Battle Royale XIV discussion thread

[brandplucked]

Sola Scriptura Posturing

Sola Scriptura Posturing

Heh, sola Scriptura predates the KJB by nearly a couple centuries.

Yes, Vinny. I am well aware of that, and it is usually just more empty rhetoric and pious posturing by people who really do not believe there is now or ever was such a thing a the complete and inerrant Scriptures.

Just like today many Christians SAY "I believe the Bible is the infallible and inerrant words of God.", when the truth of the matter is they do not. It is a pious lie.

And pious lies have been around for a very long time.

 

[False Prophet]

the obvious opponent would be common sense

the bible is man made

only the church has the authority regarding anything about the bible

What church is that? :think:

 

[User Name]

What church is that? :think:

Whichever church you offer your allegiance to is the church that has the authority.

 

[brandplucked]

Welcome to 21st century Christiandumb

Welcome to 21st century Christiandumb

Whichever church you offer your allegiance to is the church that has the authority.

Welcome to 21st century Christiandumb.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Worth a read:

http://9marks.org/article/debunking-stupid-statements-about-the-bible/

AMR

 

[brandplucked]

More Pious Sounding Baloney

More Pious Sounding Baloney

Worth a read:

http://9marks.org/article/debunking-stupid-statements-about-the-bible/

AMR

More Pious Sounding Baloney

“We’re able to translate directly from the original Greek and Hebrew, so at worst we’re dealing with a translation, full stop.”

“we can in fact be highly confident that we know what those original pieces of paper said.”

This is just a bunch more of pious sounding Baloney. You are still promoting The Santa Claus “Bible” - that never seen, non-existent “THE original Greek and Hebrew”. You are confessing a faith in something that not only have you never seen, but in something you KNOW does not exist.

The fact is there are literally thousands of variant readings having to do with entire verses, hundreds of phrases and thousands of very real words, not just singular or plural or different ways of spelling the same words.

Your modern versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB follow an ever changing Critical Text that is under the direct supervision of the Vatican (The modern Catholic versions, Jehovah Witness NWT and ESV, NIV, NASB are ALL based on the same “inter confessional” text), and this text differs from the King James Bible and other Reformation Bibles by literally about 3000 words just in the New Testament, and they reject numerous Hebrew readings and not even in the same places.

Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET etc. are the new "Vatican Versions"

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

The NIV, NASB, ESV, NET and other Vatican Versions reject the Hebrew Texts - Part One - Genesis through Psalms

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

"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." Luke 8:8

 

[User Name]

What is the point of having a perfect Bible if one's understanding of what it says and means is not equally perfect?

 

[Bob Enyart]

I have a family member that is over the top with the KJVO thing.

He stopped a nephew before he started his sermon to be sure he was using the KJV, and discovered he was using NIV, so this uncle took the NIV and handed his nephew a KJV and said now you can go to preaching. Needless to say it didn't end well, the nephew was really frustrated and didn't do his usual good message, the uncle told the nephew after service that he needn't come back if he was going to bring that NIV trash to preach from in his church.​

Times a thousand.

 

[brandplucked]

21st century Christiandumb revisited

21st century Christiandumb revisited

What is the point of having a perfect Bible if one's understanding of what it says and means is not equally perfect?

None of us are going to understand everything the Bible teaches in this life. We all still see through a glass darkly. It is only when the Lord Jesus comes again that we shall know even as we have been known.

But God wants us to grow in grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ (2 Peter 3:18) and having a corrupt bible version the omits and adds to God's inspired words and perverts the meanings of the verses and corrupts true doctrines makes this all much more difficult.

Nobody seriously believes any modern version is the inerrant words of God, and the polls clearly show that people actually read these "easy to understand" versions less and less, and biblical ignorance has now reached what even the modern version users are calling "scandalous levels".

