The KJVO myth...

Bob_1000 · Nov 26, 2021

Strong in Him said:
I thought you said that someone could become a Christian without even reading the Bible and that it had nothing to do with salvation?

Yes someone can be a Christian without reading a bible but the act of becoming a Christian has nothing to do with the act of being born again.

The process of being born again is the exact same process as the natural birth except the second birth is a spiritual birth. The natural birth is conceived by human DNA while the second birth is conceived by spiritual DNA. The spiritual DNA is the incorruptible word of God.

Just like human DNA is the blueprint of the human being, spiritual DNA is the blueprint of the spiritual man which is the NEW MAN or Christ in us.

Here’s an example of Paul travailing in birth until Christ is formed in SAVED Galatians.

Gal 4:19 (KJV) My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

robycop3 · Nov 26, 2021

David Kent said:
THat

That is according to the Jesuit futurist teaching. The 7 letters are symbolic iof 7 periods of church history. The book of Revelation is the whole history of the Crstian church written in advance. Within, qwritten from the view from inside the church and without seen from the viewpoint of the world outside.

The jeezits invented preterism to keep their pope from being labeled the antichrist. And the "7 church ages" myth is as false as the preterism and KJVO myths are.

trophy33 · Nov 26, 2021

Davy said:
Can't get any more solid source than Wescott and Hort's own letters they wrote to each other announcing their plan to take down the Textus Receptus. The existence of those letters is documented history.

And the Bridge To Babylon documentary is... a scholarship documented source. Therefore, go fish.

There is no reason to use the Textus Receptus today. It served its purpose in the middle ages, but its obsolete now.

Anybody, who because of some traditional or liturgical reasons, prefers the Byzantian Majority Text, can use the Robinson-Pierpoint edition. But I know of no English translation based on it.

The others go with Nestlé-Aland, which is the top current scholar edition of the Greek New Testament.

trophy33 · Nov 26, 2021

robycop3 said:
The jeezits invented preterism to keep their pope from being labeled the antichrist.

The "jeezits" (sic) invented futurism to keep their pope from being labeled the antichrist.

There is actually not much to invent. Either:
a) it was happening in their times and so the pope could be the antichrist
b) or it had happened before (preterism)
c) or it will happen later (futurism)

For the catholic church, b) and c) were understandably better options than a).

This does not make it true or false in any way.

Strong in Him · Nov 26, 2021

Bob_1000 said:
Yes someone can be a Christian without reading a bible but the act of becoming a Christian has nothing to do with the act of being born again.

It's got everything to do with it.
Some people call themselves Christians because they were born in a Christian country, or because they go to church, do good deeds and believe, in some academic way, that Jesus existed; but they don't read the Bible, pray or see why they should do so. The idea of having a relationship with the God who created the world is foreign to them, or again, they don't see the need for it. There have been people like this in almost every church I have ever attended. I have even read a book - I think it was "9.00 in the morning" where the author spoke of how his ministry, and those of other clergy, changed when they heard about, and received, baptism in the Holy Spirit.

The word "Christian" was a nickname, people who followed Christ had been called "followers of the Way", and it meant "little Christs". The early church were doing all the things that Christ had done; preaching, healing the sick, raising the dead and telling and showing how God could change lives. So they were called "little Christs", or maybe "like Christ." Some people like to say that they are born again Christians - because the word "Christian" is so loosely used and so misunderstood.
No one who has not been born again can become a child of God, have every spiritual blessing, Ephesians 1:3 and do greater things than Jesus. Without the Spirit living IN them, and giving new life, a person just becomes a very religious person, trying to serve and love God in their own strength. A person cannot even come to Christ unless the Spirit draws them - and it is also he who gives them new, spiritual life.

When someone becomes a Christian, accepts, receives and believes in Christ they are born again - they have a new life, with Jesus at the centre. They have a new Lord, Jesus. They accept Jesus as king and enter the kingdom.
How can someone become a Christian, and new creation, 2 Corinthians 5:17, without being born again and given a new life?

Strong in Him · Nov 26, 2021

Davy said:
That's what I asked you, was to reconcile what Apostle Paul revealed in 1 Corinthians 15 with what Jesus said to Philip in Luke 24.

I don't need to "reconcile" Luke 24 with 1 Corinthians 15; I see no problem or contradiction.

It's clear that Jesus' resurrection body was physical; unless you think he was lying, he said "a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see I have." He also ate, and cooked, fish and offered to allow Thomas to touch his hands and side.
At the same time, his body was also spiritual - he appeared behind locked doors and disappeared
from sight after breaking bread on the way to Emmaus.

