Will Kinney:Pastor Reagan rightly says: "We need to establish one thing from the out-set. The authority for our preserved English text is not found in any human work. The authority for our preserved and infallible English text is in God! Printers may foul up at times and humans will still make plenty of errors, but God in His power and mercy will preserve His text despite the weaknesses of fallible man."
Then why doesn't Reagan practice what he preaches? Why does he tell only half-truths? He cannot prove God is limited to only the KJV in English any more than you can.
My belief is that God has kept His promises to preserve His inerrant words, and He has already providentially guided certain chosen men through this same "scholarly process" to select both the correct texts and the correct meaning for those texts. Afterall, only God really knows which readings are His and which are not.
Then why does the KJVO try to tell us which are God's readings and which are not? He/she has NO Scriptural support for any such "scholarship". Indeed, the KJVO does what he/she accuses non-Onlyists of doing-PICKING AND CHOOSING. But then this exhibition of yet another double standard by the KJVOs doesn't surprise me.
The KJB believer first looks to God and His promises to preserve His words, and believes that God has done what He said He would do.
Same as we KJV believers who aren't limited by the false doctrine, originated by a 7th day Adventist, to JUST the KJV.
The "No Bible is Inspired" group, or the biblical relativist, seems to think that he and his buddies are capable "restoring" what God never lost, and denies that God has already preserved His words in the King James Bible, or any other bible.
Actually, your view here is quite wrong. We believe that GOD IS NOT LIMITED, and that He can-and DOES-provide His word for us AS HE CHOOSES. It's the ONLYIST who says, "God couldn't POSSIBLY have done it this way", while the BIBLE says, "With God, all things are possible."
This is the fundamental difference in our approach to the doctines of inspiration and preservation. We KJB believers are convinced God has done what He said He would do.
So are we who believe the KJV as well as other versions. The REAL fundamental difference is that the Onlyist rejects all other valid versions of God's word because of their belief in a totally-false doctrine made by men, lacking even the most basic Scriptural support. The Onlyist has no foundation for his/her doctrine.
The Bible of the Month Club member thinks it is still an ongoing process and his results are getting more scattered and divergent as time goes by.
If the process weren't ongoing, we'd have no English Bible translations at all. After all, English didn't exist when God finished presenting His words to mankind, so it HAD to be ongoing for these words to be translated into the English of the day. The Onlyist seeks to prevent God from doing what He's been doung for 2000 years.
The Nestle-Aland, UBS Greek texts, upon which most modern versions are based, continue to change every few years, and the modern versions have introduced hundreds of variations into the Old Testament Scriptures. They often reject the Hebrew readings in favor of the alleged pre-Christian Septuagint, Syriac, Samaritan Pentateuch, or Vulgate texts. Just look at the differences between the KJB, NASB, and the ESV in this regard.
But all we have is guesswork and opinion to tell us which is correct or which is wrong. The evidence is heavily against the Onlyist's guesswork.
The King James Bible believer is convinced he has the inerrant words of God and enjoys maximum certainty and rest in the fulfilled promises of Almighty God. = "Thus saith the LORD".
And so are WE-without the baggage of trying to LIMIT GOD.
Then why doesn't Reagan practice what he preaches? Why does he tell only half-truths? He cannot prove God is limited to only the KJV in English any more than you can.
My belief is that God has kept His promises to preserve His inerrant words, and He has already providentially guided certain chosen men through this same "scholarly process" to select both the correct texts and the correct meaning for those texts. Afterall, only God really knows which readings are His and which are not.
Then why does the KJVO try to tell us which are God's readings and which are not? He/she has NO Scriptural support for any such "scholarship". Indeed, the KJVO does what he/she accuses non-Onlyists of doing-PICKING AND CHOOSING. But then this exhibition of yet another double standard by the KJVOs doesn't surprise me.
The KJB believer first looks to God and His promises to preserve His words, and believes that God has done what He said He would do.
Same as we KJV believers who aren't limited by the false doctrine, originated by a 7th day Adventist, to JUST the KJV.
The "No Bible is Inspired" group, or the biblical relativist, seems to think that he and his buddies are capable "restoring" what God never lost, and denies that God has already preserved His words in the King James Bible, or any other bible.
Actually, your view here is quite wrong. We believe that GOD IS NOT LIMITED, and that He can-and DOES-provide His word for us AS HE CHOOSES. It's the ONLYIST who says, "God couldn't POSSIBLY have done it this way", while the BIBLE says, "With God, all things are possible."
This is the fundamental difference in our approach to the doctines of inspiration and preservation. We KJB believers are convinced God has done what He said He would do.
So are we who believe the KJV as well as other versions. The REAL fundamental difference is that the Onlyist rejects all other valid versions of God's word because of their belief in a totally-false doctrine made by men, lacking even the most basic Scriptural support. The Onlyist has no foundation for his/her doctrine.
The Bible of the Month Club member thinks it is still an ongoing process and his results are getting more scattered and divergent as time goes by.
If the process weren't ongoing, we'd have no English Bible translations at all. After all, English didn't exist when God finished presenting His words to mankind, so it HAD to be ongoing for these words to be translated into the English of the day. The Onlyist seeks to prevent God from doing what He's been doung for 2000 years.
The Nestle-Aland, UBS Greek texts, upon which most modern versions are based, continue to change every few years, and the modern versions have introduced hundreds of variations into the Old Testament Scriptures. They often reject the Hebrew readings in favor of the alleged pre-Christian Septuagint, Syriac, Samaritan Pentateuch, or Vulgate texts. Just look at the differences between the KJB, NASB, and the ESV in this regard.
But all we have is guesswork and opinion to tell us which is correct or which is wrong. The evidence is heavily against the Onlyist's guesswork.
The King James Bible believer is convinced he has the inerrant words of God and enjoys maximum certainty and rest in the fulfilled promises of Almighty God. = "Thus saith the LORD".
And so are WE-without the baggage of trying to LIMIT GOD.
