Notwithstanding the nonsense spewed forth by opponents (and sadly SOME proponents of the A.V.) God has in the past blessed, and continues to bless in the present, the faithful preaching of God's Word from this version. It is a translation, but a very good one, and the best extant, in my own view. The "broad-brush" attacks by people like James White upon the supporters of the A.V.(KJV) are not justified based on the evidence. Whilst the aim might be to counteract extremists on the issue(such as Ruckman, Gail Riplinger etc.,)the net result is an unfair labelling of all who exclusively use the A.V. as fanatics. It is a sad day indeed when the use of the time-honored Authorised Version is lampooned by professing Christians. If you want to label me "KJV-only", and make that a perjorative, that is your problem. Sometimes I wonder why it is not considered aa a bad thing when some churches are NIV-only, or ESV-only, or NASB-only?? Is it not a tragic thing to witness the utter confusion that has arisen because some churches have 4 or 5 versions among attendees and yet another version employed in the pulpit??
This poor fool is living proof of the very Bible he rejects - "The carnal mind is enmity against God..." It is somewhat amusing, though sad at the same time, that people who believe there is no God are so vigorous in their attempts to dis-prove Him. If there is no God why get so het-up about it? All the railing against God and religion will not stop it, or produce a mad outbreak of Atheism. "The fool hath said in his heart:There is no God.." -i.e. no God for me. But God has His people.
Careful now what you say about the Devil....no need to be "rude" What a spineless Christianity now pervades the professing Church. What did Jesus say to the Pharisees again? Oh yes..."hypocrites...whited sepulchres...blind guides...fools...serpents..generation of vipers..." "Rude"?
John Yurich wrote: When a Catholic receives Christ as their Savior they can maintain a personal relationship with Christ as long as they dispense with the unscriptural Catholic doctrines, adhere only to the scriptural Catholic doctrines, dispense with and do not participate in the unscriptural parts to the Mass and only participate in the scriptural parts to the Mass.
And what would those "scriptural parts to the mass" be? That it is a "sacrifice for the sins of the quick and the dead"? That it is celebrated by a sacrificing "priest"? Transubstantiation (change of substance into the blood, bones, nerves, sinews, and full Deity of Christ)? Genuflections before the "altar" by the priest? Witholding the cup from the "laity"? The burning of incense? There is not much left for your faithful "Christian Catholic" when you remove all that pagan and superstitious ritual!! "Come out of her my people.."
Ernie wrote: The fact is that the 501-c-3 or Canada's version of it is the issue. The Government is subsidizing them through the Tax Exemption. If the Government monies are the people's taxes, then the tax paying people have a right NOT to fund their own destruction. If you want to be free to speak your mind and that word of God, then do not accept the privilege of being exempted from paying your fair share.
Help me here: how does paying MORE tax make you free to speak your mind? The only way you are going to stop gov't using your taxes to fund evil things is to stop paying tax. For that you will need to stop buying gasoline! Fact is, the U.S. gov't ALREADY views bona fide churches as having 501(c)3 status - so they don't get taxed on their properties (eg.buildings). Let God's people get some of their own money back, I say. Let them get tax dollar breaks on their giving. Why not? These folks who go on about churches being in the back pocket of government, that it muzzles them etc.,are talking garbage. You are under no obligation to support any wickedness gov't introduces - 501(c)3 or not. Anyway, the IRS has power already to audit your "faithful" non-501(c)3 church. The only way you will escape gov't interference is to get out of the country.
Vigilante wrote: The grievous error is running to the Canadian regime for permission in the first place! Now the same error will be repeated as they seek out 501c3 status in the papal states. Just do whatcha gotta do and keep separate from the beast and that papal whore riding it!! Have a nice day folks
I smell the influence of a Florida-based nut-job here. Railing on about the "Papal States" when in fact the said "wacko" believes the Confederacy was a good thing. Jefferson Davis and the CSA was actually supported by the Pope. But, hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good story!
You can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. The smart folks have him figured out: the church always did come a distant second (or third behind Mammy and co). Politics has wrecked the Martyrs and the "member" who thinks there are 200 people there still is delusional - the other Sunday night only 40 were there. Probably the crowd was bigger today because the Crown College choir was there - next Sunday it will be back to normality: i.e. a small crowd and a poorly-read sermon. The bluff and bluster will soon be over.....Kyle will come soon and pronounce the last rites over the embers of what was "the largest Protestant Church in Europe"...or so we were led to believe. Sad indeed.
Stupidity knows no bounds - especially in apostate ecclesiastical leadership. Who cares what this fool thinks? What God says and what this buffoon thinks rarely coincide. Get over to the Middle East if you want to be under "Sharia" law, and you will be closer to Mecca too - that is surely a win-win solution for Muslims.
Alan wrote: I don`t see this as any different than Dr Paisley attending the poppy day / remembrance day / veteran day service in London representing Northern Ireland as First Minister....that was a `non-denominational service` through a thrid party..the Royal British Legion as this was through the Scouts..its not quite the same as a joint ecumenical service in my mind! He said the mayor and deputy mayor of Ballymena attended the event and that Mr Symonds was the only clergyman invited to the event in that capacity.
Nice try Alan. Sorry the facts get in the way again! 1)Dr Paisley saw fit to mount a defense of his attendance. Why was your "poppy-day" example not part of his defense? 2) The MAYOR was NOT there - Mr Mills and others stayed AWAY because of the priest being on the order of service. Why did they not see it as a "poppy-day like" event? The SDLP deputy Mayor took Mills' place. 3)The "old" Paisley would NOT have gone near such a service, and you know it! Successive Royal occasions were boycotted because of ecumenists having a leading role in services (i.e. Di & Charles Wedding). Either he was wrong THEN, or he is wrong NOW - which is it Alan?
[QUOTE]I notice that the BBC are reporting that Mr. Paisley has taken part in a service with a Roman Catholic Priest. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7198719.stm If this turns out to be true, Mr. Paisley should be removed from his position as a Free Presbyterian Minister. The Free Presbyterian Church has always preached "..be ye separate onto the gospel" Its a sad sad day for the Free Presbyterian Church...[/QUOTE]While a radio program dealing with this issue was airing in N. Ireland (BBCNI "Sunday Sequence")a statement came in to the BBC folks to say MR P was not aware of the exact nature of the event beforehand, and that he never has, nor would he be party to "an ecumenical service". The priest said it was not an ecumenical service but "non-denominational"! In the States we call that "semantics" - playing about with words. If you are caught in a compromising situation (or trap)then the way to deal with it is to get outta there!! At least we should be glad that Dr P has denied ecumenism and confirmed his opposition to it. One hopes his actions will confirm this welcome claim. The event in question took place on 12/29/2007. Why did it take the BBC so long to comment on it?