Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Questions for KJVO's

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Questions for KJVO's

    We have asked these questions before. And not a single KJVO has made any attempt to answer them.

    How will you defend the KJVO when you don't have the facts.

    Start by answering these questions
    1. Is/was the Latin Vulgate the "word of God"? Why or why not? (Note: the Latin Vulgate was the standard Bible, by which all else was compared, more universally and for a longer period of time than the KJV has been)
    2. Is/was the Septuagint (LXX) the "word of God"? Why or why not? (Note: despite its obvious imperfections and inclusion of apocryphal books, the KJV translators still called it "the word of God")
    3. Is/was the Geneva Bible, the Great Bible, Matthew's, Tyndale's, etc. the "word of God"? Why or why not?
    4. Which edition (year) of the KJV is uncorrupted? Why do they differ, even occasionally in words? (And if your response has to do with printing problems, why would God inspire a perfect translation only to have it corrupted by the printers? The common people would still be lacking an uncorrupt word of God. And how can we know the printing errors were all found, and all properly fixed?)
    5. Who publishes the uncorrupted KJV? Cambride, Oxford, Kirkbride, Scofield, AMG, Zondervan, one of the Bible Societies, or one of the many other publishers? Why do they differ slightly, even occasionally in words?
    6. If passages like Psalm 12:6-7 and Matt 5:18 are about the KJV, what did these passages mean in 1610? In 1500? In 500 AD? Do these things, in the original context, have anything to do with a 17th century English translation of scripture?
    7. When you encounter an archaic term or phrase in the KJV, or come across a "contradiction", why do you rely on fallible tools (dictionaries, etc) to interpret the infallible?
    8. Suppose you lived in the 10th or 15th century. How would you define "preservation" as it related to God's word, so as to not contradict the KJV-only position?

      AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THE "BIG 2" QUESTIONS
    9. The KJV came out in 1611. Where was the "final authority", the "preserved word of God" in 1610 and prior? Why does the KJV differ from it, and how was it "final" if the KJV replaced it? Explain.
    10. If scripture is the sole authority for matters of faith and doctrine, then by what authority should anyone accept the doctrine of KJV-onlyism? Since scripture does not teach the doctrine of KJV-onlyism, is it not then an extra-Biblical doctrine? Why should we accept a doctrine needing a second authority, proclaimed by those who argue that there is only one authority for matters of doctrine in the first place?
    kjv-only.com

    It is fundamentally necessary and healthy for Christians to acknowledge that God foreknows nothing uncertainly, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His own immutable, eternal and infallible will. This bombshell knocks "free-will" flatů

    Martin Luther The Bondage of the Will

  • #2
    Originally posted by Beloved Daughter View Post
    We have asked these questions before. And not a single KJVO has made any attempt to answer them.

    How will you defend the KJVO when you don't have the facts.

    Start by answering these questions
    1. Is/was the Latin Vulgate the "word of God"? Why or why not? (Note: the Latin Vulgate was the standard Bible, by which all else was compared, more universally and for a longer period of time than the KJV has been)
    2. Is/was the Septuagint (LXX) the "word of God"? Why or why not? (Note: despite its obvious imperfections and inclusion of apocryphal books, the KJV translators still called it "the word of God")
    3. Is/was the Geneva Bible, the Great Bible, Matthew's, Tyndale's, etc. the "word of God"? Why or why not?
    4. Which edition (year) of the KJV is uncorrupted? Why do they differ, even occasionally in words? (And if your response has to do with printing problems, why would God inspire a perfect translation only to have it corrupted by the printers? The common people would still be lacking an uncorrupt word of God. And how can we know the printing errors were all found, and all properly fixed?)
    5. Who publishes the uncorrupted KJV? Cambride, Oxford, Kirkbride, Scofield, AMG, Zondervan, one of the Bible Societies, or one of the many other publishers? Why do they differ slightly, even occasionally in words?
    6. If passages like Psalm 12:6-7 and Matt 5:18 are about the KJV, what did these passages mean in 1610? In 1500? In 500 AD? Do these things, in the original context, have anything to do with a 17th century English translation of scripture?
    7. When you encounter an archaic term or phrase in the KJV, or come across a "contradiction", why do you rely on fallible tools (dictionaries, etc) to interpret the infallible?
    8. Suppose you lived in the 10th or 15th century. How would you define "preservation" as it related to God's word, so as to not contradict the KJV-only position?

      AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THE "BIG 2" QUESTIONS
    9. The KJV came out in 1611. Where was the "final authority", the "preserved word of God" in 1610 and prior? Why does the KJV differ from it, and how was it "final" if the KJV replaced it? Explain.
    10. If scripture is the sole authority for matters of faith and doctrine, then by what authority should anyone accept the doctrine of KJV-onlyism? Since scripture does not teach the doctrine of KJV-onlyism, is it not then an extra-Biblical doctrine? Why should we accept a doctrine needing a second authority, proclaimed by those who argue that there is only one authority for matters of doctrine in the first place?
    kjv-only.com
    The silence is deafening!
    Joh 8:36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. [NIV]

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Trucker View Post

      The silence is deafening!
      And stunningly revealing!
      It is fundamentally necessary and healthy for Christians to acknowledge that God foreknows nothing uncertainly, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His own immutable, eternal and infallible will. This bombshell knocks "free-will" flatů

      Martin Luther The Bondage of the Will

      Comment


      • #4
        Day 2. No answers from the KJVO folks!
        It is fundamentally necessary and healthy for Christians to acknowledge that God foreknows nothing uncertainly, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His own immutable, eternal and infallible will. This bombshell knocks "free-will" flatů

        Martin Luther The Bondage of the Will

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Beloved Daughter View Post
          We have asked these questions before. And not a single KJVO has made any attempt to answer them.

          How will you defend the KJVO when you don't have the facts.

          Start by answering these questions
          1. Is/was the Latin Vulgate the "word of God"? Why or why not? (Note: the Latin Vulgate was the standard Bible, by which all else was compared, more universally and for a longer period of time than the KJV has been)
          2. Is/was the Septuagint (LXX) the "word of God"? Why or why not? (Note: despite its obvious imperfections and inclusion of apocryphal books, the KJV translators still called it "the word of God")
          3. Is/was the Geneva Bible, the Great Bible, Matthew's, Tyndale's, etc. the "word of God"? Why or why not?
          4. Which edition (year) of the KJV is uncorrupted? Why do they differ, even occasionally in words? (And if your response has to do with printing problems, why would God inspire a perfect translation only to have it corrupted by the printers? The common people would still be lacking an uncorrupt word of God. And how can we know the printing errors were all found, and all properly fixed?)
          5. Who publishes the uncorrupted KJV? Cambride, Oxford, Kirkbride, Scofield, AMG, Zondervan, one of the Bible Societies, or one of the many other publishers? Why do they differ slightly, even occasionally in words?
          6. If passages like Psalm 12:6-7 and Matt 5:18 are about the KJV, what did these passages mean in 1610? In 1500? In 500 AD? Do these things, in the original context, have anything to do with a 17th century English translation of scripture?
          7. When you encounter an archaic term or phrase in the KJV, or come across a "contradiction", why do you rely on fallible tools (dictionaries, etc) to interpret the infallible?
          8. Suppose you lived in the 10th or 15th century. How would you define "preservation" as it related to God's word, so as to not contradict the KJV-only position?

            AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THE "BIG 2" QUESTIONS
          9. The KJV came out in 1611. Where was the "final authority", the "preserved word of God" in 1610 and prior? Why does the KJV differ from it, and how was it "final" if the KJV replaced it? Explain.
          10. If scripture is the sole authority for matters of faith and doctrine, then by what authority should anyone accept the doctrine of KJV-onlyism? Since scripture does not teach the doctrine of KJV-onlyism, is it not then an extra-Biblical doctrine? Why should we accept a doctrine needing a second authority, proclaimed by those who argue that there is only one authority for matters of doctrine in the first place?
          kjv-only.com
          The silence is STILL deafening!
          God's Word (Scripture) will convince me. YOUR argument is your own.

          I want to be so full of Jesus that if a mosquito bites me, he will fly away singing 'there's power in the blood. . .' (author unknown)

          Comment


          • #6
            I think we should keep this thread going, if for no reason other than to prove their foundation is completely bankrupt, without merit.
            It is fundamentally necessary and healthy for Christians to acknowledge that God foreknows nothing uncertainly, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His own immutable, eternal and infallible will. This bombshell knocks "free-will" flatů

            Martin Luther The Bondage of the Will

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Beloved Daughter View Post
              No answers from the KJVO folks!
              According to one KJV-only poster's recent assertion concerning debate, KJV-only advocates are forfeiting or conceding the debate if they do not answer the questions.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Beloved Daughter View Post
                I think we should keep this thread going, if for no reason other than to prove their foundation is completely bankrupt, without merit.
                Agreed.
                I am just a miserable sinner saved by grace, called according to His purposes, made righteous and holy by faith in Jesus and who can now boldly enter the throne room of heaven itself.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Three days. Not a single KJVO has replied.
                  It is fundamentally necessary and healthy for Christians to acknowledge that God foreknows nothing uncertainly, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His own immutable, eternal and infallible will. This bombshell knocks "free-will" flatů

                  Martin Luther The Bondage of the Will

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Four days.
                    It is fundamentally necessary and healthy for Christians to acknowledge that God foreknows nothing uncertainly, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His own immutable, eternal and infallible will. This bombshell knocks "free-will" flatů

                    Martin Luther The Bondage of the Will

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      SIX days.
                      It is fundamentally necessary and healthy for Christians to acknowledge that God foreknows nothing uncertainly, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His own immutable, eternal and infallible will. This bombshell knocks "free-will" flatů

                      Martin Luther The Bondage of the Will

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I hope you keep this thread at or near the top. The absence of KJVO replies make all their other responses in other KJVO threads moot.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by roby3 View Post
                          I hope you keep this thread at or near the top. The absence of KJVO replies make all their other responses in other KJVO threads moot.
                          Because they have no answer.
                          I am just a miserable sinner saved by grace, called according to His purposes, made righteous and holy by faith in Jesus and who can now boldly enter the throne room of heaven itself.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Seven days!
                            It is fundamentally necessary and healthy for Christians to acknowledge that God foreknows nothing uncertainly, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His own immutable, eternal and infallible will. This bombshell knocks "free-will" flatů

                            Martin Luther The Bondage of the Will

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Beloved Daughter View Post
                              We have asked these questions before. And not a single KJVO has made any attempt to answer them.

