KJVONLYism and Gnosticism - Are there parallels?

JDS

Well-known member
JDS - As usual:
- The great majority of your above post doesn't actually deal with the points, challenges, and refutations that have been put to you.
- The argument about how many words have been added/taken away has already been answered multiple times. What is especially telling about that is that all your posts have ever done is run away from the truth that the KJV translators themselves did the very thing you accuse other translations of doing.
- Your accusation of "those who publish these new MV's are taught that words are not important" is one more (silly) accusation that is totally devoid of proof of any kind whatsoever. And I will predict right here and now that there never will be any proof provided, because - as is true for SO MUCH of what's in your posts - You can't produce proof that never has and does not exist.


The only thing the post does is side-tracking - which is just a form of running away.

Understandable, considering the posting history - But still not really a good thing.
Your explanation for your claim that scores of translations and paraphrases in the English language accurately records the exact thoughts of God without a single conflict of any doctrine is worse EDIT divisive.

Then, after all that, to try to convince the nice people here who reads your comments that you are not arguing for a divine message only and not for divine words is cause to not take you serious and this teaching from you can be evidenced by you failure to quote a single bible passage that demonstrates that I am violating anything that God ever said when I ask you to believe he is giving his own testimony in his own words. Your opposition to this is the single strongest indicator that you are preaching a message that comes from your own reasoning and imagination.

The take away from this is that you are exposed by this conversation as having a non scriptural doctrine of the Bible.
and the only reason you have presented so far for your opposition of my view is that it disagrees with yours because you hold the majority view.

EDIT divisive
 
Last edited by a moderator:

John t

Super Member
Your explanation ...........

Like to use hyperbole much? :p

It is one thing to disagree amicably, but quite a different thing to disagree by stirring up trouble.

Can you come to the point that ALL translators of the Bible, in ALL languages are attempting to give an accurate rendition to the best of their abilities of what is stated in the original languages of the Bible, namely Hebrew, Aramaic (Daniel 1-7) and Koine Greek?

Can you come to the point that ALL the translators are imperfect, and therefore the concept of the "perfect translation" in any language is merely an unachievable illusion?

If you can come to those opinions, then IMHO there will be less inflammatory rhetoric.
 
Last edited:

John t

Super Member
The above is 100% irrefutable TRUTH. In order for KJVONLYists to say that anything in the first 3 chapters of Corinthians teaches or even HINTS in any way at all towards KJVONLism, that idea has to be very deliberately and very dishonestly forced onto the text in order to pervert the text to say what they want it to say.

In a certain way, I am trolling, and I know that I am a johnnie-come-lately in this thread.

But in order to get onto a different level, I ask what are the arguments that the KJV-only proponents use to support their position that the first three chapters in one of the two letters to the Corinthians supports KJV only-ism.

From my perspective the biggest hurdle for those guys to overcome is the obvious error of anachronism. No sane person can deny that there is a 1550+ years-long gap between what Paul wrote, and what King James commissioned.

Since the New Testament was authored in Greek, how could it refer ONLY to a then non-existant language?

Why would the same "logic" exclude every other language excepting English? Could it not also include Russian, Spanish, French or Klingon?

These are primary considerations that need addressing before any other discussions are made about your KJV only position
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
Why would the same "logic" exclude every other language excepting English? Could it not also include Russian, Spanish, French or Klingon?

That's one of many questions that KJV-Only's refuse to answer.

Is there a perfect "KJV" style translation in each language in the world?
Or does the the world have to learn English to have access to "the perfect Bible translation"?
 

imJRR

Active member
Your explanation for your claim that scores of translations and paraphrases in the English language accurately records the exact thoughts of God without a single conflict of any doctrine is worse EDIT divisive.

Then, after all that, to try to convince the nice people here who reads your comments that you are not arguing for a divine message only and not for divine words is cause to not take you serious and this teaching from you can be evidenced by you failure to quote a single bible passage that demonstrates that I am violating anything that God ever said when I ask you to believe he is giving his own testimony in his own words. Your opposition to this is the single strongest indicator that you are preaching a message that comes from your own reasoning and imagination.

The take away from this is that you are exposed by this conversation as having a non scriptural doctrine of the Bible.
and the only reason you have presented so far for your opposition of my view is that it disagrees with yours because you hold the majority view.

