Biblical and/or Factual Basis

[kevinmiller]

I agree with you on your last point Randy. I don't agree that the factual basis for it should be the fruit though since that is subjective.

[Calvary]

AsI said before kevin, you are you own advocate. Your own opinion has more value than anyfacts that any one ever could present as your heart as already predetermined what your version of the truth is. No one here is going to teach you anything, you already know we're wrong.

You really exhibit very littel grasp as to what the Bible actually says about itself, if you think my argument as to self identification is weak. For one who claims to believe the Bible, you dismiss the scriptures as facts. Sad really.

The only factual basis is what the Bible says, I have already told you that your version of facts is limited and therefore of little merit.

Your stubborness only tells me that you are yet unteachable and therefore I will stick to my first impression of your posts, desingenious and tehrefore not really honest in any search for truth.

What William Kenney has to do with the thread is beyond me. So as I said, your trying to just 'get back" at men who have a much greater concept of the issues at hand which you dismiss with the bravado of "Well, I just want the facts". You've been given the facts and you just resist them as they don't make your weak scholarship the deciding factor.

There is no elite class of Christians that are endowed with the preservation of the scritprues. It is and always will be the universal priesthood of believers that wiull decide what the Bible is. The common saint can tell you that the KJB is the word of God. Your problem is you want technical information and mss studies to sway the argument.

The facts are that the Bible identifies itself. If you can't understand the design of that, then why continue to argue about what you aren't going to submit to?


If my presentation is so weak, why did you not address it? You refuted not one line of the biblical doctrine of providential preservation by the priesthood of believers.

You danced around it kevin, you ignored, but you didn't say anything to dismiss my statements other than "I think". You refuted absolutely nothing with any evidence whatsoever. None.

So you go kiddo. You go on with your bad self. You the man!

God bless,

Calvary

[Will]

The source docs it uses are from Antioch, where the followers were first called Christians, not from Egypt
God didn't make mistakes in His word - such as calling Joseph the 'father' of Jesus
Also, a direct, literal translation is required, since God did not always give the meanings to the human author.
Bibles that don't indicate which words are added to increase readability are adding or taking away from what God said.
The KJV and older English bibles also translate verb tenses accurately instead of modernising both singular and plural 'you's

1. How does the location of the manuscripts change anything about the text?

2. Luk 2:41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover.

[Will]

@ Will

The word of God says,

Mar 1:1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;
Mar 1:2 As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
Mar 1:3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

The NASB says,

1The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
2As it is written in Isaiah the prophet:
"BEHOLD, I SEND MY MESSENGER AHEAD OF YOU,
WHO WILL PREPARE YOUR WAY;
3THE VOICE OF ONE CRYING IN THE WILDERNESS,
'MAKE READY THE WAY OF THE LORD,
MAKE HIS PATHS STRAIGHT.'"

See the quotations in the NASB? That is English grammer to denote that what is contained in those quotation marks is atrributed to a person, in this case the prophet Isaiah. See the quotation inside the quotation? That is attributed to someone else not mentioned or attributed to the source within the first quotation marks, hence making Isaiah the author (humanly speaking) of verse 2.

Does that fulfill the immutable attribute of the word of God as dictated by God himself?

Not only is the answer, no sir, it does not, but it is also a slight upon the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. It ruins a prefectly good cross reference that makes the owner of that quote Jehovah God, and the foreunner John the Baptist, hence, making John the forerunner of God in the flesh.

In Mark 1:1-3 the NASB disqualifies itslef as being the word(s) of God.


I'm sure that you're both convinced now right? (sarcasim intended )

God bless,

Calvary

Honestly, I don't see how that even begins to prove your point. It is easily understood that when the text refers to a quotation from a prophet, that the prophecy came from God.

[kevinmiller]

AsI said before kevin, you are you own advocate. Your own opinion has more value than anyfacts that any one ever could present as your heart as already predetermined what your version of the truth is. No one here is going to teach you anything, you already know we're wrong.

You really exhibit very littel grasp as to what the Bible actually says about itself, if you think my argument as to self identification is weak. For one who claims to believe the Bible, you dismiss the scriptures as facts. Sad really.

