King James Version Bible vs. Modern English Perversions

[Marymog]

Nope, didn't say that.

God Bless,
Taken

Please don't partially quote me. There was a question mark at the end of that sentence which means I want to know what you think.

If one was to look at your out of context quote it would appear I am making a statement. It is dishonest to partially quote anyone to make a question look like a statement.

You are the one who mentioned Israelites, Jews and Jewish laws in your statement. That left me with the impression that you were suggesting it was a Jewish law and not a Christian law. If that's not what you meant then say it.

If you DO NOT believe it was only a Jewish Law then everything I said on this matter still holds firm.

The Church decides who is a pagan or tax collector, not the individual Christian.

Love, Mary

 

[mjrhealth]

Thank you. What man do you listen to?

Curious Mary

None dont you get it, Jesus isnt a religion havnt you figured that out yet?? So many offended by His name.

Joh_14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

So many seem to have found another way.

 

[Marymog]

None dont you get it, Jesus isnt a religion havnt you figured that out yet?? So many offended by His name.

Joh_14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

So many seem to have found another way.

You are a man. Aren't you?

Are you saying you don't even listen to yourself?

Curious Mary

 

[Taken]

Now you have me REALLY confused. It appears in your statement just before this you think it is a Jewish thing.

Jews were the teachers. Jews and Gentiles learned from the Jews. I didn't say it was exclusive to Jews.

Not it seems you are saying we as Christians can take it to our church clergy? I'm confused.

Sure a Christian can take a matter to thier clergy. However if the two parties are not members of the church: I doubt the church clergy would have much influence in the matter.

None the less.....I agree with you that individual men certainly could know if another Trespassed against them; then as today.

But scripture makes it clear that we MAY not know what a trespass is and we could be trespassing unintentionally.

I agree a person may not Trespass Intentionally....what we would call an accident.
but then not know it? Eh...not sure I agree with that.

That is why there was disagreement with WHAT a trespass was.

I don't see the dilemma of Knowing WHAT a trespass is.

That is why we were told to go get two or three other brothers to confer with. If that person didn't listen to us WE didn't decide if it was a trespass. We took it to THE CHURCH and it was THE CHURCH who decided if it was a trespass. The Church may tell the three of us we are wrong and the person that we thought was trespassing was right. It wasn't up to the individual (or the three of us) to decide. It was up to The Church.

The Jews had Laws that spelled out the Trespasses. Taking the matter to the Church, was similar to taking the matter to a "civil court"... The resolve is based on evidence and Law; not feelings, and buddies, etc.

Take it up civilly??????

Jesus is CLEARLY talking about the laws of God (sin), not of man. Civil courts don't enforce sin.

My point was speaking about brothers, and what that means;
Also about how to deal with Trespasses between brothers;
Also how to deal with Trespasses NOT between clan/tribal brothers, relative brothers, or religious brothers.

A civil court has laws to handle civil cases that deal with Trespasses; that can not be resolved between the two parties; or within the church.

What does the time frame matter?????

Gods laws are universal and are not held by time.

Seriously? For Laws to have force and effect; a person must first be subject to the Law.

Are you subject to Chinese Laws?
Are you subject to Hebrew/Jewish Laws?

As far as Gods Laws...an individual makes himself Subject God; and thereafter Subject to the Laws of God that applies to the man.

Reading literacy was not prevalent in society for another 1600 years AFTER scripture was written. It doesn't matter if I can read or not. A lot of people today can't read. Does that mean THEY have to go to The Church to get a decision but since I can read I get to decide????? I'm confused.

If a person is subject to A Law...don't you think it is a hinderence if the person can not read, to KNOW what is or is not required of him? Illerate people, are dependent upon others to tell them....and hope the person telling him is honest.

The Jewish Church WAS the "GO TO" place for men to sit and hear the Jewish Laws.

Scripture CLEARLY says THE CHURCH decides if scripture has been violated.

.

Not sure what you mean...
Clearly where?
"Scripture" violated? What does that mean?

Each individual doesn't decide.

Too simplistic.

God Bless,
Taken

 

[Marymog]

Jews were the teachers. Jews and Gentiles learned from the Jews. I didn't say it was exclusive to Jews.

Sure a Christian can take a matter to thier clergy. However if the two parties are not members of the church: I doubt the church clergy would have much influence in the matter.

