Is YOUR church doctrinal statement ONE with SATAN?
- Thread starter ChosenbyHim
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
You should watch it though. It will really help you. And it surely will humble you, that is for sure!
I understand that taking correction is not easy, but as a Christian you have to eventually get to the point where you are willing to grow up, and mature in Christ Jesus and His holy word.
I understand that taking correction is not easy, but as a Christian you have to eventually get to the point where you are willing to grow up, and mature in Christ Jesus and His holy word.
-
1
- Show all
What I believe they are saying is that the 1611 KJV is the very Text from the Original Autographs since it is the very words which God said in the original autographs of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, preserved and translated into the English tongue and language.
This is the main point also of the video: Reproving the double speak (YES & NO) statements made by many Christians and many churches today regarding the Bible and its Inspiration. Consider these following examples, which brother G. Jon Rov gives regarding this very subject:
YES Statement: "We Believe in the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures without mistakes
NO Statement: As far as in the original writings, and autographs."
- Contemporary Church (Doctrinal Statement)
YES Statement: "Yea,
NO Statement: Hath God said...?"
- Satan (Gen. 3:1)
Furthermore, the following which G. Jon Rov states in his book is very accurate, precise and spot on:
"Plainly speaking, the thought that God has not finished a specific Bible is an upside-down thought. The thought that God's original manuscripts are of greater value than His finished manuscripts is also an upside-down thought. Because "the carnal mind is enmity against God (Rom. 8:7)," there is a hostility from the start to the very thought that God has finished a Bible, especially the King James Bible as the very one."
Now Let us consider another example from brother G. Jon Rov:
FOUNDATION of the Christian: God has written the Bible
FOUNDATION of the Unbeliever: God has NOT written the Bible (Upside Down Foundation)
FOUNDATION of the King James Bible believing (KJB) Christian: God has written the Bible. It is the King James Bible: God has gathered the books, ordered the books, divided the chapters, divided the verses, numbered the verses, chosen the words, chosen the letters. God has finished the line of the Bible and it is the King James Bible.
FOUNDATION of today's Christian: God has not written the King James Bible. God has likely chosen the books, but God has not ordered them. God certainly has not divided the chapters and verses, the numbers mean nothing but handiness, and God definitely has not chosen the words in English and especially not the letters in English, because there is no specific Bible today that is God's Authorized Bible. There is no perfect Bible. Every Bible contains mistakes. Why is my profession of "faith" sounding more like the "unbeliever" the more I speak??? (Upside Down Foundation)
We believe in the absolute authority of the holy scriptures. We believe the original manuscripts were given by inspiration of God and were without error. We believe the God who gave His word to man has taken upon Himself the responsibility for its preservation. We believe the incorruptible word of God which cannot pass away is available to the English-speaking world in the Authorized (King James) Version. This Bible is our final authority in all matters.
-
2
- Show all
absolutely right
let X be a statement, and ¬X be its negation, 'not X'
you can prove ¬X by exhaustively listing every instance of X and showing ¬X in each one
you can prove ¬X by induction, showing ¬X is true in one instance and also that, given ¬X is true in any arbitrary instance it must be also true in the next.
you can prove ¬X by assuming X is true and showing that the assumptions of X imply ¬X
you can prove ¬X by showing it follows from axioms
you can prove ¬X by finding a concrete example of X being false.
for example
let X be a statement, and ¬X be its negation, 'not X'
you can prove ¬X by exhaustively listing every instance of X and showing ¬X in each one
you can prove ¬X by induction, showing ¬X is true in one instance and also that, given ¬X is true in any arbitrary instance it must be also true in the next.
you can prove ¬X by assuming X is true and showing that the assumptions of X imply ¬X
you can prove ¬X by showing it follows from axioms
you can prove ¬X by finding a concrete example of X being false.
for example
-
1
- Show all
absolutely right
let X be a statement, and ¬X be its negation, 'not X'
you can prove ¬X by exhaustively listing every instance of X and showing ¬X in each one
you can prove ¬X by induction, showing ¬X is true in one instance and also that, given ¬X is true in any arbitrary instance it must be also true in the next.
you can prove ¬X by assuming X is true and showing that the assumptions of X imply ¬X
you can prove ¬X by showing it follows from axioms
you can prove ¬X by finding a concrete example of X being false.
for example
let X be a statement, and ¬X be its negation, 'not X'
you can prove ¬X by exhaustively listing every instance of X and showing ¬X in each one
you can prove ¬X by induction, showing ¬X is true in one instance and also that, given ¬X is true in any arbitrary instance it must be also true in the next.
you can prove ¬X by assuming X is true and showing that the assumptions of X imply ¬X
you can prove ¬X by showing it follows from axioms
you can prove ¬X by finding a concrete example of X being false.
for example
-
1
- Show all