I used to not call myself a KJV onlyist. I use to go around saying it was just the best translation, but every time someone disputed some variant in it I found myself defending it. Sense to me thee major point of contention of King James Onlyism with it's critics is the belief in an infallible Bible that we can hold in our hands and read I decided to go ahead and embrace the term.
Non-Ruckmanite KJV Only - believing that God has preserved the Heb OT & Greek Received NT, and that the KJV is the best and most faithful translation of those texts into English. If that is a cult, then so is ESV Onlyism, Modern Version Onlyism, Critical Text Onlyism, CBGM Onlyism and so forth. It's the pot calling the kettle black.
Ruckman was brilliant. His gifts he fully understood were given to him by God and gave God and his preserved text ALL the credit. No single person to my knowledge has used his time and gifts to glorify our Lord in BELIEVING the words of God, rather than doubting than our dear brother Peter S Ruckman. People who love the truth as nourishment and are able to take it no matter how rough it goes down , truly want to grow by it.
I can easily find errors in all the versions. The only one I can’t find errors in is the 1611 AV King James Bible. You can pretty much wipe out most of the Bibles by simply demanding what they did with Acts 8:37. It is easy to see thy they left out this one verse because it opposes infant baptism and baptism in water as needed for salvation. I don’t personally even know a preacher that wants to even enter into that conversation. For one, they don’t have the slightest clue about the manuscripts and history of the Protestant bible and that it is not the same manuscripts used for the catholic bibles. Most people are content in their ignorance and make assumptions (even telling others) about something vitally important. Th Wes we are the words of God! Shame on whoever gains an audience based on opinions and ignorance. There is no greater topic to endeavor to know!
@@martinbaker7032 you're very misinformed 1st point - the translators faithfully translated the accounts of baptism in the scriptures to depict total bodily immersion 2nd point - the three codexes you are referring to that are "older" and "more accurate" disagree within themselves 1000s of times 3rd point - Easter is not a mistranslation (if you're genuinely interested in considering that you could be wrong about this then see below teachings) p1 --> th-cam.com/video/6_0lZPRtS6c/w-d-xo.html p2 --> th-cam.com/video/l-6eokMIEPo/w-d-xo.html 4th point - The translators used all the available manuscripts they could and compared them to the Bishop's Bible as the standard, 6 independent teams of translators had to agree internally with their translation, then each team had to collectively agree with the translations, and then the final draft was made available for all learned teachers in England to examine and ridicule, the scholarship involved with the KJB vastly outperforms any modern translation, and the pedigree of the translators far exceeds any modern pseudo-polyglot that has a Strong's Concordance, please see Lawrence Vance, "King James, His Bible, and Its Translators," 2e. 5th point - Your typing is illegible 6th point - You have the ability to purchase a Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary, modern words have archaic definitions, don't see you arguing against them, to say you can't understand an archaic word is to be purely lazy and willfully ignorant. Please see Lawrence Vance, "Archaic Words and The Authorized Version". My conclusion is that you are unlearned in this topic and confirming yourself in your bias. Study to shew thyself approved unto God.
Acts 8 v 37 is not missing from the more accurate modern translations. That verse is not found in the older superior manuscripts. The KJV was translated from manuscripts dedicated to the Pope with added uninspired verses like Acts 37 v 8 Added by uninspired scribes. Because it is not found in more accurate modern translations, does not mean they are teaching infant baptism. There are many scriptures that makes it quite clear that baptism by immersion, follows repentance and faith in Christ. Also the Anglicans who translated the KJV and included Acts 8 v 37 practised infant baptism. Even though the scripture is clear that baptism by immersion is for believers in Christ. So much for your fantasies that modern translations teach infant baptism. When it is very clear they do not. You can't find mistakes in the KJV? Then you haven't read it honestly. Mistranslations like Easter instead of Passover. Latin words like Lucifer borrowed from the Latin Vulgate showing the Catholic influence on the KJV. No Latin word should be in an English translation. Calling the Holy Spirit an it four times denying his deity. Added uninspired verses like 1 John 5 v 7 Acts 8 v 37. The archaic English where so many words have changed meaning making the KJV even more inaccurate. That is why God has blessed us with more accurate modern translations. Yes KJV onlyism is a an unbilical Christ dishonouring heresy and cult
I'm 37 and was born again at 19, in that time I've been bullied more often by kjv onlyists who then whenever I defend myself against their bullying they gaslight me and actually say it was my fault. I have family that used to go to a KJV onlyist church and I was invited. They where relatively friendly people but only to love bomb me and get you in the door to add you to their numbers. Then they changed completely and insisted the NIV I brought was of the Devil and that if I wasn't reading my KJV Bible specifically then I was not saved. I refuse to ever go back to such a place who changes the Gosp of Jesus Christ and adds to it. One problem even with what I just said is that a whole lot of youtube channels that are in fact KJV onlyist camouflage themselves as something all together different.
