Stopping the KJVO myth in its tracks...

brandplucked

New member
I read the KJV and many other translations and it is proof that we can know God's Truth no matter which translation we read.

OK, God's Truth. Which of these is the truth of God? I have literally hundreds of examples like this.


1 Samuel 6:19 - 50,070 men slain or only 70 or 75 or 70 men 50 chief men or 50 oxen of a man? Why we cannot trust the Bible commentators or the modern versions.

1 Samuel 6:19 King James Bible (NASB, NET, NKJV, ISV) - "And he smote the men of Bethshemesh, because they had looked INTO the ark of the LORD, even he smote OF THE PEOPLE FIFTY THOUSAND AND THREESCORE AND TEN MEN: and the people lamented, because the LORD had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter."

ESV 2016 (NIV 2011, Catholic St. Joseph New American bible 1970, Catholic New Jerusalem 1985) - "He struck SEVENTY men of them, and the people mourned because the LORD had struck the people with a great blow."

Young’s "literal" translation reads: “He smiteth among the people SEVENTY MEN - FIFTY CHIEF MEN”.

The Voice of 2012, one of the new Critical Text versions, actually says: “God struck down 75 men”

The Holman Christian Standard Bible 2009 has come up with a reading that is different from them all. The HCSB now says: "He struck down 70 men out of 50,000 men."
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
You read the debate and you came up with an opinion because a debate is solely designed to solicit opinion. History shows us that truth cannot be decided by popularity. Others have different subjective opinions which are no less valuable than your subjective opinions.
No. This is utterly wrong.

The King James bible is either the inerrant word of God and therefore the only actual legitimate bible that exists and all others are perturbation of it that aught not be used or it is not.

It is not a matter of opinion. The KJV only posiiton is either true or it false and if that truth claim is falsified through rational means then it is, in fact, false.

Reason works, George. Otherwise, your claim here that everything is a matter of opinion would also be unknowable.

And it isn't history that has shown us that truth cannot be decided by popularity, it is philosophy. More specifically, it is sound reason that has shown us that. There's really good reason why making an argument based on a proposition's popularity is considered a fallacy of logic. They even have a name for it. "Argumentum ad Populum" and no one (on either side of the debate) has made such an argument.

No, they were convincing because you had already made up your mind before reading it.
Mind reader now, are ya?

Saying it doesn't make it so, George.

This is nothing more than admitting that you are not interested in further knowledge - your mind is made up.
No it doesn't!

My mind is made up but that doesn't have anything to do with me telling him to make the argument here instead of sending us all off to some other website to read some long article that probably only makes arguments that have already been refuted in the original debate.

I'm not apposed to reading the argument but I'm not going to do so because someone happens to have posted a link to it. If he's too lazy to lay out the basic points of the argument then he's too lazy to be worth my time.

Dear God,
I don't have time to read all that stuff you put in the Bible because I am pretty sure it's not worth my time. Can you please just send me the most important parts? And keep it short will you? I am a busy man.
Your friend,
xxxxx
This is stupidity.

brandplunked isn't God and the article he linked to wasn't the bible nor was it inspired by God.

brandplunked wants someone to do his arguing for him because he's lazy. If he's not lazy then he'll post a summary of the argument and, if it's worthwile, I'll respond. If it's stupity then I'll ridicule it. If it's something inbetween then I'll have to decide if I want to take the time. Maybe I will, maybe I won't.

Is God divided against Himself? Which one of these is the real Word of God? It may not be important to you, but I would really like to know and trust in the real words of Jesus. I pulled these two off the shelf.

And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. KJV
Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.” NIV
So, are you saying that those are so different that you're confused as to what is being said?

If not, then just what is your point?

If so, then there are ways to go about digging deeper into the original language and studying the various texts that were used in the various translations such that you can determine which, in your view is the superior translation. At the end of the day, however, what you're going to be left with is a translation from the language of the original text into English, whether you do it yourself or whether you decide to trust someone else's tranlsation and I hate to break it to you but there is simply no such thing as a perfect translation of a large work from one language to another. It cannot be done. Not because we're stupid or otherwise incapacitated but because it is not doable.

