[Redeemed Papist]

Re: Introduction

Your probably right. We shouldn't follow men even if they claim to follow Christ. That means that King James and whatever he said the word of God was is lying. Does that mean your pastor is lying too? Who is inspired? King James or you?

Now I know you're trolling.

I'm so glad I broke free of that death cult and follow Jesus. You mock the poor souls still ensnared by people lying when they say they know the mind of God.

I'll pray for you.

[Dr Laurence Niles]

Re: Introduction

Sounds good, but then where did Jesus ever authorize...

All Saints Day
Rosaries
The Worship and Adoration of Images
Indulgences
Purgatory
Immaculate Conception
Veneration of Saints
Counting of Beads
Transubstantiation
Confessionals
Fish on Fridays
The Worship of Mary
The Ascension of Mary
7 Sacraments
Celibacy
Papal Succession
Papal Infallibility

...and A THOUSAND OTHER THINGS.

You forgot paedophillia.

YIC

[Dr Laurence Niles]

Re: Introduction

I am pretty stupid and clumsy anyway.

Yes. Yes you are. I don't know how the good Captain puts up with you and that 'thing'.

YIC

[Thomas Taylor]

Re: Introduction

I mean that the KJV 1611 has the apocrypha in it and your KJV does not have it. Whose Bible is inspired?

Ok, my litle butt munching Papist friend

My copy of the KJV 1611, which was printed in 1642 by the way, has the Apocrypha sandwiched between the OT and the NT.

If you take the time to actually read the foreword and introductory notes, you know the pages right after you open the cover, you will see that the books of the Apocrypha while written by Godly men were not, in fact, inspired by God.

These books, while still a valuable source of history, are not considered to be part of the cannon.

Think of them, rather, as something like an encyclopedia of Biblical times.

[Pastor Ed Lowman]

Re: Introduction

Hi y'all,

I was born and raised Presbyterian. After years of study, prayer and reflection, I became Catholic last year.

I did this because Truth is not found in the traditions of men, but in a person:

In my desire to follow Jesus where ever he leads, I could not ignore what he said to Peter:

Sounds good, but then where did Jesus ever authorize...

All Saints Day
Rosaries
The Worship and Adoration of Images
Indulgences
Purgatory
Immaculate Conception
Veneration of Saints
Counting of Beads
Transubstantiation
Confessionals
Fish on Fridays
The Worship of Mary
The Ascension of Mary
7 Sacraments
Celibacy
Papal Succession
Papal Infallibility

...and A THOUSAND OTHER THINGS. I ask to try to justify any of these with God's Word. I will try not to laugh too hard in return.

Because unlike catlick satanists, we can back up our claims with the Bible.

Pastor Ed

[Mrs. Naomi Portway]

Re: Introduction

The question is: Why is the KJV the only version? You say that God has spoken in many times and in many places and I agree with you. But I got an infraction for quoting the RSV. I didn't even quote the RSV. I quoted someone who quoted the RSV. Why is the KJV the only version? Do you all believe that God miracled the KJV into the hands of King James? Or is it more complicated than that?

Aaron had to go fly on his plane somewhere, but he told me to tell you that you better stop worrying so much about us, since we're saved already. He said you needed to shut up and listen instead of asking so many stupid questions, or God was going to send you to Hell pretty soon.

He said you make even me look smart, and I sometimes get lost on the way back from the bathroom. (I really don't, but Aaron said I had to say that here on the forum, and I guess I am pretty stupid and clumsy anyway).

Also, stop making Aaron mad, it just makes it tougher for me to do good and not get in trouble.


YIC


Mrs. Aaron Portway

[Alterboy]

Re: Introduction

I was a Catholic, but Jesus showed me the error of my ways when the Catholic Church elected a NAZI as a pope.
Thank you Jesus.
Amen.

[Seth Campbell]

Re: Introduction

The question is: Why is the KJV the only version? You say that God has spoken in many times and in many places and I agree with you. But I got an infraction for quoting the RSV. I didn't even quote the RSV. I quoted someone who quoted the RSV. Why is the KJV the only version? Do you all believe that God miracled the KJV into the hands of King James? Or is it more complicated than that?

Here

http://www.chick.com/information/bibleversions/

Happy Reading.

[Didymus Much]

Re: Introduction

The question is: Why is the KJV the only version?...

"Search" function is your friend.

Seven easy ways to tell the True Bible from the false ones http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=10335

[Professor Bessemer]

Re: Introduction

The question is: Why is the KJV the only version? You say that God has spoken in many times and in many places and I agree with you. But I got an infraction for quoting the RSV. I didn't even quote the RSV. I quoted someone who quoted the RSV. Why is the KJV the only version? Do you all believe that God miracled the KJV into the hands of King James? Or is it more complicated than that?

The King James Bible is the pure form of the Word of God. All other Bible versions are watered down versions that have been interpreted by sinners to make the hard truths of scripture easier to swallow for false Christians who are not resolute enough to be truly saved.

Living by every single word of the KJV is not easy. When I was a practicing homosexual, I delighted in breaking as many of His laws as I could. But now, as a saved heterosexual, I glorify God every single minute of every day by following God's Law as stated in His Bible.

[ACatholic]

Re: Introduction

The question is: Why is the KJV the only version? You say that God has spoken in many times and in many places and I agree with you. But I got an infraction for quoting the RSV. I didn't even quote the RSV. I quoted someone who quoted the RSV. Why is the KJV the only version? Do you all believe that God miracled the KJV into the hands of King James? Or is it more complicated than that?

[Professor Bessemer]

Re: Introduction

Now those arguments make a lot on sense. Where in the Bible does it say that only the KJV1611 is the word of God?

Why would there need to be scripture that said that? The KJV 1611 is the revealed Word of Almighty God. God has spoken to others over the millennia, why do you seek to illegitimize all the rest of the Lord's work since 1611?

[ACatholic]

Re: Introduction

Now those arguments make a lot on sense. Where in the Bible does it say that only the KJV1611 is the word of God?

[Professor Bessemer]

Re: Introduction

I don't want to twist scripture. To the extent I did so I apologize. Please forgive me. I just want to know what the scriptures are. Is it the Bible that King James published in 1611, or the KJV that is on your desk?

Listen friend, I am beginning to believe that your feigned obsession with the Apocrypha is little more than a straw man that you are using to torment certain members of our Holy church. As anyone with any knowledge of theology could tell you, the Apocrypha were never considered canonical by anyone other than Catholic and Orthodox heretics.

They were placed between the Testaments and considered to be the writings of "Godly men", nothing more. By your twisted logic, copywrite dates and notations, footnotes, and publshing information about the fonts and layouts used would just as valuable as scripture. The fact that some rebellious scribes included these writings in some early versions of the One True Bible is of little consequence to saved True Christians™.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: Introduction

I don't want to twist scripture. To the extent I did so I apologize. Please forgive me. I just want to know what the scriptures are. Is it the Bible that King James published in 1611, or the KJV that is on your desk?

The Apocrypha was accepted reading based on its historical value, though not accepted as Scripture by anyone outside of the Catholic church. The King James translators therefore placed it between the Old and New Testaments for its historical benefit to its readers. They did not integrate it into the Old Testament text as do the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts.

That they rejected the Apocrypha as divine is very obvious by the seven reasons which they gave for not incorporating it into the text. They are as follows:

1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.

2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.

3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.

4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.

5. They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.

6. It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.

7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.

A little education goes a long way, my friend.