Gnosticism?

--------------------------------------------------
We already have and in your words you ignored them.

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

No you have not. What evidence or proof have you given about the KJB translators? Just in case you forgot, there were 47 of them.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and SAviour,
michelle

 

Michelle, you do the very same thing. Please, grow up and face facts and finally give some proof other than long rants of the KJV. I could post the NIV. Oh, and let me say again, you have falsely represented me. I'm a KJV user myself...KJV preferred. You stated earlier in this thread that I'm one trying to tear it down. I have done no such thing. You have falsely accused me and others here.

AVL1984

 

--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Erasmus associated with Protestants. The KJB translators were God fearing and honouring men.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ibid above.
--------------------------------------------------


Westcott and Hort did not show they loved God, nor his word of truth, nor did they show at all their fear of Him. They reviled it, and thought it had errors. These men would not have belonged to what they belonged to, done what they had done, or believed what they believed, if they truly loved God and feared him.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Even if they gave you proof, Michelle, you would not accept it. Long rants of scripture prove nothing except that you can post scripture. I can do the same. Post proof of gnosticism, and proof of which version of the KJV is the perfect, preserved Word of God. I notice you've avoided that question consistantly. Which version? 1611? 1762? 1769? The Cambridge? The Oxford??? Which one, Michelle?

AVL1984

 

.
As you said, "Prove it"!

AVL1984

 

--------------------------------------------------
Here again michelle (when backed into a corner) redefines/refines the rules of engagement to insure that only she can win the debate.

HankD
--------------------------------------------------

NO, I am not redefining anything, nor am I here to win anything. I am using common sense. You have two translators, and textual critics that are responsible alone for the underlying texts and methods of mv's today, who were involved in secret societies, and associating with skeptical characters. Then on the flip side, you have 47 men, who loved the Lord and His word of truth, and believed it was, and lived accordingly. Using common sense, what do you think would be the result of errors passing through 47 scholarly, God fearing, and honoring men, as opposed to only two heretical men?


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

--------------------------------------------------
Here is another KJVO double standard if you don't already have it. Others are supposed to read everything the KJVO proponent demands, while the KJVO refuses to even look at the versions they condemn"

Bro Tony
--------------------------------------------------

Okay Tony, since you know all, and you seem to know all about me, what is it that you gave a link to that I didn't read? Please inform me. You are falsely accusing me, based upon assumptions.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Again, Michelle...PROVE IT. Prove your allegations against W/H. Solid proof, not your usual rants, please.

AVL1984

 

--------------------------------------------------
I am sorry that you can't accept an honest question as an honest question michelle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I am not stupid C4K. I can see a slander where it is so implied, even when it is disquised in question format.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

I am putting Dr Bob's OP back in the thread here. If we cant return to the topic at hand here in the next few hours I think we can safely close this thread.

 

--------------------------------------------------
Prove they were Satan worshipping men, Michelle
--------------------------------------------------

Go read the links I gave on the thread Westcott and Hort, and read then the links I also provided on this thread. Then maybe you will be able to figure it out.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Michelle,

You have stated several times that you have not read a Modern Version of the Bible, yet you continue to attack them form second hand information. You accuse Ed of not being able to understand because he has not read what you subscribe.
There is no false accusation about you from me. I merely stated what you have stated. By your own standards you should not be talking about the MVs as you have never read one.

Do you understand?
Bro Tony

 

It wouldn't be slander. In writing it's libel. But, of course, Michelle, you know all, see all, eh?? You libel others here, myself included. I thought that was a violation of the terms of posting here.

AVL1984

 

These false accusations do not suit you sister.

 

I've read the links, and they are suspect at best, because they are from a biased source.

AVL1984

 

--------------------------------------------------
I have never said those things, and you cannot prove it from any of my posts since I have been here. You haven't even proved what Gnosticism is, nor have you proven any of your allegations against present day brethren or those who have been laid to rest. False allegations against these brethren is sin on your part. You've been asked for proof, historical proof showing you can back up what you say. Instead, you go off on rants of scriptural texts, which by the way are in the MV's too, that have nothing to do with what is being discussed. Proof Michelle. Context, Michelle. TRUTH, Michelle.
--------------------------------------------------

First of all, I do not have to prove to you what gnositicism is, nor anything else for that matter. I only have to provide you the information, and then the rest is up to you. Whether you understand it or not, is not up to me. I cannot give you understanding. I can only give you the information, and the rest is up to YOU TO FIGURE OUT.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Again, accusations that people don't understand. Only Michelle understands. Believe me lady, I understand. I've figured it out a long time ago, and you are the one refusing to post proof of anything. PROOF MICHELLE....CONTEXT, MICHELLE!

AVL1984

 

AVL,

If you were one who had special insight like someone else here you would understand. You need to move in the realm of mysticism and you will find the understanding that you need. In this realm facts mean nothing, history means nothing, scholarship means nothing only that all seeing enlighten insight means anything. Then you could understand.

Oh wait a minute, if you did that you would be a gnostic.

For the battle cry of the gnostic is......

If you would understand, you would understand.

Bro Tony

 

With all due respect Michelle, I don't trust David Cloud- especially when he uses ellipsis and lifts quotes out of their context.

He has earned this distrust. He has an article on his website claiming Philip Mauro as a KJVO like himself. The article contains quotes. Unfortunately for Mr. Cloud, the whole booklet authored by Mauro is on line and does not agree with the conclusions that Cloud ascribes to Mauro.

Mauro was simply skeptical of new textual criticism methods. At no point did he deny the validity of multiple versions nor claim perfection for the KJV. But Cloud implies that he did.

BTW, none of the quotes you gave prove that Erasmus accepted Jesus Christ as His Savior by faith alone. They don't demonstrate that Erasmus rejected the rites and traditions of the RCC. All it shows is that Erasmus recognized that the practices of the RCC had lost their spiritual element.

I will try to put the quotes you gave back in context but will it matter to you? Will you accept them if they don't prove what you want them to?

 

Are we back to Westcott and Hort being Satanists? And Michelle not providing any evidence other than "you figure it out"? Barf.

Westcott and Hort affirm, more times than I can count, that "Jesus is the Lord" and that "Jesus Christ is come in the flesh". Does michelle really believe the Scriptures that say "no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost" and "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God"? Or would she rather rely on unsupported conspiracy theories instead of these scriptures?