Tony Lopez-Cisneros wrote: "Counter": I ALREADY KNOW That You're A Satanic-Vaticanist/Roman-"Catholic"-Cultic "Jesuit(ic)" & Freemasonic-Illuminatist; Who's Sent By LUCIFER-SATAN-THE DEVIL Himself To "Wrest" My Words Against THE TRUTH: To Your ("Counter's") OWN DESTRUCTION ! (NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BULL-DUNG-"BIBLE") ! Imply That I Said That The KJV-BIBLE Is A "Perversion" Of THE HISTORIC AUTHORIZED HOLY JUDEO-CHRISTIAN BIBLE-SCRIPTURES ! YOU'RE ONLY FURTHER GIVING YOURSELF AWAY: THAT YOU'RE IN CAHOOTS WITH "Jim Lincoln" & The Vast Of Other Venomous Snakes & Nest Of Freemasonic-Illuminatist "Jesuit(ic)" Spies, Agents & Subverters: Who Habitually & Continuously Post LIES, LIES & MORE LIES On This Sermonaudio Website ! YOUR ATTEMPTS TO DESCREDIT GOD'S PRESERVED WORD IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (AKA THE KJV-BIBLE) FOR THE LAST 400 YRS. IS ONLY RESULTING IN YOUR MOST MISERABLE FAILURE & DEMISE ! *"FOR WE CAN DO NOTHING AGAINST THE TRUTH..." !
Tony; I defended your stance against Counter when he thought you were speaking against the KJV. But please, don't do all this name calling and getting off topic on these threads.
Counter wrote: The KJV is not a "Per-Version" of God's Word. Shame on YOU!
You may have misunderstood Tony's remarks. He is Pro KJV, Sometimes Vehemently so. Click on the Magnifying glass icon where his name appears, and read all of his posts. You will se how pro KJV he really is. Iv'e disagreed with many thing he's said, but I have to support his KJV stance.
Dr. Zoloft wrote: Just checking to see if my two most needy patients are still here. I wouldn't want them to get out on too many other threads. I mean all that "Satanic-Vaticanist "Jesut(ic)s" Freemasonic "Religious" Illumnatists, Cultistic, Romanistic ect...." paranoia of the one, and the "NASB, NASB, NASB," OCD disorder of the other can be very dangerous. So as long as they stay LOST on the Island this thread, that can be their entire reality. Now back to your regularly scheduled debate.
I hav'nt seen them myself lately. I have a job, and after work I'm usually reading and studying the Bible. Guess if I didn't have a job I could stay on line debating all day.
300 Lbs. wrote: Oh Come on. Everyboby's been wrong so far. Why, everyone knows the only true bible in the history of the world has been the Living Bible, and the only heavenly language is American Slang from the 1970s. Everything else is ORIGINIST, JEROMIST, LATINIST, VATICANIST, CONSTANTIENIST, OCHAMIST, MEDIEVILIST, VATICANIST, GREEK ORTHODOXIST, ARMINIANIST, AANGLICANIST, MASONIC, NEW WORLD ORDER, NEW AMERICANIST STANDARDIST, quit my job and stay on the COMPUTERIST and argue the point in the GROUNDIST, bunch of bad WORDIST, stuff
This is a very important discussion that the past several posts have touched on. However; it is getting off topic. The discussion is music, particularly Jennifer Knapps situation and what brought it on. Please stay on topic or they will close the topic.
John UK wrote: Can I ask why read other versions? They have to be different, or it would be a waste of time, eh? And as they are different, how do you know which one is THE WORD OF GOD? Or are you like Mr Lincoln, who does not believe we have the inerrant WORD OF GOD today? And please, it is not just a matter of updating archaic words, it is far more serious than that. The Bible you read dictates the sort of salvation you have. And many 'Bibles' have you saved by your works. Whereas God, in his word, says that we must be saved through faith alone, in Christ alone, by grace alone; that God may have all the glory.
Very simple; my post was meant to do two things. 1. Show my dissagreement with Mr. Lincoln. That should be evident by the sarcasm I used with the NASB. 2. To demonstrate that KJV advocates are aware of other versions. I do believe God has preserved His Word in Engish through the KJV. As to why even read others; to show the discrepencies. By doing so, I can speak first hand rather than only quoting others, as good as their writtings may be.
Iv'e met many KJV only folks. I guess I'm a KJV mainly man myself.But Iv'e never ran across a NASB mainly man till I came to this web site. I wonder if just any NASB will do. Or does it have to be a Thompson Chain Reference with red imitaion leather? I think I have one of those. The again I also have the ASV 1901, RSV, NRSV, NKJV, NIV, ESV, Holman, New Jerusalem, Youngs Literal, TEV.........Yet I'm still KJV in my persuasion. I guess KJV folks read other versions, and still stay faithful to the Recieved Text traslation.
scottishguy wrote: you cant ligislate for the unconverted, it is not right to pretend that we are in a theocracy,and to try to force Christian beliefs on a national level.
With that reasoning every country needs to legalize Murder and Stealing. That old saying "you can't legislate morality" is a misnomer. Morality is the only thing that can be legislated. Granted, there is no law that can change a heart, but that does not mean that we allow all kinds of behavior.
To You "Jesuit(ic)s" This Sermonaudio Website Is Just A Joke, A Connard, A Charade. . . . . .A Circus ! I've Been Posting Comments On This Sermonaudio Website For Some Time Now; And Have Come To Realize That It's ALL A SHAM !
Tony; Iv'e never responded to your posts before, but after reading your series on this thread, I think I need to say " You should probably not even visit Sermon Audio anymore" They are not removing your posts because you right, but because you keep violating the rules of the post. I am one that reports your abuses. I'm sure others report your abuses too. We would prefer to have discusions without disrespectful tyraids. So, if you realy think Sermon Audio is as bad as what you say, please leave the website.
John UK wrote: Actually what we're trying to do is analyse whether or not Jesus wants us to buy a sword, with which we can kill our persecutors. Charles says "yes" and the ol' turnip says "no", because that was a one-off. What do you think? And do you know any example in the whole of the New Testament where Jesus disciples defended themselves with weaponry against persecutors? Charles can't find one, but maybe you know one or two eh?
It's an interesting topic. But it sounds like it would be more fit for the article on the bible or islam being more violent. This doesn't have anything to do with a scientific discovery. I was hoping my sarcasm would have pointed that out.
Thanks guys. When I read the article about the Scientific Discovery, I missed the parts about, Jesus and his disciples, the gentiles, the sending of the 12 then the 70. I'm sure glad there are folks that can find all those hidden things in these news articles