I agree a person may not Trespass Intentionally....what we would call an accident.
but then not know it? Eh...not sure I agree with that.

I don't see the dilemma of Knowing WHAT a trespass is.

The Jews had Laws that spelled out the Trespasses. Taking the matter to the Church, was similar to taking the matter to a "civil court"... The resolve is based on evidence and Law; not feelings, and buddies, etc.

My point was speaking about brothers, and what that means;
Also about how to deal with Trespasses between brothers;
Also how to deal with Trespasses NOT between clan/tribal brothers, relative brothers, or religious brothers.

A civil court has laws to handle civil cases that deal with Trespasses; that can not be resolved between the two parties; or within the church.


Seriously? For Laws to have force and effect; a person must first be subject to the Law.

Are you subject to Chinese Laws?
Are you subject to Hebrew/Jewish Laws?

As far as Gods Laws...an individual makes himself Subject God; and thereafter Subject to the Laws of God that applies to the man.

If a person is subject to A Law...don't you think it is a hinderence if the person can not read, to KNOW what is or is not required of him? Illerate people, are dependent upon others to tell them....and hope the person telling him is honest.

The Jewish Church WAS the "GO TO" place for men to sit and hear the Jewish Laws.

Not sure what you mean...
Clearly where?
"Scripture" violated? What does that mean?

Too simplistic.

God Bless,
Taken

Thank you.

"If the two parties are not members of the church" then they wouldn't have a church or clergy to go to. Would they? I'm confused!!

You may not see a dilemma in knowing what a trespass is but scripture clearly says if a trespass occurs and one of the persons does not think they have trespassed then the ULTIMATE decision if it is a trespass is given to The Church; not individuals. Replace the word "trespass" with SIN and it makes more sense. The Church decides WHAT a sin is, not you.

Similar to a civil court? A civil court puts you in jail or fines you if you have done wrong and don't agree with them. God puts you in hell if you have done wrong and don't agree with Him. Not so similar.

The Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth (*1 Timothy). Not you. Not me. No individual is. Your truth does not trump my truth.

If a person sins and he is told by three of his brothers he has sinned it is not up to the three to make the final decision of he is to be treated as a pagan or tax collector. It is not up to the individual to decide. Scripture says The Church is the final authority.

Brothers are our fellow Christians. We are all to be ONE under ONE church with ONE authority. Not thousands of different churches with thousands of different authorities. Jesus started ONE church. That is why we are told to take our differences to The Church and The Church is the pillar or Truth.

We went from One Church with one doctrine and one authority to thousands of different churches, doctrines and autorities after the reformation.

Mary

 

[Taken]

Please don't partially quote me. There was a question mark at the end of that sentence which means I want to know what you think.

If one was to look at your out of context quote it would appear I am making a statement. It is dishonest to partially quote anyone to make a question look like a statement.

You thought I was speaking exclusively of Jews. I wasn't.

The continuation of your post was You speaking as if your assumption was correct. There was no need for me to repost the rest of your comment, I was not going to address your assumption and comment about your assumption.

If you think that dishonest, so be it.
I think it is irrelevant to post what is irrelevant.

You are the one who mentioned Israelites, Jews and Jewish laws in your statement. That left me with the impression that you were suggesting it was a Jewish law and not a Christian law. If that's not what you meant then say it.

Already told you; the point was about BROTHERS!

BROTHERS in Scripture have several meanings; Some are PARTICULAR to the Jews, and NOT Christians.

If you DO NOT believe it was only a Jewish Law then everything I said on this matter still holds firm.

Whatever. You were not on topic and I am not going to re explain it.

The Church decides who is a pagan or tax collector, not the individual Christian.

What is "The Church" you are speaking of?

God Bless,
Taken

 

[mjrhealth]

You are a man. Aren't you?

Are you saying you don't even listen to yourself?

Curious Mary

SO angry, what was it you said. you are going to be baptized into the "catholic: church... not Gods kingdom, not our Lords church,, like miss markl who was a catholic, but just got baptized into teh anglican church, because that is what teh royal family belong to,

Wake up to yourself.

 

[Taken]

Thank you.

"If the two parties are not members of the church" then they wouldn't have a church or clergy to go to. Would they? I'm confused!!

