Why do you care?

[No Swansong]

I have just noticed that the top 4 threads on this forum were started to take issue with KJVO believers. I have to ask myself why? Why would you care that there are some of us out here who believe it to be the most reliable source of God's Revelation? Why would you care that there are those out there who believe it to be the only accurate translation? Why is this enough of an issue for you that you would actually start threads to attack the position? The important thing is that we are reading Gods Revelation. If we don't agree with what you chose to read so what? You are going to read it anyway. As far as I can tell we are not starting threads telling you to stop reading it, or asking you why you believe it to be a better translation. We are not coming to you demanding to know why you believe the NIV (or NKJV or HSCB or NASB) to be a more accurate or reliable translation. Why are you making this an issue?

[Logos1560]

Why would you care that there are some of us out here who believe it to be the most reliable source of God's Revelation? Why would you care that there are those out there who believe it to be the only accurate translation? Why is this enough of an issue for you that you would actually start threads to attack the position? Why are you making this an issue?

I do not at all object to those who prefer to read only the KJV and even to those who have the opinion that it is the best overall English translation. However, there are important differences between a preference for the KJV and holding a KJV-only view. The KJV is still my overall favorite translation, and I do not think that it helps the KJV when people make inaccurate claims for it. What I disagree with is the inconsistent KJV-only view that in effect implies that God failed to preserve His Word in the original languages. I consider a KJV-only view to be unscriptural in that the KJV-only view adds to the Scripture teachings that are not actually taught and commanded in them.

KJV-only advocates have made the Bible translation issue an issue by their repeated attacks on other English translations, by their implying that the KJV-only view is taught and commanded in the Scriptures when it is not, by their implying that those who hold a KJV-only view are more spiritual and godly than those who read other English translations, by their making inaccurate claims about the KJV and about other translations, etc. There are over 100 books and pamphlets that advocate an inconsistent and unscriptural KJV-only view.

My view of Bible translation is the same view as that held by the early English translators such as William Tyndale, Miles Coverdale, John Rogers, the translators of the Geneva Bible, and even the translators of the KJV. The early English translators accepted the preserved Scriptures in the original languages as the standard and authority for the making and evaluating of all translations. I am attempting to advocate the very view of Bible translation that the KJV translators themselves held. The KJV translators clearly objected to the one-perfect-translation only view of their day [the Latin Vulgate-only view], and the KJV-only view uses several of the same invalid arguments that were used for that Latin Vulgate-only view.

I care for the truth, which is why I object to the inaccurate claims used to advocate a KJV-only view that is not taught in the Scriptures.

[No Swansong]

I do not at all object to those who prefer to read only the KJV and even to those who have the opinion that it is the best overall English translation. However, there are important differences between a preference for the KJV and holding a KJV-only view. The KJV is still my overall favorite translation, and I do not think that it helps the KJV when people make inaccurate claims for it. What I disagree with is the inconsistent KJV-only view that in effect implies that God failed to preserve His Word in the original languages. I consider a KJV-only view to be unscriptural in that the KJV-only view adds to the Scripture teachings that are not actually taught and commanded in them.

KJV-only advocates have made the Bible translation issue an issue by their repeated attacks on other English translations, by their implying that the KJV-only view is taught and commanded in the Scriptures when it is not, by their implying that those who hold a KJV-only view are more spiritual and godly than those who read other English translations, by their making inaccurate claims about the KJV and about other translations, etc. There are over 100 books and pamphlets that advocate an inconsistent and unscriptural KJV-only view.

My view of Bible translation is the same view as that held by the early English translators such as William Tyndale, Miles Coverdale, John Rogers, the translators of the Geneva Bible, and even the translators of the KJV. The early English translators accepted the preserved Scriptures in the original languages as the standard and authority for the making and evaluating of all translations. I am attempting to advocate the very view of Bible translation that the KJV translators themselves held. The KJV translators clearly objected to the one-perfect-translation only view of their day [the Latin Vulgate-only view], and the KJV-only view uses several of the same invalid arguments that were used for that Latin Vulgate-only view.

