-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Non-KJBO lies
- Thread starter RaptureReady
- Start date
--------------------------------------------------
And yet I see that you still did not answer this legitimate question..........
--------------------------------------------------
The answers have been given and plain as day for you, regardless of who shares them with you. You reject and deny them. This is your own fault and your own problem. I can't help you there, you must desire the truth at all costs. You seem to choose otherwise.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
And yet I see that you still did not answer this legitimate question..........
--------------------------------------------------
The answers have been given and plain as day for you, regardless of who shares them with you. You reject and deny them. This is your own fault and your own problem. I can't help you there, you must desire the truth at all costs. You seem to choose otherwise.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
--------------------------------------------------
O.K., once again: Which edition of the KJV?
C4K asked you this question more than once a few days ago, and you ignored him too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The answer has been given, you either deny it, or are too blind to see it. You unfortunately have blinded yourselves from seeing the truth, because of a false and man-made label, devised of wicked men who have decieved you, which keeps you from knowing the truth. I am not going to explain it anymore, just because you like to argue. If you truly desire to know, try going back and reading my posts, as well as others, with the desire for understanding, and without the bias of a label, without the desire to compromise/justify errors, without the desire to argue, and you just might then understand the answer that has been given.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
O.K., once again: Which edition of the KJV?
C4K asked you this question more than once a few days ago, and you ignored him too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The answer has been given, you either deny it, or are too blind to see it. You unfortunately have blinded yourselves from seeing the truth, because of a false and man-made label, devised of wicked men who have decieved you, which keeps you from knowing the truth. I am not going to explain it anymore, just because you like to argue. If you truly desire to know, try going back and reading my posts, as well as others, with the desire for understanding, and without the bias of a label, without the desire to compromise/justify errors, without the desire to argue, and you just might then understand the answer that has been given.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
You have NEVER answered which KJV is perfect, not once. One letter is all I want.
A) 1611
B) 1762
C) 1769
D) other
Remember, only one can be "perfect" by your definition.
A) 1611
B) 1762
C) 1769
D) other
Remember, only one can be "perfect" by your definition.
But michelle this is exactly what all the king’s men (James, who had several Anabaptists burned at the stake, how is that for the qualification of an “apostate”?) who worked upon the AV1611 did.
They reconstructed the NT out of pre-existing ancient manuscripts comparing them “diligently” with other translations (like the Church of Rome Latin Vulgate).
BTW, these men all believed in a form of baptismal regeneration (paedo-baptism) and celebrated the Eucharist (Anglo-Catholic version of the Mass) through the sacerdotal priesthood of the Church of England (how’s that for “heresy”)?
So, it appears that true to KJVO form, “apostate” and “heresy” only applies to non-KJV translations even though it can be shown that these elements flourished in the Church of England in 1611 and were practiced by the King and all the King’s men.
In fact, at that time they were actively persecuting and shedding the blood of believers with like minds as those believers here on the BB which as far as I know is a crime of which none of the MV translators are guilty.
Then as well as now, the Church of England has violently (then) denied (now) all the Baptists distinctives.
You are the one that brought up this charge concerning “apostates” and “heretics”.
HankD
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
With that said, 100 students sitting in a class, while one reads the of the King James Bible, inadvertently, no mistakes are made, because the other 99 students read from the same page. Amazing isn't it! </font>[/QUOTE]Only if they are all using the same edition of the KJV.Originally posted by RaptureReady:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Orvie:
Sorry RR, it simply doesn't work that way. Over 98% of N.T. MSS are in agreement, no matter which Family of MSS are used. (the other 2% are non essentials, i.e. not vital doctrines)...imagine this: You have 100 students sitting in a class, while one reads the page of the N.T, several minor mistakes are made, one word slightly changed, or misspelled, or other minor variations...even if ALL 100 have one different mistake, you can still reconstruct the text by comparison. i.e. you don't need to be paranoid of valid M.V.'s!
--------------------------------------------------
It is a different morning star in Isa in the NIV. The KJV also has multiple morning stars (Job 38:7) and I don't get them confused either. The KJV also has more than one who is calls "the Son of Man" (Ezek 2:1) and I don't get those confused either. I recommend that you study, pray and meditate upon these verses in the KJB.
--------------------------------------------------
You obviously ARE CONFUSED, as morning stars, is DIFFERENT than THE MORNING STAR. Singular, verses plural. I have studied, prayed, and meditated upon this, and the Lord has been faithful and very giving in my understanding of this. I will not stand for this blasphemy, and will warn those who might not know the difference. God is not the author of confusion. God has preserved the name Lucifer in that verse, in that passage, to which EVERYONE KNOWS this is referring to SATAN. Not anymore, the next generations will believe that the MORNING STAR fell from Heaven, just as the occultists/satan worshippers beleive. <
>
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Michelle - I will tolerate you questioning my spirituality, but will not let you judge in the place of God>
[ August 10, 2004, 12:00 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]
It is a different morning star in Isa in the NIV. The KJV also has multiple morning stars (Job 38:7) and I don't get them confused either. The KJV also has more than one who is calls "the Son of Man" (Ezek 2:1) and I don't get those confused either. I recommend that you study, pray and meditate upon these verses in the KJB.
--------------------------------------------------
You obviously ARE CONFUSED, as morning stars, is DIFFERENT than THE MORNING STAR. Singular, verses plural. I have studied, prayed, and meditated upon this, and the Lord has been faithful and very giving in my understanding of this. I will not stand for this blasphemy, and will warn those who might not know the difference. God is not the author of confusion. God has preserved the name Lucifer in that verse, in that passage, to which EVERYONE KNOWS this is referring to SATAN. Not anymore, the next generations will believe that the MORNING STAR fell from Heaven, just as the occultists/satan worshippers beleive. <
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Michelle - I will tolerate you questioning my spirituality, but will not let you judge in the place of God>
[ August 10, 2004, 12:00 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]
--------------------------------------------------
But michelle this is exactly what all the king’s men (James, who had several Anabaptists burned at the stake, how is that for the qualification of an “apostate”?) who worked upon the AV1611 did.
They reconstructed the NT out of pre-existing ancient manuscripts comparing them “diligently” with other translations (like the Church of Rome Latin Vulgate).
BTW, these men all believed in a form of baptismal regeneration (paedo-baptism) and celebrated the Eucharist (Anglo-Catholic version of the Mass) through the sacerdotal priesthood of the Church of England (how’s that for “heresy”)?
--------------------------------------------------
Please give me the proof that these 47 men who translated the KJB killed anyone believer, or better yet that they were HERETICS and APOSTATES - I want their words and involvements in unGodly and occultic societies, as evidence that they were? I want the EVIDENCE that these HERETICAL and APOSTATE beliefs were evidenced in the KJB and how it affected the deity and doctrines of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the translation? You want to lay the blame on the anglican church, go right ahead. However, this DOES NOT COMPARE to HERETICAL AND APOSTATE MEN who were RESPONSIBLE FOR THE UNDERLYING TEXTS AND METHODS used for TRANSLATION of the modern versions, to which evidences their APOSTATE VIEWS concerning our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and their hatred toward his preserved words. Please show me how the KJB translators expressed hatred toward the preserved words of God, and thier denial that God had preserved them?
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
But michelle this is exactly what all the king’s men (James, who had several Anabaptists burned at the stake, how is that for the qualification of an “apostate”?) who worked upon the AV1611 did.
They reconstructed the NT out of pre-existing ancient manuscripts comparing them “diligently” with other translations (like the Church of Rome Latin Vulgate).
BTW, these men all believed in a form of baptismal regeneration (paedo-baptism) and celebrated the Eucharist (Anglo-Catholic version of the Mass) through the sacerdotal priesthood of the Church of England (how’s that for “heresy”)?
--------------------------------------------------
Please give me the proof that these 47 men who translated the KJB killed anyone believer, or better yet that they were HERETICS and APOSTATES - I want their words and involvements in unGodly and occultic societies, as evidence that they were? I want the EVIDENCE that these HERETICAL and APOSTATE beliefs were evidenced in the KJB and how it affected the deity and doctrines of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the translation? You want to lay the blame on the anglican church, go right ahead. However, this DOES NOT COMPARE to HERETICAL AND APOSTATE MEN who were RESPONSIBLE FOR THE UNDERLYING TEXTS AND METHODS used for TRANSLATION of the modern versions, to which evidences their APOSTATE VIEWS concerning our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and their hatred toward his preserved words. Please show me how the KJB translators expressed hatred toward the preserved words of God, and thier denial that God had preserved them?
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
michelle said:
My Final Authority does not have the apocrypha. Those who use modern versions, take the chance of having those inserted into the scriptures of their favorite flavor of the month, as those underlying texts include them.
Lemme tell you, I live in fear that some Jesuit ninja assassin is going to sneak into my bedroom and slip an Apocrypha into my NASB.
Hey, if they could fool those "genius" KJV translators into inserting it into the Scriptures by mistake (as Jack Chick claims), then I don't stand a chance.
You gotta laugh.
My Final Authority does not have the apocrypha. Those who use modern versions, take the chance of having those inserted into the scriptures of their favorite flavor of the month, as those underlying texts include them.
Lemme tell you, I live in fear that some Jesuit ninja assassin is going to sneak into my bedroom and slip an Apocrypha into my NASB.
Hey, if they could fool those "genius" KJV translators into inserting it into the Scriptures by mistake (as Jack Chick claims), then I don't stand a chance.
You gotta laugh.