Of the SAME Church. If one is a Catholic and one a Baptist...today, (since you say the Chruch is to settle the differences)...what is going to make one go to the others clergy?

You may not see a dilemma in knowing what a trespass is but scripture clearly says if a trespass occurs and one of the persons does not think they have trespassed then the ULTIMATE decision if it is a trespass is given to The Church; not individuals. Replace the word "trespass" with SIN and it makes more sense. The Church decides WHAT a sin is, not you.

Actually scripture says of trespasses between men, to first try and settle the matter between them.

I do not agree the Church decides what trespass is or decides what Sin is.
And that would apply to me, in this era.

And not considering the time-frame, or Jew or Gentile, or Christian; "the Church" has different meanings.

Similar to a civil court? A civil court puts you in jail or fines you if you have done wrong and don't agree with them.

The court is there to determine the evidence; and based on the evidence does what the law says. The result could be the case dismissed, a ruling to favor one or the other parties, and then a sentence; which might be community service, a fine, or jail or prison.

In Jewish Law, for years they had no Nation, thus the Clergy had "positive" laws ie Moses' Laws and "negative" laws, called curses, which we call penal laws, That was first appointed to Aaron. Moses taught the Laws;
And a violation of the Law, the Jews would go to the clergy, to see what the "curse" laws said was their sentence, if found to be guilty, based on Moses law, and evidence and testimony; just like in a Civil Case today;
Which Israel has; as well as they Religious Laws.

God puts you in hell if you have done wrong and don't agree with Him. Not so similar.

Actually, it doesn't really matter IF a man has done wrong, all men are born in sin; And the Lord provides Forgiveness; for anyone who trusts to believe in Him and His Word; And gives them eternal life; that a trip to hell, is not possible.

The Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth (*1 Timothy). Not you. Not me. No individual is. Your truth does not trump my truth.

The foundation and pillar IS Jesus, who IS the Truth and the Word of God.

It is given to EVERY man, who seeks and receives; the Lords Truth, the Lords Word.

Every man who becomes Saved and Born Again becomes the body of Christ Jesus' Church. "Such" men become "brothers" IN Christ. Jesus is the foundation, the corner stone, the Head of His Church, not built with mens hands.

My truth regarding Spiritual things; is based on ME learning the Word of God, and adopting the Lords Word unto myself.

I know what I read and learn and study and trust. I have no clue what you do. So, yes, we can be in disagreement.

If a person sins and he is told by three of his brothers he has sinned it is not up to the three to make the final decision of he is to be treated as a pagan or tax collector. It is not up to the individual to decide. Scripture says The Church is the final authority.

Can't even have a response to you on that.
No clue, who the person is, why it is a sin, who are his brothers, (Jews, relatives, spiritual brothers), or what kind of Church you are talking about.

Everyone IS not the same. Different things apply to different people.

Brothers are our fellow Christians.

Can be. Can also be your biological brother. Can also be two Jews. Can also be Jesus.

We are all to be ONE under ONE church with ONE authority.

All people are not. Jews, Chinese, East Indians, the Arabs, and what about people who call themselves Christians who just started going to a Christian Church...but are not saved and born again; are they your fellow Christian?

Not thousands of different churches with thousands of different authorities.

Sure there are.

Jesus started ONE church.

And? Has everyone JOINED His Church?

That is why we are told to take our differences to The Church and The Church is the pillar or Truth.

So how do you handle a difference with a Muslim?

We went from One Church with one doctrine and one authority to thousands of different churches, doctrines and autorities after the reformation.

That happened in Genesis. Abraham's own father was following after idols and Gentile customs.

Just saying, there are too many different people, believing different things, to simply ignore timelines, and consideration of what people believe.

God Bless,
Taken

 

[Davy]

Davy,

I think we are in agreement here. Those at Berea consulted God's Holy Writ to confirm what Paul was preaching (preaching is ORAL) to them. And Paul commended them for doing that. They DID NOT accept only what Paul was telling them ORALLY the consulted scripture to confirm it. They came to believe in Jesus because of BOTH the written AND the ORAL word. Not one OR the other. The Thessalonians REJECTED the oral teaching of Paul. Maybe we are talking past each other....

