TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
sMASH wrote:Rocketraz1982, i dont have the capacity to understand those things so, but quatam mechanics have that electrons pop in and out of this dimension repeatedly and frequently, so much so that they appear to be at two places at the same time. am i on a right path?
relativity, from my interpretation, is something like newtons laws; very static and definite. i doubt that something so random and volatile could merge easily with somethings so definite.
i dont believe that time travel is significantly possible, but string theory, as far as i can understand, kind of explains logically, in a way where i see the possibility of multiverses, and time travel.
Quran - 21:104 al-Anbiya' -Verse: 104
'The Day when We shall roll up the heavens as a recorder rolleth up a written scroll. As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it. (It is) a promise (binding) upon Us. Lo! We are to perform it.'
now, when i found out about string theory and how space/time supposed to operate, where it can be folded back on it self, i remembered this verse. this describes something resembling what that theory suggests. at this point i say it is interesting, no more.
Qur'an 51:47
"The heaven, We have built it with power. Verily. We are expanding it."
this is the one which makes me think of relativity.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:^ megadoc1 also claimed he can heal people and cast out demons very true and his group is very powerful yes Christians are very powerful against the kingdom of darkness
but we have yet to see an iota of proof of these claims. yuh ain't come and see yet thats why
He claims that Roman Catholics, Presbyterians and Anglicans have twisted Christianity and carry out improper practices such as idol worshiping. I never speak about the underlined groups you mentioned
His group's practices are correct however and seen as good in God's eye's which is why they are so powerful.Mark 16:20 (King James Version)
20And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.
He also claimed the earth is 6000 years old, another point which he failed to provide a single piece of evidence for. I never made that claim on this forum ,you did assumed I said that
megadoc1 also claimed he himself does not require medication, true
as he has had no need to even take a panadol since he joined this powerful group.
is that an assumption of yours? because I never said that ,what I said is that I have no known medical issues
He said his group is powerful but there is still need for hospitals because people do not believe in Jesus.true He also said that I can bring someone for him to heal and they nor I need to believe,true so I am not sure whether you need to believe or not, to be healed.no Jesus! need for hospitals, lots of them//////////people healing in the name of Jesus all one needs to do is receive
In the mean time doctors and hospitals are still very much needed in the world.
true but there is a greater need for Jesus
because the suffering here is temporal after that its eternal without God's saving grace that comes thru faith in Jesus christ
megadoc1 claims his way is right and gandhi's way is wrong.
am............ I don't have a way ,I am following Jesus,anyone who claims to have a way is lost
big claims, no witness zero proof.
am... I think you are the one missing his posts, some very good ones, go back and take a readComputerman wrote:toyo682 wrote:^^^^I think the man was merely trying to say he is bias towards Christianity, but I guess none of you are bias in anyway, nope not at all...
Bias towards Christianity and being abusive and disrespectful to others and their beliefs are two different things! look at page one alone,when all the op wanted to know what was your best encounter with God check all the way to 70 pges of "disrespect"You should read through this thread again... seems you might have missed a few posts!
biased me againDuane 3NE 2NR wrote:^ megadoc1
claims that Roman Catholics, have twisted Christianity and carry out improper practices such as idol worshiping.
English Bible History
The fascinating story of how we got the Bible in its present form actually starts thousands of years ago, as briefly outlined in our Timeline of Bible Translation History. As a background study, we recommend that you first review our discussion of the Pre-Reformation History of the Bible from 1,400 B.C. to 1,400 A.D., which covers the transmission of the scripture through the original languages of Hebrew and Greek, and the 1,000 years of the Dark & Middle Ages when the Word was trapped in only Latin. Our starting point in this discussion of Bible history, however, is the advent of the scripture in the English language with the “Morning Star of the Reformation”, John Wycliffe.
The first hand-written English language Bible manuscripts were produced in the 1380's AD by John Wycliffe, an Oxford professor, scholar, and theologian. Wycliffe, (also spelled “Wycliff” & “Wyclif”), was well-known throughout Europe for his opposition to the teaching of the organized Church, which he believed to be contrary to the Bible. With the help of his followers, called the Lollards, and his assistant Purvey, and many other faithful scribes, Wycliffe produced dozens of English language manuscript copies of the scriptures. They were translated out of the Latin Vulgate, which was the only source text available to Wycliffe. The Pope was so infuriated by his teachings and his translation of the Bible into English, that 44 years after Wycliffe had died, he ordered the bones to be dug-up, crushed, and scattered in the river!
One of Wycliffe’s followers, John Hus, actively promoted Wycliffe’s ideas: that people should be permitted to read the Bible in their own language, and they should oppose the tyranny of the Roman church that threatened anyone possessing a non-Latin Bible with execution. Hus was burned at the stake in 1415, with Wycliffe’s manuscript Bibles used as kindling for the fire. The last words of John Hus were that, “in 100 years, God will raise up a man whose calls for reform cannot be suppressed.” Almost exactly 100 years later, in 1517, Martin Luther nailed his famous 95 Theses of Contention (a list of 95 issues of heretical theology and crimes of the Roman Catholic Church) into the church door at Wittenberg. The prophecy of Hus had come true! Martin Luther went on to be the first person to translate and publish the Bible in the commonly-spoken dialect of the German people; a translation more appealing than previous German Biblical translations. Foxe’s Book of Martyrs records that in that same year, 1517, seven people were burned at the stake by the Roman Catholic Church for the crime of teaching their children to say the Lord’s Prayer in English rather than Latin.
Johann Gutenberg invented the printing press in the 1450's, and the first book to ever be printed was a Latin language Bible, printed in Mainz, Germany. Gutenberg’s Bibles were surprisingly beautiful, as each leaf Gutenberg printed was later colorfully hand-illuminated. Born as “Johann Gensfleisch” (John Gooseflesh), he preferred to be known as “Johann Gutenberg” (John Beautiful Mountain). Ironically, though he had created what many believe to be the most important invention in history, Gutenberg was a victim of unscrupulous business associates who took control of his business and left him in poverty. Nevertheless, the invention of the movable-type printing press meant that Bibles and books could finally be effectively produced in large quantities in a short period of time. This was essential to the success of the Reformation.
In the 1490’s another Oxford professor, and the personal physician to King Henry the 7th and 8th, Thomas Linacre, decided to learn Greek. After reading the Gospels in Greek, and comparing it to the Latin Vulgate, he wrote in his diary, “Either this (the original Greek) is not the Gospel… or we are not Christians.” The Latin had become so corrupt that it no longer even preserved the message of the Gospel… yet the Church still threatened to kill anyone who read the scripture in any language other than Latin… though Latin was not an original language of the scriptures.
In 1496, John Colet, another Oxford professor and the son of the Mayor of London, started reading the New Testament in Greek and translating it into English for his students at Oxford, and later for the public at Saint Paul’s Cathedral in London. The people were so hungry to hear the Word of God in a language they could understand, that within six months there were 20,000 people packed in the church and at least that many outside trying to get in! (Sadly, while the enormous and beautiful Saint Paul’s Cathedral remains the main church in London today, as of 2003, typical Sunday morning worship attendance is only around 200 people… and most of them are tourists). Fortunately for Colet, he was a powerful man with friends in high places, so he amazingly managed to avoid execution.
In considering the experiences of Linacre and Colet, the great scholar Erasmus was so moved to correct the corrupt Latin Vulgate, that in 1516, with the help of printer John Froben, he published a Greek-Latin Parallel New Testament. The Latin part was not the corrupt Vulgate, but his own fresh rendering of the text from the more accurate and reliable Greek, which he had managed to collate from a half-dozen partial old Greek New Testament manuscripts he had acquired. This milestone was the first non-Latin Vulgate text of the scripture to be produced in a millennium… and the first ever to come off a printing press. The 1516 Greek-Latin New Testament of Erasmus further focused attention on just how corrupt and inaccurate the Latin Vulgate had become, and how important it was to go back and use the original Greek (New Testament) and original Hebrew (Old Testament) languages to maintain accuracy… and to translate them faithfully into the languages of the common people, whether that be English, German, or any other tongue. No sympathy for this “illegal activity” was to be found from Rome… even as the words of Pope Leo X's declaration that "the fable of Christ was quite profitable to him" continued through the years to infuriate the people of God.
