Why AKJV only?

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Askjo:
NIV is incorrect because Luke wrote Joseph, not "child's father."

Or maybe, Luke wrote "father" and some scribe along the line thought some might use that to argue against the virgin birth, so he "corrected" it.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by tfisher:
Don't forget that Luke 2:41 in the KJV also seems to deny the virgin birth.

Luke 2:41
41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.

KJV is correct because Luke 2:41 is what Luke wrote.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
Luke 2:48 in the KJV denies the virgin birth when Mary calls Joseph Jesus's father.

Luke wrote what Mary said. You misread this passage and misunderstand it.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by JYD:


</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Pastor Larry says, "Luke 2:48 in the KJV denies the virgin birth when Mary calls Joseph Jesus's father."

He does not know what he is talking about either.</font>[/QUOTE]

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Johnv:
Forget about what versions say "father" and what versions say "Joseph". What do the original texts say?

16 manuscripts supported "father." However 43 manuscripts supported "Joseph."

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Johnv:
Does the following verse from the KJV deny the virgin birth?

Luke 2:41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.

No, The KJV did not deny it.

 

[RaptureReady]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
If you knew anything about Greek, you would see that this is not true. There is no distinction of capital letters in the language that God chose for the Bible to be originally written in. When you see capital letters in Scripture, they are the interpretation and conventions of modern language. Luke, writing in Greek, knew no distinction between "Father" and "father." It all looks teh same in Greek. Get out your Greek NT and look it up if you don't believe me.

I sure am glad that I don’t know Greek, I may be as messed up as you guys are. I’m glad God saw that I needed to tell the difference between the two without having to learn another language.

 

[HankD]

I sure am glad that I don’t know Greek, I may be as messed up as you guys are. I’m glad God saw that I needed to tell the difference between the two without having to learn another language.

What about about all those people to whom the original koine Greek was their native language?

Why didn't God make the distinction for them?

HankD

 

[Forever settled in heaven]

Originally posted by Askjo:
16 manuscripts supported "father." However 43 manuscripts supported "Joseph."

n how many supported 1 John 5:7?

how many against?

 

[Forever settled in heaven]

Originally posted by HomeBound:
I sure am glad that I don’t know Greek, I may be as messed up as you guys are. I’m glad God saw that I needed to tell the difference between the two without having to learn another language.

that reminds me of the proverb about the ostrich exposing his only thinking parts when he gets his head gets into the sand.

anyone know the precise wording?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Askjo: "KJV is correct because Luke 2:41 is what Luke wrote."

Did Luke write this:

Now his parents went to Hierusalem
euery yeere, at the feast of the
Passeouer.

Or did Luke write this?

Now his parents went to Jerusalem
every year at the feast of the
passover.

[ July 16, 2003, 09:39 PM: Message edited by: Edifier ]

 

[Ransom]

Alexandra Spears said:

Not stupid, confused...like waitaminnit, it says here that he was born of a virgin, now it says Joseph was His father? Contradiction.

Give me a break. Don't assume the pagans have the same inability as you to read English in its plain sense.

They're lost, not stupid. Unfortunately "stupid" is the way your forced misinterpretation of Luke's plain English makes Christians look, and I will thank you not to make MY job harder.

 

[Ransom]

Askjo said:

Luke wrote what Mary said.

Ah, now we're getting somewhere.

The modern versions don't deny the Virgin Birth, the Virgin Mary does.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Alexandra Spears: "NIV Publisher (Zondervan) is owned
by the people who publish the SATANIC Bible "

And the same US Postal service delivers the
NIV and the Satanic Bible -- Oh shock

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Edifier:
Askjo: "KJV is correct because Luke 2:41 is what Luke wrote."

Did Luke write this:

Now his parents went to Hierusalem
euery yeere, at the feast of the
Passeouer.

Or did Luke write this?

Now his parents went to Jerusalem
every year at the feast of the
passover.

Luke is right to write on Luke 2:41. The difference between parents and father is what you need to be careful to look at.

For example, your child's teacher in school writes a letter to you, "Dear father." Is that right?

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Ransom:
Askjo said:

Luke wrote what Mary said.

The modern versions don't deny the Virgin Birth, the Virgin Mary does.

Yes - they deny it! Look at: what Luke wrote and what Luke wrote what Mary said.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Ah, then the NIV is what Luke said also?

Luke 2:41 (NIV):
Every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the
Feast of the Passover.

Ah, then the NKJV is what Luke said also?

Luke 2:41 (nKJV):
His parents went to Jerusalem
every year at the Feast of
the Passover.

Ah, then the New Century Version is what Luke said also?

Luke 2:41 (NCV):
Every year Jesus' parents wsehnt to JErusalem
for the Passover Feast.

I say YES to all my questions.
Each version individually is the inerrant
written Word of God. There are no errors
within any English version NOR between
two versions. Somebody wanta shout "amen"?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Askjo:
Luke is right to write on Luke 2:41. The difference between parents and father is what you need to be careful to look at.

For example, your child's teacher in school writes a letter to you, "Dear father." Is that right?

It works for me.

If the capitalization of the KJV is correct,
are the footnotes (actually sidenotes)
correct?

 

[HankD]

I don't see what all the hooplah is about.

Joseph was Jesus step-father by the will of our heavenly Father and could be rightfully called Jesus "father" as Luke 3 suggests:

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

When Jesus said that He had to be about His Father's business, He was simply reminding them that He had a heavenly Father who had a greater priority over His life.

HankD

 

[Ed Edwards]

Good term JohnV: "versionphobia"

Definition:
VERSIONPHOBIA - n. An abnormal fear that
some versionother than the KJV
might contain the inerrant written Word
of God.