The only factual basis is what the Bible says, I have already told you that your version of facts is limited and therefore of little merit.

Your stubborness only tells me that you are yet unteachable and therefore I will stick to my first impression of your posts, desingenious and tehrefore not really honest in any search for truth.

It is easy to tell me I don't grasp the Scriptures when I don't agree with you. I don't think your argument can hold up. Not on a broad scale. It's simple really.

What William Kenney has to do with the thread is beyond me. So as I said, your trying to just 'get back" at men who have a much greater concept of the issues at hand which you dismiss with the bravado of "Well, I just want the facts". You've been given the facts and you just resist them as they don't make your weak scholarship the deciding factor.

There is no elite class of Christians that are endowed with the preservation of the scritprues. It is and always will be the universal priesthood of believers that wiull decide what the Bible is. The common saint can tell you that the KJB is the word of God. Your problem is you want technical information and mss studies to sway the argument.

The facts are that the Bible identifies itself. If you can't understand the design of that, then why continue to argue about what you aren't going to submit to?

I don't see it as being a better grasp. I see it as ignorance. I really haven't been given any facts. As a matter of fact, from what I have read of Will K's posts, you both have different reasons for believing in the KJV. Both of them lie either in faith or faulty arguments.

You see, look at your best argument in defense of your KJV. "The common saint can tell you that the KJB is the word of God." Umm...so? I bet you that I can find a whole lot of "common saints" that will tell me that the NIV is the word of God. Again, you have arguments that just don't hold up.

If my presentation is so weak, why did you not address it? You refuted not one line of the biblical doctrine of providential preservation by the priesthood of believers.

You danced around it kevin, you ignored, but you didn't say anything to dismiss my statements other than "I think". You refuted absolutely nothing with any evidence whatsoever. None.

As far as I know, I responded to every section of your posts. I don't know what I didn't address, unless you read over it. I haven't presented much of my view on the subject in this thread because I have been trying to show the obvious holes in the KJVO argument. If you want me to tell you what I think, ask me. Or better yet, go read the KJV thread.

So you go kiddo. You go on with your bad self. You the man!

Hm, that's pretty cheap isn't it? I never insinuated that I thought anything of myself.

[pneu-engine]

To Kevin and Will:

Try this experiment:::: ( I can guarantee favorable results because God (the Holy Spirit) is waiting for you with a ready ear to listen, teach and help you.)

#1. Let God be God and permit Him to teach you through His own Holy Word, the KJV.

#2. Prayerfully read and obey every single verse that you read each and every morning and evening.

#3. Trust God to open your mind, heart and eyes to the Truth.

Try that experiment for one month and you'll see that God will bring you to new heights of enlightenment and joy if you'll humbly trust Him with all of your heart and nothing held back. Not only that, but if your heart is truly honest and contrite, the KJV will drive you to your knees in abject humility. The main and crucial requirement is that you put out of your heart any and all preconceived ideas and presuppositions.

The Bible (KJV for English speaking peoples) is its own best commentary and carries with it the very best Teacher, Who is the Holy Spirit.

Please be advised that the Bible is a very sharp Sword, and not to be trifled with or taken lightly. Exercise the greatest care in dealing with it.

[manofconviction]

Well presented Calvary. Thanks

[kevinmiller]

To Kevin and Will:

Try this experiment:::: ( I can guarantee favorable results because God (the Holy Spirit) is waiting for you with a ready ear to listen, teach and help you.)

#1. Let God be God and permit Him to teach you through His own Holy Word, the KJV.

#2. Prayerfully read and obey every single verse that you read each and every morning and evening.

#3. Trust God to open your mind, heart and eyes to the Truth.

Try that experiment for one month and you'll see that God will bring you to new heights of enlightenment and joy if you'll humbly trust Him with all of your heart and nothing held back. Not only that, but if your heart is truly honest and contrite, the KJV will drive you to your knees in abject humility. The main and crucial requirement is that you put out of your heart any and all preconceived ideas and presuppositions.

