[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Originally Posted by BrianT

The only solution to your problem

No problem on this end. I know, by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, precisely what books and chapters and verses are the Bible, the word of God .. and even what text.

Thank you Lord Jesus for your pure and perfect word, inspired and preserved, majestic and true.

If you ever want to know, you are welcome to continue the discussion, toes clipped or not. The identity of the pure word of God trumps even nail clippings. And faith is pleasing to God.

Shalom,
Steven

[Will Kinney]

Originally Posted by BrianT

The concept is very simple: if you claim doctrine can only come from scripture, you can't also claim a doctrine (any doctrine) that doesn't come from scripture, at least not without contradicting yourself.
This is why I keep asking about authority.

Brian,where in any of your never identified "scriptures" do you ever find the doctrine YOU have been expounding for the last few weeks? Do you have any verses that say there is no inspired, complete and inerrant Bible in any language on this earth. Where do your 'scriptures' teach that three, four or more versions that omit entire verses, change numbers and names, and have completely different meanings in scores upon scores of verses are all "in the same way the words of God"?

You keep emphasizing how we need to find our doctrine for a perfect Bible in the Bible itself, (and I believe it DOES teach this) but you seem to have a very hard time applying your own self made standards to your own position.

Where are the verses that support what YOU believe about the Bible? Where did you get this strange doctrine that there is no such thing as a perfect and inerrant Bible?

Will K

Will,

I already stated my view is only my fallible conviction, not authoritative doctrine, and that I would be opposed to someone putting it in an official doctrinal statement for the same reason.

[bibleprotector]

my view is only my fallible conviction

How can you find the objective truth with that approach? Even if you did hear the truth, you would not have any way of actually accepting it.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

How can you find the objective truth with that approach? Even if you did hear the truth, you would not have any way of actually accepting it.

I think he is hoping to bump into a half-decent "personal conviction".

The rest is .. "what is truth ?".

[MC1171611]

*wonders why Brian doesn't leave*

[PB1789]

Brian none of us said that: "You're ugly, and your Mother dresses ya fuuny." So, you can't leave just yet... and put away your nail clippers!

Will K. made a good Post above (#122) and made a valid point---turn about is far play--- in that you don't seem ( at least my eyeballs haven't seen it) to have a Solid Base. This is why I titled my Post (#98) "What do you do when you see a red Traffic Light ?" { Don't know-I assume Canada is like our road rules... in the States we have Green=Go, Yellow= Caution, Red= Stop.} If you don't stop at a red Traffic Light,,, then you will never understand what Will K. or anyone else has been trying to convey to you.

I've been reading this Thread and posting on it since early-on, and I still don't know IF you have a favorite English Translation that you can point to and turn to and say "Thus saith the Lord!"

If you are an NIV guy, then just say so. RSV ? NLT ? New Jerusalem ? Something ? A ship must have an anchor or it will drift,,, and very often will hit the rocks and shatter and sink...!

[Diligent]

BrianT,

I was wondering if you had read Thou Shalt Keep Them. It may not change your mind on anything, but it does address many of the issues you have posted questions about. In the end, what we believe about the preservation of God's word is a matter of faith, but Thou Shalt Keep Them may provide you with a more thorough understanding of the theological basis for what we believe than forum threads can.

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by BrianT

Forrest, I agree with almost all of what you said. The only thing I really want to respond to is where you said:

Thank you for being the first KJV-only supporter I have ever met that admits that the doctrine of KJV-onlyism is not authoritative. The question then remains as to why so many KJV-only churches and organizations use this unauthoritative doctrine in their doctrinal statements, while simultaneously claiming only the Bible is the source of doctrine.

God bless,
Brian

What are you thanking me for? Who said anything about doctrine in the King James Bible not being authoritative? You completely misunderstood and misrepresented what I wrote.

Again, here's exactly what I wrote:

I and many others on this Forum believe it is the King James Bible. Is that specific statement authoritative? Nope. You need to settle that for yourself. I have, but I cannot be your Holy Spirit.

Let me interpret for you. Is that specific statement: "I and many others on this Forum believe it is the King James Bible" authoritative? In other words, Brian, is it authoritative that me and many others on this Forum believe we have in our possession today an English Bible that contains every word of God in written form, in the King James Bible? NOPE.

I did not say doctrine is not authority. What I wrote was:

No, conflicting doctrine is not authoritative. The word of God is authoritative. Our spiritual understanding, unction, and discernment of His word that comes from the Holy Spirit, is only authoritative because it is of the Spirit, not man. Will we disagree on doctrine? Yes. Will we make mistakes? Yes. But the Holy Spirit doesn’t. “…does authority have to come from somewhere outside of ourselves?” Yes, it does. And it does!

Read my words, Brian. CONFLICTING doctrine is not authoritative. When two Brothers have a conflict over doctrine, the conflicting doctrine is not authority. There is no authority in conflict that arises from "I believe this" and "you believe that." Only one doctrine is authority, not both. You cannot make an assumption that just because there are 2 different views on any given doctrine, by fallible man, that the specific doctrine has no authority.

True doctrine that comes from the King James Bible is always absolute and final authority. We may not always get it right, but you can be assured God got it right. Just because we disagree on any particular doctrine found in the King James Bible, does not mean the doctrine is not absolute, final, finished, and complete.

Perhaps this is your problem, Brian. You should not be so reckless with your understand and application of words. Words mean something. Here's my advice. Carefully, examine the words of God and, by faith, receive them.

Originally Posted by BrianT

So yes, I 'deny the doctrine of an inerrant Bible composed of 66 books as having ever existed and certainly not now'". I deny that doctrine, because that doctrine is not found in the Bible.

Brian, with all due respect, you pulled down your pants and spanked yourself in front of the entire forum with that one comment back in post no. 9. Anything else you might say afterward is simply an embarrassment to yourself and an affirmation that you are in reality, your OWN AUTHORITY.

It's amazing how someone who has no final authority can spend so much time demanding it from others.

I think I speak for a few other members when I say,
we reject "your" authority, including any other "authority" that claims our inerrant Bibles do not exist. It's not that we dislike you, but it pales in light of our own worn out and tattered King James Bibles.

Most of us traded in the "authority of men" (priests, preachers, professors, and the rest) many years ago for the Authorized Version. We figured out the scam long before there was an "internet" and "computer forums." Your kind of delusion is not new---it has destroyed the faith of many believers for a long time, whether spewed from the pulpit or shoveled from the lecterns of college classes, or typed out on an ergonomic keyboard, the smell is the same.

I am so thankful to God that He helped me avoid your kind of confusion by leading me to a good church many years ago where the Pastor spent his time upholding God's Holy Word and not bloviating about a "non-existent inerrant Bible."

I would like to thank Steve Avery and Will Kinney for having the patience to bat this around, I lost mine years ago. You have both done an excellent job, carry on...