Members Standing Firm In Christ Posted November 11, 2014 Members Share Posted November 11, 2014 To some extent, I thank God for our local Church. For, had it not been for them, I would not be reaching the people I reach today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted November 11, 2014 Members Share Posted November 11, 2014 With regards to what Jim brought up, I think the great danger lies with so many these days either replacing the local church with TV preachers, books by various Christian authors, radio sermons, online preaching; or in giving little heed to their local church pastor while looking to others for spiritual guidance. Â I don't think there is anything wrong with listening to or reading Pastor Markle's sermons which he posts here (for instance) but we shouldn't skip attending a home church to do so. The same is true with reading or listening to other Christian authors and preachers. Â Hopefully, we each have at least a good, if not very good, home church and pastor, and that's where we should receive most of our Christian teaching and training; that's where our spiritual gifts and "works" should go to, or through. Â When it comes to Christian authors or preachers who ere on some points, who may be weak in some areas, or who might be outright fraudulent in some cases, it's up to each of us to decide if they are worth our time and attention. Myself, those who have proven to be fraudulent time and again, I would want nothing to do with, regardless of how sound they might be on some point. There are other, non-fraudulent authors/preachers out there who would be better to give attention to. When it comes to the others I mentioned, there are some I might read or listen to some of their stuff, but if they are very far off on some things I wouldn't recommend them to others. Â I read a lot, but my main feasting is upon what I receive from sermons, Sunday school and Bible studies at my home church led by our pastor. Jim_Alaska and Miss Daisy 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Jim_Alaska Posted November 12, 2014 Administrators Share Posted November 12, 2014 John, you said it a bit differently than I did, but you are right on the money concerning what I was feebly attempting to impart. That's what I get for trying to think and write so early in the morning. Thank you for your input. John81 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Pastor Matt Posted November 12, 2014 Administrators Share Posted November 12, 2014 Â Matt, this is why your site is dead. You allow blatant heretics to teach their rotten calvinism and to the praise of several here who should know better and you allow a mod to operate who does not accept the doctrinal position of this board. You either need to get a spine Matt or change the doctrinal statement. Â Â Thank you for your input my friend. Let me know if you are even in New England so we can do lunch. HappyChristian and DaveW 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Standing Firm In Christ Posted November 12, 2014 Members Share Posted November 12, 2014 Hey Bro Matt! Long time no see! (no really, I'm blind) Seriously Bro, if you are ever in NorthWestern Mississippi, let us know. Would love to meet and talk over some coffee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members allen32 Posted November 12, 2014 Members Share Posted November 12, 2014 (edited) i have a copy if the 1611 KJV bible in it has the book of apocrypha which was around 274 yrs. then they removed it in 1885.  i do use the 1885 KJV the more you read it the more it comes to life and you know it better. Edited November 12, 2014 by allen32 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members heartstrings Posted November 12, 2014 Members Share Posted November 12, 2014 Question; was the ''Apocrypha'' included in the original 1611 tramslation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members allen32 Posted November 12, 2014 Members Share Posted November 12, 2014 it was included in the 1611 kvj and here are the books. 1 esdras, 2esdras, tOBit , judith , addition to esther , wisdom of solomon , ecclesiasticus , baruch , letter of jeremian , prayer of azariah,susanna , bel and the dragon , prayer or manasseh , 1 maccabees and 2 maccabees they were taking out if the KJV in 1885Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Standing Firm In Christ Posted November 12, 2014 Members Share Posted November 12, 2014 There are varying opinions by scholars on both sides of the Theological Fence of Bibliography. Some say the Apocrypha was included in the orignial 1611, others assert that it was later added to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Steve Schwenke Posted November 12, 2014 Members Share Posted November 12, 2014 The original 1611 did include the Apocrypha, but it with a note that it was recommended reading rather than scripture. prophet1 and Pastor Matt 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Standing Firm In Christ Posted November 12, 2014 Members Share Posted November 12, 2014 Thank you, Steve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Ukulelemike Posted November 13, 2014 Moderators Share Posted November 13, 2014 i HAVE SEEN AND HANDLED A FIRST EDITION 1611 COPY, AND IT DOES, INDEED, INCLUD THE APOCRYPHA Genevanpreacher 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Ukulelemike Posted November 13, 2014 Moderators Share Posted November 13, 2014 Let me apologize for unintentionally mis-directing this post with my statement on Peter Ruckman. It wasn't really meant as an all-out attack or repudiation on his work-I have read many good things by him. I was merely trying to state in what way I am KJV only. Â We've had a lot ab0out Riplinger and Ruckman on the subject: there are many other very good writers on the subject. Maybe we should investigate some of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members allen32 Posted November 18, 2014 Members Share Posted November 18, 2014 i know a lot if people who use both KJV and the nKJv i only use the KJV and the more you read it and study it the better it come to you Standing Firm In Christ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members prophet1 Posted November 22, 2014 Members Share Posted November 22, 2014 I completely understood Riplinger's point in Hazardous Materials, basically she says your stupid for using Greek and Hebrew because Satan is corrupting the bible through corrupt lexicons, all based on quotes that you can't even trust. Walk into your Church bookstore, pick up the college textbook on exegesis, read the intro where the editor thanks Zondervan for the use of the NIV on CD to aid in his study. Then get back to me on "corrupt". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. 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.