teylacarter91

First, I can't answer for 1Tim115. Each of us has to react/respond as based on our own convictions. 1Tim's opinion may be much different from mine. Nor am I saying that if our views are different that I'm anymore right or wrong than he may be. We both may be right, we both may be wrong, or some combo in God's sight.

With your bolded comment above, may I ask a question? Who's guiding that decision not to visit a Baptist church? Is the Holy spirit guiding you or are you reacting with human emotions because you don't agree with another human's opinion(s)? You said you were looking forward to visiting your MIL's church. Now you're making an iron clad statement that you will NOT visit her church.

IMHO, there's a very large difference between visiting another church in our faith and becoming a member of that church. When you say that you won't set foot into a particular church, you are in essence saying that you reject what they believe. We're not talking about a Christian participating in worship services in one of the eastern religions. At this point in my life I have no intentions of participating in a Hindu, Buddist, or Muslin acts of worship, for example.

Within our reasonable driving area there are an untold number of Baptist churches. While I do not agree with some of their approaches to faith, I'm sure there are members of the body of Christ attending those. I can't find it within myself to condem them because they don't agree with me. Condem them to the point that I wouldn't set foot in their church at the invitation of a family member for a simple visit. I'm judging them, based on my own yardstick. I'm judging them, based on opinions I've formed from what I've heard about them. Rather than letting the Lord use me for His purposes. Accepting the invitation to visit, may be have within it the opportunity to help someone else or could be the Lord's way of leading me to a deeper understanding, myself.

One thing for sure is that I can testify that the invitation to visit a Baptist church has changed my life.

And, no, I don't agree with everything that happens at my church. At this stage I don't know how much of that is my own lack of maturity in my walk with the Lord. I've already learned, with the help of the Lord, some things I thought I believed were not TRUTH. That includes the application of "Judge Not least ye be judged also". Simply put, I'd forgotten the verses that follow that one. Maybe failed to study those following verses is a better way to word it.

As to the second quote above. 1Tim made a good point. Discussions, like the ones in question here, help IMHO, for each one of us to fine tune our own statements of faith. I know they do my own. When someone disagrees with me, it forces me to take a deeper and harder look at what I really do believe. (This is a matter of choice. Choose to focus on the subject, with the Holy Spirit's guidance or reject it simply because I don't agree.) Once I do that, it either strenghtens my own beliefs or forces me to reconsider if my own stubborn attitude is causing me to miss something the Holy Spirit is waiting to reveal when I'm ready to listen to Him.

I see that 2Tim215 has replied while I'm writing this post. IMHO, he's done a better job than I have in conveying his thoughts.

Bye. Maybe you will check in again and see a discussion to join other than Bible versions. You've caused me to consider rewriting my personal statement of faith for "The Word of God." I don't have the time at present but, as you see, you have made an influence on others.

One thing to consider with regard to IFB churches is that since they are independent, they are not all the same. We should each attend the church God leads us to. If at some time in the future it seems you and your husband are being led to an IFB church, I would hope you would visit the church and learn some about it rather than rejecting it simply because its IFB.

In the area I live, the few IFB churches have gone different directions and I would not recommend any of them. The Baptist church we once attended closed it's door years ago. We now attend an independent, conservative, non-denominational church which is pastored by a Baptist trained pastor and associate pastor.

I'm glad you stopped by here and am sad that you are leaving so soon.

I do not think satan is behind my decision, I will never ever leave the church and I will never stop reading the Bible.... I absolutely am still going to a Baptist church (just Baptist, not an independent one, just plain Baptist) and I continually read Gods Word.

I just don't think and IBF church is the right one for me. or that the forum is the place I need to be.

Its not just the message board it was just the final nail in the coffin... other things have lead to that decision

Since I have only posted in this thread I will say this here...

I am leaving this forum. I came here looking for answers but instead I was hurt by how hateful some of you seem to be.

None of this has changed my thinking of my mother in law, or any other IFBs.
I was very much looking forward to visiting my mother in laws church (a IFB one) but now I will never set foot in one and neither is my husband (who agrees with me)

I pray Gods blessing on you, even though it is hard for me to ask Him that.

O For a Thousand Tongues To Sing :)

But it was in the 1611 Original King James.

But it would be King James...

What if the Apocrypha was put back into the King James? Would we all suddenly claim the King James is corrupt?

Ma'am, would you kindly share your salvation testimony with us? How were you saved by God?

