“STILL
MORE ONE LINERS
TO REFUTE
THE FOGASS”
Part
4 of 7
Dear Reader, keep in mind who the FOGASS are … Formal
Equivalence sprouters, Originals believers, Greekophiles,
Adders,
Subtracters, Substituters.
Let us remind ourselves that Formal Equivalence
was perfected by the 1611 Translators … and that every Bible
version
since has demonstrated nothing but Dynamic Equivalence;
The Originals believers are a sad bunch of Scripture
twisters putting their hope in an unseen and mystical pile of
papers that
have long disappeared … called smoke and mirrors.
The Greekophiles cling to a language that is
chalk and cheese to modern Greek, and had to be corrected in
about 1,000
places in the 1611 Translators TR.
The Adders, Subtracters and Substituters
have … in wanting to be revered as Bible teachers … “Oh! Aren’t we so
grateful for
your profound knowledge, revelations and insights that the 1611
Translators
didn’t have” … not being subjected to the 1611 King James … have blasphemously
written their own versions.
Question: “What about the Dead Sea Scrolls? Surely they
show that the King
James Bible has mistakes?”
Answer: No. Just the opposite. The Isaiah text is in
total agreement with
the King James.
Question: “Why do I need a King James Bible to get someone saved?”
Answer: “You don’t. But like a dead hen sitting on a live
chicken, it will struggle
to survive and grow.
Question: “What about the Apocrypha? Didn’t the 1611 have it
in?”
Answer: “Yes, but it was placed between the Old and New
Testaments, as
evidence of how evil corrupters could twist the pure scriptures.”
Question: “How can you call the Holy Spirit an “it”
if that Spirit is a person? (Romans 8:26)”
Answer: Like the German language that has a ‘masculine’
spoon, a ‘neuter’
knife and a feminine ‘fork’, every Greek word has its own
gender,
denoted by the article “o” for masculine, feminine by “a” and neuter by
“to”. The
word for spirit in the Greek is “pneuma” and is neuter, and the King
James
Bible correctly translates “pneuma” as “itself”.
Question: Why are the majority of preachers and scholars wrong
if the King James Bible is perfect?”
Answer: “The majority are always wrong … for example … the
majority of people
will not be saved. Furthermore, most preachers and scholars have
already made
up their mind about the King James Bible.
And above all, be reminded that people will not let
the facts get in the way of what they believe.
Last but not least, ignorance is a person’s most prize
possession.”
Question: “Can’t I find the fundamentals in the versions?”
Answer: “The fundamentals have been changed, thereby
watering down sound
doctrine. The NIV and the NASB leave “begotten” out of John
3:16.
“Hell” has been watered down to quite a nice place
called “hades”
The virgin birth of Jesus has been denied where
Joseph is called Jesus’ father (Luke 2:33)
The doctrine of the Godhead (the Trinity) has
been muddied and called into question in 1 John 5:7 … and the list goes
on.
Question: “If the King James Bible has been translated from
the Greek into the English, it can’t be as good as the Greek can it?”
Answer: “Wrong. It is better. If God didn’t think so, he
would have let
Greece conquer the world as he did with the British Empire. English
then would
not be necessary. Furthermore, the 1611 Translators Greek TR was
corrected in
about 1,000 places.
Question: “But surely translations can’t be inspired?”
Answer: “God has always inspired his godly line of Bibles
all throughout
the ages, that in the final stretch on the home run, we have Wyclif,
Tyndal,
Coverdale, Matthew, Geneva and Bishop Bibles as rough nuggets …
simply being
successively polished for a more shiny gleam.
THE KING JAMES WAS NOT A NEW BIBLE.
IT WAS SIMPLY A POLISHED GEM TO MAKE IT THAT MORE
BRIGHTER.”
As the 1611 Translators said “We have come learned …
not to learn.”
Harley
Hitchcock
March
2025
This
website’s front page is:
www.AustralianBibleMinistries.com
PS
Dear
Reader, please be reminded that ABM is always open to receive any
mistakes and
errors that you may find in the King James Bible.
Furthermore,
we would love to publish your findings on our website with our reply.
“QUICK ONE LINERS
TO REFUTE THE FOGASS”
“MORE ONE LINERS TO REFUTE THE FOGASS”
“EVEN MORE ONE LINERS
TO REFUTE THE FOGASS”
“FURTHER ONE LINERS
TO REFUTE THE FOGASS”