You are STILL evading!! How do you know how to consult with your final authority? I can see what He said by going to my (error free,thank you very much) final authority,the King James Bible. I believe every word it says there. </font>[/QUOTE]As opposed to both you and Stefan but in general agreement with Ed, I do believe God has preserved His Word for us in the scriptures. He simply has not chosen to do it with one set of perfect, divinely inspired words.
I believe the KJV and accept its teachings as my final authority. But these are the same teachings that are found in several faithful versions of the Bible.
Nowhere does it teach anything remotely resembling KJVOnlyism. Therefore I reject KJVOnlyism.
You keep demanding that we give you a final authority. Why don't you be honest about yours? The KJV doesn't teach what you believe about the KJV... that belief comes from somewhere else so... the KJV is not an authority at all for you concerning Bible versions.
Thumper, Answer one question for me please. Prior to the invention of the printing press every Bible was different from all others. Out of 5300+ Greek mss, no two are exactly alike. The 6-10 manuscripts used by the Roman Catholic Desiderus Erasmus to create the text that became known as the Textus Receptus were all different. Only one contained any portion of Revelation and that was imbedded in a commentary. Erasmus actually back translated the last 7 verses of the Bible from the RCC's Latin Vulgate into Greek. Brilliant scholarship... however it created readings in those verses with zero, nada, zilch Greek support.
In Revelation 22:19, there is no Greek support for "book of life"- that comes from the Latin Vulgate. The Greek reads "tree of life"... like most MV's. Contrary to most of the variations between MV's and TR based Bibles, this one has possibly legitimate doctrinal implications.
____________________________________________________
I, like others on our side, used to be KJVO... until I evaluated that belief by biblical principles.
1) It depends on double standards in violation of Bible commands concerning equal balances and plain honesty.
2) It ignores issues of fact contrary to the biblical command to "prove all things"- note the scripture doesn't say to "assume all things." You can't just assume that a Bible created 1500 years after the originals (that is obviously different from the originals not even being the same languages) is the standard by which all other Bibles are to be compared. That is by definition making yourself the final authority rather than appealing to the "proof" God commands us to use and that He providentially provided.
3) It is based on experential traditions of men... like those of the Pharisees that Jesus condemned. I and many others argue that it is the "spirit" ie. sayings, messages, word, revelations, etc. of the originals that is perfectly preserved and not the "letter of the text".
Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for concentrating on the letter of the law while violating the spirit of the law.
4) There are no promises in the Bible that a perfect text will be preserved or supplied in different languages. In fact, there is direct proof in the KJV contrary to such a notion, witness and compare Luke 4:18 v. Isaiah 61:1.
5) The Bible says that it is profitable for "doctrine" to the point that we can be "perfect" or mature and "thoroughly furnished unto all good works". Yet, if version onlyism is true doctrine there should be scripture to make it plainly clear without having to read into the text as Michelle does... the scriptures are completely silent on how we are to go about choosing that one perfectly worded Bible to the exclusion of all others. It doesn't tell us to use feelings, experience, past success, historical use, or anything else. It simply doesn't say that only one set of wording exclusively expresses God's Word.
I can add much more but until you deal with these things I don't want to overwhelm you.
[ August 18, 2004, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: Scott J ]
