Why is the KJV the main subject in this section?

I responded in that forum... that I don't know what you are talking about. You are going to have to be a little more clear about what you are accusing me of.

What hypocrisy am I guilty of? (Moderators: Please don't snip Frank's use of this word.)

You accuse me of not edifying but then throw unsubstantiated charges at me without asking for an explanation or clarification first.

As far as I know, there is no contradictions between what I said about tatoos and what I contend in this forum. If there is then please feel free to point out where you think they exist.

 

Frank, you've said you'll no longer visit this forum, and I know why...You came here bearing the false KJVO doctrine & got it hammered yet again by the truth. having no answers, you're bailing out. But the plane will continue to fly, with or without you. Many another KJVO has likewise bailed, proving to the world that THEY CANNOT DEFEND THEIR FALSE DOCTRINE.

Where's your EVIDENCE to sustain your view? All I've seen from you is the same decades-old guesswork and fishing stories from the original myth laced with a little personal opinion.

No, this debate and similar ones are NOT sin...opposition to FALSE DOCTRINE is NEVER sin, while BLINDLY ACCEPTING such a false doctrine CERTAINLY ISN'T right, while PREACHING it certainly isn't pleasing to GOD. It's saying God CANNOT present His very own words AS HE CHOOSES.

I say it without reservation...THE KJVO MYTH IS A FALSE DOCTRINE!!!! Again and again we've asked its proselytes for EVIDENCE to probe otherwise...and they've come up EMPTY from the gitgo! Remember, this is the word of the ALMIGHTY GOD we're dealing with...and you'd jolly well better have some TRUE, REAL EVIDENCE for what you say about it...for some day you shall GIVE ACCOUNT TO GOD for what you've said! Think HE will buy the KJVO myth, or accept any excuses?

 

Again, the real reason is because of caustic, divisive, "holier than thou" statements like that.

As far as I can tell, there are no "apostates" here, nor anyone who hates the KJV. Unless you can specifically point them out to us, your comments only prove my point.

 

I responded in that forum... that I don't know what you are talking about. You are going to have to be a little more clear about what you are accusing me of.

What hypocrisy am I guilty of? (Moderators: Please don't snip Frank's use of this word.)

You accuse me of not edifying but then throw unsubstantiated charges at me without asking for an explanation or clarification first.

As far as I know, there is no contradictions between what I said about tatoos and what I contend in this forum. If there is then please feel free to point out where you think they exist. </font>[/QUOTE]Hypocrisy isn't one of those "attacks", Sir, it is a msiguided mentality.
</font>[/QUOTE] Actually, it is a gross sin and a Christian should be very careful before accusing another Christian of it. They should have their facts lined up- you don't seem to.

Huh? On the one hand I am wrong for saying that by principle one who follows worldly trends is wrong but on the other hand I am wrong for opposing a false doctrine?

Please explain further. If you want to dispute that I am opposing a false doctrine BTW please show your scriptural and factual support for KJVOnlyism.

If you are referring only to my "contentious attitude", tell me who suggested that others were subjected to a tool of the devil? Who suggested that people who disagreed with a particular translation preference were automatically workers for the devil and apostate? Who is throwing around unsubstantiated charges without making sure they understand the other's position?

I oppose a false doctrine- not the KJV, not other Christians. I use the KJV and believe it to be a great translation.

If my style doesn't suit you then I am sorry. If contentious means that I am contending strongly for the truth then thank you for the indirect compliment. If it means that I am being unduly antagonistic then please tell me specifically what bothers you.

 

This is actually true. The devil and apostates hate every faithful version of God's Word and many not so faithful versions that retain some measure of truth.

Would mind listing the versions you have a problem with and why? And since this is a side ways condemnation of the motives of people who do translation work, would you mind telling us specifically whose motives were wrong and why?

Oh- and be careful that the arguments that you use against other versions cannot apply equally well to the KJV or its translators.

Now I'm not trying to be contentious... just trying to get you to prove your point.

 

Frank Betz: KJVO isn't a "myth", unless you're accusing DR. Bob of propigating a myth.

Dr. Bob will speak for himself, I'm sure, but in all the time I've been here I've NEVER seen him write in defense of the KJVO myth.

And again, the only reason the King james Bible keeps coming up in every thread in this forum is because it is the Word of God and the devil and the apostates hate it,

Wrong.

The TRUE reason the KJV is so often discussed is that it happens to be the version around which a godless, man-made myth has been built. The KJV and other English versions existed together for a long time without this ridiculous sham of a doctrine made about any of them. Then, from the pen of a cult official, 7TH DAY ADVENTIST Dr. Ben Wilkinson came an error-filled book in 1930 advocating the ridiculous idea that the KJV is the ONLY valid English Bible version; several dishonest authors copied heavily from that book, and with the help of modern media, created the KJVO myth. This counterculture was successful in infiltrating the Baptist faith for awhile, but now more & more baptists are actually studying the subject for themselves, and, as I have, have found KJVO totally false.

It's not because of the KJV that this myth has arisen; it's because several dishonest people propagated it, spread it, and later authors saw a cash cow in selling KJVO material to the gullible among the public.

Again, I say, without reservation: KJVO IS A MYTH AND A FALSE DOCTRINE! There is but ONE legit reason to be KJVO...PERSONAL PREFERENCE. All others are false.


else they wouldn't promote their taunted versions which contradict the very manuscripts they come from, except those they do interpret accurately, but then the rest contradict them.

May I recommend you put in some time actually STUDYING the subject in depth, then once again try telling us how wrong we are? Seems as if all you've read about it is the KJVO stuff, which, if you take time to verify, you'll find badly wanting for truth.

And, Sir, I see you have no reply to my accusations against the KJVO myth. Typical.

 

"Why is the KJV the main subject in this section?"

Hmmmmm.........

Could it be that it is due to the "KJV ONLY" sect making God's word a point of division within the body of Christ?

One who says that the KJV is the ONLY true word of God is exhibiting a truly facinating form of twisted logic at best, and is IMHO denying the providential work of the Holy Spirit at worst.

Logically, if one declares that the KJV is the ONLY true word of God; then every English speaker prior to 1611 resides in Hell along with every non-English speaker of any generation...

Would anyone who is KJVO care to comment as to how this can be reconciled to God's desire in 2 Peter 3:9?

The one who declares the the KJV is the ONLY true word of God IMHO needs to rip John 14:26 out and throw it away, as obviously it is the grammar, syntax, and word choice that illuminates and not the Holy Spirit.

Let's get real here.......

 

This thread has reached the five page limit and has sadly degenerated into a personal grudge match.