Comments for Dammit, Rick! https://rickbeckman.org A Romance of Hope in the Wake of Belief Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:06:36 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.5 Comment on The Tyranny of God by faith a grace https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-831611 Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:06:36 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-831611 Christians do die on this earth but we have ETERNAL life in heaven with God!

]]>
Comment on The Tyranny of God by faith a grace https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-831610 Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:03:32 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-831610 the bible isn’t a NOVEL it is the WORD OF GOD!

]]>
Comment on The Tyranny of God by faith a grace https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-831608 Fri, 13 Apr 2018 00:01:32 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-831608 you are missing the BIGGEST part of Christianity. God LOVES us with a never stopping, never ending, never failing, everlasting love. GOD LOVES US. God loves us so much he sent his son to die for us. how can he be a tyrant? God isn’t cruel as many would like to believe. God is JUST. there is a HUGE difference between those two words.

]]>
Comment on The Tyranny of God by faith a grace https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-831607 Thu, 12 Apr 2018 23:53:21 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-831607 also, is there ANYTHING more humbling than dying on a CROSS?

]]>
Comment on The Tyranny of God by faith a grace https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-831604 Thu, 12 Apr 2018 23:50:45 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-831604 but if, as you say, God is tyrannical than why would he send his only SON whom he LOVED to DIE on a cross for US. we don’t even begin to deserve his love or forgiveness!

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Jerry Sponaugle https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-831397 Tue, 10 Apr 2018 04:18:39 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-831397 The truth is as you said, “that you have only scratched the surface” in what I’m sure is a very scholarly tome after your decade of study. This is not amateur hour my friend…Leave the research to the real scholars. You are not fit to tie the theological shoes of the likes of James White. If you think you are then challenge him to a debate and stop bad mouthing him and hiding behind the security blanket of the internet. Just a thought.

]]>
Comment on The King James Version Only Challenge by Cj https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-only-challenge/#comment-831054 Mon, 02 Apr 2018 04:53:46 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2006/12/08/the-kjv-only-challenge/#comment-831054 You have been proven wrong a very long time ago. Please watch on YouTube, Hazardous Materials a Book by Gail Riplinger, or buy the book.

]]>
Comment on He Hangs the Earth on Nothing — Job 26:7 by Rick Beckman https://rickbeckman.org/log/earth-hangs-nothing/#comment-830566 Mon, 05 Mar 2018 22:27:37 +0000 http://www.rickbeckman.com/?page_id=39#comment-830566 You’re presupposing that “physical laws” are something separate from the universe that the universe is subject to.

In reality, “physical laws” are merely descriptions we’ve come up with to describe how the universe is. The universe isn’t conforming to anything, it just is. We do our best to understand how it is, and in the cases of things which seem to be a certain way universally, we develop “laws” to describe them.

]]>
Comment on He Hangs the Earth on Nothing — Job 26:7 by Mo H. https://rickbeckman.org/log/earth-hangs-nothing/#comment-830565 Mon, 05 Mar 2018 21:25:20 +0000 http://www.rickbeckman.com/?page_id=39#comment-830565 Just one question about a comment in this post: You mentioned that there isn’t a God needed for something that can be explained by “natural cause and effect processes”. My question is, if there’s not a God, how does one account for the establishment of “natural cause and effect processes”? Did the cosmos form itself with a mind to adhere to physical laws? I have no intentions of an argument, I am just genuinely interested to hear some theories related to the idea.

Thanks,

-MH

]]>
Comment on The Line of Cain by F Kramer https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-line-of-cain/#comment-830388 Mon, 19 Feb 2018 07:12:29 +0000 http://disciple.rickbeckman.com/?p=13#comment-830388 Well it seems we have overlooked Noah’ wife. Shem, Ham, and Japheth wives’
as well.

]]>
Comment on Psalm 12:6 and KJV-Onlyism by Mark https://rickbeckman.org/log/psalm-126-and-kjv-onlyism/#comment-830196 Sun, 04 Feb 2018 04:01:46 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/01/19/psalm-126-and-kjv-onlyism/#comment-830196 This may never be properly settled unless the KJV believer submits to the original Hebrew which would be the way to go. Remember, English punctuation was in its infancy in 1611 but target the word preserve… How often was it used for people?

