The ONE QUESTION whose correct answer proves the KJVO myth false...

[robycop3]

    The ONE QUESTION KJVOs don't DARE answer correctly is:

BY WHAT AUTHORITY  do you believe the KJVO myth?

  It's not found in Scripture, not even in the KJV itself. And every Christian knows that all TRUE doctrines of faith/worship are found in Scripture, either directly, or by clear implication, as the doctrine of the Holy Trinity is.

  The CORRECT answer to the question above is:

BY THE AUTHORITY OF OTHER MEN.

  That, of course, means the KJVO myth is FALSE. Without any SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT, it cannot be true, simple as THAT!

  Some KJVOs stupidly say,"It's supported by Psalm 12:6-7." REALLY, now?  Just WHERE do those verses mention KJVO? And for THAT matter, where does ANY Scripture mention KJVO? Truth is, IT DOESN'T ! !

  So, O KJVOs, by believing the KJVO myth, you're placing the authority of OTHER MEN  over the authority of GOD'S WORD, adding man-made hooey  to the precepts of GOD!


**THE KJVO MYTH - PHONY AS A FORD CORVETTE !**

 

[Twisted]

    The ONE QUESTION KJVOs don't DARE answer correctly is:

BY WHAT AUTHORITY  do you believe the KJVO myth?

  It's not found in Scripture, not even in the KJV itself. And every Christian knows that all TRUE doctrines of faith/worship are found in Scripture, either directly, or by clear implication, as the doctrine of the Holy Trinity is.

  The CORRECT answer to the question above is:

BY THE AUTHORITY OF OTHER MEN.

  That, of course, means the KJVO myth is FALSE. Without any SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT, it cannot be true, simple as THAT!

  Some KJVOs stupidly say,"It's supported by Psalm 12:6-7." REALLY, now?  Just WHERE do those verses mention KJVO? And for THAT matter, where does ANY Scripture mention KJVO? Truth is, IT DOESN'T ! !

  So, O KJVOs, by believing the KJVO myth, you're placing the authority of OTHER MEN  over the authority of GOD'S WORD, adding man-made hooey  to the precepts of GOD!


**THE KJVO MYTH - PHONY AS A FORD CORVETTE !**

And it's THE AUTHORITY OF OTHER MEN that's telling you it's wrong to be KJVO.

 

[FSSL]

Roby! Welcome!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[robycop3]

And it's THE AUTHORITY OF OTHER MEN that's telling you it's wrong to be KJVO.

  On the contrary, Sir...

    MY authority is GOD'S WORD ITSELF, where God says, "Do not add to nor subtract from My commands."

  The KJVO has the burden of proof to JUSTIFY believing the KJVO myth, let alone telling it to others!

  So, what's YOUR justification for it, Sir ?

 

[robycop3]

Roby! Welcome!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  Thank you, Sir!

 

[Twisted]

  So, what's YOUR justification for it, Sir ? 

My granny said it was God's word and until I see in the Bible that it's not, I'll just keep believing that it is.

 

[robycop3]

  So, what's YOUR justification for it, Sir ? 

My granny said it was God's word and until I see in the Bible that it's not, I'll just keep believing that it is.

  Well, so are quite a few other English Bible translations, and neither you nor anyone else can prove differently.

  But the KJVO myth is entirely man-made, its current edition has a cultic, dishonest origin, & has no authority from God for anyone to believe it.

 

[Twisted]

  So, what's YOUR justification for it, Sir ? 

My granny said it was God's word and until I see in the Bible that it's not, I'll just keep believing that it is.

  Well, so are quite a few other English Bible translations, and neither you nor anyone else can prove differently.

  But the KJVO myth is entirely man-made, its current edition has a cultic, dishonest origin, & has no authority from God for anyone to believe it.

Well, thank you for enlightening us all.  Your attitude and spirit draw us all closer to Jesus.

 

[robycop3]

  I hope so. The KJVO myth drives people AWAY from Jesus, by casting doubt upon His word.

 

[logos1560]

And it's THE AUTHORITY OF OTHER MEN that's telling you it's wrong to be KJVO.

It is the authority of actual scriptural truths applied justly that would tell believers that human KJV-only reasoning is wrong.

KJV-only advocates have not proven their human opinions or claims concerning the KJV to be acceptable to the Lord and to be taught in the Scriptures.

Eph. 5:10
Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.

 

[robycop3]

Roby! Welcome!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  No, actually, 'tis the LACK OF AUTHORITY for KJVO in the KJV itself that tells me it's wrong - not to mention the goofs in the doctrine itself.

