- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (heiscomingintheclouds @ June 30 2006,03:19) Sorry t eight, but the verse should be in the bible. And I have been called a hypocrite before. It matters little to me what others call me. I just bless them as it says to do according to God's word. I am a man just like you. I am a sinner just like you. The only good in me is my allowing the Lord to work through me by being submissive to his will and suppressive to my self will. Oh how evil this flesh is. It is always warring against our spirit, trying to impose it's will of carnage which can bring death to the soul. Yet, he who is in us is greater then he who is in the world. It is our faith in Jesus that helps us overcome the carnal mind.
Romans 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
Hi H,
When the basis of your belief is one version of the bible then you will ignore all other realities to state that it is perfect and no fault can possibly be found in it.
That is human nature and has nothing to do with following Jesus.Considering my one version can shred to pieces the other versions, does it not make sense reality wise, you are speaking as carnal? You have yet to make a stand on anything other then the doctrine of Nick and when proven wrong, your doctrine disappears quicker then a man standing in quicksand.
Nick and H,
What is this almost fanatical attachment to the KJV Bible? There is NO perfect
translation of the Bible and there are even older, more reliable original Hebrew & Greek
texts available today than when the KJV was written. H, did you check out the
Sacred Name Version of the KJ? I think I gave you the link.Tradition wise, the KJV was the ONLY Bible in my house growing up. However, it was
so difficult to read that I simply gave up. Now I think if I had another version,
I would been much more aware of what the Bible really taught, and not rely
on what people SAID it taught.In fact the KJV editors were trinitarians who TOOK OUT part of Matthew 24:36:
No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, NOR THE SON
but only the Father.They deliberately REMOVED “nor the Son”, because they couldn't explain it and it didn't
fit with their trinity theology.I look for a Bible that is more literal such as Young's but that is simply my preference. A good Greek
Interlinear is also indispensible. HOWEVER, I don't put my trust in anything but the power of
God to show me His Word. I have several translations including the KJV as
Bullinger's Companion Bible which is an amazing piece of work even today. I use and enjoy
them all and am always open to reviewing other translations especially if they are based on
the older, more reliable manuscripts.To the KJV credit, the book of Isaiah is nearly unchanged from the same book found in the
Dead Sea Scrolls. However, I am determined to test and prove all things.Tootles,
Semmy
Quote (seminarian @ July 22 2006,16:04) In fact the KJV editors were trinitarians who TOOK OUT part of Matthew 24:36: No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, NOR THE SON
but only the Father.They deliberately REMOVED “nor the Son”, because they couldn't explain it and it didn't
fit with their trinity theology.
I didn't know that.Thank you for pointing that out.
Those Trinitarians. I have a distrust for people who preach this doctrine and when I see things like this it only reinforces what I think.
The ironic thing here is that heiscomingintheclouds doesn't believe in the Trinity doctrine, yet thinks that the KJV is the perfect translation.
This translation is so biased toward the Trinity Doctrine that it adds and also takes away verses that doesn't fit that view.
heiscomingintheclouds, you must be in conflict over this.
Then why is it I can so easily debunk the trinity doctine using the KJ bible. The reason none of you can is because you don't use the KJ evidently or use it enough to understand it. Come on brothers, you are not doing the group and the faith any good bickering over my stand on the KJ. Please, I love you guys. Why do you keep this up. Let the doctrine settle the dispute.
When I first came to the group, if not mistaken, I think all said that at least would revert to the KJ for reference. Don't you think I don't have all the other translations at my disposal? Why do you think I would have no problem in a debate on translations? All I ask is if you do use the KJ as reference, why not try to understand the doctrine. Are we not all seeking the face of God? Is not truth, God's truth, not mans, what we are all after?
T8, you have become my biggest disappointment. I will pray for you. I love you so much and you are breaking my heart. I thought if anyone would see the truth in the words you would, yet you have let the words of Nick blind you and on this I am saddened. Nick is a wolf in sheeps clothing. He does not seek any truth other then that of his own.
