Modern translations/ scriptural support ?

Truth7t7

Well-known member
Nope, I have way more trust and confidence in God than to believe that. There are valid reasons the early church( pre RCC) ) and then the reformers rejected the minority texts as corrupt.
Because they were well aware of the corruptions and lies in the Alexandrian Egyptian Philosophical Schools,the very reason why 1 John 4 was written, as many in the Alexandrian schools denied Jesuus Christ had a fleshly body, but was a spirit being
 

kiwimac

Member
Because they were well aware of the corruptions and lies in the Alexandrian Egyptian Philosophical Schools,the very reason why 1 John 4 was written, as many in the Alexandrian schools denied Jesuus Christ had a fleshly body, but was a spirit being
Hooey.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
Screen Shot 2018 06 19 at 09.22.23

heard You got a new car
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
We are clearly in agreement on the bankruptcy of the KJVO position, but I also challenged your post a week or so ago here. We can discuss further on an appropriate forum if you'd like...

Kind regards,
Jonathan
Kiwi doesn't have time, hes tending the sheep on the other side of the mountain, and rarely gets to town for internet reception
 

En Hakkore

Well-known member
Kiwi doesn't have time, hes tending the sheep on the other side of the mountain, and rarely gets to town for internet reception
Do you have the same limited access to the Internet? I've been waiting since Saturday for your acknowledgement that the Essenes did include Leviticus among their sacred texts, as documented here.

Kind regards,
Jonathan
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
Do you have the same limited access to the Internet? I've been waiting since Saturday for your acknowledgement that the Essenes did include Leviticus among their sacred texts, as documented here.

Kind regards,
Jonathan
No need to argue the fact, the Essenes didnt sacrifice for sin in the Jerusalem Temple, they were renegades outside of Gods will for sin and atonement

Sorta like a cult group today denying repentance and acceptance of the finished work of Calvary
 

En Hakkore

Well-known member
No need to argue the fact...
I'll take that as a concession to the point I made about Leviticus' place within the Essene sacred library.

the Essenes didnt sacrifice for sin in the Jerusalem Temple,
Agreed, that is a historically-sound claim.

they were renegades outside of Gods will for sin and atonement
That's debatable, but best taken up in the other thread with someone who has vested interest in the topic... I'm afraid that isn't me. Have a good night/day.

Kind regards,
Jonathan
 

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
The KJV translators could have used the English word immersion. They didn't. They used baptism. Which means different things to different people.

Appealing to how Dr Strong defined a Greek word doesn't speak to what the translators choose to say.

This how them mind of a KJVOist works. They will grasp at any information to hold on their idol of KJVOism.
The 1611 translators could have very well chosen Immersion, but their Church of England theology precluded that!
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
My point is that the 1611 could have translated it that way, but choose to not due to church of England view on water baptism!
The KJV translators translated baptizo into baptize, which means immersion . 100% nonsense the MV’s lean toward RCC doctrine ,and I do not see those influences in the KJV.
 

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
The KJV translators translated baptizo into baptize, which means immersion . 100% nonsense the MV’s lean toward RCC doctrine ,and I do not see those influences in the KJV.
Eramus steeped in Church of Rome theologe, Church of Engkand has unscriptural doctrines, guilt by association that you label on Westcott and Hort, dop you agree then with Rome and Anglican churches?
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
Eramus steeped in Church of Rome theologe, Church of Engkand has unscriptural doctrines, guilt by association that you label on Westcott and Hort, dop you agree then with Rome and Anglican churches?
Yet you have not produced even one thing in the KJV that supports any Roman or Anglican doctrine not even one, and yet most modern versions align with Romes theology.
 
Top