]]>
Comment on Holy Polygamy: Men of the Bible with Multiple Wives by Aussie Mormon https://rickbeckman.org/log/bible-polygamists/#comment-830109 Thu, 25 Jan 2018 03:40:45 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=1567#comment-830109 I’ve seen the Mormons mentioned several times in these comments and although some seem to be aware of it, others are not.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (commonly called the Mormon church) does not practice polygamy. They (and it wasn’t everyone) did in the early days of the church, but that was stopped in 1890.
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/od/1?lang=eng

Some fundamental offshoots of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do still practice it however.

]]>
Comment on The Tyranny of God by Rick Beckman https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-829894 Fri, 29 Dec 2017 05:48:53 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-829894 Do Christian apologists that speak about Islam often believe that Allah exists? Do creationists who spend their days fighting evolution while never actually doing science believe that evolution is real?

No?

You see now how stupid it is to claim that arguing against the idea of God means that someone must believe in said God is.

Being an atheist doesn’t require any faith. Babies don’t believe by default. Plenty of people are atheist and simply don’t think about or consider God or religion in their lives. I’m an atheist because I left religion when I realized how immoral the biblical god is and found that I couldn’t then find reason to believe in any other god, so I’m an atheist.

I fight against God because the god of most religions (mainly Christianity as it is most common in America) is abominable and as a result followers of those gods tend to push abominable things onto non-adherents of those religions. If believers in God would keep such belief to themselves and out of science, schools, hospitals, statehouses, etc., then perhaps I and other atheists wouldn’t need to fight so hard.

]]>
Comment on The Tyranny of God by Terence https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-829875 Mon, 25 Dec 2017 13:02:25 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-829875 If God is not real, why do you need to fight a non-existent God through unbelief? There is nothing to fight against.

Being an atheist requires an unshakable faith. You must possess a rock solid belief that there is absolutely No God. Not an iota of a percentage point that God exists. Zero.

If you are fighting still, you aren’t an atheist.

Romans 1:
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Rick Beckman https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-829792 Sun, 17 Dec 2017 01:30:50 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-829792 So your argument is that English changed more drastically in the 150 years between 1611 and 1769 than it has in the couple of hundred years since 1769?

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Paul Rain https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-829767 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 23:13:17 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-829767 No. The 1769 version is perfectly readable even to modern deracinated people, who have suffered the degermanization of the mother tongue.

Anyone who can’t read and understand 1769 KJV English can’t read anyway.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Rick Beckman https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-829765 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 22:34:48 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-829765 Do you approve of the far more numerous changes made since then to deal with the changing language as well? If not, why not?

And by what standard has English declined?

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Paul Rain https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-829764 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 22:33:12 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-829764 The only changes in the 1769 version are those required to deal with the decline in the English language in the past century.

]]>
Comment on The Tyranny of God by Denizen https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-829693 Sun, 10 Dec 2017 21:43:02 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-829693 We can try nuclear weapons.

Also he dosen’t like iron chariots.

]]>
Comment on The Tyranny of God by Denizen https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-829692 Sun, 10 Dec 2017 21:31:44 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-829692 That’s the Greek definition of the Supreme Being, not the Biblical one. Christians will often use this argument which was stolen from Greek Philsopheres. The God of the Bible is not perfect. The God of the Bible is not all loving. The God of the Bible hands out death by the millions and frequently hates.

eviticus 20:23 – “And ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast out before you: for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them.”

Leviticus 26:30 – “And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your images, and cast your carcases upon the carcases of your idols, and my soul shall abhor you.”

Deuteronomy 32:19 – “And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters.”

Psalm 5:5 – “The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.”

Psalm 5:6 – “Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing: the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.”

Psalm 10:3 – “For the wicked boasteth of his heart’s desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom the LORD abhorreth.”

Psalm 11:5 – “The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.”

Psalm 53:5 – “There were they in great fear, where no fear was: for God hath scattered the bones of him that encampeth against thee: thou hast put them to shame, because God hath despised them.”

Psalm 73:20 – “As a dream when one awaketh; so, O Lord, when thou awakest, thou shalt despise their image.”

Psalm 78:59 – “When God heard this, he was wroth, and greatly abhorred Israel:”

Psalm 106:40 – “Therefore was the wrath of the LORD kindled against his people, insomuch that he abhorred his own inheritance.”

Proverbs 6:16-19 – “These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.”

Proverbs 22:14 – “The mouth of strange women is a deep pit: he that is abhorred of the LORD shall fall therein.”

Lamentations 2:6 – “And he hath violently taken away his tabernacle, as if it were of a garden: he hath destroyed his places of the assembly: the LORD hath caused the solemn feasts and sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion, and hath despised in the indignation of his anger the king and the priest.”

