SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
And, regardless of the outcome, I will continue to believe every single word of my KJB even when I don't understand it.
Battle Royale XIV discussion thread
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
heir
TOL Subscriber
Amen!
I just thought the same thing this morning when I was telling my mom about this debate. I will always stay in the KJV, also no matter what is said or shown. Yesterday actually, is when I thought that because I looked up a list of all Bibles ever, some partial and incomplete then the complete Bibles and manuscripts. KJV is it for me.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
It will never lead you astray, you can rely on it, and believe it.
so who is arguing for what ? is Bob Enyart for KJV only ? Is this debate about only KJB and no other Bible being inspired ?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Will Kinney- for KJB, all others fakes
Bob and someone else- against KJB inerrancy
Whilst I am sure the debate will be interesting, for me it is a foregone conclusion. Having also debated in some detail with a few KJVO members here, and not once received an answer to obvious and straightforward questions, my guess is that quite a number of questions will also remain unanswered even in a debate at this high level.
Note that I am in no way against the KJV. The KJV was one of the first Bibles I ever read and the NKJV remains one of my most valued translations. It is the O that is the problem.
The arguments against the O are simple and powerful and no amount of detail or logic can overcome them. Indeed, the greatest ploy of KJVOnlyists in my experience has been to make the arguments more complicated than they need be to create a shield against the obvious.
Note that I am in no way against the KJV. The KJV was one of the first Bibles I ever read and the NKJV remains one of my most valued translations. It is the O that is the problem.
The arguments against the O are simple and powerful and no amount of detail or logic can overcome them. Indeed, the greatest ploy of KJVOnlyists in my experience has been to make the arguments more complicated than they need be to create a shield against the obvious.
drbrumley
Well-known member
What is your position on KJO?
Not to mention:
The 1611 KJV included the Apocrypha.
The 1611 KJV contained a list of holy days that included All Saints Day, The Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin, The Purification of the Blessed Virgin, and other Saints days.
The 1611 KJV had marginal cross-references to books of the Apocrypha
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
My position on the matter of the AV versus others is really one of manuscript tradition, preferring the Byzantine, versus the Alexandrian.
More can be read here:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4458764#post4458764
AMR
More can be read here:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4458764#post4458764
AMR
Like the good ol' days.Battle Royal??!! :noway:
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
So did Aliester Crowley...
patrick jane, the opening post should answer your questions! Can't wait for this to begin!
- Bob Enyart
kgov.com
genuineoriginal
New member
Could the title of the Battle Royale XIV be changed to
"Is the King James Bible the Only Inspired Scripture In English on Earth Today?"
It seems very unfair against Will Kinney if Bob Enyart and Will Duffy are able to bring in Hebrew and Greek scripture as proof that there is scripture in other languages that is clearly more inspired than any translation.
For that matter, there is still the Latin scripture used by the Catholic church and the German scripture used by the Reformers that have been used for even longer than the KJV.
Allowing the argument to wander away from English translations will just muddle the debate.
