Could this be the stone?

You theology is much like could God create a rock He couldn’t lift. The problem is that God is not limited but He does work the way He wants. He has chosen to work through people to give out the gospel. Your theology would dictate that God is not limited by people and that He also gives out the gospel. Just read Romans 10:14. According to your theology is Romans 10:14 true or not?

I have counseled enough people who believe the same way you do who abuse their spouse with physical violence and place the blame on God. I would assume that you believe He does everything and man does not need to accept any responsibility. If that is the case then how does your theology fit in with 2 Timothy 2:15,16. Because if the English are the very words of God then the translators would have no need to study. The OT and NT writers did not study on what to write. They wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. So if I were to believe what you do then I could translate the Bible into any language without any study because God would give me the very words.

So you don’t think the Greek, Hebrew ands Aramaic text is sufficient? The words of God were never in English.

Just like you misspelled “original” the same thing has happened in a few KJV translations. Do you think God made that mistake too in some of the early KJV’s?

I am well aware that we do not have the originals. But I am satisfied to say that I believe we have the best text in what we believe are the originals we have ever had.

 

Obviously you are <personal attack snipped>. It is impossible to debate such <snipped>. If you were to read the passage where Jesus addresses Peter, context does not point out that difference at all.

FYI phileo and agapao are in many ways the same and in others very diferent. Study will point those things out to you not just context.

[ July 26, 2004, 01:02 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

You are more like the way Mormons think that you think you are. If you ever share your faith with them you see what I am talking about. That is the reason why I pointed it out to you.

Are you telling me you don’t like reproof?

Prov 25:11, 12, “Like apples of gold in settings of silver Is a word spoken in right circumstances. Like an earring of gold and an ornament of fine gold Is a wise reprover to a listening ear.”

Prov 12:1, “Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, But he who hates reproof is stupid.”

 

--------------------------------------------------
FYI phileo and agapao are in many ways the same and in others very diferent. Study will point those things out to you not just context.
--------------------------------------------------


And MY POINT TO YOU is that I DO NOT NEED TO KNOW NOR STUDY IT, because God has already PROVIDED his words for me in my own language - Praise the Lord! I don't question nor doubt it. Based upon what you have revealed of your beliefs, you do doubt it. No further conversation can come between us, and obviously it would be useless. I come from a position relying upon faith, you come from relying upon your own intellect and reasoning.

All I can say is I am done debating this with you. If you had one <personal attack snipped> then I might continue, but I do not like the unecessary insults, and attacks because I am dealing with this based upon my faith in what the scriptures say about God's words, and I have it evidenced right before my very eyes, and in my heart. Enouph said.

May the Lord continue to richly bless you and your family.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

[ July 26, 2004, 01:04 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

--------------------------------------------------
Are you telling me you don’t like reproof?

--------------------------------------------------

What you are doing is in no way, shape or form biblical reproof, but was an insult and false accusation. You may think it is reproof, but you are sadly mistaken. I do not mind reproof and correction, and gladly welcome it when I am in error and need of it. You are reproofing me based upon the fact that I do not approach this in a worldly manner as you have. You are reproofing my FAITH in what God has said in his word! You should be the one reproved.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

I'm glad the AV translators did not believe like you...read the preface of the 1611, you'll see that the KJV translators were not KJVO!

 

But michelle, the very translators themselves tried to keep up with the emerging English of each generation and did an excellent job until 1769 at which time the generational updates "fell by the wayside" (to quote a Scripture cliche).

The NKJV is an attempy to keep this update current.

Ask your children for instance about this verse:

1 Chronicles 26
14 And the lot eastward fell to Shelemiah. Then for Zechariah his son, a wise counsellor, they cast lots; and his lot came out northward.
15 To Obededom southward; and to his sons the house of Asuppim.
16 To Shuppim and Hosah the lot came forth westward, with the gate Shallecheth, by the causeway of the going up, ward against ward.
17 Eastward were six Levites, northward four a day, southward four a day, and toward Asuppim two and two.
18 At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar.

