The Error of KJV-Onlyism

[NightTwister]

All of them were perfect. But one was more Perfect in the sense of being matured or having come to full fruition.

Some of them are more equal than others.

 

[fredoheaven]

This is not according to Jamaisson, Faucet, and Brown “logos” rendered here as “the word” is a literal meaning. So, from the standpoint of formal equivalence, I believe KJB is accurate in the passage being discussed. There is no dispute that logos literal meaning is “word” in many cases of both modern English Bible and KJB. Not only the translation is supported by the Greek grammar rule which may be dependent on the context. The scripture speaks of parallelism as well or line upon line (Isa. 28:10, 13) or as Paul stated “comparing spiritual things with spiritual (1 Cor. 2:13), thus for 1 Cor. 1:18 would correspond to Paul’s in 1 Cor: 1:23. If it is used literally, the question is what is the word of the cross? Did the cross speak literally? And so on and so forth.

1 Corinthians 1:18

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

! Corinthians 1:23
But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

Jamaisson, Faucet, and Brown Taken from E-Sword

preaching, etc. — literally, “the word,”

This is not according to Jamaisson, Faucet, and Brown for “logos” rendered here as “the word” is literal in meaning. Yep, this is a correction to what I mean. That's my bad. lol!

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Some of them are more equal than others.

See my point with Scripture here.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Your adeherence to the stupid ignorant doctrine of KJV-onlyism combined with your own propensities leads you to accuse others without any basis.

The Bible does not teach anything about preserving doctrine in the KJV. That is just dumb. The Bible was written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. When you read the KJV, you are reading a translation of what these texts say.



Straw man. I pointed out how the KJV rendered a passage in a way that did not align with the Lord Jesus' interpretation, but rather aligned with that of the Pharisees who were testing him. How is that an issue of 'textual criticsm'?

One time in the Bible we see the questioning of God’s Words is with the serpent. The serpent got Eve to question God’s words. “Yea, hath God said….?” So if questioning the Bible like Textual Critics do is considered normal and good to try and find His perfect words someday (that you will never have), then why don’t we see good examples of this? But we don’t. What we have is the serpent as an example of questioning God’s words. So questioning God’s words is bad according to the Bible. Yet, this is at the very heart of Textual Criticism. One is constantly questioning and criticizing the text. How on Earth you can just put your head in the sand on this point is beyond me.

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

In other words, the Bible is God’s work, and it is perfect like He is (Also see: Galatians 3:8 and Romans 9:17).

And Exactly Why we place His Perfect Word Where "He Magnifies It":

"I will worship toward Thy holy temple, and praise Thy Name for Thy ​

Lovingkindness and for Thy Truth: for Thou Hast Magnified Thy Word ​

Above All Thy Name." (Psalm 138:2)​

​

Part and parcel of our perfect worship of Him, eh?

Amen.

 

[NightTwister]

There is an important piece of information that you must understand when it comes to biblical inspiration. It was the WORDS that were inspired, not the men! God worked through men by His Holy Spirit with the result of the WORDS being inspired. The words are what God breathed life into, not the men. The words of God are living!

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

It's both. God inspired those men to write down those words.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

And Exactly Why we place His Perfect Word Where "He Magnifies It":

"I will worship toward Thy holy temple, and praise Thy Name for Thy ​

Lovingkindness and for Thy Truth: for Thou Hast Magnified Thy Word ​

Above All Thy Name." (Psalm 138:2)​

​

Part and parcel of our perfect worship of Him, eh?

Amen.

Modern Bibles alter even this verse.

 

[Mem]

Used as an literary adjective, such as of water, 'living' means 'perennially flowing' ; i.e. streams of living water.

 

[NightTwister]

A homonym is a word that looks and sounds the same but they have different meanings.

They can also look different and have different meanings, e.g.
Two too to
Their there

 

[NightTwister]

See my point with Scripture here.

No. If there is any difference, they cannot all be "perfect." Words have meaning. You've defeated your entire argument on you own. The rest of this is just trolling as all you do is continually repeat yourself.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Jesus said His words are spirit, and they are life.
Jesus said Heaven and Earth shall pass away but my words will not pass away.
But Modern Bibles remove certain words of Jesus.

 

[NightTwister]

Modern Bibles alter even this verse.

Circular reading fallacy. It's really all you have.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

They can also look different and have different meanings, e.g.
Two too to
Their there

A true example of a homonym:

The bark of the dog echoed up the tree at the squirrel who was hanging on the bark of the tree at the top near the branches.

So the word “bark” in this sentence is a homonym.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Circular reading fallacy. It's really all you have.

