SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Is Words and how we understand them really important ?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 )
PosterThread









 Re:

Quote:
I believe the new Bible versions are being secularized by Satan, so that eventually there is no difference between Christians and believers of other religions. The emergence of this "New Christianity" that we have today can be shown to be a direct result of new Bible version's wording. No more is righteousness important but rather riches, and we don't want a cross but would choose a crown instead and "new creation" is so passe, today we have bought into an "imitation".

The Bible, angels, men, prophets and apostles are not holy anymore. Are these new versions "holy"? The Majority Text distinguishes between good angels and bad angels and good prophets and bad prophets but the new versions do not. .allaboard



I realise this was not addressed to myself but I thought perhaps I'll survive commenting on it.

Given that the word "holy" as far as men are concerned means "set apart" for God the idea of good and bad does not come into the deeper meaning I would have thought. If what you are speaking about is "false" then a person can be "holy" (consecrated) and still be false. Is it really necessary to assert that the reason why "holy" is missing is because Satan is doing an axe job on the scriptures? By the way I have no doubt that men are doing an axe job on scriptures. But so did the reformation fathers as well. Each just according to his own understanding.

If Satan immediately cometh and take away the word means something other than the way the Lord intended those words to carry meaning I would love to hear about it.

 2013/6/14 2:35
allaboard
Member



Joined: 2011/5/28
Posts: 100


 Re:

I did not mention any doctrines. We are talking about words.

Correct me if I am wrong but did you just imply that I want to "murder Catholics" or view them as "damnable heretics" or condemn them? I could not help but catch how noble you made yourself look by drawing inaccurate characterizations of me.

I am talking about a religious structure that foments lies and deceptions not individual people so please take back what you said.

Again, we are talking about words. A few words here and a few words there and then YES, you have actually altered a doctrine. I would be happy to show you where that has occurred by tampering with the individual words. However, better judgment might indicate that I don't have any further exchanges with someone that hurls such poisonous, accusatory arrows. I read recently where someone referred to you as passive-aggressive and I think at least in your reply to me, that is an accurate description of you.

Satan immediately cometh and taketh away the word by EVERY MEANS POSSIBLE.

Do you know all the ways that the Holy Spirit illuminates that passage to disciples of Christ? I did not think so.

 2013/6/14 2:38Profile









 Re:

Quote:
Textus Receptus was (and still is) the enemy of the Roman Catholic Church. This is an important fact to bear in mind.




Quote:
Textus Receptus strongly upholds the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith: the creation account in Genesis, the divinity of Jesus Christ, the virgin birth, the Saviour's miracles, his bodily resurrection, his literal return and the cleansing power of his blood!



To murder is to hate your brother. Not talking about the business of destroying men's bodies.

If these two statements above don't add up to saying that the Roman Catholic Church resists the received texts or conversely that the received texts stand against the Roman Catholic Church then what do they mean? As for the Roman Catholic Church being a religious structure so are all of the protestant denominations similarly religious structures. Who could deny that if I were to declare that I am a Roman Catholic this would be viewed with suspicion at very least or else it would be out right condemned. Some would say it plainly others would infer it and the majority of opinions would fall silent!

As to your own personal attitudes I have no idea in reality, especially if you deny what you say I have said. But I do agree my words do carry an inference. If I am wrong then I apologise.

 2013/6/14 3:06
allaboard
Member



Joined: 2011/5/28
Posts: 100


 Re:

Now you are saying I hate people?

Regarding "religious structures", I never said other religious institutions were NOT religious structures. You seem great at continually making implications.

Thank you for your apology. Henceforth, I do not think it wise that I have further exchanges with you. Not just based on the exchange in this thread but your interactions with others that I have been reading about. I don't hate you or hold anything against you, I just sense it would be wise to go my way while you go your way. I am going to decline your invitation to fight.



 2013/6/14 3:17Profile









 Re:

I rather think the words we choose to use make their own inferences and whilst the internet is a difficult place due to the ease of being misunderstood we all have a great deal of history to go by. If we are sufficiently equipped to comprehend the significance of the historical use of extant greek manuscripts and we make use of that knowledge, then by implication we become vulnerable to correction or question. This is true for all of us. The more recent exchanges which you have read no doubt make for an understanding. What it means may not be revealed until the day of Christ. Beyond that it may in the end prove to be a matter of repentance. Such is the nature of things.

 2013/6/14 3:44





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy