The origin of the KJVO myth...

[robycop3]

So Catholics were Christians and so everything Catholics says and put it in their Catechism is Christian? If it is not true for the Catholic Catechism, then why should dr. W's and his book speak for the just cause for relying only on the KJV for the meat of His words to discern good & evil by Him?

Dr. W wrote in 1930. The book was little-read outside the SDA cult for awhile, & once the internal squabble was over, it faded into obscurity, with Dr. W himself losing interest in it. It was found by a Baptist preacher named J. J. Ray, who legally plagiarized quite-heavily from it when he wrote God Wrote Only One Bible in 1955 without acknowledging Dr. W at all. From there, the flood of KJVO junk proliferated, with Dr. D. O. Fuller's Which Bible? being the leader in 1970. That book copied from both Dr. W & Ray, but at least he acknowledged them, while being careful not to mention Dr. W's CULT AFFILIATION. So, the current edition of the KJVO myth started with a book by a cult official, & 2 dishonest "Baptists" copying from it & using modern media to sell their garbage.

It was the Puritans that put in that request to King James for a new Bible because of errant marginal notes in the Geneva Bible.

No, the request was made to QE1 by the Anglican heirarchy, as the British monarch is head of that church. She died before she could act on the request, so the Anglicans had to wait for a new monarch to take the throne, & to learn his views before they renewed their request.

Can you prove that your prejudices against KJVO has not blinded you to the truths as kept in the KJV?

Easily. I asm saved by Jesus as per His instructions in newer versions, the KJV, & in older versions than that.

You say you are not anti-KJV & yet you argue if someone only relies on the KJV and calls them KJVO?

Their overview of Scripture is very narrow, & they're subject to other false doctrines, as YOU are.

Why don't you accuse everyone of being Catholic then?

Because they're not. Neither am I.

For most of your ministry, it is anti-KJVO. Don't you think something is off the mark here? But then again, only Christ Jesus can show that to you.

What's off the mark is your KJVO myth. It's simply FALSE. And, on KJVO forums, I stick to the subject. (I'm against any & all false doctrines of faith/worship, & against cults & false religions.)

 

[RiJoRi]

And vise versa.

Do you believe in OSAS? I forgot your position on that issue of faith. If you are, then you would be the first anti-KJVO that believes in OSAS that I have come across in this forum so far.

My opinion would probably irk both sides, but here goes...

I believe God is omni-temporal; that is, all times are as one to Him. And thus, we who are truly saved are saved forever. We can wander and go astray, but the Good Shepard will bring us back.

However, from our perspective, humans can "come to Jesus" and later wander off. This, to us, looks like OSNAS.

As to the "security scriptures", they are for the weak in faith, reassuring them. The "insecurity scriptures" (so to speak) are there for the presumptuous.

As I said, this is my opinion, the way I've settled things in my head. You are welcome to agree, disagree, or ROFL. But I will NOT argue the matter. It's still a tender spot even after 45 years.

--Rich

 

[logos1560]

yet scripture says believers can be deceived.

That means that you can also be deceived although you seem to avoid dealing with that scriptural truth. Your human, non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning can deceive you. You choose to believe blindly some KJV-only assertions that have not been proven to be true and that are not actually true. Believing assertions that are not true is by definition being deceived.

 

[logos1560]

. If you are, then you would be the first anti-KJVO that believes in OSAS that I have come across in this forum so far.

You may choose to jump to unproven and false opinions concerning the beliefs of non-KJV-only Bible believers.

There are many non-KJV-only Bible believers that believe what the Scriptures teach concerning OSAS [once saved always saved] since that would involve the meaning of eternal life. If believers could lose their salvation, they were not given the eternal life that Christ promised to give them (John 10:28).

Just as God's word declares and teaches, when a person has eternal life or eternal salvation, they shall never perish and no man, which would have to include they themselves since "no man" includes all men, can pluck them out of God's hand (John 10:27-29).

 

[Hark]

Dr. W wrote in 1930. The book was little-read outside the SDA cult for awhile, & once the internal squabble was over, it faded into obscurity, with Dr. W himself losing interest in it. It was found by a Baptist preacher named J. J. Ray, who legally plagiarized quite-heavily from it when he wrote God Wrote Only One Bible in 1955 without acknowledging Dr. W at all. From there, the flood of KJVO junk proliferated, with Dr. D. O. Fuller's Which Bible? being the leader in 1970. That book copied from both Dr. W & Ray, but at least he acknowledged them, while being careful not to mention Dr. W's CULT AFFILIATION. So, the current edition of the KJVO myth started with a book by a cult official, & 2 dishonest "Baptists" copying from it & using modern media to sell their garbage.

That is the same reasoning given about the rapture event. Only thing is, there are 2 claims as to the origin of that issue as cited by those who claim it is falsehood. Guilt by association is hardly a sound judgment. Either you address the specific heresy and correct by scripture or we are just wasting time with KJVO as a general & vague judgment from you & others on this forum.

As it is, you might as well condemn Christianity as a cult because we have Catholicism in it. So how do you defend Christianity? By exposing why Catholicism is not Christianity.

So how do I defend relying only on the KJV for the meat of His words when other modern bibles are not saying the same thing? By sharing scripture in comparing the messages among the modern Bibles that are supporting false teachings whereas the KJV reproves it.

It is because of reliance on modern Bibles that only Jesus Christ can reveal to you that the KJV is keeping the truths in His words on all issues.

No, the request was made to QE1 by the Anglican heirarchy, as the British monarch is head of that church. She died before she could act on the request, so the Anglicans had to wait for a new monarch to take the throne, & to learn his views before they renewed their request.

Regardless, the request was made to King James for how the Puritans wanted another Bible version because of errant marginal notes in the Geneva Bible as running against scripture... like saying the angel Michael was Jesus Christ or to rise up against those in authority etc.

