The ONE QUESTION whose correct answer proves the KJVO myth false...

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
12,679
Reaction score
88
Points
48
If God had supported KJVO, He woulda let us know
This is a joke, right?

Without looking it up, I'm pretty sure the KJV has outsold most all other versions combined, and many of those sit in dust on a shelf.

The legacy of how God has blessed and USED the King James Bible should be obvious to anyone.
 

tmjbog

Active member
Registered
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
649
Reaction score
83
Points
28
This is a joke, right?

Without looking it up, I'm pretty sure the KJV has outsold most all other versions combined, and many of those sit in dust on a shelf.

The legacy of how God has blessed and USED the King James Bible should be obvious to anyone.
Just because greater things began to happen spiritually when the KJV was primarily used does not prove it was the cause. During the 350 years or so of spiritual awakening and revivals was there anything else going on. Did any major religious monopolies (Catholic/Anglican) lose their power? Did any new nations come on scene that were freer and more open societies? Were there any significant nations that embraced freedom of religion in that time period? It's hard to hold a revival when the police show up to throw you in prison as soon as you start.
 

Ransom

An admitted Calvinist, supposedly
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
7,730
Reaction score
118
Points
63
Without looking it up, I'm pretty sure the KJV has outsold most all other versions combined, and many of those sit in dust on a shelf.
The NIV began to outsell the KJV back in the 1990s.

If that's your proof that God particularly approves of the KJV in a way he doesn't the other versions, I guess he's changed his allegiance.
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
12,679
Reaction score
88
Points
48
The NIV began to outsell the KJV back in the 1990s.
How nice, but so what?

"When Americans reach for their Bibles, more than half of them pick up a King James Version (KJV), according to a new study advised by respected historian Mark Noll.

The 55 percent who read the KJV easily outnumber the 19 percent who read the New International Version (NIV). And the percentages drop into the single digits for competitors such as the New Revised Standard Version, New America Bible, and the Living Bible."


  • The best selling and fastest growing version of the Bible in the United States is the NIV.
  • 82%. That’s the percentage of people who regularly read the Bible who will reach for a King James Version before any other.
 

Ransom

An admitted Calvinist, supposedly
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
7,730
Reaction score
118
Points
63
How nice, but so what?
Well . . .

Without looking it up, I'm pretty sure the KJV has outsold most all other versions combined, and many of those sit in dust on a shelf.
How nice, but so what?

"When Americans reach for their Bibles, more than half of them pick up a King James Version (KJV), according to a new study advised by respected historian Mark Noll.
And yet this has nothing to do with one version "outselling" another.

Good job moving those goalposts. You were wrong the first time, now you're trying to obfuscate your error by changing the subject.
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
12,679
Reaction score
88
Points
48
Well . . .



How nice, but so what?



And yet this has nothing to do with one version "outselling" another.

Good job moving those goalposts. You were wrong the first time, now you're trying to obfuscate your error by changing the subject.
LOL! Yeah, the NIV has outsold in 40 years what the KJB has sold in 400 years.
 

UGC

Active member
Joined
Jan 18, 2020
Messages
904
Reaction score
33
Points
28
The ONE QUESTION KJVOs don't DARE answer correctly is:

BY WHAT AUTHORITY do you believe the KJVO
Sorry pal, but this is a stupid question.

The reason people use the KJV instead of the other versions is because the English New Versions have problems, not because God prophesied in the Bible "a King named James will translate an English Bible" (ridiculous).

I use the KJV and not the English New Versions because those versions are corrupt, not because I need any evidence that the KJV is the "only version" (why KJV-"O" can be misleading). Clearly there are other translations in other languages that also translated from the Majority Text (some actually translated from the KJV itself) so the KJV is not the only version.
 

Ransom

An admitted Calvinist, supposedly
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
7,730
Reaction score
118
Points
63

UGC

Active member
Joined
Jan 18, 2020
Messages
904
Reaction score
33
Points
28
Just look at one page's verse comparisons of KJV and NASB (read the black text for explanations): http://www.hissheep.org/kjv/a_comparison_of_the_kjv_nasb.html


Here's a screenshot of it.
This isn't even 20% of the verses compared on that page.
Even if you hypothetically could argue away half of these comparisons, you'd still have the other half to deal with.
There is simply too much evidence for the corruption of these New Versions to ignore all of it.
Screen Shot 2020-06-03 at 9.03.21 PM.png
 

Twisted

Well-known member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
May 5, 2016
Messages
12,679
Reaction score
88
Points
48
Just look at one page's verse comparisons of KJV and NASB (read the black text for explanations): http://www.hissheep.org/kjv/a_comparison_of_the_kjv_nasb.html


Here's a screenshot of it.
This isn't even 20% of the verses compared on that page.
Even if you hypothetically could argue away half of these comparisons, you'd still have the other half to deal with.
There is simply too much evidence for the corruption of these New Versions to ignore all of it.
View attachment 1117
They ain't interested in facts.
 

