Textual/version stance

[Guest Guest]

[quote="HappyChristian"][quote="candlelight"]LuAnne...My reason for saying Jesus says this is b/c man cannot dispute the KJVO stance. If man could, then Jesus would be wrong...and, He certainly isn't. My God is a gentleman...through and through. I take him at his word...the KJVO. I don't argue it b/c I don't doubt it.[/quote]
I understand that you don't doubt it. I don't use any MV's. I don't have any doubts as to the fact that the KJB is God's preserved Word for English speakin people. But I really don't understand this - you say Jesus says it because man can't argue it. Well, but they do. And they do have verses that they use, and they do have logic. I don't swallow it, please understand. My point in that is - if you say that Jesus says it, it has to be written somewhere -see what I mean? Someone who is trying to discredit the KJB would not be convinced by saying that Jesus says it because man can't dispute it. KWIM?

And please note - I am not arguing...this is just not a clear reasoning, to me anyway. Thanks.[/quote]

My whole point, LuAnne is this. Men (in their finite minds) have been "trying" to get rid of the KJV 1611 AV for years. Yet, it is still around? This must be God's Holy word...pure and simple. The other "counterfit" Bibles are exactly, that. They are rubbish that is never going to replace the KJV 1611 AV. I don't settle for second best. That is my stance on this whole MV issue. The KJV 1611 AV is easy to read and comprehend if man would stop making the obvious so complicated.

[Jerry]

Hm, I watched part of that video - five minutes of rambling and repeating himself before he gets to his first point, then endless repetition and stories until about 11:34 where he starts calling those who disagree with him "jackass"es (though he had used one or two questionable terms before that). Wow, what godly language for a supposedly mature Christian man to use - not!

James 3:2 For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.

According to this verse, Ruckman is not a mature (ie. [i]perfect[/i]) Christian because he cannot bridle his tongue.

[Jerry]

Ruckman uses the Lord's name in vain in 12:09 "My God, no, you couldn't win an argument with him. He's too smart." Yes, he is quoting someone else - but it is still using God's name in vain - as they were not referring to God and not praying to Him.

[Bakershalfdozen]

That quote is highly suspect IMO. I have a really hard time believing that BJ the 2nd would say that exact phrase about PR.

[Jerry]

I agree - but whether the quote is legitimate or false, it still uses the Lord's name in vain - so Ruckman is doing wrong by stating it.

[Guest Guest]

[quote="Jerry"]Annie, I made a decision months ago to back off for a couple of days from threads and/or posters that bother/annoy me. Rather than getting in the flesh, I take a step back and wait for other people to respond first, as well as for time to pass to make sure I am not responding based on emotion. It has nothing to do with not being able to answer what is posted in a thread (though, granted, when a thread grows rapidly, it is easy to lose track of specific statements or questions sometimes).

Various times you have stated that you believe the KJV has contradictions and problems - and that is your justification for not being KJVOnly and for knocking those that are. I asked you to stop knocking the KJV without proof of those kind of errors. You are on a KJVonly message board - YOU CAME HERE TO US - it is up to you to back up your statements against our position, or basically quit rocking the boat. The Bible teaches that those who sow discord among the brethren are an abomination in God's eyes. If your division is caused by standing on truth, then I am sure that is where the Lord would have you stand; however, if your division is caused by parroting cliches and unproven statements, then you are sinning and God is not too happy with you.

Proverbs 6:16-19 [i][b]These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him[/b]: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and [b]he that soweth discord among brethren[/b].[/i][/quote]

:amen: :goodpost: Br. Jerry. :thumb

[JerryNumbers]

[quote="KJB_Princess"]I think this really needs to get back on topic. I don't really care to argue about a man. I'd rather defend the Bible than a preacher.[/quote]

And your always defend this man, Ruckman, on this message board.

I want to ask y'all a question about talking about people who have died?

Do y'all only say good things about Hitler? Remember, he is not around to defend him self.

What is actually sad is when some of these off the wall teachers are set up on a pedestal. Many are quicker to defend a man that they are God.

Actually a person decides how they want to be remembered and talked about by the character they have lived before the world.

Jack Hyles proved beyond a doubt that he was a hypocrite, Ruckman proved beyond a doubt he knows not how to teach the Bible, nor how to live his life by the Bible.

[JerryNumbers]

[quote="Bakershalfdozen"][quote="KJB_Princess"]
If we want to talk about who started it, she did by posting a long rant about what's "wrong" with Dr. Ruckman. She wasn't the first to bring Ruckman into this topic, though.
[/quote]

It wasn't a rant because I'm not angry. I was exposing the truth. And in case you didn't notice, most of what I wrote about concerned the Hyles movement. JH and others preachers like him handle the Word of God deceitfully in order to serve their own purposes. I saw and heard the exact same thing in the video sermon I saw of PR.[/quote]

Y'all pardon me for a moment, I need to make a comment to Bakers and her post.

Bakers, Your absolutely 100 % right and that needed to be said and I thank you for posting it, and I feel this needs to be added to it.