You asked if blood still means blood.
Do bowels still mean bowels?

How about this one:

Philemon 1
20 Yea, brother, let me have joy of thee in the Lord: refresh my bowels in the Lord.

OR:

2 Corinthians 10
11 O ye Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our heart is enlarged.
12 Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels.
13 Now for a recompence in the same, (I speak as unto my children,) be ye also enlarged.

HankD

 

You quoted one verse out of context and you call that faith.Even someone else pointed that out to you, To proof text something like you do is not exegesis <personal attack snipped>.

[ July 26, 2004, 01:57 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

It is not a matter of questioning God's word but getting a full understanding of it.

So are you saying that you enjoy your ignorance? Obviously you do not know the difference between the three words translated with one word in English. I guess you are more enlightened than all of the seminaries and Bible schools that require biblical languages. I don't know of one Bible school or seminary that would say such things as you do. But according to you they are all stupid.

What pride that you would claim such brilliance. I have known many scholars who are the best and would never make such claims. It is the ignorant who boast of such claims. Even Paul talks about those people in 1 Cor stating that they know so little.

By saying you don't need to study is exposing your study habits and dishonor of God's word. Because 2 Timothy 2:15,16 says that we are to study and you say otherwise!! How you dishonor God's word!

 

I'de like to give michelle credit where credit is due.

She puts a great fight, goes off and licks here wounds then sooner or later she's back again for another round.

Though I don't agree with her in most of these KJVO issues, I admire her tenacity.

HankD

 

Michelle:By the same way you judge me and others. I know there are those who question the importance of the KJV as sound, and accurate, for if they actually did believe this, they would not, and could not stand for the mv's.

Know what "Bah! Humbug!" means?


This is how many of you are mv onlites. All of God's pure and accurate word is not found in the mv's that has been shown to you and many others over and over again.

Yes, it is, and no, it hasn't.


But you all turn a blind eye, or excuse it away. You have in reality and truth, no final authority.

Spoken like a true, dyed-in-the-wool, closed-minded KJVO. Thought you said you weren't KJVO. If not, why do you use their stupid catchphrases?

 

Michelle:The same goes for you. Give me some solid fact instead of emotional jargon and rhetorical questions that you and everyone else here knows cannot be proven to your satisfaction, and is the straw man that you all construct to tear down.

You have it backwards. It's the KJVOs who've built the straw man from a book written by a SDA, a myth without one pip of supporting evidence. The total lack of scriptural support for the KJVO myth is self-evident, while we've shown you two significant facts from Scripture to prove there were more than one version of Scripture in use in Jesus' time.


The KJVO side has given you all much evidence, proof and scriptural support for their stance,

Where? When?

I believe all you've had is LACK of Scriptural support. And you keep saying we've been shown evidence. Again, where & when? All else we've been shown is KJVO spin with a complete dodge of the direct questions we've asked concerning the KJVO myth.


yet all you can come up with is rhetoric and unbelief in God's promises.

No, it's rhetoric disproving the KJVO myth and unbelief in KJVOist imaginations.


You all approach it with the eyes of men, rather than through the mind of Christ. Not one person that debates for the mv side EVER GLORIFIES THE LORD through their defense,

Would you be happy if we added PRAISE THE LORD to every sentence?


but only glorifying of man and man's logic and fallibility, totally missing the point and the power and providence of God Almighty over his word and regarding his word.

No, that would be YOU and the KJVOs in general. Another undeniable fact is that every English BV is different from any other, & that the English world had no prob with that until this SDA wrote his error-filled book.


In fact, God's promise of preserving his pure words, for every generation is mocked and scorned, and worst yet, even denied that it is even a promise.

If you're speaking of Ps.12:7, you've been shown that the AV translators believed that verse is speaking of people, as they proved with their marginal note. As for the actual preservation of His word, there's not a Christian here who doesn't believe God didn't preserve His word. What we DON'T believe is that He's limited to just one English version. THAT belief is denying the power of God in certain aspects.


