The Ending of Mark and Snake Handling

--------------------------------------------------
Any second hand source should never be trusted. One should always take a look at the primary source.
--------------------------------------------------


The link I provided confirmed your primary source. It can be trusted, and has proven itself as such to be trusted.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Amen, Brother Phillip -- Preach it!

I note this thread is in a series of forums
called BAPTIST DEBATE FORUMS (BAPTIST ONLY).
The object is to DEBATE.
Citing unbiblical sources is a good way
to loose the debate.
Ignoring 90% of the opponent's points
is a good way to loose the debate.

Ed's best bet: Go to a fellowship forum
and a play a quite game.

 

--------------------------------------------------
IMHO no KJVO website can be trusted considering that the doctrine is unbiblical.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Actually, what is unbiblical, is to think and believe that God has not preserved HIS WORDS OF TRUTH and that man must "reconstruct it", to which is what many of the modern scholars of today believe, including Metzger, gb's primary source.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Yours was a primary source of what he wrote but not what he said about Metzger.

You quoted him who spoke for someone else. That is called a secondary source. If you would have quoted Metzger then you would have quoted a primary source. If you wouild have taken a look at Metzger then you would have been able to see your source stretched exaggerated Metger. You do know what exaggeration is?

What you are doing is not what Paul commended in Acts 17:11. You did not examine the source. You admitted that believed someone else and took his word. That is called being gullible. The JW'do that all the time with good Christian scholars such as A.T. Robertson. I have shown some of those things to JW's and they just keep on truckin' and keep believin' the same thing. Even in spite of all the evidence they just refuse to believe the truth.

I have even had some Mormons come to my door and admit I was right and they were wrong. So I asked them what they were going to do. They went back to their old ways and never came to my home again. Lots of Chrtistians are the same way. They are so convinced of their rightness that when you put the truth in front of them they still refuse to believe.

To let someone else convince you without at least consulting the original sources is stupid at best.

When Paul commended the folks in Acts 17:11 he commended them for not accepting what he said but for taking a look at the scriptures for themselves.

 

--------------------------------------------------
You quoted him who spoke for someone else. That is called a secondary source. If you would have quoted Metzger then you would have quoted a primary source. If you wouild have taken a look at Metzger then you would have been able to see your source stretched exaggerated Metger. You do know what exaggeration is?
--------------------------------------------------


And as it has been shown to you and by your own quoting of his own statement, they indeed did not.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Amazing your judgments! Did I ever say that God has not preserved His word? Show me where I ever wrote or said such things you are accusing me of. Blaphemous on your part! You should be ashamed for being such a liar and accuser! There is one person in scripture that is mentioned by that quality. Just remember the Lord hates a lying tongue.

blas·phe·my 
3. Theol. the crime of assuming to oneself the rights or qualities of God.

 

They exaggerated Metzger's position. That is one of the reasons why I gave the quote.

FYI Metzger is not my God. I odn't happen to subscribe to all of his theology. But at least be honest and quote the man without exaggeration.

 

Interesting that in starting this post, Phillip shouted that it would be shut down if it turned into a KJVO debate, but as long as 3 or 4 guys gang up on Michelle for KJVO bashing, it's acceptable.

 

Mark 16:9-20 (HCSB = Holman Christian Standard Bible)

9 Early on the first day of the week, after He had risen, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had driven seven demons. 10 She went and reported to those who had been with Him, as they were mourning and weeping. 11 Yet, when they heard that He was alive and had been seen by her, they did not believe it. 12 Then after this, He appeared in a different form to two of them walking on their way into the country. 13 And they went and reported it to the rest, who did not believe them either.

14 Later, He appeared to the Eleven themselves as they were reclining at the table. And He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who saw Him after He had been resurrected. 15 Then He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation. 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In My name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new languages; 18 they will pick up snakes; if they should drink anything deadly, it will never harm them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will get well."

19 Then after speaking to them, the Lord Jesus was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. 20 And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word by the accompanying signs.]

"[" and "]" denote the limits of a scripture
not found in some sources. My HCSB is the
full words of God written plain for the
21st Century English user. The HCSB is
inerrant and is the Written Word of God.

 

I noticed when I looked up the HCSB online Mark 16:9-20 was bracketed and had a footnote.

 

I was going to look up this matter
in THE AWE OF THY WORD by Gail Riplinger.
This book is NOT useful for researching a
matter. There is no list of Verses cited

 

--------------------------------------------------
Michelle turned it into a KJVO debate. This is no intentional ganging up on Michelle; she makes incredible statements, then expects our members to swallow them whole. What did you expect?
--------------------------------------------------


I did? Please refer to me the post/s that I did this?


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

--------------------------------------------------
Interesting that in starting this post, Phillip shouted that it would be shut down if it turned into a KJVO debate, but as long as 3 or 4 guys gang up on Michelle for KJVO bashing, it's acceptable.
--------------------------------------------------


Thank you pastorGreg for pointing this out, and standing up for me! I really appreciate this.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

I do not think you have a good understanding of many who use the KJV exclusively. You talk about the KJVOs as though there is one set of doctrine about the KJV that all of us adhere to. Nothing could be farther from the truth. There are abundant reasons why people, as well as churches, use only the KJV. To attempt to pigeon hole everyone who holds to this view is absurd. I think your dislike for KJVO people has blinded you to much of the truth.

 

Yes, this is the normal MV tactic. It is called hypocrisy.