EDIT divisive

JDS - The fact, truth, and reality here is that my posts (and those of others) have already explained and proven - many many times, and in more than one thread - about your position and belief of KJVONLYism being wrong...and worse than wrong. A big part of the posting history that does this is right here on this very thread. KJVONLYism has not only been disagreed with and opposed; it has been refuted. That is the posting history. You can object and deny that, sure; but that's completely irrelevant. What your posts have never done and cannot do is that you cannot actually refute what's been put forth. There is no post anywhere at any time that does so, and there never will be because you cannot produce what does not exist and has never existed to begin with.

The idea/belief that ONLY the KJV has (these are your very words) "the words of God" and has "Gods stamp of approval" is nothing but mere and sheer imagination. This imaginary belief definitely leads to a form of gnosticism that significantly parallels the first century gnostics and their claims and beliefs and view of others not in their elitist and divisive and very wrong group. Some characteristics of the early gnostics were put forth in the initial post of this thread. As the thread has progressed, more characteristics have been posted/

And there are even posts by YOU, JDS, that PROVE that the gnostic characteristics mentioned in initial post (and the other characteristics subsequently mentioned) are 100% accurate and true to KJVONLYism. Again, I thank you for doing that.

I see the moderators have removed part of your post. That's good, and my thanks to them since it was personal and divisive and totally untrue.

As for my opposition to your idea/belief of "God giving his own testimony in his own words" - Let's get very real: You believe that that happens ONLY in the KJV. As a person who likes things like truth, of course I oppose it - because KJVONLYism is flat out NOT true...and worse. This is very easy to understand: I oppose and expose and refute your KJVONLY idea/belief because your idea/belief is and has been shown to be nothing but mere and sheer imagination. THAT is what you believe, JDS - an imagination, and nothing more. No post by you has ever shown otherwise, and no post ever will, because there is NOTHING at all in terms of real, actual evidence that shows KJVONLYism to have any validity at all whatsoever. But the BIG reason I oppose KJVONLYism is because that imaginary belief of KJVONLYism is not merely wrong - It directly leads to very serious and very negative results - as has been shown here (even by your own posts).

And yes - I have said and do say that the MVs - in particular the ones you yourself listed - show no omission or threatening of any Christian belief or teaching. And I say that because that's the TRUTH. Here again - There is no post by you that has ever shown otherwise and there never will be because you cannot produce what does not exist.

As for quoting Scripture - That's already been answered MULTIPLE times. You can type allll the verse you want - NONE of them point to or support KJVONLYism in the slightest way. Not one. As a KJVONLYist you imagine they do, but that's all your belief is and you have never and cannot show otherwise. Again - You cannot produce what does not exist.

As for me and my doctrine of the Bible - That's also already been answered MULTIPLE times. I remind you again - The subject here is KJVONLYism, and it is not going to change. I do understand that you'd like the subject changed to something or someone else - I would too, were I in your shoes, because it has been very clearly and repeatedly shown/proven that KJVONLYism is not based on either Scripture or reason.

As for this statement: "the only reason you have presented so far for your opposition of my view is that it disagrees with yours because you hold the majority view" - Nope. That's simply one more statement by you that's simply not true.
 
Last edited:

logos1560

Well-known member
Do not insult others
There are only two opinions.
Perhaps you are using the fallacy of false dilemma since there may be more than two options. You do not prove that there are only two opinions or only two options. The KJV-only use of fallacies is not sound logic. EDIT INSULT . EDIT INSULT EDIT INSULT that they do not state. Perhaps you run with the most EDIT INSULT -a crowd of one person who seems to think EDIT INSULT EDIT INSULT

The KJV was not based on a single source. The KJV was based on multiple, textually-varying sources including the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament. The KJV does not match any single original-language source. In addition, post-1900 varying editions of the KJV are not identical to the 1611 edition of the KJV and are not even identical to the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV. There is not one single text of the KJV found in the hundred or more varying editions of the KJV.

You do not demonstrate that the Church of England makers of the KJV had any direct commission from God to make yet another English Bible translation when the word of God had been translated into English many years before 1611. There are many differences both in text and in translation between the pre-1611 English Bibles and the KJV.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JDS

Well-known member
.

As for me and my doctrine of the Bible - That's also already been answered MULTIPLE times.

