Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 30
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Isa 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

So, you declare that this is not in the Bible.

Jerry, Jeff was saying that the Bible does not say, "The lion shall lie down with the lamb." And he's right: it doesn't in those words. I'm not sure what his point was, though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Jerry, Jeff was saying that the Bible does not say, "The lion shall lie down with the lamb." And he's right: it doesn't in those words. I'm not sure what his point was, though.


Sorry, the point was that no matter if you use the KJB or not, it is necessary to be certain that what you are calling Biblical truth from the pulpit, is actually found in the Bible.
It's just that if so and so is making a habit of twisting scripture, it really doesn't matter if they use the KJB or not. Thus- having the right words alone doesn't make you right, if you don't understand or use the right words correctly.

Jesus didn't rebuke the Scribes and Pharisees for using the wrong version of the Bible for example, but for applying the wrong use of the right words they had.

So what I am finding is that those I have asked in the IFB of which I agree with some of what they are saying cause me to get thrown into false teacher mode, when they misquote and twist scripture. I also get thrown into false teacher mode when other pastors claim, "you can't really trust what these Bible words mean, so let my superior knowledge clear up these mistakes".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


Jerry, Jeff was saying that the Bible does not say, "The lion shall lie down with the lamb." And he's right: it doesn't in those words. I'm not sure what his point was, though.







For someone to quote that, is just an innocent mistake. Yet if the Bible is true, and animals shall be as told in that verse, its quite clear the lion and the lamb will be at peace with one another.

Is his point is to try and disapprove the Bible, God, in his heart, and while this old saying is true, misery loves company?


PS. I might add, yes, the Bible, {KJ}, is true and it can be trusted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites









For someone to quote that, is just an innocent mistake. Yet if the Bible is true, and animals shall be as told in that verse, its quite clear the lion and the lamb will be at peace with one another.

Is his point is to try and disapprove the Bible, God, in his heart, and while this old saying is true, misery loves company?


PS. I might add, yes, the Bible, {KJ}, is true and it can be trusted.


Well let me try again. I'll use the name Bro. Cloud for an example.

If Bro. Cloud is building his KJV Defense, and one of the pillars of that defense is the utter importance of every single word needing to be accurate, (otherwise it is inaccurate) which is true evidence of the preservation of the Word.
[i agree for now despite a few questions, but I want to hear more]

Then Bro. Cloud misquotes (saying the lion lays down with the lamb) those accurate words in the KJB that he just got done pounding his Bible across the pulpit with, and demonstrates:
1. Accuracy is not -relevant but the idea is. Which is the case of the anti-KJV position
2. He is quoting someone else other than the Bible which he claims at that moment to be preaching from.
3. He has learned a behavior and doctrine by proxy not by diligent study.
[i decide his lack of consistency overpowers his defense, and I end up throwing out most of what he says as unreliable in this case]

Now if several pastors in the same denomination/group display the same twisted scripture, you know they too didn't get it from diligent Bible study, but are parroting someone else other than the Bible, so any other false teaching or mistake made by the source of the problem they are quoting will also be taught. False teaching begets more false teaching.

So if Bro. Cloud in this case tells me He is really studying the issue, then displays he is not studying but rather re-telling a story. Then he is also misrepresenting himself as the one doing the research.

I'll use Bro. Cloud again in another example.

Say that Bro. Cloud writes the book on repentance, and the importance of the Cross in preaching the Gospel to the lost.
[i agree, have a couple definition questions but want to hear more]

Then I watch Bro. Clouds "Gospel" video from his website for example, and OOPS wouldn't you know it, no mention of Repentance or the Cross in his Gospel message video and demonstrates;
1. Accuracy isn't really necessary
2. We can proclaim the Gospel how we want, not how it is written.
3. Toss out his book on the importance of Repentance cuz not even he believes it is important.
[i decide his lack of consistency overpowers his defense, and throw out most of what he says as unreliable in this case]

