Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
My momma can beat yo' momma,Originally posted by natters:
My dad can beat up your dad.
in domino-o(es)
-
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 your final authority?
- Thread starter KJVBibleThumper
- Start date
in domino-o(es)
KJVBT,
God makes no mistakes. He is perfect.
"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever."
He says: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
From the original KJV translation made in 1611, to the one that you read, (the edition of 1769), a number of changes were made. Some of those were simply an updating of the language. But others were actual spelling errors and printers errors.
"IF," (and that is a big IF), the KJV of 1611 was and is inspired, then either you must read that edition of the KJV (the original one--which apparently did have spelling mistakes and printers errors that needed to be corrected and thus was not perfect. Therefore how could it be inspired? Or admit that the edition that you use is also not inspired because it has been changed from the inspired 1611 KJV.
An inspired Bible has no mistakes. God does not make mistakes. He is a perfect God.
I would rather convert to Islam and believe in the Almighty God of Allah (as they view him), then to believe in a God who makes spelling mistakes!!
God inspired the original writings. He never inspired a translation--in any language.
DHK
God makes no mistakes. He is perfect.
"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever."
He says: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
From the original KJV translation made in 1611, to the one that you read, (the edition of 1769), a number of changes were made. Some of those were simply an updating of the language. But others were actual spelling errors and printers errors.
"IF," (and that is a big IF), the KJV of 1611 was and is inspired, then either you must read that edition of the KJV (the original one--which apparently did have spelling mistakes and printers errors that needed to be corrected and thus was not perfect. Therefore how could it be inspired? Or admit that the edition that you use is also not inspired because it has been changed from the inspired 1611 KJV.
An inspired Bible has no mistakes. God does not make mistakes. He is a perfect God.
I would rather convert to Islam and believe in the Almighty God of Allah (as they view him), then to believe in a God who makes spelling mistakes!!
God inspired the original writings. He never inspired a translation--in any language.
DHK
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
It wouldn't be so bad if it were not the same old questions by every new KJVO member who comes along. What gives anyone the right to declare their favourite version as the final authority. Does not that really make them the "final authority?"
[ August 17, 2004, 02:24 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
The 1611 KJV revised in I believe 1768(or 9) to modern spelling. Note, I did not say "modern words" I said modern spelling of old words.Such as changing "Iesus" to "Jesus" </font>[/QUOTE]In your studies KJVBT - may I suggest you do a thourough study into the differences between 1611 and 1769? The sources are available online, or even better if you could get your 1611 reprint and a 1769 version and sit down and write out all of the changes yoruself. There are a few more than Iesus to Jesus. Just an idea to help on your paper.
GrannyGumbo
<img src ="/Granny.gif">
I think Thumper is doing really well, considering he's only 15(as he stated in another thread). I'm praying for you, son, just don't let 'em cause you to lose your cool. Sometimes it's best to shake the dust off your feet and walk away...wanna borry my vac? 
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
I trust that Thumper will do well in his quest. My advice about examining the two KJV editions himself was genuine. He needs to know for himself, while he is young, why he believes what he does and not depend on what he has heard others say.
KJVBibleThumper
"I would like to know what peoples final authority is."
"'
In theory that would be God, since I don't have his cellphone number, I'll have to settle for the Bible.
Your next question is, what version of the Bible?
For all practical purposes that would be the Bibleversion used during churchservices.
To my pastor that would be the original language texts used to translate the BV we read in church.
Ofcourse I read neither Greek nor Hebrew. So my final authority in practice is the NBG translation of the Bible (that's the one we use).
See, simple.
"I would like to know what peoples final authority is."
"'
In theory that would be God, since I don't have his cellphone number, I'll have to settle for the Bible.
Your next question is, what version of the Bible?
For all practical purposes that would be the Bibleversion used during churchservices.
To my pastor that would be the original language texts used to translate the BV we read in church.
Ofcourse I read neither Greek nor Hebrew. So my final authority in practice is the NBG translation of the Bible (that's the one we use).
See, simple.
KJVBP,
My advice to you is to study the issue for yourself. Don't take the word of Gipp, Ruckman, Cloud, Waite, Riplinger, etc... without looking into the issue from both sides and comparing evidence.
As a former foaming at the mouth rabid KJVOist, I pretty much know what you are sitting under when KJVOism is taught. I would suggest getting a reprint of the AV1611 and read the Message to the Reader.
When you read the AV1611 and see all the marginal notes and differences then you must ask yourself why the AV was changed if it is perfect.
After studying the issue, e-mail some well known KJVOIst leaders and ask why they don't use a real AV1611. You like I did will discover that something is terribly wrong in the KJVO Camp.