All of that, for me, confirms what Paul says about the resurrection body being different from the physical body. It is like a seed; it grows and changes, and the resulting plant does not resemble the seed that was planted. His body must have been both, because Scripture says that it was - purely physical bodies cannot appear in locked rooms, and purely spiritual bodies cannot eat fish or offer to show wounds in flesh that does not exist.

Davy said:
So if you read both Scriptures and choose one over the other, that still... shows an improper interpretation, and that you're missing understanding somewhere.

I wasn't choosing one over the other; it seemed to me that that's what you were doing by not considering Jesus' physical body.

Davy said:
2 Corinthians 5 by Apostle Paul is yet another Scripture you must reconcile with Luke 24.

I don't see any contradictions in Scripture so I do not have to "reconcile" anything.

Davy · Nov 26, 2021

myst33 said:
There is no reason to use the Textus Receptus today. It served its purpose in the middle ages, but its obsolete now.

Anybody, who because of some traditional or liturgical reasons, prefers the Byzantian Majority Text, can use the Robinson-Pierpoint edition. But I know of no English translation based on it.

The others go with Nestlé-Aland, which is the top current scholar edition of the Greek New Testament.

That's so... funny! You sound like those liberal Leftists we have here in the U.S. that like to say the same thing about the U.S. Constitution, even though 'all' public servants and military in the U.S. take an oath to uphold and defend it.

Davy · Nov 26, 2021

Strong in Him said:
I don't need to "reconcile" Luke 24 with 1 Corinthians 15; I see no problem or contradiction.

That means then you have chosen... to contradict the Scriptures about it, because the Luke 24 Scripture cannot stand alone. Yet that is what you've chosen to heed, Luke 24 only, and reject the other Scriptures I showed you. I didn't write those other Scriptures I showed you, by the way. Christ Himself and His Apostles did, especially Apostle Paul. And even Solomon in the Book of Ecclesiastes 12 nailed the matter.

Strong in Him · Nov 26, 2021

Davy said:
That means then you have chosen... to contradict the Scriptures about it, because the Luke 24 Scripture cannot stand alone. Yet that is what you've chosen to heed, Luke 24 only, and reject the other Scriptures I showed you. I didn't write those other Scriptures I showed you, by the way. Christ Himself and His Apostles did, especially Apostle Paul. And even Solomon in the Book of Ecclesiastes 12 nailed the matter.

I didn't even quote only Luke 24; I gave you other Scriptures that showed that Jesus was raised with a physical body. If you ignore those, you are ignoring Scripture.

Davy · Nov 26, 2021

Strong in Him said:
I didn't even quote only Luke 24; I gave you other Scriptures that showed that Jesus was raised with a physical body. If you ignore those, you are ignoring Scripture.

Yeah you did.

You said:
"It's clear that Jesus' resurrection body was physical; unless you think he was lying, he said "a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see I have."

That's a quote from the Luke 24:39 verse.

Try quoting the 1 Corinthians 15:50 verse, and see how that feels.

Bob_1000 · Nov 26, 2021

Davy said:
I see you've never read Ecclesiastes 12:5-7. Explain that in relation to what Lord Jesus said in Matthew 10:28 (KJV).

I may be missing something but I don’t see any correlation between the two. Ecclesiastes is talking about the judgement on israel and Matthew 10:28 is about fearing God who has the ability to kill the body and the soul.

I’m just trying to find out if you believe the resurrection is about raising the soul from death to life because it is and if that’s how you see it, you’re one of the few that I’ve run across that do see it.

Davy · Nov 26, 2021

Bob_1000 said:
I may be missing something but I don’t see any correlation between the two. Ecclesiastes is talking about the judgement on israel and Matthew 10:28 is about fearing God who has the ability to kill the body and the soul.

I’m just trying to find out if you believe the resurrection is about raising the soul from death to life because it is and if that’s how you see it, you’re one of the few that I’ve run across that do see it.

The Ecclesiastes 12:5-7 Scripture is Solomon explaining what happens at flesh death. So try again.

trophy33 · Nov 27, 2021

Davy said:
That's so... funny! You sound like those liberal Leftists we have here in the U.S. that like to say the same thing about the U.S. Constitution, even though 'all' public servants and military in the U.S. take an oath to uphold and defend it.

Nobody takes an oath to uphold and defend the KJV or the Textus Receptus at all cost and forever.

It served its historical purpose in its time. But there are better choices, today.

Strong in Him · Nov 27, 2021

Davy said:
Yeah you did.

You said:
"It's clear that Jesus' resurrection body was physical; unless you think he was lying, he said "a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see I have."

That's a quote from the Luke 24:39 verse.

Try quoting the 1 Corinthians 15:50 verse, and see how that feels.

I said that I did not ONLY quote Luke 24 - my references about Jesus' physical body also came from John 20, where Jesus invited Thomas to touch him, and John 21 where Jesus had built a fire and was cooking fish on the seashore. IOW my argument was not built on one verse.