 

[illinoisguy]

The introduction to the original 1611 edition of the King James Version refutes "King James Only."  The translators said, "Therefore as St. Augustine saith, that variety of translation is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures, so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is not so clear, must needs do good, yea, it is necessary, as we are persuaded. . . . They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other."  I have the original 1611 KJV - it has 6637 marginal notes (alternative readings) in the Old Testament and 765 marginal notes in the New Testament.  The KJV translators, the greatest scholars of their time, were not KJV only - so I am not KJV only either (or should I say neither).

 

[robycop3]

  God has promised to preserve His word for all generations, and He's done exactly THAT! He caused the KJV to be made for the British of 400 years ago, same as He's caused the NASV, NKJV, etc. to be made for current English users. KJVOs try to LIMIT GOD by denying that modern BVs are His word, & that He caused them to be made.

  Yes, I realize there are bogus versions out there, but that's nothing new. Seems the AV makers were aware of some in their time as well.

 

[Walt]

BY WHAT AUTHORITY  do you believe the KJVO myth?

Welcome.

Please define terms: what do you mean by the KJVO "myth"? There is the Bob Gray/Gail Riplinger teaching that says to to use concordances, and to avoid commentaries, and that the KJV was (effectively) written by God. These people oppose learning Greek and Hebrew and denies that there is a language in which God gave the original Scriptures.  (I wouldn't waste my breath trying to defend such)

But there is another school that believes that the so-called critical text that underlies most modern versions is corrupt and a product of apostate critics, and thus they only use the KJV, as one based upon the common text in use down through the centuries.

 

[Ransom]

Well, they're both myths.

 

[robycop3]

Well, they're both myths.

  The KJVO myth is the false doctrine that the KJV is the only valid English Bible translation out there. It's a myth because it's an invention of man's, and is false. And it's false because there are quite a few other English Bible translations available, old and new, that are just-as-valid & legitimate as the KJV is.

Hope that answers your question.

 

[robycop3]

  Still, NO REPLY from any KJVO disputing the fact of no Scriptural support for the KJVO myth!

  C'mon, KJVOs! Surely, you erudite scholars can prove me wrong! I'm just a custodial engineer in a steel mill (Albeit at about $1K a week-UNION JOB !) Ihave no education beyond high school & a coupla tech schools. Surely you can show us something from GOD'S WORD supporting the KJVO myth that lil' ol' unedjikated me overlooked !

 

[logos1560]

Please define terms:

Do you practice what you preach and define all your terms clearly and apply them consistently and justly?

Do you define your terms such as "corrupt" and "apostate"?

 

[logos1560]

But there is another school that believes that the so-called critical text that underlies most modern versions is corrupt and a product of apostate critics, and thus they only use the KJV, as one based upon the common text in use down through the centuries.

Because they believe something is not proof that what they believe is sound, true, or scriptural.

Does this school close their minds and eyes to a number of actual facts such as the fact that Erasmus and Beza introduced some textual conjectures into their edited Greek NT text editions that have not been proven to be part of any common Greek NT text in use down through the centuries?

 

[benw31]

I have been attended Independent Fundamental Baptist churches since I was a toddler. I personally only use the KJV. However, I have never been able to grasp why those who hold to that conviction can not just admit that it is their opinion period. Some seem so dogmatically determined to assert as fact that the KJV is the preserved word of God for the English speaking people. Here is a response I gave to one such person on another forum recently after he insisted the KJV was proven by history, education, and scripture to be the preserved Word.


Historically speaking there have been many periods where people did not have access to a full copy of the Word of God. There are even many people groups in the world today that have no copy of the Word of God in their language. So, historically I can not see that we are made any such guarantee. Why would God be obligated to make something available to us that is, and has been unavailable to so many others?

Scripturally we are given a nugget of hope.

Psalm 12:6-7 KJVS
"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. [7] Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

However, how are we to know the KJV is that preservation. How do we know it is not an earlier predecessor such as the Tyndale Bible that was that preservation? The King James Bible itself has gone through several revisions making minor translation changes and correcting printing errors according to Thomas Nelson Bibles. So, how do we know which revision is the preserved word? Is it 1611, 1629, 1638, 1760, or 1769? 

Of course the KJV is superior to the modern translations because the modern translations are based on erroneous documents that contradict themselves multiple times,  (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus).

Regarding whether the KJV is the perfect preserved Word of God, I have studied much historical, educational, and scriptural material regarding this matter. I have not come to the conclusion that it can be evidentially proven to be so. However, it is my opinion that the KJV is the preserved Word of God. You say that a fact can not be an opinion and that is so. But it can be my opinion as whether a fact is true or not since I don't posses the actual evidence wherewith to prove it true.

This is similar to the concept of faith. Whatever is true remains true whether I believe it or not.  When referencing the preservation of the KJV and I say it is my opinion that it is the preserved Word. I am expressing an abstract belief in my heart of a fact that I cannot evidentially prove.

Sent from my REVVL 2 PLUS using Tapatalk