I care for the truth, which is why I object to the inaccurate claims used to advocate a KJV-only view that is not taught in the Scriptures.
And yet as far as I know you came here looking for a fight. The KJO folk did not come looking for you. Again I repeat I am not KJO but I see no reason you should care. Take whatever translation you read and read it, preach from it, witness from it, teach from it. You claim repeated attacks and yet on this forum (Fundamentalist Churches) there have been no such attacks.
I doubt that you will find any of the authors that you speak of on this thread, if you did it would be a surprise to me. Are there KJVO folk here, sure there are. They also add to the board a great deal of biblical knowledge, and insight. They also pray for and with us, are concerned about each of us, ask about our families and our health etc. They have accepted that there are those here who disagree and we have accepted that they are KJVO. I can understand having a conversation or asking a question or two but I recommend not as a moderator but as a Christian brother that you simply accept that they are KJVO and leave it at that. They certainly have already accepted that you are not. The animosity that you have is showing through.

[desmalia]

It does seem strange to me too that there are so many threads on this subject. There are much more important battles to fight out there.

I think it's great that we can discuss these differences openly, but I don't think they should ever need to be a source of division.

I too have no problem with the KJV, but do not consider it to be the only inspired, inerrant English translation of the Word of God. If we can all agree to disagree on that point, and respect each other as brothers and sisters in Christ, we should be able to get past this. If there are KJVO believers out there who would judge me because I use present day English translations too, then we do have a problem. But I hope that is not the case. I certainly don't judge them for using the KJV only.

There are waaaay bigger problems in today's churches as so many of them become more and more worldly. These are the end times and Satan is working hard to divide and conquor. I think we could much better use this forum to strengthen each other from those evil influences. That can be done regardless of which translation we each use, as long as we always source the most accurate texts available, which aren't in English to start with. Let us be known by our fruits whether we are following a false ideology, or are following the one true God.

If some of us actually subscirbe to unbiblical concepts, let's discuss these individual issues instead of broad generalizations and claims.

[TwinCrier]

I like to think that they (KJV critics) actually are trying to help us KJOs find their better, newer translation. I believe that by having these discussions, both sides are forced to look at various facts on the issue. I know I myself used to use modern versions, including one of the worse in my opinion now: The Living Bible. It wasn't until someone pointed out to me that this paraphrase contained the phrase "son of a [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]" that I looked closer at the modern versions. I find similar degradation in all modern bibles. I also realized that certain parts that should be very familiar; such as the 10 commandments, Lord's Prayer and 23rd Psalm, had unfamiliar wording from what I had previously learned.
A person Will Kinney (username Brandplucked), who used to post here at CF had several articles on his website that finally made me realize the KJV was the final authority. http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/

[desmalia]

I believe that by having these discussions, both sides are forced to look at various facts on the issue. Totally agree. :thumbsup:

I know I myself used to use modern versions, including one of the worse in my opinion now: The Living Bible.I think you'll be pretty hard pressed to find a fundie who advocates using the paraphrased ones like the Message or Living Bible. They contain clear examples of twisting of Scripture to supposedly make it more 'palatable' or politically correct. They don't use accurate translation, but rely on man's interpretation to paraphrase. Very dangerous stuff, IMO.

See, there's lots of stuff we can agree on! ;)

[TwinCrier]

Yes, I agree. It's dangerous to add or remove words from the bible that appear in the manuscripts. http://biblebelievers.com/New_Eye_Opener.html

[mwduke]

I have just noticed that the top 4 threads on this forum were started to take issue with KJVO believers. I have to ask myself why? Why would you care that there are some of us out here who believe it to be the most reliable source of God's Revelation? Why would you care that there are those out there who believe it to be the only accurate translation? Why is this enough of an issue for you that you would actually start threads to attack the position? The important thing is that we are reading Gods Revelation. If we don't agree with what you chose to read so what? You are going to read it anyway. As far as I can tell we are not starting threads telling you to stop reading it, or asking you why you believe it to be a better translation. We are not coming to you demanding to know why you believe the NIV (or NKJV or HSCB or NASB) to be a more accurate or reliable translation. Why are you making this an issue?
I care when somebody proclaims that the Bible I read is not from God. Some people in your camp go so far as to say that the Bible I read is from satan. Wouldn't you make this an issue too?

I never claimed that NIV, NASB, or anything else is more accurate or reliable than KJV, I just don't like the archaic vocabulary that it uses.

[mwduke]

I like to think that they (KJV critics) actually are trying to help us KJOs find their better, newer translation. I believe that by having these discussions, both sides are forced to look at various facts on the issue. I know I myself used to use modern versions, including one of the worse in my opinion now: The Living Bible. It wasn't until someone pointed out to me that this paraphrase contained the phrase "son of a [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]" that I looked closer at the modern versions. I find similar degradation in all modern bibles. I also realized that certain parts that should be very familiar; such as the 10 commandments, Lord's Prayer and 23rd Psalm, had unfamiliar wording from what I had previously learned.
A person Will Kinney (username Brandplucked), who used to post here at CF had several articles on his website that finally made me realize the KJV was the final authority. http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/
I dont think that anyone is trying to get anyone else to switch Bibles except for the KJV only proponents.

