That's the One!

FSSL

Active member
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
6,749
Reaction score
15
Points
38
Just as inspired and pure as the KJV. There?s no competition when it comes to the word of God.

 

illinoisguy

Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
237
Reaction score
22
Points
18
Which KJV is The One?  According to Mickey Carter, "things that are different are not the same."  The 1611 KJV and 1769 KJV are not the same - there are substantive wording differences, not just spelling differences or typographical errors.  Somebody please tell us which version is The One, the 1611 or the 1769.  (And tell us why).

Genesis 15:18, 1611: "In that same day the LORD made."  1769 : "In the same day the LORD made."
Leviticus 26:23, 1611: "And if ye will not be reformed by these things."  1769: "And if ye will not be reformed by me by these things."
Numbers 7:31, 1611: "Of an 130 shekels."  1769: "Of the weight of an 130 shekels."
Ruth 3:15, 1611: "And he went into the citie."  1769, "And she went into the city." [Who went into the city?]
Esther 3:4, 1611: "Whether Mordecai his matters would stand."  1769, "Whether Mordecai's matters would stand."
Psalm 69:32, 1611: "And your heart shall live that seek good."  1769, "And your heart shall live that seek God."
Psalm 105:30, 1611: "The land brought forth frogs."  1769, "Their land brought forth frogs."
Isaiah 51:16, 1611: "And have covered thee."  1769, "And I have covered thee."
Jeremiah 40:5: "Over all the cities of Judah."  1769, "Over the cities of Judah."
Daniel 3:15, 1611: "A fiery furnace."  1769, "A burning fiery furnace."
Zechariah 11:2, 1611: "Because all the mighty are spoiled"  1769, "Because the mighty are spoiled."
Matthew 3:11, 1611: "But will burne up the chaffe."  1769, "But he will burn up the chaff."
Matthew 12:23, 1611, "Is this the sonne of David?" 1769, "Is not this the son of David?"
Mark 10:18, 1611, "There is no man good, but one."  1769, "There is none good, but one."
Luke 1:3, 1611, "Having had perfect understanding of things."  1769, "Having had perfect understanding of all things."
1 Corinthians 4:9, 1611, "As it were approved to death."  1769, "As it were appointed to death."
1 Corinthians 15:6, 1611, "And that hee was seene."  1769, "After that he was seen."
1 Corinthians 15:41, 1611, "Another of the moone."  1769, "Another glory of the moon."
1 Timothy 1:4, 1611, "Rather than edifying which is in faith."  1769, "Rather than godly edifying which is in faith."
2 Timothy 4:13, 1611, "Bring with thee, but especially the parchments."  1769, "Bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments."
1 John 5:12, 1611, "hee that hath not the Sonne hath not life."  1769, "He that hath not the Son of God hath not life."
Jude 25, 1611, "Power, now and ever."  1769, "Power, both now and ever."

According to standard, established Ruckmanite dogma, there can only be one true, inspired version of the Bible in English.  All other versions of the English Bible, if even only a few words are changed, are to be rejected and used as kindling for bonfires.  So I need to know, which KJV should I toss into the bonfire, my 1611 version or the 1769 version.
 

Ransom

Calvinist Mole
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
7,499
Reaction score
80
Points
48
The cartoon has spoken. The dude on the right is correct.

P.S. I have less hair and a mustache in addition to the goatee. Please correct accordingly.
 

logos1560

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
521
Reaction score
27
Points
28
How are your cartoons in the opening post of this thread accurate and true?

The KJV would involve the human reasoning of Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, and the Church of England makers of the KJV as they picked and chose various readings and even introduced some conjectures in their inconsistent textual criticism decisions, using multiple, textually-varying sources.    Perhaps the term "reasoned eclecticism" would describe the actual process for the making of the underlying printed texts used in the making of the KJV and in the making of the KJV itself.