I have tried to reach out to him but to no avail. Because of my stand on the KJ, he will never accept me. It matters not. I will love him and pray for him. One thing I do know is that his gospel is not the gospel of Christ.
He does not understand that when a man is saved, that Christ comes and lives in that man. It is because he has not experienced it. So I ask all in the group to pray for him, that he be saved.
Semmy, I believe that to say there is no perfect translation of the bible is to believe a lie. Do you think that Almighty God does not have the ability to get his Word into print and have it done perfectly? To say there is not a perfect translation is selling God short. Is the world so corrupted that they think God cannot do such a simple thing?
H, you keep saying: Let the doctrine settle the dispute. You keep saying: The KJV is so good at debunking the trinity. Well, in most of our eyes, any Bible is good at debunking the trinity. But the KJV is less good at this because of a spurious verse like 1 john 5:7 or because of removing the words “nor the son” as mentioned above.
You think you can refute the trinity. I'm sure you can. But you could do so easier if you used a Bible that didn't have a definite trinitarian slant to it.
Your defence to this is to say: Well how come I can easily debunk the trinity doctrine using the KJV? Well, the truth is, you think you can. If you go on the trinity thread and convince a trinitarian that the trinity is not Biblical using the KJV, then maybe your claim would have some merit. But the truth is, if I wanted to convince people that God is a trinity, the KJV would be the obvious choice. You state that we shouldn't keep bickering over this Bible. But you are the fuel of this fire. Simply stop saying it is infallible. Every time you do that, someone comes up with another reason it is fallible, Mat 24:36 being the last.H, there is nothing wrong with being enthused about the Bible. But sometimes you seem more enthrawled with King James Bible than with God's Word. Which is more important?
david
Quote (seminarian @ July 21 2006,21:04) Nick and H, What is this almost fanatical attachment to the KJV Bible? There is NO perfect
translation of the Bible and there are even older, more reliable original Hebrew & Greek
texts available today than when the KJV was written. H, did you check out the
Sacred Name Version of the KJ? I think I gave you the link.Tradition wise, the KJV was the ONLY Bible in my house growing up. However, it was
so difficult to read that I simply gave up. Now I think if I had another version,
I would been much more aware of what the Bible really taught, and not rely
on what people SAID it taught.In fact the KJV editors were trinitarians who TOOK OUT part of Matthew 24:36:
No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, NOR THE SON
but only the Father.They deliberately REMOVED “nor the Son”, because they couldn't explain it and it didn't
fit with their trinity theology.I look for a Bible that is more literal such as Young's but that is simply my preference. A good Greek
Interlinear is also indispensible. HOWEVER, I don't put my trust in anything but the power of
God to show me His Word. I have several translations including the KJV as
Bullinger's Companion Bible which is an amazing piece of work even today. I use and enjoy
them all and am always open to reviewing other translations especially if they are based on
the older, more reliable manuscripts.To the KJV credit, the book of Isaiah is nearly unchanged from the same book found in the
Dead Sea Scrolls. However, I am determined to test and prove all things.Tootles,
Semmy
Good Stuff SemmyHi,
The definition of true religion shown by James as being looking after widows and orphans is a reflection of Is 1.12-17
” 12″When you come (A)to appear before Me,
Who requires of you this trampling of My courts?
13″Bring your worthless offerings no longer,
(B)Incense is an abomination to Me
ÂNew moon and sabbath, the (D)calling of assemblies–
I cannot (E)endure iniquity and the solemn assembly.
14″I hate your new moon festivals and your (F)appointed feasts,
They have become a burden to Me;
I am (G)weary of bearing them.
15″So when you (H)spread out your hands in prayer,
(I)I will hide My eyes from you;
Yes, even though you (J)multiply prayers,
I will not listen
(K)Your hands are covered with blood.
16″(L)Wash yourselves, (M)make yourselves clean;
(N)Remove the evil of your deeds from My sight
(O)Cease to do evil,
17Learn to do good;
(P)Seek justice,
Reprove the ruthless,
(Q)Defend the orphan,
Plead for the widow.”Job stated: “I would rescue the afflicted one crying for help, and the fatherless boy and anyone that had no helper.”—Job 29:12.