This is NOT GLORIFYING OUR PRECIOUS AND MERCIFUL LORD, but DENYING THE POWER and PROMISES OF HIM. IT really comes down to the fact that many are sadly calling God a liar, not in words, but by their denial of this.

No, it's the denial of the veracity of the totally man-made, totally-wrong KJVO myth, a myth not supported in the least by Scripture, and whose man-made roots have been easily traced.

 

Michelle:Yes, by way of their saying it has errors in it in order to justify or excuse away the obvious errors in the mv's that are pointed out to them at the expense of scripture that God has already preserved.

The errors are quite obvious & have been pointed out umpteen times on this very board. In fact, we just finished discussing an obvious one-"Easter" in Acts 12:4.


The errors they claim are in the KJB, reject the preserved words or verses of scripture that God has clearly preserved.

Wrong. It's pointing out the booboos made by imperfect man handling God's perfect word.


You either have God's pure and infallible word for your final authority, or you don't. You either believe every word, and every verse of scripture is the pure word of God preserved for you, or you don't. If you don't, then you make of yourself your own judge as to what is, or is not the words of God, rather than believing and trusting what God has already done.

That's what we say about the KJVOs. Did God cause the Geneva Bible to be made before the AV b1611, or was it totally the work of man? How about the Tyndale Bible that Tyndale gave his life for? Both are different from the KJV and from each other.

 

...and who gives anyone the right or ability to judge the KJV alone as that final authority?
--------------------------------------------------Michelle:God Almighty does based upon what he has already done and provided and through our faith and understanding of what he has given to us.

Scripture, please????????????????????


WE are to check the scriptures daily, to see if what we are being taught is the truth.

I do, and that's why I totally reject the KJVO myth.


If something comes along, claiming to be the words of God, that is different(changed) in any way from what God has ALREADY PROVIDED FOR US, then we should reject it.

Then you should reject the KJV. It's different from its parent, the AV 1611, which is different from the Geneva Bible, and on & on ad nauseum.


The KJV is our standard and has been the standard, and the very words of God to us in English for hundreds of years.

The Geneva Bible was the standard, as was the "Great Bible" before it. By whose authority were those standards changed? If you say, "God", then you must provide Scriptural backing.


--------------------------------------------------
What if I beleive that God was done with the Geneva Bible?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

History proves that God was done with the Geneva Bible, for it served it's purpose for that time as God saw fit. Is there anything wrong with the Geneva Bible? NO.

Then there was no need to replace it then, right???????


The KJB is the Bible that God has seen fit to provide for his people in the English language and history proves this and we shouldn't question it.

Yes, we SHOULD. Amos 3:7 says God does nothing w/o first telling His servants the prophets, and I don't see anything from any true prophet that God was gonna limit Himself to one version in a language that didn't exist at the time. Therefore, the KJVO myth is merely a tool of the devil with which he deceives some of God's people into attacking His word as He's chosen to provide it.

He made a good translation better, but not different, which is different than what we see with the mv's to which there is not the same comparison.

Psalm 12:7, KJV-"...thou shalt preserve THEM..."

Same verse, Geneva Bible-"...thou shalt preserve HIM..."

Different, or not?

I can point out differences between the GB & KJV all day, but this one example should make the point. They ARE different.

 

Maybe I am just stupid - could you give me ONE verse to support your view that the KJV is God's only Bible?
--------------------------------------------------

Michelle:I do not say you are stupid, but very unobservant as to many posts that myself and others have posted in the past. I see that you have been here alot longer than I have, and you should be well aware of my previous posts.

Right. He's seen all the same ole KJVO bunk umpteen times, same as I. And, same as I, he knows it IS bunk, totally man-made, totally incorrect.

