The Error of KJV-Onlyism

I don't use the term and many others because they aren't used as descriptions and pejorative. But they also are mislabels because people don't fit neatly into groups.

As far as the term Christian goes, I find it appropriate even though it too began as a pejorative because we are told to follow Christ.

Given the massive amount of information exposing the corruption of the modern versions, anyone who has been shown the differences, and continues to use corrupted bibles, will be held accountable.

God is very particular about the integrity of His Word. Christ said that we are to live by EVERY WORD that proceeds out of the mouth of God. But if thousands of words have been omitted or added, it is NOT the Word of God.

Frank Logsdon was one of the primary translators of the NASB. But soon after he made this comment: "But I finally got to the place where I said, "Ann, I'm in trouble; I can't refute these arguments; it's wrong; it's terribly wrong; and what am I going to do about it?" Well, I went through some real soul searching for about four months, and I sat down and wrote one of the most difficult of my life, I think. "

These words are found here, and you need to read the article in full (and so should everyone else) and also play the audio:
Frank Logsdon Repudiates the NASB
Frank Logsdon was asked two questions about the Bible version issue and used the occasion to explain why he finally rejected the Critical Text and repented of his involvement in the creation of the New American Standard Version in 1960. Here is an audio recording of the lecture.

Play the audio:
https://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/logsdon-repudiates-nasb.html

See, here's the problem with labels. People go beyond belief to opinion and are guilty of assumptions about others without ever gathering evidence.

I don't believe one can fellowship with unbelievers. What fellowship has light with darkness? But I welcome them to come and worship.

Granted, I believe the Pure Cambridge 1900 is the seventh and final purification of the KJB editions and not the 1769 Oxford by Blayney (i.e., the Authorized Version). While all previous six KJB editions are true (despite small minor word differences), and corrections in printing errors, the Pure Cambridge Edition KJB is the true final settled Word. The difference between 1 John 5:8 between the Blayney Oxford vs. the Pure Cambridge by A.W. Pollard is considerable.

1 John 5:8 in the Authorized Version (Blayney Oxford) capitalizes the word Spirit.
1 John 5:8 in the Pure Cambridge (A.W. Pollard) places the word “spirit” in lowercase.

While the Oxford is correct, the Cambridge Edition KJB offers a more clearer truth.

1 John 5:7 is the witness (or record) of God in Heaven (with God being three persons and yet one God).
1 John 5:8 is the witness of man on the Earth with him being made up of water, blood, and spirit. Note: Blood and water came out of Jesus when His side was pierced, and Jesus yielded up His spirit when His body died.
1 John 5:9 says that the witness of God is greater.

So…

Verse 7 is talking about the witness of God.
Verse 8 is the witness of man.
Verse 9 says the witness of God is greater.

Granted, there are other subtle small updates that shows a clearer truth, as well.

So the Bible is wrong in that we are called Christians?
We are also called the sons of God. That is also a label.
So if labels were wrong, then God could not give us any labels.
Without labels, we would not be able to recognize a job position or other things in life.
So you’re just going off your own thoughts that runs contrary to the Bible and real life.
Christian organizations could not label themselves so as to help distinguish their beliefs from others according to you.
So everybody is wrong except you on this point it seems.

Calling others unbelievers is a label.
So this refutes your false belief that you cannot use labels.
You are not even holding to your own standard, my friend.

Nope, the Bible is never wrong. You didn't read what I wrote. But the Bible doesn't say we are to be called Christians; only that the term was first used in Antioch.
Also, sons of God is a name God gave. No reason not to use it.
Also, I never said labels were inherently bad, but that men tended to misuse them.

Do you believe the Earth is millions of years old?
Do you believe in a local flood or a global flood?
Do you consider some stories in the Bible as folklore and or myth like the story of Job and Jonah?

It sounds like you are changing your tune on labels. That's good because your statements before that appears to be against label making is unbiblical.

As for us being called Christian:

Peter says,
"Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf." (1 Peter 4:16).

So this was not a bad label. Peter positively uses this label as a part of an important message to us.
If it was a derogatory or insulting label that was enforced upon believers that the apostles did not like, then Peter would not use such a word in this manner.

So if the Bible is never wrong, then that must mean that you believe there is a perfect translation that exists today.
So which one is the real Bible that is never wrong?

The simple fact of the matter is that one is either a Bible believer or they are a Bible agnostic.

See this article here:

http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Art...th_Bible_Agnostic_Doug_Kutilek_by_Will_Kinney

You aren't paying attention. Labels themselves aren't the problem. And I've already discussed biblical labels and their use. I didn't say I don't use labels. I said I don't use certain labels that are extra biblical because the are often used pejoratively.
What I'm not holding to is your misunderstanding of what I'm actually saying.

I'll rephrase since you are bent this evening on trying your hardest to confuse what I am actually meaning. God's word is inerrant and infallible. I have never read any Bible version that was inerrant and infallible.

My entire point is, if you have the word of truth, the Spirit can guide you unto all truth.

You are very good at arguing against everything...Is there anything you argue for?

All scripture is given by inspiration of God...thy word is truth...the word of the Lord is true...

And my question to you is, do you think that the Holy Spirit cannot guide us into all truth if we don't have the complete, perfect word of God?

That doesn't answer my question.

You said this: "But those translations cannot be considered the holy, pure words of God without error. "

I asked, "Where is that in Scripture?"

Please answer the question.

Thanks for the compliment.