Second update on "Hoss vs Bible corrector"

Update on my correspondence with a Bible "corrector". My comments in green, his in red. --Eli "Hoss" Caldwell

Dear Mr. Watkins,

Good sir, attached to the email message you will find a 34 page critique of Dr. James Robert White's The King James Only Controversy. I hope you find it educated, scholarly, godly, civilized, appropriate, polite, and most certainly informative.

Good day to you sir. --Mr. Hoss

Ha. This is anything but "educated, scholarly, godly, civilized, appropriate, polite, and most certainly informative". Your accusations against DOCTOR White and myself are quite terrible. You call us the blasphemers while you continuously bash the true inerrant scripture in the original languages.

Your accusations against the modern versions of the Bible are equally ridiculous. The NASB is a quite fine translation and probably what I believe to be the most accurate. I use the NASB for all my personal study and have been greatly benefitted from it spiritually. Your false accusation against John 1:18 in the NASB having "two Gods" is utterly ridiculous and quite honestly nonsense. (I hope you don't mind me using such a strong word)

I will also note that your defense of the differences in different KJV's was also not good. That is an issue I find most KJV Only advocates are limp wristed on. If the KJV is the only word of God than they would all read the same.

But what should I expect from a 16 year old kid? (certainly not anything scholarly as you have demonstrated) 

Hey Mr. Watkins!

Your a joke buddy. What do you consider "true inerrant scripture", you haven't named it ONCE in our correspondence. You have blabbed about "original languages" but what which manuscripts? NAME THEM. If you name Aleph you better be ready to accept the epistle of Barnabas and "Shepard of Hermes" as inspired scripture, cuz it is in dar......meanwhile the satanic perversions NASB, NIV, ESV, etc. leave those books untranslated PROVING that even their translators know that the manuscript is unreliable adding entire books to the NT. But bless God it is an "older and better manuscript"! I had rather go with the LATEST AND GREATEST manuscripts than Aleph (Siniaticus).

The NASB is a quite absurd, ridiculous, and outrageous translation. Get some new adjectives man! I get tired of reading the same ol' crud that comes out of your blaspheming (but "scholarly"!) mouth. I counted the number of Gods in John 1 of the NASB, there is one that is "begotten" and one that is "unbegotten". Deal with it.

Why can't the AV's differ and still be the word of God? OT quotes in the NT don't always match the original OT passage but they are still inspired. Meanwhile you state that the NASB is the "most accurate" while the different editions differ.

ORIGINAL NASB "Amos 3:2 You only HAVE I KNOWN of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities."

NASB OF 1972 "You ONLY HAVE ME of all the families of the earth."

NASB of 1977 "You only HAVE I CHOSEN among all the families of the earth."

But somehow they are still all accurate even though they differ? Prime example of Alexandrian Cult DOUBLE STANDARD. (and White thought that it was only AV believers that did that)

And what you mean "what should I expect from a 16 year old kid"??? When you contacted me you called me a "more experienced KJV Only advocate". Which is it, am I a novice or "experienced".

Have a nice day Sir! --Mr. Hoss

Meanwhile I notice that you emphasized Jimmy White as "DOCTOR". His doctorate is only honorary, but even if it weren't I still wouldn't call him doctor.

My dad has a earned doctorate, but he never stamps it in front of his name. I find that most people I meet that want to be called "Doctor" are a little to proud. See Matthew 23.....

[1] Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
[2] Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
[3] All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
[4] For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
[5] But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
[6] And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
[7] And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. (nowadays its "Doctor, doctor")