Larry said:
For approximately the 573rd time- would you provide even one example of how any MV attacks the Deity of Jesus. If you won't, then why not cease making this spurious accusation once and for all.
Michelle responded:
Larry, don't act like you are stupid and ignorant about these things. You KNOW very well what these things are.
You can't do it, eh? No surprise there.
You gotta laugh.
For approximately the 573rd time- would you provide even one example of how any MV attacks the Deity of Jesus. If you won't, then why not cease making this spurious accusation once and for all.
Michelle responded:
Larry, don't act like you are stupid and ignorant about these things. You KNOW very well what these things are.
You can't do it, eh? No surprise there.
You gotta laugh.
--------------------------------------------------
Member # 7160
posted August 10, 2004 11:47 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have NEVER answered which KJV is perfect, not once. One letter is all I want.
A) 1611
B) 1762
C) 1769
D) other
--------------------------------------------------
The answer has been given, you either deny it, or are too blind to see it. You unfortunately have blinded yourselves from seeing the truth, because of a false and man-made label, devised of wicked men who have decieved you, which keeps you from knowing the truth. I am not going to explain it anymore, just because you like to argue. If you truly desire to know, try going back and reading my posts, as well as others, with the desire for understanding, and without the bias of a label, without the desire to compromise/justify errors, without the desire to argue, and you just might then understand the answer that has been given.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Member # 7160
posted August 10, 2004 11:47 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have NEVER answered which KJV is perfect, not once. One letter is all I want.
A) 1611
B) 1762
C) 1769
D) other
--------------------------------------------------
The answer has been given, you either deny it, or are too blind to see it. You unfortunately have blinded yourselves from seeing the truth, because of a false and man-made label, devised of wicked men who have decieved you, which keeps you from knowing the truth. I am not going to explain it anymore, just because you like to argue. If you truly desire to know, try going back and reading my posts, as well as others, with the desire for understanding, and without the bias of a label, without the desire to compromise/justify errors, without the desire to argue, and you just might then understand the answer that has been given.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Who is arguing? You have NEVER answered this simple question.
Which KJV is perfect, not once. One letter is all I want.
A) 1611
B) 1762
C) 1769
D) other
What are you afraid of?
Which KJV is perfect, not once. One letter is all I want.
A) 1611
B) 1762
C) 1769
D) other
What are you afraid of?
--------------------------------------------------
Larry, don't act like you are stupid and ignorant about these things. You KNOW very well what these things are.
You can't do it, eh? No surprise there.
--------------------------------------------------
I can, and I have, and many others have, you just continue to say we haven't. That is your own fault. I am not going to continue repeating myself, and others, just to cater to your argumentative spirit.
Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Larry, don't act like you are stupid and ignorant about these things. You KNOW very well what these things are.
You can't do it, eh? No surprise there.
--------------------------------------------------
I can, and I have, and many others have, you just continue to say we haven't. That is your own fault. I am not going to continue repeating myself, and others, just to cater to your argumentative spirit.
Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
I don't think you have EVER given simple answer to a question. Every reply is the same, you either post a lot of scripture unrelated to the topic,or you say something like "if you understood you would understand."
It is very difficult to take your arguments seriously.
It is very difficult to take your arguments seriously.
--------------------------------------------------
It is very difficult to take your arguments seriously.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How can you take something seriously, if you do not understand, even when it has been answered? All you all look to do, is entrap someone so as to control the conversation and direct down some irrelevant road. I am tired of it, and quite frankly, I am not going there anymore. The important and truthful issue is the here and now and TODAY. You are all trying to show constantly double standards and lies from the KJBO people to prove that the truth is a lie, so that at the end of the day you feel justified for compromising and condoning things that a born again, blood bought child of God should not do. No, I am not attacking your salvation. I am merely pointing out a fact of truth in the believers life. Some believers grieve the Holy Spirit of truth. You say that I am, I say that you are. WE both cannot be right. One of us is wrong. I know that I am right, and I am at peace. I wouldn't know this if it weren't for the Lord Jesus Christ showing this to me. Of course, you will say the same for yourself. I cannot know, nor can you know what the Lord has revealed to another. I just know for myself, and this is the truth that He has revealed to me. I am sure of it, as sure as I am of my salvation. I just hope that you are sure of yours, not just for your own sake, but for the sake of others.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
It is very difficult to take your arguments seriously.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How can you take something seriously, if you do not understand, even when it has been answered? All you all look to do, is entrap someone so as to control the conversation and direct down some irrelevant road. I am tired of it, and quite frankly, I am not going there anymore. The important and truthful issue is the here and now and TODAY. You are all trying to show constantly double standards and lies from the KJBO people to prove that the truth is a lie, so that at the end of the day you feel justified for compromising and condoning things that a born again, blood bought child of God should not do. No, I am not attacking your salvation. I am merely pointing out a fact of truth in the believers life. Some believers grieve the Holy Spirit of truth. You say that I am, I say that you are. WE both cannot be right. One of us is wrong. I know that I am right, and I am at peace. I wouldn't know this if it weren't for the Lord Jesus Christ showing this to me. Of course, you will say the same for yourself. I cannot know, nor can you know what the Lord has revealed to another. I just know for myself, and this is the truth that He has revealed to me. I am sure of it, as sure as I am of my salvation. I just hope that you are sure of yours, not just for your own sake, but for the sake of others.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Michelle said "You obviously ARE CONFUSED, as morning stars, is DIFFERENT than THE MORNING STAR."