One last example and I'll use Bro. Cloud again.
Say that Bro. Cloud gives a diligent offense against CCM. Warning to watch out for even the very tiny details, and exposes the utter folly and foolishness of even using music produced by unsaved ungodly people for your church background music, such as "special music". It really matters he pounds over and over again from the pulpit.
[i agree, and want to send him a bucket of money because I agree so much]

Then Bro. Cloud uses ungodly music composers in the background music of his Gospel Video on his website, and doesn't bother giving credit to the music composer either, which would be a copy-write infringement in this case and who knows more about copy-write infringement than Way of Life which has a warning about copy-write on every document they produce? (do as I say, not as I do, is a form of hypocrisy in this example and not Biblical)
[i decide his lack of consistency overpowers his defense, and throw out most of what he says as unreliable in this case]

Now if I was trusting Bro. Cloud as a reliable source for my own KJB defense, my defense material fails the reliability test because Bro Cloud has proven unreliable in these examples. So now I have a bunch of questions with possibly faulty answers that need wrestled with again.

Does that do a better job of explaining I am not trying to question the Bible?
I'm fishing for more reliable information than I have previously found, but I think the whole house of cards is about to crumble.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



1st thank you for asking "Have you ever trusted Jesus Christ and accepted Him as Savior and Lord of your life?"
Yes!
Would that make me saved? I was also baptized in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, would that finalize the deal? I was also baptized again and spoke in tongues after being prayed for to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, would that provide the evidence I really was saved for some? I spent may years tithing and going to church and doing lots of good deeds, is that evidence for others?

My answers to the question you asked don't really answer the question however, because my first and second response were referring to my Mormon conversion, then I referred to my Pentecostal type conversion, then my Calvary Chapel conversion. Non of those conversions are actually Biblical or true to Saving Faith however good it could sound on the surface to complete the requirements of said religions.

To expose my hidden agenda... I've gone through a lot of liars, wolves, and "hirelings" trying to get to the bottom of what is the Real Gospel, and True Saving Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, what Bible version is the one to use, and so on, and I do take 1 John 4:1 "try the spirits" quite literally, as we all must do. As part of my test, I just use the Bible...

So yes absolutely, I am framing the questions as actually loaded to the pastors I mentioned, because I am not an IFB (yet?) and I am looking at what it means to be an IFB from all angels because I have been abused, deceived fooled, lied to, and these questions have eternal consequences. It really truly does matter what you "think" the Gospel is. If the Gospel is offensive to you, think about why. If the Gospel you proclaim isn't the one in the Bible, it would be another Gospel and not Biblical. right?


Why are you consulting people you believe to be " liars, wolves, and "hirelings" " trust God and what He tells you. I have yet to see God hit anyone over the head with the Gospel of Christ, He is however straight forward about grace, faith, and salvation. If you believe Christ then lay aside all the rest. I don't know if somewhere in the experiences you've had, whether you were saved or not; Christ does...ask Him. What do all these side issues have to do with salvation? Glancing over your other comments it appears you want to trust the word of God; so, take it and run with it. Do you want me to add you to my prayer list for something?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If your looking for the perfect preacher, pastor, evangelist, you will not find him, for none is perfect but Christ. But God does use imperfect men in the position of preacher, pastor, evangelist.

Be sure to follow God, not the man.

As previously stated, the point your using to condemn this man will actually come to pass in the menluiamn. Itsa not false teachings, its Bible teaching. If I remember right you stated nothing like it can be found in the Bible, yet it can be found in the pages of the Bible.

Isa 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
Isa 11:7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
Isa 11:8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
Isa 11:9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.
Isa 11:10 ¶ And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.
Isa 11:11 And it shall come to pass in that day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

First, let me say that I have no idea what Bro. Cloud believes, as I'm not familiar with his ministry...and I think you're using his name just for sake of discussion. I just want to make it clear that in addressing this post, I'm not trying to defend Bro. Cloud. Now that we have that clear...


Well let me try again. I'll use the name Bro. Cloud for an example.

