Is the label "KJVO" an insult?

You forgot modernist!
 
bibleprotector said:
Appealing to subjective, relativistic and prejudicially non-traditional/non-common benchmarks cannot stand as an argument against actual Biblically-derived and self-authenticating standards.
Click to expand...

This has been our argument against Bibleprotector. So far he has not provided objectivity.

Turning our arguments around to us NOTHING to establish your position. It is silliness because none of us are making the same claims you make.

Your use of the word "objectively" cannot be accepted in this discussion, as your view is highly prejudicial against what is commonly (including potentially ignorantly) accepted as the "norm" in KJB editions.
Click to expand...
You reject Burgon Society's claim that the 1769 Oxford is the standard. Why?
 
rsc2a said:
After reading the arguments from BP, BB, Avery, binacachugger and others,  I'm convinced...

...Latin Vulgate only is the proper Christian position for Bible believers.
Click to expand...

Of course it was the Bible of the Western Church for more than a thousand years.

King James can't touch that.

The big one is that Latin is more precise than English and is better fitted to hold the Words of God in their purity.

English is ever changing, it's evolution would seem to be on course to continue shifting and morphing in perpetuity.
:)
 
bibleprotector said:
Alignment to truth is. And your side does not have Biblical doctrines in its approach to textual, translational, editorial and interpretative issues.
Click to expand...

5 years ago I asked if you did any exegetical work on Psalm 12. You didn't. Have you yet?

Well, do you accept that James White is right to specifically reference the "1769 Cambridge Edition"?
Click to expand...

I don't remember him making claims that the Cambridge is the one we are supposed to use.

Fact is.... your movement is splintered.  You cannot even agree on the "standard KJV edition."

 
bibleprotector said:
Appealing to subjective, relativistic and prejudicially non-traditional/non-common benchmarks cannot stand as an argument against actual Biblically-derived and self-authenticating standards.
Click to expand...

It is a modern, man-made KJV-only theory that appeals to inconsistent, subjective, relativistic, and non-scriptural benchmarks and that opposes actual sound Biblically-derived truths and use of consistent, just measures.

Claimed tradition or KJV-only attempts to rewrite history cannot stand against what the Scriptures actually teach.

The fallible translation decisions of one exclusive group of imperfect Church of England priests/scholars [critics of the pre-1611 English Bibles] in 1611 and inconsistent, imperfect editing decisions of later KJV editors are not "self-authenticating standards."

 
FSSL said:
You reject Burgon Society's claim that the 1769 Oxford is the standard. Why?
Click to expand...

He likely knows that not one of the KJV editions in print today match 100% with the English text of the 1769 Oxford edition.  As many as 400 changes have been made to the English text of the 1769 Oxford edition in present KJV editions.

    Besides the over 100 differences involving LORD/Lord and GOD/God and over 200 differences in other matters such as spelling, use of hyphens, dividing or combining of words, some places were the 1769 Oxford would differ from most present editions include the following Old Testament examples:  “Heman” (Gen. 36:22), “thy progenitors” (Gen. 49:26), “Zithri” (Exod. 6:21), “travel’ (Num. 20:14), “brakedst” (Deut. 10:2), “thy tithe“ (Deut. 12:17), “thy earth” (Deut. 12:19), “the widow’s” (Deut. 24:17), “Beer-sheba, Sheba” (Josh. 19:2), “children of Gilead” (Jud. 11:7), “all the coast” (Jud. 19:29), “in a straight“ (1 Sam. 13:6), “Shimei“ (1 Chron. 6:30), “whom God alone” (1 Chron. 29:1), “on the pillars” (2 Chron. 4:12), “thy companions’ (Job 41:6), “unto me“ (Ps. 18:47), “my foot” (Ps. 31:8 ), “feared” (Ps. 60:4), “in the presence” (Ps. 68:2), “part“ (Ps. 78:66), “When there were” (Ps. 105:12), “gates of iron” (Ps. 107:16), “the latter end” (Prov. 19:20), “riches, honour” (Prov. 22:4), “king of Jerusalem” (Eccl. 1:1), “gone to” (Isa. 15:2), “travel‘ (Lam. 3:5), “a brier” (Micah 7:4), and “mighty is spoiled” (Zech. 11:2).  In the New Testament, examples include “And in the same” (Luke 7:21), “ye enter not” (Luke 11:52), “lifted“ (Luke 16:23), “and the truth” (John 14:6), “Now if do” (Rom. 7:20), “not in unbelief” (Rom. 11:23), “the earth” (1 Cor. 4:13), “was done“ (2 Cor. 3:11), “about” (2 Cor. 12:2), “you were inferior” (2 Cor. 12:13), “those who” (Gal. 2:6), “the holy apostles” (Eph. 3:5), “broidered” (1 Tim. 2:9), “sprinkled likewise” (Heb. 9:21), “our joy” (1 John 1:4), and several missing words at Revelation 18:22.

