MS wrote: B Mc. I find no meekness of spirit in sc post. Just meddling. Good day.
Thanks MS. SC started off by saying that he was being gracious because he emailed me when she had no possible way of knowing what was said between us. Since she was sticking her nose into someone's business that she knew nothing about; that is my definition of a busybody. The fact that she said John was being gracious and I was holding a grudge is beyond logic. How in the world could she or anyone know that?
BM will find no fault with those that criticize me or a few others like you. That is her nature as I have often said. Well, it didn't work this time. I'm not even bothered by her anymore. I will address her if she confuses the body of Christ, so in a sense she is not on ignore. Lastly, being on ignore doesn't mean I don't read someone's comments, but I simply will "probably" not respond to them. How does she know he has apologized? But, the way I think, I forgive whether someone has apologized or not and if I forgive, then I want the Lord to bless them.
Anyway, I hope is going well with you and your loved ones. Having a birthday get together tonight and that is something I never look forward to. Not mine,by the way.
Bible Discernment Ministry wrote: Conclusion KJV-Onlyism runs the gambit from moderately reasonable advocates (David Cloud, E.L. Bynum, John R. Rice), to the wacked-out, stone throwers ( D.A. Waite , Jack Hyles , Samuel Gipp, Walter Bebe, Texe Marrs , Peter Ruckman, ..., etc.). A couple of years ago, Gary Hudson launched a website devoted to exposing the errors of âKing James Onlyismâââ The King James Only Resource Center .â Gary has a number of articles and reports posted. This site has become a âone stopâ resource center for all questions related to âKing James Onlyism.â
Jim. The Roman Catholics have been publishing their own version of the Bible for centuries.
List of RCC bibles - Vulgate Douay-Rheims Bible 1582, 1609, 1610 WVSS Westminster Version of the Sacred Scriptures 1913â1935 SPC Spencer New Testament 1941 CCD Confraternity Bible 1941 Knox Bible 1950 KLNT KleistâLilly New Testament 1956 RSVâCE Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition 1965â66 JB Jerusalem Bible 1966 NAB New American Bible 1970 TLBâCE The Living Bible â Catholic Edition 1971 NJB New Jerusalem Bible 1985 GNTâCE Good News Bible Catholic Edition5 2001 RSVâ2CE Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition 2006 CTSâNCB CTS New Catholic Bible 2007 NABRE New American Bible Revised Edition 2011/1986 (OT/NT).
Jim. The Reformed Church did not and would not use the RCC bibles, texts or interpretations.
However: FYI:- Quote: "These manuscripts represent the corrupted copies of the Bible, also known as the Alexandrian manuscripts. These manuscripts, many times, do not even agree with each other. The RCC Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts are part of this group. These are the manuscripts on which Westcott and Hort and the modern versions rely so heavily." (chick.com)
Lynn Stuart Parramore wrote: To make it into the one percent, you need to have, according to some estimates, at least about $350,000 a year in income, or around $8 million accumulated in wealth. At the lower end of the one percent spectrum, the âlower-uppers,â as they have been called, youâll find people like successful doctors, accountants, engineers, lawyers, vice-presidents of companies and well-paid media figures.
Plenty of these affluent people have enjoyed blessings from Lady Luck, but a lot of them work hard at their jobs and want to contribute to their communities in positive ways. In times past, these kinds of citizens served on the boards of museums and cultural institutions and were active and prominent figures in their towns and cities. But now they are getting shoved aside unceremoniously by the vastly richer Wall Street financiers and Silicon Valley tycoons above them.
Full Blessings Sermon! When we were "saved" we received All
good things from God -- Grace has given you every blessing that God can give us yet we don't understand and use these
treasures. We have everything, and need nothing more.
Observer, I have strong convictions against the Romish Bible, http://tinyurl.com/hgsvaj4 (Is the King James Version a âRoman Catholic Bibleâ?), which of course it is, "I believe it is misguided for fundamental Baptists to defend a version of the Bible based on a Greek text, prepared by a liberal Roman Catholic, translated by Episcopalians and authorized by a king who hated Baptists. While they reject translations based on a Greek text approved by all the great scholars and early fundamental leaders and translated by good Bible believing scholars from all groups, including Baptists. A.T. Robertson was the greatest Greek scholar America ever produced. He was a conservative Baptist and approved of the American Standard Version. This irony is strange indeed when fundamental Baptists take sides with Episcopalians and Catholics and reject their own. "I also find it disturbing that the KJV Only group can write books, preach sermons and talk continually against all other versions. However, the minute I point out errors in the KJV, they call me a âBible correctorâ and an unbeliever, and other names.... http://tinyurl.com/j8gpwqv (Which Bible?).
Thanks for your perception which should always be kept in mind of course. Sadly the ideas propagated here are not unique to a poster. There is a conspicous, global current from the apostate, ecumenical and liberal camp, to undermine the KJV. Aware of the mixed crowd landing on these boards, and conscious of the simplistic minds abounding in the evangelical camp, it is advisable from time to time, for the instruction of others, to construct a correct understanding about the topic, and confront untruths appearing here. Thanks again very much. With much appreciation for your genuine concern, and valuing your imput, Peace and grace be unto you.
A word to the wise. Jim is typical of those who hold to "spoonfed christianity". These people have no real convictions of their own. In Jim's particular case you will see that his modern day "apostle" whose spoon is firmly glued inside Jim's mouth is Gil Rugh. So what you will find is links that Jim has found which confirm Gil's teachings or Gil referred him to and of course if Gil says something Jim dare not doubt it.
There is therefore no attempt by Jim ever to engage on any subject using his own words, thoughts etc. He would rather point to some "expert" that Gil has referred to, or that he stumbled upon who happened to confirm what Gil taught.
In short my friends you are dealing with a robotic brain who is here to promote Gil's teachings and ain't here to learn anything.
You might as well talk among yourselves and put Jim on the ignore list. I can tell you that he won't care either way. Even if he had no one engaging with him, he'd still post here - very like our friend John Yurich.
If you take the admonition to redeem your time seriously you will not give Jim a second more, knowing that he is incorrigible and you are on a futile quest.