Easily. I asm saved by Jesus as per His instructions in newer versions, the KJV, & in older versions than that.

Yet you do not believe in OSAS for you to call Jesus your Savior that you are saved? How does that work? For you not to believe in OSAS, would it not be the truth by telling others that Jesus Christ might be your Savior because you are not sure if you are truly saved yet? That it is on you to keep yourself saved, thus Jesus Christ & you are the saviors?

That is why discipleship aka running that race is not about obtaining salvation but to be fruitful as His disciples to be received by Him as that vessel unto honor in His House. So where odes the vessel unto dishonor comes from that are still in His House? Those that did not look to Him for help to lay aside every weight & sin daily for why they become reprobate or disqualified and thus denied to attend the Marriage supper in heaven as part of the firstfruits of the resurrection at the pre great tribulation rapture event when God will judge His House first.

Their overview of Scripture is very narrow, & they're subject to other false doctrines, as YOU are.

Either you think about what you just said or you are pretty much saying no one Bible is keeping the truths in His words. You have to figure it out by reading multiple Bibles which the early church did not have nor were they nor we were instructed to do in getting to the truth of the matter..

Because they're not. Neither am I.

Then you should consider how you judge any one as relying only in the KJV as KJVO.

What's off the mark is your KJVO myth. It's simply FALSE. And, on KJVO forums, I stick to the subject. (I'm against any & all false doctrines of faith/worship, & against cults & false religions.)

What exactly am I posting that is KJVO myth? Are you judging everyone that used the KJV only when it came out as becoming cultic? Yet you insist you are not against the KJV, but just wanting to access many Bible versions that are available today and yet you seem to disregard the KJV.

You want to see my homework then using all Bible versions including the KJV? ALL Bibles says john 16:13 testifies that the Holy Spirit cannot speak for Himself nor utter anything at all from Himself but speaks what He hears. But most modern Bibles do not keep that truth in John 16:13 in that Romans 8:26-27 in their modern Bibles but the KJV and a few modern Bibles do as He cannot even utter His groanings. The errant modern Bible versions that implies sounds are being heard with wordless groans and sighs are being used by modern tongue speakers today that claim that tongues can also be used for private use as if one of those uses is the Holy Spirit praying in tongues for them to God.

Then out of that discernment with the Lord, He led me to see how all Bibles do not keep the same message in 1 Corinthians 1:18 as the KJV does that we are saved, and not in the process of being saved as in "are being saved" as written in error in some modern Bibles, but not in the KJV.

I have shared this with you before, but I do not believe the Lord has led you to be impartial yet to do that homework that you claim you are doing when using all Bible versions to get to the truth of any matter.

If anything, you are proving to me that because not all Bibles are saying the same thing, and modern Bibles has scripture running against scripture within whatever modern bible you are using, I can see why you would have doubts in His words about the original message of truth.

If you cannot pick one Bible for assurance in having His words to discern good & evil by it, then how can you prove you are not on that slippery slope to error & falsehood? How can you not see that you are opposing yourself being against OSAS and yet you say you are saved?

 

[Hark]

That means that you can also be deceived although you seem to avoid dealing with that scriptural truth. Your human, non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning can deceive you. You choose to believe blindly some KJV-only assertions that have not been proven to be true and that are not actually true. Believing assertions that are not true is by definition being deceived.

You should reconsider your comment. Does that mean before all those other modern versions became available, and only a few other bibles versions were available back then when the KJV came out, that all Christians that only used the KJV have been led astray since then?

You really think that all churches, let alone every individual believer, had access to those few other modern bible versions like Wycliffe's, Tyndale's & the Geneva Bible along with the KJV back then before the rest of the modern Bibles came to compare all versions to find the truth in His words?

How about showing scripture that says we are to find the truth in His words like that?

I can show you scripture that Jesus warned us from the Father that we will need His help to discern who loved Him to keep His words because there will be those who will not love Him to keep His words.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

John 15:20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.

That means there has to be one Bible kept by those who loved Him & His words but you guys are all over the place and yet not all Bibles are saying the same thing so I doubt you all can say the same thing by reading all those modern Bibles when they sow doubts in His words.

 

[Hark]

You may choose to jump to unproven and false opinions concerning the beliefs of non-KJV-only Bible believers.

There are many non-KJV-only Bible believers that believe what the Scriptures teach concerning OSAS [once saved always saved] since that would involve the meaning of eternal life. If believers could lose their salvation, they were not given the eternal life that Christ promised to give them (John 10:28).

Just as God's word declares and teaches, when a person has eternal life or eternal salvation, they shall never perish and no man, which would have to include they themselves since "no man" includes all men, can pluck them out of God's hand (John 10:27-29).

Are you announcing that you believe in OSAS as an anti-KJVO? Or am I misreading you here?

I have not made any opinion nor judgment yet, and I doubt I will since any poll or survey on a limited amount of people can be misleading, but if you are an anti-KJVO and you do believe in OSAS, then that answers my question.

However, if you are, then how do you contend with believers that think they are in the process of being saved when they use 1 Corinthians 1:18 to support that false teaching in some modern Bibles thus sowing doubts in His words per your John 10:27-29 reference?

If you believe it is wrong to rely only on one Bible version, when the KJV has been keeping the truth/meat in His words for me to discern good & evil by it, then how can you reprove others of false teachings by comparing all Bible versions when some modern bibles would support it?

 

[Hark]

My opinion would probably irk both sides, but here goes...

I believe God is omni-temporal; that is, all times are as one to Him. And thus, we who are truly saved are saved forever. We can wander and go astray, but the Good Shepard will bring us back.

However, from our perspective, humans can "come to Jesus" and later wander off. This, to us, looks like OSNAS.