Jesus rebuked the Jewish leaders because they were hypocrites for not practicing what they preached: The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice. He didn't reject them because of their ORAL traditions. In fact Jesus instructed his disciples to observe what they tell you since they sat in Moses seat.

Do you know what "Moses seat" is? The significance of it?

The Protestants who broke away from the RCC have their own ORAL traditions that they follow.

The Protestants who broke away from those Protestants have their own oral traditions that they follow.

The Protestants who broke away from the broken away Protestants have their own oral traditions that they follow.

And so on, and so on until today, 500 years later, we have churches that perform gay marriages and teach abortion is not murder. How sad.

Mary

No, we are not saying the same thing.

You keep defending the idea of ORAL tradition by comparing it to Paul preaching The Gospel of Jesus Christ, which is not about tradition, but about The Word of God. Men's traditions, what Jesus called the "commandments of men", has nothing to do with The Gospel.

Matt 15:8-9
8 This people draweth nigh unto Me with their mouth, and honoureth Me with their lips; but their heart is far from Me.
9 But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
KJV


Have some Protestant Churches created men's traditions also? Yes, over time, but none of them I know of exalted a bishop upon a throne supposedly given authority to act like a monarch. This the papal system has done.

 

[Taken]

No, we are not saying the same thing.

You keep defending the idea of ORAL tradition by comparing it to Paul preaching The Gospel of Jesus Christ, which is not about tradition, but about The Word of God. Men's traditions, what Jesus called the "commandments of men", has nothing to do with The Gospel.

Matt 15:8-9
8 This people draweth nigh unto Me with their mouth, and honoureth Me with their lips; but their heart is far from Me.
9 But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
KJV


Have some Protestant Churches created men's traditions also? Yes, over time, but none of them I know of exalted a bishop upon a throne supposedly given authority to act like a monarch. This the papal system has done.

Agree.

"Father" Abraham...the faithful servant.

"Father" on earth, of many nations -
Established by God

"Father" on earth, of Jesus' earthly genealogy-
Established by God

"Father" on earth, of children IN Christ -
Established by God

"Father" Peter, Pope, Bishop of Rome..
Established by men

God Bless,
Taken

 

[Marymog]

No, we are not saying the same thing.

You keep defending the idea of ORAL tradition by comparing it to Paul preaching The Gospel of Jesus Christ, which is not about tradition, but about The Word of God. Men's traditions, what Jesus called the "commandments of men", has nothing to do with The Gospel.

Matt 15:8-9
8 This people draweth nigh unto Me with their mouth, and honoureth Me with their lips; but their heart is far from Me.
9 But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
KJV


Have some Protestant Churches created men's traditions also? Yes, over time, but none of them I know of exalted a bishop upon a throne supposedly given authority to act like a monarch. This the papal system has done.

Dear Davy,

I don't defend oral tradition. Scripture defends it: So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth OR by letter.

We, as scripture says, should not for the sake of our tradition make void the word of God. That would make us hypocrites (Matthew 15:-7). Can you name me one Catholic tradition that voids the word of God?

Scripture establishes the office of the bishop. The pope is the bishop of Rome. I am not sure what YOU mean by monarch? Have you ever heard of the Bishop Justin Welby OR Bishop Heinrich Bedford-Strohm OR Joel Olstean etc. etc. Are they not the head of their churches?

Who is the head of your church?

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Of the SAME Church. If one is a Catholic and one a Baptist...today, (since you say the Chruch is to settle the differences)...what is going to make one go to the others clergy?

Now we are getting to the meat of the matter.....what is going to make one go to the others clergy??? It stands to reason if you are a member of The Church, you wouldn't go to the clergy of a DIFFERENT church to settle your differences.

Scripture establishes One Church with One authority and One doctrine. Jesus wants us all to be One, not many. There can only be One Church and only One can be right. Is it the Baptist or the Catholic Church (the two you mentioned)? Or is it the church that Taken attends?

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

SO angry, what was it you said. you are going to be baptized into the "catholic: church... not Gods kingdom, not our Lords church,, like miss markl who was a catholic, but just got baptized into teh anglican church, because that is what teh royal family belong to,

Wake up to yourself.

You didn't answer my questions:

You are a man. Aren't you? Are you saying you don't even listen to yourself?

