Comments on: The Bible and the KJV Only Debate http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/ Reforming Fundamentalism (IFB) through Reformed Theology Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:36:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: abomination_desolation http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-6655 abomination_desolation Fri, 30 Mar 2007 21:54:20 +0000 http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/#comment-6655 so long as people read it, but KJV and NIV are the best! so long as people read it, but KJV and NIV are the best!

]]> By: The Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 5 « Fundamentally Reformed http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-6650 The Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 5 « Fundamentally Reformed Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:58:37 +0000 http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/#comment-6650 [...] Fri 2 Mar 2007 The Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 5 Posted by fundyreformed under KJV-onlyism  • Introduction [...] [...] Fri 2 Mar 2007 The Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 5 Posted by fundyreformed under KJV-onlyism  • Introduction [...]

]]> By: The Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 4 « Fundamentally Reformed http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-6654 The Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 4 « Fundamentally Reformed Wed, 28 Feb 2007 23:28:37 +0000 http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/#comment-6654 [...] Introduction [...] [...] Introduction [...]

]]> By: The Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 3 « Fundamentally Reformed http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-6656 The Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 3 « Fundamentally Reformed Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:31:05 +0000 http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/#comment-6656 [...] Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 3 Posted by fundyreformed under KJV-onlyism  Having introduced this topic, and having explained the Scriptural arguments given for KJV Onlyism, I now turn to the Bible [...] [...] Bible & the KJVO Debate, part 3 Posted by fundyreformed under KJV-onlyism  Having introduced this topic, and having explained the Scriptural arguments given for KJV Onlyism, I now turn to the Bible [...]

]]> By: Jeff http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-6657 Jeff Mon, 19 Feb 2007 17:21:49 +0000 http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/#comment-6657 Here is an article from Pastor Carter on "Public spanking for James White" http://www.mag-net.com/~maranath/white.htm Here is an article from Pastor Carter on “Public spanking for James White”

http://www.mag-net.com/~maranath/white.htm

]]> By: The Bible & the KJVO Debate, Part 2 « Fundamentally Reformed http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-6659 The Bible & the KJVO Debate, Part 2 « Fundamentally Reformed Sun, 18 Feb 2007 06:15:42 +0000 http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/#comment-6659 [...] Bible & the KJVO Debate, Part 2 Posted by fundyreformed under KJV-onlyism  In the introduction to this series, I tried to explain briefly why the KJV Only debate is so important: KJV Onlyists are framing the [...] [...] Bible & the KJVO Debate, Part 2 Posted by fundyreformed under KJV-onlyism  In the introduction to this series, I tried to explain briefly why the KJV Only debate is so important: KJV Onlyists are framing the [...]

]]> By: Rhett Kelley http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-6658 Rhett Kelley Sun, 18 Feb 2007 02:34:02 +0000 http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/#comment-6658 What remaining bits of KJV-onlyism I had in my was slayed by James White's book "The King James Only Controversy"... It's a must read! RK What remaining bits of KJV-onlyism I had in my was slayed by James White’s book “The King James Only Controversy”… It’s a must read!

RK

]]> By: Kent Brandenburg http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-6660 Kent Brandenburg Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:29:30 +0000 http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/#comment-6660 Don, James White does not believe in preservation in the totality of the manuscripts. There is at least one OT passage that he believes, as well as others, that the manuscript has not yet been found. Now if he does believe in the preservation of the totality, then he does not believe that we need to continue collating new manuscripts that are found. More have continued to be found, including the Dead Sea Scrolls. These people have no settled text on earth. They believe in an ongoing task of restoration. This not only does not fit Biblical presuppositions, but it leads to gaps in Biblliology that a semi-truck can drive through. Dave, when I said he nailed the issue, I was saying that he nailed from his perspective, as I explained, that is, if they can find one error for us, in their opinion of course, then we are right where they are in the preservation issue. Don,

James White does not believe in preservation in the totality of the manuscripts. There is at least one OT passage that he believes, as well as others, that the manuscript has not yet been found.

Now if he does believe in the preservation of the totality, then he does not believe that we need to continue collating new manuscripts that are found. More have continued to be found, including the Dead Sea Scrolls. These people have no settled text on earth. They believe in an ongoing task of restoration.

This not only does not fit Biblical presuppositions, but it leads to gaps in Biblliology that a semi-truck can drive through.

Dave, when I said he nailed the issue, I was saying that he nailed from his perspective, as I explained, that is, if they can find one error for us, in their opinion of course, then we are right where they are in the preservation issue.

]]> By: Don Fields http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-6666 Don Fields Sat, 17 Feb 2007 16:02:16 +0000 http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/#comment-6666 I haven't read this pamphlet by Bauder, but I have read Dr. James White's book <i>The King James Only Debate</i> which I found very helpful and enlightening. He believes in preservation, not in one manuscript but in the totality of manuscripts. I find that to be a much more <i>reasonable</i> and <i>intellectual</i> position - based completely on God's Word! I haven’t read this pamphlet by Bauder, but I have read Dr. James White’s book The King James Only Debate which I found very helpful and enlightening. He believes in preservation, not in one manuscript but in the totality of manuscripts. I find that to be a much more reasonable and intellectual position – based completely on God’s Word!

]]> By: pmallinak http://www.fundamentallyreformed.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-6652 pmallinak Fri, 16 Feb 2007 22:09:06 +0000 http://fundyreformed.wordpress.com/2007/02/16/the-bible-and-the-kjv-only-debate/#comment-6652 I disagree that Bauder nails the issue. He nails what his (and those of his persuasion) would argue against the Providential Preservation possition. But by no means does he nail the real issue. The truth be told, Douglas Wilson nails the heart of the issue in his chapter on receiving the word. The issue is one of pressuppositions. The issue is not academic, it is fideistic. I disagree that Bauder nails the issue. He nails what his (and those of his persuasion) would argue against the Providential Preservation possition. But by no means does he nail the real issue. The truth be told, Douglas Wilson nails the heart of the issue in his chapter on receiving the word.

The issue is one of pressuppositions. The issue is not academic, it is fideistic.

]]>