Also you ask "Where is the word of God TODAY? Where can I get a physical copy to read and study" this again is a false question, there are a number of assumptions:

1. You assume that there are perfect translation(s) this is a false assumption.

2. You assume that the perfect translation is the same, the Oxford KJV and the Cambrige KJV differ from each other, which one is the true KJV?

1. You assume that there is only 1 King James Version, when in point of fact, it has been changed. Furthermore you fail to recognize that the Oxford and Cambridge edition of the KJV differ from each other, which leads to the question, "Which KJV is the perfect word of God?"

2. Your argument is an appeal to tradition, thus it can be likened to a Roman Catholic argument.

3. The KJV was mostly based on Tyndale's version, thus it could rightly be called a revision of Tyndale's Bible.

4. People such as the late R.C. Sproul, did not use the KJV in their preaching and ministry, however the ministry has flourished over America and other places, therefore shall we say that the NASB, ESV, etc. are starting to have a greater influence?

5. It also assumes that a version that is used by God in a great and mighty way must then be the perfect word of God, there's no logical connection between the two.

Jaycobee, I recommend you check our CARM, and I recommend that you go to www.aomin.org, it is Dr. James White's ministry, and he has debated 40+ prominent Roman Catholic apologists such as Trent Horn, Patrick Madrid, Peter Stravinskis, and he is scheduled to debate a Roman Catholic in June.

But I wish to direct you to my comment where I said any orthodox Baptist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, etc. would not worship the statute as being Christ.

Where in my comment did I say it was lawful to have the statue that you might worship it?

And your last comment is kinda confusing, because the people* are still not gathering in the church building to worship the visible statue, they are not gathering to worship the statute as a sort of proxy, but they are in the church worshiping God, not directing their attention towards the statute.

The IFB churches I know of preach against sin, and I don't know how much the SBC affects the IFB churches, that would be an interesting study.

I would agree with Wayfarer that the SBC Storm would be on Calvinism, I mean the John 3:16 conference was something else, especially the Q&A, but that is kinda dated I suppose, but if there's a spilt between the SBC, I wonder what would happen.

Although I wonder where the statue will go, and I would like to see a picture of this statue.

@Former Catholic, I think that those verses apply to God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, I don't know if we can exegetically prove that it applies to the Son,

Furthermore any orthodox baptist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, etc. would not worship the statue as being Jesus.

Here is my original comment, show me where I'm wrong:

Adriel, I would argue that that the RRC does has and teach morals. I would also assert that they teach theology, they certainly affirm the doctrine of the Trinity.

Patrick Madrid, Peter Stravinsakas, Trent Horn, Jerry Matatics, etc. etc. all teach theology, all affirm the Trinity, all affirm Monotheism, they reject polytheism, atheism, agnosticism, dualism, etc. etc.

Do they teach sound theology? In some aspects yes but they teach false doctrines such as the Marian doctrines, purgatory, sola ecclesia, papal infallibility, etc.

I affirm that the RCC is not the bride of Christ, but Christians are not to falsely represent people. So I encourage you to accurately represent the RCC,

"Having good morals does not get one into heaven, nor does teaching good morals."

I never said it does.

"Now, IF the RCC had good morals, then why is their priesthood filled with homosexuals and pedophiles?"

The RCC has morals, but you have to distinguish between good morals and bad morals. I am willing to make the distinction, are you willing to?

"There is not one thing the RCC teaches that can be labeled as 'good'."

How about the Trinity? They affirm the Trinity. How about monotheism?

"The fact that they lead souls down the broad road is an abomination to the most high God, regardless of whatever 'good' anyone thinks they represent."

Hmm, so the Trinity is not good?

"They do not teach correct biblical theology Connor, be careful sticking your neck out to defend the great harlot. You should know better."

Prove that I was sticking my neck out for the RCC, all I called for was fairness in representing them, I would think every Christian should fairly represent any cult, religion, etc.

MS said, "Discernment is sorely lacking in Christendom when it comes to this satanic cult." Show me where I was not discerning.

@Adriel, will you recant your statement that the RCC does not teach morality and theology?

[14] And I saw a great mystery, and an angelic watcher came unto me and said, "Look thou into the north, what seest thou?" So I looked and behold, out of the north and then said I, "I see a slave owner, dressed in fine linen, having much possessions. And he sold one of his slaves to another, and received many more riches.

[15] The said the angelic watcher, "Thou seest well, look thou into the south." Then said I, "I see a man, having nothing, yet he goeth into the marketplace, and selleth his crafts."

[16] Then saith he, "Thou hast well seen, for he shall make for himself a mansion on earth, and many evils shall he make, his evils will wax worse and worse, and the world shall be given to his descendants.

Patrick Madrid, Peter Stravinsakas, Trent Horn, Jerry Matatics, etc. etc. all teach theology, all affirm the Trinity, all affirm Monotheism, they reject polytheism, atheism, agnosticism, dualism, etc. etc.

Do they teach sound theology? In some aspects yes but they teach false doctrines such as the Marian doctrines, purgatory, sola ecclesia, papal infallibility, etc.

I affirm that the RCC is not the bride of Christ, but Christians are not to falsely represent people. So I encourage you to accurately represent the RCC,

1. Jim, you're a flaming hypocrite, many people on here have documented, yes documented that you are indeed a racist.

2. Penned, what is the point you're trying to make? You present conspiracy theories a lot but have very few, if any, documentation of these theories.

"rothchild created Israel with the Balfour Declaration out of England, same year as the Scofield Bible release out of Oxford Press, 1917"

You know what this reminded me of? Gail Riplinger trying to make a connection between the new versions and the sinking of the Titanic.