The Bible (KJV for English speaking peoples) is its own best commentary and carries with it the very best Teacher, Who is the Holy Spirit.

Please be advised that the Bible is a very sharp Sword, and not to be trifled with or taken lightly. Exercise the greatest care in dealing with it.

I'm not sure what you're looking for here PE. It almost sounds as though Will and I are unsaved or something. I already use the KJV every morning for devotions and I do my best to obey every verse. :huh:

[pneu-engine]

I'm not sure what you're looking for here PE. It almost sounds as though Will and I are unsaved or something. I already use the KJV every morning for devotions and I do my best to obey every verse.

This is precisely what I meant by presuppositions and preconceived notions. In industry we call it a "spring-loaded" position.

Kevin:::

I want you to do something if you are willing:::

Clear your mind of anything and everything that would cause you to generate a "fixed" thought on what I said up there and do the following instead:::

#1. Nowhere did I ever insinuate that you are not saved.

#2. Resist the urge to "fix" your mind on anything that I did not say.

#3. Take my previous post at face value for the words that they are and only that.

#4. Take God at His Word and let Him teach you. God loves to obligate Himself to His children's desire to learn His Word when they have a pure and contrite heart. Not only that but He exercises great joy in coming alongside those that come to Him in abject humility with all of their hearts and nothing held back.

Only God can teach you, and He desires to do so. We human creatures have a tendency to get "human". I.E. We get frustrated if people don't see things our way. That's when pot-shots, cheap-shots and nasty little cuts and digs get thrown around and then no-body is helped or edified. Yea verily, all such-like things do indeed gender strife. :sad

[kevinmiller]

This is precisely what I meant by presuppositions and preconceived notions. In industry we call it a "spring-loaded" position.

Kevin:::

I want you to do something if you are willing:::

Clear your mind of anything and everything that would cause you to generate a "fixed" thought on what I said up there and do the following instead:::

#1. Nowhere did I ever insinuate that you are not saved.

#2. Resist the urge to "fix" your mind on anything that I did not say.

#3. Take my previous post at face value for the words that they are and only that.

#4. Take God at His Word and let Him teach you. God loves to obligate Himself to His children's desire to learn His Word when they have a pure and contrite heart. Not only that but He exercises great joy in coming alongside those that come to Him in abject humility with all of their hearts and nothing held back.

Only God can teach you, and He desires to do so. We human creatures have a tendency to get "human". I.E. We get frustrated if people don't see things our way. That's when pot-shots, cheap-shots and nasty little cuts and digs get thrown around and then no-body is helped or edified. Yea verily, all such-like things do indeed gender strife.

I still don't get your point. You tell me to study the Bible and believe it. I already do that. Are you assuming that if I study the Bible I will automatically come to the conclusion that the KJV is the Bible, well, just because? I already believe that the KJV is the Bible. I disagree with the methods and logic used in defending it.

[Calvary]

Well presented Calvary. Thanks

You're welcome and thank you.


@ kevin,

I see that you're conclusion of my defense is still unwarrented and unfounded based on my posts as a whole, therefore I conclude that your opinion is the only valid opinon you hold to.

That small snippet you pasted is really pathetic to presetn as somewhat foundational to the doctrine of providential preservation.

As I have previously said, your inability to see that you naturalistic approach is unscientific, unbiblical will never allow any room for anyone to ever teach you anything.

It is easy to tell me I don't grasp the Scriptures when I don't agree with you. I don't think your argument can hold up. Not on a broad scale. It's simple really.

No sir, it's not simple. It's biblical. Providential preservation is a sound doctrine. On the Biblical scale it holds water with no leaks. It's not caprich or whim or scientific. It's simple Bible. You however want something more than Bible, you saeem todesire some astecic, profoundly technical argument to bolster your faith in a Bible that you wouldn't go to the mat for.

I don't see it as being a better grasp. I see it as ignorance. I really haven't been given any facts. As a matter of fact, from what I have read of Will K's posts, you both have different reasons for believing in the KJV. Both of them lie either in faith or faulty arguments.