Hosea 9:15 – “All their wickedness is in Gilgal: for there I hated them: for the wickedness of their doings I will drive them out of mine house, I will love them no more: all their princes are revolters.”

Zechariah 11:8 – “Three shepherds also I cut off in one month; and my soul lothed them, and their soul also abhorred me.”

Malachi 1:3 – “And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.”

Romans 9:13 – “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”

]]>
Comment on The Tyranny of God by Denizen https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-829691 Sun, 10 Dec 2017 21:27:49 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-829691 “He gave up His only begotten son so that we didnt have to die ”

Christians STILL die.

“the bible says for the wages of sin is death ”

No. The wages of Sin is HELL.

“but guess what God wasnt going to sit back and let us die He died on the cross so that we could be free ”

No. Sinners that are “saved” are then enslaved to Jesus and God for enternity. That is the very defintion of “not free”

“a really loving God who obviously isnt a tyrant and like the others nielish said how are you going to try and act like you know any of this”

It’s obvious you’re the one who knows nothing.

]]>
Comment on The Tyranny of God by Denizen https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-tyranny-of-god/#comment-829690 Sun, 10 Dec 2017 21:23:09 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=2161#comment-829690 “Bible believers believe that everyone is born depraved and deserves punishment, but the plan of salvation provided through Jesus is acceptable payment for our punishment. ”

This statement is irrational and arbitrary. . God declared something like disobedience to him as evil, and then declared an arbitrary sacrifice to clean it. Oh, and those that are “saved” are expected to serve both Jesus and God in Heaven for eternity. You are just confirming that God is a tyrant by bringing this up.

“but for Him to be God, His character and attributes must be perfectly balanced. ”

Omnipotent beings are be definition not limited by anything, even things like balance. The god of the Bible frequently acts imperfect and unbalanced. Your argument is invalid both ways.

” If God were to wipe out all evil, He would have to wipe us all out because our thoughts are evil. ”

Apparently you do not understand the statement of being all powerful. If one is all powerful, one can change rather than destroy. An omnipotent being can eliminate evil without violting free-will or eliminating thoughts. God’s previous attempts to “destroy” evil failed. Even after the Flood and Jesus’ sacrifice, evil is still here. God either failed or he desires evil to exist.
Oh, and why hasn’t God just eliminated Satan? No one can answer me that.

“Jesus came to die for us.”
But he didn’t stay dead for us. Not much of a sacrifice.

“You say you are an atheist, but you are acknowledging his existence by calling him a tyrant.”

He exists as a fictional character. There are many many fictional tyrants. Are hypothetical situations beyond your ken?

“I am christian and believe He is merciful and chooses to use the Bible as a means for us to know Him and for us to share with others the idea that there is forgiveness.”

Sounds like you’re excusing his tyrannical actions. It’s okay. Abused spouses often do that, as do citizens in dictatorships.

“Now, where did evil come from? Hahaha! …I don’t know.”

It came from God. Isaiah 45:7 “I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I, the Lord, do all these things.” I suggest you read your Bible in its entirety rather than let your pastor feed you tiny easily digestible bits.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by COMALite J https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-829013 Sat, 14 Oct 2017 07:36:39 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-829013 Quoth Ronald Broadstone:

Deception #3 — Older and more reliable manuscripts have been discovered since the King James Bible.

Truth: Dr. Sam Gipp writes, “The fact is, that the King James translators had ALL OF THE READINGS available to them that modern critics have available to them today.” (The Answer Book, Gipp, p. 110)

I can disprove Dr. Sam Gipp’s silly little assertion in three words: “Dead Sea Scrolls.”

I’ll rip apart more of your screed later. Bedtime now.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by COMALite J https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-829012 Sat, 14 Oct 2017 07:32:14 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-829012 Quoth daniel:

I agree that knowingly false translations such as “In the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was a god.” from the Mormons are examples of how heresy can creep in through mistranslation.

Allow me to fix that for you:

I agree that knowingly false translations such as “In the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was a god.” from the Mormons Jehovah’s Witnesses are examples of how heresy can creep in through mistranslation.

The translation in question is the New World Translation (NWT) published by the Watchtower Society, aka Jehovah’s Witnesses.

The LDS (“Mormons”) use the KJV as their primary Bible version, but do also use some parts of Joseph Smith’s own “translation” (JST-LDS [to avoid confusion with the completely unrelated Julia Smith Translation which is a valid scholarly translation]), which does not contain what you quoted from John 1:1. The JST-LDS version of John 1:1 reads: “In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God.”

