Bryan Ross wrote: “As King James Bible Believers, we need to make sure that we are applying the Berean principal (Acts 17:11) to our position on the Bible, and search things out to make sure they are so. Empty, unsound, and incorrect rhetoric does not help our position; it harms it” (KJB in America, p. 135). Bryan Ross noted: “I believe it is detrimental to the integrity of the position to say things that cannot be supported by the historical and/or textual facts” (p. 131).
Empty, unsound, and incorrect KJV-only rhetoric is harmful
- Thread starter logos1560
- Start date
Act 17:11 [KJV] "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."
I've yet to hear or see a KJVO-ist present a case for the KJV based – in a rational fashion – on the scriptures. All kinds of logical errors, and emotional reactions, yes. But reasonable argumentation? Pffft!
--Rich
I've yet to hear or see a KJVO-ist present a case for the KJV based – in a rational fashion – on the scriptures. All kinds of logical errors, and emotional reactions, yes. But reasonable argumentation? Pffft!
--Rich
One clear example of empty, unsound, and incorrect KJV-only rhetoric would be the KJV-only accusation that the NKJV is supposedly a counterfeit.
The accusation or claim that the NKJV is supposedly a counterfeit is not true and is harmful, and the advocating of that bogus claim could be regarded as a con job that attempts to mislead or deceive people into believing something that is not true.
The NKJV is a genuine or real English Bible translation in the same sense (univocally) that the KJV is a genuine English Bible translation.
The accusation or claim that the NKJV is supposedly a counterfeit is not true and is harmful, and the advocating of that bogus claim could be regarded as a con job that attempts to mislead or deceive people into believing something that is not true.
The NKJV is a genuine or real English Bible translation in the same sense (univocally) that the KJV is a genuine English Bible translation.
True! (But it's so much fun believing you are part of the "in-crowd" standing firmly against "them"! Very human.)
--Rich
One of the KJV-only advocates whose writings that Bryan Ross was critiquing was Matthew Verchuur (Bible Protector). The two above statements in effect addressed some of Matthew Verchuur's unproven claims concerning KJV editions.
Steven Avery
Well-known member
Actually their big differences seems to be whether the AV has differences in meaning and usage in words like the following:
stablish - establish
ensample - example
alway - always
From my studies to date, I tend to side with Matthew Verschuur.
christ_undivided
Well-known member
KJV-only author David O-Steen, pastor of Hope Bible Church, wrote: "Bible-believers should not allow a Pentecostal preacher to undermine their confidence in the KJB that they have in their hands. None of the examples that the 'Bible Protector' gives are corruptions of the word of God" (Study Notes on the King James Bible, p. 105).
Steven Avery
Well-known member
From O'Steen (not O-Steen):
1 John 5:7-8 (AV)
For there are three that bear record in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
And there are three that bear witness in earth,
the spirit, and the water, and the blood:
and these three agree in one.
Capitalizing spirit is wrong, and prevents the excellent interpretation of the Johannine crucifixion verses.
christ_undivided
Well-known member
From O'Steen's 2021 book, Study Notes on the King James Bible, pg. 83:
Two Streams
There are basically two streams of manuscripts that flow primarily from two places. The pure stream flows from Antioch in Syria. The corrupt stream flows from Alexandria in Egypt (the western text of Rome is associated with Alexandria).
Adding the words from the Latin "
in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
And there are three that bear witness in earth" is wrong, and destroys what God is saying about his Son.
David O'Steen also claimed: "In this chapter we will see that it is possible to trace the historical trunk and branches between the root and the fruit on the good tree that produced the KJB and the corrupt tree that produces the modern versions" (p. 87).
This is yet another example of how current KJV-only authors are still using and relying upon the erroneous two streams argument even though Steven Avery seemed to suggest that they are not.
Steven Avery
Well-known member
Above I showed you my sharing with some Baptist AV folks around 2010.
And I started doing my more public presentations around 2015, on PBF.
Bryan Ross did his major presentation in 2019, after he properly quizzed me on issues like the Wilkinson misuse of Frederick Nolan.
Many folks have changed. Takes some time.
Some never went that route, like Hills.
Afaik, Nick Sayers, Matthew Verschuur, Jeffrey Riddle are among those who never went the two streams route.
One person is not many folks. You still do not explain why Will Kinney has not corrected his use of this false argument after over 10 years of your sharing.
Beloved Daughter
Super Member
Oneness is classified as a CULT at CARM. They believe in cult-like behavior.
For myself, I would classify the RSV as much superior to the KJV and the NKJV, and even the NRSV, for its decision not to capitulate to Comma doctrine, as well as to the Comma itself (1 John 5:7 in KJV). Most people don't grasp that it is not only the Comma that is aberrant, but also its doctrine that worms its way into mistranslation of other verses such as Rom 9:5. Only the RSV properly encapsulates the true rendition of Rom 9:5 untainted by the Comma doctrine, as understood by the learned grammarians like Winer. It could plausibly be said that the Comma is not only wrongly inserted into the KJV, but a continuing curse from the past even on those modern translations that have seen fit to dispense with the Comma.
Last edited:
Romans 9:5
(KJV) Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
(RSV) To them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.
(NRSV) To them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, comes the Messiah, who is over all. God blessed for ever. Amen.
(NKJV) Of whom are the fathers and from whom, according the flesh, Christ came, who is above all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.
(GNB) They are descended from the famous Hebrew ancestors; and Christ, as a human being, belongs to their race. May God, who rules over all, be praised forever! Amen.
(Schonfield) Whose are the Patriarchs, and above all from whom in the physical sense came Christ, blessed be God for ever. Amen.
(KJV) Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
(RSV) To them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.
(NRSV) To them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, comes the Messiah, who is over all. God blessed for ever. Amen.
(NKJV) Of whom are the fathers and from whom, according the flesh, Christ came, who is above all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.
(GNB) They are descended from the famous Hebrew ancestors; and Christ, as a human being, belongs to their race. May God, who rules over all, be praised forever! Amen.
(Schonfield) Whose are the Patriarchs, and above all from whom in the physical sense came Christ, blessed be God for ever. Amen.
David Daniels claimed: “There are actually two single mistakes that were introduced by printers at Oxford University Press over 60 years after the KJV was first printed” (Answers to your Bible Version Questions, p. 127). Daniels asserted: “Cambridge University Press did not make the printing error. And all Cambridge-type texts have the correct readings” (Ibid.).