[TwinCrier]

Welkl, we feel the same when some claim our bible has error when we know it does not.

[mwduke]

Welkl, we feel the same when some claim our bible has error when we know it does not.
there's a difference between having someone accuse you of reading a Bible that is not from God but from satan, and having someone tell you that there are errors in your Bible. and just for the record I never said that KJV has errors, that is someone else on these forums.

[TwinCrier]

If I was reading a bible Satan had altered I'd want to know.

[mwduke]

If I was reading a bible Satan had altered I'd want to know.
see thats just mean. who is reading satan's altered Bible? what version do you say that it is? i know that it can't be NIV or NRSV because those are the two versions i first read and understood, leading me to accept Christ. I tried KJV in the past and it is just too archaic in terms of the vocabulary.

[No Swansong]

Once again I am not KJO. I am not in a camp other than the Christian camp. As for your comment about accusations, I don't know that any such accusations were made until after the threads, which were opened to attack the KJO stance, were opened. Once again I ask why were they opened in the first place? The only logical assumption is that they were opened for no other purpose than to begin an argument about a subject that has not been an problem on Fundamentalist Churches Forum, at least not for some time.

[mwduke]

Once again I am not KJO. I am not in a camp other than the Christian camp. As for your comment about accusations, I don't know that any such accusations were made until after the threads, which were opened to attack the KJO stance, were opened. Once again I ask why were they opened in the first place? The only logical assumption is that they were opened for no other purpose than to begin an argument about a subject that has not been an problem on Fundamentalist Churches Forum, at least not for some time.
Actually I started my thread why do many fundamentalists think KJV is the only "true" Word? (http://www.christianforums.com/t4403856-why-do-many-fundamentalists-think-kjv-is-the-only-true-word.html) not to start an argument, but to try and understand the reasons why some Christians reject all other versions but KJV. Until I posted that thread and got some responses I didn't know the reasons behind the KJV only movement.

Also, I thought that this was a forum that welcomed discussions concerning differences between personal beliefs and Biblical preferences. Is it really that offensive to start a completely benign thread about an inquiry into those differences? And does it really give KJV only believers the right to blatantly call out believers who use other versions as reading a Bible altered by satan? Now that is truly offensive.

[No Swansong]

Actually I started my thread why do many fundamentalists think KJV is the only "true" Word? (http://www.christianforums.com/t4403856-why-do-many-fundamentalists-think-kjv-is-the-only-true-word.html) not to start an argument, but to try and understand the reasons why some Christians reject all other versions but KJV. Until I posted that thread and got some responses I didn't know the reasons behind the KJV only movement.

Also, I thought that this was a forum that welcomed discussions concerning differences between personal beliefs and Biblical preferences. Is it really that offensive to start a completely benign thread about an inquiry into those differences? And does it really give KJV only believers the right to blatantly call out believers who use other versions as reading a Bible altered by satan? Now that is truly offensive.
Your initial question although faulty is fine and certainly a valid question for someone who is not familar with the subject.

Additionally we welcome questions and debate on these boards however we have gotten to the point that those who wish to disprove KJO are starting more and more threads and inundating the forum with the subject.

I see no reason to keep asking the same questions.

[mwduke]

Your initial question although faulty is fine and certainly a valid question for someone who is not familar with the subject.

Additionally we welcome questions and debate on these boards however we have gotten to the point that those who wish to disprove KJO are starting more and more threads and inundating the forum with the subject.

I see no reason to keep asking the same questions.
I don't know why so many people started new threads after mine as well. I see no point in any more. I also see no point in KJV only-ers making ridiculous claims that some modern versions were altered by satan. It seems like perhaps THEY are the ones wishing to start an argument.