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by COMALite J https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-829011 Sat, 14 Oct 2017 07:30:42 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-829011 Then where are the accounts of any of these 500 people? I want it in their words, not second-hand from Saul of Tarsus (and even he didn’t quote any of them — he merely said that “above five hundred brethren at once” had seen the risen Lord Jesus).

I tore that whole passage apart months ago (back in June) in a Reply to Wayne. There’s a lot more wrong with it than just the nameless, wordless 500 “witnesses” (witnesses are only worth something if you can hear or read their own testimony — try Paul’s tactic in a court case and see how far you get). It flatly contradicts all four Gospel accounts of Jesus’s Resurrection (which also contradict each other) on numerous points.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Craig Bryan https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-829009 Sat, 14 Oct 2017 05:49:49 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-829009 Luke 13:3 says ” I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” we don’t all perish in the end. Only those who did not repent. If you do repent, you will be saved. I’ll give you a few verses.
Romans 3:23
Romans 5:8,12
Romans 6:23
Luke 13:3
Romans 10:9-10, 13
These verses first say we are all sinners and the latter verses say that even though we are sinners, Christ died for us to pay for our sins and everyone can be saved.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Craig Bryan https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-829008 Sat, 14 Oct 2017 05:45:23 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-829008 He went wrong with saying you should kill yourself. But to “Arrange a meeting” with God didn’t work out that well with Job either. God asked Job 83 questions and job couldn’t answer a single one. His first question, “Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.” Seeing how you can’t or any other person on this earth could possible answer that question. I wouldn’t like to try and answer the rest. And second, personally I don’t know how Dueteronomy 22 could “kill” your faith, New Testament churches today believe that Jesus got rid of the law. We use the Old Testament for learning purposes as well as to track the genealogy of Jesus and the story of the Jews. The New Testament is where we see that we are no longer under the law, but grace. Also about the 500 nameless people. No they aren’t named, but think logically for the time period. There were many books from outside sources that tried to disregard Christ saying he didn’t raise from the dead, but that proves that Jesus was alive. And these 500 nameless people were able to defend it at the time. And If I’m correct there are 39 books outside of the Bible that reference Christ. Many of those mention the 500 nameless people. That makes them more important. Those 500 nameless people prove that Jesus was alive at the time and rose from the dead after he was crucified.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Rick Beckman https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-828945 Sat, 07 Oct 2017 04:37:57 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-828945 Give me a better reason to repent; we all perish in the end, so that’s no real argument.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Jeff https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-828944 Sat, 07 Oct 2017 04:35:40 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-828944 You were always an atheist, the truth is, you were never a Christian or you would have continued on in the faith.

You hate God because you love your sin,
Repent and believe, or you too will perish.

]]>
Comment on Holy Polygamy: Men of the Bible with Multiple Wives by Kevin https://rickbeckman.org/log/bible-polygamists/#comment-828779 Mon, 18 Sep 2017 02:40:55 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=1567#comment-828779 Biblical Polygamy – Briefly
Romans 15:4 For EVERYTHING that was written in the past WAS WRITTEN TO TEACH US, so that through the endurance taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope.