If Bro. Cloud is building his KJV Defense, and one of the pillars of that defense is the utter importance of every single word needing to be accurate, (otherwise it is inaccurate) which is true evidence of the preservation of the Word.
[i agree for now despite a few questions, but I want to hear more]

Then Bro. Cloud misquotes (saying the lion lays down with the lamb) those accurate words in the KJB that he just got done pounding his Bible across the pulpit with, and demonstrates:
1. Accuracy is not -relevant but the idea is. Which is the case of the anti-KJV position
2. He is quoting someone else other than the Bible which he claims at that moment to be preaching from.
3. He has learned a behavior and doctrine by proxy not by diligent study.
[i decide his lack of consistency overpowers his defense, and I end up throwing out most of what he says as unreliable in this case]

I think you've made an interesting point here. However, would you agree that a sermon is not "inspired" by God like Scripture is? And, would you agree that a proper sermon consists of more than just standing up and reading/quoting Scripture? If you say yes to either or both of these questions, then you are acknowledging that, in preaching a sermon, a man is adding his own words to the words of Scripture, to exposit and clarify and bring forth the meaning of Scripture, and apply it to the lives of his listeners. So...if this is true, then the question you should be asking is not, "Is everything this man is saying a perfect quotation of Scripture?" (because a sermon doesn't consist only of Scripture), but rather, "Is what this man is saying true to Scripture?" No, Scripture does not say exactly, "The lion shall lie down with the lamb," and in this case the preacher probably slipped up, being human and all, and being affected by the common way misquoting this phrase. But the principle of the lion lying down with the lamb (IOW, that there will be peace at that time) is not anti-Scriptural. So, a person can care about the accuracy of "every word" of Scripture, yet make mistakes in quoting it, and still not be preaching heresy. Should a preacher try to quote accurately? Sure. But will he always? Nope.

Now if several pastors in the same denomination/group display the same twisted scripture, you know they too didn't get it from diligent Bible study, but are parroting someone else other than the Bible, so any other false teaching or mistake made by the source of the problem they are quoting will also be taught. False teaching begets more false teaching.

I don't think this is a case of "twisted Scripture" at all.

I'll use Bro. Cloud again in another example.

Say that Bro. Cloud writes the book on repentance, and the importance of the Cross in preaching the Gospel to the lost.
[i agree, have a couple definition questions but want to hear more]

Then I watch Bro. Clouds "Gospel" video from his website for example, and OOPS wouldn't you know it, no mention of Repentance or the Cross in his Gospel message video and demonstrates;
1. Accuracy isn't really necessary
2. We can proclaim the Gospel how we want, not how it is written.
3. Toss out his book on the importance of Repentance cuz not even he believes it is important.
[i decide his lack of consistency overpowers his defense, and throw out most of what he says as unreliable in this case]

I don't think that the video in question necessarily demonstrates these things. (I would have to see it to understand what you're talking about.) It could be that while the term repentance may not be used, he might say something like, "Turn from your sin," which means the same thing. Similarly, he might not say the word cross, but instead say, "Jesus died for you." Again, if this is what is going on, the man is not presenting a "false gospel." I don't know if this is the kind of thing you're talking about, but, although there are concepts that should not be left out of a thorough presentation of the gospel, it isn't possible for every presentation of the gospel to include everything we know about sin, Christ's life, death, and resurrection. Again, I'd have to see the video to understand what you're talking about.

One last example and I'll use Bro. Cloud again.
Say that Bro. Cloud gives a diligent offense against CCM. Warning to watch out for even the very tiny details, and exposes the utter folly and foolishness of even using music produced by unsaved ungodly people for your church background music, such as "special music". It really matters he pounds over and over again from the pulpit.
[i agree, and want to send him a bucket of money because I agree so much]

Then Bro. Cloud uses ungodly music composers in the background music of his Gospel Video on his website, and doesn't bother giving credit to the music composer either, which would be a copy-write infringement in this case and who knows more about copy-write infringement than Way of Life which has a warning about copy-write on every document they produce? (do as I say, not as I do, is a form of hypocrisy in this example and not Biblical)
[i decide his lack of consistency overpowers his defense, and throw out most of what he says as unreliable in this case]

Music is an area of discernment in which not everyone agrees completely. I would agree that the preacher is being inconsistent if he includes in his video series the same music that he has just condemned. But I don't think that's what is going on here. The music is, in YOUR opinion, "ungodly." And not all music is under copyright. Again, I'd have to see the example in question in order to make a call one way or the other.

