Search results

Think there were at least 1000 words that changed their initial meaning

I use Nas/esv mainly, but just was stating that those who MUST keep using Kjv should use the 1828 webster, in order to get an accurate understanding of the words used in their Kjv

No highjacking intended, just want Van to stop doing his grenade tossing on the Board

Michaels cannot be the Lord Jesus, Daniel 10:13, 21: Michael is described as "one of the chief princes" who came to help a messenger angel against the "prince of the kingdom of Persia," showing his power in spiritual warfare. Daniel 12:1: He is called "the great prince who stands guard over...

The1984 was a decent translation, but it became worse in the 2011 revision of the Niv

Jesus is very God, cannot be Michael, as Michael mere arch angel

Aska nd ye shall receive and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Very wrong, as Jesus is God, Michael the archangel

What is supreme irony to me would be that those who wish to blast off on him most of the time have no idea about textual criticism, Hebrew and Greek languages and text, see those quakes in the Kjvo Ruckmann and Riplinger

The big problem is thta those you would see as being false teachers and false doctrines are actually what the bible teaches

Jesus denied that, as he plainly warned us against eternal hell fire

The ONLY people that as lost sinners will be doing that would be due to the Holy Spirit working in and thru them to get them saved, not by their own desires and efforts and will

Very same message and meaning

There is no biblical support for it

Same passages the Kjv did

The Nas/Nkjv/esv all stated that same truth, agreed?

Except the psa atonement view fist best the Pauline Justification theology inspired by the Holy Spirit

No, you have just strawman our views, as we hold that Isaiah 53 teaches to us that the promised messiah would come and die in the place of, and for the sin debt of His own people, to take upon himself what we deserved in order to atone for us, and to have the father now able to justify us...

You do the very same thing though Brother, as you have chosen to just see the atromement thru the lens of PSA must be false, so however Calvinists see it as being int he scriptures must also be false

No, Psa upholds the truth that for God to remain Holy Judge, and still eb able to freely justify the ungodly, someone must atone for personal sins