KJV vs. modern Bible Versons

Brian said:

BTW Ransome I looked up heretic in the Websters online and in the realm of Baptistry I don't fit the definition.

I don't follow exactly what you're trying to argue, but if you're attempting to say that there is no such thing as "heresy" for Baptists, then you are even more ignorant than I initially thought.

Any way you slice it, KJV-onlyism is a false doctrine and an addition to Scripture and therefore ought to be shunned by any believing Chrisitan, Baptist or otherwise, who claims the Bible is his rule of faith. And anyone who tries to promote it ought to be subject to the discipline of his church.

 

I see what you are doing. First I'm not trying to argue any thing. Nor am I trying to identify heresy. I just pointed out that you were mistaken in calling me a heretic. You appear to be saying any version of the bible is ok. And if you are dissagreed with the other person is ignorant or heritical or what ever you come up with next. The same arguement you pose ie KJVO=heresy then any version is fine also=heresy. Using your method any definitive statment would be heresy. I don't quite get you but it's obvious that you like to cause discord. I might be educateable if I weren't insulted directly by you every time you post.

Wallowing in my ignorance and drooling.
Completly done.

 

Okay, time for an adult to intervene. Name-calling is childish, so either grow up or go elsewhere. If you can't discuss the issues feel free to opt out of the discussion. If you disagree with something another poster has said, disagree with the position, but don't call that person names. Ad hominem is the last refuge of the incompetent debater.

 

Ooh I just reread your post. PLease explain what you mean by using the Bible as a rule of Faith. And if you would be so kind answer these. Do you believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. (step away from versionality for a moment) Do you believe the Bible to be the final authority in all matters?

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brian:
Uh where did that plain old stait forward English come from anyway?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From the ancestral tongues of invading Germanic tribes, greatly enhanced by French
invaders with a bunch of Latin-based words, and finally from borrowing Greek and other words to throw new ones together.

 

&lt; Just food for thought. On a similar thread you called me a heretic because I beleive that the KJV is a true Bible and for me THE true Bible. done &gt;

Jesus would disagree with that, since the KJV is not the one He read and quoted from.

 

Brian:

You appear to be saying any version of the bible is ok.

What?

 

Brian said:

PLease explain what you mean by using the Bible as a rule of Faith.

I mean that everything a Christian needs to know about doctrine and morality is contained within the pages of Scripture and does not need to be supplemented from outside.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:16-17)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God.

Yes.

Do you believe the Bible to be the final authority in all matters?

No, only matters directly dealing with doctrine and conduct. Obviously the Bible does not contain detailed instructions for every activity I might engage in, such as laying carpet.

However, it has indirect application in every sphere of life. The Christian faith is comprehensive.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Jesus would disagree with that, since the KJV is not the one He read and quoted from. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nither is the version that you are reading from.
So are you saying that we do not have the word of God anymore?

 

Brian speaks in riddles:

Ok Ransom
I see what you are

What would that be?

Liberal?
Apostate?
Catholic?
Homosexual?

I've heard it all before, you can't insult me by heaping yet another meaningless insult on my head. We all know that to a fundamentalist, "liberal" has no more meaning than "stinky wart-face."

and will pray for you.

Why, thank you.

 

You are welcome.

 

sorry hit the post button too soon. I am not riddleing. Are you any of the things you listed? I was thinking along the lines of misguided, meanspirited in posting and discordant.
And still praying for you!

[ November 14, 2001: Message edited by: Brian ]

 

Brian said:

sorry hit the post button too soon. I am not riddleing. Are you any of the things you listed?

Depends on who's asking.

I was thinking along the lines of misguided,

Nope.

meanspirited in posting

Nope.

and discordant.

Actually I'm quite tolerant, but not of people who glory in heresies and deny there is any such thing.

 

BTW I did not mean to imply that you were not welcome. I just posted before my thought was finnished.

 

Rockfort, I noticed that you were the last to post and yet there is no post here from you, huh, must have got deleted for more of that unchristian like name calling, huh?

Why can't you have a part in a discussion without calling people names and being vulgar?
I really hope you do some praying about that.

God speed.

 

&lt; Rockfort, I noticed that you were the last to post and yet there is no post here from you, huh, must have got deleted for more of that unchristian like name calling, huh? &gt;

No; no name-calling, Joey-- of course I did it here, though. It was just an expression from my rural Texas background.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>No; no name-calling, Joey-- of course I did it here, though. It was just an expression from my rural Texas background. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yea, I've heard about you folks out there in texas.

Hehehe!

[ November 14, 2001: Message edited by: Joey M ]