There are actually around 90 places where the 1769 Oxford edition has "LORD" where most present KJV editions [besides The Companion Bible and perhaps a few others] have "Lord": [Gen. 18:27, Gen. 18:30, Gen. 18:31, Gen. 18:32, Gen. 20:4, Exod. 15:17, Exod. 34:9, Num. 14:17, Josh. 3:11, Jud. 13:8, 1 Kings 3:10, 1 Kings 22:6, 2 Kings 7:6, 2 Kings 19:23, Neh. 1:11, Neh. 4:14, Neh. 8:10, Job 28:28, Ps. 2:4, Ps. 22:30, Ps. 35:17, Ps. 35:22, Ps. 37:13, Ps. 38:9, Ps. 38:15, Ps. 38:22, Ps. 39:7, Ps. 40:17, Ps. 44:23, Ps. 51:15, Ps. 54:4, Ps. 55:9, Ps. 57:9, Ps. 59:11, Ps. 62:12, Ps. 66:18, Ps. 68:11, Ps. 68:17, Ps. 68:19, Ps. 68:22, Ps. 68:32, Ps. 77:2, Ps. 77:7, Ps. 78:65, Ps. 79:12, Ps. 86:3, Ps. 86:4, Ps. 86:5, Ps. 86:8, Ps. 86:9, Ps. 86:12, Ps. 86:15, Ps. 89:49, Ps. 89:50, Ps. 97:5, Ps. 110:5, Ps. 114:7, Ps. 130:2, Ps. 130:3, Ps. 130:6, Ps. 135:5, Ps. 136:3, Ps. 140:7, Ps. 141:8, Ps. 147:5, Isa. 3:17, Isa. 3:18, Isa. 4:4, Isa. 9:8, Isa. 9:17, Isa. 11:11, Isa. 21:6, Isa. 21:16, Lam. 1:14, Lam. 1:15, Lam. 2:1, Lam. 2:5, Lam. 2:7, Lam. 2:20, Lam. 3:31, Lam. 3:36, Lam. 3:37, Lam. 3:58, Ezek. 18:25, Ezek. 18:29, Zech. 4:14, Zech. 6:5, Zech. 9:4, Mal. 1:14, Mal. 3:1].  At three verses, the 1769 Oxford has “Lord” where present KJV editions have “LORD” [Gen. 30:30, Deut. 29:23, Jer. 7:4].  The 1769 Oxford has “LORD God” where most present KJV editions have “Lord GOD” at some verses [Exod. 23:17, Exod. 34:23, 2 Sam. 7:18, 2 Sam. 7:19, 2 Sam. 7:20, 2 Sam. 7:28, Isa. 56:8].  At Daniel 9:3, the 1769 Oxford has “Lord GOD” instead of “Lord God” that is in most present KJV editions.  The 1769 Oxford has “Lord God” at five verses where present KJV editions have “Lord GOD” [Jud. 6:22, Isa. 3:15, Isa. 61:1, Ezek. 16:23, Ezek. 45:9].  The 1769 Oxford has “LORD GOD” at one verse [Amos 6:8].  The 1769 Oxford still has “God” at 2 Samuel 12:22 instead of “GOD.”

 
FSSL said:
5 years ago I asked if you did any exegetical work on Psalm 12. You didn't. Have you yet?
Click to expand...

I have addressed your entire thesis of what you term exegesis itself. I have written extensively on the subject.

My view is that the entire of Psalm 12 is a prophecy about these days. These teachings are available on my website.
 
bibleprotector said:
FSSL said:
5 years ago I asked if you did any exegetical work on Psalm 12. You didn't. Have you yet?
Click to expand...

I have addressed your entire thesis of what you term exegesis itself. I have written extensively on the subject.

My view is that the entire of Psalm 12 is a prophecy about these days. These teachings are available on my website.
Click to expand...

There you go again trying to generate hits for your web site.
 
bibleprotector said:
FSSL said:
5 years ago I asked if you did any exegetical work on Psalm 12. You didn't. Have you yet?
Click to expand...

I have addressed your entire thesis of what you term exegesis itself. I have written extensively on the subject.

My view is that the entire of Psalm 12 is a prophecy about these days. These teachings are available on my website.
Click to expand...
Then please provide us a link to your best singular exegetical position.
 
bibleprotector said:
FSSL said:
5 years ago I asked if you did any exegetical work on Psalm 12. You didn't. Have you yet?
Click to expand...

I have addressed your entire thesis of what you term exegesis itself. I have written extensively on the subject.

My view is that the entire of Psalm 12 is a prophecy about these days. These teachings are available on my website.
Click to expand...

So . . . that'd be a "no," then.
 
Ransom said:
So . . . that'd be a "no," then.
Click to expand...

Correct.

After asking him for his best singular source of exegesis on Psalm 12... he once again leads us down a rabbits hole.

I find nothing in his document.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top