View Single Post
  #149  
Old 05-20-2009, 12:30 PM
George's Avatar
George George is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
Posts: 891
Default Re: "Do you have to be KJVO to be here???"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathew Ward View Post
George...thank you for taking the time to read my blog, I appreciate your comments.

As far as having to compromise with those on the other side of the MV vs KJV debate, I honestly do not believe one has to. Your assessment of some that come here to stir up trouble and cause strife and doubt is very true and I am sure you have seen many on the KJV side stir up trouble as well (maybe not on this forum). However I have learned over the years that I would rather discuss the truths of the Bible then to argue which Bible. Many may see that as a compromise, but if I agree with someone in 90% of doctrine, why do we have to argue the 10%? It can be a civil discussion (the Bible issue) and if I believe that I have the Word of God and that their Bible contains the Word of God, we are still talking about the Word of God!

If we would practice what is written in the Bible, the many verses you quoted, we would be much better off.
And your "reply" to brother Parrish after he said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bro. Parrish
From what I have seen, most members of this forum are very patient with the "Bible correcting brethren" who are honestly seeking truth, however since the 10 percent we are talking about impacts the entire platform of authority, I think we have a position worth defending with vigor. After all, it takes just a small percentage of leaven to leaven the whole lump.

Your reply:
Quote:
Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

"If people are patient and kind in honestly discussing the issue, then I think Christ is honored. However, I think at times in our vigor we violate what the Bible we are defending teaches."
Aloha brother Matthew,

Now brother, I believe that "you mean well", if I didn't, I wouldn't be spending my time trying to reason with you. So I am asking you not to be offended by what I am going say in this Post (if we were "face to face" you would be able to perceive my intentions far better - although I do come across, quite often, as a crotchety old curmudgeon even with my immediate family )

The Holy Bible says: "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" [Amos 3:3] Now the obvious, and only reasonable, answer to the question is - NO they can't! If I want to go to Florida and my wife insists on going to California, is it possible for us to "walk together, except we be agreed?" And the answer is simply - of course not! (That's the "problem" with most marriages in the U.S.A.)

Now, she can't go with me 10% of the way or even 50% of the way. She is either going to "walk" with me ALL of the way, or we aren't going to be walking TOGETHER for very long!

Your "analogy" just won't work! Your desire to see the brethren in Christian Unity & Charity is admirable, BUT if you check out the New Testament - often times there were "differences" between the brethren: Jame & John vs the rest of the Disciples; Barnabas vs Paul; Paul vs many of the brethren in Jerusalem; Peter vs Paul; etc.; etc. There are going to be "differences" between Christian brethren (sometime so "sharp" that they no longer "walk together" i.e. Barnabas & Paul)

Acts 15:36 And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do.
37 And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark.
38 But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work.
39 And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;
40 And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God.

41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches.

The WHAT? "the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other:" If Paul and Barnabas had problems getting along, do you honestly believe that we can do "better" - without SOMEONE COMPROMISING?

YOU SAID: "
if I agree with someone in 90% of doctrine, why do we have to argue the 10%?" I have an "analogy" for you: IF someone offers to feed your child with nutritious "milk" (a "type" of the word) and it ONLY has 1% Strychnine or 1% Arsenic in it would you allow them them to give it to your child? Would you allow your child to drink it? Of course NOT!

IF, as we believe, the modern versions are "corrupt", and newborn Christians need wholesome "milk":
"As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:" [1 Peter 2:2] Are we to stand by and allow the modern version proponents "poison" Christians in order to get along? {Without saying anything?}

IF, being born again is dependent upon the "incorruptible" word of God[1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.] Are genuine Bible believers supposed to stand by while Christians "corrupt" the Holy word of God, and in addition also attack and malign it?

IF, we are to live "by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."[Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.] Shouldn't we take as many steps as we can to insure that that "Bread" is fresh & "wholesome" and NOT STALE and MOLDY? [Galatians 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.] Is it just a "LITTLE" LEAVEN (not even 10%) that LEAVENS THE WHOLE LUMP or does the Bible say it takes a LOT OF LEAVEN?

And IF, the HOLY Bible says that "the word of the Lord is RIGHT" - and the modern versions can be PROVEN to be "corrupt" (i.e. WRONG) Are we not obligated to "stand fast" and SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT? [Psalms 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.]

Your desire for Christian "unity" is an honorable one, however, there is too big a "gap" between those of us who have trusted God to have preserved His Holy word (exactly as he wants it) in the King James Bible and those who don't believe that God has preserved His word in "ANY" SINGLE BOOK.

I can "fellowship" with Christians that do not believe as I do about the King James Bible - I CANNOT "fellowship" with those "Christians" who SUBTRACT from it; or ADD to it; or CHANGE it. And I especially want NOTHING TO DO with those "Christians" who will ATTACK it; RIDICULE it; and MALIGN it.

I ask you (once again) compare this Forum (the AV1611 Bible Forums) with the FFF - can you not "SEE" a "DIFFERENCE" in the "ATTITUDE" of the those people on the FFF who continually engage in malicious attacks on the King James Bible; and who are constantly ridiculing those of us here on this Forum? [1 Corinthians 10:15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.] I am NOT judging "them" - I am judging WHAT they say and HOW they conduct themselves. God will judge "them", just as He will judge us (at the Judgment Seat of Christ); in the meantime I will continue to judge their words & their conduct according to the Holy Bible.

"Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" [Amos 3:3] The answer is emphatically - NO, not while I draw breath in my body! The Holy words of God are far too "precious" to me [1Samuel 3:1], that I should COMPROMISE them in order to have "unity" and "fellowship" with those people who "correct" and "attack" my Bible on the FFF. {It's NOT worth it!}

Isaiah 66:5 Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.