Now if I was trusting Bro. Cloud as a reliable source for my own KJB defense, my defense material fails the reliability test because Bro Cloud has proven unreliable in these examples. So now I have a bunch of questions with possibly faulty answers that need wrestled with again.

Does that do a better job of explaining I am not trying to question the Bible?
I'm fishing for more reliable information than I have previously found, but I think the whole house of cards is about to crumble.

It is if you are "trusting Bro. Cloud" (or anyone else) for your position on any issue. God gave us brains to think for ourselves, after all. I personally do not think the KJVO view is supportable. But I did not arrive at that conclusion only because I was "trusting in" a person. I read extensively on both sides of the issue, and made up my mind what to believe, based on Scripture and historical fact. You are right to call it a "house of cards" if its foundation is on a man, a denomination, a church, or anything else but Scripture.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Another Jeff,

I am a avid user of the K&D commentary. I believe it is one of the best commentaries on the Old Testament. The commentary is not based on the KJV, it is based on the original Hebrew text. The K&D commentary would not hold to a position that the KJV has been re-inspired. It would take the position that the KJV is preserved.

The position on errors by copyists is simple. Whenever you copy something there is always a potential for a copying error. That is how we have the "She KJV" and a few other KJV editions that had copy errors.

Even the revered Schofield Bible has a few copy errors that they have decided not to fix. This is why I was not allowed to use a Schofield Bible for scripture memorization in my Bible classes.

Hope that helped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites




It is if you are "trusting Bro. Cloud" (or anyone else) for your position on any issue. God gave us brains to think for ourselves, after all. I personally do not think the KJVO view is supportable. But I did not arrive at that conclusion only because I was "trusting in" a person. I read extensively on both sides of the issue, and made up my mind what to believe, based on Scripture and historical fact. You are right to call it a "house of cards" if its foundation is on a man, a denomination, a church, or anything else but Scripture.


To be sure I am learning something here, it's not what I was thinking I was asking about... but non-the-less it appears my sentences are not able to be understood to a large degree or something.
What I am learning is that however I am saying stuff, people are wanting a surface thing to pick at, to help them understand my question. I think.

I don't know what the problem is.

I give up.

Thanks anyway for your time and thoughts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Another Jeff,

I am a avid user of the K&D commentary. I believe it is one of the best commentaries on the Old Testament. The commentary is not based on the KJV, it is based on the original Hebrew text. The K&D commentary would not hold to a position that the KJV has been re-inspired. It would take the position that the KJV is preserved.

The position on errors by copyists is simple. Whenever you copy something there is always a potential for a copying error. That is how we have the "She KJV" and a few other KJV editions that had copy errors.

Even the revered Schofield Bible has a few copy errors that they have decided not to fix. This is why I was not allowed to use a Schofield Bible for scripture memorization in my Bible classes.

Hope that helped.


Thank you for responding to my original question!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



To be sure I am learning something here, it's not what I was thinking I was asking about... but non-the-less it appears my sentences are not able to be understood to a large degree or something.
What I am learning is that however I am saying stuff, people are wanting a surface thing to pick at, to help them understand my question. I think.

I don't know what the problem is.

I give up.

Thanks anyway for your time and thoughts.

Wait...don't give up yet! :) I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding your questions and dilemmas. Looking at what you've said so far, it's hard for me to know if you're really searching or if you've already decided that all IFB churches/pastors/preachers are pretty much hypocritical and/or crazy and condescending. And, you've mentioned so many different issues...KJVO, the K&D commentary, music, repentance, the Cross, the gospel. It's a bit much to take in all at once, and it's hard to figure out what you're really wanting to focus on. We started with the commentary. As I see it, you're looking for proof for a position you already hold (KJVO or at least that the KJV is best), but you're not sure whom to trust. Does that pretty much sum up the issue you want to discuss? Edited by Annie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...