Unfounded opinion.
Actually, I followed the claim up with precisely what I founded it upon. Maybe read past the period of one sentece before responding to it.

Opinion based on ignorance. (maybe you should read more stuff you don't have time for before making a fool of yourself)
It is not my opinion. It is demonstable fact, which you'd know if you had bothered to read the debate.

Even if it were an opinion (which it isn't) the translators of the KJV themselves state that it isn't a perfect translation in the preface of the 1611 edition.

Bob Enyart said:
Post #18

the 1611 KJ translators said the same, not only in their preface but thousands of times over as they incorporated those admissions directly into their 1611 translation work. They provided more than 2,150 alternative translations in the margins of the KJV because they were unsure of how to translate the text. And in the margins they identified 67 variant readings, indicating that they were uncertain even as to the correct underlying Hebrew or Greek wording that they were supposed to be translating.

More unfounded opinion.



Pay attention! this was answered.



So was this.



So was this. Boy you really have a lot of reading to do!
Saying it doesn't make it so.

God tells us that the authors were inspired. Nothing else. Getting what the authors said right was a process.
By this logic, no inerrant word of God existed prior to 1611.

If it is not inerrant, then it can't be God's Word.
That's your unfounded opinion.

He does all things well.
This is not in dispute and therefore does not prove your case.

The writing of the bible was inspired by God. It is your CLAIM that it's transalation into English was done by inspiration in 1611, (except that it had spelling and printing errors (OOPS!) but are entirely incapable of proving that claim. You cannot even prove that the 1611 translation is superior to the 1982 translation of the New King James.

You can make arguments that support why you think it's superior but you cannot PROVE that it is. If you think you can then you do not understand what it means to prove something nor do you know anything about how language works.

Clete
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
You read the debate and you came up with an opinion because a debate is solely designed to solicit opinion. History shows us that truth cannot be decided by popularity. Others have different subjective opinions which are no less valuable than your subjective opinions.



No, they were convincing because you had already made up your mind before reading it.



This is nothing more than admitting that you are not interested in further knowledge - your mind is made up.
Dear God,
I don't have time to read all that stuff you put in the Bible because I am pretty sure it's not worth my time. Can you please just send me the most important parts? And keep it short will you? I am a busy man.
Your friend,
xxxxx​



Is God divided against Himself? Which one of these is the real Word of God? It may not be important to you, but I would really like to know and trust in the real words of Jesus. I pulled these two off the shelf.

And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. KJV
Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.” NIV



Unfounded opinion.



Opinion based on ignorance. (maybe you should read more stuff you don't have time for before making a fool of yourself)
Of the tens of thousands of supposed objections to inerrancy there are only a handful that don't more than one possible and quite reasonable solutions. Except, of course, for those whose narrative demands mistakes.



More unfounded opinion.



Pay attention! this was answered.



So was this.



So was this. Boy you really have a lot of reading to do!



God tells us that the authors were inspired. Nothing else. Getting what the authors said right was a process.



Clete [ /QUOTE ]

If it is not inerrant, then it can't be God's Word. He does all things well.


(Please be advised that these comments may/may not reflect the beliefs of 'brandplucked' and are solely my responsibility.)



Fix your formatting please.

This is why:

No. This is utterly wrong.

The King James bible is either the inerrant word of God and therefore the only actual legitimate bible that exists and all others are perturbation of it that aught not be used or it is not.

It is not a matter of opinion. The KJV only posiiton is either true or it false and if that truth claim is falsified through rational means then it is, in fact, false.

Reason works, George. Otherwise, your claim here that everything is a matter of opinion would also be unknowable.

And it isn't history that has shown us that truth cannot be decided by popularity, it is philosophy. More specifically, it is sound reason that has shown us that. There's really good reason why making an argument based on a proposition's popularity is considered a fallacy of logic. They even have a name for it. "Argumentum ad Populum" and no one (on either side of the debate) has made such an argument.


Mind reader now, are ya?

Saying it doesn't make it so, George.


No it doesn't!

My mind is made up but that doesn't have anything to do with me telling him to make the argument here instead of sending us all off to some other website to read some long article that probably only makes arguments that have already been refuted in the original debate.

