ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
One argument I believe I defeated in one of my last journals, advocating the KJV-onlyist side, was this:
All other translations change, add to, or subtract from the Bible, and are therefore corrupted by satan!
I wanna defeat it again, but present it slightly differently.
An argument consists of premises and a conclusion. For example:
Premise 1: All men are mortal.
Premise 2: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.
If the premises are proven to be correct and the conclusion follows through, then it's a valid argument. However, a conclusion cannot also be a premise.
Premise 1: Socrates is mortal.
Premise 2: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.
Basically, "it's true because it's true." How does this relate to the "corrupted other translations" argument? Here's what they're saying:
Premise 1: Other translations change, add to, or subtract from the Bible.
Conclusion: The KJV is the only perfect Word of God.
But what do they hide when making this argument? A second premise that is combined with the first. Here's what they're really saying:
Premise 1: The KJV is the only perfect Word of God.
Premise 2: Other translations change, add to, or subtract from the Bible (and "the Bible" they are referring to is what? The KJV!)
Conclusion: The KJV is the only perfect Word of God.
What have they done? They have assumed that what they're trying to prove is already true before they've even proved it! They've put the conclusion as an assumed premise in order to come out with that conclusion at all.
I have come to find that this is probably one of the worst of the KJV-only arguments. It's a circular one, and it assumes the conclusion is true in order to prove it. And that's the only way they can get that conclusion in this argument, is if it's an assumed premise. This argument simply cannot be used to say the King James Bible is the best and the others are all corrupted.
There is one argument I saw from a KJV-onlyist that I thought was pretty good.
Those who do not believe that the King James is the Word of God would argue that no man or group of men are perfect and infallible, and the translators themselves claimed to be fallible. And I agree. They did say they were fallible and never claimed to be inspired. Neither did Matthew, or Mark. Can you show me where Paul said he was inspired? That argument they make is pointless. It means nothing.
Good one. It does, in fact, show that that argument means nothing. You don't have to claim to be infallible or inspired to be both. Good point with the Apostles not saying they were inspired either, even though they obviously were, though they probably didn't know it at the time.
Only one problem I find though. He's left a hole in there. Now I'm also able to say that the people who made the NIV did not claim to be inspired and infallible either. And you cannot tell me otherwise, because there are revisions being made to it. I have seen plenty of versions of the NIV. They update it regularly. The first one (made in 1973 I think) is not the same as the 2011 version. If they claimed to be infallible and inspired, they wouldn't need to update it and attempt to make it better. So really, saying that the KJV translators never said they were inspired can only lead to saying the others didn't say they were either, thus a pointless argument to make.
Another one that kinda ticks me off that I've heard maybe once or twice, and implied a few times:
1 Corinthians 2:13-16 "Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ." You cannot be spiritual, nor do you have a walk with God if you don't realize the KJV is the Word of God. If you would just have faith, you would know."
Hey, I just thought of something (I had another response to that just now, but deleted it when I thought of this). It's an ad hominem! (An argument that's attacking the person instead of their position/argument. It's actually Latin for something like "to the man.") Whether or not they have a walk with God or faith has nothing to do with whether or not the KJV is perfect. I bet even an atheist somewhere wouldn't mind saying the KJV was translated accurately, perhaps even perfectly, and prove it even better than a Christian could, though he still doesn't believe it. (Edit: After I published this journal, CitizenJustin commented on my previous journal, saying, "Despite not being a believer in God I do admire the translators of the King James, as a freely available Bible was something that was desperately needed at that particular time..." I told y'all they were out there!) I would imagine saying, "Thanks for caring about my walk with God and how much faith I have, but let's get back to proving whether or not the KJV is perfect."
I'm still not drawing my conclusion yet about KJV-onlyism, but unless I find some good, logical or factual arguments for their case, I'm just gonna have to go with the KJV not being the perfect Word of God. Seriously, if it's true, start thinking up (and using) better arguments. I would really like a good argument to chew on. These are just... not good at all. I want something better.
PS: The only things I based on the internet was the year the NIV first came out (I didn't know 'till now) and that the "you need to have faith" argument comes from 1 Corinthians 2:13-16. (I did kinda wonder if that had any Biblical basis.) Other than those two, this is purely my own thoughts. Nothing from the internet that I read and agreed with and decided to paraphrase.
All other translations change, add to, or subtract from the Bible, and are therefore corrupted by satan!
I wanna defeat it again, but present it slightly differently.
An argument consists of premises and a conclusion. For example:
Premise 1: All men are mortal.
Premise 2: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.
If the premises are proven to be correct and the conclusion follows through, then it's a valid argument. However, a conclusion cannot also be a premise.
Premise 1: Socrates is mortal.
Premise 2: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.
Basically, "it's true because it's true." How does this relate to the "corrupted other translations" argument? Here's what they're saying:
Premise 1: Other translations change, add to, or subtract from the Bible.
Conclusion: The KJV is the only perfect Word of God.
But what do they hide when making this argument? A second premise that is combined with the first. Here's what they're really saying:
Premise 1: The KJV is the only perfect Word of God.
Premise 2: Other translations change, add to, or subtract from the Bible (and "the Bible" they are referring to is what? The KJV!)
Conclusion: The KJV is the only perfect Word of God.
What have they done? They have assumed that what they're trying to prove is already true before they've even proved it! They've put the conclusion as an assumed premise in order to come out with that conclusion at all.
I have come to find that this is probably one of the worst of the KJV-only arguments. It's a circular one, and it assumes the conclusion is true in order to prove it. And that's the only way they can get that conclusion in this argument, is if it's an assumed premise. This argument simply cannot be used to say the King James Bible is the best and the others are all corrupted.