William Tyndale was the Captain of the Army of Reformers, and was their spiritual leader. Tyndale holds the distinction of being the first man to ever print the New Testament in the English language. Tyndale was a true scholar and a genius, so fluent in eight languages that it was said one would think any one of them to be his native tongue. He is frequently referred to as the “Architect of the English Language”, (even more so than William Shakespeare) as so many of the phrases Tyndale coined are still in our language today.
Martin Luther had a small head-start on Tyndale, as Luther declared his intolerance for the Roman Church’s corruption on Halloween in 1517, by nailing his 95 Theses of Contention to the Wittenberg Church door. Luther, who would be exiled in the months following the Diet of Worms Council in 1521 that was designed to martyr him, would translate the New Testament into German for the first time from the 1516 Greek-Latin New Testament of Erasmus, and publish it in September of 1522. Luther also published a German Pentateuch in 1523, and another edition of the German New Testament in 1529. In the 1530’s he would go on to publish the entire Bible in German.
William Tyndale wanted to use the same 1516 Erasmus text as a source to translate and print the New Testament in English for the first time in history. Tyndale showed up on Luther's doorstep in Germany in 1525, and by year's end had translated the New Testament into English. Tyndale had been forced to flee England, because of the wide-spread rumor that his English New Testament project was underway, causing inquisitors and bounty hunters to be constantly on Tyndale's trail to arrest him and prevent his project. God foiled their plans, and in 1525-1526 the Tyndale New Testament became the first printed edition of the scripture in the English language. Subsequent printings of the Tyndale New Testament in the 1530's were often elaborately illustrated.
They were burned as soon as the Bishop could confiscate them, but copies trickled through and actually ended up in the bedroom of King Henry VIII. The more the King and Bishop resisted its distribution, the more fascinated the public at large became. The church declared it contained thousands of errors as they torched hundreds of New Testaments confiscated by the clergy, while in fact, they burned them because they could find no errors at all. One risked death by burning if caught in mere possession of Tyndale's forbidden books.
Having God's Word available to the public in the language of the common man, English, would have meant disaster to the church. No longer would they control access to the scriptures. If people were able to read the Bible in their own tongue, the church's income and power would crumble. They could not possibly continue to get away with selling indulgences (the forgiveness of sins) or selling the release of loved ones from a church-manufactured "Purgatory". People would begin to challenge the church's authority if the church were exposed as frauds and thieves. The contradictions between what God's Word said, and what the priests taught, would open the public's eyes and the truth would set them free from the grip of fear that the institutional church held. Salvation through faith, not works or donations, would be understood. The need for priests would vanish through the priesthood of all believers. The veneration of church-canonized Saints and Mary would be called into question. The availability of the scriptures in English was the biggest threat imaginable to the wicked church. Neither side would give up without a fight.
Today, there are only two known copies left of Tyndale’s 1525-26 First Edition. Any copies printed prior to 1570 are extremely valuable. Tyndale's flight was an inspiration to freedom-loving Englishmen who drew courage from the 11 years that he was hunted. Books and Bibles flowed into England in bales of cotton and sacks of flour. Ironically, Tyndale’s biggest customer was the King’s men, who would buy up every copy available to burn them… and Tyndale used their money to print even more! In the end, Tyndale was caught: betrayed by an Englishman that he had befriended. Tyndale was incarcerated for 500 days before he was strangled and burned at the stake in 1536. Tyndale’s last words were, "Oh Lord, open the King of England’s eyes". This prayer would be answered just three years later in 1539, when King Henry VIII finally allowed, and even funded, the printing of an English Bible known as the “Great Bible”. But before that could happen…
Myles Coverdale and John “Thomas Matthew” Rogers had remained loyal disciples the last six years of Tyndale's life, and they carried the English Bible project forward and even accelerated it. Coverdale finished translating the Old Testament, and in 1535 he printed the first complete Bible in the English language, making use of Luther's German text and the Latin as sources. Thus, the first complete English Bible was printed on October 4, 1535, and is known as the Coverdale Bible.
John Rogers went on to print the second complete English Bible in 1537. It was, however, the first English Bible translated from the original Biblical languages of Hebrew & Greek. He printed it under the pseudonym "Thomas Matthew", (an assumed name that had actually been used by Tyndale at one time) as a considerable part of this Bible was the translation of Tyndale, whose writings had been condemned by the English authorities. It is a composite made up of Tyndale's Pentateuch and New Testament (1534-1535 edition) and Coverdale's Bible and some of Roger's own translation of the text. It remains known most commonly as the Matthew-Tyndale Bible. It went through a nearly identical second-edition printing in 1549.
In 1539, Thomas Cranmer, the Archbishop of Canterbury, hired Myles Coverdale at the bequest of King Henry VIII to publish the "Great Bible". It became the first English Bible authorized for public use, as it was distributed to every church, chained to the pulpit, and a reader was even provided so that the illiterate could hear the Word of God in plain English. It would seem that William Tyndale's last wish had been granted...just three years after his martyrdom. Cranmer's Bible, published by Coverdale, was known as the Great Bible due to its great size: a large pulpit folio measuring over 14 inches tall. Seven editions of this version were printed between April of 1539 and December of 1541.
It was not that King Henry VIII had a change of conscience regarding publishing the Bible in English. His motives were more sinister… but the Lord sometimes uses the evil intentions of men to bring about His glory. King Henry VIII had in fact, requested that the Pope permit him to divorce his wife and marry his mistress. The Pope refused. King Henry responded by marrying his mistress anyway, (later having two of his many wives executed), and thumbing his nose at the Pope by renouncing Roman Catholicism, taking England out from under Rome’s religious control, and declaring himself as the reigning head of State to also be the new head of the Church. This new branch of the Christian Church, neither Roman Catholic nor truly Protestant, became known as the Anglican Church or the Church of England. King Henry acted essentially as its “Pope”. His first act was to further defy the wishes of Rome by funding the printing of the scriptures in English… the first legal English Bible… just for spite.
The ebb and flow of freedom continued through the 1540's...and into the 1550's. After King Henry VIII, King Edward VI took the throne, and after his death, the reign of Queen “Bloody” Mary was the next obstacle to the printing of the Bible in English. She was possessed in her quest to return England to the Roman Church. In 1555, John "Thomas Matthew" Rogers and Thomas Cranmer were both burned at the stake. Mary went on to burn reformers at the stake by the hundreds for the "crime" of being a Protestant. This era was known as the Marian Exile, and the refugees fled from England with little hope of ever seeing their home or friends again.
In the 1550's, the Church at Geneva, Switzerland, was very sympathetic to the reformer refugees and was one of only a few safe havens for a desperate people. Many of them met in Geneva, led by Myles Coverdale and John Foxe (publisher of the famous Foxe's Book of Martyrs, which is to this day the only exhaustive reference work on the persecution and martyrdom of Early Christians and Protestants from the first century up to the mid-16th century), as well as Thomas Sampson and William Whittingham. There, with the protection of the great theologian John Calvin (author of the most famous theological book ever published, Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion)and John Knox, the great Reformer of the Scottish Church, the Church of Geneva determined to produce a Bible that would educate their families while they continued in exile.
The New Testament was completed in 1557, and the complete Bible was first published in 1560. It became known as the Geneva Bible. Due to a passage in Genesis describing the clothing that God fashioned for Adam and Eve upon expulsion from the Garden of Eden as "Breeches" (an antiquated form of "Britches"), some people referred to the Geneva Bible as the Breeches Bible.