I have not recommended nor advocated any English translations from the Westcott/Hort Greek text or the later Critical Text so it is clear that the cartoon unfairly and unjustly attempts to misrepresent and distort what I actually state and believe.   
 

illinoisguy

Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
237
Reaction score
22
Points
18
The cartoon was funny, but it was unfair to me.  I have more hair than that, and no beard.
 

logos1560

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
521
Reaction score
27
Points
28
Are cartoons supposedly the best evidence that KJV-only advocates have for their human, non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning?
 

the duck

New member
Registered
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
27
Reaction score
2
Points
3
I heerd someone say that unless you got saved by the original thee and thou 1611, you are not saved.
The copy must have the s's that look like f's etc.

I believe the kjv but that's going too far.
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
12,548
Reaction score
73
Points
48
I heerd someone say that unless you got saved by the original thee and thou 1611, you are not saved.
The copy must have the s's that look like f's etc.

I believe the kjv but that's going too far.
There are morons everywhere.
 

logos1560

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
521
Reaction score
27
Points
28
I heerd someone say that unless you got saved by the original thee and thou 1611, you are not saved.
Several KJV-only authors have stated or implied such a claim, especially those who attempt to assert that only the KJV is incorruptible seed.

Herb Evans, a KJV-only advocate, in an article "Did Our Inspired Bible Expire?" wrote: "Almost without exception (and we are not sure about the exceptions) any births, resulting from the above perverted bibles [English Bibles other than the KJV], are perverted also--spiritual cripples" (The Flaming Torch, January-March, 1992, p. 10). This unscriptural claim would make the Holy Spirit responsible for the new birth of spiritual cripples and perverts (John 3:5-8, 1 John 3:9, 5:4, Eph. 1:13, Titus 3:5). In Ruckman's Bible Believers' Bulletin, Herb Evans declared: "We have been born of incorruptible seed," and he claimed that this incorruptible seed is the 1611 KJV (October, 1978, p. 3). Peter Ruckman himself had claimed that “the AV was incorruptible in 1611, and it is incorruptible now.” Michael O’Neal also stated: “I believe that this (the King James Bible) is incorruptible seed” (Do We Have, p. 13). Perhaps, some KJV-only advocates might excuse this claim that modern translations produce spiritual cripples by saying that only the extreme followers of Ruckman would make such statements. However, fundamental pastors and advocates who do not claim to follow Ruckman's view have already gone to this extreme and even further. Almost no one admits that they follow Ruckman's KJV-only ideas.

KJV-only advocate Al Hughes acknowledged: "There is a movement afoot that claims 'no one can get saved by hearing one of the devil's perversions'" (Flaming Torch, Oct./Nov./Dec., 1999, p. 16). William Byers claimed: "I've said that I've never heard of a sound conversion coming from a modern translation" (The History of the KJB, p. 5). J. J. Ray wrote: "Only an unaltered Bible can produce a perfect, soul-saving faith" (God Wrote Only One Bible, p. 10). In his fundamentalist publication Church Bus News (July-Dec., 1993), Wally Beebe stated: "My constant reference to the King James Version, being in fact the inspired Word of God and our authority, is very important as a prerequisite to salvation" (p. 11). Jack Hyles, well-known fundamentalist pastor, wrote: "Then, if corruptible seed is used, one cannot be born again. I have a conviction as deep as my soul that every English-speaking person who has ever been born again was born of incorruptible seed; that is, the King James Bible" (Enemies of Soul Winning, p. 47). Hyles also claimed: "This means that the New King James Bible is not precious seed because it is not incorruptible" (Ibid., p. 46). Hyles noted: "If all a person has ever read is the Revised Standard Version, he cannot be born again, because corruptible seed is used" (Ibid., p. 47). In a recorded sermon, Hyles stated: "The King James Bible is necessary for anybody to be saved in the English language."