I may be guilty at times, I know its far easier to see others peoples faults than our own, and believe me, I know I fall short of the glory of God and my Savior.

When we disagree with some people, it does make them bitter, it does make them mad, at times they will come back and say your slandering me, your attacking me, and that is not what was done at all. I understand well, when we are defending our beliefs which we hold dearly, some people think we are on a rant and or attacking them and or bashing a person they look up to.

I wish we all would grow thicker skin and stop thinking that every time someone disagrees with us and post a post to us, its not a rant, its not an attack, its not hate, and its not slander and not come back with a post stating it is.

[JerryNumbers]

[quote="KJB_Princess"][quote="Bakershalfdozen"]That's because the others are based on preservation (plenty of verses for this) and not re-inspiration (no verses for this).[/quote]

That's because almost everyone here misunderstands the concept of God inspiring a translation. It isn't like God re-wrote the Bible. He inspired the translators (He gave them understanding) as they were translating the King James Bible.[/quote]

They had the leading of the Holy Spirit just like any other born again person, plus their agenda was to translate the Bible into English where the English speaking people would have a copy of God's Word.

They did not have the agenda of translating the Bible where they could make huge profits, to teach works base salvation, to teach homosexuality is OK, to teach baptizing saves you, oneness doctrines, nor any of those other false teaching doctrines that are around in the past several years, they were just trying to preserve the Word of God for English speaking people, and God guided them to do this thru the Holy Spirit.

[rancher824]

[quote="KJB_Princess"][quote="Bakershalfdozen"][quote="KJB_Princess"]Bakershalfdozen, why don't you explain or post your definition of "inspiration"...

I can post the Bible definition again, if you would like, though my husband and I have discussed this and defined it multiple times without any acceptance from the mainstream community here.[/quote]


How do you know "my" definition isn't the Bible definition? :saint

Sure, I'll play along. I'll give the Greek word and its definition (which should be sufficient because our KJV N.T. was translated from Greek; it really didn't fall out of the sky) and you'll reject that because you don't do Greek and proceed to tell me about the verse in Job which is the only other use of the English word, "inspiration" (which has nothing to do with inspiration or preservation of the Scriptures) and so on.

Nah.

See, I told ya we should start numbering these discussions. :lol:[/quote]

The only reason you don't want to accept the Bible's own definition of the word "inspiration" is because it doesn't fit your pre-conceived ideas of what Biblical inspiration is supposed to be.

If we just rely solely on the King James Bible to define itself, here's what we come up with:

First mention of inspiration in the Bible.
[i]Job 32:8 But there is a spirit in man: and the [b]inspiration of the Almighty[/b] giveth them understanding.[/i]

(notice: "inspiration of the Almighty" is the same as saying "inspiration of God".)

The only other mention of inspiration in the Bible.
[i]2 Timothy 3:16 [b]All scripture is given by inspiration of God[/b], and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:[/i]


The Bible tells us what the doctrine of inspiration is! It's understanding that God gives to men. The Bible tells us, plain and clear, that all Scripture is given by inspiration. It doesn't say the Bible is inspired. The King James Bible itself was not inspired, it was [b]given by inspiration[/b].

God keeps these things simple. We don't need a college education to understand Biblical inspiration. Anyone with a basic knowledge of English can read and learn from the King James Bible what inspiration is.[/quote]
O.k. Question. If inspiration in 2 timothy is speaking of understanding given by God, and the KJV translators were inspired, why did they all not leave their beliefs behind and become baptistic in belief. I do not believe they left their false faiths. But if God gave them understanding, why would they not?????

[Jerry]

Hm, thanks Rancher - that reminds me of this passage, which contradicts KJBPrincess' definition:

1 Peter 1:10-12 Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.

God inspired the holy writers of Scripture to write what He wanted them to write - but they did not necessarily understand what was written.

[Guest Guest]

[quote="Jerry"]Hm, thanks Rancher - that reminds me of this passage, which contradicts KJBPrincess' definition:

1 Peter 1:10-12 Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.

God inspired the holy writers of Scripture to write what He wanted them to write - but they did not necessarily understand what was written.[/quote]


Jerry, I never said that the translators understood everything that they wrote down, or that they automagically learned all the right doctrine. It simply means that the Holy Spirit gave them the words to write down, beginning with the writers (2 Pet. 1:21) and extending to the translators. No, they weren't doctrinally sound, but the words that God gave them to write were.

That's why I say "The King James Bible is the perfect word of God, without error and given by inspiration." It's complete, pure and given by the direct inspiration of God. Everyone that has ever argued with me or my husband over this incredibly clear Biblical topic has completely misunderstood what we're saying, and they refuse to listen to the explanation of it, and so continue to imply that we're heretics, simply for believing what the Bible says without wasting time on "The Hebrew" or "The Greek."