Your confusing two different things. I don't think many if any on this board would deny that the MV's contain some of the word of God, but that doesn't make them Gods inerrant preserved scriptures as a whole. For example if I were to tell a lost person "if you don't repent and turn to Christ trusting in him alone for salvation your going to one day die and go to hell" is that the word of God? Yes it is in a sense, because it accurately expresses the truth found in the scriptures. However it obviously is not scripture itself, it is merely an explanation of the truth of scripture and the accuracy of the statement depends on how well it conforms to the actual scriptures.

That is what your talking about.

Do not confuse that with the divinely & perfectly preserved scriptures themselves though. The bible itself uses the term "holy" to describe the scriptures. For example:

"2 Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus."

Note that the apostle Paul calls the scriptures "holy" when speaking to timothy. Remember that they did not have the original copies of the old testament scriptures he was speaking of any more than we have the original copies of either the old or new testament scriptures. Yet in spite of that Paul, under the inspiration of God, calls the scriptures "holy" because God had and still has perfectly preserved the scriptures. In truth, most of the users of the MV's(at least if they have studied the issues enough to understand them) do not even believe what their bible says on the cover let alone the contents. It may say "holy bible" but they don't really believe that, they believe that some parts are of God & some parts contain errors and they get to pick and choose which is which. If one takes that approach I fail to see how one could possibly genuinely believe the scriptures are holy as they claim to be.

If someone uses The Message Bible to bring someone to Christ and they accept Jesus as their savior then great!

When we say God only favors certain translations, doesin't that mean we are limiting the power of God?

If God's Word is Preserved, Which ones are? Also, which ones are not preserved?

That's the point that is conveniently forgotten by many.

In the Bible there are examples of "originals" being destroyed. Starting with Moses and the ORIGINAL 10 commandments. God did preserve those by His own hand. Do we doubt the 10 commandents because we can't put the original pieces of stone back together? No, as Christians, we understand (should understand) that God did and does preserve the scriptures, even though the evidence isn't as "dramatic" as the second writing of the commandments.

The only one that can truly be the "best" one is the original texts written by Moses, David, Paul, etc...

It's not that simple. One can't look at the dozens of different versions, all disagreeing with on another on various points, and believe they are all equal.

I know some solid Christians who mostly use the NIV so I know God can work through it, but I don't know how because to me the NIV has always seemed like very watered down tea, at best.

For serious growth in the Lord, I don't think anything is better than the KJB.

The NIV was written by some gnostics and a militant lesbian among others. It's root is rotten as it comes from the Alexandrian texts via the gnostic/socialists Wescott and Hort.

One cannot learn the doctrines of Christ properly by reading and studying the corrupt NIV. The NIV was the bible that was in my hands every day for three years after my salvation. I was awash in all manner of error with the modern-charismatics until the Holy Spirit burdened me to study the different translations. It's been two years since I became a member of one of Jesus Christ's New Testament churches and a faithfull reader of the King James Bible. As others have said, I learned the doctrines we're supposed to follow very quickly with the King James but still struggle to de-program myself from the rotten and corrupt NIV text.

I read through that link. Thank you very much!
:)

Hello all,

I have yet another question (I am fascinated discussing things like with with people)

I know people who are IFB KJB only. I respect that.
Some are part of a group on Fabcebook "I am a Independent Fundamentalist 1611 King James Only Baptist" -something like that.
When I mention the Apocrypha they get very defensive, saying its pagan and evil. But as I studied more on the subject I found that the 1611 King James had the Apocrapha. and it was not until 274 years after it was printed that it was removed.
So by saying you believe the 1611 Edition of the King James is the one true Bible... why do you reject the Apocrapha?

I would love to hear your thoughts about this, as I am confused about why people claim the Apocrapha is wrong yet it was in the very Bible we cherish.

Wycliffe translated into English from the Latin Vulgate. It was then hand-copied & distributed. It was so successful that there are nearly 200 copies in museums.

You might find it difficult to read, even when type-set:

JN 3:16 For God louede so the world, that he yaf his `oon bigetun sone, that ech man that bileueth in him perische n

ot

, but haue euerlastynge lijf.

The English reformation effectively began with Wycliffe, 150 years before Luther.

Thank you :)

I really couldn't answer that question. All I know is that God directed me to the KJB and from that moment on the Word opened up to me, I was able to memorize with relative ease and I grew like I never thought possible before that.

I didn't come by the KJB because I was taught that or told I had to, it was after prayer and asking about this that the Lord led me to the KJB.

The Geneva Bible was hard to find until more recent years. It's seen a revival of sorts among some who hold to more of a Reformed Theology.

The main problem many had with the Geneva Bible was that it was filled with study notes written from a Reformed, Calvinist viewpoint. This is one of the reasons the King James Bible was specifically put forth without study notes.