If you continually insist, and try to make it as though I have not ever stated my scriptural reasons, I will again repeat it to you. Here is the one scripture I will give you to start with - Psalm 12. You however, along with many others here on these threads do not accept this,

Because, as I and many others have PROVEN, not guessed at nor opinionized, Ps.12:7 is NOT about God's words. In my last post, I showed you how the GB translators rendered it, and not two weeks ago, I and others posted the AV translators' marginal note showing THEY believed the verse referred to people. But since you know more than those translators, you can tell us they were wrong if their work doesn't match your theory about it.


nor will you ever accept any clear scriptural support for our belief, because you are looking for scripture that says the actual name of KJV or where it specifically states only one version, etc.

Of course we won't accept something that simply isn't there whatsoever, either by direct statement or undeniable implication. If we did, that would be adding to God's word.


This is why I continually try to remind you all, to stop focusing on the labels, and solely on the WORDS OF GOD.

Focusing solely on the words of God, there's absolutely NO SUPPORT for any one-versionism whatsoever. Focusing solely upon God's words, Jesus clearly read aloud from another version of Isaiah besides that which is translated into our Bibles. Focusing solely upon God's words, the Ethiopian official in Acts 8 was clearly reading from another version of Isaiah besides that which is translated into our Bibles. Focusing only upon God's words, we see more than one version in use. That's clear, empirical evidence, found in the KJV itself. Now, where's YOUR Scriptural evidence that God has presented His word in English ONLY in the KJV?

I am not going to get into another debate on Psalm 12. There are many here who refuse to understand this passage for what it clearly states, and I will not go into this again.

Smart. You'd only get proven wrong again.


One will either believe God's promise of preservation of his pure words, or they do not. I believe God, because this IS what he has promised.

So does every other Christian. What we DON'T believe is the manner in which the KJVOs say He's preserved His word-only in THEIR fave version.


How do I know? Because the Lord is who gives me understanding through the Holy Spirit, and through the context of the passage. Not only that, but looking at the whole of scripture, this can't mean anything but that. God proves it within the scriptures himself. Can you see it yet?

In the whole of Scripture, we see that God provides His word AS HE CHOOSES, & that He's NOT LIMITED whatsoever in how He may choose to do it. He's provided it in writing, and in several versions, as I mentioned above, with that point heavily elaborated upon in several recent threads on this board.. He provided it in many spoken languages at once at the "first pentecost".

We're right back on Square One. We've provided Scriptural proof that God wasn't limited to just one version in the past, while you have yet to provide one scintilla of Scripture supporting the KJVO myth, either directly ot by implication. All you've provided is your opinion, based upon guesswork, fishing stories, and imagination, rather than FACTS. You're still batting zero, Michelle.

 

Of course, you have no Bible evidence - human logic and reasoning only - end of story.
--------------------------------------------------

Michelle:Your lack of understanding is showing forth. The evidence is in the scriptures, and what God has preserved for us and said about them (Psalm 12, etc).

As posted previously, the Scriptures are AGAINST one-versionism.

And you say you won't discuss up Psalm 12 again, but you keep bringing it up. You wanna use it for "scriptural support" but you don't wanna get clobbered again over its references to people. Looks like a DOUBLE STANDARD to me.


The mv's have ommitted/added/changed much of scripture, to which God has warned not to do.

How do you know? Just saying "It aint the KJV" won't do.


WE are to reject them. THis is my standard as to what I go by, and come to a sound biblical reason/judgement regarding them. What is my standard? What God has providentially provided throughout the churches concerning the scriptures and in what the scriptures themselves say about the scriptures/words of the Lord. Now where is your evidence and scriptural support for your view?

The proof is in both Scripture and history. First, I just mentioned the Scriptural proof above, which is comparing Luke 4 & Acts 8 with the corresponding verses in Isaiah, which has been done several times on this board. The historical proof is that no two English BVs are alike.

 

Michelle:Excuse me, but let us get onto the right understanding. I do not view my Bible as being a version, but as the very words of God Almighty HIMSELF, preserved for those who love him and his word. It is not my favorite version, but the very words of God and my first and final authority.

That's another thing in which you're WRONG - The KJV and every other English Bible version is just that - A VERSION! Only if you have His original words in their original languages, as originally written, do you not have a version.


