franklinmonroe
Active Member
If you state that the RT is perfect --
but admit the KJV doesn't fully follow the RT --
then the KJV can't be perfect.
-
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?
- Thread starter Winman
- Start date
- Status
then the KJV can't be perfect.
Please. Get real. You know as well as I do that the MVs based on the CT are missing thousands of words, dozens of verses, and entire passages shown in the KJB based on the RT. Why do you persist with this foolish argument?
I cannot prove that the KJB based on the RT is the perfect and inerrant Word of God. There is the possibility that the CT is the preserved and inerrant Word of God.
But why won't any MVs stand up for the CT?
The only commitment the MVs will make is to say all versions are perfect and inerrant. Of course, they talk out of both sides of their mouth and say all versions contain error.
I've never understood MV logic that can say all versions can be perfect and inerrant and full of error at the same time, but somehow they seem to be able to believe this. It is hard to hold a rational conversation with someone who can believe an illogical impossibility can be true.
You know, I thought that one of you MVs would spite me and say they believe their particular version the one and only perfect and inerrant version in English. But you folks just can't do that.
No, I firmly believe the KJB is the perfect and preserved Word of God in English. I don't know the exact texts the KJB translators used and don't care, you see I believe God preserved his Word as he said. I don't need to understand exactly how he did this.
But why is there not one (at least I've never heard or met one) MV that will take a bold stand for a particular MV? I mean, it is totally ridiculous, not one.
You dismiss this so easily, when it should be saying so much to you. Literally millions of Christians will take a firm stand for the KJB.
Do you believe us KJB onlies a cult of hypnotized zombies? Do you believe thousands of great and learned preachers and scholars all totally deceived?
What I can't understand is how he can say all versions have mistakes in them, and yet they are all preserved at the same time.
I guess the mistakes have been well preserved. :laugh:
Quote:robycop3
Why not? And by WHAT authority do YOU decide which are valid & which aint? Remember, there are multiple English meanings for many, MANY Greek or Hebrew words/phrases.
Please. Get real. You know as well as I do that the MVs based on the CT are missing thousands of words, dozens of verses, and entire passages shown in the KJB based on the RT. Why do you persist with this foolish argument?
Cuz the argument is REAL, AS YOUR NEXT SENTENCE SHOWS.
I cannot prove that the KJB based on the RT is the perfect and inerrant Word of God.
But in your very next post ya say,
There is the possibility that the CT is the preserved and inerrant Word of God.
OF COURSE there is.
But why won't any MVs stand up for the CT?
Been answered already. Why do ya keep asking? Hoping to get an answer ya like better than the ones so far?
The only commitment the MVs will make is to say all versions are perfect and inerrant. Of course, they talk out of both sides of their mouth and say all versions contain error.
each is perfect for GOD'S intended use.
I've never understood MV logic that can say all versions can be perfect and inerrant and full of error at the same time, but somehow they seem to be able to believe this. It is hard to hold a rational conversation with someone who can believe an illogical impossibility can be true.
"With GOD, all things are possible". Every Bible translation is God's perfect word handled by imperfect men. GOD is fully aware of this, of course.
You know, I thought that one of you MVs would spite me and say they believe their particular version the one and only perfect and inerrant version in English. But you folks just can't do that.
Still waiting for YOU to prove the KJV is. If ya CAN'T, you're just whistling in the wind.
Why not? And by WHAT authority do YOU decide which are valid & which aint? Remember, there are multiple English meanings for many, MANY Greek or Hebrew words/phrases.
Please. Get real. You know as well as I do that the MVs based on the CT are missing thousands of words, dozens of verses, and entire passages shown in the KJB based on the RT. Why do you persist with this foolish argument?
Cuz the argument is REAL, AS YOUR NEXT SENTENCE SHOWS.
I cannot prove that the KJB based on the RT is the perfect and inerrant Word of God.
But in your very next post ya say,
So, actually, you're GUESSING!
There is the possibility that the CT is the preserved and inerrant Word of God.
OF COURSE there is.
But why won't any MVs stand up for the CT?