As to the "security scriptures", they are for the weak in faith, reassuring them. The "insecurity scriptures" (so to speak) are there for the presumptuous.

As I said, this is my opinion, the way I've settled things in my head. You are welcome to agree, disagree, or ROFL. But I will NOT argue the matter. It's still a tender spot even after 45 years.

--Rich

Then you should pray, asking Jesus Christ for wisdom in understanding His words. Jesus said that He will not lose any of all the Father has given Him and He will in no wise cast out in John 6:37-40. Even though He says all are saved there, He does speak of a casting out for not abiding in Him as His disciples per verse 6 of John 15:1-8 & for not being ready when He comes per Luke 12:40-49 as cast out into the bed of the coming great tribulation unless the believer repented per Revelation 2:18-25 regardless if the church remains unrepented.

This is why He helps me to align His words to see that those left behind or have gone astray are still His sheep and still saved. There is more.

Matthew 18:10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. 11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. 12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? 13 And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. 14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

So after the rapture. having gathered the 99 sheep in His barn, He will go after that lost sheep left behind. We are not to desive the ones that have gone astray for they are still His. Then Jesus expounds further in regards to correcting those astray.

15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. 16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Jesus taught excommunication for the church to do as He will do when He comes as the Bridegroom in judging His House first at the rapture. Although He gathered the sheep that followed Him, He will go back for that lost sheep not found abiding in Him because they are His sheep.

We are not to deny the Lord that bought them for why OSAS is true. You will always see corrections given to those astray, but not the preaching of the gospel to those that have gone astray because they already know the gospel for why they are still saved. Lies can turn saved believers in overthrowing their faith in Jesus Christ, but He still abides even in former believers 2 Timothy 2:10-26 for why He will get those left behind saints.

When you consider how you have confidence in Him to finish His work in you ( Philippians 1:6-11 & 2 Timothy 4:18 ) as you trust Him to get you ready & keep you ready, then you can understand that He will finish His work in those left behind that had stopped looking to Him for having them ready to go by helping them in laying aside every weight & sin daily. That is the point of living this reconciled relationship with God through Jesus Christ, but not every saved believer will be found looking to Him to help them be ready to go when He comes.

But they will look to Him after the rapture event as there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when left behind like that for not being ready. Even though death may come upon them, they ae still His and sinners can still call on Jesus Christ to save them and He will. Though they may die, their spirits will be with the Lord in Heaven afterwards, awaiting their resurrection after the great tribulation.

 

[robycop3]

That is the same reasoning given about the rapture event. Only thing is, there are 2 claims as to the origin of that issue as cited by those who claim it is falsehood. Guilt by association is hardly a sound judgment. Either you address the specific heresy and correct by scripture or we are just wasting time with KJVO as a general & vague judgment from you & others on this forum.

Paul, while referring to "tongues", made the common-sense starement that preaching should be in the language of its audience, or it'd be meaningless to them. Insisting on KJVO is trying to force modern English users to rely on archaic, out-of-use language to read/hear God's word, from a far-from=perfect version. And the HOLY SPIRIT enabled everyone in the audience at the "first pentecost" to hear Peter's preaching in his/her own language, no matter what it was. (Peter was actually speaking in Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic.) Thus, it's heresy to expect everyone to use an outdated Bible version that's not in the common tongue. And it's heresy to believe or push a doctrine of faith/worship that has NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT WHATSOEVER, by even the slightest implication.

As it is, you might as well condemn Christianity as a cult because we have Catholicism in it. So how do you defend Christianity? By exposing why Catholicism is not Christianity.

Of course. How can you defend the KJVO myth? Just by saying newer versions aren't correct , while being unable to prove it?

So how do I defend relying only on the KJV for the meat of His words when other modern bibles are not saying the same thing? By sharing scripture in comparing the messages among the modern Bibles that are supporting false teachings whereas the KJV reproves it.

Often it's the KJV that's wrong and a newer version is right, such as the "Easter" thingie, or the 1 Tim. 6:10 thingie.

It is because of reliance on modern Bibles that only Jesus Christ can reveal to you that the KJV is keeping the truths in His words on all issues.

But it's NOT. I pointed out to you that the KJV ADDED to God's word in Rev. 16:5, in express disobedience to God's command for which you had no satisfactory answer. And that's only ONE of several goofs & booboos in it.

Regardless, the request was made to King James for how the Puritans wanted another Bible version because of errant marginal notes in the Geneva Bible as running against scripture... like saying the angel Michael was Jesus Christ or to rise up against those in authority etc.

KJ left it in the hands of Archbishop Bancroft. His main objection to the Geneva was its footnotes questioning the "Divine rights of kings".

Yet you do not believe in OSAS for you to call Jesus your Savior that you are saved? How does that work? For you not to believe in OSAS, would it not be the truth by telling others that Jesus Christ might be your Savior because you are not sure if you are truly saved yet? That it is on you to keep yourself saved, thus Jesus Christ & you are the saviors?

How silly! I don't believe in OSAS because it's plain that if a saint does a 180 & rejects Jesus, he has let go of Jesus & is lost.

That is why discipleship aka running that race is not about obtaining salvation but to be fruitful as His disciples to be received by Him as that vessel unto honor in His House. So where odes the vessel unto dishonor comes from that are still in His House? Those that did not look to Him for help to lay aside every weight & sin daily for why they become reprobate or disqualified and thus denied to attend the Marriage supper in heaven as part of the firstfruits of the resurrection at the pre great tribulation rapture event when God will judge His House first.

Either you think about what you just said or you are pretty much saying no one Bible is keeping the truths in His words. You have to figure it out by reading multiple Bibles which the early church did not have nor were they nor we were instructed to do in getting to the truth of the matter..

Then you should consider how you judge any one as relying only in the KJV as KJVO.