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

What is "The Church" you are speaking of?
God Bless,
Taken

The Church that Jesus established when he said, For you are Peter, rock, and upon this rock I will build my Church. And the gates of hell will not prevail against it.

What Church do you speak of?

Mary

 

[Davy]

Dear Davy,

I don't defend oral tradition. Scripture defends it: So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth OR by letter.

We, as scripture says, should not for the sake of our tradition make void the word of God. That would make us hypocrites (Matthew 15:-7). Can you name me one Catholic tradition that voids the word of God?

Scripture establishes the office of the bishop. The pope is the bishop of Rome. I am not sure what YOU mean by monarch? Have you ever heard of the Bishop Justin Welby OR Bishop Heinrich Bedford-Strohm OR Joel Olstean etc. etc. Are they not the head of their churches?

Who is the head of your church?

Mary

This site is not about a re-hashing of the history and traditions of the Roman Catholic Church. I suggest you go elsewhere if you want to get into all that. The mere existence of the Protestant Church and the historical European wars between them is already hashed out in the history books too, if you're looking for more reasons of why the Protestant Church came into existence.

 

[Marymog]

This site is not about a re-hashing of the history and traditions of the Roman Catholic Church. I suggest you go elsewhere if you want to get into all that. The mere existence of the Protestant Church and the historical European wars between them is already hashed out in the history books too, if you're looking for more reasons of why the Protestant Church came into existence.

Hi Davy,

This site is "Christianity Board", not Protestant board. A board where all Christians can come and speak their mind. I know of no rule of this board that says us Christians can't re-hash the history and tradition of our Christian faith. There is a debate and a apologetics section on this forum. Are we not allowed to debate our history and traditions or be an apologetic for our doctrine?

The reason the protestant churches ORIGNIALLY came into existence is because the reformers rejected the Catholic Churches doctrines, traditions and beliefs. Shortly after the reformation there where then people who rejected the teachings of the original reformers. Then there were people who rejected the reformers of the reformers. Are they welcome on this site? Does Davy decide who is welcome?

I ask again: Can you name me one Catholic tradition that voids the word of God?

Are they not the head of their churches?

Mary

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Hi Davy,

This site is "Christianity Board", not Protestant board. A board where all Christians can come and speak their mind. I know of no rule of this board that says us Christians can't re-hash the history and tradition of our Christian faith. There is a debate and a apologetics section on this forum. Are we not allowed to debate our history and traditions or be an apologetic for our doctrine?

The reason the protestant churches ORIGNIALLY came into existence is because the reformers rejected the Catholic Churches doctrines, traditions and beliefs. Shortly after the reformation there where then people who rejected the teachings of the original reformers. Then there were people who rejected the reformers of the reformers. Are they welcome on this site? Does Davy decide who is welcome?

I ask again: Can you name me one Catholic tradition that voids the word of God?

Are they not the head of their churches?

Mary

Matthew 23:9;
And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.
The pope calls himself "Holy Father".
The nerve.....

 

[Windmillcharge]

You are of the belief that no church and no man on earth knows The Truth of scripture? We all have SOME truth but no one has the full Truth?

Mary

I believe that the bible contains all the information we need to be saved, but I also believe that people have added their traditions to the bible that are not esential for salvation.

So whether one is a strict baptists or a liberal methodist, a roman catholic or an idepentant , one is saved by ones personal relationship with Jesus, not ones place in an organisation.

 

[Windmillcharge]

What sacred language?
What are you making up now?
There's not enough untruth rolling around?
There's no such thing as a sacred language.

The reluctance of the RCC to authorse the translation of the bible into the common tonge wasin part because they believed latin was a 'special' language.

It is similar with the kjonly camp they think that God only speaksuseing 16th centuary dialect.

Yes you are correct there is no sacred language, Gods word is to be in every language, dialect and in the common speech so ordinary people can meet with God.

 

[Marymog]

Matthew 23:9;
And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.
The pope calls himself "Holy Father".
The nerve.....

Thank you.

What does your statement have to do with my post?

According to your interpretation of scripture I guess I can't fulfill scripture and honor my FATHER and mother?

And when Jesus called Abraham FATHER in Luke 16 He was wrong also?

Paul really messed up and violated scripture in I Corinthians 4 and in Romans 4 when refers to himself as FATHER and Abraham as FATHER.

But I digress.

Mary