lesser lesson wrote: And for the record, as a free man with God as my witnessâ€¦ I DO NOT CONSENT!!!
Just a comment: As serious and sad things may appear, in some countries one might need certification of status for inheritance purposes, taxation or other matters. Bureaucracy pairs with government in any Fascist or Socialistic State.
Heated - very angry 730 - a state of insanity or instability Shook - to be scared. Rock bottom - to be severely depressed
The rapper Kane West running for president 2020. Jim Lincoln can appeal to him to bring in that relevant modern American contemporary rap bible for the 21st century young people! "Wicked, bro'...sick man."
"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"
Jim Lincoln wrote: BM, I'll look around in my other posts on the TR ... I'm glad you're not one of those who think the Greek texts etc. should be corrected by the KJV
Mr. Lincoln, please, never mind.
1. Most of your links contain blatant inaccuracies and bold untruths such as these two examples from 'Westcott & Hort vs. Textus Receptus: Which is Superior?':
"... the strongest argument in favor of the Westcott-Hort text vis-a-vis the textus receptus, is the fact that it has firm support from the oldest extant Greek manuscripts, plus the earliest of the versions or translations, as well as the early Christian writers of the 2nd through 4th centuries."
"The majority of manuscripts and Westcott and Hort agree against the textus receptus in excluding Luke 17:36; Acts 8:37; and I John 5:7..."
2. It is regretful that Critics in your camp are given to correct the TR against their personal judgment.
3. Many useful resources refuting your critics have been provided here for your personal consideration. There is no need to continue castigating the audience with repetitive and pernicious links. In case you were sincerely interested you are invited to consider this site: http://www.tbsbibles.org/articles
BTT, now you know how I feel when I see all that KJV ONLY ignorance, which matches, what is it 20 to 1 of my posts, about the glories of Elizabethan gibberish! But I have been seeing this nonsense for so many years--which should have died years ago, it's still fresh in my mind. But perhaps the more rational of the KJVOs will like this,
R.L. Dabney wrote: This received text contains undoubtedly all the essential facts and doctrines intended to be set down by the inspired writers; for if it were corrected with the severest hand, by the light of the most divergent various readings found in any ancient MS. or version, not a single doctrine of Christianity, nor a single cardinal fact would be thereby expunged....If all the debated readings were surrendered by us, no fact or doctrine of Christianity would thereby be invalidated, and least of all would the doctrine of Christ's proper divinity be deprived of adequate scriptural support. Hence the interests of orthodoxy are entirely secure from and above the reach of all movements of modern criticism of the text whether made in a correct or incorrect method, and all such discussions in future are to the church of subordinate importance.
BM, I'll look around in my other posts on the TR--oh, look this over please.
"This topic is a fascinating one. It cuts right to the core of several KJV-only arguments at the same time, and will also turns the KJV-onlies' definition of 'preservation' on its ear. In fact, the topic of "qere" is so devastating to the KJV-only position, that ALL BY ITSELF it proves the KJV-only position is nothing more than an unjustified, idealistic fantasy. It also shows that some of the 'problems' the KJV-onlies denounce other translations for, are deeply rooted in the KJV as well.
â€śMarriage is a civil contract to which there are three parties-the husband, the wife and the state.â€ś
Even as the Supreme Court â€“ which has mistakenly translated the word â€śsupremeâ€ť to mean that these seven appointed â€śjusticesâ€ť who pass â€śopinionâ€ť upon the masses of consenting â€ścitizensâ€ť are more supreme than even God himself â€“ these men and women; who are not voted into these positions of power in any way by the people, but instead are appointed by the President of the United States (corporation) â€¦ these self-imposed deities clearly state here that they are the law of the land, and that that â€śthe natural consequence of citizenshipâ€ť is for the people to be under their supreme opinion!
Well I for one do not voluntarily submit to the opinions of these megalomaniacs any longer.
And for the record, as a free man with God as my witnessâ€¦
The battle over how to officially determine someone's gender arises from a controversy over whether transgender high school students can declare their own gender when participating in sports.
Now this is meant to be sarcasm, so please donâ€™t anyone think I am advocating this. But, if men and women are equal or should be deemed as equal in all respects, then why canâ€™t a man play on a womanâ€™s sports team especially if they can claim their own gender? If a woman has enough skills to play with men, then they are often heralded and held up by our feminist society, but it doesnâ€™t work in reverse for obvious reasons. Men would be frowned upon; that is obvious.
Look at the recent news concerning women serving in the Special Forces as an example. Those women who passed the training were lifted up in society. Now the answer to this question is pretty simple for any reasonable minded person. If men were allowed to play on womenâ€™s sports teams, the female teams wouldnâ€™t exist and they would all become menâ€™s teams.
If anyone gets into a debate with a genuine feminist, someone who says all discrimination is wrong, they should present my argument and that should do it.
And since getting a license means something is a sin, then where in the scriptures does God state that marriage is a sin, or traveling, or speaking, or writing, or eating and drinking, or assembling together, or parenting and raising children, or assembling children together, or caring for children, or caring for the elderly, or building shelter, or securing water, or eliminating body waste, or healing, or working, or working and getting a reward and keeping the entire reward (not giving some or all to strangers with guns), or buying and selling, or giving, or giving medical advice, or giving financial advice, or giving spiritual advice, or giving legal advice when dealing with the heathen legal system, or simply living (being freely on the land without rent payments)?
10th amendment wrote: They simply recorded their marriages in their Family Bibles. So should we. You should not have to obtain a license from the State to marry someone anymore than you should have to obtain a license from the State to be a parent, which some in academic and legislative circles are currently pushing to be made law.
I have said this often and it is worth repeating. The RCC simply absorbs its deviants. So, whatever their followers think they stand for, they donâ€™t. They donâ€™t object to their priests being homosexual as long as they â€śsayâ€ť they donâ€™t practice that abomination. So, these priests get together and have sex or have sex with some little child and then they simply confess the sin to each other. Sinning is okay within Catholicism as long as it is confessed and absolved by another sinful man and they repeat enough hail Maries and â€śour fathersâ€ť. They will often talk as if they have absolutes, but they do not. Every once in a while they will excommunicate one of their own, but that is simply to confuse mankind, not to bring others to Christ.
And let me simply add this. Even if they preach or teach a â€ścorrectâ€ť moral truth, they are simply acting as a wolf in sheepâ€™s clothing or as an angel of light instead of their true form, an angel of darkness. All of the popes have placed themselves in the place of Christ. Can anyone imagine any genuine Christian saying it is okay to call them â€śholy fatherâ€ť?
The RCC is satanâ€™s church on this earth because they have confused the most and therefore are the best counterfeits to the true church.
Catholics who support abortion, fruitcakeness and artificial birth control should be told to either fall in line with Catholic teaching and be against abortion, fruitcakeness and artificial birth control or be excommunicated from the Catholic Church.