What exactly am I posting that is KJVO myth? Are you judging everyone that used the KJV only when it came out as becoming cultic? Yet you insist you are not against the KJV, but just wanting to access many Bible versions that are available today and yet you seem to disregard the KJV.

You want to see my homework then using all Bible versions including the KJV? ALL Bibles says john 16:13 testifies that the Holy Spirit cannot speak for Himself nor utter anything at all from Himself but speaks what He hears. But most modern Bibles do not keep that truth in John 16:13 in that Romans 8:26-27 in their modern Bibles but the KJV and a few modern Bibles do as He cannot even utter His groanings. The errant modern Bible versions that implies sounds are being heard with wordless groans and sighs are being used by modern tongue speakers today that claim that tongues can also be used for private use as if one of those uses is the Holy Spirit praying in tongues for them to God.

Then out of that discernment with the Lord, He led me to see how all Bibles do not keep the same message in 1 Corinthians 1:18 as the KJV does that we are saved, and not in the process of being saved as in "are being saved" as written in error in some modern Bibles, but not in the KJV.

I have shared this with you before, but I do not believe the Lord has led you to be impartial yet to do that homework that you claim you are doing when using all Bible versions to get to the truth of any matter.

If anything, you are proving to me that because not all Bibles are saying the same thing, and modern Bibles has scripture running against scripture within whatever modern bible you are using, I can see why you would have doubts in His words about the original message of truth.

If you cannot pick one Bible for assurance in having His words to discern good & evil by it, then how can you prove you are not on that slippery slope to error & falsehood? How can you not see that you are opposing yourself being against OSAS and yet you say you are saved?

You won't get that garbage out of your head that there'll be saints left behind at the rapture. You believe in OSAS no matter what a person does contrary to Christianity. You believe the man-made KJVO myth. I'm beginning to think you're a pseudo-Christian cultic, eaten up with false doctrines that need to be purged. And it looks like only the HOLY SPIRIT can do it. No wonder the Baptist Board banned you for 6 months, hoping you'd ditch the false doctrines in that time. You need some serious & sincere prayer time to ask God to correct you & show you His TRUTH.

 

[Hark]

Paul, while referring to "tongues", made the common-sense starement that preaching should be in the language of its audience, or it'd be meaningless to them.

Like Jesus referred to Gehenna on earth to the hearers?

Insisting on KJVO is trying to force modern English users to rely on archaic, out-of-use language to read/hear God's word, from a far-from=perfect version.

Perfect? Maybe that should be defined before applying it as KJVO for what makes that certain perfection as KJVO, because anti-KJVers have been assigning modern bibles as a much better version thus saying it is more perfect, yes? So how does modern bible escape that Onlyism when they are still trying to make an easier to read then the KJV Bible? Would you think they have done it after the NIV came out? But no.

So does every Bible version that comes out after another Bible version is the more perfect or perfect version? No. They are still making more Bible versions and so far, nobody has said any version is the perfect version and yet they say it is better than the KJV?

Also, during the times I have heard about this debate about KJVO, a false charge that King James was a homosexual was brought up and that he had changed the Bible, but the Bible verses are still there calling homosexuality an abomination so what did he changed? Nothing. I find it telling when anti-KJVO do not stop that lie when others repeat it over and over again. And because he had enemies telling lies back then about him, does that not bring circumspect to those trying to discredit relying only on the KJV? I'd say yes.

And the HOLY SPIRIT enabled everyone in the audience at the "first pentecost" to hear Peter's preaching in his/her own language, no matter what it was. (Peter was actually speaking in Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic.) Thus, it's heresy to expect everyone to use an outdated Bible version that's not in the common tongue. And it's heresy to believe or push a doctrine of faith/worship that has NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT WHATSOEVER, by even the slightest implication.

I believe that was another lie against the KJVO given by anti-KJVO. I recall how they mock the KJVO as if Jesus had spoken only in archaic English. and yet by doing so, they discredit all other English modern Bibles. It is a hypocritical reasoning borne out of mocking KJVO. Did Jesus spoke in modern English? No. So you might as well mock all English Bibles if you are going to assign KJVO like that.

Of course. How can you defend the KJVO myth? Just by saying newer versions aren't correct , while being unable to prove it?

Been proving it. The fact that anti-KJVOs say that not all Bibles are saying the same thing nor keeping the same message are the ones saying that I cannot prove the new Bible versions are not correct.

Remember 1 Corinthians 1:18 between "are saved per KJV and some modern bibles to "are being saved" in some modern bibles? You believe you are saved but yet do not believe in OSAS. So which side of that verse do you believe? Are you saved or in the process of being saved?

What about 1 Peter 4:19? Ask yourself why the keeping of our souls is dropped in other modern versions from how the KJV has it? Even the NKJV has dropped that topic in that verse. It is no wonder why believers are led astray by that verse thinking one can make a commitment to Christ & to do good when scripture opposes following Jesus by the flesh of keeping that commitment when we are to live by faith in Him as our Good Shepherd to help us to follow Him for why it is written that the just shall live by faith.

Not to mention how all Bibles say the truth in John 16:13 that the Holy Spirit cannot speak for Himself or utter any sounds at all while modern day tongue speakers use the NIV and other modern versions of Romans 8:26-27 as if the Holy Spirit is uttering wordless groans or some sort of sounds like gibberish nonsense which said tongue is gained by what they believe was the Holy Spirit apart from salvation bringing that tongue. That is the apostasy Paul was warning about in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-15 where he addressed the reproof towards such nonsense of getting tongues or slain in the spirt of holy laughter by believing in the lie that one can receive the Holy Spirit again after other sensational signs in the flesh. That reproof was by reminding believers when they had received the sanctification of the Spirit & the belief of the truth which was at the calling of the gospel. Paul goes unto the next chapter addressing those that are disorderly and not walking after the traditions of us any more that we are to withdraw from them in 2 Thessalonians 3:1-7 but he said to not treat these that are at risk of being damned as the enemy, but to admonish them as brothers still because they are still brothers and thus still saved (2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 ) but at risk of being left behind in becoming "damned" as vessels unto dishonor for why they are still in His House for not departing from iniquity.