There are many Bible passages where God directly and indirectly justifies polygamy. It would be disingenuous, i.e. dishonest, deceitful, underhand, underhanded, duplicitous, double-dealing, two-faced, dissembling, insincere, false, lying, untruthful to ignore all of these passages:
For Example:
1 Exodus 21:8 – Establishes rules for slaves who became wives. Note there is no mention of the man having to be single to marry a slave.
2 Exodus 21:10 – A man is not allowed to diminish food, clothing and marital rights (sexual cohabitation), if he marries an additional wife.
3 Leviticus 20:14 – Prevents a man from marrying a woman and her mother at the same time. This rule would be irrelevant if polygamy was a sin.
4 Deuteronomy 21:15 “If a man has two wives,” obviously provides for multiple wives.
5 Deuteronomy 22:28-29 – A man is to marry a virgin he had sex with, as long as the father did not refuse him. However, notice there is no mention on whether than man is single or not. If it was a sin to be a polygamist, there would have been a rule here saying if the man was already married, he would be punished or stoned.
6 Judges 8:30 – Gideon had 70 sons and “many wives”. He was a man of God.
7 1 Samuel 1:2 & 13:14 – Elkanah a Levite, has two wives. One of his wives, Hannah, gave birth to the prophet Samuel. Wouldn’t he be an illegitimate child, if polygamy was a sin?
8 2 Samuel 12:7-8 – David was given his dead master’s wives. Also God said he could have given him more than what he had. However, David chose to kill a man to steal his wife and that was where his sin was. God indirectly promotes polygamy in this passage.
9 1 Kings 11:1-3 & Deuteronomy 17:17 – Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. However, it is made clear, his sin was marrying strange (foreign) wives and multiplying wives, not having more than one wife. His foreign wives ended up leading him to idolatry later on in his life. Adding more than one wife, such as his father, King David did, was not a sin. And it should be clear, that Bathsheba was married and the sin was he was taking another’s wife, not adding another wife, as is made clear by the prophet who rebukes him. However, multiplying or hoarding wives, as King Solomon did was a sin.
2 Samuel 12 – Further, when Nathan confronts David about the matter of Uriah he compares marriage to owning sheep. The poor man had one sheep and the rich man had many sheep. Neither was in the wrong until the rich man stole the poor man’s sheep. Which matches precisely with God’s endorsement of David to his son (see the following item).
10 1 Kings 15:5 – King David married about eight wives and 10 concubines, but it says David did what was right in the sight of the Lord (1 Kings 11:4, 2 Kings 18:3, 2 Chronicles 29:2, 2 Chronicles 34:2, Acts 13:22). If polygamy was a sin, David would not be right in God’s eyes.
11 1 Chronicles 2:46-48 – Caleb had two concubines. Yet, he was one of only two men allowed to enter the promised land! And, as you know, Moses was not even allowed to enter the promised land due to one sin! Numbers 20
12 2 Chronicles 24:2, 3 – Joash did what was right in the eyes of the LORD all the years of Jehoiada the priest. King Joash had two wives that were chosen by Jehoiada the priest!
13 Nehemiah 13:26 – Solomon is again shown to have sinned because he took foreign wives and multiplied wives, not because he had more than one wife.
14 Esther 2:2-4 – Esther was at least the second wife of the King. God orchestrated the salvation of the Jews through her marriage to a polygamist.
15 Job 27:15 – Job mentions a man whose “wives shall not weep”.
16 Song of Solomon 6:8 – The Shulamite is praised by many queens and concubines of the king who loves her. If you add up all the queens and concubines, you discover that the Shulamite who is courting with King Solomon here is the 141st wife of King Solomon.
Remember, this is a story on how God desires us to be with our spouse.
17 Isaiah 4:1 Mentions a day, when seven women will seek to be married to one man.
18 Jeremiah 3:6-10 – God portrays himself as a polygamist with more than one wife.
19 Jeremiah 31:31-32 – Same thing again here. God with more than one wife.
20 Matthew 25:1-13 – Parable of the 10 virgins, where Jesus has himself as the groom marrying 5 of the 10 virgins, making himself a polygamist in the parable.
21 Romans 5:13 – If there is no law for something, it is not a sin. There is no law against polygamy, therefore, it is not a sin.
22 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 – Mentions that adulterers will not inherit the Kingdom of God, yet in Hebrews 11, we see many polygamists listed who inherited the Kingdom of God. Therefore, polygamy is not adultery.
23 1 Corinthians 5:1 – A possible reference to a N.T. polygamous marriage: “It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife.”
24 1 Timothy 3:2, 12 – Bishops / Deacons must be husband of one or first wife (Gk G3391 – The KJV translates Strongs G3391 in the following manner: one (62x), first (8x), a certain (4x), a (3x), the other (1x), (Gk: “mia” irregular feminine of G1520; one or first wife i.e. not divorced). Because God does not change, ref. Malachi 3:6, Hebrews 13:8, These verses are most likely saying that leaders have to at least have one wife. (consider the above information and item 3 below)
25 Titus 1:5, 6 – Elders the husband of one wife (Gk: “mia”” irregular feminine of G1520; one or first wife i.e. not divorced). These verses are most likely saying that leaders have to at least have one wife. (consider the above information and item 3 below).
26 James 2:23 – Abraham was called “a friend of God”, but he was a polygamist.

