Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

[vanacakes]

Dear vanacakes,

You have received an infraction at The Landover Baptist Church Forums.

Reason: Quoting Wrong Bible Version
-------
1611 KJV Bible only on here. No false, heretical Scripture allowed.
-------

This infraction is worth 10 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post:
http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?p=388516

So instead of welcoming people with christian beliefs, and people who have studied their scripture, you penalize them for not using your preferred form of the bible?
Who cares what version of the bible I have read, isn't the fact that i read scripture at all the important part here?

And while browsing I saw a thread asking whether beating a woman for burning his steak was justified. And people told him it was. How sick is that?
I mean really, Jesus would be ashamed of you people.

[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

Who cares what version of the bible I have read, isn't the fact that i read scripture at all the important part here?

You said that you believe all Bibles are the same, only the Authorized Version uses an "archaic dialect".

Is that true, are all Bibles the same? Let's find out.

It looks like you are using the ESV, RSV, or something similar.

In Acts 8:36, the eunuch asked Phillip what he needed to do in order to be baptized. Phillip answered him in Acts 8:37. Please look in your Bible version and tell me what Acts 8:37 says.

Pastor Billy-Reuben

[vanacakes]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

You said that you believe all Bibles are the same, only the Authorized Version uses an "archaic dialect".

Is that true, are all Bibles the same? Let's find out.

It looks like you are using the ESV, RSV, or something similar.

In Acts 8:36, the eunuch asked Phillip what he needed to do in order to be baptized. Phillip answered him in Acts 8:37. Please look in your Bible version and tell me what Acts 8:37 says.

Pastor Billy-Reuben

I've been pulling my quotes off the internet and I do believe they are ESV,
But since oyu want me to use MY bible, I will.

Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

I've been pulling my quotes off the internet and I do believe they are ESV,
But since oyu want me to use MY bible, I will.

Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

I wanted you to look in the ESV that you quoted from earlier. The ESV does not contain a verse 38.

The ESV Bible was translated by people who believed in infant baptism. Since Acts 8:38 proves that baptism is for believers only, they deleted it from the Bible because it contradicted what they wanted to believe. Most Bible versions are riddled with problems like those. Out of all the Bibles I have read, I have found only the AV 1611 King James Bible to be trustworthy, and most in keeping with the original texts.

It looks like you are quoting from the NKJV now, which doesn't suffer from this problem, but it has a whole host of problems of its own. Take a look at this.

Pastor Billy-Reuben

[Rev. Jim Osborne]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

Yes, Pastor Billy-Reuben is completely right about this. Another thing to seriously consider is that the 1611 KJV is a translation of the Textus Receptus, while other versions are based off the inferior Latin Vulgate. Any serious Biblical scholar will tell you that the translations in the KJV are the most accurate of any English Bible. Other Bibles are tantamount to heresy since they are twisting God's words into something else.

[vanacakes]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

I wanted you to look in the ESV that you quoted from earlier. The ESV does not contain a verse 38.

The ESV Bible was translated by people who believed in infant baptism. Since Acts 8:38 proves that baptism is for believers only, they deleted it from the Bible because it contradicted what they wanted to believe. Most Bible versions are riddled with problems like those. Out of all the Bibles I have read, I have found only the AV 1611 King James Bible to be trustworthy, and most in keeping with the original texts.

It looks like you are quoting from the NKJV now, which doesn't suffer from this problem, but it has a whole host of problems of its own. Take a look at this.

Pastor Billy-Reuben

Theres nothing wrong with the NKJ version, and that site is propagandist junk. The NKJ version simply takes what KJ says and translates the archaic language into something more understandable in this day and age. It could be compared to the side by side Shakespeare books they have.

[TheGoodWife]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

This girl is a heathen and need a good old fashioned beating around the kitchen

[Levi Jones]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

I wanted you to look in the ESV that you quoted from earlier. The ESV does not contain a verse 38.

The ESV Bible was translated by people who believed in infant baptism. Since Acts 8:38 proves that baptism is for believers only, they deleted it from the Bible because it contradicted what they wanted to believe. Most Bible versions are riddled with problems like those. Out of all the Bibles I have read, I have found only the AV 1611 King James Bible to be trustworthy, and most in keeping with the original texts.

It looks like you are quoting from the NKJV now, which doesn't suffer from this problem, but it has a whole host of problems of its own. Take a look at this.

Pastor Billy-Reuben

I love the second person formal vs. familiar differences. It gives additional insight on whom the person in the text is referring to.

If I were speaking with a Pastor or any True Christian, I would use you and your. If I was speaking with a vampire geeks tard, my wife or my children, I would use thee, thou and thine.

I love the level of formality in speech. It's a shame the beaners essentially dropped the entire vosotros/vos tense, which basically translates to all y'all.

[Oakland "Reb" Griner]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

. . . Who cares what version of the bible I have read, isn't the fact that i read scripture at all the important part here? . . .

My gosh.

I read the most astonishing things here. Folks traipse in a state the most gawdawful crap imaginable, and then have no clue when they are called on it.







If it isn't the correct Bible (King James 1611 !!!!) then it ISN'T Scripture.

[VictoryOS]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

It amazes me that these heathens think they have the right to "reply" to infractions! If the Good Lord wanted to know your opinion, He would have asked or at least provided a form here where you could air your grievances. Silly unsaved trash.

[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

Theres nothing wrong with the NKJ version, and that site is propagandist junk. The NKJ version simply takes what KJ says and translates the archaic language into something more understandable in this day and age.

The KNJV does much more than translate "archaic" language. That site showed several instances where verses were changed to say something different.

Here is one example:
Matt 18:26 (KJV) The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all.
Matt 18:26 (NKJV) The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’

Notice that the NKJV removed the phrase "and worshipped him". Is removing the fact that the servant worshiped Jesus about "translating archaic language into something more understandable in this day and age", or is it about denying that Jesus is worthy of worship?

How is "Master" more understandable than "Lord"? The NKJV translators deny that Jesus is Lord.

Pastor Billy-Reuben

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: Since I cant reply to you directly Rev. Jim Osborne

Theres nothing wrong with the NKJ version, and that site is propagandist junk. The NKJ version simply takes what KJ says and translates the archaic language into something more understandable in this day and age. It could be compared to the side by side Shakespeare books they have.

I hope you'll have a look at my sermon on the subject HERE. I'm sure it will be worth your while.