BrotherJesse
New Member
This is not an attack Doc, just a survey.
-
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!
What is the best Bible?
- Thread starter ATeenageChristian
- Start date
I guess it depends on your presuppositions eh?? I thought it was just a survey of the facts of the case as demonstrated by Scrivener and others historically.
Heisall2meIFB.
New Member
Its The KJV for ME! hidee Ransom...missed ya...Hubby said I could come here! Tell everyone I miss Them ALL so much.
Is this ad hominem?? It sure looks like it
Strange from someone suggesting there should be no "attacks" on the KJV. Is it okay to attack people?More to the point, are you saying that Scrivener was wrong when he made his list of typos and errors? I was not aware that anyone this side of Ruckman denied this. You yourself have admitted these errors exist; you simply do not consider them errors of fact.
By the way, my reading comprehension works just fine.
Perhaps you can explain then. It seems that I understood what you said just fine. You misunderstood my first post, causing you to say some things that were not true (an error which after being corrected you again failed to acknowledge and apologize for). Then you attack my reading ability, again causing you to say some things that are not true. I am curious as to what I missed in my reading comprehension.
1. What in my post (any of them) showed a lack of reading comprehension?
2. How does your attack on my reading comprehension not constitute an ad hominem argument?
3. Are you disagreeing with Scrivener who identified numerous errors and changes in the KJV's various editions?
[ June 30, 2002, 01:18 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]
Reality check.......
Most people don't really care about this issue, I know that may come as a shock to some, but it is the truth. Having had the opportunity to preach in many parts of the country and always asking if there was a version perfered by the church the answer always was/is, "Whatever you are most comfortable with will be fine." Very funny to me how a non-issue becomes an issue when left to the "experts". Sad too but mostly funny.
Most people don't really care about this issue, I know that may come as a shock to some, but it is the truth. Having had the opportunity to preach in many parts of the country and always asking if there was a version perfered by the church the answer always was/is, "Whatever you are most comfortable with will be fine." Very funny to me how a non-issue becomes an issue when left to the "experts". Sad too but mostly funny.
Chris Temple
New Member
You are quite right that most people do not care about the issue, but that does not make it a non-issue, (nor remotely funny). In that vein, people then neither care if they might be using a NWT or a catholic edition with deuterocanonical books. (Sadly, this is probably the case). But believers need to be taught where their Bibles came from, what constitutes a good Bible, and how to avoid and/or agrue against abberant doctrine like KJVO. Simply because people "don't care" is not a reason to avoid teaching them the truth of an issue.
Thomas appears to have either 1) missed the questions or 2) be unable to prove his assertions. Which is it? I will post them again and hope for some evidence to back them up. I get very tired of personal attacks, especially when no evidence has been offered to support them. Jump in here Thomas; support your claims.
1. What in my post (any of them) showed a lack of reading comprehension?
2. How does your attack on my reading comprehension not constitute an ad hominem argument?
3. Are you disagreeing with Scrivener who identified numerous errors and changes in the KJV's various editions?</font>[/QUOTE]
Perhaps you can explain then. It seems that I understood what you said just fine. You misunderstood my first post, causing you to say some things that were not true (an error which after being corrected you again failed to acknowledge and apologize for). Then you attack my reading ability, again causing you to say some things that are not true. I am curious as to what I missed in my reading comprehension.
1. What in my post (any of them) showed a lack of reading comprehension?
2. How does your attack on my reading comprehension not constitute an ad hominem argument?
3. Are you disagreeing with Scrivener who identified numerous errors and changes in the KJV's various editions?</font>[/QUOTE]
Please don't misrepresent what I said. It is a terrible sin, not to mention a terrible testimony.</font>[/QUOTE]Okay then, you've critiqued mvs before. But now you disapprove of a critique of the KJV. So then is it okay for you to do it and not others? Hypocrisy is a pretty lousy witness, too.Originally posted by DocCas:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by TomVols:
I see. According to Thomas then, we can never critique a Bible translation. Guess we need to shut this forum down then.
[ July 01, 2002, 10:51 AM: Message edited by: TomVols ]