The Geneva Bible was the first Bible to add numbered verses to the chapters, so that referencing specific passages would be easier. Every chapter was also accompanied by extensive marginal notes and references so thorough and complete that the Geneva Bible is also considered the first English "Study Bible". William Shakespeare quotes hundreds of times in his plays from the Geneva translation of the Bible. The Geneva Bible became the Bible of choice for over 100 years of English speaking Christians. Between 1560 and 1644 at least 144 editions of this Bible were published. Examination of the 1611 King James Bible shows clearly that its translators were influenced much more by the Geneva Bible, than by any other source. The Geneva Bible itself retains over 90% of William Tyndale's original English translation. The Geneva in fact, remained more popular than the King James Version until decades after its original release in 1611! The Geneva holds the honor of being the first Bible taken to America, and the Bible of the Puritans and Pilgrims. It is truly the “Bible of the Protestant Reformation.” Strangely, the famous Geneva Bible has been out-of-print since 1644, so the only way to obtain one is to either purchase an original printing of the Geneva Bible, or a less costly facsimile reproduction of the original 1560 Geneva Bible.
With the end of Queen Mary's bloody reign, the reformers could safely return to England. The Anglican Church, now under Queen Elizabeth I, reluctantly tolerated the printing and distribution of Geneva version Bibles in England. The marginal notes, which were vehemently against the institutional Church of the day, did not rest well with the rulers of the day. Another version, one with a less inflammatory tone was desired, and the copies of the Great Bible were getting to be decades old. In 1568, a revision of the Great Bible known as the Bishop's Bible was introduced. Despite 19 editions being printed between 1568 and 1606, this Bible, referred to as the “rough draft of the King James Version”, never gained much of a foothold of popularity among the people. The Geneva may have simply been too much to compete with.
By the 1580's, the Roman Catholic Church saw that it had lost the battle to suppress the will of God: that His Holy Word be available in the English language. In 1582, the Church of Rome surrendered their fight for "Latin only" and decided that if the Bible was to be available in English, they would at least have an official Roman Catholic English translation. And so, using the corrupt and inaccurate Latin Vulgate as the only source text, they went on to publish an English Bible with all the distortions and corruptions that Erasmus had revealed and warned of 75 years earlier. Because it was translated at the Roman Catholic College in the city of Rheims, it was known as the Rheims New Testament (also spelled Rhemes). The Douay Old Testament was translated by the Church of Rome in 1609 at the College in the city of Douay (also spelled Doway & Douai). The combined product is commonly referred to as the "Doway/Rheims" Version. In 1589, Dr. William Fulke of Cambridge published the "Fulke's Refutation", in which he printed in parallel columns the Bishops Version along side the Rheims Version, attempting to show the error and distortion of the Roman Church's corrupt compromise of an English version of the Bible.
With the death of Queen Elizabeth I, Prince James VI of Scotland became King James I of England. The Protestant clergy approached the new King in 1604 and announced their desire for a new translation to replace the Bishop's Bible first printed in 1568. They knew that the Geneva Version had won the hearts of the people because of its excellent scholarship, accuracy, and exhaustive commentary. However, they did not want the controversial marginal notes (proclaiming the Pope an Anti-Christ, etc.) Essentially, the leaders of the church desired a Bible for the people, with scriptural references only for word clarification or cross-references.
This "translation to end all translations" (for a while at least) was the result of the combined effort of about fifty scholars. They took into consideration: The Tyndale New Testament, The Coverdale Bible, The Matthews Bible, The Great Bible, The Geneva Bible, and even the Rheims New Testament. The great revision of the Bishop's Bible had begun. From 1605 to 1606 the scholars engaged in private research. From 1607 to 1609 the work was assembled. In 1610 the work went to press, and in 1611 the first of the huge (16 inch tall) pulpit folios known today as "The 1611 King James Bible" came off the printing press. A typographical discrepancy in Ruth 3:15 rendered a pronoun "He" instead of "She" in that verse in some printings. This caused some of the 1611 First Editions to be known by collectors as "He" Bibles, and others as "She" Bibles. Starting just one year after the huge 1611 pulpit-size King James Bibles were printed and chained to every church pulpit in England; printing then began on the earliest normal-size printings of the King James Bible. These were produced so individuals could have their own personal copy of the Bible.
The Anglican Church’s King James Bible took decades to overcome the more popular Protestant Church’s Geneva Bible. One of the greatest ironies of history, is that many Protestant Christian churches today embrace the King James Bible exclusively as the “only” legitimate English language translation… yet it is not even a Protestant translation! It was printed to compete with the Protestant Geneva Bible, by authorities who throughout most of history were hostile to Protestants… and killed them. While many Protestants are quick to assign the full blame of persecution to the Roman Catholic Church, it should be noted that even after England broke from Roman Catholicism in the 1500’s, the Church of England (The Anglican Church) continued to persecute Protestants throughout the 1600’s. One famous example of this is John Bunyan, who while in prison for the crime of preaching the Gospel, wrote one of Christian history’s greatest books, Pilgrim’s Progress. Throughout the 1600’s, as the Puritans and the Pilgrims fled the religious persecution of England to cross the Atlantic and start a new free nation in America, they took with them their precious Geneva Bible, and rejected the King’s Bible. America was founded upon the Geneva Bible, not the King James Bible.
Protestants today are largely unaware of their own history, and unaware of the Geneva Bible (which is textually 95% the same as the King James Version, but 50 years older than the King James Version, and not influenced by the Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament that the King James translators admittedly took into consideration). Nevertheless, the King James Bible turned out to be an excellent and accurate translation, and it became the most printed book in the history of the world, and the only book with one billion copies in print. In fact, for over 250 years...until the appearance of the English Revised Version of 1881-1885...the King James Version reigned without much of a rival. One little-known fact, is that for the past 200 years, all King James Bibles published in America are actually the 1769 Baskerville spelling and wording revision of the 1611. The original “1611” preface is deceivingly included by the publishers, and no mention of the fact that it is really the 1769 version is to be found, because that might hurt sales. The only way to obtain a true, unaltered, 1611 version is to either purchase an original pre-1769 printing of the King James Bible, or a less costly facsimile reproduction of the original 1611 King James Bible.
Although the first Bible printed in America was done in the native Algonquin Indian Language by John Eliot in 1663; the first English language Bible to be printed in America by Robert Aitken in 1782 was a King James Version. Robert Aitken’s 1782 Bible was also the only Bible ever authorized by the United States Congress. He was commended by President George Washington for providing Americans with Bibles during the embargo of imported English goods due to the Revolutionary War. In 1808, Robert’s daughter, Jane Aitken, would become the first woman to ever print a Bible… and to do so in America, of course. In 1791, Isaac Collins vastly improved upon the quality and size of the typesetting of American Bibles and produced the first "Family Bible" printed in America... also a King James Version. Also in 1791, Isaiah Thomas published the first Illustrated Bible printed in America...in the King James Version. For more information on the earliest Bibles printed in America from the 1600’s through the early 1800’s, you may wish to review our more detailed discussion of The Bibles of Colonial America.
While Noah Webster, just a few years after producing his famous Dictionary of the English Language, would produce his own modern translation of the English Bible in 1833; the public remained too loyal to the King James Version for Webster’s version to have much impact. It was not really until the 1880’s that England’s own planned replacement for their King James Bible, the English Revised Version(E.R.V.) would become the first English language Bible to gain popular acceptance as a post-King James Version modern-English Bible. The widespread popularity of this modern-English translation brought with it another curious characteristic: the absence of the 14 Apocryphal books.
Up until the 1880’s every Protestant Bible (not just Catholic Bibles) had 80 books, not 66! The inter-testamental books written hundreds of years before Christ called “The Apocrypha” were part of virtually every printing of the Tyndale-Matthews Bible, the Great Bible, the Bishops Bible, the Protestant Geneva Bible, and the King James Bible until their removal in the 1880’s! The original 1611 King James contained the Apocrypha, and King James threatened anyone who dared to print the Bible without the Apocrypha with heavy fines and a year in jail. Only for the last 120 years has the Protestant Church rejected these books, and removed them from their Bibles. This has left most modern-day Christians believing the popular myth that there is something “Roman Catholic” about the Apocrypha. There is, however, no truth in that myth, and no widely-accepted reason for the removal of the Apocrypha in the 1880’s has ever been officially issued by a mainline Protestant denomination.
