The "Psalm 12:6-7 thingie" used by KJVOs is false.

[rlvaughn]

Now, had this evidence been presented by Prof. E. Z. Luvvin of the Alfred E. Neumann School of Applied Hispory, you'd be acclaiming it, but since it was presented by an old retired steelman, it's false to you. I see...

Somehow I overlooked this statement before. Once again you are making stuff up. I neither said nor suggested that man-made is better if it comes from a professor man. Makes no matter who says it -- some nutty professor or an old retired steelman. It is the content of what is said compared to the Bible that matters, and not who presents it. Man-made is man-made.

 

[rlvaughn]

Do YOU have a candidate for Cain's wife who wasn't his sister? I don't, but I firmly believe it was other than a sister.

It is a necessary inference. God created Adam & Eve. He did not create anyone else. The first people to inhabit the earth with Adam & Eve were their children. Anyone born into this world was born to these people. They had no one else to marry. The only way you can get around this is to make up a false doctrine that God created other men and women for the sons and daughters of Adam & Eve to marry. You have asserted this man-made doctrine in the past, have you not? Do you still hold to it?

You can beat that dead horse all you like, but my opinion won't change unless proven wrong by actual evidence, not opinion or guesswork.

Your doctrine is man-made, phony as a Ford Corvette & a Chevy Mustang, and I suppose it may also be a dead horse. I would be glad if you would change your unscriptural opinion about the sons & daughters of Adam & Eve. But ultimately, I am more interested in seeing you drop the false narrative that others hold man-made doctrines, while you always avoid all false, man-made doctrines.

 

[Stratton7]

I, too, believe we have God's word in English; just not only in the KJV. And the KJV's rendering of His words is NOT PURE. I, & others, have pointed out some of the KJV's goofs & booboos, & you're batting.000 in countering them.

Right, because I haven’t shared anything on it. What it boils down to is what “evidence” you’ll accept. Which from all the topics I’ve seen you comment on are virtually none other than your own take on things.
The point is that you want to tear down/destroy the faith of those who believe they have God’s words in a particular translation. What does that benefit you?

Yes, Satan is still using some people to hawk his false KJVO myth, including some well-meaning Christians who don't know any better.

Again, that also goes the other direction as well.

 

[Stratton7]

You incorrectly imply that only KJV-only advocates believe God keeps His promises, but your allegation is not true. Your allegation would bear false witness.

My response was to Roby and you missed what I was implying. It was about a why try to destroy the faith of those who believe in their translation.
The are many promises that are for Christians by those who believe them. I was referring with that to the promise of divine preservation pertaining to the KJB.
I probably could have worded the post more clearly.

God did not promise that errors made by men whether in copying, in printing, or in translating are pure words of God. God did not promise that mistranslations or inaccurate renderings are pure words of God.

You’re definition of what is an error and what others consider them to be differ vastly on the subject.
As I keep reading I keep coming across convos or discussions you’ve had with others across the internet as your name keeps popping up, so this isn’t an assumption.

 

[Logos1560]

You’re definition of what is an error and what others consider them to be differ vastly on the subject.

You do not demonstrate that your assertion is correct. You do not present what you may assume and claim my definition to be.

Perhaps I merely would apply consistently and justly the very same measures/standards that would be needed to claim renderings in present-day English Bibles to be errors in translation and apply them likewise to the KJV.

I clearly have advocated that the exact same measures/standards should be applied justly to all Bible translations so do you suggest that others would not apply the same measures/standards justly?

 

[robycop3]

Funny that you deflect this time by finding refuge in the fact that God had not yet forbade the type of marriage between Abram & Sarai or Amram & Jochebed, but are not willing to admit that he had not yet forbade the type of marriage of Cain & his sister (or Cain & his niece, etc.). You refuse to admit the obvious, so instead create a man-made doctrine that God might have made someone else for him to marry. The candidates for Cain's wife is someone who was born to Adam & Eve, or to a child of Adam & Eve, or to a grandchild of Adam & Eve -- because they were the only people here that God created. You have not bothered to deny that fact this time around, but find refuge in a man-made doctrine that assuages your discomfort over how the descendants of Adam & Eve came about. Totally man-made. A firm belief in a Ford Corvette.
No, I don't address "thingies". But I am addressing some of your comments in the OP: You are paddling the same boat you try to put others in, the boat christened "myth without any Scriptural support."

No one had ever died that we know of when Cain murdered Abel. But God severely punished Cain for it. And God has abolished very few of His rules for all mankind, nor added very many since the beginning. He's EXPANDED existing ones, such as He did with incest, ending a common practice of half/siblings marrying, So He's evidently always had an anti-incest rule in place. I'll not believe Cain married his sister unless I'm shown unequivocal proof.

NOW, MAY WE RETURN TO THE REGULARLY-SCHEDULED PROGRAM?

 

[robycop3]

Somehow I overlooked this statement before. Once again you are making stuff up. I neither said nor suggested that man-made is better if it comes from a professor man. Makes no matter who says it -- some nutty professor or an old retired steelman. It is the content of what is said compared to the Bible that matters, and not who presents it. Man-made is man-made.

The Psalm 12:7 thingie is man-made.

 

[rlvaughn]

The Psalm 12:7 thingie is man-made.

Your statement to which I replied is clearly man-made. However, do not bother to admit that you misrepresented my saying that who said it was somehow important to whether we should listen to it or not, which I did not.