I've already said that Jesus' resurrection body was both spiritual AND physical. Spiritual because he could appear in rooms that had locked doors and suddenly disappeared after breaking bread; physical because he ate fish, reassured them that he was not a ghost and had flesh and bones and invited Thomas to touch his hands and side. Even if Thomas had not done so, he must at least have been able to see the scars. Otherwise, I suggest, he would not have responded with the words "my Lord and my God". He changed from being a doubter and cynic to being the first to declare that the risen Christ was God. I don't know how Jesus' resurrection body could have been both spiritual and physical, but to say otherwise is to deny what is clearly in the Gospels.
Jesus later ascended into heaven and no longer has a body of flesh and blood.

Besides which, it is not possible to say that he can't inherit the kingdom - he's the King. Without him, there is no kingdom.

Bob_1000 · Nov 28, 2021

Strong in Him said:
It's got everything to do with it.
Some people call themselves Christians because they were born in a Christian country, or because they go to church, do good deeds and believe, in some academic way, that Jesus existed; but they don't read the Bible, pray or see why they should do so. The idea of having a relationship with the God who created the world is foreign to them, or again, they don't see the need for it. There have been people like this in almost every church I have ever attended. I have even read a book - I think it was "9.00 in the morning" where the author spoke of how his ministry, and those of other clergy, changed when they heard about, and received, baptism in the Holy Spirit.

The word "Christian" was a nickname, people who followed Christ had been called "followers of the Way", and it meant "little Christs". The early church were doing all the things that Christ had done; preaching, healing the sick, raising the dead and telling and showing how God could change lives. So they were called "little Christs", or maybe "like Christ." Some people like to say that they are born again Christians - because the word "Christian" is so loosely used and so misunderstood.
No one who has not been born again can become a child of God, have every spiritual blessing, Ephesians 1:3 and do greater things than Jesus. Without the Spirit living IN them, and giving new life, a person just becomes a very religious person, trying to serve and love God in their own strength. A person cannot even come to Christ unless the Spirit draws them - and it is also he who gives them new, spiritual life.

When someone becomes a Christian, accepts, receives and believes in Christ they are born again - they have a new life, with Jesus at the centre. They have a new Lord, Jesus. They accept Jesus as king and enter the kingdom.
How can someone become a Christian, and new creation, 2 Corinthians 5:17, without being born again and given a new life?

We are a new creature because we have been raised from death to life instantly at salvation, but that isn't the birth of the spiritual man. The spiritual man, or Christ in us, is something that comes later. It has to be worked for. In Galatians 4:19 Paul is travailing AGAIN... meaning this isn't the first time he has been laboring to birth Christ in the SAVED Galatians.

Gal 4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

Strong in Him · Nov 28, 2021

Bob_1000 said:
We are a new creature because we have been raised from death to life instantly at salvation, but that isn't the birth of the spiritual man.

The Spirit gives life to spirit, John 3:6.
When we are saved we are raised from death to life, yes; spiritual, eternal life. The Spirit gives that life.
Paul said that we are to be filled with the Spirit, Ephesians 5:18, that we are to walk in the Spirit, Galatians 5:16, that we have been set free by the Spirit, Romans 8:2, that we live by the Spirit, Romans 8:4-5, that we are not to grieve the Spirit, Ephesians 4:30, that we have taken off our old self and put on our new self, Colossians 3:9-10, that we are new creations, 2 Corinthians 5:17, that our new life is hidden with Christ in God, Colossians 3:3 - and I'm sure there are many other references to our new life and the work that the Spirit does in us.
How could any of this happen without us being spiritually reborn?

Bob_1000 said:
The spiritual man, or Christ in us, is something that comes later. It has to be worked for.

None of us can ever work to earn any gift or blessings that God has for us.
If we could, then we would be able to boast that our spiritual life was our doing and the result of our efforts. That is not so and can never be; all is from God.

Bob_1000 said:
In Galatians 4:19 Paul is travailing AGAIN... meaning this isn't the first time he has been laboring to birth Christ in the SAVED Galatians.

Yes, he was preaching Christ to them again - because they had been listening to a false Gospel, Galatians 1:6-9. They had been listening to false teachers who said that Christ was not enough and they need to be circumcised to be saved. It seems that those teachers were in, or near, Galatia and were more easily able to tempt the Galatians away - Paul was elsewhere and had heard about what was going on. So he had to persuade them, once again, that the Gospel was true, NOT what these teachers were saying.
Paul said that such teachers should be condemned to hell, and then went on to say that if the Galatian Christians submitted to circumcision for salvation they were saying that Christ meant nothing to them, Galatians 5:2.