 

[Bob Enyart]

That is part of his tactics. He tries to smear people but I think it is a part of a bitter contentious spirit as well. He has put himself in an extreme position which probably most people who like and use the KJV. Would not agree. He thinks the KJV is and must be infallible in every word, verse and passage and he knows it by revelation. This view makes it necessary to defend every page (of the Cambridge edition) even when the related doctrinal issues are not particularly crucial. He fights with the desperation of someone who has a lot to lose...and it is true. If it were ever to be shown that he is wrong on a single point his case for infallibility would collapse. I have found debating him an unpleasant experience. From the first time he started posting he was disrespectful to others and needlessly rude and provocative. He does not know how to make his points graciously without making enemies.

Wow. Thanks Shasta. Where there's life there's hope. - Bob

 

[brandplucked]

Bible agnostics try to feel better about themselves

Bible agnostics try to feel better about themselves

Originally Posted by Shasta
That is part of his tactics. He tries to smear people but I think it is a part of a bitter contentious spirit as well. He has put himself in an extreme position which probably most people who like and use the KJV. Would not agree. He thinks the KJV is and must be infallible in every word, verse and passage and he knows it by revelation. This view makes it necessary to defend every page (of the Cambridge edition) even when the related doctrinal issues are not particularly crucial. He fights with the desperation of someone who has a lot to lose...and it is true. If it were ever to be shown that he is wrong on a single point his case for infallibility would collapse. I have found debating him an unpleasant experience. From the first time he started posting he was disrespectful to others and needlessly rude and provocative. He does not know how to make his points graciously without making enemies.

Wow. Thanks Shasta. Where there's life there's hope. - Bob

Shasta and Bob Enyart. It is just a simple FACT that neither of you men are honest enough to admit - neither one of you really believes there is now or ever was such a thing as a complete and inerrant words of God Bible in any language, translated or untranslated.

Bob Enyart doesn't believe his own NKJV is inerrant. And his utterly loopy idea that some Hungarian Bible that hardly anybody has even heard of and not even he himself can read, is his inerrant and inspired Standard is absurd in the extreme.

Especially since this Hungarian bible contains 1 John 5:7 that Bob told us is not inspired scripture.

If any of you ever get around to actually identifying this "inerrant Bible" you sometimes pretend to believe in, you only show that you have no idea what you are talking about and you end up contradicting yourselves.

There IS revelation (which you guys mock, though it is a completely biblical teaching) in knowing the KJB is God's inerrant Book, but it is not a blind revelation.

We see the purity and consistency of the doctrines found in the King James Bible, and it is the ONLY one seriously believed by multiplied thousands of God's people to be the inerrant words of the living God.

God Himself has born witness to this one Bible far more than to any other in all of history.

And the reason I am so "rude and provocative" with you guys on this is because I hate phoniness and hypocrisy. I will challenge your empty and meaningless pious posturings of faith in "the perfect words of God" that you profess to believe in, but can't and never will show us.

Everybody seems to think he's an "expert" at "correcting" God's book and smarter than the God who promised to give us "the book of the LORD" and to preserve His words.

We must all eventually stand before God to give an account. If we see any truth at all, it is all by His sovereign grace. I would rather stand before Him having believed and defended the inerrancy of His Book, a real Book I can hold in my hands and read and tell anyone else where to get one too, than to be one who sowed doubt, uncertainty and confusion about what His words are or where they can be found.

 

[Desert Reign]

We must all eventually stand before God to give an account. If we see any truth at all, it is all by His sovereign grace. I would rather stand before Him having believed and defended the inerrancy of His Book, a real Book I can hold in my hands and read and tell anyone else where to get one too, than to be one who sowed doubt, uncertainty and confusion about what His words are or where they can be found.

That's a very hypocritical position of you to take considering that I have openly confirmed that I do not believe in a 100% inerrant book in the manner you define and yet you have not seen fit to answer any of my questions relating to the fact that there are many versions of the KJB published by different publishers at different times and you have had the opportunity many times to clear it up both in the main debate and here and give clarity but haven't. Because you know you can't.

