Hi Bro. Parrish,
Quote:
Nonsense.
Can you show me another person on this thread who said an inerrant Bible does not exist right now in 2008? Please don't try to project your delusion on others. What you wrote in post no. 9 is still there, and plain to see.
|
You misunderstood. Let me try again - The only difference between what I said and what (some) others have said is: (some) others believe there was no "complete, inspired and inerrant Bible in any language" prior to 1611 but that there was after 1611, while I agree with them about prior to 1611 and see no authoritative reason to believe them about things doctrinally changing in 1611.
Quote:
|
That is your "authority" and your "doctrine."
|
No, that is my opinion. I do not claim it is authoritative.
Quote:
|
You are teaching others that the KJV contains errors
|
Why should I
authoritatively believe any different? Why make a new doctrine about the KJV that didn't exist for the first 80% of church history? What other new, unauthoritative doctrines should we open ourselves up to believing?
MC1171611 said:
It's not my job to prove a negative. Those proclaiming a new doctrine must prove it, and the authority behind it. Otherwise, anything goes.
Anyone else want a last kick at the can before I leave this thread permanently? Vendetta Ride? stephanos?
God bless,
Brian