2 Timothy 2:20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.

Do you acknowledge reading that verse 20 or not? If purging oneself by departing from iniquity with His help is how one can be received as a vessel unto honor, then with His help, you may see that the vessels of wood & earth that is in His House are the ones resurrected after the great tribulation to serve the King of kings on earth as these are the ones that did not depart from iniquity or sin before the Bridegroom had come.

To be continued.

 

[Hark]

Often it's the KJV that's wrong and a newer version is right, such as the "Easter" thingie, or the 1 Tim. 6:10 thingie.

Easter is only wrong when you refuse to acknowledge that Easter also meant Passover per Tyndale's Bible. So how Easter was used in Tyndale's Bible became archaic for a better preference of Passover for the modern day user is hardly a mistake. Claiming that Easter is only referring to the pagan holiday is the mistake still being made by anti-KJVO.

1 Timothy 6:10 is you being literal about "all" without realizing that they are both saying the same thing.

1 timothy 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. KJV

1 Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

The root of all kinds of evil is just as encompassing as the root of all evil. You just do not want to read it that way but that is saying the same thing.

But it's NOT. I pointed out to you that the KJV ADDED to God's word in Rev. 16:5, in express disobedience to God's command for which you had no satisfactory answer. And that's only ONE of several goofs & booboos in it.

I do not recall this as mentioned to me. Sure you are not talking about someone else? Anyway... let us see with the Lord's help..

Revelation 16:5 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus.

I believe this is referring to how Jesus Christ is, when He judges.

Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

Going by Strong's Concordance, I do not see how you can say the KJV translated it wrong.

"ho own kahee ho ane kahee ho er-khom'-en-os a phrase combining o - ho 3588 with the present participle and imperfect of eimi - eimi 1510 and the present participle of ercomai - erchomai 2064 by means of kai - kai 2532; the one being and the one that was and the one coming, i.e. the Eternal, as a divine epithet of Christ:--which art (is, was), and (which) wast (is, was), and art (is) to come (shalt be)."

Okay. Now I recall that you did address that to me but you said nothing in response to what I had just shared here again. You certainly did not prove the proper translation as being different than how the Strong's Concordance had put it.

But still Revelation 16:5 is just referring to He is the same in how He shall be in how He judges in the future as well in the past & present.

KJ left it in the hands of Archbishop Bancroft. His main objection to the Geneva was its footnotes questioning the "Divine rights of kings".

Along with the errant marginal note of the angel Michael being Jesus.

How silly! I don't believe in OSAS because it's plain that if a saint does a 180 & rejects Jesus, he has let go of Jesus & is lost.

It should not be plain when He is faithful because He still abides in former believers per 2 Timothy 2:13. You have to ask why. OSAS is true.

You won't get that garbage out of your head that there'll be saints left behind at the rapture. You believe in OSAS no matter what a person does contrary to Christianity. You believe the man-made KJVO myth. I'm beginning to think you're a pseudo-Christian cultic, eaten up with false doctrines that need to be purged. And it looks like only the HOLY SPIRIT can do it. No wonder the Baptist Board banned you for 6 months, hoping you'd ditch the false doctrines in that time. You need some serious & sincere prayer time to ask God to correct you & show you His TRUTH.

In Luke 12:40-49, believers not found ready, are cut off to be with unbelievers. That is Jesus clearly testifying to believers in being cut off to be with what? Unbelievers; those whom have never believed in Jesus Christ.

Yet, these self same believers are being given stripes per the knowledge they had for not being ready and lesser stripes per the lack of knowledge they had for not being ready. Unbelievers are not given any stripes. On top of all that, He still calls them His servants. OSAS.

Side note, after everyone on earth that has seen the Lord at the rapture & the everlasting gospel is preached everywhere before the end comes when that fiery calamity will burn one third of the earth, everyone calling on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

 

[logos1560]

Remember 1 Corinthians 1:18 between "are saved per KJV and some modern bibles to "are being saved" in some modern bibles? You believe you are saved but yet do not believe in OSAS. So which side of that verse do you believe? Are you saved or in the process of being saved?

Perhaps your question involves use of the either/or fallacy. You ignore the possibility that it could be both instead of either/or. There is a past aspect of salvation [justification], a present aspect of salvation [the continuing process of needed spiritual growth and becoming more like Christ--sanctification], and a future aspect of salvation [glorification]. Do you claim already to have a glorified body like that Christ had after His resurrection?

 

[logos1560]

Going by Strong's Concordance, I do not see how you can say the KJV translated it wrong.

"ho own kahee ho ane kahee ho er-khom'-en-os a phrase combining o - ho 3588 with the present participle and imperfect of eimi - eimi 1510 and the present participle of ercomai - erchomai 2064 by means of kai - kai 2532; the one being and the one that was and the one coming, i.e. the Eternal, as a divine epithet of Christ:--which art (is, was), and (which) wast (is, was), and art (is) to come (shalt be)."

Okay. Now I recall that you did address that to me but you said nothing in response to what I had just shared here again. You certainly did not prove the proper translation as being different than how the Strong's Concordance had put it.

You are misusing or misunderstanding the purpose of Strong's Concordance. Strong's Concordance is not perfect, and it is not the word of God. There have been proven errors in editions of Strong's Concordance, where the wrong number is given for the Greek word. In this case, Strong's Concordance may be merely giving the meaning of the Greek word introduced by Beza into his printed text as a conjecture and which the KJV followed. Strong's Concordance is not presenting the meaning of the Greek as found in all known preserved Greek NT manuscripts. Strong's Concordance merely lists the ways that Greek words are translated in the KJV, but it does not demonstrate whether the words are translated correctly and accurately. You are ignoring and avoiding the actual facts concerning the preserved Greek NT.