Been answered already. Why do ya keep asking? Hoping to get an answer ya like better than the ones so far?
The only commitment the MVs will make is to say all versions are perfect and inerrant. Of course, they talk out of both sides of their mouth and say all versions contain error.
each is perfect for GOD'S intended use.
I've never understood MV logic that can say all versions can be perfect and inerrant and full of error at the same time, but somehow they seem to be able to believe this. It is hard to hold a rational conversation with someone who can believe an illogical impossibility can be true.
"With GOD, all things are possible". Every Bible translation is God's perfect word handled by imperfect men. GOD is fully aware of this, of course.
You know, I thought that one of you MVs would spite me and say they believe their particular version the one and only perfect and inerrant version in English. But you folks just can't do that.
Still waiting for YOU to prove the KJV is. If ya CAN'T, you're just whistling in the wind.
Notice the word I highlighted and underlined? Believe. You are a scholar, look it up in your concordance, it is a Bible word, very important one at that.
God asks us to "believe" him. He does not always give us proof. He gives us his Word and promises us it is true, and asks us to trust and believe him.
And that is exactly where lots of folks go wrong. They don't want to believe God when he said he would preserve his Word. So, they spend their entire lifetime studying books and the original languages.
2 Tim 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
You know, there have been folks that go on expeditions to find Noah's ark. I will admit, I take a great interest in this type thing. And from time to time there are discoveries that prove the scriptures were always accurate and true. But truth is, God is far more pleased if we simply believe and trust him.
Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
When you believe God it pleases him. When you do not believe God, it is the same as calling him a liar, not a wise thing to do.
1 John 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
This verse speaks of "the record" that God gave of his Son. What record is that? Why, it is the scriptures of course.
I am not calling anybody here an unbeliever. All I am saying is that God has placed some things outside our knowledge and we must simply take his word for it. There is no absolute way to determine how God preserved his Word, but he promised to do so.
But you can't go around saying all these very different versions are full of mistakes and are preserved at the same time, that is an illogical impossibility.
The fact that their are no fanatics supports their position.
The fact that there are SO Many fanatics for the KJVO position is a detriment to it.
I recall some kool-aid drinkers a while back who were fanatics too.
A senseless argument in like fashion might work this way- "How come no baptist folks have any leaders they are willing to die for. At least the Jim Jones followers are bold enough to stand for what they believe in!"
That's the same logic as saying, "How come no MVs will declare that ONLY their Bible is the Word of God?"
The answer is because they are smarter than that- smarter than KJVO's by and large.
It is not an intelligent position to say the only version in the English language which is the perfect word of God is yours.
Only KJVO's think that.
BTW, the King James is still my favorite version by far and I only preach out of it.
But I also like the ESV and the NKJV.
What a ridiculous and dishonest comparison. Awhile back someone said Jim Jones was KJVO and I posted a link for an audio where Jim Jones was ridiculing the KJB and saying it was full of errors.
He agreed with you, not me.
Lots of Baptists have given their lives for their leader Jesus Christ.
http://www.worldvision.org/worldvis...27A8EB78B31DC5D988256E6A007513C2?OpenDocument
Oh I see, you MVs are smarter by and large than KJBs.
You sound like guys who beat their wives and then claim they love them.
Winman:No, I firmly believe the KJB is the perfect and preserved Word of God in English.
Butcha can't even BEGIN to PROVE it.
I don't know the exact texts the KJB translators used and don't care, you see I believe God preserved his Word as he said. I don't need to understand exactly how he did this.
I believe the SAME THING, only I DON'T tryta LIMIT GOD as the KJVOs do.
But why is there not one (at least I've never heard or met one) MV that will take a bold stand for a particular MV? I mean, it is totally ridiculous, not one.
With all due respect, Winman, that Q has been answered by myself & several others. Repeatedly asking it is NOT gonna make anyone change their answers. If they're NOT the answers ya wanted to hear, that's just tuff. I am NOT gonna commit to a doctrine of worship NOT FOUND IN SCRIPTURE, & neither is anyone else who's answered thusly! You can ask the same Q 1000 times & you're gonna get the same answers 1000 times till this thread is closed!