I'm not apposed to reading the argument but I'm not going to do so because someone happens to have posted a link to it. If he's too lazy to lay out the basic points of the argument then he's too lazy to be worth my time.


This is stupidity.

brandplunked isn't God and the article he linked to wasn't the bible nor was it inspired by God.

brandplunked wants someone to do his arguing for him because he's lazy. If he's not lazy then he'll post a summary of the argument and, if it's worthwile, I'll respond. If it's stupity then I'll ridicule it. If it's something inbetween then I'll have to decide if I want to take the time. Maybe I will, maybe I won't.


So, are you saying that those are so different that you're confused as to what is being said?

If not, then just what is your point?

If so, then there are ways to go about digging deeper into the original language and studying the various texts that were used in the various translations such that you can determine which, in your view is the superior translation. At the end of the day, however, what you're going to be left with is a translation from the language of the original text into English, whether you do it yourself or whether you decide to trust someone else's tranlsation and I hate to break it to you but there is simply no such thing as a perfect translation of a large work from one language to another. It cannot be done. Not because we're stupid or otherwise incapacitated but because it is not doable.


Actually, I followed the claim up with precisely what I founded it upon. Maybe read past the period of one sentece before responding to it.


It is not my opinion. It is demonstable fact, which you'd know if you had bothered to read the debate.

Even if it were an opinion (which it isn't) the translators of the KJV themselves state that it isn't a perfect translation in the preface of the 1611 edition.


Of the tens of thousands of supposed objections to inerrancy there are only a handful that don't more than one possible and quite reasonable solutions. Except, of course, for those whose narrative demands mistakes.



More unfounded opinion.



Pay attention! this was answered.



So was this.



So was this. Boy you really have a lot of reading to do!



God tells us that the authors were inspired. Nothing else. Getting what the authors said right was a process.



Clete [ /QUOTE ]

If it is not inerrant, then it can't be God's Word. He does all things well.


(Please be advised that these comments may/may not reflect the beliefs of 'brandplucked' and are solely my responsibility.)[ /QUOTE ]
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Hi and the Holy Spirit mess up with all these translations and do you believe in DOUBLE INSPIRATION !! I DON'T , DO YOU ??

Do you see where all GREEK SCHOLARS are in agreement !! NO !!

That is why we are to study to be approved , 2 Tim 2:15 , don't you see !

dan p
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Robycop is a very confused individual who has NO complete and inerrant Bible in any language he can show to anybody.
Since there is no complete and inerrant Bible in any language, then Robycop is not confused.
The people that are confused are the ones that believe that there is a complete and inerrant Bible to be found.

Your link about "Seven easy ways to tell the true Bible from the false ones" is just a page that says that a Bible is true if the translation can be twisted and misinterpreted to support several false doctrines that you prefer to believe over the truth.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Hi Dan. Well, sir, if "only the original autographs are inspired", then you (like most Christians today) are professing a faith in a Phantom Bible that you have never seen, never read, can't show to anybody else and that you KNOW does not exist. Yet you use a present tense verb - ARE - when you tell us that something that does not exist "ONLY the ORIGINAL AUTOGRAPHS ARE inspired!"
Where do you believe the Bible came from if nobody wrote any of it?
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Hi God's Truth. "Which ones contradict?"
They all contradict each other. I can easily prove this. Here is the Bible Agnostic Test for example. These are just a few of the literally hundreds of examples I can show you.

the Bible Agnostic Test.

https://brandplucked.webs.com/bibleagnostictest.htm
That is an interesting web page you put together.
Why do you think that proving that the KJV has mistakes will help your theory that the KJV is the only translation to believe?
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Clete, if you think just any "bible" out there in Bible Babble Buffet Land is the inerrant words of God, then. why don't you take up the Bible Agnostic Test challenge I gave here and so far nobody has actually taken?
Clete has already stated that the Word of God does not need to be inerrant.
The bottom line is that the bible is God's word and if it isn't "inerrant" then it doesn't need to be.