And Bob Enyart, Will Duffy and many others have not sown any doubt at all. Their belief is clear: you can read the word of God in any decent translation or in the original language texts if you can. I fail to see what's 'sowing doubt' about that. So you have to not only be a hyprocrite but you also have to lie about your opponents' position. Even your own Bible which you referred to in the main debate is not the same one as what can be bought in the shops today. Your belief is exactly what I said it was in my previous post - a placebo to make people feel good about reading a particular version of the Bible, a magic key, a short-cut to holiness; when all they needed to do, regardless of version or translation, was to read it for themselves and submit to the Spirit working within them. You would deny them that by insisting that what they are doing is less than the perfect will of God, namely for them to read the word of God in any language available to them. So you are a peddler of placebos. And a coward.

 

[Bob Enyart]

That is part of his tactics. He tries to smear people but I think it is a part of a bitter contentious spirit as well. He has put himself in an extreme position which probably most people who like and use the KJV. Would not agree. He thinks the KJV is and must be infallible in every word, verse and passage and he knows it by revelation. This view makes it necessary to defend every page (of the Cambridge edition) even when the related doctrinal issues are not particularly crucial. He fights with the desperation of someone who has a lot to lose...and it is true. If it were ever to be shown that he is wrong on a single point his case for infallibility would collapse. I have found debating him an unpleasant experience. From the first time he started posting he was disrespectful to others and needlessly rude and provocative. He does not know how to make his points graciously without making enemies.

Shasta, there is also the mental illness component. When some of our church members went to Kansas to protest the Westboro Baptist folks, one of Fred Phelps relatives, who is a part of their church, was able to admit in a conversation that there is mental illness among them. Of the differing degrees of mental illness, even if someone has only a slight condition, that is then easily exacerbated by pride, self-righteousness, and other sinful behavior. As we pointed out in the debate (and on our radio show a hundred times): stupid does not make you sin but sin makes you stupid. For example, the KJO proponent in one breath can defend its history of errors with an argument regarding its original documents having been burned in a fire, and in the next breath mock others because their original documents are unavailable. That this is still done here in the Grandstands after the debate, and without any acknowledgement or even an attempt at explanation, is sufficient proof of mental illness exacerbated by sin.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

The only things Bob and his fellow bible agnostic Will Duffy brought up against the KJB was the whole issue of minor printing errors that have occurred over the years by various publishing houses, which he claims are deliberate changes in the text. He did not prove his case at all, but is boasting that he did and has won the day for the Bible Agnostics United Against the King James Bible, who tell us they are not bible agnostics, even though they do not know where to find an inerrant Bible, and they claim to be Bible believers, even though they will never show us any actual copy of this complete and inerrant Bible they profess to believe in.

And Bob thinks he "won the debate", even though the only thing he proved was that he is a very confused individual, who when hard pressed to actually identify what his "infallible Standard" is, comes up with one of the goofiest answers ever - a 1590 Hungarian bible that hardly anybody ever heard of, that Bob himself can't even read, and that contains verses he himself tells us are not inspired Scripture.

:up:

 

[George Affleck]

Shasta, there is also the mental illness component. When some of our church members went to Kansas to protest the Westboro Baptist folks, one of Fred Phelps relatives, who is a part of their church, was able to admit in a conversation that there is mental illness among them. Of the differing degrees of mental illness, even if someone has only a slight condition, that is then easily exacerbated by pride, self-righteousness, and other sinful behavior. As we pointed out in the debate (and on our radio show a hundred times): stupid does not make you sin but sin makes you stupid. For example, the KJO proponent in one breath can defend its history of errors with an argument regarding its original documents having been burned in a fire, and in the next breath mock others because their original documents are unavailable. That this is still done here in the Grandstands after the debate, and without any acknowledgement or even an attempt at explanation, is sufficient proof of mental illness exacerbated by sin.