Kind of but you didn't even mention the Ruckmanites they are a bizarre group of Fundamental Baptist Church who claim that everything that he ever said or did was right even though I've done extensive research on Peter Ruckman and it turns out he had a messed up background of abuse, molestation, financial mismanagement, and much more. But all these Ruckman churches will never ever tell you this. If you are a member and leave the church because of you finally realize it is a cult not a church, then they will slander you, ruin your job, slander you and outright gang stalk you. It's disturbing and it does happen. I do not prefer the KJV as my main Bible but I do like it, I also have many other Bibles like a really good ESV study bible I got a while back. I know what you mean about the categorization thing in terms of when talking about this particular subject because, well to be frank to just use the term (KJV Only) is way to vague. And even what I was talking about is not specifically a KJV Only Cult it is in fact a Fundimental Baptist Church of founded by Peter Ruckman. Sorry if my reply is a bit rambling I have a tendency to do that having Autism. Have a great day and God Bless, I'll be adding you to my prayer list.
![[ไฮไลต์] แบดมินตันหญิง ไท่ ซือ หยิง vs เมย์ รัชนก อินทนนท์ รอบแบ่งกลุ่ม | โอลิมปิก 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LUCG0H5qkpQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![[ไฮไลต์] แบดมินตันชาย วิว กุลวุฒิ(ไทย) vs Kenta Nishimoto(ญี่ปุ่น) รอบ 16 คน | โอลิมปิก 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kaQRLljJkSI/mqdefault.jpg)
I used to not call myself a KJV onlyist. I use to go around saying it was just the best translation, but every time someone disputed some variant in it I found myself defending it. Sense to me thee major point of contention of King James Onlyism with it's critics is the belief in an infallible Bible that we can hold in our hands and read I decided to go ahead and embrace the term.
Yeah I don't really care if people call me KJVO lol
amen!... this is what i call nailing it BIG time!.... :)
Non-Ruckmanite KJV Only - believing that God has preserved the Heb OT & Greek Received NT, and that the KJV is the best and most faithful translation of those texts into English.
If that is a cult, then so is ESV Onlyism, Modern Version Onlyism, Critical Text Onlyism, CBGM Onlyism and so forth.
It's the pot calling the kettle black.
The Alexandrian Cult!
Ruckman was brilliant. His gifts he fully understood were given to him by God and gave God and his preserved text ALL the credit. No single person to my knowledge has used his time and gifts to glorify our Lord in BELIEVING the words of God, rather than doubting than our dear brother Peter S Ruckman. People who love the truth as nourishment and are able to take it no matter how rough it goes down , truly want to grow by it.
@@henrylaurel4476 what did he preach that was false?
Yes it is. It's pretty cool tho
lol dork
Nuh uh
Join our KJVO cult, we have cupcakes.
Aka ME
Wow this is funny but so frighteningly true, their main tactic to get one to join is the psychological usage of love bombing.
Yes definitely a cult
I can easily find errors in all the versions. The only one I can’t find errors in is the 1611 AV King James Bible. You can pretty much wipe out most of the Bibles by simply demanding what they did with Acts 8:37. It is easy to see thy they left out this one verse because it opposes infant baptism and baptism in water as needed for salvation. I don’t personally even know a preacher that wants to even enter into that conversation. For one, they don’t have the slightest clue about the manuscripts and history of the Protestant bible and that it is not the same manuscripts used for the catholic bibles. Most people are content in their ignorance and make assumptions (even telling others) about something vitally important. Th Wes we are the words of God! Shame on whoever gains an audience based on opinions and ignorance. There is no greater topic to endeavor to know!
