Riplinger/Ruckman charts are a joke and back fire when applied consistently to KJV also.
Theology Club: Is MAD doctrine correct?
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
Riplinger/Ruckman charts are a joke and back fire when applied consistently to KJV also.
The KJV is NOT a false view. KJV-onlyism is a myth/false view. KJV is not the most readable, accurate version and adds an unnecessary interpretative barrier (old vs new English). It has been used by cults for their false teachings. It has also been used by Christians for truth.
I am not against KJV. I am against KJV-only views because they are divisive, destructive, undermine biblical credibility, etc.
"KJVO is a false view." My post at 2:12 p.m. You have misunderstood or misrepresented me. The quote is copy/paste and not what you said above about me. Sheesh.
You are not against KJV? You could have fooled me.
I list KJV as a credible version. When I make a list of Bibles, it is not necessarily in a particular order. I would not make it my primary Bible (though I once did) because it is not the most accurate, readable version. It is worth comparing, but NKJV has corrected some of the problems and ESV is in the same family (TR/Byzantine) and has the advantage of more manuscript evidence and more discovered translation/textual criticism scholarship.
This is more than bias or preference. It is an informed position based on objective reality vs myth.
heir
TOL Subscriber
Which Bible do you believe is the pure and preserved words of the Lord?
Multiple corrupted (per)versions all say the same thing is a false view. Based on what as their final authority are they right or wrong?
heir
TOL Subscriber
He is just like tetelestai
The original autographs were superintended in a way that no translation was. They are reflected in a wealth of manuscript evidence that reproduces the originals to near perfection. Any variants do not affect anything. The plethora of translations from one language to another necessarily have strengths and weaknesses with perfection not possible since God did not choose to dictate them or superintend them (based on the evidence of imperfections).
Tet and I disagree on many things. I am dispensationalist and he is not. We are both against MAD and probably both not KJVO.
Myth, not evidence based. It is a false security blanket for the lazy and ignorant.
Doing this again is like going from teasing to being mean.
But I don't dislike madists. They're better than preters and hyper calv types.
And said unto them, Thus it is written, - OLD TESTAMENT
and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations,
beginning at Jerusalem. - NOT W/PAUL
BUT IN JERUSALEM
And ye are witnesses -DISCIPLES NOT PAUL
of these things. - Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem,
until ye be endued with power -NOT WAIT FOR PAUL BUT POWER
from on high. (*Luke *24:*46-49 KJV)
But I don't dislike madists. They're better than preters and hyper calv types.
And said unto them, Thus it is written, - OLD TESTAMENT
and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations,
beginning at Jerusalem. - NOT W/PAUL
BUT IN JERUSALEM
And ye are witnesses -DISCIPLES NOT PAUL
of these things. - Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem,
until ye be endued with power -NOT WAIT FOR PAUL BUT POWER
from on high. (*Luke *24:*46-49 KJV)
heir
TOL Subscriber
I believe God kept His promise:
Psalms 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psalms 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
You don't have the pure and preserved words of the Lord only your religious opinion, which means nothing.
heir
TOL Subscriber
:rotfl: You must be joking!
heir
TOL Subscriber
These KJVO proof texts have nothing to do with English versions. It is begging the question, anachronistic to say so. If it does, I could claim it for ESV, etc. The evidence contradicts your assumption.
heir
TOL Subscriber
No. He could have, but He did not. He could also have created with evolution, but He did not.
heir
TOL Subscriber
God created in six days and did not speak of evolution, but God did promise that His words are pure and preserved and you believe He didn't. You make God a liar. Your god is the liar, littlegrulz.