[Annie]

Annie' date=' I made a decision months ago to back off for a couple of days from threads and/or posters that bother/annoy me. Rather than getting in the flesh, I take a step back and wait for other people to respond first, as well as for time to pass to make sure I am not responding based on emotion. It has nothing to do with not being able to answer what is posted in a thread (though, granted, when a thread grows rapidly, it is easy to lose track of specific statements or questions sometimes).[/quote']

Jerry, I think this is an admirable way to handle issues that might cause you to react in a way you'd regret later.



Again, I'm not sure how anything I've done could possibly be construed as "knocking" anyone. I know I've asked questions that might have been resented, since no one was able to give a clear answer to them. If anyone has been "knocked," it's the "Bible critics," the ones who are willfully ignorant, and blind, and have been "educated above their intelligence." I'm not complaining...just asking you to notice that it's not me doin' the knockin.'

Thank you for the clarification on what you meant by "errors." I will attempt to post on that below.



The "errors" I'm talking about are ones that I'm quite sure you and others on here are familiar with, and have probably discussed at one time or another...basically, KJV passages that contradict each other. That's why, before I brought them up, I wanted to get an idea from you what you think an "error" is.

For just one of many examples (which I'm sure you've heard of before):

II Samuel 24 and I Chronicles 21 both describe the same historical event: David's sin in numbering the people. We can tell by comparing these passages that it's the same story, not two different times that David numbered Israel. The events are outlined pretty clearly. But there are discrepancies in the details. The discrepancy between numbers, for one thing. (I suppose that can be explained by exactly what men are referred to, etc., but there's still a pretty big discrepancy between "800,000 men that drew the sword" and "100,000 men that drew the sword" (for Israel). Judah's numbers are more comparable; the Samuel account gives the round number of "500,000," and the Chronicles amount is more exact at "470,000." (Of course, nowhere does either passage claim to be exact or rounding numbers...both accounts read as if the numbers were meant to be exact.)

Another detail of this story that the passages do not line up on is when the prophet Gad brings God's message of judgment to David (see below for comparison).

II Samuel 24:12-13:
Go and say unto David, Thus saith the LORD, I offer thee three things; choose thee one of them, that I may do it unto thee.
So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him, Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee? or that there be three days' pestilence in thy land? now advise, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.

I Chronicles 21:10-12:
Go and tell David, saying, Thus saith the LORD, I offer thee three things: choose thee one of them, that I may do it unto thee.
So Gad came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee
Either three years' famine; or three months to be destroyed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee; or else three days the sword of the LORD, even the pestilence, the the land, and the angel of the LORD destroying throughout all the coasts of Israel. Now therefore advise thyself what word I shall bring again to him that sent me.

Another thing we can note as we compare these passages is that in the first account, Gad presents David's options to him consistently in the form of questions: David, will you take [this option]? or [this option]? or [this option]? In the second account, Gad phrases the options consistently in imperative form: David, choose either [this], or [this], or [this]. IOW, there's no "negotiating" going on...like, "Do you want seven years of famine? No?...O.K., just three." It is clear in both accounts that Gad is simply laying out before David the exact options that God had just given him. Either God said seven years of famine, or He said three years of famine. He could not have said both, since both of the passages clearly state that God gave David exactly three (not four) options. The quality of the options themselves are the same in both passages (famine, pursuit by enemies, and pestilence); the duration of one of these events is the point of discrepancy.

I just wanted to add that I am in no way "attacking" the KJ version of the Bible!!!! I LOVE THE KJV (can I say that enough?)!!! My faith is not shaken because the translators (and/or previous scribes) made a minor error in translation or transcription. I happen to know that the Greek Septuigint clarifies that both passages should say THREE years of famine, as indicated in the Chronicles account. I'm just posting this "error" to see what KJVOs think about it. I guess the obvious question is that, considering "errors" like the above, how can a person believe the KJV to be a perfect preservation of God's infallible Word (and, what's more, the ONLY place in which this perfection can be found)?

[Guest Guest]

I just wanted to bump this topic back up. Annie finally posted one of the "contradictions" she was talking about. Now is anyone going to respond to her post?

Annie, just to let you know... I'm looking into this one. :smile

[Guest Guest]

I wanted to bump this topic b/c I promised OB brothers and sisters in Christ, that I would talk w/ Bro. Bruce Musselman...the evangelist from my church, about the the "proof" that members needed on Baptist History. He is back from preaching in PA. :clap:

With this [b]Textual/version stance[/b] discussion in mind, I was burdened to ask him some questions on the KJVO stance. He told me that 98% of the KJV 1611 AV comes from the Greek text. He welcomes any and all questions regarding this debate on MV's. He even offered his telephone # to OB members. I told him that this would not be a good place to post a telephone #, though...as many "lurk" on IFB sites. :lol: Keep in mind...he doesn't have a computer (he has volumes of books in his library, instead.) Also, with regards to men as JH, PB, and others...he stated much of this talk comes from the "lost" world and gradually moves it's way into our IFB churches. He stated that critics are out there waiting eagerly to bring men of God down....and, these "critics" start in cults, then, move their way slowly to the IFB church.

I will pray and think on how to get the information to OB members VIA Bro. Bruce. :ideas: :smile