@@martinbaker7032 you're very misinformed
1st point - the translators faithfully translated the accounts of baptism in the scriptures to depict total bodily immersion
2nd point - the three codexes you are referring to that are "older" and "more accurate" disagree within themselves 1000s of times
3rd point - Easter is not a mistranslation (if you're genuinely interested in considering that you could be wrong about this then see below teachings)
p1 --> th-cam.com/video/6_0lZPRtS6c/w-d-xo.html
p2 --> th-cam.com/video/l-6eokMIEPo/w-d-xo.html
4th point - The translators used all the available manuscripts they could and compared them to the Bishop's Bible as the standard, 6 independent teams of translators had to agree internally with their translation, then each team had to collectively agree with the translations, and then the final draft was made available for all learned teachers in England to examine and ridicule, the scholarship involved with the KJB vastly outperforms any modern translation, and the pedigree of the translators far exceeds any modern pseudo-polyglot that has a Strong's Concordance, please see Lawrence Vance, "King James, His Bible, and Its Translators," 2e.
5th point - Your typing is illegible
6th point - You have the ability to purchase a Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary, modern words have archaic definitions, don't see you arguing against them, to say you can't understand an archaic word is to be purely lazy and willfully ignorant. Please see Lawrence Vance, "Archaic Words and The Authorized Version".
My conclusion is that you are unlearned in this topic and confirming yourself in your bias. Study to shew thyself approved unto God.
Acts 8 v 37 is not missing from the more accurate modern translations. That verse is not found in the older superior manuscripts. The KJV was translated from manuscripts dedicated to the Pope with added uninspired verses like Acts 37 v 8 Added by uninspired scribes. Because it is not found in more accurate modern translations, does not mean they are teaching infant baptism. There are many scriptures that makes it quite clear that baptism by immersion, follows repentance and faith in Christ. Also the Anglicans who translated the KJV and included Acts 8 v 37 practised infant baptism. Even though the scripture is clear that baptism by immersion is for believers in Christ. So much for your fantasies that modern translations teach infant baptism. When it is very clear they do not. You can't find mistakes in the KJV? Then you haven't read it honestly. Mistranslations like Easter instead of Passover. Latin words like Lucifer borrowed from the Latin Vulgate showing the Catholic influence on the KJV. No Latin word should be in an English translation. Calling the Holy Spirit an it four times denying his deity. Added uninspired verses like 1 John 5 v 7 Acts 8 v 37. The archaic English where so many words have changed meaning making the KJV even more inaccurate. That is why God has blessed us with more accurate modern translations. Yes KJV onlyism is a an unbilical Christ dishonouring heresy and cult
I'm 37 and was born again at 19, in that time I've been bullied more often by kjv onlyists who then whenever I defend myself against their bullying they gaslight me and actually say it was my fault. I have family that used to go to a KJV onlyist church and I was invited. They where relatively friendly people but only to love bomb me and get you in the door to add you to their numbers. Then they changed completely and insisted the NIV I brought was of the Devil and that if I wasn't reading my KJV Bible specifically then I was not saved. I refuse to ever go back to such a place who changes the Gosp of Jesus Christ and adds to it. One problem even with what I just said is that a whole lot of youtube channels that are in fact KJV onlyist camouflage themselves as something all together different.
Hopefully my video cleared up some of the differences between the kinds of KJVO that you're talking about and what I believe.
Kind of but you didn't even mention the Ruckmanites they are a bizarre group of Fundamental Baptist Church who claim that everything that he ever said or did was right even though I've done extensive research on Peter Ruckman and it turns out he had a messed up background of abuse, molestation, financial mismanagement, and much more. But all these Ruckman churches will never ever tell you this. If you are a member and leave the church because of you finally realize it is a cult not a church, then they will slander you, ruin your job, slander you and outright gang stalk you. It's disturbing and it does happen. I do not prefer the KJV as my main Bible but I do like it, I also have many other Bibles like a really good ESV study bible I got a while back. I know what you mean about the categorization thing in terms of when talking about this particular subject because, well to be frank to just use the term (KJV Only) is way to vague. And even what I was talking about is not specifically a KJV Only Cult it is in fact a Fundimental Baptist Church of founded by Peter Ruckman. Sorry if my reply is a bit rambling I have a tendency to do that having Autism. Have a great day and God Bless, I'll be adding you to my prayer list.