I don't even think of God's word in terms of being favorite, because there is only one word of God and nothing to compare it to!

Then you'd better get rid of those nasty ole English-language Bibles!


God's words are the truth, and the means by which I get to know him, and what his will is for me. By saying "favorite" implies that I have a choice in choosing what is God's word and what isn't, to which I do not.

You do so have many choices. This aint Cuba.


God's words are already established and eternal, and will never pass away and I have no power or authority over them, nor to judge them. God's words do the judging all on their own.

And they've judged to appear in English in many versions, no two exactly alike.

All I can say to you, is what the Lord has revealed to me. I cannot speak for you. That is between you and the Lord, and is between me and the Lord.

AH...The ole KJVO cop-out, used when the KJVO is cornered because of a lack of evidence to support the KJVO myth.


Let us not focus on who is wrong regarding what the Lord has revealed to us, because then all kinds of trouble can come from that.

Right. The English world existed a long time with several different BVs in use with no prob whatsoever, till a SDA wrote a book that some unlearned men expanded upon to create a whole new doctrine that's phony as a Kerry tax-relief promise.


My conscience is at peace regarding my belief regarding this issue because of the understanding he has given me, not of my own imagination,

But you sure don't hesitate to use it, do you?


but through the scriptures, and the evidence that is given.

No Scriptures, no evidence, but lotsa guesswork and tall tales.

 

Michelle:How can you honour and respect those things that have altered the pure words of God and then claim to love the word of God?

Same way you can honor & respect the KJV, which altered the words of the Geneva Bible, the British standard Bible before C.1644.

 

Michelle:Instead of treating me as a fellow saved born again believer in Christ, you always treat me as someone who is not.

That's because you try to LIMIT GOD with your vivid imaginations about His word.


Shall I now compare you to some heretic or false religion because of your view regarding this issue? No, two wrongs do not make a right, and I will not do that. You are falsely accusing me of something I am not, just because I believe and share with others that we have God's pure words of truth 100% today in our very language, and this hardly qualifies me of being a heretic or apostate in my faith and rather agrees with the scripture, for this is where I recieved understanding of this wonderful truth.

Actually, it's because you try to define what God is able to do, instead of simply acknowledging that he can do anything, and that He's limited only by His own will, and NOT by any inability. We know God has preserved His word for us. The KJVO simply ignores the fact that there's NO LIMIT on how God can present/provide His word to us. Nor does the KJVO pay any attention to language differences. God gave His words to His chosen writers in THEIR languages, & they wrote in their languages. hebrew and Aramaic are imprecise languages with their speakers often having to decide upon the correct nuances by the context, and the readers'(and translators') NOT having the assistance of voice inflections, body language, etc. Therefore, there are often several possible translations of the same words or phrases possible. Greek is more precise, but not quite as precise as modern English.

Here are some examples: The Hebrew word "almah" means a young unmarried virtuous Jewish woman. The rendering "virgin" is correct here, as the virginity of an almah is a gimme. The rendering "young woman" is also correct, but isn't really a complete description of an almah. But for that matter, neither is virgin. Given the whole context of Scripture, virgin is the better rendering. But an almah is more than just a virgin.She's also a clean-living righteous person. The point is, it takes several English words to precisely define "almah".

The Greek is more precise with 'parthenos', which simply means "virgin".

And the KJV takes away some of the precision of the Greek and Hebrew by calling hades, sheol, tartarus, & gehenna "hell". They're all separate places.

What I'm getting at is that different people will translate foreigh words & phrases in different ways. None of this is lost on God, who designed all the languages to begin with, and who provides His word in each of them AS HE CHOOSES. The development and changing within each language is according to God's will, and He keeps His word current in each of them. This is something you try to gloss over. WHERE DOES GOD SAY HE'S FINALIZING HIS WORD WITHIN ANY LANGUAGE??? WHERE??? WHERE???

The KJVO myth is just that-A MAN-MADE MYTH.