The idea is, we can not just assume God is against polygamy, if there is no legitimate reason for such a belief. If God permits polygamy throughout the Old Testament and never does away with it in the New Testament, we must assume, it is still permissible even today.
Using a couple of vaguely referenced scriptures (i.e. ~ two becomes one flesh) to further a viewpoint is not good, and is just self-serving.
A great deal of the doctrinal contentions in the church could easily be solved by making a few requirements while studying the Bible on any doctrine:

1 You must consider ALL the Old and New Testament scripture when attempting to learn God’s mind on a topic or doctrine.
Psalm 19:7 The law of the LORD is perfect, refreshing the soul. The statutes of the LORD are trustworthy, making wise the simple (open minded).
Matthew 22:29 Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness
2 You must consider the fact that all God’s Word is inspired, consistent, logical and truthful.
Psalm 12:6 And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver purified in a crucible, like gold refined seven times.
Psalm 119:24 YOUR statutes are my delight; THEY ARE MY COUNSELLORS.
3 You must consider that God is not hypocritical and that He does not change.
Malachi 3:6 “I the LORD DO NOT CHANGE.”
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is THE SAME YESTERDAY AND TODAY AND FOREVER.
4 You must consider the Holy Spirit’s leading on interpretation while studying scripture.

1 John 2:27 As for you, the anointing you received from HIM remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as HIS anointing TEACHES YOU about ALL things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in HIM
1 Corinthians 2:4-5 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that YOUR FAITH MIGHT NOT REST ON HUMAN WISDOM,
but on God’s power.
1 Corinthians 4:6b “Do not go beyond what is written.” Pro 30:6 Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Glynn https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-828632 Fri, 01 Sep 2017 08:16:43 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-828632 Perhaps you should worship Jesus rather than the Bible. The kjv is an idol to you.

]]>
Comment on The Four Calls of an Impotent Spirit by David Douglass https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-four-calls-of-an-impotent-spirit/#comment-828587 Mon, 28 Aug 2017 09:14:13 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/05/14/the-four-calls-of-an-impotent-spirit/#comment-828587 When Jesus said “If I be lifted up I will draw ALL MEN unto me”
Does he force ALL men to come or just those considered Elect?
Does “For ALL have sinned” really mean ALL

]]>
Comment on Holy Polygamy: Men of the Bible with Multiple Wives by Favour Odion https://rickbeckman.org/log/bible-polygamists/#comment-828496 Fri, 18 Aug 2017 13:10:29 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/?p=1567#comment-828496 I want u to name men in d new testament dat had more than 1 wife…
We have to understand d bible very well.
In d beginning, who did adam’s sons got married to,I mean who did dey hav kids with?it ws their own sisters….. Right???
Bt nw or in d new testament wer brothers n sisters allowed to marry eachother n hav a family?

]]>
Comment on More Changes Between the 1611 and the 1769 Editions of the KJV by Rick Beckman https://rickbeckman.org/log/more-changes-between-the-1611-and-the-1769-editions-of-the-kjv/#comment-828364 Tue, 01 Aug 2017 05:03:56 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/25/230/#comment-828364 How is that hypocrisy? I believed in God when I wrote the article, so I spoke in a way which reflected it. I don’t believe in God now, but the article from 2007 still exists. Do you even know what “hypocrisy” is? Because I don’t think you do.

]]>
Comment on More Changes Between the 1611 and the 1769 Editions of the KJV by Nate Beck https://rickbeckman.org/log/more-changes-between-the-1611-and-the-1769-editions-of-the-kjv/#comment-828362 Tue, 01 Aug 2017 03:47:23 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/25/230/#comment-828362 Why on earth do you say “May the Lord…” in your article when you don’t even believe in the Lord anymore?

Hypocrite!

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by COMALite J https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-827787 Wed, 07 Jun 2017 14:40:22 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-827787

I’d say that the resurrection is factual proof with over 500 eye witnesses to His post resurrection appearances.

Really? Who are these 500 witnesses? What are their names? Where can we read their own accounts of this?

Oh, wait, you’re talking about some guy named “Saul of Tarsus” who couldn’t even keep his own origin story straight who claimed that “above five hundred brethren” saw the resurrected Christ (I Corinthians 15, key verse 6)?

Funny thing: not a single one of the Gospel accounts (you know, the books written expressly to record the life and ministry and crucifixion and resurrection and aftermath thereof of Jesus Christ, specifically to provide evidence that He truly was the promised Messiah? Yeah. Them.) so much as hint of such a thing happening — not even the one written by “Paul”’s bestest buddy and personal physician Luke (the guy who also wrote The Acts of the Apostles which is all about what happened after Jesus ascended and how the Apostles started spreading the Gospel but failed at it so along comes Paul née Saul of Tarsus to show them how to do it right)!

