KJVONLYism and Gnosticism - Are there parallels?

imJRR

Active member
logos 1560 wrote: 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.

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



Okay, this is getting to be a real serious departure from anything that can be called truth and reality. First, logos states the fact that the KJV does NOT provide an English word for every original-language word of Scripture given by inspiration of God to the prophets and apostles - therefore, all His words are NOT preserved in the KJV.

And then JDS basically says, Well, that's the best argument for believing that God superintended the inspiration of the KJV."

So - JDS is saying that the KJV is the (only) inspired word of God, even though it does NOT provide an English word for every original-language word of Scripture given by inspiration of God to the prophets and apostles - even though the KJV has omitted, added, changed, condensed, and optimized the wording in its translation.

I believe that this position by JDS does, at the very least, infer that the KJV is more inspired by God than the original writings of the prophets and apostles.

I submit that this position is not in keeping with anything that can be called truth and reality. To be very candid, I believe it to be quite insane (for starters).

There is a definite need for clear, plain-spoken clarification here.
 
Last edited:

John t

Super Member
SOME IRREFUTABLE FACTS must be agreed to in order that common sense discussion may prevail:

  1. There are ZERO writings in any language that can accurately predict what will happen with subsequent translations of the original writings.
  2. It is necessary to have studied another foreign language in order to fully understand that there is no such thing as a word-for-word translation in any language at any time.
  3. Because the KJVO people give no indication of having studied any other language they are at a distinct disadvantage. As a result, their posts here reflect that they are uneducated; ignorant of facts and linguistics however, they are not stupid.
  4. The KJVO people are loyal to what they comprehend, and what they have been taught. Therefore, anything perceived as an "attack on the KJV" is translated as a total attack on what they have learned. When they see that, they can get emotionally defensive and "stubborn", sometimes grasping at straws to make a point. For example, if we read in 2 Hezekiah ;) that the wall was green, we cannot arbitrarily say "No, it was yellow." without destroying the fact of Scripture
  5. Similarity, we cannot make an argument from silence from the Bible. We cannot discuss the diets of unicorns of curelomons or Big Foot from the Bible because all three do not exist, and are not recorded in the Bible
These should be universally agreed upon as fallacies of logical discourse. If future posts can reflect the repetition of the many errors exhibited in this thread, then there will be more ciivil discussion, and less moderator action.
 

JDS

Well-known member
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.
Example?
 

imJRR

Active member
Well, in terms of the first statement - There has never once been a scriptural case made for KJVONLYism, because no such thing exists or has ever existed. That is an irrefutable fact and truth, contrary to the mere and sheer imaginings found in your posts.
 

John t

Super 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.
OK, you are making a case for certain dispensations in the economy of God. To be consistent, you need to follow through with the different dispensations affect humanity, or else you are mixing unlike things together
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....
The flood of Noah's day, how could one miss that one


Now you are jumping from the flood to Abraham with no connection provided. Additionally, the flood CAME BEFORE Abbraham . That is an error of chronology (time of the event).Therefore, your argument fails.

.....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.
This has nothing to do with anything you previously posted in your post. All you are doing is making "mashed potatoes" out of Scripture. Nothing makes sense there, sorry to say.
This is the best argument that could be given for The superintendency of God over the translation of his inspired words.

Please inform us all where the words, "translation" "inspired" and "superintendency are in that section. I'll save you time. they ARE NOT THERE. What you are doing is simply making an argument from silence. Since Scripture is silent on those things, it is irrational and illogical to state that they exist where you say they do. No, I am NOT saying that those concepts are wrong; rather I am saying that very plainly, those words are absent. Thus you are making an argument from silence. The only rational thing that anyone can say about those verses is they do not support what you claim that they support.
 

RiJoRi

Well-known member
I may be mistaken, but didn't the Gnostics have a "secret language," or at least special meanings for common words?

--Rich
 

John t

Super Member
I may be mistaken, but didn't the Gnostics have a "secret language," or at least special meanings for common words?

--Rich
I cannot be certain.

However since the Gnostic s were all about having "secret knowledge", having a "secret language" would be in keeping with their "secret knowledge". It is just another anti-Christian cult/heresy.
 
Top