You see, look at your best argument in defense of your KJV. "The common saint can tell you that the KJB is the word of God." Umm...so? I bet you that I can find a whole lot of "common saints" that will tell me that the NIV is the word of God. Again, you have arguments that just don't hold up.

But it is a better grasp. Your knowledge of mss evidence is so wane that I don't really comprehend why you insist on using any TR evidence or continue to mention the Byzantine text, when there is no Byzantine text, there exists only a type, and where did it come from? Is it inferior to it's source or family type itself being a hybrid? Can you expound on the influence of the Western text type on the Syriac as a passing influence on the "Byzantine" text? Can you explain to me the purging process that underlies part of the providential preservation doctrine?

To actually suggest that "my best arguemnt" is... shows your inability to read with comprehension. If you really believe that little snippet is foundational to the doctrine of preservation, you're sadly incapable of continuing this discussion with any real facts at all. Sorry kevin, your limited information seems to hinder you more than it does impress me that you are at all aquainted with much information that apparently you do not have access to or refuse since you can't understand it.

I'll say again, you go on with your bad self, I can't help you as you already are predisposed to reject any defense that comes your way.

It's no cop out, but if you have this need to be right all the time, let me just say to you publically, I was wrong, kevin is right.

I hope that helps your ego brother.

God bless,

Calvary

[kevinmiller]

I see that you're conclusion of my defense is still unwarrented and unfounded based on my posts as a whole, therefore I conclude that your opinion is the only valid opinon you hold to.

That small snippet you pasted is really pathetic to presetn as somewhat foundational to the doctrine of providential preservation.

As I have previously said, your inability to see that you naturalistic approach is unscientific, unbiblical will never allow any room for anyone to ever teach you anything.

I don't hold to a naturalistic approach nor do I make an argument based on opinion. I take a factual approach.
And if you are going to refer to something that I said, please quote me since I really don't know what you're talking about. I haven't been posting my beliefs, I have been showing the weaknesses of your arguments. My beliefs can be found in another thread.

No sir, it's not simple. It's biblical. Providential preservation is a sound doctrine. On the Biblical scale it holds water with no leaks. It's not caprich or whim or scientific. It's simple Bible. You however want something more than Bible, you saeem todesire some astecic, profoundly technical argument to bolster your faith in a Bible that you wouldn't go to the mat for.

Biblical scale eh? So you defend the KJV with the KJV. You can't defend something with the same thing that you are defending. Because, no, it won't hold water. You didn't even quote the Bible. You simply gave your own opinion of how to determine the Bible that can be applied across a wide spectrum of books/Books.

I don't want anything profoundly technical or aesthetic. I want facts. I don't see a problem with that. And I would go to the mat for the Bible but I wouldn't go to the mat for the KJV. Now, that is to say I would defend the Bible in the form of the KJV but I wouldn't defend the KJV as a name.

But it is a better grasp. Your knowledge of mss evidence is so wane that I don't really comprehend why you insist on using any TR evidence or continue to mention the Byzantine text, when there is no Byzantine text, there exists only a type, and where did it come from? Is it inferior to it's source or family type itself being a hybrid? Can you expound on the influence of the Western text type on the Syriac as a passing influence on the "Byzantine" text? Can you explain to me the purging process that underlies part of the providential preservation doctrine?

To actually suggest that "my best arguemnt" is... shows your inability to read with comprehension. If you really believe that little snippet is foundational to the doctrine of preservation, you're sadly incapable of continuing this discussion with any real facts at all. Sorry kevin, your limited information seems to hinder you more than it does impress me that you are at all aquainted with much information that apparently you do not have access to or refuse since you can't understand it.

The verse "much learning hath made you mad" comes to mind. Do I need a PHD in Biblical texts to utilize common sense?
You are very arrogant to say the least. I have to expound on the influence of the Western text type on the Syriac blah blah blah? Give me a break.
You have a problem with the Greek and Hebrew? Then tell me where the KJV came from? What texts? Or was it not a translation?

I'll say again, you go on with your bad self, I can't help you as you already are predisposed to reject any defense that comes your way.

It's no cop out, but if you have this need to be right all the time, let me just say to you publically, I was wrong, kevin is right.