[JoyforJESUS]

Hay, I use the KJV from early childhood,
teen years I used "Good News for Modern Man"
my previous congregation used RSV
In Bible studies I have used NIV
my personal preference is the Rainbow edition of the NIV
(because I can use it to tell new believers about what the verse pertains to eg. salvation, history,pfrfacy)
I use many versions, for Psalms, there is nothing like the KJV. But I have found only that I must be able to discern what God is trying to lead me to understand as I read the WORD of GOD

[No Swansong]

I don't know why so many people started new threads after mine as well. I see no point in any more. I also see no point in KJV only-ers making ridiculous claims that some modern versions were altered by satan. It seems like perhaps THEY are the ones wishing to start an argument.
Except they didn't start the threads and it appears to me they were stating an opinion much like your opinion that modern versions are as much the words of God than is the KJV. Opinions by the way that by my reading they were pressured into sharing. To be fair as an individual who has not only an education in Communication but also has depended upon it in life threatening situations, it seems to me that once the question was answered the KJO's were put on the defensive.

[mwduke]

Except they didn't start the threads and it appears to me they were stating an opinion much like your opinion that modern versions are as much the words of God than is the KJV. Opinions by the way that by my reading they were pressured into sharing. To be fair as an individual who has not only an education in Communication but also has depended upon it in life threatening situations, it seems to me that once the question was answered the KJO's were put on the defensive.
I disagree that KJV-ers were somehow "pressured" into sharing their opinion that NIV is a satan Bible. It was completely unnecessary and added nothing to the crux of the thread except to insult anyone who uses NIV.

[No Swansong]

Perhaps because I am involved in this thread it had not occurred to me that some were insulted by the comment. I will close the thread and bring in a Supervisior for their opinion. Should the comment be found in violation of CF rules it will be removed. Please forgive me for my lack of sensitivity.

[mwduke]

Perhaps because I am involved in this thread it had not occurred to me that some were insulted by the comment. I will close the thread and bring in a Supervisior for their opinion. Should the comment be found in violation of CF rules it will be removed. Please forgive me for my lack of sensitivity.
I don't understand why you closed my thread. TwinCrier made her egregious statement in THIS thread, on page 2. maybe this thread should be closed?

[No Swansong]

Closed for review.

[No Swansong]

I am reopening this thread only for a short time. I was asked to do so by a poster who wanted to make a point. I am the original poster and threads may be requested to be closed by the original poster. So I will be doing that. However I wanted to give the individual who asked a chance to post. Judging from previous posts this individual and I probably do not agree on this issue so please do not jump to the conclusion that I am trying to dismiss a particular point of view.

As the original poster I am closing the thread because I didn't get an answer and it has served to cause the opposite effect that it was intended to have.

Thank you for your patience in the reopening of this and another thread, there have been serious health issues to contend with and other issues which prevented me from more closely attending my duties here. I apologize for that and assure you that I will be much more present in the future.

[TwinCrier]

I disagree that KJV-ers were somehow "pressured" into sharing their opinion that NIV is a satan Bible. It was completely unnecessary and added nothing to the crux of the thread except to insult anyone who uses NIV.
Likewise calling my bible erroneous or archaic is an insult. Satan would be quite a fool to not attempt to alter the bible.

[desmalia]

Likewise calling my bible erroneous or archaic is an insult.To my recollection, I believe that most (if not all) of us have no issue with the KJV, and have not attacked it in any way. Some of us do not prefer the old English, but that is nothing more than an issue of preference. It has nothing to do with questioning the validity of the book.

If some people are hurling such accusations at you perhaps it would be best to address them individually instead of painting everyone with such a broad brush. Can you please provide some specific examples of this happening? Thanks.

[No Swansong]

To my recollection, I believe that most (if not all) of us have no issue with the KJV, and have not attacked it in any way. Some of us do not prefer the old English, but that is nothing more than an issue of preference. It has nothing to do with questioning the validity of the book.

If some people are hurling such accusations at you perhaps it would be best to address them individually instead of painting everyone with such a broad brush. Can you please provide some specific examples of this happening? Thanks.

I agree it entirely is a matter of opinion but what has happened is that those who are not KJO are attacking the opinion of those who are. As I pointed out earlier no one here for a long time has posted anything about the modern versions. It only occured after the KJO position was itself assailed.

I think it it natural for those who disagree to defend their position.

[cubanito]

I am bothered by the tone of these many threads, specifically mdukes, but not by the content.

I am not KJO, and funny enough to respond to Desmalia, as a Fundy I do not have a problem with the paraphrases like the Message because they label themselves so and do not try to pass of as translations.

While I might not go as far as calling it a "Satan Bible" I have serious misgivings about the NIV, because it plays very loosely with the concept of translation, and still claims not to be a paraphrase.

So there, a fundy who likes the paraphrases, so long as they do not pass themselves off as translations.