Hey, I could claim that Herakles aka Hercules came back to Earth, and that “above five thousand men” saw him. But unless I could cough up the names of these alleged witnesses, and unless at least some of them wrote their own accounts of this, it’d mean only that I had nothing to show for my claims than my own bluster. You know, like Paul did.

Oh, and the other events Paul mentions there are flatly contradicted by the four Gospels. He says that the resurrected Lord was first seen by Cephas (“Peter”) and all of the twelve (verse 5), then this mysterious appearance to “above 500 brethren at once” which no other Bible writer nor even Pauline epistle seems to know anything about (v. 6), then to “James and the other apostles” (v. 7), and “last of all” by Saul himself (v. 8ff).

Except that not a single one of the Gospel accounts backs that up, even without the verse 6 part. The verse 7 part could refer to the appearance in the upper room where doubting Thomas was finally present and saw and felt Jesus’s resurrected but still-wounded hands and feet and side and where He ate fish and honeycomb, but all four Gospel accounts say that the first people to see Him after His resurrection was a group of women led by Mary Magdalene (with various companions which differs from Gospel to Gospel). Paul seems to be totally unaware of this. In fact, in all of his Epistles, Paul never even so much as mentions Mary Magdalene (he does allude to a “Mary” in Romans 16:6, but only in the context of greeting several leading women in the Church at Rome, who’d be very unlikely to be Mary Magdalene nor Mary the mother of Jesus and adopted mother of John, nor Mary the mother of John Mark that Peter abode with in Acts 12).

The verse 5 part is flatly impossible since it says that Jesus was seen by Cephas then all of the twelve. Problem is, there wasn’t twelve Apostles at the time. Remember, Judas Iscariot had betrayed Him four days previously, and had gone and offed himself in his shame over that? And his replacement Matthias wouldn’t be appointed by casting forth lots until after Jesus ascended into Heaven forty days later! So just who are these twelve, all of whom saw Him before these Nameless 500? “All of” means “every last one of,” without a single exception.

Paul in fact doesn’t really seem to know a whole lot about the Jesus of the four Gospels (not even the one his buddy Luke wrote). For instance, what was Jesus most commonly known as by the general public? “Jesus of Nazareth,” right? And what did He call Himself more than any other title? “The Son of Man,” right? Paul doesn’t seem to know about either name. Not once in any of his Epistles does he use either, nor does he even mention Nazareth as a city! (Nor Bethlehem, for that matter, but that’s another subject in itself.) Only once in all of his Epistles does he actually quote Jesus, and that only briefly to do with the Last Supper. He flatly contradicts Jesus’s teachings on numerous points, including the requirements for salvation itself (Paul says by grace alone with works having no part, Jesus says works are what determines who is and who is not saved in numerous places and in no uncertain terms [Matthew 25:31–46 being the most important but by no means the only one]).

You also mentioned “fulfilled prophecy.” Boy howdy can I have a field day with that! Those Messianic prophecies don’t hold up anywhere near as well as you think, but I don’t have time to go into it right now. Later.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Rick Beckman https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-827781 Wed, 07 Jun 2017 06:01:53 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-827781 Exactly the sort of thing you wouldn’t expect to find in a work hailed as “perfect” and “God’s Word on Earth.”

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Alan Jones https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-827779 Wed, 07 Jun 2017 05:51:40 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-827779 Yawn-inspiring list of printing mistakes.

]]>
Comment on The Great Polygyny Debate by Patrick https://rickbeckman.org/log/the-great-polygyny-debate/#comment-827693 Fri, 02 Jun 2017 20:18:20 +0000 http://rickbeckman.org/2007/08/14/the-great-polygyny-debate/#comment-827693 I KNOW that i know that God is right in all He says. Man doesn’t need to make it “better”. I also know that man has his
so called “standards”, doctrines, which he may think it’s God’s Word but it isn’t.

For instance, it is not the Law of God that marriages should be conducted by the priest/church. Biblically, it is purely a domestic affair. But man has it that it has to be in Church, and by a priest.. kinda it looks more “spiritual”. No Scripture to support this but man already feels the urge to modify God’s Law. No wonder the State intervened to support man’d idea, and now man wants same-sex marriage.. IN CHURCH BY THE PRIEST!

