The Greek Expert who lost The Book

[brandplucked]

As usual John posts his "scholarship" and ends up with no inerrant or infallible Bible. He's not even sure about which texts might be right and which ones not, nor how to translate them once he thinks he's found them, but he sure thinks he has a handle of how to translate some obscure Greek verb tense. Only problem with is theory is - NOBODY who even puts together all those modern, contradictory and confusing "bible" versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NKJV, Holman or whatever, consistently agrees with John either. They ALL often translate the aorist Greek verbs in exactly the same way as "pastor" Tim and John tell us is the wrong way to do it. Once these "Every Man For Himself" Bible correctors abandon faith in an infallible Bible and the sovereignty of God in preserving His pure words, they very seldom can be restored to a sound mind; They just get loopier and loopier.

Happy trails, John.

Will K

[Jerry]

It makes saved that our identification with Christ is a past action that affects our future. I was not just saved, I am saved. I am dead with Christ, I am baptized into Christ, I am risen with Christ, I am seated with Christ, etc.

[John the Baptist]

As usual John posts his "scholarship" and ends up with no inerrant or infallible Bible. He's not even sure about which texts might be right and which ones not, nor how to translate them once he thinks he's found them, but he sure thinks he has a handle of how to translate some obscure Greek verb tense. Only problem with is theory is - NOBODY who even puts together all those modern, contradictory and confusing "bible" versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NKJV, Holman or whatever, consistently agrees with John either. They ALL often translate the aorist Greek verbs in exactly the same way as "pastor" Tim and John tell us is the wrong way to do it. Once these "Every Man For Himself" Bible correctors abandon faith in an infallible Bible and the sovereignty of God in preserving His pure words, they very seldom can be restored to a sound mind; They just get loopier and loopier.

Happy trails, John.

Will K

Well, Will ignorance is bliss. I didn't know you were such a scholar Will. Gee, I think you think you know more than than anybody. You have to attack everyone who does not agree with you like some junk yard dog. Well, this attitude demonstrates how insecure you are in your belief system. I will pray for you. It is okay to be KJV only, but there is no need to attack everybody that disagrees with you.

God Bless
John

[brandplucked]

Well, Will ignorance is bliss. I didn't know you were such a scholar Will. Gee, I think you think you know more than than anybody. You have to attack everyone who does not agree with you like some junk yard dog. Well, this attitude demonstrates how insecure you are in your belief system. I will pray for you. It is okay to be KJV only, but there is no need to attack everybody that disagrees with you.

God Bless
John

John, I am not the one thinking I know more than anyone else, YOU are. You complain about how the KJB (and Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops' bible, the Geneva Bible and many foreign bibles as well) have sometimes translated the aorist tense, and yet every single modern version out there like the RV, ASV, NKJV, NASB, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NET and Holman have ALL OF THEM translated the aorist tense in exactly the same way YOU criticize. So you are the one who is saying that not even your beloved NASB or any other version out there got it right either. You and you alone are claiming to have a correct understanding of how God's word SHOULD BE translated. Have you put your "new findings" into an actual Book in print that is available for others to read? Haven't had the time yet? So, you have effectively placed yourself in the sole position of being the only one who apparently knows what God REALLY said.

By the way, I don't attack everybody that disagrees with me. There are lots of areas where I am not in agreement with other Christians whom I respect and get along with. BUT I take great offense at any self appointed scholar like yourself who promotes the idea that there is no such thing as a complete, inspired and infallible Bible in any language, and that to find out what God "most likely said" we have to come to people like you.

If a serpent comes along and asks "Yea, hath God said...?", I'm going to stomp on its head.

Will K

[John the Baptist]

John, I am not the one thinking I know more than anyone else, YOU are. You complain about how the KJB (and Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops' bible, the Geneva Bible and many foreign bibles as well) have sometimes translated the aorist tense, and yet every single modern version out there like the RV, ASV, NKJV, NASB, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NET and Holman have ALL OF THEM translated the aorist tense in exactly the same way YOU criticize. So you are the one who is saying that not even your beloved NASB or any other version out there got it right either. You and you alone are claiming to have a correct understanding of how God's word SHOULD BE translated. Have you put your "new findings" into an actual Book in print that is available for others to read? Haven't had the time yet? So, you have effectively placed yourself in the sole position of being the only one who apparently knows what God REALLY said.

By the way, I don't attack everybody that disagrees with me. There are lots of areas where I am not in agreement with other Christians whom I respect and get along with. BUT I take great offense at any self appointed scholar like yourself who promotes the idea that there is no such thing as a complete, inspired and infallible Bible in any language, and that to find out what God "most likely said" we have to come to people like you.

If a serpent comes along and asks "Yea, hath God said...?", I'm going to stomp on its head.

Will K

It is amazing how you accuse me of saying things I never said. It is also amazing how because I don't hold to KJV Only that you accuse me of not believing the Word of God. You are classic dogmatic KJV only and twist and pervert what people say. Just like you attacked Pastor Tim.

[brandplucked]

t is amazing how you accuse me of saying things I never said. It is also amazing how because I don't hold to KJV Only that you accuse me of not believing the Word of God. You are classic dogmatic KJV only and twist and pervert what people say. Just like you attacked Pastor Tim.

John, when you talk about "believing the Word of God" are you referring to any specific Book in any language that you actually believe to be the very words of the living God and that you yourself would not change, alter, correct, add to nor delete in any way? Do you have a hold it in your hands and read infallible Bible of any kind, or do you just like the philosophical concept of an inspired and inerrant Bible but lack the reality?

I already know the answer to the question, but thought I would ask it anyway so that your "imaginary and highly personalized" bible position will be clarified for others here.

Tell us where we too can get a copy or your perfect Bible so we can compare it to what we are using now.

Thanks,

Will K

[brandplucked]

It is amazing how you accuse me of saying things I never said. It is also amazing how because I don't hold to KJV Only that you accuse me of not believing the Word of God. You are classic dogmatic KJV only and twist and pervert what people say. Just like you attacked Pastor Tim.

Here are some more quotes from "pastor" Tim. I did not twist nor pervert anything he said at all. He is the one claiming to have the true Bible "right here in front of me on my desk" and yet when pressed to tell us exactly what it is, the following quotes demonstrate that he has no final authority but his own mind - just like you.

For the sake of summing up pastor Tim's "every man for himself bible versions" mentality, here are some direct quotes from Tim's rebuttals. You can see them at the Baptist site: "The Bible I have on the desk in front of me is a NKJV. I use it for preaching and teaching. It is a very good translation, but not perfect. When I think there is some question of interpretation, I go to the Greek Textus Receptus. I DO have solid criteria for assessing the text of any English translation. I compare them to the Greek of the Textus Receptus.The TR does not have to be perfect to be my authority. Neither does the NKJV have to be a perfect translation to be my authority. I don't need to "prove" that any particular version of the TR is perfect. I only need to examine the evidence, and decide for myself which is BEST. That is what I have done. I agree with the thinking of Dean Burgon, that the TR needs only very minor revision based on newer evidence that the KJV translators did not have. I take the TR readings as authoritative UNLESS overwhelming evidence from ancient sources can be shown to cast doubt some of them. If the evidence is overwhelming, then the TR should be revised in those places."

It should be obvious from pastor Tim's comments that he does not have a complete and infallible Bible. He has placed his own mind and understanding as his final authority regarding both the text and the translation of his ongoing, highly personalized and subjective "work in progress". - and so does John.

Will K