For the KJO crowd, may I suggest you take a look at the NASB? At many points it is more word-for-word than even the KJV. It is, I admit, far less readable, precisely because of this faitfulness to the original language. I especially love the side notes were they translate colloquialisms, word for word,giving me an insight as to the ancient Hebrew mind.

But whatever, I agree we needs be a bit nicer. This coming from someone who often loses his cool

JR

[desmalia]

I agree it entirely is a matter of opinion but what has happened is that those who are not KJO are attacking the opinion of those who are. As I pointed out earlier no one here for a long time has posted anything about the modern versions. It only occured after the KJO position was itself assailed.

I think it it natural for those who disagree to defend their position.
Certainly it is natural, and I fully support everyone's option to do so. In fact, when we're just comparing logic, I find it all very interesting. What I see as one of the major problems is that the KJVO crowd are going so far as to claim that the rest of us are following Satan's writings, which is a very serious accusation. The natural response is to look at the reasons used for such an accusation and then attempt to refute them. In this case that includes showing that the translation issues they have with the modern versions are actually just as applicable to the KJV. It's not that anyone is attacking the KJV. Quite the opposite actually. It's just an attempt to show the the arguments themselves are not convincing. Users of the modern versions are just trying to make a point that the arguments for KJVO can just as easily be used to discredit the view as they can to support it. Unfortunately that might possibly appear as if the KJV itself is being attacked, but that is not the case.

What is being disagreed on is basically two differing doctrines about how to determine which version or translation to use. The key is to remember that we are brothers and sisters in Christ and not to let those issues divide us, no matter how passionate we might be about them.

I do agree with you that there are some very emotional posts on both sides of the issue and that things have gotten a little out of control. And I share your desire for things to be shared in a peaceful, respectful manner.

[mwduke]

Certainly it is natural, and I fully support everyone's option to do so. In fact, when we're just comparing logic, I find it all very interesting. What I see as one of the major problems is that the KJVO crowd are going so far as to claim that the rest of us are following Satan's writings, which is a very serious accusation. The natural response is to look at the reasons used for such an accusation and then attempt to refute them. In this case that includes showing that the translation issues they have with the modern versions are actually just as applicable to the KJV. It's not that anyone is attacking the KJV. Quite the opposite actually. It's just an attempt to show the the arguments themselves are not convincing. Users of the modern versions are just trying to make a point that the arguments for KJVO can just as easily be used to discredit the view as they can to support it. Unfortunately that might possibly appear as if the KJV itself is being attacked, but that is not the case.

What is being disagreed on is basically two differing doctrines about how to determine which version or translation to use. The key is to remember that we are brothers and sisters in Christ and not to let those issues divide us, no matter how passionate we might be about them.

I do agree with you that there are some very emotional posts on both sides of the issue and that things have gotten a little out of control. And I share your desire for things to be shared in a peaceful, respectful manner.
I totally agree that we all, as Christian brothers and sisters, must not let this issue divide us as faithful members of the body of Christ. I think we should recall Mark 3:24: " And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand." I don't believe that the intention of any of the KJO threads were meant to try and divide us, but we shouldn't be doing a lithmus test on all Christians concerning which version of the Bible they use, splitting us into two categories--KJO and everyone else.

[No Swansong]

I totally agree that we all, as Christian brothers and sisters, must not let this issue divide us as faithful members of the body of Christ. I think we should recall Mark 3:24: " And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand." I don't believe that the intention of any of the KJO threads were meant to try and divide us, but we shouldn't be doing a lithmus test on all Christians concerning which version of the Bible they use, splitting us into two categories--KJO and everyone else.
Once again I am not sure anyone was doing that until all of these threads were started.

[twistedsketch]

I am the poster who wanted it opened up, because I wanted to weigh in. Nobody had really gotten to this yet.

KJV-onlyists have attacked legitimate, cutting-edge ministries. I'm not one of those people that claims a church ought to have a circus every Christmas and Easter, but there are pockets of people out there who interested in God but afraid of church and church people. When Christians go out to reach out to these people speaking the truth and love, good things can happen sometimes. People are pulled out of depressed and suicidal states, people put their trust in Jesus, people start reading the Bible and living according to it. And that's not all we did. We stood up against licentiousness and heresy. Newer translations were mostly used. But you know what happened? KJV-onlyist trolls came in and attacked the very foundation of the ministry. One of their two problems was that the Bibles we were using were not KJVs. Therefore it must have all been from the devil (never minding all the evidence to the contrary). With "brothers" and "sisters" like this, who needs the Enemy?