Gail Riplinger claimed: "The new birth occurs from the KJV seed" (Which Bible is God's Word, p. 12). Riplinger even seemed to imply that people may "receive a false salvation or a false spirit from reading them" [other translations instead of the KJV] (Ibid., p. 80). In his booklet entitled Another Bible Another Gospel, which is published by The Bible for Today, Robert Baker implied that other translations teach another gospel when he wrote: "Removing or adding to Jesus' words results in preaching 'another gospel'" (p. 5). Chick Salliby asked: "Will not a defective Bible produce a defective faith?" (If the Foundations Be Destroyed, p. 93). Pastor Raymond Blanton declared: "Faith is not produced in the heart of the sinner by a powerless perversion of God's Word" (The Perilous Times, June, 1995, p. 7). In another issue of his publication, Blanton also claimed: "No one is saved through counterfeit Bibles. The New American Standard Version, The Revised Standard Version, Good News for Modern Man, Amplied New Testament, NIV, etc., etc., are dead imitations and corruptions, and no one is saved through them" (Feb., 1997, p. 4). Douglas Stauffer wrote: "Our relationship with Jesus Christ is based upon a particular Bible translation" (One Book Stands, p. 97).
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
12,548
Reaction score
73
Points
48
Several KJV-only authors have stated or implied such a claim, especially those who attempt to assert that only the KJV is incorruptible seed.

Herb Evans, a KJV-only advocate, in an article "Did Our Inspired Bible Expire?" wrote: "Almost without exception (and we are not sure about the exceptions) any births, resulting from the above perverted bibles [English Bibles other than the KJV], are perverted also--spiritual cripples" (The Flaming Torch, January-March, 1992, p. 10). This unscriptural claim would make the Holy Spirit responsible for the new birth of spiritual cripples and perverts (John 3:5-8, 1 John 3:9, 5:4, Eph. 1:13, Titus 3:5). In Ruckman's Bible Believers' Bulletin, Herb Evans declared: "We have been born of incorruptible seed," and he claimed that this incorruptible seed is the 1611 KJV (October, 1978, p. 3). Peter Ruckman himself had claimed that “the AV was incorruptible in 1611, and it is incorruptible now.” Michael O’Neal also stated: “I believe that this (the King James Bible) is incorruptible seed” (Do We Have, p. 13). Perhaps, some KJV-only advocates might excuse this claim that modern translations produce spiritual cripples by saying that only the extreme followers of Ruckman would make such statements. However, fundamental pastors and advocates who do not claim to follow Ruckman's view have already gone to this extreme and even further. Almost no one admits that they follow Ruckman's KJV-only ideas.

KJV-only advocate Al Hughes acknowledged: "There is a movement afoot that claims 'no one can get saved by hearing one of the devil's perversions'" (Flaming Torch, Oct./Nov./Dec., 1999, p. 16). William Byers claimed: "I've said that I've never heard of a sound conversion coming from a modern translation" (The History of the KJB, p. 5). J. J. Ray wrote: "Only an unaltered Bible can produce a perfect, soul-saving faith" (God Wrote Only One Bible, p. 10). In his fundamentalist publication Church Bus News (July-Dec., 1993), Wally Beebe stated: "My constant reference to the King James Version, being in fact the inspired Word of God and our authority, is very important as a prerequisite to salvation" (p. 11). Jack Hyles, well-known fundamentalist pastor, wrote: "Then, if corruptible seed is used, one cannot be born again. I have a conviction as deep as my soul that every English-speaking person who has ever been born again was born of incorruptible seed; that is, the King James Bible" (Enemies of Soul Winning, p. 47). Hyles also claimed: "This means that the New King James Bible is not precious seed because it is not incorruptible" (Ibid., p. 46). Hyles noted: "If all a person has ever read is the Revised Standard Version, he cannot be born again, because corruptible seed is used" (Ibid., p. 47). In a recorded sermon, Hyles stated: "The King James Bible is necessary for anybody to be saved in the English language."