                              How will you defend the KJVO when you don't have the facts.

                              Start by answering these questions
                              1. Is/was the Latin Vulgate the "word of God"? Why or why not? (Note: the Latin Vulgate was the standard Bible, by which all else was compared, more universally and for a longer period of time than the KJV has been)
                              1. I doubt KJVOs will respond and yet as a partial KJVO supporter I see a need to point out a few things for the record. I do believe the Latin Vulgate is a very old record which contains the Word of God, although it is not the Word of God itself.

                              2. Is/was the Septuagint (LXX) the "word of God"? Why or why not? (Note: despite its obvious imperfections and inclusion of apocryphal books, the KJV translators still called it "the word of God")
                              I believe the Septuagint was gleaned and translated from the inspired Scriptures, except for the 10 spurious additional books.

                            • Is/was the Geneva Bible, the Great Bible, Matthew's, Tyndale's, etc. the "word of God"? Why or why not?
                            All were translated from the pure Word of God and Christians can, with God's help, find God's exact meanings in even bad or poor translations.

                          • Which edition (year) of the KJV is uncorrupted? Why do they differ, even occasionally in words? (And if your response has to do with printing problems, why would God inspire a perfect translation only to have it corrupted by the printers? The common people would still be lacking an uncorrupt word of God. And how can we know the printing errors were all found, and all properly fixed?)
                          • Scholars make a common mistake when they think a translation has to match perfectly the originals. No translation on earth does that. The purity of God's Word is in God and in many ancient manuscripts, but men need God's help to properly sort out the truth. However, Christians can go to God directly to seek His help in leading them into all perfect truth. Christians do not have to solve debatable problems with innumerable manuscripts in order to gain God's help in understanding His exact meanings in the translated Bible.

                          • Who publishes the uncorrupted KJV? Cambride, Oxford, Kirkbride, Scofield, AMG, Zondervan, one of the Bible Societies, or one of the many other publishers? Why do they differ slightly, even occasionally in words?
                          • Debatable errors in different KJV translations may never be resolved or solved but that does not stop God from revealing perfect truth to His children in translations like the KJV.

                          • If passages like Psalm 12:6-7 and Matt 5:18 are about the KJV, what did these passages mean in 1610? In 1500? In 500 AD? Do these things, in the original context, have anything to do with a 17th century English translation of scripture?
                          • References to God's perfect Word in Scriptures are not meant to be speaking specifically of translations, but can be appropriately understood to be speaking speaking of God's pure Word translated into other language Bibles.

                          • When you encounter an archaic term or phrase in the KJV, or come across a "contradiction", why do you rely on fallible tools (dictionaries, etc) to interpret the infallible?
                          • Suppose you lived in the 10th or 15th century. How would you define "preservation" as it related to God's word, so as to not contradict the KJV-only position?
                          • I am not sure what you are asking. I recommend my students make reference to dictionaries, commentaries, lectionaries and other resources, but always caution them to go to God for wisdom so as not to be misled by men.

                            AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THE "BIG 2" QUESTIONS
                          • The KJV came out in 1611. Where was the "final authority", the "preserved word of God" in 1610 and prior? Why does the KJV differ from it, and how was it "final" if the KJV replaced it? Explain.
                          • I personally don't believe the KJV has ever been the final authority. God's Word translated into Bible translations is the final authority.

                          • If scripture is the sole authority for matters of faith and doctrine, then by what authority should anyone accept the doctrine of KJV-onlyism? Since scripture does not teach the doctrine of KJV-onlyism, is it not then an extra-Biblical doctrine? Why should we accept a doctrine needing a second authority, proclaimed by those who argue that there is only one authority for matters of doctrine in the first place?
                          • kjv-only.com
                            I don't think the Bible supports KJV-onlyism, although some ideas called KJVO may be right.

                            I am not a NPB-Onlyist (No Perfect Bible Onlyist), nor a NA/UBS-Onlyist. Marke

                            If this book be not infallible, where shall we find infallibility? We have given up the Pope, for he has blundered often and terribly; but we shall not set up instead of him a horde of little popelings fresh from college. C. H. Spurgeon

                            For that Revised Version I have but little care as a general rule, holding it to be by no means an improvement upon our common Authorized Version. C.H. Spurgeon

                            Comment

                              Working...
                              X