The KJVO Myth - Phony As A Ford Corvette !

[Swan7]

Well I’m confused. I thought this thread was about being against KJVO, but I’m reading it as against the very version itself and not the mindset.

 

[Jipsah]

What's wrong with a Corvette?

It's still a Chevrolet.

 

[※※♡Rose○Gold○Macaron♡※※]

Umm, Carl, nothing except it wasn't made by Ford.lol

It's like saying 'the famous Chevrolet Thunderbird' is my favorite car !

My favorite car is the Porsche Beetle!

 

[Jipsah]

Well I’m confused. I thought this thread was about being against KJVO, but I’m reading it as against the very version itself and not the mindset.

OK, KJV good, KJVO dumb. That's my opinion, worth the price charged.

 

[PaulCyp1]

Actually the King James Version is the poorest translation of the Bible still in common use, with several thousand translational errors. The translators appointed by King James were simply not expert in the ancient languages, and it shows, on almost every page. Many of the errors are minor - singular vs. plural, verb tenses, etc. But some of them are plain ridiculous. For example, the KJV is the only translation of the Bible that mentioned unicorns. The translators translated the Greek term for "horned beasts" as "unicorns", instead of the obvious correct translation found in every other version of the Bible - "cattle", or "oxen".

 

[Der Alte]

...One of the most common biblical manuscripts used to make our modern English translations is known today as the Nestle Text. Yet it was Prof. Eberhard Nestle himself who warned us in his Einfhrung in die Textkritik des griechischen Testaments: "Learned men, so called Correctores were, following the church meeting at Nicea 325 AD, selected by the church authorities to scrutinize the sacred texts and rewrite them in order to correct their meaning in accordance with the views which the church had just sanctioned."
St. Jerome wrote: "They write down not what they find but what they think is the meaning; and while they attempt to rectify the errors of others, they merely expose their own" (Jerome, Epist. lxxi.5).

I have read this objection before, and as with many such "quotes" I doubt that the person who posted this has ever seen the quoted sources.
The Einfhrung in die Textkritik des griechischen Testaments: is available for review at Internet archives. I searched it and could not find any reference to "Learned men, so called Correctores." Here is a link I challenge this poster to find the quoted text. And OBTW it is written in German.
Full text of "Einführung in das griechische Neue Testament [microform]"
Here is what Jerome actually said.

If then you find errors or omissions which interfere with the sense, these you must impute not to me but to your own servants; they are due to the ignorance or carelessness of the copyists, who write down not what they find but what they take to be the meaning, and do but expose their own mistakes when they try to correct those of others.
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series II, Vol. VI​

The poster distorted the meaning of the quote by omitting the words.

If then you find errors or omissions which interfere with the sense, these you must impute not to me but to your own servants; they are due to the ignorance or carelessness of the copyists, ​

This is due to UR-ites having complete, unwavering trust in anything that is written which appears to support UR.

 

[ClementofA]

The KJV, like most translations, supports universalism in Lamentations 3:

Lam.3:31For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:
32But though he cause grief, yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies.
33For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve THE CHILDREN OF MEN. (KJV, emphasis mine)

Therefore it, like most translations, is self contradictory and therefore erroneous.

Could most modern translations be in error?

 

[Swan7]

OK, KJV good, KJVO dumb. That's my opinion, worth the price charged.

Lol! Thanks for the clarification

 

[Swan7]

I have a couple of KJV Bibles and honestly I found much of the same language in the Hebrew text (one of those mirror Bibles that have the Hebrew on one side and English on the other). However, I find much meat in the Hebrew itself, the language is quite unique, as is every other in its own way.

I do read other versions as well, but most importantly, no wisdom is found without God’s help in interpretation both historically and personally.

 

[Dave G.]

My favorite car is the Porsche Beetle!

We had a guy here in town who used to like to hot rod beetles, he had one he stuffed a Porsche drive train in.

 

[DamianWarS]

I am with you on everything except you number 1. There is no Scriptural support for any Bible translation. Scripture came before our Bible translations.

it's not about questioning scriptural support for the translation of KJV which would be silly, it is about questioning scriptural support for the translation to replace all other scripture including the Greek/Hebrew.

 

[Zao is life]

On a now-closed thread, a gent posted a lot of pro-KJVO material. (KJVO means "King James Version Only", the false doctrine that says the KJV is the only valid English Bible translation out there.)

I, & several others, pointed out FACTS that prove that myth is false, but that gent failed to even ATTEMPT to counter them. Here are some of those facts for your review:

1. There's no Scriptural support for KJVO. And without Scriptural support, no doctrine of faith/worship can be true, as only GOD can make such true doctrines.

2. The current edition of the KJVO myth is drawn from a CULT OFFICIAL'S book, that book being Our Authorized Bible Vindicated (1930) by Dr. Ben Wilkinson, a 7TH DAY ADVENTEST preacher/teacher/official.

3. The KJV is NOT perfect, as KJVOs say it is It both ADDS & SUBTRACTS from God's word.
ADDS: In Rev. 16:5, the KJV ADDS the words "and shalt be", which are NOT found in any ancient Greek manuscript of Revelation !
SUBTRACTS: The KJV OMITS the words "through our Lord Jesus Christ" in Jude 25, which are found in most ancient mss. of the Book of Jude.

