THE FAKE KJV ONLY ARGUMENT

[SavedInHim]

I see you found it quite funny but I don't hear any counter argument.

 

[Davy]

I see you found it quite funny but I don't hear any counter argument.

You'd have to had done your own research in order to have a conversation with you about this. One can tell you haven't really looked into it, but are just playing religious politics.

 

[HealthyShape]

You'd have to had done your own research in order to have a conversation with you about this. One can tell you haven't really looked into it, but are just playing religious politics.

It is you who needs to do some proper research or at least some study, because what he said is true.

One can tell that you looked just at some biased KJV Only sources.

 

[doctrox]

Watching youtube and reading KJV Only websites is not research. It is not even studying. It is not even learning.

I agree, which is why I rather posted authentic verifiable documentation rather than hearsay and ad hominems.

Erasmus was a textual critic. The textus receptus is an eclectic document, partly based on the Latin Vulgate (look out!). I think it's fantastic we have all the different manuscripts and fragments we have today, and Bibles that include footnotes and variant readings. Erasmus would've love it too!

No, Erasmus was no "textual critic." Neither can you claim to speak for what he may have, or may not have, "love[d]".

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

 

[HealthyShape]

No, Erasmus was no "textual critic."

What do you mean by that? Erasmus was a textual critic. He created his edition of the Greek New Testament from several manuscripts, collating variant readings, restoring what he judged to be the original text, and noting textual differences in his annotations and marginalia.

He also engaged in textual criticism of classical Latin authors, producing critical editions with emendations and commentary.

 

[Wrangler]

"Notes" are not equivalent to the primary (or even secondary) documentation I provided above.

How are they different?

 

[doctrox]

What do you mean by that? Erasmus was a textual critic.

Few have given a clear-sighted view of the true beliefs of Erasmus. Erasmus taught Tyndale, influenced Luther, and printed a Greek New Testament that was consulted by the KJV translators. He was a multilingual Greek text editor, a man used by God to print the pure Greek New Testament which parallels the King James Bible. Erasmus stands in sharp contrast to his contemporary Greek text editors who promote the false notion that “Scripture remains full of meanings “which are not able to be understood in any way other than from the very fount of the original languages” [quae nequeant aliunde quam ex ipso archetypae linguae fonte cognosci]. This quote is taken from the preface of the Catholic Complutensian Polyglot produced by Cardinal Ximenez in 1517; this Catholic ‘father’ spawned “the first” Greek New Testament lexicon, which bred today’s mongrels.

Erasmus also reveals why some Greek and Latin copies corrupt verses about the deity of Christ and the blood; these errors appear today in the NIV, TNIV, NASB, HCSB and ESV.

Erasmus warned of the font from which lexicons are taken and their “danger of taking words in a sense they may well have in classical Greek, but which is not the sense in which they are used in the New Testament.” Sometimes, “The new words implied a new theology.” (Cambridge History of the Bible, Vol. 2, p. 366 et al.).

Erasmus recommends only the Bible’s built-in dictionary, where one can “compare texts fruitfully one with another” (Cambridge History of the Bible, Vol. 2, p. 504).

In the 1500s Erasmus said, “God is in every syllable” (The Bible Through the Ages, p. 306).

Erasmus’s view that vernacular Bibles are inspired led him to use them as proofs for disputed readings and to use them in place of lexicons, because Holy Bibles show the God-honored translation of each word in each context.

The guy always stood to study, read or translate the scriptures, in reverence for the word of God. (Translating For King James, pp. 145, 147, 148, 150). I trust you get the point.

How are they different?

Note: A brief record of something written down to assist the memory or for future reference. Synonyms: minute, memorandum. notes, a record or outline of a speech, statement, testimony, etc., or of one's impressions of something.

Primary documentation: Primary sources are immediate, first-hand accounts of a topic, from people who had a direct connection with it.

Secondary documentation: Secondary sources are one step removed from primary sources, though they often quote or otherwise use primary sources. They can cover the same topic, but add a layer of interpretation and analysis.

 

[HealthyShape]

Few have given a clear-sighted view of the true beliefs of Erasmus. Erasmus taught Tyndale, influenced Luther, and printed a Greek New Testament that was consulted by the KJV translators. He was a multilingual Greek text editor, a man used by God to print the pure Greek New Testament which parallels the King James Bible. Erasmus stands in sharp contrast to his contemporary Greek text editors who promote the false notion that “Scripture remains full of meanings “which are not able to be understood in any way other than from the very fount of the original languages” [quae nequeant aliunde quam ex ipso archetypae linguae fonte cognosci]. This quote is taken from the preface of the Catholic Complutensian Polyglot produced by Cardinal Ximenez in 1517; this Catholic ‘father’ spawned “the first” Greek New Testament lexicon, which bred today’s mongrels.

Erasmus also reveals why some Greek and Latin copies corrupt verses about the deity of Christ and the blood; these errors appear today in the NIV, TNIV, NASB, HCSB and ESV.