The Americans responded to England’s E.R.V. Bible by publishing the nearly-identical American Standard Version (A.S.V.) in 1901. It was also widely-accepted and embraced by churches throughout America for many decades as the leading modern-English version of the Bible. In the 1971, it was again revised and called New American Standard Version Bible (often referred to as the N.A.S.V. or N.A.S.B. or N.A.S.). This New American Standard Bible is considered by nearly all evangelical Christian scholars and translators today, to be the most accurate, word-for-word translation of the original Greek and Hebrew scriptures into the modern English language that has ever been produced. It remains the most popular version among theologians, professors, scholars, and seminary students today. Some, however, have taken issue with it because it is so direct and literal a translation (focused on accuracy), that it does not flow as easily in conversational English.
For this reason, in 1973, the New International Version (N.I.V.) was produced, which was offered as a “dynamic equivalent” translation into modern English. The N.I.V. was designed not for “word-for-word” accuracy, but rather, for “phrase-for-phrase” accuracy, and ease of reading even at a Junior High-School reading level. It was meant to appeal to a broader (and in some instances less-educated) cross-section of the general public. Critics of the N.I.V. often jokingly refer to it as the “Nearly Inspired Version”, but that has not stopped it from becoming the best-selling modern-English translation of the Bible ever published.
In 1982, Thomas Nelson Publishers produced what they called the “New King James Version”. Their original intent was to keep the basic wording of the King James to appeal to King James Version loyalists, while only changing the most obscure words and the Elizabethan “thee, thy, thou” pronouns. This was an interesting marketing ploy, however, upon discovering that this was not enough of a change for them to be able to legally copyright the result, they had to make more significant revisions, which defeated their purpose in the first place. It was never taken seriously by scholars, but it has enjoyed some degree of public acceptance, simply because of its clever “New King James Version” marketing name.
In 2002, a major attempt was made to bridge the gap between the simple readability of the N.I.V., and the extremely precise accuracy of the N.A.S.B. This translation is called the English Standard Version (E.S.V.) and is rapidly gaining popularity for its readability and accuracy. The 21st Century will certainly continue to bring new translations of God’s Word in the modern English language.
As Christians, we must be very careful to make intelligent and informed decisions about what translations of the Bible we choose to read. On the liberal extreme, we have people who would give us heretical new translations that attempt to change God’s Word to make it politically correct. One example of this, which has made headlines recently is the Today’s New International Version (T.N.I.V.) which seeks to remove all gender-specific references in the Bible whenever possible! Not all new translations are good… and some are very bad.
But equally dangerous, is the other extreme… of blindly rejecting ANY English translation that was produced in the four centuries that have come after the 1611 King James. We must remember that the main purpose of the Protestant Reformation was to get the Bible out of the chains of being trapped in an ancient language that few could understand, and into the modern, spoken, conversational language of the present day. William Tyndale fought and died for the right to print the Bible in the common, spoken, modern English tongue of his day… as he boldly told one official who criticized his efforts, “If God spare my life, I will see to it that the boy who drives the plowshare knows more of the scripture than you, Sir!”
Will we now go backwards, and seek to imprison God’s Word once again exclusively in ancient translations? Clearly it is not God’s will that we over-react to SOME of the bad modern translations, by rejecting ALL new translations and “throwing the baby out with the bathwater”. The Word of God is unchanging from generation to generation, but language is a dynamic and ever-changing form of communication. We therefore have a responsibility before God as Christians to make sure that each generation has a modern translation that they can easily understand, yet that does not sacrifice accuracy in any way. Let’s be ever mindful that we are not called to worship the Bible. That is called idolatry. We are called to worship the God who gave us the Bible, and who preserved it through the centuries of people who sought to destroy it.
We are also called to preserve the ancient, original English translations of the Bible… and that is what we do here at WWW.GREATSITE.COM
Consider the following textual comparison of the earliest English translations of John 3:16, as shown in the English Hexapla Parallel New Testament:
* 1st Ed. King James (1611): "For God so loued the world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life."
* Rheims (1582): "For so God loued the vvorld, that he gaue his only-begotten sonne: that euery one that beleeueth in him, perish not, but may haue life euerlasting"
* Geneva (1560): "For God so loueth the world, that he hath geuen his only begotten Sonne: that none that beleue in him, should peryshe, but haue euerlasting lyfe."
* Great Bible (1539): "For God so loued the worlde, that he gaue his only begotten sonne, that whosoeuer beleueth in him, shulde not perisshe, but haue euerlasting lyfe."
* Tyndale (1534): "For God so loveth the worlde, that he hath geven his only sonne, that none that beleve in him, shuld perisshe: but shuld have everlastinge lyfe."
* Wycliff (1380): "for god loued so the world; that he gaf his oon bigetun sone, that eche man that bileueth in him perisch not: but haue euerlastynge liif,"
* Anglo-Saxon Proto-English Manuscripts (995 AD): “God lufode middan-eard swa, dat he seade his an-cennedan sunu, dat nan ne forweorde de on hine gely ac habbe dat ece lif."
Timeline of Bible Translation History
1,400 BC: The first written Word of God: The Ten Commandments delivered to Moses.
500 BC: Completion of All Original Hebrew Manuscripts which make up The 39 Books of the Old Testament.
200 BC: Completion of the Septuagint Greek Manuscripts which contain The 39 Old Testament Books AND 14 Apocrypha Books.
1st Century AD: Completion of All Original Greek Manuscripts which make up The 27 Books of the New Testament.
315 AD: Athenasius, the Bishop of Alexandria, identifies the 27 books of the New Testament which are today recognized as the canon of scripture.
382 AD: Jerome's Latin Vulgate Manuscripts Produced which contain All 80 Books (39 Old Test. + 14 Apocrypha + 27 New Test).
500 AD: Scriptures have been Translated into Over 500 Languages.
600 AD: LATIN was the Only Language Allowed for Scripture.
995 AD: Anglo-Saxon (Early Roots of English Language) Translations of The New Testament Produced.
1384 AD: Wycliffe is the First Person to Produce a (Hand-Written) manuscript Copy of the Complete Bible; All 80 Books.
1455 AD: Gutenberg Invents the Printing Press; Books May Now be mass-Produced Instead of Individually Hand-Written. The First Book Ever Printed is Gutenberg's Bible in Latin.
1516 AD: Erasmus Produces a Greek/Latin Parallel New Testament.
1522 AD: Martin Luther's German New Testament.
1526 AD: William Tyndale's New Testament; The First New Testament printed in the English Language.
1535 AD: Myles Coverdale's Bible; The First Complete Bible printed in the English Language (80 Books: O.T. & N.T. & Apocrypha).
1537 AD: Tyndale-Matthews Bible; The Second Complete Bible printed in English. Done by John "Thomas Matthew" Rogers (80 Books).
1539 AD: The "Great Bible" Printed; The First English Language Bible Authorized for Public Use (80 Books).
1560 AD: The Geneva Bible Printed; The First English Language Bible to add Numbered Verses to Each Chapter (80 Books).
1568 AD: The Bishops Bible Printed; The Bible of which the King James was a Revision (80 Books).
1609 AD: The Douay Old Testament is added to the Rheims New Testament (of 1582) Making the First Complete English Catholic Bible; Translated from the Latin Vulgate (80 Books).
1611 AD: The King James Bible Printed; Originally with All 80 Books. The Apocrypha was Officially Removed in 1885 Leaving Only 66 Books.
1782 AD: Robert Aitken's Bible; The First English Language Bible (KJV) Printed in America.
1791 AD: Isaac Collins and Isaiah Thomas Respectively Produce the First Family Bible and First Illustrated Bible Printed in America. Both were King James Versions, with All 80 Books.
1808 AD: Jane Aitken's Bible (Daughter of Robert Aitken); The First Bible to be Printed by a Woman.
1833 AD: Noah Webster's Bible; After Producing his Famous Dictionary, Webster Printed his Own Revision of the King James Bible.
1841 AD: English Hexapla New Testament; an Early Textual Comparison showing the Greek and 6 Famous English Translations in Parallel Columns.