The Law of Moses specified: “You people must not afflict any widow or fatherless boy.” (Exodus 22:22, 23)
The apostle Paul displayed the same thoughtfulness. When he and Barnabas were given their preaching assignment, ‘keeping the poor in mind’ was among the instructions they received. “This very thing I have also earnestly endeavored to do,” Paul could say in good conscience. (Galatians 2:9, 10) The account of the activities of the Christian congregation shortly after its establishment noted: “There was not one in need among them . . . In turn distribution would be made to each one, just as he would have the need.” (Acts 4:34, 35)
Is that all true religion encompases? There are those that look after orphans and widows but don't make following God's word a priority in their lives.
Notice that in that verse James also mentions to “keep [ourselves] without spot from the world.” (James 1:27; 4:4)
Nick, I'm wondering how you take those words. In addition to saying to take care of orphans and widows and to keep oneself withou spot from the world in verse 27, we see related words in this verse.
JAMES 4:4
“Adulteresses, do YOU not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God.”How do you take these words Nick?
Hi david,
We are to be in the world but not of the world. We are the salt of the earth and vessels for the light in the darkness.I guess Scripture speaks of Faith and Love and Worship as the big issues in our relationship with our new Father, and religion as the practical expression of that faith among the lonely and desperate lives that we see every day.
Religion as men define it is not the deal. Men can have a very tidy and organised system going that makes men feel very self satisfied and content but God may have not part in it as with the Whore of Babylon.
Relationship with Christ and by him with God means nothing if we do not bear fruit towards those of the faith and our neighbours. Living loving, hospitable, friendly lives in the world is our advertising for that Love of God that enables us to be at peace in our own hearts. And helping His beloved poor is the divine tax He asks of us.
And what do you believe being “not of the world” entails? How does it actually affect you in life? Where does it come into play?
To you does it just mean being different from the world? Clearly, we are not to be friends of the world. How do you take this?
In a month, Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide are going to be giving everyone (including you Nick) a tract entitled: “The End of False Relgion has Drawn Near.”
Every so often we do this, distribute a Bible based message worldwide at the same time.
I believe this is one of those tracts that is going to bring on a great deal of friction, and won't be well accepted.At one time, not too long ago, the idea of all religion being banned or outlawed or done away with by human institutions (such as the U.N. for example) was ….unbelievable. Religion has been so strong. But it has slowly become weaker and opposers have grown and become stronger. The case for removing religion is growing.
Quote (david @ Aug. 06 2006,05:20) And what do you believe being “not of the world” entails? How does it actually affect you in life? Where does it come into play? To you does it just mean being different from the world? Clearly, we are not to be friends of the world. How do you take this?
Hi david,
It is not a matter of externals-what we wear, how we dress, where we meet on Sundays, whom we follow or what label we choose to claim.These things are of man and divide us from people.
It is our inner peace, our love, our joy, our hospitality and kindness to neighbours that makes others wonder about the source of this hope and the grace that gives it life.
Hi,
I was amazed a few years ago speaking with a Presbyterian minister who told me he believed that the pope was the head of his church.
A Methodist minister friend of mine said recently.
“If you scratch a methodist you will find an anglican.”
I believe if you scratch an anglican you will find a catholic
andif you scratch a catholic you will find the whore of Babylon
and
if you scratch the whore you will find Satan.Quote These things are of man and divide us from people. MATTHEW 10:34-35
“Do not think I came to put peace upon the earth; I came to put, not peace, but a sword. For I came to cause division, with a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a young wife against her mother-in-law.”True Christianity would “divide” people, even members of one's household.
Quote It is our inner peace, our love, our joy, our hospitality and kindness to neighbours that makes others wonder about the source of this hope and the grace that gives it life. You're right. It's not a matter of externals. But how we dress for example, does show whether we respect others and ourselves. Some dress sloppily. What image does that convey? You're right. Dress, for example, is not of prime importance. But it does say something about a person. If you were meating together in someone's home to have a Bible study, and to pray, or come before God, would you not want to do so in respectful attire?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