Clete
You have the false belief that God's word needs to be inerrant, and that false belief cannot be supported by the Bible.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
I'm not going to respond to someone else's work on another website. Make the argument here. It doesn't need to be 4000 words. Just boil it down to its basic points so that I can tell wether the longer article is even worth my time to bother reading.
This is nothing more than admitting that you are not interested in further knowledge - your mind is made up.
Dear God,
I don't have time to read all that stuff you put in the Bible because I am pretty sure it's not worth my time. Can you please just send me the most important parts? And keep it short will you? I am a busy man.
Your friend,
xxxxx​
What makes you believe that brandplucked is God and that the webpage brandplucked created is the Holy Bible?
brandplunked isn't God and the article he linked to wasn't the bible nor was it inspired by God.
Yep. :thumb:
 

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
The writing of the bible was inspired by God. It is your CLAIM that it's transalation into English was done by inspiration in 1611, (except that it had spelling and printing errors (OOPS!) but are entirely incapable of proving that claim. You cannot even prove that the 1611 translation is superior to the 1982 translation of the New King James.

No Sir. That is not my claim at all.
Some others may make this claim but it is not mine.

My claim on this thread is simply that you do not have the courtesy to do the necessary legwork to educate yourself but you are quite willing to share with us your uninformed opinion.

You don't even have the ability to discern between a comment made about your lack of commitment to knowledge and a whimsical letter to God.

My claim is that everything you have written so far is childish in comparison to Mr. Kinney's proficiency and scholarship. Listen to yourself; "...I'll have to decide if I want to take the time. Maybe I will, maybe I won't."

God forbid you should learn something!
 

brandplucked

New member
brandplunked wants someone to do his arguing for him because he's lazy.
Clete

Uhhh....Clete. Just so you know, that link I posted and all the links I post in response to you guys are my own articles and studies. I did them. Nobody else. It is my own website.

Are you willing to just be honest about it and admit the FACT that you do not have nor do you believe that any Bible in any language you can show us is now or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God? Some bible agnostics are at least honest enough to admit this. Others keep wanting to give the impression that they are real Bible believers, when they are not.
 

God's Truth

New member
OK, God's Truth. Which of these is the truth of God? I have literally hundreds of examples like this.


1 Samuel 6:19 - 50,070 men slain or only 70 or 75 or 70 men 50 chief men or 50 oxen of a man? Why we cannot trust the Bible commentators or the modern versions.

1 Samuel 6:19 King James Bible (NASB, NET, NKJV, ISV) - "And he smote the men of Bethshemesh, because they had looked INTO the ark of the LORD, even he smote OF THE PEOPLE FIFTY THOUSAND AND THREESCORE AND TEN MEN: and the people lamented, because the LORD had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter."

ESV 2016 (NIV 2011, Catholic St. Joseph New American bible 1970, Catholic New Jerusalem 1985) - "He struck SEVENTY men of them, and the people mourned because the LORD had struck the people with a great blow."

Young’s "literal" translation reads: “He smiteth among the people SEVENTY MEN - FIFTY CHIEF MEN”.

The Voice of 2012, one of the new Critical Text versions, actually says: “God struck down 75 men”

The Holman Christian Standard Bible 2009 has come up with a reading that is different from them all. The HCSB now says: "He struck down 70 men out of 50,000 men."

I go by the KJV; however, all the translations make it clear that God struck a lot of people dead.


We are warned against doing what you are doing.

Here is one scripture that tells us:

2 Timothy 2:14
Remind the believers of these things, charging them before God to avoid quarreling over words, which is in no way profitable and leads its listeners to ruin.
 

brandplucked

New member
When "God's Truth" asks: "Hi brandplucked. I do use different versions. Show me which ones contradict." and he is then shown just one example out of a hundred I can easily show him of totally different names, numbers, omissions, additions, and completely different meanings for just one verse, and he has no clue how to explain these blatant textual differences, he comes back with this shallow and inane reply quoting a verse out of context that has nothing to do with the issue at hand:


"We are warned against doing what you are doing.

Here is one scripture that tells us:

2 Timothy 2:14
Remind the believers of these things, charging them before God to avoid quarreling over words, which is in no way profitable and leads its listeners to ruin.