You dismiss this so easily, when it should be saying so much to you. Literally millions of Christians will take a firm stand for the KJB.
I doubt if it's millions, & if they're doing it for the WRONG REASON(S), then wrong is WRONG, no matter what "flavor".
OF COURSE we dismiss it! It's an extrascriptural addition to the total body of worship.
Do you believe us KJB onlies a cult of hypnotized zombies?
"Hypnotized", no, but misguided, deceived & incorrect, YES.
Do you believe thousands of great and learned preachers and scholars all totally deceived?
Well, not TOTALLY deceived, but misguided and wrong about Bible versions, YES.
Winman, you asked a Q & several of us have answered it. Now, willya please answer mine?
Q:"You KNOW there's NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for KJVO. As a Christian, BY WHAT AUTHORITY do ya believe it, seeing as it's NOT FROM GOD?"
Butcha can't even BEGIN to PROVE it.
I don't know the exact texts the KJB translators used and don't care, you see I believe God preserved his Word as he said. I don't need to understand exactly how he did this.
I believe the SAME THING, only I DON'T tryta LIMIT GOD as the KJVOs do.
But why is there not one (at least I've never heard or met one) MV that will take a bold stand for a particular MV? I mean, it is totally ridiculous, not one.
With all due respect, Winman, that Q has been answered by myself & several others. Repeatedly asking it is NOT gonna make anyone change their answers. If they're NOT the answers ya wanted to hear, that's just tuff. I am NOT gonna commit to a doctrine of worship NOT FOUND IN SCRIPTURE, & neither is anyone else who's answered thusly! You can ask the same Q 1000 times & you're gonna get the same answers 1000 times till this thread is closed!
You dismiss this so easily, when it should be saying so much to you. Literally millions of Christians will take a firm stand for the KJB.
I doubt if it's millions, & if they're doing it for the WRONG REASON(S), then wrong is WRONG, no matter what "flavor".
OF COURSE we dismiss it! It's an extrascriptural addition to the total body of worship.
Do you believe us KJB onlies a cult of hypnotized zombies?
"Hypnotized", no, but misguided, deceived & incorrect, YES.
Do you believe thousands of great and learned preachers and scholars all totally deceived?
Well, not TOTALLY deceived, but misguided and wrong about Bible versions, YES.
Winman, you asked a Q & several of us have answered it. Now, willya please answer mine?
Q:"You KNOW there's NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for KJVO. As a Christian, BY WHAT AUTHORITY do ya believe it, seeing as it's NOT FROM GOD?"
Winman:Notice the word I highlighted and underlined? Believe. You are a scholar, look it up in your concordance, it is a Bible word, very important one at that.
Actually, I'm NOT a scholar; I'm a steelworker with only a HS ed + a few tech schools. But it takes no rocket science to see you're confusing "believe" with "guess".
Actually, I'm NOT a scholar; I'm a steelworker with only a HS ed + a few tech schools. But it takes no rocket science to see you're confusing "believe" with "guess".
You misunderstood the illustration. I was not saying that KJVO's are like Jim Jones. I was pointing out the flaw I perceived in your logic.
Your logic seems to work like this: the fact that there are many KJVO's who believe their Bible is the only Word of God in English is support for their position.
I was arguing that it is not support. It is actually a detriment to their position as fanaticism usually is.
As an illustration of fanaticism being a detriment to one's position I chose the Jones analogy. I could have chosen the fans of the Crimson Tide for that matter. But I would not have been saying that all KJVO's are Tide Fans.
You missed the point of the illustration. You made an unnecessary link between the two.
I do stand by the position that the KJVO is not an intelligent position and that the leaders of MVs tend to be far more thoughtful and even educated.
So are your KJV's if you have multiple editions.
Statements like this is why it is rarely profitable to discuss the matter. You're not capable of debate without personal attacks. Sad.
This is huge. In my opinion it may be the most important issue of out day. It goes back to Sola Scriptura.
