SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Use the definition you used when you said, "The KJV is without error."
List the versions that are without error, and those that are in error.
Battle Royale XIV discussion thread
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Use the definition you used when you said, "The KJV is without error."
List the versions that are without error, and those that are in error.
ccfromsc, yes, really.
You know about dinosaur soft tissue, I assume? You can Google it or http://rsr.org/soft
And you can check out http://rsr.org/dragon
And thanks for being a part of the discussion here!
- Bob E.
That may be, tetelestai, but hey, I say: give judging a chance, no? http://kgov.com/judging or http://kgov.com/try-judging-youll-like-it
Last edited:
heir
TOL Subscriber
:up: That's what I did and have been doing since I finally got saved! It has changed my life!
If I told you that I believe God preserved His words in the Geneva Bible, what would you say?
Well, my thanks go to all the participants in the debate, especially to BE and WD for actually giving us a proper debate with real research, rather than WK, whose contribution was 90% regurgitated from his own website and other writings, which only shows rather his contempt for the debate, the other parties in the debate and those following it.
Indeed, what I wrote before the debate even began has been fulfilled to the letter:
The KJVO position relies for its support on playing a psychological flaw in some Christians that allows them to be bullied or emotionally blackmailed into reading the KJB because no one else claims that any other version or translation is 100% inerrant. But merely claiming that it is 100% inerrant doesn't make it so. The KJVO position is thus anti-intellectual, oppressive and despicable.
Now, I know that many folks who are regular contributors on TOL hold the KJV in high regards. One of the successes of the KJVO movement is to ride piggy-back on that high regard and claim it for the movement. I can sure accept the spirituality of people like STP or Heir for examples. However the KJVO movement makes it look like that spirituality is equivalent of their own teachings. As a matter of fact, we all believe that God's word is inerrant but some of us have been deceived into believing that this means there is a 100% inerrant translation in our own language.
God has only once written down the words of the scriptures and that was when he wrote himself the Ten commandments. Will Kinney and others are so full of pride that they think they are important enough for God to go a stage further and write down the full text of the Bible in their own language, which just so happens to be English, more than what he ever did to Moses, or Elijah, or Isaiah or Ezra.
I sincerely hope that those who appreciate the great translation that the KJB is will see through this ruse and distance themselves from it. Otherwise, the KJB itself will become a victim due to its association with such lunacy.
I did that with the Bible I first read through from end to end, which was the NASB. And yes it was amazing what God showed me.
Indeed, what I wrote before the debate even began has been fulfilled to the letter:
The KJVO position relies for its support on playing a psychological flaw in some Christians that allows them to be bullied or emotionally blackmailed into reading the KJB because no one else claims that any other version or translation is 100% inerrant. But merely claiming that it is 100% inerrant doesn't make it so. The KJVO position is thus anti-intellectual, oppressive and despicable.
Now, I know that many folks who are regular contributors on TOL hold the KJV in high regards. One of the successes of the KJVO movement is to ride piggy-back on that high regard and claim it for the movement. I can sure accept the spirituality of people like STP or Heir for examples. However the KJVO movement makes it look like that spirituality is equivalent of their own teachings. As a matter of fact, we all believe that God's word is inerrant but some of us have been deceived into believing that this means there is a 100% inerrant translation in our own language.
God has only once written down the words of the scriptures and that was when he wrote himself the Ten commandments. Will Kinney and others are so full of pride that they think they are important enough for God to go a stage further and write down the full text of the Bible in their own language, which just so happens to be English, more than what he ever did to Moses, or Elijah, or Isaiah or Ezra.
I sincerely hope that those who appreciate the great translation that the KJB is will see through this ruse and distance themselves from it. Otherwise, the KJB itself will become a victim due to its association with such lunacy.
I did that with the Bible I first read through from end to end, which was the NASB. And yes it was amazing what God showed me.
Last edited:
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
I would respect you for believing God preserved his words, and taking a stand.
heir
TOL Subscriber
I would be glad that you were taking the attitude of a believer.
1 Thessalonians 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
I do that and what a difference !! Instead of being on the look out for a problem and simply believing every word, really enhanced my Bible study. I find the KJB more accurate, richer, more detailed and more information.
Would you be able to demonstrate that I'm wrong?
Would you disagree with me that the Geneva Bible is God's perfect and preserved word?
Patrick, what was the single best argument Will Kinney gave in the debate to show that the KJV is the only inspired scripture on earth and all other Bibles are uninspired?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
I wouldn't even try.
heir
TOL Subscriber
Why would I want to argue with you for believing you had the pure words of the Lord? That's what an unbeliever would do.
Why would I want to attempt to talk you out of taking God at His word? Why would you? What's it to you if someone believes they have the pure words of the Lord?
Last edited:
brandplucked
New member
What about the Geneva Bible?
What about the Geneva Bible?
