ASongOfDegrees

No contention here, "TheSword" believes that every word in the KJV to be an potential error because of how "definitions change over the years". He'll let us know when he gets his lexicon out. The prOBlem in this forum, as in all of America, people think being nice is being spiritual and nOBody wants to call it like it is. Anyone who waves his bible around proclaiming it to be the word of God without error then corrects it at every chance he/she can is a lying hypocrite. How's that be being kind?

I would discuss things with you but my knowledge of the original languages are limited. I get a kick out of how bible correctors always like to appear so holy and only want to speak to edification when all they do is correct the bible. How edifying. You are a dime a dozen. I just wish you would all stop posing as KJV bible believers. I would respect you much more.

I am in awe of your knowledge of the originals. The fact that there are 250 English versions of the bible since 1900 and the unlimited heresies that have sprung up since that time (the modern day Charismatic movement itself began a year after the ASV came to America) should be enough to tell you about your lovely original languages and the mess they have caused.

Being harsh, blunt or rebuking false teachings is not a personal attack. I haven't seen too many personal attacks other than an occasional charge against someone's character in handling scripture which personal I don't care about. Just don't say anything about my mother! I don't believe anyone in here hates anyone else. Maybe a little put off or frustrated, but no hatred. Paul turned people over to Satan for teaching heresies. How's that for love? (Not suggesting anyone in this forum should be turned over to Satan.) You can't be thin skinned when debating the truth.

Scofield was deceived like a lot of bible scholars, as well as regular Christian folks, about the issue of textual critcism. The time he lived was when the teachings of higher criticism began to really take off and many were swept off their feet. It could be possible that if he were alive today things may be different. That being said, the difference between Scofield and Wescott/Hort was Scofield had a heart for the dissemination of truth while Wescott and Hort, in their own words, INTENTIONALLY set out to alter the words of God.

I guess a preterist would think animals being in a zoo together would qualify as a fulfillment of Isaiah 11.

You won't find a case of a Muslim ever being arrested for protesting. So that tells me it's legal. And they fear the Muslims too. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/20/watch-the-wild-vid-of-islamists-protesting-in-england-shariah-is-an-inevitability/

What the preterist will do is quote Galatians 6:16 and Romans 9:7, then use the Greek to change the word "covenant" to "testament" (or just refuse to recognize the difference between the two words) and voila, they just kicked Israel out of the passage and replaced her with the church.

There's a cop right there in the photos? How can it not be legal?

Adding a little Greek at the end of your comment smacks of elitism. The prOBlem with you is the KJV is not good enough. So why beat around the bush and waste your time with it? Just go with the originals full steam ahead because that's where you are heading anyways. Oh, by the way, most heresies and "strange doctrines" don't not come from the meaning of English words but rather from people messing around with the "original languages".

Brother, you might as well toss out the KJV and read your originals.

Legal in Great Britain:

The IFB label was important at one time to distinguish from modernist churches but since that time (I say around the 1980's) the waters have been too muddied within the IFB movement for the label to mean much anymore.

It is relevant because it shows what's really at the heart of the issue. Romans 11:17-24 [17] And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; [18] Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. [19] Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. [20] Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: [21] For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. [22] Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. [23] And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. [24] For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?

It was given for those saints who will go through the Tribulation.