2 Timothy 2:14 - “STRIVE NOT ABOUT WORDS to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.”

Some among the “No Bible in any language IS the inerrant words of God” crowd quote this verse and apply it in such a way as to teach that arguing, debating or disputing about the inerrancy of the Bible and other major doctrines of the faith are things that we Christians should not be doing.


It it pretty amazing how one can take a verse out of context and apply it in such a way as to deny scores of other verses that teach us we are to “earnestly contend for the faith.” (Jude 1:3)

The apostle Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, wrote numerous verses and even whole letters combating and refuting false doctrines. The whole letter to the Galatians was written to correct the false teaching that we are justified by the law instead of by the grace of Christ. So were large portions of the book of Romans.

He refuted false teachings and doctrines in the books of Colossians, and corrected wrong views of the coming of the Lord in First and Second Thessalonians.

Here are just a few of the many verses that show the importance of sound doctrine and how error should not be tolerated but refuted with “the form of sound words.” (2 Timothy 1:13).

When some Judaizers had “taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved” we read: “When therefore Paul and Barnabas had NO SMALL DISSENSION AND DISPUTATION WITH THEM…AND WHEN THERE HAD BEEN MUCH DISPUTING…” (Acts 15:2,7)

Again in Acts 17:16-17 we read: “Now while Paul waited for them in Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry. Therefore DISPUTED he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.”

And in Acts 19:8-9 - “And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, DISPUTING and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God. But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, DISPUTING DAILY in the school of one Tyrannus.”


“Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to EXHORT AND CONVINCE the gainsayers. For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: WHOSE MOUTHS MUST BE STOPPED, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake.” (Titus 1:9-11)

“Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.” (1 Timothy 1:5-7)

“If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: FROM SUCH WITHDRAW THYSELF." (1 Timothy 6:3-5)

“Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” (2 Timothy 4:2-4)

So what exactly does the apostle mean when he says “STRIVE NOT ABOUT WORDS TO NO PROFIT”? Is he suddenly contradicting himself and retracting everything he said and did throughout his ministry?

Of course not. Sound doctrine is supremely important and errors and heresy are to be soundly refuted. We do not suddenly stop combating wrong teachings and erroneous views of Scripture just because somebody who doesn’t understand what a verse means rips it out of context and says “See, we are not supposed to strive about words, so stop all this arguing over doctrines and whether or not the Bible is inerrant.”

He tells Titus to stop the mouths of those who teach false doctrine “that they may be sound in the faith; Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.” (Titus 1:13-14)

Throughout the books of First and Second Timothy, and Titus the apostle Paul exhorts young Timothy to “be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.” (1 Timothy 2:1-2)

It is in this context that he further tells Timothy “Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they STRIVE NOT ABOUT WORDS TO NO PROFIT, but to the subverting of the hearers. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. BUT SHUN PROFANE AND VAIN BABBLING: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philters; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.” (2 Timothy 2:14-18)

What I believe the apostle Paul is saying in the context is to teach sound doctrines about the grace of God in Christ Jesus; to hold fast the form of sound words and to rightly divide and teach “the word of truth”.

And once these sound doctrines are taught, do not allow the false teachers to continue to spread their false teachings that subvert and undermine these truths of God. We are to PURGE OURSELVES FROM THESE so that we may be a vessel unto honour, meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work. (2 Timothy 2:21)

"A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition REJECT; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself." (Titus 3:10-11)

See my article on this verse and how many modern versions have totally changed the meaning of this verse.

Titus 3:10 "Heretic" or "A Divisive Person"? Satan's Deception in the Modern Versions

http://brandplucked.webs.com/hereticordivisive.htm

“Now I beseech you, brethren, MARK THEM WHICH CAUSE DIVISIONS and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; AND AVOID THEM.” (Romans 16:17)

If the false teachers continue to “strive about words to no profit”, then we are to shut their mouths to stop them from teaching false doctrines; to withdraw ourselves from such and to avoid them.

“Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: FROM SUCH WITHDRAW THYSELF.” (1 Timothy 6:5)


It can even reach the point of delivering them over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.

“Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck; Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.” (1 Timothy 1:19-20)


You cannot pull this one verse out of context - “strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers” - and make it contradict all the teachings we find in numerous other Scriptures.


2 Timothy 2:14 - "strive not about words" - cannot mean that we do not defend the faith, sound doctrines and the absolute truth of the inerrant words of God. Especially in a day like today when so many are denying the fundamental doctrines like the inerrancy of the Bible, the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the reality of the torments of hell, and that only Saviour from sin, death and damnation is through the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The verse simply means that we should not continue to argue and dispute with the heretics, Judaizers and false teachers and allow them to subvert others in our assembly. Rather we are to stop their mouths, withdraw ourselves from them and avoid them.

The attack on the inerrancy of ANY Bible in ANY language is a fierce battle that has only increased in intensity, and the difference now is that the attack comes primarily from those within the professing church of Jesus Christ. We King James Bible believers did not start this fight.

Men who do NOT believe there is such a thing as a REAL inerrant Bible did it by criticizing the King James Bible. Men like Westcott and Hort, the RSV translation committee, James White, Dan Wallace, R.C. Sproul, James Price, (chief editor of the NKJV) and Edwin Palmer, the chief editor of the ever changing Vatican Version called the NIV.


For documented proof of these claims, see my article ironically titled “Why do you King James only people "Cause Divisions" and attack the word of God?”

http://brandplucked.webs.com/attackthewordofgod.htm

“I have FOUGHT A GOOD FIGHT, I have finished my course, I HAVE KEPT THE FAITH” - the apostle Paul, 2 Timothy 4:7

All of grace, believing the inerrant words of God - the King James Holy Bible.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
No Sir. That is not my claim at all.
Some others may make this claim but it is not mine.

My claim on this thread is simply that you do not have the courtesy to do the necessary legwork to educate yourself but you are quite willing to share with us your uninformed opinion.
Well, you can't prove that claim either!

I've been around here a long long time. I know when someone is trying to let someone else do the work for them. The point of this website is not to go seaching the internet for arguments that you can then come here and post links too. The idea is for you to make the arguments yourself. If bp doesn't want to do that then I can't make him do so but neither can he make me go off reading someone else's work. I've got a life and am fully persuaded that the KJV only stance is silly. If you, or he want to make an argument to the contrary then, if I think it worthy of a response then I'll respond to it. Otherwise, I'll discuss something else with someone else.

You don't even have the ability to discern between a comment made about your lack of commitment to knowledge and a whimsical letter to God.
I responded to your own words and wasn't the only one who took you to be saying the same thing.

I am not responsible for reading your mind. If you can't articulate yourself well, then that's your issue not mine.

My claim is that everything you have written so far is childish in comparison to Mr. Kinney's proficiency and scholarship. Listen to yourself; "...I'll have to decide if I want to take the time. Maybe I will, maybe I won't."
Everyone makes that same decision every time they post here, George.

I get more of my time wasted than I care to contemplate. 90% of the arguments I make on this website are responded to by people simply repeating the argument that I just spent two hours refuting as though doing so counts as a valid rejoinder.

God forbid you should learn something!
I'm not here to learn anything from you or bp or anyone else who preaches false doctrine. That's not to say that I'm apposed to learning things but merely that doing so is not my purpose here.

Your approval is neither requested nor required.

Clete
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Uhhh....Clete. Just so you know, that link I posted and all the links I post in response to you guys are my own articles and studies. I did them. Nobody else. It is my own website.

Are you willing to just be honest about it and admit the FACT that you do not have nor do you believe that any Bible in any language you can show us is now or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God? Some bible agnostics are at least honest enough to admit this. Others keep wanting to give the impression that they are real Bible believers, when they are not.

Well, you might have said so to begin with.

Regardless, I'm not interested in reading all of that. Boil it down or it'll go ignored. Or at least it will by me. As far as I'm concerned your position has been thoroughly falsified and anything beyond a brief argument isn't worth the time to read. If the brief version proves substantive then that might change but if what you posted in Battle Royale XIV is any indication, I really doubt it. In short, you have to earn my time.