Obviously I am not confused, as I do not think Isa 14 is about Jesus in the first place.
So you're saying that if a Bible had "morning star" in Isa and "the bright Morning Star" in Rev, that although you would still disagree with it, it would be enough of a distinction for you to allow the possibility that they are not referring to the same person?
Michelle said "I will not stand for this blasphemy, and will warn those who might not know the difference."
Than you can save your breath (or fingers) here, because no one here believes Isa 14 is about Jesus.
Michelle said "God has preserved the name Lucifer in that verse, in that passage, to which EVERYONE KNOWS this is referring to SATAN."
This is untrue. The earliest translations, which are much older than the KJV, have linguistical equivalents of "morning star" in that verse. "Lucifer", which God preserved, is the Latin and Old English term for Venus when it appears as a morning star. The KJV translators said it meant "day star". The Geneva translators said it referred to Venus the morning star. So obviously not EVERYONE thought it refers to Satan.
Thank you C4K for snipping Michelle's comments that demonstrated her perceived ability to read my mind and foretell my future.
Michelle said "Please give me the proof that these 47 men who translated the KJB killed anyone believer"
It is documented fact. Their wide persecution and martyring of a few is easily researched and easily verified. I suggest you start with looking into the "High Commission Court" and especially the KJV translators Richard Bancroft (overseer of the KJV translation), Lancelot Andrewes and George Abbott. Books you can look into are "History of the Puritans" by Neal, "Select Memoirs" by Thomas Smith, and "God's Secretaries : The Making of the King James Bible" by Nicolson, for starters.
Michelle said "HERETICAL AND APOSTATE MEN who were RESPONSIBLE FOR THE UNDERLYING TEXTS AND METHODS used for TRANSLATION of the modern versions, to which evidences their APOSTATE VIEWS concerning our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and their hatred toward his preserved words"
This is completely untrue.
Obviously I am not confused, as I do not think Isa 14 is about Jesus in the first place.
Michelle said "I will not stand for this blasphemy, and will warn those who might not know the difference."
Than you can save your breath (or fingers) here, because no one here believes Isa 14 is about Jesus.
Michelle said "God has preserved the name Lucifer in that verse, in that passage, to which EVERYONE KNOWS this is referring to SATAN."
This is untrue. The earliest translations, which are much older than the KJV, have linguistical equivalents of "morning star" in that verse. "Lucifer", which God preserved, is the Latin and Old English term for Venus when it appears as a morning star. The KJV translators said it meant "day star". The Geneva translators said it referred to Venus the morning star. So obviously not EVERYONE thought it refers to Satan.
Thank you C4K for snipping Michelle's comments that demonstrated her perceived ability to read my mind and foretell my future.
Michelle said "Please give me the proof that these 47 men who translated the KJB killed anyone believer"
It is documented fact. Their wide persecution and martyring of a few is easily researched and easily verified. I suggest you start with looking into the "High Commission Court" and especially the KJV translators Richard Bancroft (overseer of the KJV translation), Lancelot Andrewes and George Abbott. Books you can look into are "History of the Puritans" by Neal, "Select Memoirs" by Thomas Smith, and "God's Secretaries : The Making of the King James Bible" by Nicolson, for starters.
Michelle said "HERETICAL AND APOSTATE MEN who were RESPONSIBLE FOR THE UNDERLYING TEXTS AND METHODS used for TRANSLATION of the modern versions, to which evidences their APOSTATE VIEWS concerning our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and their hatred toward his preserved words"
This is completely untrue.
In your own words (or similar) I have already given this proof several times but you didn't take the time to read it or you denied the truth.
But, however, I see now you want to qualify and amend the definitons of these words ("apostate" and "heresy") to more conveniently fit your own narrow requirements. This has been and always will be the hallmark of the KJVO, make a statement, bring a charge against the brethren, then modify it when it is shown to be a fulfilment of the following:
Matthew 7:2
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
HankD
Natters, Michelle referrs to anyone who translated any Bible besides the KJV translators of the 1600's to be "heretical and apostate men", yet refuses to acknowlege that the KJV tralsnators are also being heretical and apostate when their own marginal notes refer to Lucifer as "day star".