KJV only, why not?

[Mommy2Kids]

I HATE when people deliberately use "Teh". I think it's stupid.

[C_Fresh]

I generally only intentionally spell it wrong when poking greg or someone about 'Teh Gayz™'. Or some other type of conspiracy...

[greg]

(06-22-2012 10:37 AM)C_Fresh Wrote:  I generally only intentionally spell it wrong when poking greg or someone about 'Teh Gayz™'. Or some other type of conspiracy...

Like the PC conspiracy you're currently involved in?

[C_Fresh]

What's that, greg? I can't hear you through your tin foil hat!

To what PC conspiracy are you referring?

EDIT: I should probably clarify my previous statement. I did not mean greg specifically when referring to "Or some other type of conspiracy...". That would be anyone from Al Gore to fundies (is there a difference?).

[Waldo L]

(06-22-2012 12:15 PM)C_Fresh Wrote:  That would be anyone from Al Gore to fundies (is there a difference?).

Yes! A huge difference. Fundies hate Al Gore because he's an eco-freak "go green" hypocrite. He's not your religious hypocrite that fits in with Fundies.

[Somedewd]

(05-03-2012 04:20 PM)B-Ray Wrote:  I read that a lot of you since reforming have also went to other bible versions. For me this is the hardest thing to contend with. I have so much literature on the subject, u know how stuff is removed and changed or even whole verses left out of all those other versions that, i cant see it any different.

For instance, where the NIV calls satan the daystar in that O.T. verse, but in peter its Jesus is the Daystar. Much more than just this, this is just to me the worst

I can understand that this is a difficult topic. When I was at PCC I wrestled with this issue. I read every piece of literature I could find on the topic. There are some points that convinced me that the KJVO position is bologna. And heresy.

1. The literature supporting KJVO positions is heavily flawed. Poor scholarship, lack of first hand quoted source material, misquoted sources, and poorly constructed arguments permeate the literature. When I realized that Touch Not the Unclean Thing was a piece of scholarly trash, I realized that people were pushing this issue not because they truly believe in the KJV issue but because they had a clear agenda.

2. The KJV translators themselves would reject the KJVO position. You owe it to yourself to read the KJV translators' preface to the KJV. You will find that they clearly state that, "the meanest translation of Scripture is still the word of God," and that they welcomed others to revise their work and make it better.

3. It is just as wrong to add to the Scriptures as it is to take away. KJVO advocates think that early texts and modern translations have subtracted from the Scriptures. Consider this, my friend. How do you know that the early texts subtracted anything? Isn't it just as likely, if not more so, that the later manuscripts added to the text? Consider also that people such as Eusibeus are suspected to have tampered with not only the texts but also the works of Josephus in order to inject specific theologies.

4. Jesus and the disciples quoted the Septuagint. Not the Hebrew OT. Try comparing the Septuagint with the KJV sometime--I guarantee you will find significant differences. For that matter, try comparing KJV NT quotes of the OT with the rendering in the KJV OT. You will also find significant differences there.

Good luck in your spiritual journey. May you find peace and reason in your search.

[C_Fresh]

(06-22-2012 05:21 PM)Waldo L Wrote:  

(06-22-2012 12:15 PM)C_Fresh Wrote:  That would be anyone from Al Gore to fundies (is there a difference?).

Yes! A huge difference. Fundies hate Al Gore because he's an eco-freak "go green" hypocrite. He's not your religious hypocrite that fits in with Fundies.

That was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I consider Al Gore to be an environemental fundamentalist, complete with hypocracy.