Clete
 

God's Truth

New member
When "God's Truth" asks: "Hi brandplucked. I do use different versions. Show me which ones contradict." and he is then shown just one example out of a hundred I can easily show him of totally different names, numbers, omissions, additions, and completely different meanings for just one verse, and he has no clue how to explain these blatant textual differences, he comes back with this shallow and inane reply quoting a verse out of context that has nothing to do with the issue at hand:
Don't you think I have debated this before in my life?
The scriptures don't contradict.
I told you they all say that God killed a lot of people for looking in the ark.

2 Timothy 2:14 - “STRIVE NOT ABOUT WORDS to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.”

Some among the “No Bible in any language IS the inerrant words of God” crowd quote this verse and apply it in such a way as to teach that arguing, debating or disputing about the inerrancy of the Bible and other major doctrines of the faith are things that we Christians should not be doing.


It it pretty amazing how one can take a verse out of context and apply it in such a way as to deny scores of other verses that teach us we are to “earnestly contend for the faith.” (Jude 1:3)
You just don't get it. What you are doing goes against GOD and the faith.


The apostle Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, wrote numerous verses and even whole letters combating and refuting false doctrines. The whole letter to the Galatians was written to correct the false teaching that we are justified by the law instead of by the grace of Christ. So were large portions of the book of Romans.
I can show you all your false doctrines with any translation you want.

He refuted false teachings and doctrines in the books of Colossians, and corrected wrong views of the coming of the Lord in First and Second Thessalonians.

Here are just a few of the many verses that show the importance of sound doctrine and how error should not be tolerated but refuted with “the form of sound words.” (2 Timothy 1:13).

When some Judaizers had “taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved” we read: “When therefore Paul and Barnabas had NO SMALL DISSENSION AND DISPUTATION WITH THEM…AND WHEN THERE HAD BEEN MUCH DISPUTING…” (Acts 15:2,7)

Again in Acts 17:16-17 we read: “Now while Paul waited for them in Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry. Therefore DISPUTED he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.”

And in Acts 19:8-9 - “And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, DISPUTING and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God. But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, DISPUTING DAILY in the school of one Tyrannus.”


You don't see the difference between that and what you are doing.

None of the translations make for false doctrines. However, you argue about words that don't matter.


“Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to EXHORT AND CONVINCE the gainsayers. For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: WHOSE MOUTHS MUST BE STOPPED, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake.” (Titus 1:9-11)

“Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.” (1 Timothy 1:5-7)

“If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: FROM SUCH WITHDRAW THYSELF." (1 Timothy 6:3-5)

“Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” (2 Timothy 4:2-4)

So what exactly does the apostle mean when he says “STRIVE NOT ABOUT WORDS TO NO PROFIT”? Is he suddenly contradicting himself and retracting everything he said and did throughout his ministry?

Of course not. Sound doctrine is supremely important and errors and heresy are to be soundly refuted. We do not suddenly stop combating wrong teachings and erroneous views of Scripture just because somebody who doesn’t understand what a verse means rips it out of context and says “See, we are not supposed to strive about words, so stop all this arguing over doctrines and whether or not the Bible is inerrant.”

He tells Titus to stop the mouths of those who teach false doctrine “that they may be sound in the faith; Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.” (Titus 1:13-14)

Throughout the books of First and Second Timothy, and Titus the apostle Paul exhorts young Timothy to “be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.” (1 Timothy 2:1-2)

It is in this context that he further tells Timothy “Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they STRIVE NOT ABOUT WORDS TO NO PROFIT, but to the subverting of the hearers. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. BUT SHUN PROFANE AND VAIN BABBLING: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philters; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.” (2 Timothy 2:14-18)

What I believe the apostle Paul is saying in the context is to teach sound doctrines about the grace of God in Christ Jesus; to hold fast the form of sound words and to rightly divide and teach “the word of truth”.

And once these sound doctrines are taught, do not allow the false teachers to continue to spread their false teachings that subvert and undermine these truths of God. We are to PURGE OURSELVES FROM THESE so that we may be a vessel unto honour, meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work. (2 Timothy 2:21)

"A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition REJECT; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself." (Titus 3:10-11)

See my article on this verse and how many modern versions have totally changed the meaning of this verse.

