Do you think that someone who is not in agreement with the KJV only position should be considered a heretic? Have they committed apostasy if they use another English translation and consider it to be equally valid? I look forward to your thoughts.

[LindaR]

againstheresies...

What is the purpose of your question? On the other thread, you asked why we reject the NKJV. When given the reasons, you continually picked every answer apart and beat a dead horse into the ground. Are you waiting for someone to call you a heretic so you can do the same thing on this thread?

BTW, I used to use the NKJV all the time until I decided to study the issue for myself. I wasn't quite as knowledgeable as you appear to be on this issue, but I was knowledgeable enough to be able to compare texts and verses and allow the Holy Spirit to show me which texts were God's Word and which weren't.

It's really odd that all those who use the MVs, compare those MVs to the KJV...why not compare them to other MVs? Or would that be too confusing? Many of the MVs contradict other MVs, depending on which MV you are using, I guess..

Originally Posted by LindaR

againstheresies...

What is the purpose of your question? On the other thread, you asked why we reject the NKJV. When given the reasons, you continually picked every answer apart and beat a dead horse into the ground. Are you waiting for someone to call you a heretic so you can do the same thing on this thread?

BTW, I used to use the NKJV all the time until I decided to study the issue for myself. I wasn't quite as knowledgeable as you appear to be on this issue, but I was knowledgeable enough to be able to compare texts and verses and allow the Holy Spirit to show me which texts were God's Word and which weren't.

It's really odd that all those who use the MVs, compare those MVs to the KJV...why not compare them to other MVs? Or would that be too confusing? Many of the MVs contradict other MVs, depending on which MV you are using, I guess..

No. I genuinely want to know your response. I picked at some of your arguments on the other thread because it was my opinion that the arguments were fallacious. I wanted to see if you could see the weakness and provide a better response.

In this thread I want to know your opinion. I am not sure why no one has responded. All I am looking for is a simple yes or no to the question. I am not asking you to defend your position.

Don't feed the trolls

Originally Posted by againstheresies

Do you think that someone who is not in agreement with the KJV only position should be considered a heretic? Have they committed apostasy if they use another English translation and consider it to be equally valid? I look forward to your thoughts.

...No

I went for a time after I was saved (while reading the KJV btw) reading the NIV, but after a friend showed me all the omissions that exists in the NIV, and after looking at tracts that shows all the verses that are missing, all the Lord missing, and I can go on and on... that I went to KJV and I have no plans of going back. I've read only a little bit of the NKJV and that version has the same problems as the NIV so i wouldn't read it either... Just the KJV... so... you can be a saved person and reading the NKJV... If the KJV only position is wrong, then hey, I am still going into Heaven because my salvation is secure... but I want to be sure that I am getting no omissions, no dropped verses, and I sure do not need footnotes that states "in some manuscripts blah blah blah" that would only lead me to question if there is indeed that it is God's Word that I am reading...

Tit 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
Tit 3:10 A man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition reject;
Tit 3:11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

A man is not a heretic because he rejects the KJV, but because after he asks foolish, unprofitable and vain questions, he rejects the admonition given him.

If the hat fits, wear it.

Originally Posted by againstheresies

Do you think that someone who is not in agreement with the KJV only position should be considered a heretic? Have they committed apostasy if they use another English translation and consider it to be equally valid? I look forward to your thoughts.

It's funny, I looked up the verse you use 2Peter 3:18. and IRONICALY, 2Peter 2:1 says this. But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers amoung you, who pivily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. KJV!!!

AGIAINST HERESIES??????? i don't think so....

According to Webster's 1828 dictionary, this is the definition of a heretic:

-A person under any religion, but particularly the christian, who holds and teaches opinions repugnant to the established faith, or that which is made the standard of orthodoxy. In strictness, among christians, a person who holds and avows religious opinions contrary to the doctrines of Scripture, the only rule of faith and practice.

So according to the definition, I would say that person would be a heretic if he started teaching false doctrine. In many cases though someone who has a false Bible, has it under ignorance. I would not consider them a heretic unless they practiced and preached unbiblical doctrine.

Do you think that someone who is not in agreement with the KJV only position should be considered a heretic? Have they committed apostasy if they use another English translation and consider it to be equally valid?

In a word, No.

I think of the KJB as fresh, wholesome "food". I consider other versions as varying degress of canned "food" lacking proper nutrients because of tampering and "over-processing".