I hope that helps your ego brother.

I don't need an ego booster. But apparently most KJVO's do seeing as they feel the need to condemn, mock and belittle anyone and everyone who disagrees with them. Really, hardcore KJVO's disgust me in general. Their arrogance, hatefulness and intolerance is repulsive.

[pneu-engine]

Calvary,
A hearty AMEN to all your posts. :thumb :java:

Kevin,

I'm not assuming anything, only telling you that God's Word is true, pure and holy, and guaranteed to bring conviction, enlightenment, understanding, as well as joy unspeakable and full of glory to all who will read and heed with an open mind as well as a broken and contrite heart. If we have preconceived ideas in our heads we might just as well read a fairy tale for all the good it would do.

Here's the thing, Kevin,

I'm older'n dirt. Have you any idea how many times in the last 50 odd years that I have heard somebody say what you have said::: I.E. That you read and still are not convinced that the KJV is the Bible according to the ways in which it is defended and proclaimed as the only Bible for English speaking people.

I still don't get your point. You tell me to study the Bible and believe it. I already do that. Are you assuming that if I study the Bible I will automatically come to the conclusion that the KJV is the Bible, well, just because? I already believe that the KJV is the Bible. I disagree with the methods and logic used in defending it.

Right away I have to ask you what ways of portrayal of the KJV would convince you that the KJV is the one and only true Bible in English. What we have presented is that for a Bible to be truly God's pure and holy Word it would have to do the following::::

#1. Adhere word for word to the Textus Receptus and Masoretic texts.

#2. Add nothing nor take away anything from the accepted manuscripts (TR and Masoretic), unless those extra words are clearly noted (e.g. italicized).

Since the TR and the Masoretic texts are already proven to be pure and preserved by the LORD, Himself, all that we have to do is adhere to them precisely. ((((Please understand also that there are those that are vainly puffed up in their fleshly, carnal mind to dscredit the KJV by saying that there are errors in the translation, when in fact the errors are in their own lack of understanding and shallow research.))))

In so doing a Bible written for English speaking people will be the KJV. There isn't any other.

So then, what would you like to see and what would you like this discussion to show.

Here is what I have noticed in this discussion::::::::

You, Kevin, have accused Calvary of cheap-shots, and yet you called Brandplucked a spammer. Can you see your double-standard??? I.E. You do the very thing that you accuse others of doing. This is not even to mention your arrogant blanket statements. Witness::::

I don't need an ego booster. But apparently most KJVO's do seeing as they feel the need to condemn, mock and belittle anyone and everyone who disagrees with them. Really, hardcore KJVO's disgust me in general. Their arrogance, hatefulness and intolerance is repulsive.

[pneu-engine]

Kevin,

I will also say that I expected a lot better of you. You already know where this board stands on the KJV, and yet you voiced comments against men of God of a very clear inflammatory nature that seem to be intended to gender strife and a major conflagration. :sad

What ever happened to respect for your elders and men of the cloth???

[kevinmiller]

You, Kevin, have accused Calvary of cheap-shots, and yet you called Brandplucked a spammer. Can you see your double-standard??? I.E. You do the very thing that you accuse others of doing. This is not even to mention your arrogant blanket statements.

We started the discussion politely as you can see in the beginning. Calvary is the one who began making the insulting comments.

As far as BP goes, he is a spammer. He goes to forums all over the internet posting his articles and then lambasting those who disagree with him. If you don't believe me, google his username.

I made a general statement, not a blanket statement. I have met a few KJVO's who are nice about discussing the KJV. But of the many that I have debated with, I have found the vast majority of them to be hateful and condemning.
But there is no double-standard. I don't spam, and I don't start the insults. But I have a real problem with those who do.

Basically, I have a problem with people that teach something as fact that they honestly cannot prove factually or Biblically. I do use the KJV exclusively but the KJVO movement offends me in their presentation and in the prevailing attitude amongst them. The King James Bible is a great translation, but don't make it greater than the Bible itself.

But as Calvary so aptly puts it:
Whatever. :tip: