can you say SHIBBOLETH?
Dear born-again Christian, you must watch this video. This is but a glimpse of the perverse apostasy going in scholarly circles. This is Bill Grady preaching and exposing apostasy on video with a sermon called "7 signs of pseudo-King James Onlyism". "Pseudo" means false/fake.
The 7 signs he mentions are
1) They trust in the Textus Receptus, not the English KJV
2) They love to appear intellectual
3) They prefer couth over truth
4) They have only shallow knowledge of Bible especially when it comes to cross-referencing the verses and dividing the Bible
5) They cling only to fundamentals Bible truths and pre-KJVO era terminology like"the verbal and plenary inspiration of the original autographs"
6) They hate controversy
7) They go bonkers when they hear the name "Ruckman"
If you don't believe the King James Bible is perfect, you have no Bible to stand on. You just have the contemporary competing renditions of various scholars. The link has 2 videos. The first one is entitled "PCC Video", it is brief and serves as a context-setter for Bill Grady's preaching before a whole class of young Bible students. The written preambules will explain more. Keep your eyes on the man to your right of the pulpit as he squirms while he slowly discovers what the preaching is about. Then draw a smile at the irony invlovled as Sexton goes into damage control mode after that Grady is done.
There is no original greek.You can't find it anywhere. If there is, present one in court or desist.
When we say we are Bible-believers, we mean there's a Bible we can hold in our hand and believe that every word in it from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21 is divinely preserved, needing no further improvement.
Are you a Bible-believer, or just a version preferer?
can you say SHIBBOLETH?
I do not prefer the KJV. I like the NKJV.
I advocate the Majority Text tradition, of which the TR is a part. I do not believe the TR is the best representation of the Majority Text.
The KJV is a good Bible translation. It was my very first Bible, and I preferred it for many years.
I dislike tremendously the NIV. (I dare say I would rather use stronger words).
I do not like the critical text position of the NASB and its eclectic tendencies.
In the final analysis, I don't completely trust any English version. I have been persuaded to the Majority Text. I prefer my translation to any English version.
I have some problems with the KJV and some of its word choices. Yet, I think it is a beautiful English version. When reading, I prefer good punctuation, which the KJV does not have.
I have not watched the video. I will watch it and comment if I feel constrained to.
KJV onlyism has its pros and cons. Pro- advocating a Majority Text type. Con- there are errors in the KJV.
I hope you all don't dislike me now. I happen to love you all, and wish you all the blessings of Christ. It is my prayer that you not only know Christ's word, but walk in it,
grace and peace to you,
Antonio
I just have this to say:
If you are educated just as much as this Grady guys is, you will be KJO.
If you are educated more, you will necessarily be a liberal, being used by Satan to subvert America and Christianity.
I don't buy it.
KJV is a good bible version. Yet it is dated.
I don't believe in dynamic equivalence, or the critical text position. The oldest MSS are not necessarily the best, especially when they do not agree with each other.
The Majority Text is the best. The NKJV used the TR and is not a new version but an update to the KJV. It retains some of the KJVs errors. Yet I prefer the KJV.
I must be honest. You may dislike me and ask me to leave your blogs.
KJVonlyism has elements of being cultish, kooky, and fringe. You may then say, well, we are standing up for truth and we don't care if it seems to the world that this position may look like such things.
The KJV is not "theopnuestos". Period. It was a translation into a foreign language.
If you have visited my blog anytime recently, you know that I have been doing research into the phrase "save your souls" in the Greek. Let me ask you a question.
Why does the KJV and the NKJV translate "psyche" (soul, life) as "life" here:
Mark 8:34-37
34 And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
35 For whosoever will save his life [psyche] shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life [pscyhe] for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.
But translates "psyche" just one verse afterwards, in the SAME context, conjoined by the explanatory "gar", speaking to the same subject matter and issue, as "soul"?
36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul [psyche]?
37 Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul [psyche]?
KJV
It gives the erroneous impression that Jesus was talking about two different things. Has these verses ever confused you before? They did before I knew that the same Greek word is used in all 4 instances throughout these few verses.
Jesus is talking about the temporal "life" not the man-made thomistic/hellenistic view of "soul" which is some immaterial substance of man.
Jesus says "What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and LOSES HIS LIFE".
It is one context, one teaching of Jesus, and the KJV/NKJV got it sadly wrong.
35 and 36 talk about losing the life.
How often has these verses taken from the KJV spawned a Lordship and Legalistic soteriology? Only God knows...
Antonio
I don't know why you think we'd ask you not to come here again, you are most welcome.
Why English? Are the Brits and the Americans God's chosen people?
Does God inspire one translation per language?
If He doesn't, well then why not?
Were there any other inspired translations in the first 1600 years before the KJV?
Also,
why should I be worried that I match up with signs 2 and 4 on a list made by a fallible man?
You beg the question. You assume what you do not substantiate, i.e. that the KJV English text is inspired of God.
I'll tell you one thing, I do not completly trust any translator or translation of scripture. They invariably allow their preconceived doctrines and assumptions to creep into their translation.
The aforementioned reference to Mark 8 is only one example of the this unfortunate practice.
I appreciate your allowance of my views on your blog. I also am grateful for your welcome.
blessings to you!
Antonio
I hope I didn't sound raw. I have a sinful nature that I daily must put to death, living by the resurrection power of Christ. I try to speak (and type) in love. I fall short every day.
I appreciate that you all are people of convictions, and I am persuaded that we are brothers in the Lord.
Thank you for the opportunity to discourse with you.
grace and peace to you,
Antonio
you think that I love to appear intellectual, and have a shallow knowledge of the bible?
that is not the nicest thing I have ever been characterized as. But I am sure you meant it in the best possible way ;)
Antonio
thanks for the comments.
"Why English? Are the Brits and the Americans God's chosen people?
Does God inspire one translation per language?"
Allow me a couple of questions of mine own:
why are the Jews God's chosen people? Why did He give them the oracles of God (Romans 3:2)? Why was it given in the Hebrew language and no other?
Why did He choose Greek to pen the New Testament and not Arabic, or Latin, or Aramaic, or Gaelic? Do you not base your own translation on the greek?
Of course the Lord had His words preserved before 1611; there have been the Syriac, the Old Latin (not Rome's fake latin vulgate) and others. Different eras of history have had their God-honoured bibles. Today God is using the 7th international language, English.
I say all this as a Lebanese from the Middle East; English is my third (not second) language.
There are translations of the KJV in Korean, French and a whole bunch of others.
"why should I be worried that I match up with signs 2 and 4 on a list made by a fallible man?"
You don't have to be worried. I just thought it was interesting that you quickly dove into your understanding of the greek. That lends credence to the validity and reliability of Grady's 7 signs.
"I prefer my translation to any English version."
"I'll tell you one thing, I do not completly trust any translator or translation of scripture. They invariably allow their preconceived doctrines and assumptions to creep into their translation."
Just like you do, friend. And just like I would.
As for the sinful nature, we're both in it together brother. One of my favourite hymn stanzas reads
"dear dying Lamb thy precious blood shall never lose its power, 'till all the ransomed church of God be saved to sin no more."