There has developed over the past century a dangerous doctrine among protestant and Baptist folks. It is that we can develop doctrines apart from the Word of God.
This is the crux of the issue in the music thread, and this one.
The problem is not that they believe that the KJV is the only version. The problem is much deeper. It is that they believe it without a single scripture to support it.
The problem is that we can believe things as doctrine in spite of their absence from God's Word.
With all due respect, Winman, I believe your Q has been answered.
And you CANNOT "win" any pro-KJVO argument becausa the FACT that KJVO is entirely MAN-MADE, without one scintilla of SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT. For that matter, there's NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for ANY committment to any one translation or text. This FACT dooms any & all pro-KJVO arguments before they're born.
As I asked earlier, I'd liketa know BY WHAT AUTHORITY you're committed to KJVO, knowing it's NOT FROM GOD.
And you CANNOT "win" any pro-KJVO argument becausa the FACT that KJVO is entirely MAN-MADE, without one scintilla of SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT. For that matter, there's NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for ANY committment to any one translation or text. This FACT dooms any & all pro-KJVO arguments before they're born.
As I asked earlier, I'd liketa know BY WHAT AUTHORITY you're committed to KJVO, knowing it's NOT FROM GOD.
Robycop, do you even understand what faith is? Faith is never something you can prove.
Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
What is the deal with the "gansta" talk you have going here and when you said "butcha" earlier? You will appear far more intelligent if you use proper English. I know you are intelligent, but you are not helping your cause with language like this.
I don't worship my Bible, it is ink on paper. But I do worship the God who said he would preserve his Word to all generations, who said heaven and earth would pass away, but his words would never pass away.
If we are wrong, we are wrong. It is not unscriptural however at all. God said he would preserve his Word, we believe it, and believe in the English language he preserved it in the KJB. There is the remote possibility we are wrong, I have always said that. We believe by faith, not scholarly proof. But if the KJB is not the preserved Word of God in English, then which version is?
And that is a question that has never been answered by any MV except to give the false argument that all versions are the preserved Word of God.
There is no verse in the Bible saying that God would preserve his Word in the English language in a version called the King James Bible.
But God did say he would preserve his word to all generations. So it is very scriptural to believe that God's true and preserved Word is in the world. No version is identified, so we must seek to identify it on our own. We have the witness of early church fathers whose writings agree with the RT but do not agree with the CT texts. We have very early scriptures in other languages that agree with the RT but do not agree with the CT.
We also have the witness of those who followed the CT versus the RT. What came out of the CT? The Roman Catholic Church and their suppression for nearly 1000 years, their murder of hundreds of thousands if not millions of true Christians, their complete corruption. It was not called the Dark Ages without reason.
What fruit did the RT produce? It brought about the Reformation and the breaking away from the slavery of the RCC for millions. The common man now had the scriptures he could hold in his own hands and study, and not be dependent upon the corrupt RCC church. We have worldwide evangelism where the gospel was taken and preached on every continent and in all nations.
Matt 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
I actually agree with you that God has blessed the Majority Text and the TR.
God also blessed the preaching of an ass. But that doesn't mean the only preachers have to be donkeys.
And I do agree with you that God promised he would preserve his Word- but how you go from that to demanding that it is only the KJV- which even the KJV translators did not believe- I cannot understand.
I don't demand that only the KJB is God's preserved Word in English, I believe it by faith and millions of other Christians boldly proclaim the same.
If the KJB is not the preserved Word of God in English, then which version is? Why do I have to ask this over and over again?
And none of you MVs will EVER commit to a single MV version. I mean, that is remarkable to say the least. You would think there would be a few nut cases out there that would claim only the NIV was the preserved version in English, or the ESV, or another version.
The Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons have more conviction than MVs. I believe they are in error, but at least they take a stand.
But because KJBs take a firm stand does not prove we are in error like the JW or Mormon's. We could be correct, and I believe we are.
Won't one of you go out on a limb and say your version is the only preserved scriptures in English? Come on, do it just to spite me.
- Status