[Catholic - Not Christian]

Re: Why the King James?

Yawn. http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0031/0031_01.asp

You know? I read on another thread where someone was chastised for simply posting links or copy and pasting.

I guess you just don't really know what you're talking about so you have to have someone else say it for you

I'll read it anyway...

[Bobby-Joe]

Re: Why the King James?

You know? I read on another thread where someone was chastised for simply posting links or copy and pasting.

Copy pasting and presenting it as their own work is what was unacceptable.

[Catholic - Not Christian]

Re: Why the King James?

Copy pasting and presenting it as their own work is what was unacceptable.

Nope. "James Peter" was mocked for copy and pasting and his posts were denied for such reasons. Need I link you to the page?

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=2366&page=7

Hypocrites.

[Catholic - Not Christian]

Re: Why the King James?

Yawn. http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0031/0031_01.asp

Deception. Lies. Propaganda.

If you ever come up with real facts let me know

And if there was something specific I was supposed to see here, feel free to point it out to me.

All I see here, is that you claim it is "Satanic". And the only claim you have for that, is that you said so! Why should I believe your opinions? How about some facts??

Hint: You won't find any. Because the only reason these books were removed, was because Martin Luther wanted it so.

[Bobby-Joe]

Re: Why the King James?

Nope. "James Peter" was mocked for copy and pasting and his posts were denied for such reasons. Need I link you to the page?

SLANDER DELETED

Hypocrites.

What is with your personal attacks friend? We allow you to come into our church forum so we can show you were you are wrong and you repay our kindness with personal attacks!

Were friend, were have we wronged you?

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: Why the King James?

Since last week, I've spent every moment reading about this. I think its amazing and I think I know what it is about it that works.

When you embrace the Bible like a friend and lover, then you feel it. The Bible that Pastor Ezekiel is talking about here, the King one, it gives you a feeling like an orgazm when you love it, but the other ones mentioned do NOT...they are like eating a jelly donut that is missing the jelly part.

hope this helped someone.

vw

Now we're talkin'!

[Catholic - Not Christian]

Re: Why the King James?

What is with your personal attacks friend? We allow you to come into our church forum so we can show you were you are wrong and you repay our kindness with personal attacks!

Were friend, were have we wronged you?

I couldn't even tell you how offended this leaves me.

But I would rather not get off subject.

My question: Why do you deny the Deuterocanon, despite the fact that over 2/3 of ALL instances when the NT quotes the OT are directly from the Septuagint, which included the Deuterocanon?

[Bobby-Joe]

Re: Why the King James?

I couldn't even tell you how offended this leaves me.

But I would rather not get off subject.

It offends you we want to help you?

How is it wrong to want to help someone?

I see you as the robed man in the Good Samaritan; assaulted, stripped of your clothes and left beaten and raped by the wayside (spiritually speaking) to aid you and you scorn me?

Why won't you let me help you?

[Catholic - Not Christian]

Re: Why the King James?

It offends you we want to help you?

How is it wrong to want to help someone?

I see you as the robed man in the Good Samaritan; assaulted, stripped of your clothes and left beaten and raped by the wayside (spiritually speaking) to aid you and you scorn me?

Why won't you let me help you?

If you want to help me answer the question

My question: Why do you deny the Deuterocanon, despite the fact that over 2/3 of ALL instances when the NT quotes the OT are directly from the Septuagint, which included the Deuterocanon?

[-matty-]

Re: Why the King James?

To be honest, I doubt many foreigners get to Heaven.

It is much harder for them to be Saved, no doubt.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say otherwise.

Revelation ch7 vv9-15: After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; and cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb. And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God, saying "Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen." And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, "What are these which are arrayed in white robes and whence came they?" And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them. (KJV)

If this is not the Bible saying that people of any nation ('foreigners') can, and will, be 'Saved' then what is? Do you have a scripture that backs up your statement?

This is Gods' favorite country. We founded ourselves on Christianity

As I understand it, the Christianity that America was founded on was the English Christianity of the time. This Christianity was a breakoff of Catholicsm, which was done by the English King Henry VIII when the Catholic Church did not want him to divorce his wife so he could marry another woman.

[Bobby-Joe]

Re: Why the King James?

If you want to help me answer the question

My question: Why do you deny the Deuterocanon, despite the fact that over 2/3 of ALL instances when the NT quotes the OT are directly from the Septuagint, which included the Deuterocanon?

We don't deny the Deuterocanon friend, God denies it when He told King James to write The Bible in 1612.

[Catholic - Not Christian]

Re: Why the King James?