It is the Spirit's job to bring people to Christ. No-one can make that happen; all we can do is present the Gospel and pray that the Spirit of truth will lead them into all truth. We are told to instruct one another, teach the truth and lead people away from error. And all of us grow in knowledge and holiness.
But that is not the same as saying that we have to work to receive Christ in us, or be born again.

Bob_1000 · Nov 28, 2021

Strong in Him said:
The Spirit gives life to spirit, John 3:6.
When we are saved we are raised from death to life, yes; spiritual, eternal life. The Spirit gives that life.
Paul said that we are to be filled with the Spirit, Ephesians 5:18, that we are to walk in the Spirit, Galatians 5:16, that we have been set free by the Spirit, Romans 8:2, that we live by the Spirit, Romans 8:4-5, that we are not to grieve the Spirit, Ephesians 4:30, that we have taken off our old self and put on our new self, Colossians 3:9-10, that we are new creations, 2 Corinthians 5:17, that our new life is hidden with Christ in God, Colossians 3:3 - and I'm sure there are many other references to our new life and the work that the Spirit does in us.
How could any of this happen without us being spiritually reborn?

None of us can ever work to earn any gift or blessings that God has for us.
If we could, then we would be able to boast that our spiritual life was our doing and the result of our efforts. That is not so and can never be; all is from God.

Yes, he was preaching Christ to them again - because they had been listening to a false Gospel, Galatians 1:6-9. They had been listening to false teachers who said that Christ was not enough and they need to be circumcised to be saved. It seems that those teachers were in, or near, Galatia and were more easily able to tempt the Galatians away - Paul was elsewhere and had heard about what was going on. So he had to persuade them, once again, that the Gospel was true, NOT what these teachers were saying.
Paul said that such teachers should be condemned to hell, and then went on to say that if the Galatian Christians submitted to circumcision for salvation they were saying that Christ meant nothing to them, Galatians 5:2.

It is the Spirit's job to bring people to Christ. No-one can make that happen; all we can do is present the Gospel and pray that the Spirit of truth will lead them into all truth. We are told to instruct one another, teach the truth and lead people away from error. And all of us grow in knowledge and holiness.
But that is not the same as saying that we have to work to receive Christ in us, or be born again.

Paul is trying to BIRTH Christ in the Galatian believers, do you consider that birth to be the second birth?

Gal 4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

Strong in Him · Nov 29, 2021

Bob_1000 said:
Paul is trying to BIRTH Christ in the Galatian believers, do you consider that birth to be the second birth?

Gal 4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

No; Paul is comparing his attempts to preach the Gospel and turn them away from false teachers as being like the pains of childbirth.

Creating new birth, new life, is not something that Paul could do; that was, and is, God's work. You have ignored all the references I gave you about receiving the Spirit and new life, in favour of ONE verse which, you claim, proves your point.
James said that God has chosen to give us birth by his word of truth, James 1:18, and Peter says that God gave us new birth into a living hope, 1 Peter 1:3.

Bob_1000 · Nov 29, 2021

Strong in Him said:
No; Paul is comparing his attempts to preach the Gospel and turn them away from false teachers as being like the pains of childbirth.

Creating new birth, new life, is not something that Paul could do; that was, and is, God's work. You have ignored all the references I gave you about receiving the Spirit and new life, in favour of ONE verse which, you claim, proves your point.
James said that God has chosen to give us birth by his word of truth, James 1:18, and Peter says that God gave us new birth into a living hope, 1 Peter 1:3.

I see what's going on here. You think that whole verse is just figure of speech and it literally doesn't mean what it says. In other words Paul IS NOT travailing in birth to FORM Christ in them. Am I correct?

Strong in Him · Nov 29, 2021

Bob_1000 said:
I see what's going on here. You think that whole verse is just figure of speech and it literally doesn't mean what it says. In other words Paul IS NOT travailing in birth to FORM Christ in them. Am I correct?

I don't think the verse is a figure of speech. Paul is trying to persuade them not to be taken in by other Gospels and, for those who may have been taken in, he is trying to steer them back to the truth.
Paul could not FORM Christ in them; he was not the Holy Spirit. He could work hard to persuade them of the truth and pray hard for them, but it is the Spirit who convicts and who gives new hope and new life.

The fact that you continually ignore all the other Scriptures I have given you suggests that you are ignoring Scriptural teaching on this and just clinging to one verse which, you claim, proves your point.

The KJVO myth...

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Great is thy faithfulness

Great is thy faithfulness

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Great is thy faithfulness

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Great is thy faithfulness

Well-Known Member

Great is thy faithfulness

Well-Known Member

Great is thy faithfulness

Well-Known Member

Great is thy faithfulness

Similar threads