That is simply not true and I do not understand why you keep saying it. You have not opposed my argument that God has preserved his words in translation from the scriptures a single time. You have merely stated the same things over and over. You have not engaged in the debate on scriptural grounds. You have just asserted that I am wrong because you are right.

You will need to do better from this point on.
 

JDS

Well-known member
Perhaps you are using the fallacy of false dilemma since there may be more than two options. You do not prove that there are only two opinions or only two options. The KJV-only use of fallacies is not sound logic. Your own arrogance may exceed that of those you accuse. You arrogantly assume that you are more familiar with the ways of God than all non-KJV-only believers. You also arrogantly attempt to put words in the mouths of others that they do not state. Perhaps you run with the most arrogant crowd that there is--a crowd of one person who seems to think himself superior to every one else. You seem to think that you cannot be wrong in your unproven, non-scriptural claims for the KJV.

The KJV was not based on a single source. The KJV was based on multiple, textually-varying sources including the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament. The KJV does not match any single original-language source. In addition, post-1900 varying editions of the KJV are not identical to the 1611 edition of the KJV and are not even identical to the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV. There is not one single text of the KJV found in the hundred or more varying editions of the KJV.

You do not demonstrate that the Church of England makers of the KJV had any direct commission from God to make yet another English Bible translation when the word of God had been translated into English many years before 1611. There are many differences both in text and in translation between the pre-1611 English Bibles and the KJV.
Are you arguing that all English translations and paraphrases are sanctioned by God and he has no interest about any of them., and if your answer is yes, how do you know it?
 

imJRR

Active member
That is simply not true and I do not understand why you keep saying it. You have not opposed my argument that God has preserved his words in translation from the scriptures a single time. You have merely stated the same things over and over. You have not engaged in the debate on scriptural grounds. You have just asserted that I am wrong because you are right.

You will need to do better from this point on.

Yes, JDS - It IS true. I HAVE indeed answered concerning what I believe about the Bible. I have done so more than once. It's in the recorded posting history. It is not a good thing that I have to point out that what you write has already been answered multiple times. Besides this - Again, I remind you of something very, very important that your entire post above misses: The subject here is KJVONLYism, not me. As I said in my previous post - You keep trying to make the subject something (or someone) different. Also, as I said in my previous post: I would too, were I in your shoes, because it has been very clearly and repeatedly shown/proven that KJVONLYism is not based on either Scripture or reason. There is nothing that can honestly be called "real" when it comes to evidence supporting KJVONLYism - not from reason, and most certainly not from Scripture. Your posts have never once provided or shown any such evidence; and that's because you cannot produce what has never and does not exist. This is irrefutable, JDS.

As for this: "You have not engaged in the debate on scriptural grounds" - This, also, has been answered multiple times. Here again, it is not a good thing that I have to point out that what you write has already been answered multiple times. Again, an honest reading of the posts of this thread easily shows that. There are NO scriptural grounds for KJVONLYism. There never have been; there never will be. KJVONLYism has been shown/proven to be nothing but an imaginary myth. There is no post by you anywhere that has ever shown/proven otherwise, and no post ever will, because there is NOTHING at all in terms of real, actual evidence that shows KJVONLYism to have any validity at all whatsoever. And, as I said earlier - KJVONLYism is not merely imaginary and wrong - It directly leads to very serious and very negative results - as has been shown here (even by your very own posts on this thread).

As for this: "You have just asserted that I am wrong because you are right" - That is simply not a truthful statement on your part and here's why: The recorded posting history of this thread does show and prove that...
a) the idea/belief that ONLY the KJV has (these are your very words) "the words of God" and has "Gods stamp of approval" is nothing but mere and sheer imagination.
b) this imaginary belief definitely leads to a form of gnosticism that significantly parallels the first century gnostics and their claims and beliefs and view of others not in their elitist and divisive and very wrong group. Some characteristics of the early gnostics were put forth in the initial post of this thread. As the thread has progressed, more characteristics have been posted.

That's what this thread shows, and as I said earlier: There are even posts by YOU, JDS, that PROVE that the gnostic characteristics mentioned in initial post (and the other characteristics subsequently mentioned) are 100% accurate and true to KJVONLYism. Again, I thank you for doing that.