1846 AD: The Illuminated Bible; The Most Lavishly Illustrated Bible printed in America. A King James Version, with All 80 Books.
1885 AD: The "English Revised Version" Bible; The First Major English Revision of the KJV.
1901 AD: The "American Standard Version"; The First Major American Revision of the KJV.
1971 AD: The "New American Standard Bible" (NASB) is Published as a "Modern and Accurate Word for Word English Translation" of the Bible.
1973 AD: The "New International Version" (NIV) is Published as a "Modern and Accurate Phrase for Phrase English Translation" of the Bible.
1982 AD: The "New King James Version" (NKJV) is Published as a "Modern English Version Maintaining the Original Style of the King James."
2002 AD: The English Standard Version (ESV) is Published as a translation to bridge the gap between the accuracy of the NASB and the readability of the NIV.
The Roman Catholic Church claims to have started in Matthew 16:18 when Christ supposedly appointed Peter as the first Pope. However, the honest and objective student of the Scriptures and history soon discovers that the foundation of the Roman church is none other than the pagan mystery religion of ancient Babylon.
While enduring the early persecutions of the Roman government (65-300 A.D.), most of professing Christianity went through a gradual departure from New Testament doctrine concerning church government, worship and practice. Local churches ceased to be autonomous by giving way to the control of "bishops" ruling over hierarchies. The simple form of worship from the heart was replaced with the rituals and splendor of paganism. Ministers became "priests," and pagans became "Christians" by simply being sprinkled with water. This tolerance of an unregenerate membership only made things worse. SPRINKLED PAGANISM is about the best definition for Roman Catholicism.
The Roman Emperor Constantine established himself as the head of the church around 313 A.D., which made this new "Christianity" the official religion of the Roman Empire. The first actual Pope in Rome was probably Leo I (440-461 A.D.), although some claim that Gregory I was the first (590-604 A.D.). This ungodly system eventually ushered in the darkest period of history known to man, properly known as the "Dark Ages" (500-1500 A.D.). Through popes, bishops, and priests, Satan ruled Europe, and Biblical Christianity became illegal.
Throughout all of this, however, there remained individual groups of true Christians, such as the Waldensens and the Anabaptists who would not conform to the Roman system.
The Papacy and Priesthood
In the Bible there are no popes or priests to rule over the church. Jesus Christ is our High Priest (Heb. 3:1; 4:14-15; 5:5; 8:1; 9:11), and all true Christians make up a spiritual priesthood (I Pet. 2:5). Jesus Christ has sanctified all Christians who believe on Him (Heb. 10:10-11), so all priests today are unnecessary and unscriptural. Furthermore, the practice of calling a priest "father" is forbidden by Jesus Christ in Matthew 23:9. There is only ONE mediator between God and men (I Tim. 2:5).
The Catholic church teaches that Peter was the first Pope and the earthly head of the church, but the Bible never says this once. In fact, it was Peter himself who spoke against "being lords over God's heritage" in I Peter 5:3. Popes do not marry, although Peter did (Mat. 8:14; I Cor. 9:5). The Bible never speaks of Peter being in Rome, and it was Paul, not Peter, who wrote the epistle to the Romans. In the New Testament, Paul wrote 100 chapters with 2,325 verses, while Peter wrote only 8 chapters with 166 verses. In Peter's first epistle he stated that he was simply "an apostle of Jesus Christ," not a Pope (I Pet. 1:1). The Roman papacy and priesthood is just a huge fraud to keep members in bondage to a corrupt pagan church.
The Worship of Mary
Roman Catholics believe that Mary, the mother of Jesus, remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus and was sinless all of her life. She is worshiped in the Catholic church as the "Mother of God" and the "Queen of Heaven." St. Bernard stated that she was crowned "Queen of Heaven" by God the Father, and that she currently sits upon a throne in Heaven making intercession for Christians.
The Bible teaches otherwise. In the Bible, Mary was a sinner just like the rest of us. She said herself that she needed a "Saviour" (Lk. 1:47), and she even had to offer a sacrifice for her sins in Luke 2:24. Jesus was only her "firstborn" son, according to Matthew 1:25, because she later had other children as well (Mt. 13:55; Gal. 1:19; Psa. 69:8). There's only ONE mediator between God and men, and it isn't Mary (I Tim. 2:5). The last time we hear from Mary in the Bible she is praying WITH the disciples, not being prayed to BY the disciples (Acts 1:14). The Bible never exalts Mary above anyone else. Neither should we.
Purgatory
The Catholic Church teaches that a Christian's soul must burn in purgatory after death until all of their sins have been purged. To speed up the purging process, money may be paid to a priest so he can pray and have special masses for an earlier release.
This heresy began creeping into the Roman Church during the reign of Pope Gregory around the end of the sixth century, and it has no scriptural support. In fact, Jesus warned us about this pagan practice in Matthew 23:14 when He spoke of those who devoured widows houses and made long prayers for a pretence. Psalm 49:6-7 tells us that a person couldn't redeem a loved one, even if such a place did exist: "They that trust in their wealth, and boast themselves in the multitude of their riches; None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:"
Peter addresses this issue in Acts 8:20 when he says, "Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money." God's word is clearly against the doctrine of purgatory.
The Mass
By perverting the Christian practice of the Lord's Supper (Mat. 26:26-28; I Cor. 11:23-27), the Catholic Church has created the Mass, which they believe to be a continual sacrifice of Jesus Christ:
"Christ...commanded that his bloody sacrifice on the Cross should be daily renewed by an unbloody sacrifice of his body and blood in the Mass under the simple elements of bread and wine." (The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 10, Pg. 13, Article: "Mass, Sacrifice of")
Jesus never made such a command. If you'll check the above references in Matthew 26 and I Corinthians 11, you'll see for yourself that the Lord's Supper is a MEMORIAL and a SHOWING of Christ's death until He comes again. It is not a sacrifice. The Catholic Encyclopedia states the following:
"In the celebration of the Holy Mass, the bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ. It is called transubstantiation, for in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the substance of bread and wine do not remain, but the entire substance of bread is changed into the body of Christ, and the entire substance of wine is changed into his blood, the species or outward semblence of bread and wine alone remaining." (Vol. 4, pg. 277, Article: "Consecration")
The Catholic Church teaches that the "Holy Mass" is a LITERAL EATING AND DRINKING OF THE LITERAL FLESH AND BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST. The priest supposedly has the power to change the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.
Now, what does God's word say about such practices? If you'll read Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 17:11-12, and Acts 15:29, you will find that God absolutely FORBIDS the drinking of blood all through the Bible.
Rome teaches that the Mass is a continual "sacrifice" of Jesus Christ, but God's word states that Jesus made the FINAL sacrifice on Calvary! This is made perfectly clear in Hebrews 10:10-12:
"By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God."
The mass is unnecessary and unscriptural.
Image Worship
The Catholic religion is filled with all sorts of symbols, images, and relics. The Catechism of the Council of Trent states these words:
"It is lawful to have images in the Church, and to give honor and worship unto them..."
It's lawful to honor and worship images? Not according to God's word. Exodus 20:4-5 says, "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me." Image worship is unscriptural and will end with the eternal damnation of those who practice it (Rev. 14:11).
Salvation by Works
Through infant baptism, keeping sacraments, church membership, going to mass, praying to Mary, and confession (just to mention a few), the Catholic church has developed a system of salvation through WORKS. God's word says that we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not through works:
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Eph. 2:8-9)
"But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." (Romans 4:5)
Jesus Christ came into this world to lay down His sinless life for YOU--to pay for your sins, because you couldn't. Jesus is your only hope for salvation. Only by receiving Him as your Saviour can you enter the gates of Heaven. There is no other way.
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me." (John 14:6)
The Lord Jesus Christ has come and PAID for your sins by shedding His own Blood on Calvary. By receiving Him as your Saviour, you can be WASHED from all your sins in His precious Blood (Rev. 1:5; Col. 1:14; Acts 20:28; I Pet. 1:18-19). Notice these important words from Romans 5:8-9:
"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him."