Hi Will Duffy. Sir, you don't honestly believe that ANY Bible IS or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God, right? I haven't seen you actually tell us the name of this inerrant Bible you seem to want us to think you believe in.
You paid lip service to the NKJV, but do you believe 1 John 5:7 as it stands in the KJB and NKJV is inspired Scripture and belongs in the Bible - unlike Bob Enyart or not?
Maybe Bob Enyart thinks it is NOT inspired Scripture in English, but it IS inspired Scripture in that Hungarian bible he can't even read. Who knows?
Now you are just tossing dust into the air with this Geneva bible thingy.
The Geneva bible was textually superior to the modern Vatican Versions like the NIV, ESV, NASB, NET stuff, and it was a Reformation text bible, but God put it on the virtual shelf of oblivion long ago.
I have a hard copy of the Geneva bible. Actually, it kept changing over the years, so they are not all the same, but though it was a pretty good bible it most certainly was NOT the finished product and it is not the inerrant words of God.
Now, you may ask why I say this. What proof do I have. Well, if you are willing to actually look at the clear evidence, it should be apparent why the Geneva Bible was not the inerrant Book and it was not the finished product.
Are you willing to look at some actual examples of its imperfections?
This is my own study; not a copy and paste from some other site.
The Deficiencies of the Geneva Bible
http://brandplucked.webs.com/deficientgeneva.htm
"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." Luke 8:8
God bless.
What about the Geneva Bible?
Hi Will Duffy. Sir, you don't honestly believe that ANY Bible IS or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God, right? I haven't seen you actually tell us the name of this inerrant Bible you seem to want us to think you believe in.
You paid lip service to the NKJV, but do you believe 1 John 5:7 as it stands in the KJB and NKJV is inspired Scripture and belongs in the Bible - unlike Bob Enyart or not?
Maybe Bob Enyart thinks it is NOT inspired Scripture in English, but it IS inspired Scripture in that Hungarian bible he can't even read. Who knows?
Now you are just tossing dust into the air with this Geneva bible thingy.
The Geneva bible was textually superior to the modern Vatican Versions like the NIV, ESV, NASB, NET stuff, and it was a Reformation text bible, but God put it on the virtual shelf of oblivion long ago.
I have a hard copy of the Geneva bible. Actually, it kept changing over the years, so they are not all the same, but though it was a pretty good bible it most certainly was NOT the finished product and it is not the inerrant words of God.
Now, you may ask why I say this. What proof do I have. Well, if you are willing to actually look at the clear evidence, it should be apparent why the Geneva Bible was not the inerrant Book and it was not the finished product.
Are you willing to look at some actual examples of its imperfections?
This is my own study; not a copy and paste from some other site.
The Deficiencies of the Geneva Bible
http://brandplucked.webs.com/deficientgeneva.htm
"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." Luke 8:8
God bless.
See, I'm not in the camp that no other Bibles are inspired, I believe they are inferior. To say the KJV is the ONLY God inspired bible today would be inaccurate, that's just my opinion. I forsake other versions in favor of my KJV Bibles. That's why I said the KJV won and not a person(s).
genuineoriginal
New member
I fixed that for you, and you are welcome.
(in case you ask whether I read the article, I just have to ask you whether you actually read the Battle Royale you participated in)
Thanks D.R. for this, for your prediction, now fulfilled, and for your gracious words toward Heir and STP.
I'm on a phone that I don't quite know how to navigate on, but someone said I should see on of your previous posts analyzing the debate. Was it that prediction perhaps?
brandplucked
New member
Show is this "bible" you say you believe in.
Show is this "bible" you say you believe in.
Hi Will Duffy. Sir, can you show us a copy of this "the underlying Greek manuscripts" you supposedly believe is of a higher authority than the KJB?
Don't try to dazzle me with pious sounding, religious phrases. Be very specific. WHICH "the underlying Greek manuscripts" are you talking about? The hundreds of different scraps and pieces and partial copies in the libraries of the world, or is there an actual Book in print we can see that is your "the" Greek authority?
Can you show it to us? Give us a link to where we can see it? Can we buy a copy of it for ourselves somewhere?
You refer to "the Greek mss." as your alleged final authority, so where did you get your copy of them?
Surely you wouldn't be trying to make us think you have something that you really don't, right?
Show is this "bible" you say you believe in.
Hi Will Duffy. Sir, can you show us a copy of this "the underlying Greek manuscripts" you supposedly believe is of a higher authority than the KJB?
Don't try to dazzle me with pious sounding, religious phrases. Be very specific. WHICH "the underlying Greek manuscripts" are you talking about? The hundreds of different scraps and pieces and partial copies in the libraries of the world, or is there an actual Book in print we can see that is your "the" Greek authority?
Can you show it to us? Give us a link to where we can see it? Can we buy a copy of it for ourselves somewhere?
You refer to "the Greek mss." as your alleged final authority, so where did you get your copy of them?
Surely you wouldn't be trying to make us think you have something that you really don't, right?