We don't deny the Deuterocanon friend, God denies it when He told King James to write The Bible in 1612.

Do you know why Martin Luther originally threw out the Deuterocanon and added to scripture? It didn't fit "his" idea of what the bible "should" say. Here's a quote:

"You tell me what a gread fuss the papists are making because the word 'alone' does not appear in the text of Paul. if your papist makes such an unnecessary row about the word 'alone', say right out to him: 'Dr. Martin Luther will have it so.' and say: 'Papists and asses are one and the same thing.' I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. I know very will that the word 'alone' is not in the Latin or the Greek text, it was not necessary for the Papists to teach me that."
-Martin Luther, 1520 AD.

Now. The Septuagint was written roughly 200 years before Christ. It was a Jewish Canon of Scripture and contained the Deuterocanon. Over 2/3 of all instances when the NT quotes the OT were taken directly from the Septuagint. This means that the Apostles knew the Septuagint very well. It was their Scripture and they taught by it. And for 1500 years, it was included in every Bible ever made. Until Martin Luther decided he didn't like what it said and threw them out. It is history. Yet, you deny the Deuterocanon on the basis that King James agreed with you?

Please realize that these books were learned and taught by the Apostles.

If you would rather trust King James, the Lord be with you and good luck. But to remove from scripture is a grave sin.

[Bobby-Joe]

Re: Why the King James?

Do you know why Martin Luther originally threw out the Deuterocanon and added to scripture? It didn't fit "his" idea of what the bible "should" say. Here's a quote:

"You tell me what a gread fuss the papists are making because the word 'alone' does not appear in the text of Paul. if your papist makes such an unnecessary row about the word 'alone', say right out to him: 'Dr. Martin Luther will have it so.' and say: 'Papists and asses are one and the same thing.' I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. I know very will that the word 'alone' is not in the Latin or the Greek text, it was not necessary for the Papists to teach me that."
-Martin Luther, 1520 AD.

Now. The Septuagint was written roughly 200 years before Christ. It was a Jewish Canon of Scripture and contained the Deuterocanon. Over 2/3 of all instances when the NT quotes the OT were taken directly from the Septuagint. This means that the Apostles knew the Septuagint very well. It was their Scripture and they taught by it. And for 1500 years, it was included in every Bible ever made. Until Martin Luther decided he didn't like what it said and threw them out. It is history. Yet, you deny the Deuterocanon on the basis that King James agreed with you?

Please realize that these books were learned and taught by the Apostles.

If you would rather trust King James, the Lord be with you and good luck. But to remove from scripture is a grave sin.

I fail to see what Judism has to do with Christianity. Some times you make no sense.

[Catholic - Not Christian]

Re: Why the King James?

I fail to see what Judism has to do with Christianity. Some times you make no sense.

Jesus was Jewish. The Apostles were Jewish. This was their Scripture. To them, the Deuterocanon was inspired by God.

But it's not good enough for you.

[Dr. Warren Wierdsbe]

Re: Why the King James?

Do you know why Martin Luther originally threw out the Deuterocanon and added to scripture? It didn't fit "his" idea of what the bible "should" say. Here's a quote:

"You tell me what a gread fuss the papists are making because the word 'alone' does not appear in the text of Paul. if your papist makes such an unnecessary row about the word 'alone', say right out to him: 'Dr. Martin Luther will have it so.' and say: 'Papists and asses are one and the same thing.' I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. I know very will that the word 'alone' is not in the Latin or the Greek text, it was not necessary for the Papists to teach me that."
-Martin Luther, 1520 AD.

Now. The Septuagint was written roughly 200 years before Christ. It was a Jewish Canon of Scripture and contained the Deuterocanon. Over 2/3 of all instances when the NT quotes the OT were taken directly from the Septuagint. This means that the Apostles knew the Septuagint very well. It was their Scripture and they taught by it. And for 1500 years, it was included in every Bible ever made. Until Martin Luther decided he didn't like what it said and threw them out. It is history. Yet, you deny the Deuterocanon on the basis that King James agreed with you?

Please realize that these books were learned and taught by the Apostles.

If you would rather trust King James, the Lord be with you and good luck. But to remove from scripture is a grave sin.

I am aware of what the Septuagint contained. It contained the Word of God and the Deuterocanon. If the Apostles were so familiar with it, which I do not doubt, and quoted from the Septuagint, and the Deuterocanon were actually the Word of God, why did they never quote from those books? Had they done so, that would have been strong evidence that God approved those books. Since they never did, it's obvious to anyone with half a brain and an ounce of faith that God did NOT approve those books.

In Christ
Warren