Battle Royale XIV discussion thread

Danoh

New member
Thanks for your advice. If you have anything important to say, do let me know.

:chuckle: No offense, but your wry humor there is just funny

I'd like to just add that Mr. Kinney has expressed the view that in all previous history (and I would say this goes back to Moses) there was never a preserved text of 'God's Word'. There was no papyrus, stone or ketchup in the sand at all. Until 1769. So he would interpret your supposed promise of God to preserve his word as meaning that one day, at a specific time in the future, namely 1769 a.d., God would make good his promise but until then no one could have access to an inerrant version of that word.

Do you agree with Mr. Kinney on this GA?

There are occasions in Scripture where it is lost and then recovered; and this, back when God was intervening in the affairs of men in very direct manner - outside of His Word.

Personally, I believe some on both sides of the fence are actually after the truth of the matter.

As for the balance of people on both sides, well; all is their logic and how that because said logic makes sense to them, there is no other.

Anyway, have you or he personally studied out whether or not there is any concern with Preservation in the Scripture itself - in - their - day - and as to what passages promise what, or not, if any?

Also, as to what its writers and those they describe in their narrative had believed about Preservation - by their words and or actions - as to this issue?

It is obvious from Matt. 4: 4 and 2 Tim. 3:16-17 that both Jesus and the Apostle Paul had held to some sort of a Preservation of the Scripture doctrine.

What is the following if not a Preservation issue...

Matthew 15:

3. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
4. For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
5. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
6. And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
7. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
8. This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
9. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Obviously, this that follows was also the same Preservation issue...

2 Thessalonians 2:

2. That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

5. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6. And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

As was this...

2 Corinthians 2:

17. For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

In all those, an emphasis was made in written from as to the need to Preserve the Truth these men had asserted had been "given by inspiration of God" - that it be "profitable for doctrine," etc., in short "for instruction in righteousness.." 2 Tim. 3:16-17.

Obviously, Matthew 4:4's "it is written... man shalt no live by... but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God... shalt man live by" is a Preservation of the Scripture issue.

Case in point of what said Preservation was meant to allow way, way, way before 1769 - Nehemiah 7:

14. And they found written in the law which the LORD had commanded by Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month:
15. And that they should publish and proclaim in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, saying, Go forth unto the mount, and fetch olive branches, and pine branches, and myrtle branches, and
palm branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths, as it is written.

16. So the people went forth, and brought them, and made themselves booths, every one upon the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the street of the water gate, and in the street of the gate of Ephraim.
17. And all the congregation of them that were come again out of the captivity made booths, and sat under the booths: for since the days of Jeshua the son of Nun unto that day had not the children of Israel done so. And there was very great gladness.
18. Also day by day, from the first day unto the last day, he read in the book of the law of God. And they kept the feast seven days; and on the eighth day was a solemn assembly, according unto the manner.

They lost it, then found it, and it was a very big deal!

Isaiah 30:

8. Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever:

Write what?

9. That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the LORD:
10. Which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits:
11. Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us.
12. Wherefore thus saith the Holy One of Israel, Because ye despise this word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and stay thereon:
13. Therefore this iniquity shall be to you as a breach ready to fall, swelling out in a high wall, whose breaking cometh suddenly at an instant.
14. And he shall break it as the breaking of the potters' vessel that is broken in pieces; he shall not spare: so that there shall not be found in the bursting of it a sherd to take fire from the hearth, or to take water withal out of the pit.
15. For thus saith the Lord GOD, the Holy One of Israel; In returning and rest shall ye be saved; in quietness and in confidence shall be your strength: and ye would not.

There is the issue right there - For thus saith the Lord GOD...in the Old, reiterated in the New - Matthew 4:

2. And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.
3. And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
4. But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

But, lets not leave Peter out of this - the poor brother is far too often looked down upon as some sort of a fool sub-Apostle.

2 Peter 1:

19. We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
20. Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Just look at how serious this Preservation issue had been for them - 2 Peter 2:

1. But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
2. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
3. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

2 Peter 3:

1. This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2. That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

13. Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
14. Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16. As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other
scriptures, unto their own destruction.


Preservation of the Scriptures appears to have been a big concern to the Lord GOD; to the Spirit, to the Son, and to all these men...way before 1769... as even now, Rom. 11:13; 16:25-27.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
This appears to contradict what was claimed in the opening of the second post made by Will Kinney:

Hi brother Bob. Throughout your first post you make some unfounded claims about what I, as a King James Bible believer, actually believe, and it seems that your main focus so far has been on the issue of “Printing Errors”...

Then at the end of the post this admission:

Bob E said:
WKA12- BWQ12: “Will Kinney, do you agree that these actual handwritten notes from the 1611 translators themselves demonstrate that various errors previously admitted by the KJO camp were not the fault of the printers, but that these errors were generated by the translators themselves?”

Uhh…No, I do not. I maintain they were simple printing errors.

How can the claim be unfounded when is maintained by ones own words, dismissing all the evidence?
 

Right Divider

Body part
I concur. It's not usual to encounter someone who's willing to admit that his worldview might be flawed, and that he's basically stepped out on faith that his chosen view is the correct one.
That's true. Everyone does it but many won't admit to it, especially the "objective atheists". :think:
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
The actual debate isn't that interesting, and it isn't going to resolve anything.
What is interesting to me is the attitude of each side.


1. KJB- we want there to be a perfect word of God available, we want a book that we can believe no matter what, even when we don't understand it. We want to be under it's authority.

