Battle Royale XIV discussion thread

[tetelestai]

only a true bibliophile could've thought of it.

Actually it was a Seventh Day Adventist who first thought of it.

Here's the verse from the KJV:

(Acts 13:42 KJV) And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

Seventh Day Adventism is based around Acts 13:42

Most modern versions say something like:

(Acts 13:42 ASV) And as they went out, they besought that these words might be spoken to them the next sabbath.

Thus, the beginning of King James Onlyism.

The SDA's started it to protect their Seventh Day Adventism, and now it exists in almost every denomination.

You will find no such thing as King James Onlyism before Seventh Day Adventism was invented.

 

[Granite]

Yeah, well, it's a pretty nutty idea no matter who cooked it up.:chuckle:

 

[Stripe]

KJVism is so bizarre, so idolatrous, so absurd, that only a true bibliophile could've thought of it.

This is typical of an evolutionist: All derisive assertion, no reasoning.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I'd like to say that I appreciate the time and effort of Will Kinney/brandplucked with his opening posts and especially how accessible he is on the discussion forum.

I agree, it's nice to see his devotion to a Book he believes.

 

[Danoh]

Actually it was a Seventh Day Adventist who first thought of it.

Here's the verse from the KJV:

(Acts 13:42 KJV) And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

Seventh Day Adventism is based around Acts 13:42

Most modern versions say something like:

(Acts 13:42 ASV) And as they went out, they besought that these words might be spoken to them the next sabbath.

Thus, the beginning of King James Onlyism.

The SDA's started it to protect their Seventh Day Adventism, and now it exists in almost every denomination.

You will find no such thing as King James Onlyism before Seventh Day Adventism was invented.

Tell that to the Puritans, et al. The sad account of their persecution for their not having been KJVO is one missing from the supposed noble intent behind the KJV.

Thats the thing about these issues.

The Word nevertheless greatly profited from Rome's great, vain Empire building on, all the way down to the roads the Apostle Paul had been able to travel far and wide on.

 

[Danoh]

Tell that to the Puritans, et al. The sad account of their persecution for their not having been KJVO is one missing from the supposed noble intent behind the KJV.

Thats the thing about these issues.

The Word nevertheless greatly profited from Rome's great, vain Empire building; all the way down to the roads the Apostle Paul had been able to travel far and wide on.

 

[Granite]

I suppose the fact that it's a product of a committee commissioned by a king and cobbled together essentially by scholars under the auspices of bureaucrats who lifted a lot of their work from two previous versions and Tyndale's work...all that stuff doesn't really matter? Because God was just working through all that, right?

KJVism always struck me as the analogue to the Muslim insistence that the Koran can only be truly understood and appreciated in Arabic.

 

[brandplucked]

Easter is correct in Acts 12:4

Easter is correct in Acts 12:4

Why would Christ rejecting Jews or any Christ rejecting person celebrate the resurrection of Christ ?

Uhh... patrick. May I suggest you actually READ the article first before you ask more silly questions. Thanks.

http://brandplucked.webs.com/easter.htm

 

[patrick jane]

Uhh... patrick. May I suggest you actually READ the article first before you ask more silly questions. Thanks.

http://brandplucked.webs.com/easter.htm

I read the article and I was talking to tet

 

[brandplucked]

Easter is correct in Acts 12:4

Easter is correct in Acts 12:4

I might be disagreed with on this, but any consistent Mid-Acts Dispensationalist (Acts 9 aka MAD) will not agree with those various "Easter" explanations, BP.

Any MADs who are KJVO, will, as a result, remain silent as to an explanation on that passage other than a generic explanation. They know the arguments posed are not valid.

The only one I have seen hold is that Tyndale's and others' "Easter" bias made it into their translation work, just as their bias in other areas made it into their translation in other passages.

But this is an issue found both happening, and being addressed, in Scripture itself - as it was being written, as well as after it was.

In this, MAD Historian (Grace History Project) and KJV Onlyist, Bryan Ross, has made a very good point - to paraphrase him; KJVO MADs are going to have to stop relying on Acts 2 Baptists and others for their "Charismatic" explanations of supposed KJVO problems.

Thing is, that to get all dogmatic because one is not agreed with, solves nothing.

Scripture relates the need for both Preservation and Refinement.

So its not like God was somehow caught off guard, and that the way to solve for that is to come up with all sorts of supposedly "Spirit led" explanations - and so dogmatically intolerant ones that actual solutions remain "lost."

Hi Danoh. Everybody has the right to be wrong, including you.

God bless.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Hi Knight. Sorry, I didn't know we are not allowed to edit it. All I did was to correct a spelling error from "translated BUY some guy" to "translated BY some guy" That was it. But now that I know, if I make more typos I will just leave them. Thanks.

I moved this post into here so we wouldn't be discussing this in the BR thread.

Brandplucked it's no big deal that you edited your post unknowingly. But we can't tell what has been edited so we don't allow that. I believe that you corrected typos etc. But in the future just leave them so it doesn't cause confusion.

Thanks!! :up:

 

[genuineoriginal]

I moved this post into here so we wouldn't be discussing this in the BR thread.

Brandplucked it's no big deal that you edited your post unknowingly. But we can't tell what has been edited so we don't allow that. I believe that you corrected typos etc. But in the future just leave them so it doesn't cause confusion.

Thanks!! :up:

Hi Knight,

At the bottom of each thread there is a statement that either says "You may edit your posts" or says "You may not edit your posts"

Does this mean there is a setting you can use to prevent the participants in the Battle Royale from being able to edit their posts?

 

[tetelestai]

Tell that to the Puritans, et al. The sad account of their persecution for their not having been KJVO is one missing from the supposed noble intent behind the KJV.

Huh?

The King James hadn't even been written when the Puritans started being persecuted in the late 1500's.

The Puritans had their Geneva Bible, but then switched to the KJV by the mid 1600's

The Westminster Confession of Faith (written in 1646) uses the language of the KJV.

As I stated, you won't find a trace of KJVO before Seventh Day Adventism.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Hi Knight,

At the bottom of each thread there is a statement that either says "You may edit your posts" or says "You may not edit your posts"

Does this mean there is a setting you can use to prevent the participants in the Battle Royale from being able to edit their posts?

I could turn off the ability to edit posts but it's a universal setting and therefore nobody anywhere on the forum could edit posts.

 

[tetelestai]

Seventh Day Adventism was established in 1863

I challenge the KJVOist's to produce any mention of KJVO before 1863?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Seventh Day Adventism was established in 1863

I challenge the KJVOist's to produce any mention of KJVO before 1863?

Which do you hate the most, MAD or KJVO?

 

[False Prophet]

The Mormons include the King James in their triple white book set with the Book of Mormon and I guess a Code of Ethics by Joseph Smith.

 

[tetelestai]

Which do you hate the most, MAD or KJVO?

MAD by a landslide margin.

KJVO is just stupid and annoying.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

MAD by a landslide margin.

KJVO is just stupid.

A few years ago, you stated the KJB was without error.
What changed your mind?

 

[genuineoriginal]

I could turn off the ability to edit posts but it's a universal setting and therefore nobody anywhere on the forum could edit posts.

Well, I guess we will have to rely on the participants to restrain the urge to fix typos.