So, in terms of which of us needs to be "doing better from this point on":
- Considering the multiple avoidances of your posts to deal with multiple challenges that have been submitted;
- Considering the multiple attempts your posts have made to make something (or someone) other than KJVONLYism the subject;
- Considering the proven false accusations your posts have made toward/about others;
- Considering that your very own posts have helped prove the 100% truth of the original post (and others) about the inherent gnosticism of KJVONLYism;
- Considering the actual refutations that KJVONLYism has received that your post have no answer at all for;

I'm very content to let the readers decide between us as to which of needs to be "doing better".
 

logos1560

Well-known member
You have not engaged in the debate on scriptural grounds. You have just asserted that I am wrong because you are right.

You will need to do better from this point on.

You describe your own non-scriptural KJV-only theory. You do not practice what you preach. You merely claim to be right, but you fail to prove that you are actually right. You need to do better yourself.
 

logos1560

Well-known member
Are you arguing that all English translations and paraphrases are sanctioned by God and he has no interest about any of them., and if your answer is yes, how do you know it?
You should already know that my answer to your question would be no if you accurately understood what I state. Your question is based on your misunderstanding and misrepresentation of what I actually state. There are more than two options. If someone disagrees with the non-scriptural claim that only one English translation is sanctioned by God, it does not lead to the bogus conclusion that that person claims that all English translations and paraphrases are sanctioned by God. You make your question invalid since it seems to rely upon use of the fallacy of false dilemma. The Scriptures do not state nor teach that the word of God is bound to the textual criticism decisions, Bible revisions decisions, and translation decisions of one exclusive group of doctrinally-unsound Church of England priests/critics in 1611.

The history of the making of the KJV would prove that more than one English translation is permitted or allowed by God. Even some KJV-only authors would suggest that God blessed and used the 1560 Geneva Bible for around 100 years, and it has many differences with the 1611 KJV.
 

JDS

Well-known member
Perhaps you are using the fallacy of false dilemma since there may be more than two options. You do not prove that there are only two opinions or only two options. The KJV-only use of fallacies is not sound logic. Your own arrogance may exceed that of those you accuse. You arrogantly assume that you are more familiar with the ways of God than all non-KJV-only believers. You also arrogantly attempt to put words in the mouths of others that they do not state. Perhaps you run with the most arrogant crowd that there is--a crowd of one person who seems to think himself superior to every one else. You seem to think that you cannot be wrong in your unproven, non-scriptural claims for the KJV.

The KJV was not based on a single source. The KJV was based on multiple, textually-varying sources including the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament. The KJV does not match any single original-language source. In addition, post-1900 varying editions of the KJV are not identical to the 1611 edition of the KJV and are not even identical to the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV. There is not one single text of the KJV found in the hundred or more varying editions of the KJV.

You do not demonstrate that the Church of England makers of the KJV had any direct commission from God to make yet another English Bible translation when the word of God had been translated into English many years before 1611. There are many differences both in text and in translation between the pre-1611 English Bibles and the KJV.
Human history is 6000 years old and while God is the same in character now and forever and because he is achieving a certain and detailed end with opposition of heaven and earth, he makes certain obvious pivot points in his dealing with mankind. The flood of Noah's day, how could one miss that one. The end of the law of Moses as the operative principle of divine dealing with Israel at the cross is very clear to all but the Jews who still have not acknowledged that to this very day.

Some are not so obvious, but profound, like the revelation in Gen 15 of the word of the LORD, Adonay Jehovah, whom Abraham saw in a vision in the very beginning of the third millennium, and who fills the scene in the remainder of the OT, and is the same person who is the Word at the beginning of the NT, according to Jn 1. You can be sure he has ordered moves among men by providence that he has not explained to any of us because he has a certain appointment for this world while he is extending forth an invitation to all sinners to join with him because he has appointed a day, called in scripture in 17 different prophetic books over a period of 1500 years by 12 different authors, called the "day of the Lord" where he will purge from the earth those whom he cannot save because of their resistance to his lordship.

Zep 3:8 Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the LORD, until the day that I rise up to the prey: for my determination [is] to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, [even] all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy.
9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.

Isa 13:9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by [that] man whom he hath ordained; [whereof] he hath given assurance unto all [men], in that he hath raised him from the dead.