Here is a link that lists some of the differences between the AV1611 and current KJV(assuming that your KJV is a 1769 Oxford edition).
http://members.aol.com/pilgrimpub/revision.htm
Now I have a simple challenge for you. List the scripture in the KJV that supports KJVOism. After you list this scripture then please list the scripture proving that your KJV is perfect when it is not a true AV1611. I have been asking these questions since I got out of KJVOism.
Please do not take offense to my post. E-mail me if you have any questions.
By the way, God is my final authority through prayer, the Holy Spirit, etc...
My advice to you is to study the issue for yourself. Don't take the word of Gipp, Ruckman, Cloud, Waite, Riplinger, etc... without looking into the issue from both sides and comparing evidence.
As a former foaming at the mouth rabid KJVOist, I pretty much know what you are sitting under when KJVOism is taught. I would suggest getting a reprint of the AV1611 and read the Message to the Reader.
When you read the AV1611 and see all the marginal notes and differences then you must ask yourself why the AV was changed if it is perfect.
After studying the issue, e-mail some well known KJVOIst leaders and ask why they don't use a real AV1611. You like I did will discover that something is terribly wrong in the KJVO Camp.
Here is a link that lists some of the differences between the AV1611 and current KJV(assuming that your KJV is a 1769 Oxford edition).
http://members.aol.com/pilgrimpub/revision.htm
Now I have a simple challenge for you. List the scripture in the KJV that supports KJVOism. After you list this scripture then please list the scripture proving that your KJV is perfect when it is not a true AV1611. I have been asking these questions since I got out of KJVOism.
Please do not take offense to my post. E-mail me if you have any questions.
By the way, God is my final authority through prayer, the Holy Spirit, etc...
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Amen, Brother David J. -- Preach it!
Thank you for refreshing my bowels in
the Lord today! May God be liberal
today with blessing toward you,
your family, and your ministy. Amen.
\O/ Praise Iesus, Sonne of God \O/
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Say that all of us had one and only one Bible,
the KJV1769 (the most commonly available
Bible in the USofA). How do we agree with one
another on what a specific passage means?
I know that I teach a Sunday School Class
and usually there are six people there
in addition to myself. I've had as many
as seven understandings of a particular
phrase! How do we agree with each other
on what a specific passage means?
I note an ongoing discussion at
Why are there so many Denominations?!?!
about this matter. The solution here is
just not to agree on each matter but
seperate from the other.
How do we agree in chruch when we have
a variation of understanding about a scripture?
(Assume that we all use the KJV1769 only)
I've conteded in this Forum that there are
more variant denominations due to the reading
of the KJV than because of the different readings
of the various versions including the
Modern Versions. I still think i'm right.
Who your final authority is makes a difference.
"What is your final authority" is a poor
question. To answer the question "What
is your final authority" with a version's
name is a poor answer. To answer the
good question: "Who is your final authority"
with a version name is even more foolish.
I see 67% of the people voting
here to this time
abide in agreement with me.
BTW, my authority is the Jesus with whom
i have a personal relationship.
the KJV1769 (the most commonly available
Bible in the USofA). How do we agree with one
another on what a specific passage means?
I know that I teach a Sunday School Class
and usually there are six people there
in addition to myself. I've had as many
as seven understandings of a particular
phrase! How do we agree with each other
on what a specific passage means?
I note an ongoing discussion at
Why are there so many Denominations?!?!
about this matter. The solution here is
just not to agree on each matter but
seperate from the other.
How do we agree in chruch when we have
a variation of understanding about a scripture?
(Assume that we all use the KJV1769 only)
I've conteded in this Forum that there are
more variant denominations due to the reading
of the KJV than because of the different readings
of the various versions including the
Modern Versions. I still think i'm right.
Who your final authority is makes a difference.
"What is your final authority" is a poor
question. To answer the question "What
is your final authority" with a version's
name is a poor answer. To answer the
good question: "Who is your final authority"
with a version name is even more foolish.
I see 67% of the people voting
here to this time
abide in agreement with me.
BTW, my authority is the Jesus with whom
i have a personal relationship.
Anti-Alexandrian
Member
I trust that he will as well..He will find that the "differences" most harumpf about are GENUINE updating,and nothing but Alexandrian propaganda that would make Goebbels proud.The KJB has not been altered in respect to it's text.
Here is the problem Thumper:
God did, in fact, preserve "His word", but not in the way that makes you comfortable.
He preserved it by ensuring that thousands of hand-written copies would be made in a time when there was no printer. These copies were distributed to hundreds of churches within a relatively short time and they, in turn, began making copies. Over time, the original letters were lost. However, the very fact that thousands of copies were made ensures we can know FOR CERTAIN what the originals said.