More reinforcing of the "guilt by association" argument which you claim never happened. You can't debate the man you are debating, so you take shots at others who drive the same colour car.

 

[brandplucked]

The unbeliever protests because he is an unbeliever

The unbeliever protests because he is an unbeliever

That's a very hypocritical position of you to take considering that I have openly confirmed that I do not believe in a 100% inerrant book in the manner you define and yet you have not seen fit to answer any of my questions relating to the fact that there are many versions of the KJB published by different publishers at different times and you have had the opportunity many times to clear it up both in the main debate and here and give clarity but haven't. Because you know you can't.

Desert, You yourself, and Bob Enyart as well, that you do not have nor do you believe in the existence of an inerrant Bible. And it is not just "how I define inerrant". Look up the word in any dictionary.

These fake bible versions you guys promote are full of errors and confusion, and nobody really believes that any of them are the inerrant words of God.

All Bob Enyart pointed out were mere printing errors that different publishing houses at different times in the long history of the KJB have made. The underlying texts have never changed, and (even though you do not like the answer) I have repeatedly told you that you can go to any bookstore and buy a Cambridge printing of the King James Bible. That is the complete and inerrant words of God.

You obviously do not have or believe in a complete and inerrant Bible in ANY language, translated or untranslated. That is just a fact.

All you have to do to prove me wrong, is to simply and clearly tell us which bible out there in Bible Babble Land IS now the complete and inerrant, infallible and 100% true words of God.

Will you do that for us? Not gonna happen, is it? Or maybe you will come up with some goofy Hungarian bible that Bob Enyart tells us is his "infallible standard" that he not only can't even read himself, but it contains verses in it that he told us are not original Scripture.

And then Bob E. has the chutzpah to imply that we Bible believers are somehow mentally unbalanced! Good one, Bob. Scraping the bottom of the barrel now, are you?

 

[CabinetMaker]

If any of you ever get around to actually identifying this "inerrant Bible" you sometimes pretend to believe in, you only show that you have no idea what you are talking about and you end up contradicting yourselves.

When people do identify a bible that they consider the perfect word of God you will simply ignore them.

God Himself has born witness to this one Bible far more than to any other in all of history.

This is an extraordinary claim. Do you have the extraordinary evidence to support this claim?

 

[Bob Enyart]

More reinforcing of the "guilt by association" argument which you claim never happened. You can't debate the man you are debating, so you take shots at others who drive the same colour car.

George, if I have this wrong, please correct me. But it seems that you just clarified your thinking. You had me really confused by your repeated claim that we were trying to make our opponent guilty by association. In your latest sighting, I did not claim, nor do I have any information regarding, any association of the Westboro Baptist folks with our KJO opponent WK. So now I realize that you see guilt by association even where just an illustration is given. And I also now realize how it is that you can cling to that claim for BR XIV even without quoting the asked for statement that justifies it. You actually realize that what you see as gba doesn't really qualify as such, but you enjoy seeing it and saying it anyway. Correct?

- Bob

 

[brandplucked]

Bob Enyart is getting desperate

Bob Enyart is getting desperate

Shasta, there is also the mental illness component. When some of our church members went to Kansas to protest the Westboro Baptist folks, one of Fred Phelps relatives, who is a part of their church, was able to admit in a conversation that there is mental illness among them. Of the differing degrees of mental illness, even if someone has only a slight condition, that is then easily exacerbated by pride, self-righteousness, and other sinful behavior. As we pointed out in the debate (and on our radio show a hundred times): stupid does not make you sin but sin makes you stupid. For example, the KJO proponent in one breath can defend its history of errors with an argument regarding its original documents having been burned in a fire, and in the next breath mock others because their original documents are unavailable. That this is still done here in the Grandstands after the debate, and without any acknowledgement or even an attempt at explanation, is sufficient proof of mental illness exacerbated by sin.