That day will be here soon but it is apparent to me that God pivoted west out of Europe with his word to a new continent with a bible he had previously prepared and it has been instrumental in winning millions of souls and keeping the church pure. He then brought people from all nations into the melting pot so they could hear this glorious gospel in a free society that he himself thought up.

He did not need to tell me what he was doing but I have eyes to see this wise and glorious plan. I can also see that you fellows are not a part of the plan, and yea, some of you, knowingly or unknowingly, are engaged with the opposition.
 

JDS

Well-known member
You should already know that my answer to your question would be no if you accurately understood what I state. Your question is based on your misunderstanding and misrepresentation of what I actually state. There are more than two options. If someone disagrees with the non-scriptural claim that only one English translation is sanctioned by God, it does not lead to the bogus conclusion that that person claims that all English translations and paraphrases are sanctioned by God. You make your question invalid since it seems to rely upon use of the fallacy of false dilemma. The Scriptures do not state nor teach that the word of God is bound to the textual criticism decisions, Bible revisions decisions, and translation decisions of one exclusive group of doctrinally-unsound Church of England priests/critics in 1611.

The history of the making of the KJV would prove that more than one English translation is permitted or allowed by God. Even some KJV-only authors would suggest that God blessed and used the 1560 Geneva Bible for around 100 years, and it has many differences with the 1611 KJV.
God can use anything he wants. The end is that sinners get saved and God gets glory. Of course he can, and probably did use the 1560 Geneva, as well as many of the MV's. That is not the argument. KJV only people argues that God preserved his words in the KJV. I argue that his timing for it was strategic. I do not care what others argue and why.
 

glenlogie

Well-known member
Human history is 6000 years old and while God is the same in character now and forever and because he is achieving a certain and detailed end with opposition of heaven and earth, he makes certain obvious pivot points in his dealing with mankind. The flood of Noah's day, how could one miss that one. The end of the law of Moses as the operative principle of divine dealing with Israel at the cross is very clear to all but the Jews who still have not acknowledged that to this very day.

Some are not so obvious, but profound, like the revelation in Gen 15 of the word of the LORD, Adonay Jehovah, whom Abraham saw in a vision in the very beginning of the third millennium, and who fills the scene in the remainder of the OT, and is the same person who is the Word at the beginning of the NT, according to Jn 1. You can be sure he has ordered moves among men by providence that he has not explained to any of us because he has a certain appointment for this world while he is extending forth an invitation to all sinners to join with him because he has appointed a day, called in scripture in 17 different prophetic books over a period of 1500 years by 12 different authors, called the "day of the Lord" where he will purge from the earth those whom he cannot save because of their resistance to his lordship.

Zep 3:8 Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the LORD, until the day that I rise up to the prey: for my determination [is] to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, [even] all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy.
9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.

Isa 13:9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by [that] man whom he hath ordained; [whereof] he hath given assurance unto all [men], in that he hath raised him from the dead.

That day will be here soon but it is apparent to me that God pivoted west out of Europe with his word to a new continent with a bible he had previously prepared and it has been instrumental in winning millions of souls and keeping the church pure. He then brought people from all nations into the melting pot so they could hear this glorious gospel in a free society that he himself thought up.

He did not need to tell me what he was doing but I have eyes to see this wise and glorious plan. I can also see that you fellows are not a part of the plan, and yea, some of you, knowingly or unknowingly, are engaged with the opposition.
Again we have the poster questioning the salvation of those that disagree with him
Bragging that he is the epitome of the knowledge of God.
 

logos1560

Well-known member
KJV only people argues that God preserved his words in the KJV. I argue that his timing for it was strategic. I do not care what others argue and why.
The Scriptures do not state nor teach that God preserved His word in the KJV especially only in the KJV. The Bible doctrine of preservation concerns the actual specific words God gave by inspiration to the prophets and apostles.

It is a fact that the KJV does not provide an English word for every original-language word of Scripture given by inspiration to the prophets and apostles so that all His words are not preserved in the KJV. You argue incorrectly something that the Scriptures do not teach. Are you suggesting that you do not care what the Scriptures teach as you advocate your personal opinions?
 

