What is your final authority?

[StefanM]

Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by StefanM:
BTW, we aren't anti-KJV; we are anti-KJVO.

If you reject the KJV superiority, you are anti-KJV. </font>[/QUOTE]No, it means I do not think the KJV is the best translation. I am not against it. If you read the KJV, fine by me.

 

[StefanM]

Originally posted by KJVBibleThumper:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by StefanM:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by KJVBibleThumper:

And smoke rises from the anti-KJV position...

Yes, the smoke emanating from the flame thrower that has devoured all the KJVO arguments!

BTW, we aren't anti-KJV; we are anti-KJVO. </font>[/QUOTE]Do flamethrowers emit smoke? I thought there was only flame coming from the barrel.
There is no between ground.You either take the other versions with their contradictions with the KJV,or you pick and choose which versions you are going to use,or you are KJVO. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]That's a false dilemma. It's not pick and choose vs. KJVO.

For example I can do the exact same thing with the NASB.

There is no between ground. You either take the other versions with their contradictions with the NASB, or you pick and choose which versions you are going to use, or you are NASBO.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Originally posted by Trotter:
Sure. You go ahead with your paper, Thumper. But don't be surprised if no one gives it a standing ovation.

The same old proof-texts, the same old dog-eared arguements. Why, if a KJVO could actually put together something that resembled a true-to-life, thought out, original arguement, I might actually jump on board.

But, instead, we see the same verses, ripped bleeding out of their contexts, strentched and warped into a KJVO mold.

Instead, we see the same arguements originally put forth by a Seventh-Day Adventist, which was copied by the forefathers of the KJVO lie (word-for-word).

Instead, we see, "I know because I know, and you don't" over and over again (Michelle is an excellent example of this).

So, you write your paper. And we'll see what you come up with.

In Christ,
Trotter

I am asking this in christian love and fellowship,okay? Dont pre-judge my paper before you see it. And while I dont for a minute believe that my sides arguments are dogeared and tired,for the sake of argument,lets assume they are. Yours are in an even worse boat as you have REALLY old and tired arguments that many times are contradictory. Futhurmore we KJVO only people can hold up our Bibles and say "this is our authority!!" You guys dont have one but yourselves and your interpratation of many confusing bibles.
Now the next thing im going to hear from you guys is probably"God is our Final Authority!" O well that ones not a problem either.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Originally posted by StefanM:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by StefanM:
BTW, we aren't anti-KJV; we are anti-KJVO.

If you reject the KJV superiority, you are anti-KJV. </font>[/QUOTE]No, it means I do not think the KJV is the best translation. I am not against it. If you read the KJV, fine by me. </font>[/QUOTE]Is this a case of half my friends say this and half say that and im with my friends?
How do you manage to believe contradictory things at once? What Bible do you think that God has preserved His Word in as He promised?

 

[StefanM]

I do not believe God has promised to preserve His Word as a Bible.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Originally posted by StefanM:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by KJVBibleThumper:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by StefanM:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by KJVBibleThumper:

And smoke rises from the anti-KJV position...

Yes, the smoke emanating from the flame thrower that has devoured all the KJVO arguments!

BTW, we aren't anti-KJV; we are anti-KJVO. </font>[/QUOTE]Do flamethrowers emit smoke? I thought there was only flame coming from the barrel.
There is no between ground.You either take the other versions with their contradictions with the KJV,or you pick and choose which versions you are going to use,or you are KJVO. </font>[/QUOTE]That's a false dilemma. It's not pick and choose vs. KJVO.

For example I can do the exact same thing with the NASB.

There is no between ground. You either take the other versions with their contradictions with the NASB, or you pick and choose which versions you are going to use, or you are NASBO. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Are you NASB only? Because if you are you are the first person I have met that is not KJVO that believes that another(one-singular) bible is Gods preserved Word and all other versions are phony.

 

[StefanM]

Nope, I'm not NASB-only; I was just showing how that was a false dilemma.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Originally posted by StefanM:
I do not believe God has promised to preserve His Word as a Bible.

Then where O where did He preserve it? He promised to preserve it so where is it?

 

[Ed Edwards]

KJVBibleThumper: //Futhurmore we KJVO only people can hold
up our Bibles and say "this is our authority!!"
You guys dont have one but yourselves and your
interpratation of many confusing bibles.//

1. Please don't say my Bibles are confusing. Thank you.
2. Your statement represents more projection of your
doubts than fact about my side: MV user.
3. I can hold up any one of a couple dozen Holy Bibles
and say - "This is our authority". That includes three
each Bibles called King James Version, each different
from the rest.

Still, I will argue:
More doctrinal variations come from misunderstanding
of the KJB than from actual document variations.
(the ratio is about 49 to 1 /98%/)

 

[StefanM]

I don't believe Psalm twelve is referring to preserving His Word in any form.

If He did preserve it, it is in heaven.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Originally posted by StefanM:
Nope, I'm not NASB-only; I was just showing how that was a false dilemma.

Oh,how sad I thought I had found a non KJVO person who had a final authority besides their interpritation of many bibles.

 

[StefanM]

I have a final authority other than my interpretation--God.