tmjbog

Active member
Registered
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
649
Reaction score
83
Points
28
Just look at one page's verse comparisons of KJV and NASB (read the black text for explanations): http://www.hissheep.org/kjv/a_comparison_of_the_kjv_nasb.html


Here's a screenshot of it.
This isn't even 20% of the verses compared on that page.
Even if you hypothetically could argue away half of these comparisons, you'd still have the other half to deal with.
There is simply too much evidence for the corruption of these New Versions to ignore all of it.
View attachment 1117
I'll start with just the first one. It looks like you have those rotten Alexandrians right where you want them. Since it can be proven that the longer ending was in the oldest and best texts then prove it. Give us your evidence.
1591269984374.png
 

Ransom

An admitted Calvinist, supposedly
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
7,730
Reaction score
118
Points
63
"Leaves out." The list shows its bias and circular reasoning by assuming the conclusion it has to prove: that the KJV has the perfect text, and the NASB is the corrupt one.

Of course UGC won't answer this. There'll be a video Real Soon Now. Remember to like and subscribe, those views won't shill for themselves!
 

tmjbog

Active member
Registered
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
649
Reaction score
83
Points
28
They will be after UGC's next video drops
and all the popular myths of contemporary Christendom go
View attachment 1118
Speaking of myths. Did you teach about the water circulatory systems yet? The planets we'll be inhabiting? Eves adulterous affair with satan? The six plans of salvation? The grape tree? The fact that race mixers are mentally sick? From what I hear those are all in the KJV somewhere. Rotten alexandrians leave 'em out of the modern versions.
 

UGC

Active member
Joined
Jan 18, 2020
Messages
904
Reaction score
33
Points
28
It looks like you have those rotten Alexandrians right where you want them.
Why are you ad hominem attacking our Alexandrian friends?

"We must influence them, not separate." -FSSL

(lol)

The list shows its bias and circular reasoning by assuming the conclusion it has to prove
Actually it's rooted in comparing the fundamentals of the faith with JW beliefs (i.e. Jesus wasn't God, they never worshipped him, he didn't ascend into heaven, salvation is by grace without works, etc.).

If you saw any of the video clips I shared in other threads, Westcott and Hort held many of these beliefs and wrote about them clearly.

Westcott and Hort made many friends, ecumenical and beyond, which is why these JW-favored readings made it into the New Versions, even though Erasmus rejected them hundreds of years prior due to their departure from the Majority MSS and from the fundamentals held by prominent early Christians: https://paddlingupcreek.wordpress.com/2014/05/09/erasmus-rejected-vaticanus/

And anyway, the KJV was already the widely accepted, tried and true version it was by 1881 so critiquing the ladder against the one that came before it is acceptable reasoning, it is not circular reasoning. Circular reasoning would be if you tried to defend the New Version's readings for their own sake over the KJV's.
 

Ransom

An admitted Calvinist, supposedly
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
7,730
Reaction score
118
Points
63
Actually it's rooted in comparing the fundamentals of the faith with JW beliefs
That's nice. As usual, no straight answer from the Wonder Twins.

Answer what I said, not what you wish I said.
 

tmjbog

Active member
Registered
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
649
Reaction score
83
Points
28
Why are you ad hominem attacking our Alexandrian friends?

"We must influence them, not separate." -FSSL

(lol)


Actually it's rooted in comparing the fundamentals of the faith with JW beliefs (i.e. Jesus wasn't God, they never worshipped him, he didn't ascend into heaven, salvation is by grace without works, etc.).

If you saw any of the video clips I shared in other threads, Westcott and Hort held many of these beliefs and wrote about them clearly.

Westcott and Hort made many friends, ecumenical and beyond, which is why these JW-favored readings made it into the New Versions, even though Erasmus rejected them hundreds of years prior due to their departure from the Majority MSS and from the fundamentals held by prominent early Christians: https://paddlingupcreek.wordpress.com/2014/05/09/erasmus-rejected-vaticanus/

And anyway, the KJV was already the widely accepted, tried and true version it was by 1881 so critiquing the ladder against the one that came before it is acceptable reasoning, it is not circular reasoning. Circular reasoning would be if you tried to defend the New Version's readings for their own sake over the KJV's.
I still don't understand why you fight so hard for the KJV when it's not even your final authority. Ruckman is your final authority. That's why when Ruckman taught these strange unbiblical truths you accept-and likely know there really is no support in any bible. Most on here who use other than KJV have more respect for the KJV than you do.

I Tim 1:3-7
As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus so that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines,

4 nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith.

5 But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

6 For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion,

7 wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions.
 

UGC

Active member
Joined
Jan 18, 2020
Messages
904
Reaction score
33
Points
28
tmjbog is doing is mole thing.

Hard to string together lies better than this guy.
 

tmjbog

Active member
Registered
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
649
Reaction score
83
Points
28
tmjbog is doing is mole thing.

Hard to string together lies better than this guy.
That kinda sounds like a non-answer. Understandable, though, I wouldn't want to try to defend Ruckman's crazy doctrines either.
 
Top