Also, the Jesus Film, which has been translated into hundreds of languages to get people around the world who have never heard of Jesus and who cannot read is based on the NIV. I guess all of that foreign missionary work is evil too. Maybe you would care to explain it to the converts half a world away when you meet them in Heaven.

If you like you King James Bible, that's fine. If you badmouth other translations that God is using to do awesome work in the lives of many, that is not. By calling these other translations "perversions" and "satanic" you are spreading harmful lies and giving the devil what he wants. It is this divisive spirit that keeps the church well below its potential capacity for Kingdom-building. So you can tie your own hands and make yourselves angry about the most minute details all you want. Others will be out there making a difference for God.

[No Swansong]

Again my contention was not that the KJO view is correct, and twistedsketch my brother I am saddened that people were being reached and that was disturbed. This is a tragedy.
The purpose for my post was to ask why people were purposely seeking out KJO folk and initiating this particular debate. Noone, at least on this board, had made any such comments in any thread recently concerning the modern versions. These threads were purposely posted to illicit a specific response. That is why I asked "Why do you care?". It seems to me that there are more important things to do than to look for a reason to start an argument.

However I wanted people to have a chance to respond to this thread and as I am the OP and I request that it be closed I am closing it. I will not do so however until tomorrow to give a fair response to anyone who wishes and to prevent appearing that I am using my ability to close a thread to have the "last word".

[TwinCrier]

I totally agree that we all, as Christian brothers and sisters, must not let this issue divide us as faithful members of the body of Christ. I think we should recall Mark 3:24: " And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand." I don't believe that the intention of any of the KJO threads were meant to try and divide us, but we shouldn't be doing a lithmus test on all Christians concerning which version of the Bible they use, splitting us into two categories--KJO and everyone else.
It is interesting that there are no defenders of the NIV or RSV or any of the other 100 or more bible versions out there. Maybe that is a question worth investigating. If any of these versions are as good or better, why is no one willing to put themselves on record that some other version is God's word?
I am the poster who wanted it opened up, because I wanted to weigh in. Nobody had really gotten to this yet.

KJV-onlyists have attacked legitimate, cutting-edge ministries. I'm not one of those people that claims a church ought to have a circus every Christmas and Easter, but there are pockets of people out there who interested in God but afraid of church and church people. When Christians go out to reach out to these people speaking the truth and love, good things can happen sometimes. People are pulled out of depressed and suicidal states, people put their trust in Jesus, people start reading the Bible and living according to it. And that's not all we did. We stood up against licentiousness and heresy. Newer translations were mostly used. But you know what happened? KJV-onlyist trolls came in and attacked the very foundation of the ministry. One of their two problems was that the Bibles we were using were not KJVs. Therefore it must have all been from the devil (never minding all the evidence to the contrary). With "brothers" and "sisters" like this, who needs the Enemy?

Also, the Jesus Film, which has been translated into hundreds of languages to get people around the world who have never heard of Jesus and who cannot read is based on the NIV. I guess all of that foreign missionary work is evil too. Maybe you would care to explain it to the converts half a world away when you meet them in Heaven.

If you like you King James Bible, that's fine. If you badmouth other translations that God is using to do awesome work in the lives of many, that is not. By calling these other translations "perversions" and "satanic" you are spreading harmful lies and giving the devil what he wants. It is this divisive spirit that keeps the church well below its potential capacity for Kingdom-building. So you can tie your own hands and make yourselves angry about the most minute details all you want. Others will be out there making a difference for God.
If you win the world by being like the world, it is really the world that has won you.

[mwduke]

It is interesting that there are no defenders of the NIV or RSV or any of the other 100 or more bible versions out there. Maybe that is a question worth investigating. If any of these versions are as good or better, why is no one willing to put themselves on record that some other version is God's word?

If you win the world by being like the world, it is really the world that has won you.
aha ! you still dont understand that NOBODY is claiming NIV, NRSV is the true Word of God and KJV isn't. you dont understand the debate at all. They are all the Word of God. I'll readily defend the use of NIV or NRSV, but I make no ridiculous claim that the version I read is the ONLY TRUE WORD OF GOD. thats just blasphemous.

[No Swansong]

Ok, as previously slated; I reopened the thread to let another poster have his comments recorded. I also indicated that it was my intention to close this thread because I am the OP and threads may be closed by the request of the OP.
Thanks for everyone who responded however the question was never really answered. I wanted to know why people who are not KJO were purposely seeking out those who are and starting this argument.

In any case the thread is now closed.