Which scenario do you prefer:
1. One local church had sole authority and ownership of all copies of the Bible and only this one group could control their distribution.
or,
2. It happened the way I described above: thousands of copies were made and, as they are collated, we find virtually no doctrinal inconsistency among families of texts.
Which is preferable? I don't know that I would trust God's word if it were "owned" by one group of individuals. How do I know they didn't corrupt it? You like to say the Alexandrian texts "corrupt" God's word, but I counter that with the fact that we have the Majority Text families to review and, if you're honest, you'll find no doctrinal differences.
I assume you'll disagree with the last sentance above. If that's the case, then please answer this question:
What specific doctrines of our faith are ONLY found in the King James Version?
God did, in fact, preserve "His word", but not in the way that makes you comfortable.
He preserved it by ensuring that thousands of hand-written copies would be made in a time when there was no printer. These copies were distributed to hundreds of churches within a relatively short time and they, in turn, began making copies. Over time, the original letters were lost. However, the very fact that thousands of copies were made ensures we can know FOR CERTAIN what the originals said.
Which scenario do you prefer:
1. One local church had sole authority and ownership of all copies of the Bible and only this one group could control their distribution.
or,
2. It happened the way I described above: thousands of copies were made and, as they are collated, we find virtually no doctrinal inconsistency among families of texts.
Which is preferable? I don't know that I would trust God's word if it were "owned" by one group of individuals. How do I know they didn't corrupt it? You like to say the Alexandrian texts "corrupt" God's word, but I counter that with the fact that we have the Majority Text families to review and, if you're honest, you'll find no doctrinal differences.
I assume you'll disagree with the last sentance above. If that's the case, then please answer this question:
What specific doctrines of our faith are ONLY found in the King James Version?
It depends on what you call "altered in respect to its text".
The KJV translators did NOT consider their work to be something revolutionary, but simply a revision of the Tyndale version (see the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, p. 112). The difference in how the language changed in just 75 years (the time between the Tyndale and the KJV) was dramatic. Dr. Sattergood updated the KJV 71 years later to make it current for the readers of his day. Dr. Blayney updated the KJV 86 years after Sattergood's revision to make it current for his day.
Those KJVOists who claim "400 years" of preservation with the KJV are quite mistaken. At best, the only claim that comes close would be one of 235 years. Revision of the KJV has been ongoing, as demonstrated by Blayley and Sattergood. That there has been 235 years since the Blayney revision only argues that the English of the KJV should have been updated many years ago. The gradual falling away from the use of the KJV during the last 65 years lends credence to the need to update its language as has been done in the past, contrary to the footstomping of the KJVOists.
Ah ah ahh,it was forced on them,and they took it out as soon as possible. </font>[/QUOTE]No they didn't. In fact, some of the same folks who gave us the KJV made it illegal to print a Bible in Britain without the apocrypha.
The targets of this ruling were Baptists, Separatists, some Puritans, and Independents as well as their preferred Bible version that did not contain the Apocrypha... the Geneva Bible.
The KJV only gained domininance after the 1630's when the Church of England by the authority of the English king made the printing, binding, and/or distribution of any other version a High Commission crime punishable by imprisonment. Even after that, some dissenters (like the Baptist) operated a black market for Geneva Bibles printed in Holland.
BTW, the first Bibles brought to America was not the KJV... it was the Geneva.
My final authority is God, represented as the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. If you are asking about what bible version I use then I would have to answer that since I don't know how to read Greek, Aramaic or Hebrew, then I have to rely on a translation of these languages into the modern English which I speak. I use several translations, mainly the KJV, the HCSB, the NIV, NASB, Reina Valera 1960 and many others. Often time I look up a specific verse in many translations to get a better meaning of the thought it is trying to relay. I also rely on some commentaries to provide some insight on the verse. However the final authority on the verse is God, represented as the Holy Spirit within me who is able to give me discernment.
DeclareHim
New Member
I trust that he will as well..He will find that the "differences" most harumpf about are GENUINE updating,and nothing but Alexandrian propaganda that would make Goebbels proud.The KJB has not been altered in respect to it's text. </font>[/QUOTE]Oh please check this out.
"and he went into the citie." Ruth 3:15 1611 KIV
"and she went into the city." Ruth 3:15 1769 KIV
"in the temple" 2 Kings 11:10 1611 KIV
"in the temple of the Lord" 2 Kings 11:10 1611 KIV
"God" Isaiah 14:13 KIV 1611
"the LORD" Isaiah 14:13 KIV 1769
So which of those choices are right. And don't show ignorance by saying both. According to you KIVO there's only 1 way to translate something correctly. So which is it.