Jesus PAID your way to Heaven for you! By receiving Him as your Saviour, you will be receiving God's ONLY means of Salvation for you. Are you willing to forsake YOUR righteousness and receive Jesus Christ as your Saviour, your ONLY HOPE for Salvation? Romans 10:13 says, "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." Romans 10:9 says, "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Are you willing to forsake your own righteousness, and trust Jesus Christ alone? He will save you just as He promised. Why not receive Him today and trust Him to give you a better way of life?
am... I think you are the one missing his posts, some very good ones, go back and take a readmegadoc1 wrote:Computerman wrote:toyo682 wrote:^^^^I think the man was merely trying to say he is bias towards Christianity, but I guess none of you are bias in anyway, nope not at all...
Bias towards Christianity and being abusive and disrespectful to others and their beliefs are two different things! look at page one alone,when all the op wanted to know what was your best encounter with God check all the way to 70 pges of "disrespect"You should read through this thread again... seems you might have missed a few posts!
toyo682 wrote:16 cycles wrote:Still want to know where the contract was made to absolve sin using the blood of an innocent person.....
Let me break it down, it is not a literal contract I was talking about, there is no paper saying anyone soul belongs to the devil.
The Bible tells us that we all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Sin is like a hereditary disease we all will sin at some point. The law of God dictates that the wages or penalty of sin is death, read Genesis 2, God told Adam up front that if he disobeys his command, law what ever you want to call it, the penalty is death. Just like our laws, for instance, the law against driving on the shoulder, which many break every day carries a fix preordained fine or penalty. Now if we are caught driving on the shoulder we are fined, though many feel it is their right to do so, and are often vex with the police when they are caught and fined. It shows us man's moral standards, we often hear from these people “why the police doh go and look for the real criminals. Well guess what you break the law any law that makes you a criminal to. We use this same moral standard when it comes to sin. We often compare ourselves to others, well my sin may just be lying, while my friend is a fornicating thief, so clearly I am not as bad as him. However we fail to realize a sin is a sin in the eyes of God, both the liar and thief will meet the same end. Why? Is this just? We fail also to realize that all sin regardless of what it is, is essentially one thing, rebellion to God. The liar is in rebellion to God since God is a God of truth, and the thief is in rebellion to God since clearly thieving in not something God's righteousness will have him do. They are both guilty of the same crime.
Now God is not a God who can have any part in sin, nor can he have fellowship with those who are sinful. We break this fellowship with God when we commit sin which just comes naturally for us now that Adam sin. How is this fair that we should pay for something we cannot help but do? (I will get to that soon) Now when we break fellowship with God, we enter into fellowship with Satan because just like in the garden he incites us to sin against God often by telling us we will not surely die as he did with Eve. Once we break fellowship with God we step out from under his divine cover and protection, and come under the cover of darkness which is ruled by Satan. Now this is like either living in T&T or USA, which country you live in dictates the rules or laws you follow. Since it is clear Satan is a liar he will tell you one thing and then do another. For instance, he may whisper in you ear (maybe not audible for all smart men) it is okay to fornicate you will not die, then you end up with Aids or some other STD and you blame God and ask why he allow it, the same sin he incited you to commit is the some sin he brings before God to condemn you . The reality is once you are not under the jurisdiction of God he is not obligated to help you. Once you are a sinner you are under the jurisdiction of Satan.
So what does this mean? Does God not love sinners? Not at all. In fact God does love them so much that we are told that Christ died for us while we were yet sinners. Now since the wages of sin is death, then our sins demands that blood must be spilled for our sins to be atoned for. We are told in scripture that without the shedding of blood there will be no remission of sin. Sin demands death. Now in the old testament God gave Moses the law to which the Israel should live by, but although they tried their best they were incapable of keeping the laws of God just as we are. So they had to make sacrifices to atone for their sin. Now this was burden some and also impossible, since every time you sin you would have to make a sacrifice. Could you imagine if we had to do that to day how much money it would cost. Now God all ready knew all of this and even in Genesis 3 God spoke of a redeemer to come. God knew and knows that it is impossible for us to keep his laws or be sinless.
Since the sacrifices for sin had to be spot less and without blemish, or in our terms sinless, God could not allow man to die for sin because lets face it we are sinners. That is like taking a dirty rag to clean a dirty counter, in the end you are just moving the dirt around you are not cleaning any thing. Now since to only person alive who is sinless is God then the only person who could redeem man is God. Now check this. Since man's sin is pass down from the father Adam, Jesus had to come the way he came. Born of a virgin and fathered by God. Now this is how Christ was fully human and fully God. He knew what is is for us and our battle with sin. We are told he was tempted in the same way as us yet he was without sin. But because of his birth no sin was passed to Him.
So what does that mean for us. Well we are told that Christ died so that none should perish but that all should have everlasting life. Now what essentially has taken place is that Christ took our place of death that was demanded by law. So when we come to faith in Christ, God counts his death as our death. Now this is done by faith, we don't have to die. He counts Christ's resurrection as our resurrection. So once we were dead to God in sin,(since God cannot have fellowship with sin we are counted dead in that state) now we are alive in Christ and God takes us back into fellowship.
So what about good works, well that makes the death of Christ foolish if we can pay our own price, but since we cannot, we are not in need of an example but a saviour. Can we bribe God to ignore that fact that we have broken his law, which has been laid out in our heart, that is why we have a conscience. We deep down in side know what is right and wrong, or do you think that the thieves who robbed and killed that guy for the 100k in music did not know that it is wrong to kill. If they are never caught and brought to justice before man, but sell the car and music and build a house for their grandmother who has none, do you think God should let them off the hook in eternity if the price for their sin of murder is not paid although they took the rewards of their crime and did good. Good works theory is like going before a judge and saying, judge I know you are a good man and I know I did rape that woman breaking a law, but on the way here I washed your car and fed two beggars. However I know you are good and loving and would let me off. The judge may say however, you are right about one thing I am a good man and as a result I will see to it that the law and its judgment would be carried out, the very goodness that many appeal to will be the thing that condemns them in the end.
So Christ paid the price we cannot, it is simple have faith, the evidence of such will be good works that all will see, since the gratefulness that you have not receive what you deserve will be extended to others as you give them what they don't deserve. Or you can try and work for it. The love of God is wrapped up in the death of Christ, since it is God himself who paid the price to satisfy his own justice and law, that we many be redeemed and escape everlasting punishment. Bless
My beliefs
toyo682 wrote:It is so funny how people don't see the love of God in the message that he himself has paid the price the you are now trying to pay by you good works. We are preaching Christ died for your sins that you may be free, but some how that is foolishness to those who would rather save themselves. I guess it is more loving to allow your Child who is drowning to continue to try and save themselves than to put them on your back and carry them. Thank God I am a fool.
d spike wrote:This nonsense has returned... Admittedly, a rather common misunderstanding among Christians, but one that had been already explained to Megadoc, about six months ago!
Christians believe that Christ died to bridge the gap between Men and God, atonement for our human failings. He didn't "pay" for the sins that we commit - that is up to us - he ensured that we could attain the perfection required to enter heaven, as nothing imperfect can enter Paradise. The phrase, "He takes away the sin of the world", does not refer to the actual sins themselves, but to the lack that all men suffer from - known as original sin.
I
d spike wrote:We each follow a path of our own choosing... to be derided or abused for our choice interferes with our ability to choose - if the true God gave us the ability to choose freely, who is this mortal to interfere and harass us?
Computerman wrote:toyo682 wrote:^^^^I think the man was merely trying to say he is bias towards Christianity, but I guess none of you are bias in anyway, nope not at all...
Bias towards Christianity and being abusive and disrespectful to others and their beliefs are two different things! You should read through this thread again... seems you might have missed a few posts!
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:^ megadoc1 also claimed he can heal people and cast out demons and his group is very powerful
but we have yet to see an iota of proof of these claims.
megadoc1 wrote:^ I refer to toyo's posts as Very good ones because I am biased to the truth
and toyo's post are genuine
I am intolerant to your post because they are lies from hell
for they attempt to make Jesus a liar
Says who? You? Because you didn't understand what was said? You, who could barely write English, claim to be able to comprehend the Shakespearean English in the KJV - which gives the average secondary schoolchild problems to read and understand? And abusing me in your ignorance? That's a laugh.
