Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Askjo, Apr 29, 2003.
[ May 09, 2003, 07:37 PM: Message edited by: Askjo ]
The point you should be making is that one of these men is wrong. This has nothign to do with the version they use. It has to do with their belief. Many oneness pentecostals use the KJV and support their doctrine from it. The reality is that the NIV is as clear, if not clearer, on the deity of Christ than the KJV is.
Attack the problem: The doctrine of these men. Don't attack something that has nothing to do with the the problem.
Pastor Larry is correct. It is reduction to the absurd to link MVs with liberal doctrine. Liberals used the KJV also.
I concur with Tom and Larry. Though I recommend and promote the KJV, I must say that, if what I believe (in general) is the truth, then there is MUCH MORE false doctrine than true doctrine taught by people who use the KJV. Of course, the same would also be true concerning the NIV, NAS, etc.. The charge of false doctrine must be laid at the feet of those who teach it, and has little or nothing to do with which version they use.
Agreed. It's not hard to find people who use the KJV that support baptismal regeneration, for example.
The fault lies in their beliefs, not the version.
Having said all that, a version may add to some confusion (KJV in Acts is misused by second Holy Spirit baptism folks, for example). But the conscientious Bible student will dig enough to evade these pitfalls.
But incidents of confusion are not limited to one version.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints uses the KJV exclusively and they do not support the orthodox definition of the Trinity.
But incidents of confusion are not limited to one version. </font>[/QUOTE]I wasn't trying to imply that they were.
"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints uses the KJV exclusively and they do not support the orthodox definition of the Trinity."
So did the JWs until they created their own version.