Schaap: King James is not God's Preserved or Inspired Word

Schaap says the KJB is: Simply a translation,

not inspired, was "fairly error free" after

1769, Perfect?, not God's preserved words, not

as important as clothing standards and music.

If you think this is taken out of context read,

watch and listen to the sources it only gets

worse. This is only a sample of what was said

to publicize this issue.

Book:
http://s5.tinypic.com/j0ff45.jpg
http://s5.tinypic.com/2mwhwe8.jpg
http://s5.tinypic.com/zixhjd.jpg

Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--Nq-

vhjPGc&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=LYGzQkaNBiY&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=5dGwNkp79mk&feature=channel_page

Audio (a different sermone from above)
http://www.filefactory.com/file/af70d53/n/Schaap

_not_kjo_mp3

For all the die-hard Schaap supporters, just

leave the worst comment you can think up. I

really get a kick out of how much all you like

to kiss schaap's big fundamental pope toe.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Schaap
• Fugate
• Controversy
• King
• James
• Bible
• Only
• KJV
• only
• not
• inspired
• preserved
• word
• of
• God
• Al
• lacy
• Jack
• Hyles

[sarje1970]

To get a rebuttal, see: "Stand on the King James Bible - Re: Ask Pastor Jack Schaap" video. Additionally, there is a REASON we stand on the KJV. The main reason is that it is drawn from the Textus Receptus (the Accepted Text) that was verified in 1611. This text is what we believe is preserved. FROM this we get the KJV. Most other versions are actually from DIFFERENT GREEK, HEBREW, ARAMAIC, etc. But, regardless of how we feel about the English.. does it NEED to be changed? No. Leave it alone

[ideservehell4mysin]

king James bible, only one for me

[starryskye6829]

Repent

[Arbuthnotification]

Why do people in the USA refer to the Authorised Version or 1611 bible as the "King James" bible without saying WHICH King James they're talking about? There were 7 of them in Scotland, of whom 2 were also kings of England. There were many other kings called James elsewhere, especially Spain.

Have those "fighting for the King James Bible" actually READ the works of the king in question? He was an extensively published author. You won't like it if you do.

[Arbuthnotification]

(continued)... from Tyndale's original English translation and Coverdale's slight revision of it. In fact James VI & I stipulated that they should preserve the existing text unless it required correction and that there should be NO MARGINAL NOTES. Getting rid of the marginal notes was really the whole point of it BECAUSE THE MARGINAL NOTES WERE FAVOURABLE TO EVANGELICAL AND CALVINIST THEOLOGY and not conduicive to the so-called "divine right of kings".

[Arbuthnotification]

(continued)..bible of the revolution. The 1611 translation was then dusted down and reprinted. It is extremely odd that Evangelicals now should argue for the 1611 "kingly" or restoration bible over the Geneva bible, to which those of their persuasion at the time clung tenaciously and fought so hard for.

It makes very little difference anyway. Apart from the marginal notes of the Geneva Bible, the actual text of ALL versions, including the 1611 one, was very little changed..

[Arbuthnotification]

(continued) Those purposes were achieved well before the translation was finished, and James lost interest in it. It was full of printer's errors when it came out and it tanked -completely disappeared from view. The bible everyone was using and continued to use was the GENEVA BIBLE, which had copious marginal notes of a strongly Calvinist bent. It was only after the restoration, over 50 years later, that a need was felt for a "kingly" bible to replace the strongly Evangelical and Calvinist..

[Arbuthnotification]

If only people knew the story of the political stitch-up which produced the 1611 bible! It was a clever move by an unusually clever king (most of them being as thick as two planks) who was a keen student of Machiavelli, and this was a move worthy of that tutelage. Its purposes were to gain badly-needed protestant kudos for James, a closet catholic as people suspected, and to keep the ideologues who were potential trouble-makers busy for a few years.

[mircipricop]

Marcosuno15, The crown on England has the copyright for King James Bible.