And what makes his posts "genuine" and mine otherwise? Because he does not correct you? You have absolutely no idea of what you speak.d spike wrote:This nonsense has returned... Admittedly, a rather common misunderstanding among Christians, but one that had been already explained to Megadoc, about six months ago!
Christians believe that Christ died to bridge the gap between Men and God, atonement for our human failings. He didn't "pay" for the sins that we commit - that is up to us - he ensured that we could attain the perfection required to enter heaven, as nothing imperfect can enter Paradise. The phrase, "He takes away the sin of the world", does not refer to the actual sins themselves, but to the lack that all men suffer from - known as original sin.
I
totally opposite to what toyo posted you both cannot be right
d spike wrote:megadoc1 wrote:^ I refer to toyo's posts as Very good ones because I am biased to the truth
and toyo's post are genuine
I am intolerant to your post because they are lies from hell
for they attempt to make Jesus a liar
Says who? You? Because you didn't understand what was said? You, who could barely write English, claim to be able to comprehend the Shakespearean English in the KJV - which gives the average secondary schoolchild problems to read and understand? And abusing me in your ignorance? That's a laugh.at least you cant fool this dummy
And what makes his posts "genuine" and mine otherwise? his post are based on his faith in the true and living God
Because he does not correct you? well he did once or twiceYou have absolutely no idea of what you speak. lies...... I have more than an idea ,I have experience, check sig ......I can say though that You have absolutely no idea of who you speak up against.d spike wrote:This nonsense has returned... Admittedly, a rather common misunderstanding among Christians, but one that had been already explained to Megadoc, about six months ago!
Christians believe that Christ died to bridge the gap between Men and God, atonement for our human failings. He didn't "pay" for the sins that we commit - that is up to us - he ensured that we could attain the perfection required to enter heaven, as nothing imperfect can enter Paradise. The phrase, "He takes away the sin of the world", does not refer to the actual sins themselves, but to the lack that all men suffer from - known as original sin.
I
totally opposite to what toyo posted you both cannot be right
Quite right... assuming you are correct (and in this you might be wrong) in that we claim opposing views. If so, one of us is right, and the other is not. Perhaps you should have someone explain it to you with words you can understand.
toyo682 wrote:16 cycles wrote:Still want to know where the contract was made to absolve sin using the blood of an innocent person.....
Let me break it down, it is not a literal contract I was talking about, there is no paper saying anyone soul belongs to the devil.
The Bible tells us that we all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Sin is like a hereditary disease we all will sin at some point. The law of God dictates that the wages or penalty of sin is death, read Genesis 2, God told Adam up front that if he disobeys his command, law what ever you want to call it, the penalty is death. Just like our laws, for instance, the law against driving on the shoulder, which many break every day carries a fix preordained fine or penalty. Now if we are caught driving on the shoulder we are fined, though many feel it is their right to do so, and are often vex with the police when they are caught and fined. It shows us man's moral standards, we often hear from these people “why the police doh go and look for the real criminals. Well guess what you break the law any law that makes you a criminal to. We use this same moral standard when it comes to sin. We often compare ourselves to others, well my sin may just be lying, while my friend is a fornicating thief, so clearly I am not as bad as him. However we fail to realize a sin is a sin in the eyes of God, both the liar and thief will meet the same end. Why? Is this just? We fail also to realize that all sin regardless of what it is, is essentially one thing, rebellion to God. The liar is in rebellion to God since God is a God of truth, and the thief is in rebellion to God since clearly thieving in not something God's righteousness will have him do. They are both guilty of the same crime.
Now God is not a God who can have any part in sin, nor can he have fellowship with those who are sinful. We break this fellowship with God when we commit sin which just comes naturally for us now that Adam sin. How is this fair that we should pay for something we cannot help but do? (I will get to that soon) Now when we break fellowship with God, we enter into fellowship with Satan because just like in the garden he incites us to sin against God often by telling us we will not surely die as he did with Eve. Once we break fellowship with God we step out from under his divine cover and protection, and come under the cover of darkness which is ruled by Satan. Now this is like either living in T&T or USA, which country you live in dictates the rules or laws you follow. Since it is clear Satan is a liar he will tell you one thing and then do another. For instance, he may whisper in you ear (maybe not audible for all smart men) it is okay to fornicate you will not die, then you end up with Aids or some other STD and you blame God and ask why he allow it, the same sin he incited you to commit is the some sin he brings before God to condemn you . The reality is once you are not under the jurisdiction of God he is not obligated to help you. Once you are a sinner you are under the jurisdiction of Satan.
So what does this mean? Does God not love sinners? Not at all. In fact God does love them so much that we are told that Christ died for us while we were yet sinners. Now since the wages of sin is death, then our sins demands that blood must be spilled for our sins to be atoned for. We are told in scripture that without the shedding of blood there will be no remission of sin. Sin demands death. Now in the old testament God gave Moses the law to which the Israel should live by, but although they tried their best they were incapable of keeping the laws of God just as we are. So they had to make sacrifices to atone for their sin. Now this was burden some and also impossible, since every time you sin you would have to make a sacrifice. Could you imagine if we had to do that to day how much money it would cost. Now God all ready knew all of this and even in Genesis 3 God spoke of a redeemer to come. God knew and knows that it is impossible for us to keep his laws or be sinless.
Since the sacrifices for sin had to be spot less and without blemish, or in our terms sinless, God could not allow man to die for sin because lets face it we are sinners. That is like taking a dirty rag to clean a dirty counter, in the end you are just moving the dirt around you are not cleaning any thing. Now since to only person alive who is sinless is God then the only person who could redeem man is God. Now check this. Since man's sin is pass down from the father Adam, Jesus had to come the way he came. Born of a virgin and fathered by God. Now this is how Christ was fully human and fully God. He knew what is is for us and our battle with sin. We are told he was tempted in the same way as us yet he was without sin. But because of his birth no sin was passed to Him.
So what does that mean for us. Well we are told that Christ died so that none should perish but that all should have everlasting life. Now what essentially has taken place is that Christ took our place of death that was demanded by law. So when we come to faith in Christ, God counts his death as our death. Now this is done by faith, we don't have to die. He counts Christ's resurrection as our resurrection. So once we were dead to God in sin,(since God cannot have fellowship with sin we are counted dead in that state) now we are alive in Christ and God takes us back into fellowship.
So what about good works, well that makes the death of Christ foolish if we can pay our own price, but since we cannot, we are not in need of an example but a saviour. Can we bribe God to ignore that fact that we have broken his law, which has been laid out in our heart, that is why we have a conscience. We deep down in side know what is right and wrong, or do you think that the thieves who robbed and killed that guy for the 100k in music did not know that it is wrong to kill. If they are never caught and brought to justice before man, but sell the car and music and build a house for their grandmother who has none, do you think God should let them off the hook in eternity if the price for their sin of murder is not paid although they took the rewards of their crime and did good. Good works theory is like going before a judge and saying, judge I know you are a good man and I know I did rape that woman breaking a law, but on the way here I washed your car and fed two beggars. However I know you are good and loving and would let me off. The judge may say however, you are right about one thing I am a good man and as a result I will see to it that the law and its judgment would be carried out, the very goodness that many appeal to will be the thing that condemns them in the end.
So Christ paid the price we cannot, it is simple have faith, the evidence of such will be good works that all will see, since the gratefulness that you have not receive what you deserve will be extended to others as you give them what they don't deserve. Or you can try and work for it. The love of God is wrapped up in the death of Christ, since it is God himself who paid the price to satisfy his own justice and law, that we many be redeemed and escape everlasting punishment. Bless
My beliefs
toyo682 wrote:d spike wrote:We each follow a path of our own choosing... to be derided or abused for our choice interferes with our ability to choose - if the true God gave us the ability to choose freely, who is this mortal to interfere and harass us?
Did God give us a choice as to which way to reach him. Or a choice to love or reject him?
If the former where did he say this? Is this what the Bible teaches?