Bob Enyart, even for a confused Bible agnostic like you this is stooping pretty low to try to discredit the King James Bible and those of us who believe it is the inerrant words of God.

I have repeatedly said that the examples you brought up were nothing more than minor printing errors that have occurred by various printings of the King James Bible by various printing houses.

The vast majority of these printing errors where soon caught and corrected within the first 30 years, and this work was done by two of the original translators. They never changed the actual text or the underlying Hebrew and Greek basis for this magnificent Bible.

You have no way of proving they were anything other than minor printing errors, and we have a twofold manner of making these printing error corrections. We can check the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts that form the textual basis of the KJB and the earlier English Bibles they consulted in making up their translation.

We have a complete and inerrant Bible to believe in and can tell anyone where they can get a copy of it for themselves - and Cambridge printing you can buy at your local bookstore today.

And we can show you numerous online sites where you can see it. Here is one of them.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+5:7-8&version=AKJV

On the other hand, both you and Will Duffy and all the other unbelievers in the existence of a real, in print, complete and inerrant, infallible and 100% true words of God Bible in ANY language (translated or untranslated) will never show us a copy of any Bible that you will consistently and wholeheartedly tell us IS the inerrant (no errors, either textually or theologically) words of the living God.

When guys like you DO get around to actually identifying a specific Bible as being this "infallible Standard", you end up proving yourselves to be foolishly self contradictory - like your example of the Hungarian Karoli bible being your infallible standard.

That was about as bizarre at it gets. Your telling us that a bible version hardly anybody has even heard of, and one that not even YOU can read, is the infallible words of God, which just happens to contain verses you either called into question or outright told us are not original Scripture.

And now you have the chutzpah to imply that we who are King James Bible believers who believe in a REAL Book in print we can hold in our hands, read and believe every word is the 100% truth, are somehow mentally ill and unbalanced.

You, sir, have stooped to new lows in intellectual dishonesty and perverted logic, and all in order to try to prop up your unknown and unidentified "robust message in the perfect words of God on this Earth in a thousand tongues" you keep mumbling about but will never identify for us.

And you continue to refuse to explain to us how 1 John 5:7 is not inspired Scripture in the NKJV you use, but IS inspired and infallible Scripture in the Hungarian Karoli bible you told us about.

And now you are implying that it is the KJB believers who are "mentally ill" and unbalanced???

"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." Luke 8:8

"But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant." 1 Cor. 14:38

 

[GuySmiley]

Desert, You yourself, and Bob Enyart as well, that you do not have nor do you believe in the existence of an inerrant Bible. And it is not just "how I define inerrant". Look up the word in any dictionary.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inerrant
free from error

These fake bible versions you guys promote are full of errors and confusion, and nobody really believes that any of them are the inerrant words of God.

So your side of the debate has an inerrant Bible? If you aren't a huge hypocrite, or mentally ill, just show us which one it is.

All Bob Enyart pointed out were mere printing errors that different publishing houses at different times in the long history of the KJB have made.

So you are a huge hypocrite or mentally ill after all. The KJB has errors.

The underlying texts have never changed, and (even though you do not like the answer) I have repeatedly told you that you can go to any bookstore and buy a Cambridge printing of the King James Bible. That is the complete and inerrant words of God.

Oh its the underlying text that is inerrant? Where can I get a copy of the underlying text that I can hold in my hand? My bookstore doesn't have it so I'll need to you specify where I can get it.

You obviously do not have or believe in a complete and inerrant Bible in ANY language, translated or untranslated. That is just a fact.

Neither do you unless you show us where it is. Unless you are a huge hypocrite or mentally ill, that's understandable.

All you have to do to prove me wrong, is to simply and clearly tell us which bible out there in Bible Babble Land IS now the complete and inerrant, infallible and 100% true words of God.

Wrong. You have to show which Bible out there is inerrant since that is your claim.

Will you do that for us? Not gonna happen, is it?

Ditto