSV, RV, 1769KJV, 1611 KJV, RHEIMS, GENEVA, BISHOPS, GREAT, MATTHEWS, TYNDALE.

 

When certain posters cannot abide a passing positive reference to the KJV without piling on, I must say I will keep my skepticism.

 

You fail to prove your assertion to be true. It is not a comparison that I make.

Nevertheless, it is a verifiable fact that the KJV is a 400 year old English translation with some archaic language.

You overreact to that's poster comparison.

 

You fail to defend your own unproven assertion and allegation, and you especially fail to prove it to be true. Yes, you allege, but you do not prove. There is a big difference between the two.

You do not prove that I supposedly invent any reasons to malign the KJV.

You have not answered nor refuted any of my accurate observations concerning the KJV and concerning a modern, non-scriptural KJV-only view. I present accurate, verifiable information concerning editions of the KJV.

You fail to prove that I supposedly hate the KJV. You seem to be the one inventing bogus allegations that you do not prove to be true.

I read and accept the KJV as what it actually is.

 

No, the comparison is idiotic. Furthermore, KJV Only is not cultic as Roby claims--I don't know if you are calling the exclusive use of KJV cultic. KJV is written in modern English, as everyone concedes.

 

You cowardly chose not to accept my challenge.

 

Who are you accusing here?

 

Thus far, you have also not accepted my challenge. List your ministerial history.

 

Well you did say that it is cultic, and your claim that the KJV is not modern English was disproven in one of your last threads on this subject. What credentials do you have in what is modern English and what is not? I suppose that you think that your Model A is a modern car. You actually said that it was your calling from God to expose false doctrines and cults and that you work against many others not just the KJVO myth.

There are new KJVOs & new Christians who are liable to be deceived by the KJVO myth, who should be made aware that it's false. remember, we have a Christian D-U-T-Y to expose false doctrines of faith/worship.

My calling from God is to expose false doctrines & cults. I work against many others, not just the KJVO myth. I work against JWs, LDS, SDAs, among other cults, & against preterism, "regenerational baptism", the false branches of pentecostalism, & many other false religious practices, and so does Logos, if you bother to read around the net. But here, it's the KJVO myth which is our focus.

#147 robycop3, Yesterday at 4:07 PM

 

The KJV is Early Modern English.

1 Anglo-Saxon or Old English. Anglo-Saxon scriptures
2 Middle English. Chaucer, Wycliffe Bible
3 Early modern English (or archaic modern english). Tyndale-KJV
4 Current Modern English. Today

 

Your so-called challenge was improper, and it could be regarded to attempt to shift the burden of proof as you try in effect to demand that I supposedly prove myself innocent instead of you proving your unproven allegations against me to be true. It is not my responsibility to prove the negative. The Scriptures do not teach that believers should compare themselves by themselves or among themselves (2 Cor. 10:12) in order to determine which statements are true. Claimed results do not prove a person's or a group's teaching to be true as a number of cults have a good number of followers.

Your posts have improperly and unkindly attacked me personally with negative, unproven smear tactics while I properly attempt to point out the problems with your incorrect allegations. Your allegation of being "cowardly" is yet another example of your insulting, unproven personal attacks. Your challenge would not prove my observations or points concerning human KJV-only reasoning/teaching to be incorrect so it would not answer nor refute them. You and a couple others have attempted to put words in my mouth and motives in my heart that are not mine such as the false accusation that I supposedly hate the KJV and that I am supposedly demeaning it. From the posts in this thread, it would seem that those attacking me are more guilty of attempts to demean and smear than that they prove against me. You refuse to provide any direct quotations from my posts where I am supposedly guilty of what you allege.

I nowhere claim to be perfect nor superior, but I do try to back up my points with sound documented evidence, with verifiable facts, and with a just application of scriptural truths. I attempt to honor my burden of proof and back up my positive assertions. I try to focus on addressing statements and points even though I am being personally and falsely accused of things that are not true.

Does your own negative assertion apply to your failure to defend your unproven allegation against me? You yourself asserted that you would defend what you alleged against me, but you have not proven what you claimed to be true.

Are you demonstrating that you are unable to answer or refute my actual points concerning the KJV and concerning KJV-only so you divert with attempts to attack me personally?