So is worshiping the mango tree in my backyard an acceptable way to reach God?
sMASH wrote:qg, what u talkin about is an implied idea, where the statement suggests an idea. but when u have definite statements like this, what u goin to follow?
"He is God, the One God Independent and sought by all; He begets not, nor is begotten, and there is none like unto Him" (The Holy Qur 'an - Chapter 112 - Al-Ikhlas)
'O people of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion, nor utter anything concerning God save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of God, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in God and His messengers, and do not say 'Three'. Desist, it will be better for you. God is only One God. . . . The Messiah would never have scorned to be a slave of God.' (Surat al-Nisa, 171-2)
iiiii say is majestic plural. *spike goin an come dong on meh case now wit he research*
toyo682 wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:^ megadoc1 also claimed he can heal people and cast out demons and his group is very powerful
but we have yet to see an iota of proof of these claims.
You have been invited many times to go and see, would it make it more believable if he posted a you tube video of ppls testimonies, articles from his group. Then you will start to cry it is stage. I far is I can see any thing posted here will be called false. So once again if you want proof go and see or are you afraid of what you will find.
sMASH wrote:wrt other religions, islam teaches that messengers came to many peoples at various times. they sent messages to meant for those people for a time period. the central theme of all the messages is that god is one, but small details would have differed. after the time period for those message have served their purposes, protection over them was relinquished, and men modified them to suit their own desires, and the originals were not allowed to continue to exist. the final revelation was the qu'ran, and that is what man should follow.This contradicts what you have written below, if the qu'ran is the final revelation and what man should follow, then there is no room for finding better.
god made most people with brains and some with the ability to observe, think, and consider for them selves. they are to evaluate if what they put their faith in worth putting their faith in, in that, most people have an inherent understanding of good/bad, right/wrong, is worth putting their faith in.
all major religions teach basic ethical concepts so one can be a 'good' person. but when presented with another way, it is up to them to consider if what they come across is better than what they have.If all is the same then there should be none better. Or are you trying to say some parts are easier than others?
so, this is between u and god. u do the best with what u have. if u encounter islam, investigate it. if u see the signs it shows and think it makes more sense, follow it. if u think what u already have is better, then stick to it,
u can still be doing things which please god even if u don't do every thing which pleases god.
.. oh yeah, and the incentive to not do any thing u want; judgment day. where ur good and bad would be accounted for. (yes, judgment day is real, and has a purpose, and is not a farce)
god is all powerful, he will bless what he wants, forgive what he wants and condemn what he wants, we just have an idea as to what he would like us to do and not to do.
d spike wrote:toyo682 wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:^ megadoc1 also claimed he can heal people and cast out demons and his group is very powerful
but we have yet to see an iota of proof of these claims.
You have been invited many times to go and see, would it make it more believable if he posted a you tube video of ppls testimonies, articles from his group. Then you will start to cry it is stage. I far is I can see any thing posted here will be called false. So once again if you want proof go and see or are you afraid of what you will find.
Here we go again, folks!
Toyo, this is just a discussion, perhaps a little coarse at times, but a discussion above all else. Statements are made, those in agreement back it up, those who disagree state their reasons, references are made, new material is brought into the discussion, and so on. No one has told anyone that if proof of their particular argument is required, then they should physically travel to some place to view such proof... at least, no one except Megadoc. (You remember him, the one I spoke of before... the one suffering from boorish, ill-mannered behaviour? Well, there you are!) For this is but a discussion. He fails to see the point of the concept of this activity - I hope you don't fall prey to this malaise yourself - hammering those who disagree without bringing any reason forward for doing so... to the point of being abusive (I'm the liar from hell, eh? I was told often by the same character that my master is Satan... that sounds like a rational mind to you? A mind open to discussion?)
As far as making up reasons why certain forms of proof cannot be displayed on this medium, you should know better. If it cannot be verified, then how does it come to be considered "proof" in the first place? Besides, a video can be 'staged', as well as the actual event, so going and seeing an event take place (or be 'staged') is just as useful as a recording.
This is a DISCUSSION. State your case. That is what language and logic is for. Just because some are incapable of maintaining a rational line of thought, does not mean that the matter cannot be discussed - it just means someone should have paid more attention in school. Just because you get wet in the rain while under your umbrella, does not mean umbrellas are useless - it just means yours has holes in it!
Cheers
excuse memegadoc1 wrote: then the persons asking for proof knew very well it couldn't be displayed here ,yet still insists on seeing them ,was that a form of tactic or something?
was that person being deceptive asking for something that they knew cannot be displayed on here?
megadoc1 wrote:toyo682 wrote:d spike wrote:We each follow a path of our own choosing... to be derided or abused for our choice interferes with our ability to choose - if the true God gave us the ability to choose freely, who is this mortal to interfere and harass us?
Did God give us a choice as to which way to reach him. Or a choice to love or reject him?
If the former where did he say this? Is this what the Bible teaches?
So is worshiping the mango tree in my backyard an acceptable way to reach God?
these are some serious questions here
I wonder why D spike avoids them?
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:^ why can't he have different names?
Toyo and megadoc1, by using scripture to prove your points you are assuming that the Bible is correct. sMash, as a Muslim believes the Qu'ran is correct, another user would say the Gita is correct. You are no more right or less right than he is, nor can you prove it.
it is very possible for a mango tree to be the way to God. In fact some people believe it IS!
the myopia comes from you not wanting to believe anything other than what you want to believe. However believing something DOES NOT make it the truth, no matter how much you or the people around you believe it.
If anyone could prove that his religious beliefs were THE truth, then there would not be numerous religions and religious beliefs.
No amount of quotations, angry posts, claims or self-righteousness can change that. You simply cannot prove that you are right and anyone else in here is wrong.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:excuse memegadoc1 wrote: then the persons asking for proof knew very well it couldn't be displayed here ,yet still insists on seeing them ,was that a form of tactic or something?
was that person being deceptive asking for something that they knew cannot be displayed on here?
YOU were the one who jumped in this thread and claimed YOU could save and heal people, cast out demons and that Jesus talks to you directly and that you have no illness and you are part of a very powerful group in Woodbrook.
You claim it HERE, then prove it HERE; otherwise it's just you lying and being self-righteous.
I know thats what you were up to
if you feel to call me a liar now go right ahead
megadoc1 wrote:seem like we are in the same boat just that I have proven what I believe is right
LOL the fuss is about you lying about your personal abilities OR that you are so mentally brainwashed that you believe it to be true.megadoc1 wrote:so then whats the fuss ? why are you asking for proof if you know you are not interested in seeing it ? how can you prove that I cannot prove that I am right?
for a very long time too, until you or anyone else can prove otherwise.megadoc1 wrote:for now that is what you believe
No we are ont in the same boat, we are not even in the same expanse of water.megadoc1 wrote:seem like we are in the same boat
WHERE!??? WHEN!!?? where did you prove that what you believe is right?megadoc1 wrote: just that I have proven what I believe is right
What are you going to show me as proof that you cannot show everyone here? Is it a secret?megadoc1 wrote:come with all that you believe and let God have you question yourself abit.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:^ why can't he have different names?
Toyo and megadoc1, by using scripture to prove your points you are assuming that the Bible is correct. sMash, as a Muslim believes the Qu'ran is correct, another user would say the Gita is correct. You are no more right or less right than he is, nor can you prove it.
it is very possible for a mango tree to be the way to God. In fact some people believe it IS!
the myopia comes from you not wanting to believe anything other than what you want to believe. However believing something DOES NOT make it the truth, no matter how much you or the people around you believe it.
If anyone could prove that his religious beliefs were THE truth, then there would not be numerous religions and religious beliefs.
No amount of quotations, angry posts, claims or self-righteousness can change that. You simply cannot prove that you are right and anyone else in here is wrong.
don't make empty claims that you cannot prove - we are not gullible.
There is fact based on empirical evidence; do you have any?toyo682 wrote:So there is not absolute truth then.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:There is fact based on empirical evidence; do you have any?toyo682 wrote:So there is not absolute truth then.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 78 guests