4. The KJV has several mistranslations in it. "Easter" in Acts 12:4 is one of them. The Greek word here is 'pascha', which in Luke's time meant only "passover".

Now, I'm not condemning the KJV itself; after all it's the most-printed book in history. But I AM condemning the false KJVO MYTH. The KJV is far from the only valid English Bible translation out there, old or new. The newer translations are in OUR English; they correct many of the KJV's goofs & booboos, and modern translators have over 5K mss. to work from, while the KJV makers only used some 20 mss. Plus, modern translators have computers, etc. to work with, as well as the work of their predecessors, & the tools with which to correspond instantly with other translators anywhere on earth.

And I'm asking you other readers to disregard anything the gent I mentioned in the first paragraph above has posted in favor of KJVO, as he has purposely failed to try to defend the hooey he posted, even after having had it proven to him that it was a LIE. But I DO ask that you PRAY for the Holy Spirit to open his eyes so he can see that he IS believing a lie.

Not only is it the same as "only JW's/Mormons" have the perfect truth, but it's also the same as "only our church/denomination has the correct interpretation of scripture".

The only perfect translation of the scriptures is found in the Greek manuscripts used to translate the scriptures.

 

[rockytopva]

I am KJV only! If I had any other version in my house i would get rid of it And! And that version is as genuine as my Ford Mustang!

 

[Toro]

Umm, Carl, nothing except it wasn't made by Ford.lol

It's like saying 'the famous Chevrolet Thunderbird' is my favorite car !

Ford doesnt make it, but you can have a Ford that is powered by Chevy.... its not so mythical.

 

[Carl Emerson]

There is something much larger at play here than disagreements about which English translation is best. I question whether God wanted us to have a Bible at all.

One of the most common biblical manuscripts used to make our modern English translations is known today as the Nestle Text. Yet it was Prof. Eberhard Nestle himself who warned us in his Einfhrung in die Textkritik des griechischen Testaments: "Learned men, so called Correctores were, following the church meeting at Nicea 325 AD, selected by the church authorities to scrutinize the sacred texts and rewrite them in order to correct their meaning in accordance with the views which the church had just sanctioned."

St. Jerome wrote: "They write down not what they find but what they think is the meaning; and while they attempt to rectify the errors of others, they merely expose their own" (Jerome, Epist. lxxi.5).

Does this mean the claim of biblical inerrancy is disputed by the bible itself?

 

[lsume]

On a now-closed thread, a gent posted a lot of pro-KJVO material. (KJVO means "King James Version Only", the false doctrine that says the KJV is the only valid English Bible translation out there.)

I, & several others, pointed out FACTS that prove that myth is false, but that gent failed to even ATTEMPT to counter them. Here are some of those facts for your review:

1. There's no Scriptural support for KJVO. And without Scriptural support, no doctrine of faith/worship can be true, as only GOD can make such true doctrines.

2. The current edition of the KJVO myth is drawn from a CULT OFFICIAL'S book, that book being Our Authorized Bible Vindicated (1930) by Dr. Ben Wilkinson, a 7TH DAY ADVENTEST preacher/teacher/official.

3. The KJV is NOT perfect, as KJVOs say it is It both ADDS & SUBTRACTS from God's word.
ADDS: In Rev. 16:5, the KJV ADDS the words "and shalt be", which are NOT found in any ancient Greek manuscript of Revelation !
SUBTRACTS: The KJV OMITS the words "through our Lord Jesus Christ" in Jude 25, which are found in most ancient mss. of the Book of Jude.

4. The KJV has several mistranslations in it. "Easter" in Acts 12:4 is one of them. The Greek word here is 'pascha', which in Luke's time meant only "passover".

Now, I'm not condemning the KJV itself; after all it's the most-printed book in history. But I AM condemning the false KJVO MYTH. The KJV is far from the only valid English Bible translation out there, old or new. The newer translations are in OUR English; they correct many of the KJV's goofs & booboos, and modern translators have over 5K mss. to work from, while the KJV makers only used some 20 mss. Plus, modern translators have computers, etc. to work with, as well as the work of their predecessors, & the tools with which to correspond instantly with other translators anywhere on earth.

And I'm asking you other readers to disregard anything the gent I mentioned in the first paragraph above has posted in favor of KJVO, as he has purposely failed to try to defend the hooey he posted, even after having had it proven to him that it was a LIE. But I DO ask that you PRAY for the Holy Spirit to open his eyes so he can see that he IS believing a lie.

There is a book named “God’s Secretaries” about the writing of The King James Version of The Bible. It is a powerful testament to the Power of God’s Word.

 

[Strathos]

Well I’m confused. I thought this thread was about being against KJVO, but I’m reading it as against the very version itself and not the mindset.

I like the KJV. The language is very poetic and beautiful. But it's not the most accurate translation.

 

[Dave G.]

Ford doesnt make it, but you can have a Ford that is powered by Chevy.... its not so mythical.

Ya but that's an abomination lol !!! I'm surprised it's not in the bible !

 

[Der Alte]

Ya but that's an abomination lol !!! I'm surprised it's not in the bible !

"Abomination," isn't that the part of the body between the diaphragm and the pelvis?

 

[Carl Emerson]

I'll bet Pelvis used to drive one...