37818
Well-Known Member
I do not think a Bible believing Calvinist would agree with that opinion. Maybe some ardent anti-Calvinist may agree with you, as an anti-Calvinist I do not.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Online Baptist
- Thread starter robycop3
- Start date
- Status
I was on that site for a time - as Covenanter. I respected their KJVO attitude. However I did not agree with their futurist/dispy interpretation of prophecy. After a one to one debate on the interpretation of Gabriel's 70 weeks prophecy I was removed. I did look in occasionally, & rejoined under by name Ian. I was recognised, removed & excluded from even looking at the site.
We were all KJVO until about 1980 as alternatives such as the NEB were from modernist translators. We looked at the NIV when it began to appear, & found it more suitable for a congregation including people for whom English was not their first language. We adopted it as our pulpit Bible.
One aspect of the version discussion is that we all have many versions available, but also we have access to the Hebrew & Greek on-line through e.g. the Blue Letter Bible. We establish doctrine by such references rather than arguing versions.
The militants of that website tracked me down on another forum where I pointed out that the Geneva Bible was favoured by the English Christians who became the Pilgrim Fathers. The KJV was considered what it is - the King James version with its royalist & CofE biases.
It's not an issue UNTIL a text is quoted in a specific form to prove disputed doctrine - such as the need for a church hierarchy of Bishops, Priests & Deacons & laity.
I was NASV before then. My mother use Good New Bible. My father used the New American Bible. All this happened before 1980.
Some of our posters here would fell at home there!
As Spurgeon liked to say "Calvinism is the Gospel"
Sportzz Fanzz, I DO agree with them on futurist views. But many of them carry some false doctrines as well.
The preterism myth, both full & partial, is false.
The KJVO myth is false.
Most points of calvinism are false.
I believe God has called for me to work against false doctrines of faith/worship *
& against cults, especially quasi/pseudo-Christian ones, & I shall continue to do so long as He allows me to be able.
The preterism myth, both full & partial, is false.
The KJVO myth is false.
Most points of calvinism are false.
I believe God has called for me to work against false doctrines of faith/worship *
& against cults, especially quasi/pseudo-Christian ones, & I shall continue to do so long as He allows me to be able.
Roby, I'm sorry, but as long as you adhere to your false belief about who Cain married, I just cannot take your ........." I believe God has called for me to work against false doctrines of faith/worship...." ........seriously, since you have a false belief yourself.
Let me refer you to this Scripture:
Matthew 7:3-5
3 - And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?
4- Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye?
5 - Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
IMHO, you need to take a look at your own life and beliefs before trying to "expose" other people.
Let me refer you to this Scripture:
Matthew 7:3-5
3 - And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?
4- Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye?
5 - Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
IMHO, you need to take a look at your own life and beliefs before trying to "expose" other people.
Last edited:
I would disagree strongly. Some KJVOnlyist do promote serious lies against the word of God. They tell false witness against people and Bible translations. Yet they themselves know nothing about Bible translations or how we as English speaking people came to have the Word of God in English. Using, indeed believing the KJV is the word of God is not a problem. Believing it is a perfect translation to the exclusion of all others, including the original Greek, is a false teaching. It is usually accompanied by false witness against other bibles, translators, manuscripts and people.
...and as long as you believe GOD APPROVED DIRECT INCEST BETWEEN FULL SIBLINGS, I can't take you seriously about most things, either.
Then there are a whole lot of people you don't take seriously. You have a twisted idea that God created another race of people apart from Adam and Eve without one shred of Biblical support, and yet you accuse others of having strange beliefs? I think you're a few fries short of a Happy Meal. Or, to use a phrase you seem to like....you're as phony as a Ford Corvette.
- Status