At the time of the post on the 3 baptisms, I did not have the ability to edit so I could not go back an include how to do the study on the original page. It came in a later post. Thanks for pointing that out to me. I will go back an include it on the main post. Yet, at the time, if not mistaken, I did speak to you on how to do the study then. I…[Read more]

You show me your translation and I will list the corruption in yours. I will give you the year and date of my King James, will approximate date and you can list all that is corrupt. Deal?

LOL. Nick, you did the study? Why is it then you still do not believe? So you did exactly as I asked. You took all scripture that pertained to salvation, the blood of Christ and baptism and put one scripture on each card? And then you began sorting to see what pertained to what? And you are done? You must be a genius. I would say it probably took…[Read more]

Nick how else are you going to know if what I post is of God or not of God if you do not do the study. You try to understand in part, but this cannot be understood just in part unless by the unction of the Holy Spirit and those who are on the meat of the Word.You are quick to ridicule, but cannot prove your stand. And cannot disprove mine. And you…[Read more]

I didn't think it was laziness. Because you are always on the forum spreading your doctrine. It is just that you don't want to know the truth then. For if you did want to know the truth, you would do the study.

Nick, I posted a line and went and removed it. Even though it was true, I should not have posted it. Forgive me. That was the man in me that allowed for such a thing to be posted.

So you say. If that were the case, then why did you not do the study on the baptisms? Was it because you are just lazy? You are always ready to argue against it as in our most recent talk on Romans 6 which is part of the study. What I am saying is if you don't do the study, how will you see the truth. You won't, but you will continue to argue…[Read more]

As I said before, it is those who are haters of the King James that use 1 John 5:7 as a way to try and prove that their translations are better. Yet, as I said, if the King James is corrupted, then all translations that used the King James to do their translations would be corrupt as well. And if I am not mistaken, all the translations that came…[Read more]

If you were not so lazy, you would do the study. But you would rather sit on your high and mighty perch and look down on me. You will receive your just reward. On this, you can be sure of. I will pray as always that the Lord bless you and forgive you.Your unwillingness to do the study is just futher proof that you are not after the things of God.…[Read more]

If any of you would take the time to do the study on the  baptisms, you would know the truth. It was revealed to me through the unction of the Holy Spirit and then I was shown how to make even those who are on the milk of the Word understand. Yet, can anyone here say they did the study? If you didn't now can you know if it is of God or man? There…[Read more]

As I have tried to explain to you numerous times before Nick, it is the baptism of blood that is being talked about in Romans 6. It is the baptism of blood. This is where we come to it again, I believe it is the blood of the Lamb that washes away our sins, you evidently do not and believe it is water that washes away our sins. Which is it, the…[Read more]

I rest my case.

Nick, it would be better if you just got saved. It would solve allot of problems of the forum. Because then you would see. Instead, you are bound by your fleshly ego and will never admit when you are wrong. You cannot see the things that are spiritual because you look and try to understand with fleshy eyes and reasoning.If it were not so, you…[Read more]

More Proof that the KJ is the infallible Word of GodThe argument here on this verse is not so much if the verse should or should not be included in scripture as it is the debate over the validity of the KING JAMES. Those who deny the KJ are the leading advocates for saying that this verse in spurious. If they can prove this one verse is spurious,…[Read more]

I believe John did write it. And even if there was a way to prove me wrong, which there is not, the verse is truth. So if it is truth, would it not be likely that John did write it? Show me the proof that he did not.

Romans 6 is talking about the baptism of salvation for the remission of sin. It is not talking of water, for water cannot was away the sin, but only the blood of the Lamb can cleanse us from sin. It is not with water that the body of sin is destroyed, it is with the blood of the Lamb.6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the…[Read more]

It is very easy Nick. The one lie you told is etched into my memory. We were discussion water baptism. Your stand was that a man was not saved until he was baptized by water. When proven wrong, you agree to it. Yet, it was as if you had a lapse of memory or something, you reverted back to saying that a man must be baptized in water to be saved.…[Read more]

Quote Is the verse truth? Whether added or not? If it is truth, that is the imperative, not the squabble of lesser spirits. These are only distractions from truth. Dear jahman,I don't know if this came by way of the Holy Spirit or from reading my prior posts. It matters not, because both would be of the same spirit. And for you to know and believe…[Read more]

Quote To date, there are absolutely no ancient Greek Mss (i.e. pre-7th cent) that contain 1 John 5.7. The reason why is because the greek used by Erasmus was older then that used afterward. It is for this reason the dispute.

What about being born again. They cannot even cross that hurdle. Do not get caught up in this deception. The JW believe only 144,000 will be born again if I am not mistaken. That is absurd. They do not believe in the baptism of the Holy Ghost. The next time one comes to your door, ask them if they pray in tongues. They have a form of godliness,…[Read more]