Gail Riplinger claimed: "The new birth occurs from the KJV seed" (Which Bible is God's Word, p. 12). Riplinger even seemed to imply that people may "receive a false salvation or a false spirit from reading them" [other translations instead of the KJV] (Ibid., p. 80). In his booklet entitled Another Bible Another Gospel, which is published by The Bible for Today, Robert Baker implied that other translations teach another gospel when he wrote: "Removing or adding to Jesus' words results in preaching 'another gospel'" (p. 5). Chick Salliby asked: "Will not a defective Bible produce a defective faith?" (If the Foundations Be Destroyed, p. 93). Pastor Raymond Blanton declared: "Faith is not produced in the heart of the sinner by a powerless perversion of God's Word" (The Perilous Times, June, 1995, p. 7). In another issue of his publication, Blanton also claimed: "No one is saved through counterfeit Bibles. The New American Standard Version, The Revised Standard Version, Good News for Modern Man, Amplied New Testament, NIV, etc., etc., are dead imitations and corruptions, and no one is saved through them" (Feb., 1997, p. 4). Douglas Stauffer wrote: "Our relationship with Jesus Christ is based upon a particular Bible translation" (One Book Stands, p. 97).
On this subject they are loons, one and all.
 

logos1560

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
521
Reaction score
27
Points
28
On this subject they are loons, one and all.
Their incorrect opinion is a logical consequence of their erroneous KJV-only reasoning.

You may refuse to accept this logical consequence to which KJV-only reasoning leads, but do you accept other parts of human, non-scriptural, erroneous KJV-only reasoning?
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
12,548
Reaction score
73
Points
48
Their incorrect opinion is a logical consequence of their erroneous KJV-only reasoning.

You may refuse to accept this logical consequence to which KJV-only reasoning leads, but do you accept other parts of human, non-scriptural, erroneous KJV-only reasoning?
I accept that your rejection of anyone's right to be KJVO puts you into the loon category as well.
 

logos1560

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
521
Reaction score
27
Points
28
I accept that your rejection of anyone's right to be KJVO puts you into the loon category as well.
You avoided answering a simple question that you were asked.

Your opinion is wrong. I did not reject anyone's right to accept human, non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning.
 

illinoisguy

Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
237
Reaction score
22
Points
18
Jack Hyles, in his sermon "Get Your Stinking Feet Out Of My Drinking Water," stated that it was necessary to have the KJV in order to "receive Christ" and to "get saved."

"Let's open here and see what it says, 'And when the men of the city arose early in the morning.' Now'"Men' is the opposite of women. Some of you queers wouldn't know that. Maybe I've had more fun tonight than this morning. I'm saying I've got to have every Word. I must have every Word to live. I must have every Word to get my prayers answered. I must have every Word to receive Christ the Bible says. I must have every Word to keep Him from being ashamed of me the Bible says. I must have every Word to prevent evil from coming before me the Bible says. I must have every Word to be on fire for God the Bible says. All these Scriptures I read awhile ago. I must have every Word if I speak His message. If I didn't think I had a perfect Bible I'd close this one, walk out that door, I'd never walk in the pulpit again. I have to have every Word to love Him the Bible says. I have to have every Word not to reject Him the Bible says. I have to have every Word to meditate the Bible says. I have to have every Word to avoid the plagues of God the Bible says. I have to have every Word to have an eternal Bible the Bible says. I have to have every Word to be comforted the Bible says. I have to have every Word to have wisdom the Bible says. I have to have every Word to gain light the Bible says. I have to have every Word to preach the Bible says. I have to have every Word to have the truth the Bible says. I have to have every Word to get saved the Bible says. I have to have every Word to avoid evil the Bible said."

I am so glad they had the pure drinking water of the KJV during Hyles' pastorate at FBC-Hammond. If only they had obeyed it (KJV, NKJV or whatever) it would have prevented all the sex scandals there, for which they are now being sued.

I am still waiting for someone to answer the question in my post #3 in this thread, from September 18, 2019, asking which version of the KJV (1611 or 1769) is "The One."
 
Top