Titus 3:10 "Heretic" or "A Divisive Person"? Satan's Deception in the Modern Versions

http://brandplucked.webs.com/hereticordivisive.htm

“Now I beseech you, brethren, MARK THEM WHICH CAUSE DIVISIONS and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; AND AVOID THEM.” (Romans 16:17)

If the false teachers continue to “strive about words to no profit”, then we are to shut their mouths to stop them from teaching false doctrines; to withdraw ourselves from such and to avoid them.

“Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: FROM SUCH WITHDRAW THYSELF.” (1 Timothy 6:5)


It can even reach the point of delivering them over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.

“Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck; Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.” (1 Timothy 1:19-20)


You cannot pull this one verse out of context - “strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers” - and make it contradict all the teachings we find in numerous other Scriptures.


2 Timothy 2:14 - "strive not about words" - cannot mean that we do not defend the faith, sound doctrines and the absolute truth of the inerrant words of God. Especially in a day like today when so many are denying the fundamental doctrines like the inerrancy of the Bible, the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the reality of the torments of hell, and that only Saviour from sin, death and damnation is through the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The verse simply means that we should not continue to argue and dispute with the heretics, Judaizers and false teachers and allow them to subvert others in our assembly. Rather we are to stop their mouths, withdraw ourselves from them and avoid them.

The attack on the inerrancy of ANY Bible in ANY language is a fierce battle that has only increased in intensity, and the difference now is that the attack comes primarily from those within the professing church of Jesus Christ. We King James Bible believers did not start this fight.

Men who do NOT believe there is such a thing as a REAL inerrant Bible did it by criticizing the King James Bible. Men like Westcott and Hort, the RSV translation committee, James White, Dan Wallace, R.C. Sproul, James Price, (chief editor of the NKJV) and Edwin Palmer, the chief editor of the ever changing Vatican Version called the NIV.


For documented proof of these claims, see my article ironically titled “Why do you King James only people "Cause Divisions" and attack the word of God?”

http://brandplucked.webs.com/attackthewordofgod.htm

“I have FOUGHT A GOOD FIGHT, I have finished my course, I HAVE KEPT THE FAITH” - the apostle Paul, 2 Timothy 4:7

All of grace, believing the inerrant words of God - the King James Holy Bible.

Again, you argue about words that do not matter.

I argue against false doctrines.
 

brandplucked

New member
Don't you think I have debated this before in my life?
The scriptures don't contradict.
I told you they all say that God killed a lot of people for looking in the ark.
Again, you argue about words that do not matter.

I argue against false doctrines.

"God's Truth". You asked where your multitude of conflicting "bibles" contradict each other and I gave you just one example out of a hundred I can easily give you. WHICH number? How many exactly did God kill during this time period? Was it 50,070 men slain or only 70 or 75 or 70 men 50 chief men or 50 oxen of a man?

And that's just one example. I have MANY more.


Luke 10:1,17 were there 70 sent out to preach (NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, Holman, ISV, KJB) or 72 sent out? (NIV, ESV, NET, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)

And, sir, your Fake bible versions DO pervert doctrines, not just names and numbers, and they constantly contradict each other.

Here is just one example of the many I have found.

Rejoice or Be Proud? Are Pride and Boasting Christian virtues?

Philippians 2:16 “Holding forth the word of life; that I MAY REJOICE in the day of Christ, that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain.”

REJOICE - Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Young's literal, Webster's 1833, NKJV 1982

Philippians 2:16 NIV - "in order that I MAY BOAST in the day of Christ that I did not run or labor for nothing."

ESV "THAT I MAY BE PROUD that I did not run in vain"

BE PROUD, BOAST, GLORY - NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, NET, Holman

On the day of Christ, when we finally see the full glory of God Almighty, we will not be standing around boasting of our accomplishments and patting one another on the back and telling them how proud we are of them. Nobody will be boasting or proud of his personal accomplishments in the day of the Lord Jesus. Instead we will all be flat on our faces worshipping the Lamb who alone is worthy to receive praise, honour and glory

http://brandplucked.webs.com/mvsprideasvirtue.htm
 
Top