 

[David J]

KJVBT,

It is a known fact that a SDA created the KJVO lie. David Ottis Fuller stole Benjamin Wilkinson's work and published it under the title Which Bible? Here is where you can research the book that started KJVOism.

http://www.present-truth.org/Wilkinson/AuthorizedBibleTOC.htm#FOREWORD

While searching through some references online about KJVOism, I found a book that might be of great interest to anyone researching the long arm of KJVOism. A Mormon named J. Reuben Clark Jr. wrote a book called WHY THE KING JAMES VERSION in 1956. I have the book in front of me right now. It's interesting that this Mormon author uses the same arguments that modern KJVOist use today. For example on page 321-322 this Mormon is defending the KJV against the RSV and ASV in Matt 6:9-13 using the typical KJVO line of defense. I have not read the book yet but from browsing from chapter to chapter it is very interesting to say the least.

Please note that many KJVOist love to say that modern versions are in league with the NWT but they take a blind-eye to the fact that cults like the Mormons use a KJV. Guilt by association only applies to non-KJVOist when used to claim modern bibles are perverted because of the NWT etc...

KJVBT please take a hard look at the KJVO Camp. Even on this board many KJVOist dodge and evade our questions. If you are right then why do so many KJVOist dodge questions and distort historical facts? I would suggest reading the following:

1. the true AV1611 from cover to cover.
2. find scripture to support your stand in full context. (please note the marginal note in the AV1611 in Psalm 12)
3.read research done by non-KJVOist and think for yourself.

Do not let KJVOist keep you from truly studying the issues.

I am not anti-KJV but I am 100% anti-KJVO. As a former KJVO I know that it is hard to drop KJVOism, but knowing the truth made it an easy task for me to leave KJVOism.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
KJVBibleThumper: //Futhurmore we KJVO only people can hold
up our Bibles and say "this is our authority!!"
You guys dont have one but yourselves and your
interpratation of many confusing bibles.//

1. Please don't say my Bibles are confusing. Thank you.
2. Your statement represents more projection of your
doubts than fact about my side: MV user.
3. I can hold up any one of a couple dozen Holy Bibles
and say - "This is our authority". That includes three
each Bibles called King James Version, each different
from the rest.

Still, I will argue:
More doctrinal variations come from misunderstanding
of the KJB than from actual document variations.
(the ratio is about 49 to 1 /98%/)

Sooo...let me get this straight,you can hold up at least a dozen Final Authoritys?
And im stuck with one...

Please show me how the King James and other bibles are NOT confusing.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Originally posted by StefanM:
I have a final authority other than my interpretation--God.

He comes down and talks with you?

 

[StefanM]

I go by my interpretation, but my final authority--the One by whom we are judged, is God.

 

[StefanM]

Even KJVOs can go only by their interpretations because even if the KJV is perfect, their interpretations of it aren't. So you still can't know anything for certain.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Originally posted by David J:
KJVBT,

It is a known fact that a SDA created the KJVO lie. David Ottis Fuller stole Benjamin Wilkinson's work and published it under the title Which Bible? Here is where you can research the book that started KJVOism.

http://www.present-truth.org/Wilkinson/AuthorizedBibleTOC.htm#FOREWORD

While searching through some references online about KJVOism, I found a book that might be of great interest to anyone researching the long arm of KJVOism. A Mormon named J. Reuben Clark Jr. wrote a book called WHY THE KING JAMES VERSION in 1956. I have the book in front of me right now. It's interesting that this Mormon author uses the same arguments that modern KJVOist use today. For example on page 321-322 this Mormon is defending the KJV against the RSV and ASV in Matt 6:9-13 using the typical KJVO line of defense. I have not read the book yet but from browsing from chapter to chapter it is very interesting to say the least.

Please note that many KJVOist love to say that modern versions are in league with the NWT but they take a blind-eye to the fact that cults like the Mormons use a KJV. Guilt by association only applies to non-KJVOist when used to claim modern bibles are perverted because of the NWT etc...

KJVBT please take a hard look at the KJVO Camp. Even on this board many KJVOist dodge and evade our questions. If you are right then why do so many KJVOist dodge questions and distort historical facts? I would suggest reading the following:

1. the true AV1611 from cover to cover.
2. find scripture to support your stand in full context. (please note the marginal note in the AV1611 in Psalm 12)
3.read research done by non-KJVOist and think for yourself.

Do not let KJVOist keep you from truly studying the issues.

I am not anti-KJV but I am 100% anti-KJVO. As a former KJVO I know that it is hard to drop KJVOism, but knowing the truth made it an easy task for me to leave KJVOism.

Tell you what,you write a paper with scriptural support for your position and post it and I will as well(like im doing).
plus I resent the accusation that I am brainwashed. I am thinking for myself here okay?

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by StefanM:
No, it means I do not think the KJV is the best translation.

You are Wallaceite because Dr. Wallace said same thing in his website. For sure, he is anti-KJV.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Originally posted by StefanM:
Even KJVOs can go only by their interpretations because even if the KJV is perfect, their interpretations of it aren't. So you still can't know anything for certain.

Is one of those things that I cant know for certain my salvation?