2. Non KJB- in most cases, they do not really want there to be a perfect word of God available. They are happy with a "reasonably accurate" account, and with hundreds of versions that capture "the main message". But they want the lee way to be able to dabble with all versions and be their own authority to some degree.


If a gun was to your head, and you had to know what God said on a particular matter, where would you turn?
I think the debate is interesting and informative.
But you are right that it will not solve anything, if one is looking to hold the one and only bible that can possibly save someone.

I happen to believe that someone that has never read a KJ bible, but has read another version, can be saved.
Which begs the question ..... if someone can be saved without ever reading a KJ bible, then why can't anyone be saved without ever reading a KJ bible?


To put another way .....
If every single KJV was confiscated, could you, STP, still show the gospel to someone using an NIV version?
I think you could.
 

Desert Reign

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
There are occasions in Scripture where it is lost and then recovered;

Well, I guess I can't expect you to answer a straight question as I was actually specifically asking the question to GA. But since you have commented on it, then can you answer the question directly?

Did the 100% inerrant 'Holy Scriptures' in written form exist before 1769? Do you agree with Will Kinney that they didn't and that 1769 a.d. was the first time in human history that the full inerrant text of God's word was available in any language?

I can sort of hear your response already: 'Well, it's sort of 6 of one and half a dozen of the other; and I can really see both sides' points of view and I am a much better person due to this and I am sure that you would get a lot more respect for your views if you stopped telling all of us what your views are and just sit on the fence like I do (because everybody knows that if you keep your views to yourself, everyone will respect them a lot more), and blah, blah, blah'. Anything but answer the question. Are you going to get off the fence and answer this simple question?

And you never know. Perhaps you will become a better person if you actually answer a question for once. It might be an eye-opener for you.
 

Desert Reign

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
This appears to contradict what was claimed in the opening of the second post made by Will Kinney:

Then at the end of the post this admission:

How can the claim be unfounded when is maintained by ones own words, dismissing all the evidence?

I agree entirely. Will Kinney has a mountain to climb to get out of this.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Do I need to read every writing to determine its validity?
Who said anything about you needing to determine the validity of the Apocrypha?

The Apocrypha was originally a part of the KJV Bible.
It was included in the KJV Bible by the same translators that the KJO advocates claim made the world's first complete and infallible Bible.

That alone is enough reason for me to read the Apocrypha to see why it was originally included.

It is also ironic that one of the stories in the Apocrypha provides a better argument for God creating a complete and infallible Bible than anything the KJO advocates have been able to come up with, since they rely on a version with those books missing.

Do I validate God's Word by reading it?
I don't recall reading that God had chosen you to validate His Word.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Well, I guess I can't expect you to answer a straight question as I was actually specifically asking the question to GA. But since you have commented on it, then can you answer the question directly?

Did the 100% inerrant 'Holy Scriptures' in written form exist before 1769? Do you agree with Will Kinney that they didn't and that 1769 a.d. was the first time in human history that the full inerrant text of God's word was available in any language?
<cut>
Better yet, where is it now?
 

Danoh

New member
Well, I guess I can't expect you to answer a straight question as I was actually specifically asking the question to GA. But since you have commented on it, then can you answer the question directly?

Did the 100% inerrant 'Holy Scriptures' in written form exist before 1769? Do you agree with Will Kinney that they didn't and that 1769 a.d. was the first time in human history that the full inerrant text of God's word was available in any language?

I can sort of hear your response already: 'Well, it's sort of 6 of one and half a dozen of the other; and I can really see both sides' points of view and I am a much better person due to this and I am sure that you would get a lot more respect for your views if you stopped telling all of us what your views are and just sit on the fence like I do (because everybody knows that if you keep your views to yourself, everyone will respect them a lot more), and blah, blah, blah'. Anything but answer the question. Are you going to get off the fence and answer this simple question?

And you never know. Perhaps you will become a better person if you actually answer a question for once. It might be an eye-opener for you.

As I was not there (well, I was - on a fence, somewhere :chuckle:) you'd have to ask someone who was.

Has there ever been a time when there were not "faithful men" 2 Tim. 2:2, I doubt it.
 

False Prophet

New member
Jerome gave us the Vulgate, which was the authorized version for a thousand years. They had the Codex Vaticanus when they went from scrolls to the Codices. The Codex Alexandrius and the Codex Sinaiticus have survived as well. Other codices have been discovered. Tyndale gave the KJV 70% of its vocabulary. The KJV is just a translation. Making it the divinely inspired literature that is the only trustworthy word of God is pure dogma.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Who said anything about you needing to determine the validity of the Apocrypha?

The Apocrypha was originally a part of the KJV Bible.
It was included in the KJV Bible by the same translators that the KJO advocates claim made the world's first complete and infallible Bible.

That alone is enough reason for me to read the Apocrypha to see why it was originally included.

It is also ironic that one of the stories in the Apocrypha provides a better argument for God creating a complete and infallible Bible than anything the KJO advocates have been able to come up with, since they rely on a version with those books missing.
Well.... if it's got ONE good story, then it's definitely scripture.

I don't recall reading that God had chosen you to validate His Word.
That was my point. Thanks for the validation.
 

DOCTA4me

New member
If God preserves His infallible word through human translators, why does he allow it to be corrupted by human printers? Maybe he meant for the translators to do all there own printing, but then the translators would be the corrupters for not doing what God told them to do.

How on earth can the KJOs think they can blame away the messed up KJV on the printers? That's just lame.
 
Top