But I got motive. Your side accuses us falsely that we worship the KJB (all because we believe the Bible is perfect).
Modern Bibles conveniently downgrade the importance of how God views His Word so we cannot quote this verse back to them with them even regarding this verse. Their Bible has demoted the importance of God’s Word which conveniently fits their viewpoint of the word.

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

we need to dig in to the original greek and hebrew because

Where, In Scripture, does It say I have to be a "foreign language scholar," When
The Omnipotent God [ that I know ] Preserved His Pure, Perfect, and Holy Word,
for me [ His child ], in my own language? He not only Sent The Blessed Teacher,
The Holy Spirit, Specified Certain study rules, But, Also Much More about:

Handling His Precious Word Of Life!

Amen.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

No. If there is any difference, they cannot all be "perfect." Words have meaning. You've defeated your entire argument on you own. The rest of this is just trolling as all you do is continually repeat yourself.

The seventh purification is the final and perfect Word of God for today. This is the Pure Cambridge Edition by A.W.. Pollard (during WW2). There is only one Word for today. Generally Christians either follow the Authorized Version, which is the 1769 Blayney Cambridge with the Apocrypha removed in 1885 (sixth purification), or they are following the Pure Cambridge Edition that came out sometime during WW2 (the seventh purification). The Pure Cambridge has influence today seeing it is the KJB at Biblehub.com.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

listend friend if there was anyone I could say to know the heart and aspect of God it would be @Magenta she shows his truth in tranguility kindness never upon her own vies or unde
I dot know why I have issues with cc lately I actually wrote n entire response to you but then the site went somehwere differen't

I am by no means sick of you or anyone else but if you were to ask me what translation
is the true one I would only respond in asking what is the word of God to you? it isn't about the transulation it is about how your own heart heart hears him many are called few are xhosen don't underestimate the importance of the words

so true friend

Wise words from our father. Nice to see you back too.. and good to see you back to your best 😊

 

[fredoheaven]

Example of hebrew homonym is elohim

 

[Dino246]

Uh, no. That’s not what I am saying. A homonym is a word that looks and sounds the same but they have different meanings.

I don't know why I bother trying to explain Scripture to you when you struggle with basic grammar.

A homonym is a single thing, not a 'they' which is plural. You might say "Homonyms are words that look and sound the same but have different meanings" which is basically the dictionary definition. An example is "seal" which is both a marine animal and guard against leaks. "Book" and "scroll" are not homonyms.

For example: Sons of God can refer to either angels or believers.

And more than just those two.

So “sons of God” is a homonym in the Bible.

No, it isn't. You simply have the wrong word for the concept. A homonym is a single word, not a phrase.

So it depends on the context that determines the meaning of a word. Even the word “repent” has multiple meanings in the Bible. I believe the word “book” in the Bible is defined as a scroll in many of it’s usages. But this does not always mean that this is the case. We have no idea what the Lamb’s Book of Life will be like. In any event, I believe Isaiah 34:16 is a reference to the King James Bible

I assure you, it isn't. The context is about wild beasts that take over the land of Idumea after it is destroyed under the Lord's wrath.

because….

(a) Isaiah 34 addresses Gentile nations in the beginning of the chapter.
(b) Isaiah 34 has verses that are parallels with verses in Revelation.

And that is your reason why this verse is a reference to the KJV? Wow. That stretches even the idea of a stretch. Beyond ridiculous.

So this lets us know that we Gentile nations are told to seek out the Book of the Lord and read from it during the time of Revelation. So logically this must mean we have the Book of the Lord today, seeing we are nearing the End Times spoken about in Revelation.

Um, no. You're making vast leaps of speculation.

Textual Criticism does not have a singular book they call the Book of the Lord.
What they have is manuscripts that disagree with each or Modern Bibles that contradict one another.

"Textual criticism" is not a "they"; it is a set of practices. A set of practices does not "call" anything by any name.

 

[Dino246]

One time in the Bible we see the questioning of God’s Words is with the serpent. The serpent got Eve to question God’s words. “Yea, hath God said….?” So if questioning the Bible like Textual Critics do is considered normal and good to try and find His perfect words someday (that you will never have), then why don’t we see good examples of this? But we don’t. What we have is the serpent as an example of questioning God’s words. So questioning God’s words is bad according to the Bible. Yet, this is at the very heart of Textual Criticism. One is constantly questioning and criticizing the text. How on Earth you can just put your head in the sand on this point is beyond me.

You are clearly unaware of the history behind the KJV. Please, go and do your homework. Start with Desiderius Erasmus and his five editions of the Greek text. Move on to the work of Robert Estienne (aka Stephanus), and Theodore Beza, and their work in revising the Greek text, Finally, look at the KJV translators in using all of these and many more in preparing the KJV. Then, when you have actualy done your homework, then come back and talk to us about "constantly questioning and criticizing the text". Until then, you're blathering in sheer ignorance.