Erasmus warned of the font from which lexicons are taken and their “danger of taking words in a sense they may well have in classical Greek, but which is not the sense in which they are used in the New Testament.” Sometimes, “The new words implied a new theology.” (Cambridge History of the Bible, Vol. 2, p. 366 et al.).

Erasmus recommends only the Bible’s built-in dictionary, where one can “compare texts fruitfully one with another” (Cambridge History of the Bible, Vol. 2, p. 504).

In the 1500s Erasmus said, “God is in every syllable” (The Bible Through the Ages, p. 306).

Erasmus’s view that vernacular Bibles are inspired led him to use them as proofs for disputed readings and to use them in place of lexicons, because Holy Bibles show the God-honored translation of each word in each context.

The guy always stood to study, read or translate the scriptures, in reverence for the word of God. (Translating For King James, pp. 145, 147, 148, 150). I trust you get the point.

This looks like a copy&paste text from some KJV Only cult website.

 

[rvmb]

This looks like a copy&paste text from some KJV Only cult website.

Debunk the KJV 7's anomalies codes oh yee anti-KJV cultist :)

KJV Code

kjvcode.com

 

[HealthyShape]

Debunk the KJV 7's anomalies codes oh yee anti-KJV cultist :)

KJV Code

kjvcode.com

Not interested in such cultic nonsense, sorry.

 

[rvmb]

Not interested in such cultic nonsense, sorry.

Especially since it will expose your ignorance

 

[HealthyShape]

Especially since it will expose your ignorance

Sure.

 

[rvmb]

Sure.

Did you read it ? No
Did you study it ? No
Did you try and critically analyze the patterns ? No
Keep your head in the sand :)

 

[HealthyShape]

Did you read it ? No
Did you study it ? No
Did you try and critically analyze the patterns ? No
Keep your head in the sand :)

Not interested in the KJV Only propaganda, codes, horoscopes or whatever signs you see for the KJV. Respect that and stop goading me. I will not visit your website.

 

[Armour of God]

Im not sure it really matters what translation you use. I personally find it very difficult to follow the old English of the KJV. I prefer to use the NIV because the modern English is much easier for me to follow, reading isn't really a strong point of mine
God bless

 

[Davy]

Im not sure it really matters what translation you use. I personally find it very difficult to follow the old English of the KJV. I prefer to use the NIV because the modern English is much easier for me to follow, reading isn't really a strong point of mine
God bless

Modern KJV editions are not in Old English. That means you are just regurgitating what you heard.

 

[Armour of God]

Modern KJV editions are not in Old English. That means you are just regurgitating what you heard.

I just quickly went my bible app and changed it to kjv and this is what I saw straight away. "Peter saith unto them" a few lines later "he girt his fishers coat unto him".
That is certainly not modern English, it's old style to me and I find it hard to follow, I'm a slow reader as it is. That's why I prefer NIV or something modern cos it's easier to read

God bless

 

[Wrangler]

I just quickly went my bible app and changed it to kjv and this is what I saw straight away. "Peter saith unto them" a few lines later "he girt his fishers coat unto him".
That is certainly not modern English, it's old style to me and I find it hard to follow, I'm a slow reader as it is. That's why I prefer NIV or something modern cos it's easier to read

God bless

To me, this is the final nail in KJV argument. No matter how good the FROM part of the translation is, it is translating into a DEAD language; the TO part of the translation is a complete failure!

The IDOLATORS say we should figure it out. No thanks! I don‘t care if the best translation is Swahili - I don’t speak Swahili! The KJV-only crowd ignore the very purpose of a translation. Honestly, if you’re going to make the effort, why not skip the KJV entirely and go right to the source material in the original ancient languages?

These IDOLATORS are shocked when you remind them that Christ did not speak the King’s English. LOL.

 

[Armour of God]

To me, this is the final nail in KJV argument. No matter how good the FROM part of the translation is, it is translating into a DEAD language; the TO part of the translation is a complete failure!

The IDOLATORS say we should figure it out. No thanks! I don‘t care if the best translation is Swahili - I don’t speak Swahili! The KJV-only crowd ignore the very purpose of a translation. Honestly, if you’re going to make the effort, why not skip the KJV entirely and go right to the source material in the original ancient languages?

These IDOLATORS are shocked when you remind them that Christ did not speak the King’s English. LOL.

"The KJV only crowd"

I didn't know there was such a thing. I was wondering why the person before was being so rude and making a false accusation about me, saying "i was just regurgitating what i had heard", I thought that wasn't very Christ like. I was speaking from personal experience and simply prefer a modern translation, I can't see what the big deal is. I'm much better with numbers than words so reading that old style is a great effort, I read a page and forget what I read at the start of it and miss much of the message.

Thank you and God bless

 

[Davy]

I just quickly went my bible app and changed it to kjv and this is what I saw straight away. "Peter saith unto them" a few lines later "he girt his fishers coat unto him".
That is certainly not modern English, it's old style to me and I find it hard to follow, I'm a slow reader as it is. That's why I prefer NIV or something modern cos it's easier to read

God bless

Go look up the 1st edition KJV Bible, and you'll see what I mean.