According to KJV defender Edward F. Hills, this KJV rendering “shalt be” came from a conjectural emendation interjected into the Greek text by Beza (Believing Bible Study, pp. 205-206). Edwards Hills again acknowledged that Theodore Beza introduced a few conjectural emendations in his edition of the Textus Receptus with two of them kept in the KJV, one of them at Revelation 16:5 shalt be instead of holy (KJV Defended, p. 208). Edward F. Hills identified the KJV reading at Revelation 16:5 as “certainly erroneous” and as a “conjectural emendation by Beza” (Believing Bible Study, p. 83).

 

[robycop3]

Like Jesus referred to Gehenna on earth to the hearers?

Perfect? Maybe that should be defined before applying it as KJVO for what makes that certain perfection as KJVO, because anti-KJVers have been assigning modern bibles as a much better version thus saying it is more perfect, yes? So how does modern bible escape that Onlyism when they are still trying to make an easier to read then the KJV Bible? Would you think they have done it after the NIV came out? But no.

So does every Bible version that comes out after another Bible version is the more perfect or perfect version? No. They are still making more Bible versions and so far, nobody has said any version is the perfect version and yet they say it is better than the KJV?

Also, during the times I have heard about this debate about KJVO, a false charge that King James was a homosexual was brought up and that he had changed the Bible, but the Bible verses are still there calling homosexuality an abomination so what did he changed? Nothing. I find it telling when anti-KJVO do not stop that lie when others repeat it over and over again. And because he had enemies telling lies back then about him, does that not bring circumspect to those trying to discredit relying only on the KJV? I'd say yes.

I believe that was another lie against the KJVO given by anti-KJVO. I recall how they mock the KJVO as if Jesus had spoken only in archaic English. and yet by doing so, they discredit all other English modern Bibles. It is a hypocritical reasoning borne out of mocking KJVO. Did Jesus spoke in modern English? No. So you might as well mock all English Bibles if you are going to assign KJVO like that.

Been proving it. The fact that anti-KJVOs say that not all Bibles are saying the same thing nor keeping the same message are the ones saying that I cannot prove the new Bible versions are not correct.

Remember 1 Corinthians 1:18 between "are saved per KJV and some modern bibles to "are being saved" in some modern bibles? You believe you are saved but yet do not believe in OSAS. So which side of that verse do you believe? Are you saved or in the process of being saved?

What about 1 Peter 4:19? Ask yourself why the keeping of our souls is dropped in other modern versions from how the KJV has it? Even the NKJV has dropped that topic in that verse. It is no wonder why believers are led astray by that verse thinking one can make a commitment to Christ & to do good when scripture opposes following Jesus by the flesh of keeping that commitment when we are to live by faith in Him as our Good Shepherd to help us to follow Him for why it is written that the just shall live by faith.

Not to mention how all Bibles say the truth in John 16:13 that the Holy Spirit cannot speak for Himself or utter any sounds at all while modern day tongue speakers use the NIV and other modern versions of Romans 8:26-27 as if the Holy Spirit is uttering wordless groans or some sort of sounds like gibberish nonsense which said tongue is gained by what they believe was the Holy Spirit apart from salvation bringing that tongue. That is the apostasy Paul was warning about in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-15 where he addressed the reproof towards such nonsense of getting tongues or slain in the spirt of holy laughter by believing in the lie that one can receive the Holy Spirit again after other sensational signs in the flesh. That reproof was by reminding believers when they had received the sanctification of the Spirit & the belief of the truth which was at the calling of the gospel. Paul goes unto the next chapter addressing those that are disorderly and not walking after the traditions of us any more that we are to withdraw from them in 2 Thessalonians 3:1-7 but he said to not treat these that are at risk of being damned as the enemy, but to admonish them as brothers still because they are still brothers and thus still saved (2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 ) but at risk of being left behind in becoming "damned" as vessels unto dishonor for why they are still in His House for not departing from iniquity.

2 Timothy 2:20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.

Do you acknowledge reading that verse 20 or not? If purging oneself by departing from iniquity with His help is how one can be received as a vessel unto honor, then with His help, you may see that the vessels of wood & earth that is in His House are the ones resurrected after the great tribulation to serve the King of kings on earth as these are the ones that did not depart from iniquity or sin before the Bridegroom had come.

To be continued.

I could answer all your tripe piece by piece, but there are three FACTS which trump it all, & here they are: Fact # 1. The KJVO myth has absolutely NO Scriptural support, a fact which alone makes it false, not to mention the lies within it.; its man-made origin is posted in other threads in this forum. Now, before you say there's no Scriptural support for other versions either, read Fact #2- NO OTHER ENGLISH VERSION has any claims of exclusivity for it! There are no NIVO, NASVO, NKJVO, ESVO, etc. groups, literature, or boox promoting ant other English versions as "The One". Thus, Scriptural support doesn't come into play for them. Fact # 3- The KJV is NOT in OUR everyday language. It's a "Model T" version. While the Model T is still a street-legal car, it's totally-unsuited for modern roads, quite-uncomfortable, must have fuel additive, can barely make 55-60 MPH, & is unheated with poor headlights. The KJV is in archaic language, has its share of goofs & booboos & has many second-rate translations such as "Thou shalt not KILL".

The whole KJVO myth is simply a lie invented by Satan & spread among men by some under his influence, including even some Christians. it appears to be shrinking now, as more people check it out for themselves instead of simply buying into it. While it'll always be around, it's being relegated into "minor, unimportant' status.

 

[Shoonra]

KJVOism coerces people into avoiding all Bibles except the KJV, which means, many of us would agree, a difficult read for contemporary audiences, thereby actually discouraging Bible reading.

 

[Hark]

Perhaps your question involves use of the either/or fallacy. You ignore the possibility that it could be both instead of either/or. There is a past aspect of salvation [justification], a present aspect of salvation [the continuing process of needed spiritual growth and becoming more like Christ--sanctification], and a future aspect of salvation [glorification]. Do you claim already to have a glorified body like that Christ had after His resurrection?

Since scripture is not of private interpretation, then which is the real message? Paul cannot be speaking out of both sides of his mouth. Granted, he can talk about both subjects, but we should be led by the Spirit to discern when he is since both topics are not the same thing that we can tell the difference, right?

When you take into context the message between 1 Corinthians 1:18-21, then it is about how we are saved presently for having believed the preaching of the gospel rather than that future redemption of our bodies at the firstfruits of the resurrection which is the rapture event.

If you refer to the present state of the unbelievers that perish as if inferring their future condemnation, you are forgetting Jesus's own words in John 3:18 whereby those believed are saved whereas the state of the unbelieving are condemned already for not believing in the name of Jesus Christ.

John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

In other words, before we were saved, we were heading to hell until we got saved at the calling of the gospel. That is to His glory.

That is why those who do not believe the preaching of the cross are condemned already, seeing them as they that perish.

 

[Hark]

You are misusing or misunderstanding the purpose of Strong's Concordance. Strong's Concordance is not perfect, and it is not the word of God. There have been proven errors in editions of Strong's Concordance, where the wrong number is given for the Greek word. In this case, Strong's Concordance may be merely giving the meaning of the Greek word introduced by Beza into his printed text as a conjecture and which the KJV followed. Strong's Concordance is not presenting the meaning of the Greek as found in all known preserved Greek NT manuscripts. Strong's Concordance merely lists the ways that Greek words are translated in the KJV, but it does not demonstrate whether the words are translated correctly and accurately. You are ignoring and avoiding the actual facts concerning the preserved Greek NT.

I can accept that, but you should also accept that your source for translating the Greek is not accurate also. We need Him to discern the message.

According to KJV defender Edward F. Hills, this KJV rendering “shalt be” came from a conjectural emendation interjected into the Greek text by Beza (Believing Bible Study, pp. 205-206). Edwards Hills again acknowledged that Theodore Beza introduced a few conjectural emendations in his edition of the Textus Receptus with two of them kept in the KJV, one of them at Revelation 16:5 shalt be instead of holy (KJV Defended, p. 208). Edward F. Hills identified the KJV reading at Revelation 16:5 as “certainly erroneous” and as a “conjectural emendation by Beza” (Believing Bible Study, p. 83).

If we were talking about God aka Jesus Christ... then "shalt be" would be a contention, but if in that message about Him is in regards to how He judges, then "shalt be" applies when it is about how He will judge as being the same in the past & present, as He shall in the future.

Revelation 16:4 And the third angel poured out his vial upon the rivers and fountains of waters; and they became blood. 5 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus. 6 For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.

Is it not strange how He judges here in the future? And yet He has judged the same in the past and even presently. So why switch it out with holy in regards to how He had judged presently, and in the past, when obviously, it is not about Him being holy but how He shall judge the same in the future?

 

[JDS]

KJVOism coerces people into avoiding all Bibles except the KJV, which means, many of us would agree, a difficult read for contemporary audiences, thereby actually discouraging Bible reading.

How do you know this?

 

[Hark]

I could answer all your tripe piece by piece, but there are three FACTS which trump it all, & here they are: Fact # 1. The KJVO myth has absolutely NO Scriptural support, a fact which alone makes it false, not to mention the lies within it.; its man-made origin is posted in other threads in this forum. Now, before you say there's no Scriptural support for other versions either, read Fact #2- NO OTHER ENGLISH VERSION has any claims of exclusivity for it! There are no NIVO, NASVO, NKJVO, ESVO, etc. groups, literature, or boox promoting ant other English versions as "The One". Thus, Scriptural support doesn't come into play for them. Fact # 3- The KJV is NOT in OUR everyday language. It's a "Model T" version. While the Model T is still a street-legal car, it's totally-unsuited for modern roads, quite-uncomfortable, must have fuel additive, can barely make 55-60 MPH, & is unheated with poor headlights. The KJV is in archaic language, has its share of goofs & booboos & has many second-rate translations such as "Thou shalt not KILL".

The whole KJVO myth is simply a lie invented by Satan & spread among men by some under his influence, including even some Christians. it appears to be shrinking now, as more people check it out for themselves instead of simply buying into it. While it'll always be around, it's being relegated into "minor, unimportant' status.

Your dismissal might as well be applied to Christianity because of Catholicism being a part of it.

Ask Jesus Christ to set aside your angst against the KJVO, and address the so called tripe, because that is how you reprove all false teaching by the scripture rather than.. by dismissing all tripe per your claim of it being a KJVO myth.

Why don't you do that with Catholics? Just haul off and dismiss them by calling it a Catholic myth? Let's apply your quote in that wise.

" I could answer all your tripe piece by piece, but there are three FACTS which trump it all, & here they are: Fact # 1. The catholic myth has absolutely NO Scriptural support, a fact which alone makes it false, not to mention the lies within it.; its man-made origin is posted in other threads in this forum. Now, before you say there's no Scriptural support for other churches either, read Fact #2- NO OTHER CHURCHES has any claims of exclusivity for it! There are no denominational groups, literature, or boox promoting ant other churches as "The One". Thus, Scriptural support doesn't come into play for them. Fact # 3- The Catholic Church is NOT in OUR only Church. It's a "Model T" version. While the Model T is still a street-legal car, it's totally-unsuited for modern roads, quite-uncomfortable, must have fuel additive, can barely make 55-60 MPH, & is unheated with poor headlights. The Catholic Church is in hypocrisy, has its share of goofs & booboos & has many hypocrisy such as "Thou shalt not KILL". "

Or don't you correct them by addressing each tripe by scripture?

But let me address your angst;

"I could answer all your tripe piece by piece, but there are three FACTS which trump it all, & here they are: Fact # 1. The KJVO myth has absolutely NO Scriptural support, a fact which alone makes it false, not to mention the lies within it.; its man-made origin is posted in other threads in this forum."

Why are the lost books not in the accepted scripture? Is it not true because they run against the accepted scripture? Yes or no.

Now, before you say there's no Scriptural support for other versions either, read Fact #2- NO OTHER ENGLISH VERSION has any claims of exclusivity for it! There are no NIVO, NASVO, NKJVO, ESVO, etc. groups, literature, or boox promoting ant other English versions as "The One". Thus, Scriptural support doesn't come into play for them.

What happens when a modern version has scripture running against scripture within that same modern version Bible? Doesn't the rule regarding the lost books for why they are not accepted scripture applies?

Fact # 3- The KJV is NOT in OUR everyday language. It's a "Model T" version. While the Model T is still a street-legal car, it's totally-unsuited for modern roads, quite-uncomfortable, must have fuel additive, can barely make 55-60 MPH, & is unheated with poor headlights. The KJV is in archaic language, has its share of goofs & booboos & has many second-rate translations such as "Thou shalt not KILL".

The one I am using is hardly that archaic. Jesus gives me wisdom in understanding His words as kept in the KJV. Jesus even gives me wisdom when footnotes or commentaries are running against the scripture in that same KJV Bible. Yep. Full circle for why the Puritans wanted another better Bible than the Geneva Bible with its errant marginal notes running against scripture.

Not sure how the Authorized King James version is like with the extras, but I am sure if they have them, probably should be always discerning with Him there too. I prefer to go with what is written for believers to read and rely on the Unction from the Holy One to teach us.

Might as well know that I am not bothering to defend KJVO, but by His grace & help, I am defending the KJV as keeping the truths in His words so we can have the meat to discern good & evil whereas modern Bibles have changed the message to support false teachings and apostasy.

I say this again... modern Bibles are supporting false teachings and apostasy in these latter days where faith is hard to find. Wake up.

 

[robycop3]

Your dismissal might as well be applied to Christianity because of Catholicism being a part of it.

Ask Jesus Christ to set aside your angst against the KJVO, and address the so called tripe, because that is how you reprove all false teaching by the scripture rather than.. by dismissing all tripe per your claim of it being a KJVO myth.

Why don't you do that with Catholics? Just haul off and dismiss them by calling it a Catholic myth? Let's apply your quote in that wise.

" I could answer all your tripe piece by piece, but there are three FACTS which trump it all, & here they are: Fact # 1. The catholic myth has absolutely NO Scriptural support, a fact which alone makes it false, not to mention the lies within it.; its man-made origin is posted in other threads in this forum. Now, before you say there's no Scriptural support for other churches either, read Fact #2- NO OTHER CHURCHES has any claims of exclusivity for it! There are no denominational groups, literature, or boox promoting ant other churches as "The One". Thus, Scriptural support doesn't come into play for them. Fact # 3- The Catholic Church is NOT in OUR only Church. It's a "Model T" version. While the Model T is still a street-legal car, it's totally-unsuited for modern roads, quite-uncomfortable, must have fuel additive, can barely make 55-60 MPH, & is unheated with poor headlights. The Catholic Church is in hypocrisy, has its share of goofs & booboos & has many hypocrisy such as "Thou shalt not KILL". "

Or don't you correct them by addressing each tripe by scripture?

But let me address your angst;



Why are the lost books not in the accepted scripture? Is it not true because they run against the accepted scripture? Yes or no.


What happens when a modern version has scripture running against scripture within that same modern version Bible? Doesn't the rule regarding the lost books for why they are not accepted scripture applies?

The one I am using is hardly that archaic. Jesus gives me wisdom in understanding His words as kept in the KJV. Jesus even gives me wisdom when footnotes or commentaries are running against the scripture in that same KJV Bible. Yep. Full circle for why the Puritans wanted another better Bible than the Geneva Bible with its errant marginal notes running against scripture.

Not sure how the Authorized King James version is like with the extras, but I am sure if they have them, probably should be always discerning with Him there too. I prefer to go with what is written for believers to read and rely on the Unction from the Holy One to teach us.

Might as well know that I am not bothering to defend KJVO, but by His grace & help, I am defending the KJV as keeping the truths in His words so we can have the meat to discern good & evil whereas modern Bibles have changed the message to support false teachings and apostasy.

I say this again... modern Bibles are supporting false teachings and apostasy in these latter days where faith is hard to find. Wake up.

You simply can't support your ckaims against modern bible versions. Just saying they differ from the KJV isn't proof. And you've been shown that the KJV has quite a few poor or incorrect translations.

And you've not satisfactorily answered the fact that the KJV ADDS to God's word in Rev. 16:5 & SUBTRACTS from it in Jude 25, against God's express command to do neither.
Jesus doesn't give you any more knowledge in understanding the KJV than He does me to understand newer versions. All claims of "advanced" or "extra" inspiration are bogus.

And don't forget that the KJV was made for the British of the 17th century, as Wycliffe's was made for those of the 14 & 15th centuries. Far as English goes, God keeps His word current in it. When the Anglicans set out to make the AV, they weren't concerned with how English would be used 400 years later; they were concerned with the "then and there". I believe they knew their work would be built & improved on.

You really need to stop depending upon such quacks as Will Kinney to supply intel to you. Most of their stuff is man-made, same as the KJVO myth itself, & is just-as-false.