JDS

Well-known member
Matthew 4:4
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

The Scriptures do not state nor teach that God preserved His word in the KJV especially only in the KJV.
How do you know this ?
The Bible doctrine of preservation concerns the actual specific words God gave by inspiration to the prophets and apostles.
How do you know this and where did you learn it. You would be more correct to say that the doctrine of preservation concerns itself with the inspired words God gave to the church THROUGH the apostles and prophets.


Ephesians 2:20
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

It is a fact that the KJV does not provide an English word for every original-language word of Scripture given by inspiration to the prophets and apostles so that all His words are not preserved in the KJV.

This is the best argument that could be given for The superintendency of God over the translation of his inspired words.


Matthew 4:4
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Jesus said the above words to Satan about man. This causes me to say, hmmnn. Why did he say this to the very one who questioned his very words to man in the beginning. The takeaway is that one can learn something here. Obviously though, men like you will not accept that we can know every word of God.

God himself is the only one who can translate his words. He must be active in the process.



Are you suggesting that you do not care what the Scriptures teach as you advocate your personal opinions?
 

JDS

Well-known member
Follow up to logo1560 because I needed to edit past time limit.

It is a fact that the KJV does not provide an English word for every original-language word of Scripture given by inspiration to the prophets and apostles so that all His words are not preserved in the KJV.

This is the best argument that could be given for The superintendency of God over the translation of his inspired words.


Matthew 4:4
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Jesus said the above words to Satan about man. This causes me to say, hmmnn. Why did he say this to the very one who questioned his very words to man in the beginning. The takeaway is that one can learn something here. Obviously though, men like you will not accept that we can know every word of God.

God himself is the only one who can translate his words. He must be active in the process. The church doctrines are a series of mysteries.and those mysteries are revealed through words and types. What would be true of first century Christians will be true of us today, 2000 years later. Although these truths are hidden from past ages as God says through Paul in Ephesians 1, it does not mean that the types are not there. In fact, that is where they are and the type confirms the anti type. Therefore one must have a consistency of words for all the church, since it is a unity of many members in one body. For instance, the characteristics of this age is illustrated in the physical in Ge 22-24.

Here is an illustration of how that works. Jesus and his 3 disciples have just come down from the mount of transfiguration in Mark 9. It is at the end of his earthly ministry. These disciples were confused by the events and the words of Jesus that day but they knew the OT prophecies concerning the kingdom, which just had a physical manifestation for their very eyes. They knew that Elijah must come back before the kingdom is established because that is what the OT said. Here is the short version of the answer of Jesus;

Mt 11:14 And if ye will receive [it], this is Elias, which was for to come.

Mt 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
Mt 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.
Lu 1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

John the Baptist would have fulfilled the prophecies concerning the coming of Elijah, Jesus said, if Israel would have repented and been converted when Jesus first came. But they didn't and Elijah will come in the first 3 1/2 years of the 7 years tribulation, of which these disciples and Jesus were living in the physical type of this truth.

If you go around optimizing God in your new translations, you are more than likely going to optimize these types right out of the word of God, and Satan knows this. You are deceived if you think God is not preserving his word today in an understandable context. Moses did not get to enter the promised land because of his perversion of a type, the Rock from which the water came. Nadab and Abihu were killed by God for offering strange fire in the tabernacle because they perverted a type of the person and work of Jesus Christ by doing it.

We have our warning about holy things in Re 22. Ignore it at your own peril.

Are you suggesting that you do not care what the Scriptures teach as you advocate your personal opinions?
I have attempted to make a scriptural case for what I believe.
 

imJRR

Active member
There is NO "scriptural case" for KJVONLYism. KJVONLYism has been shown/proven to be nothing but an imaginary myth. There is no post by you anywhere that has ever shown/proven otherwise, and no post ever will, because there is NOTHING at all in terms of real, actual evidence that shows KJVONLYism to have any validity at all whatsoever - There is most certainly, most definitely NOTHING in scripture to support the belief. And, as I said earlier - KJVONLYism is not merely imaginary and wrong - It directly leads to very serious and very negative results - as has been shown here (even by your very own posts on this thread).
 

logos1560

Well-known member
We have our warning about holy things in Re 22. Ignore it at your own peril.


I have attempted to make a scriptural case for what I believe.
You have completely failed to make a scriptural case for your non-scriptural exclusive only claims for the KJV.

You ignore the scriptural warnings against adding to God's word as you add your personal opinions into verses that do not state what you suggest.
 
Top