Anonymous
7/22/2025, 1:07:04 AM
No.17861729
>>17861610
>1. The Holy Ghost tells saved Christians that the King James is the word of God, and that the other CORRUPTED Bible versions like the ESV, HIV, etc are frauds.
Mormons say the Holy Ghost tells them the Book of Mormon is true.
>2. Process of elimination. Every English version since the publication of the King James uses manuscripts which weren't known until the 19th century. This is a problem, because Jesus said that his word would always be with us. That leaves only the King James and its predecessors, and the Douai-Rheims.
If the manuscripts are the issue, this isn't an argument for KJV-onlyism. This is an argument for the ecclesiastical text position over the critical text position, which is a whole other discussion. Why use the KJV rather than the NKJV? Or better yet, why not just learn the languages and just go to the Hebrew and Greek texts the KJV translators used? KJV-onlyists can't argue against this without devolving into Ruckmanite heresy.
>3. There is also the question of the method of translation, of which the King James has the highest pedigree. It was wrought by dozens of scholars who spoke several languages, many devout Christians.
Most modern Bible translations are done by committees of scholars.
>1. The Holy Ghost tells saved Christians that the King James is the word of God, and that the other CORRUPTED Bible versions like the ESV, HIV, etc are frauds.
Mormons say the Holy Ghost tells them the Book of Mormon is true.
>2. Process of elimination. Every English version since the publication of the King James uses manuscripts which weren't known until the 19th century. This is a problem, because Jesus said that his word would always be with us. That leaves only the King James and its predecessors, and the Douai-Rheims.
If the manuscripts are the issue, this isn't an argument for KJV-onlyism. This is an argument for the ecclesiastical text position over the critical text position, which is a whole other discussion. Why use the KJV rather than the NKJV? Or better yet, why not just learn the languages and just go to the Hebrew and Greek texts the KJV translators used? KJV-onlyists can't argue against this without devolving into Ruckmanite heresy.
>3. There is also the question of the method of translation, of which the King James has the highest pedigree. It was wrought by dozens of scholars who spoke several languages, many devout Christians.
Most modern Bible translations are done by committees of scholars.