No one had ever died that we know of when Cain murdered Abel. But God severely punished Cain for it. And God has abolished very few of His rules for all mankind, nor added very many since the beginning. He's EXPANDED existing ones, such as He did with incest, ending a common practice of half/siblings marrying, So He's evidently always had an anti-incest rule in place. I'll not believe Cain married his sister unless I'm shown unequivocal proof.

More equivocation and deflection. You do not want proof, you only want to keep your Ford Corvette. Your example of Cain ultimately shows that God punished, but not with the punishment he later prescribed for murder. You say God always had an anti-incest rule in place, but that is just more of your opinion with no scriptural support. You can believe whatever you wish about Cain, but cannot support it with Scripture. In order to support your man-made doctrine that has no scriptural support, you are required to believe that God created extra people that he did not create.

NOW, MAY WE RETURN TO THE REGULARLY-SCHEDULED PROGRAM?

I am on my regularly-scheduled program, and you are free to get on with yours.

 

[robycop3]

It is a necessary inference. God created Adam & Eve. He did not create anyone else. The first people to inhabit the earth with Adam & Eve were their children. Anyone born into this world was born to these people. They had no one else to marry. The only way you can get around this is to make up a false doctrine that God created other men and women for the sons and daughters of Adam & Eve to marry. You have asserted this man-made doctrine in the past, have you not? Do you still hold to it? Your doctrine is man-made, phony as a Ford Corvette & a Chevy Mustang, and I suppose it may also be a dead horse. I would be glad if you would change your unscriptural opinion about the sons & daughters of Adam & Eve. But ultimately, I am more interested in seeing you drop the false narrative that others hold man-made doctrines, while you always avoid all false, man-made doctrines.

There are many things we simply don't know. We see the effects of incest in some of the royal families of Europe. The closer the relationship, the worse the birth defects of their offspring are. God calls it an abomination. It didn't go on for awhile & suddenly become abominable to Him.

Now, again, until I'm shown UNEQUIVOCAL PROOF that Cain married a sister of his, I'll believe his wife came from somewhere else. You know my view on this & I know yours, & we simply disagree. Thus, I'm through discussing this, especially on this thread, which is about Psalm 12:6-7.

 

[robycop3]

Right, because I haven’t shared anything on it. What it boils down to is what “evidence” you’ll accept. Which from all the topics I’ve seen you comment on are virtually none other than your own take on things.
The point is that you want to tear down/destroy the faith of those who believe they have God’s words in a particular translation. What does that benefit you?

It doesn't benefit ME a bit, except to know I'm doing what God influenced me to do-work against a false doctrine. And, like it or not, believe it or not, the KJVO myth has been proven false. It's proven to have a Satanic origin. It's pretty obvious he invented it to cast doubt upon God's word & try to limit its spread & the understanding of it.

And OF COURSE my posts are my take on things as I'm their author, same as yours are YOUR take. That's common sense!

Again, that also goes the other direction as well.

Not at all. Fighting a false doctrine of faith/worship is NOT Satan working against Satan.

 

[rlvaughn]

...I'll believe his wife came from somewhere else.

Where else? God created only two people and you do not believe that?

Thus, I'm through discussing this, especially on this thread, which is about Psalm 12:6-7.

You have always been free to choose to not discuss it on this thread, and could have chosen to do so at any time. However, my posts are about something ingrained in your OP, which is your harangue about doctrines without any scriptural support. My immediate goal is not to change your mind (though that would be a plus), but to expose the fact that you are content to hold views without any scriptural support when they are your man-made views.

 

[robycop3]

Wonder if we can get back on subject?

Can anyone show us how Ps. 12:6-7 supports KJVO ?

 

[robycop3]

Where else? God created only two people and you do not believe that? You have always been free to choose to not discuss it on this thread, and could have chosen to do so at any time. However, my posts are about something ingrained in your OP, which is your harangue about doctrines without any scriptural support. My immediate goal is not to change your mind (though that would be a plus), but to expose the fact that you are content to hold views without any scriptural support when they are your man-made views.

Scripture clearly condemns incest, so I DO have Scriptural support for believing Cain's wife was not his sister. End of story.

 

[rlvaughn]

Scripture clearly condemns incest, so I DO have Scriptural support for believing Cain's wife was not his sister. End of story.

Your man-made story will never end unless and until you find scriptural support for God creating someone outside the family of Adam & Eve for Cain to marry.

 

[robycop3]

Your man-made story will never end unless and until you find scriptural support for God creating someone outside the family of Adam & Eve for Cain to marry.

And YOURS won't unless you can provide proof that Cain's wife was his sister.

 

[Yeshua1]

And YOURS won't unless you can provide proof that Cain's wife was his sister.

She would have been the only female available other then Eve at that time!

 

[rlvaughn]

And YOURS won't unless you can provide proof that Cain's wife was his sister.

You don't really understand, do you? I am not trying to prove Cain's wife was his sister. I am proving you hold man-made doctrine without any scriptural support and won't admit it.

 

[robycop3]

She would have been the only female available other then Eve at that time!

Far as WE know!

 

[Yeshua1]

Far as WE know!

True, do you hold that God created more then just Adam and Eve at same time then?

 

[robycop3]

True, do you hold that God created more then just Adam and Eve at same time then?

Don't know; Scripture doesn't say.