There is one argument I saw from a KJV-onlyist that I thought was pretty good.
Those who do not believe that the King James is the Word of God would argue that no man or group of men are perfect and infallible, and the translators themselves claimed to be fallible. And I agree. They did say they were fallible and never claimed to be inspired. Neither did Matthew, or Mark. Can you show me where Paul said he was inspired? That argument they make is pointless. It means nothing.
Good one. It does, in fact, show that that argument means nothing. You don't have to claim to be infallible or inspired to be both. Good point with the Apostles not saying they were inspired either, even though they obviously were, though they probably didn't know it at the time.
Only one problem I find though. He's left a hole in there. Now I'm also able to say that the people who made the NIV did not claim to be inspired and infallible either. And you cannot tell me otherwise, because there are revisions being made to it. I have seen plenty of versions of the NIV. They update it regularly. The first one (made in 1973 I think) is not the same as the 2011 version. If they claimed to be infallible and inspired, they wouldn't need to update it and attempt to make it better. So really, saying that the KJV translators never said they were inspired can only lead to saying the others didn't say they were either, thus a pointless argument to make.
Another one that kinda ticks me off that I've heard maybe once or twice, and implied a few times:
1 Corinthians 2:13-16 "Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ." You cannot be spiritual, nor do you have a walk with God if you don't realize the KJV is the Word of God. If you would just have faith, you would know."
Hey, I just thought of something (I had another response to that just now, but deleted it when I thought of this). It's an ad hominem! (An argument that's attacking the person instead of their position/argument. It's actually Latin for something like "to the man.") Whether or not they have a walk with God or faith has nothing to do with whether or not the KJV is perfect. I bet even an atheist somewhere wouldn't mind saying the KJV was translated accurately, perhaps even perfectly, and prove it even better than a Christian could, though he still doesn't believe it. (Edit: After I published this journal, CitizenJustin commented on my previous journal, saying, "Despite not being a believer in God I do admire the translators of the King James, as a freely available Bible was something that was desperately needed at that particular time..." I told y'all they were out there!) I would imagine saying, "Thanks for caring about my walk with God and how much faith I have, but let's get back to proving whether or not the KJV is perfect."
I'm still not drawing my conclusion yet about KJV-onlyism, but unless I find some good, logical or factual arguments for their case, I'm just gonna have to go with the KJV not being the perfect Word of God. Seriously, if it's true, start thinking up (and using) better arguments. I would really like a good argument to chew on. These are just... not good at all. I want something better.
PS: The only things I based on the internet was the year the NIV first came out (I didn't know 'till now) and that the "you need to have faith" argument comes from 1 Corinthians 2:13-16. (I did kinda wonder if that had any Biblical basis.) Other than those two, this is purely my own thoughts. Nothing from the internet that I read and agreed with and decided to paraphrase.
Coin Album Search
Believe it or not, I collect coins, and love it when I have a cool coin folder to put specific coins into. They're always fun to fill.
But there is one coin folder that has alluded me. In fact, it may not exist. However, I want to see if anyone else knows anything pertaining to its existence.
Chuck E. Cheese token folder. Yesh, the tokens actually have the year they were made, believe it or not. And its because of that (and the different designs over the years) that make me wanna collect them. But I have yet to find (even with Google) any coin album for Chuck E. Cheese tokens. It'd be awesome if they did exist.
Does anyone happen to know o
New Avatar Needed
As much as I love my avatar (the ✝ Block), I'm getting a little tired of it and want to think up another one. Does anyone have any cool ideas that'd suit my tastes? Just something simple, yet really cool. Like my Christian Block :) Possibly a parody of something else, again like my ✝ Block. It can be animated or not, pixelated, vector, whatever.
I'm also looking for a favicon for my blog http://j-lindo.blogspot.com/ .
For those who don't know what that is, is the little icon that goes on the left part of the tab at the top part of your browser. I just found out you can customize the favicon for your blog on Blogspot. So I wann
Devious Journal Entry
Tagged by: !SteeveLeeII (https://www.deviantart.com/steeveleeii)
RULEZ:
1: Post these rules.
2: Tell 10 things about yourself.
3: Tag at least 10 some people from your friends list (or watchers).
4: NO TAG-BACKS.
10 Things about me:
1. I have very odd and nontraditional beliefs, relating to Christianity.
2. I think the idea of soul-winning (church groups going from house to house handing out tracts to people) is a bad idea.
3. I'm a tall boy. 6'4.
4. Parodies are awesome. (ApologetiX, Weird Al, and Kerusso are my favorite parody makers)
5. I do enjoy discussing and lightly debating theological and philosophical ideas. Especially since I don't hold very traditional be
Metro S.E.?
The antivirus Microsoft Security Essentials 2 was just updated to version 4. I don't know much about Windows 8, I haven't dabbled with it... yet =P But from what I can tell, it looks like MSE has been redesigned for Windows 8's Metro look. All flat and stuff.
I think I liked version 2's look better. Hey, at least I can occasionally glance at it with my MSE 2 Chrome theme :D http://j-lindo.deviantart.com/art/MSE-2-Google-Chrome-Theme-278012604
Anyways, I think I'll make a Chrome theme based on MSE 4. I haven't made a Chrome theme for a while.
If anyone's got an installer for MSE 1, could you give me a copy? I could make a theme based on 1 t
© 2012 - 2024 J-Lindo
Comments8
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
If the KJV is the only word of God, does that mean everyone who wants to be saved needs to learn to speak English?