• 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!

Why no commitment?

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Winman

Active Member
jbh28 said:
In meaning or word choice?

and the kjv bore the JW's and the mormons...;)
Click to expand...

The JWs formed in 1870 before the publication of the MVs. They had no other choice. However, they quickly wrote their own version based on the Critical Text.

The Mormons carry around the KJB for show only, primarily to fool people into thinking they are Christians. They have the Book of Mormon as their primary book and consider it more "correct" than the KJB. They also have other sacred texts called the Doctrines and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. Hey, they like multiple versions too! :laugh:

It's a joke to point out false churches like this, what is the most corrupt church ever? The RCC which uses scriptures based on the CT.
 
J

jbh28

Active Member
Winman said:
The JWs formed in 1870 before the publication of the MVs. They had no other choice. However, they quickly wrote their own version based on the Critical Text.

The Mormons carry around the KJB for show only, primarily to fool people into thinking they are Christians. They have the Book of Mormon as their primary book and consider it more "correct" than the KJB. They also have other sacred texts called the Doctrines and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. Hey, they like multiple versions too! :laugh:

It's a joke to point out false churches like this, what is the most corrupt church ever? The RCC which uses scriptures based on the CT.
Click to expand...

You missed my point. Just because somebody uses something doesn't make it bad. The JW's used the KJV and the mormons still use the KJV today, but that doesn't make the KJV bad. If the RCC used the TR for their translation, would that have made it bad? Of course not, and neither did it make the CT bad.
 
E

Ed Edwards

<img src=/Ed.gif>
Winman said:
Why is it that those who support the MVs will never absolutely commit to any particular version?

I have never seen one MV ever hold up a NIV and say, "This is the perfect and inerrant Word of God". I have never seen a MV say this about any modern version whether it be the NASB, ESV, NKJV or any other MV.

I have heard MVs claim that all of these various version are all the perfect, inerrant Word of God, but this is a ridiculous argument as they are all very different from each other.

But I have never seen a MV ever commit to one particular MV version. Why not?

On the contrary, there are millions of Christians who will hold up their KJB and proclaim it to be the one and only perfect and inerrant Bible in English.

So, why can't MVs commit to any single version of scripture?
Click to expand...


I find it sad some have never read my signature/trailer:
 
E

Ed Edwards

<img src=/Ed.gif>
I have even offered to take about five presuppositions of truth (the five statements of Fundamentalism would work nice) and Prove Logically (mathametical branch called 'logic') my trailer. No one wants to take a stand on what the basic set of Axioms are for Christianity?
 
E

Ed Edwards

<img src=/Ed.gif>
Anyway, the main hang up is I can hold the NIV in one hand and the Geneva Bible in the other hand and claim: In my hand I have the original True statements of God preserved for the generation in which it was translated: without Flaw nor Error caused by God.

Most one bookists must think if God and have one and only one perfect Son; then God can only have one perfect Bible, and God can only save one person :godisgood: ME. Sorry rest of you.
 
NaasPreacher (C4K)

NaasPreacher (C4K)

Well-Known Member
The answer to the OP is quite simple.

No one (or very few) outside of the KJVO group has enough confidence in their own human reasoning to elevate it to a par with scripture and hence are not willing to make it a point of contention in the body of Christ.

I, for one, am not willing to put as much faith in my opinion as I am in the word of God.

While I believe that the scriptures are best represented by the traditional text body and believe that all translations should be translated as literally as possible from that body of texts I am not willing to make that view a matter of contention in the body of Christ because it is not backed by His word in any translation. It is simply my opinion after my own prayerful study of the matter.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Trotter

Trotter

<img src =/6412.jpg>
I can't believe this train wreck of a discussion is still going on.

As usual Winman wants everyone to pick "the ONE" and is miffed because we non-KJVO refuse to make a specific translation an idol. I guess the realization that God does not have to abide by man's idea that He can only have ONE translation is just too much for Winman, stilllearning, and all the other KJVOs.

I am so thankful that God is bigger than the box the KJVOists have tried to put Him in. He alone is perfect and not some vain attempt made by fallible men. God preserves His word IN SPITE of mankind. We may not understand the reasoning behind Him allowing the various manuscripts and fragments, but it is not up to us to understand His purposes.

Our job is to spread the gospel message... no matter which translation we use. All of them have the same doctrines and teachings in them but in different words. We don't know exactly which manuscripts or which fragment is perfect... but God uses the whole to further His kingdom. It's too bad some would rather shout and argue that THEIR idol... uh, translation... is PERFECT and all others are corrupt, when there is an entire world full of people rushing headlong into hell/Gehenna/Hades without Christ.
 
J

jaigner

Active Member
Winman said:
You are wrong, there are many thousands of KJB only Baptist churches in the USA alone, and many thousands worldwide.
Click to expand...

Still just a drop in the bucket. And they are, for better or worse, the butt of many an evangelical joke.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top