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Ronald Broadstone https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-827675 Thu, 01 Jun 2017 03:49:10 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-827675 Actually there is merit pertaining to the argument of KJV translation compared to other translations. I will give a few examples of the KJV against the NIV. (which most all translations after the NIV contain the same omissions as well)

There are many but I will just spear-head with the main argument, that after the KJV, starting with the NIV, the translations began to omit or change text-proof referring to Jesus Christ being God in the flesh, one in the same as part of the Holy Trinity, Infinite since the beginning, rather than being a separate being. (Not God Himself) Which in turn, obviously, makes it nearly impossible to defend the stance that Jesus Christ IS God, our Creator, and ultimately our Savior!

Here are a few of many examples:

Ephesians 3:9
KJ – “And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.”

NIV – “and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.”

(How can you claim Jesus Christ and the Creator are seperate? I know, by leaving out the verse of Jesus Christ creating all things…)

Revelation 1:11
KJ – “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches.“

NIV – “which said: Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches“

(The blatant omission here should be obvious.)

1 John 5:7-8
KJ – “ For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”

NIV- “For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.“

(Again, obvious.)

1 Timothy 3:16
KJ- “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: GOD was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory“

NIV – “Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: HE appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory“

(Replacing “God” with “He” forces the reader to ALLUDE to He meaning God. Why do this when leaving the translation as God would make no room for debate?)

1 John 3:16
KJ – “Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. “

NIV – “This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers.”

(Same reasoning of the last example, why change it from God giving his life for us, to Jesus Christ giving his life for us, unless again you wanted to leave it open to debate whether or not he was God Himself or just a man name jesus christ?)

Romans 14:10
KJ – “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.“

NIV – “You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat.”

(I hope you are beginning to see a pattern here…)

Now that should be plenty of reasoning for the argument, but to add even more validity, here are a few more translation differences that leave out almost ENTIRE verses! Why? My own personal opinion is that it was done to take away some of the Power of the very Word itself!

Acts 8:37
KJ – “And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

NIV –

(An ENTIRE verse, just left out! A verse about the Power of Faith in Jesus Christ, how convenient for the enemy!)

Matthew 5:44
KJ – “But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;”

NIV – “But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,”

(The only point, in my mind, to leave out specific details could only be to weaken what was said, or perhaps just pure laziness of the translators…but I doubt the latter.)

Matthew 9:13
KJ – “But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

NIV – “But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

(While we’re at it, let’s leave out repentance too, why not.)

Matthew 20:16
KJ – “So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen. “

NIV – “So the last will be first, and the first will be last.”

(Don’t want to hurt the feelings of the many!)

Matthew 27:35
KJ – “And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.”

NIV – “When they had crucified him, they divided up his clothes by casting lots.”

(Bye-bye to fulfilling Old Testament prophecy…minor details that you don’t need to know.)

Mark 6:11
KJ – “And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.”

NIV – “And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them.”

(No judgement? Then deny away, no harm no foul.)

Mark 10:24
KJ – “And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!”

NIV – “The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!”

(Of course the rich don’t want to hear that so let’s just leave it out for this generation.)

Luke 4:4
KJ – “And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. “

NIV – “Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone.”

(Jesus must have forgotten the rest of the scripture reference according to these translators!)

Luke 4:8
KJ – “And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.”

NIV – “Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’”

(Drop the part about satan! *phew*…that was a close one…almost revealed our “possible” motives behind all this distortion of Gods Word…)

The list of distortions and weakening of verses goes on and on. For the sake of space I’ll stop there…with distortions. So here are a few verses the translators decided to erase from memory completely.

Matthew 18:11 KJ – “For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.”

Acts 8:37 KJ – “And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

Matthew 23:14 KJ – “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.”

Mark 9:44 KJ – “Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched”

Mark 11:26 KJ – “But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.”

So finally you’re left asking, WHY on earth distort and omit all of this information from scripture!? Well, allow the deception of the translators themselves to come to your own conclusion.

The publishers deception used to promote the NIV

Deception #1 – The NIV “just” updates the “archaic” words and makes it “easier to understand”. Nothing is “really changed.

Truth: The NIV removes some verses that confirm the deity of Jesus Christ.

Deception #2 – The NIV is easier to read and understand.

Truth: According to a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level research study, The King James Bible is by far the easiest!

Deception #3 – Older and more reliable manuscripts have been discovered since the King James Bible.

Truth: Dr. Sam Gipp writes, “The fact is, that the King James translators had ALL OF THE READINGS available to them that modern critics have available to them today.” (The Answer Book, Gipp, p.110)

Deception #4 – The NIV is more accurate.

Truth: The KJB is a literal word for word translation. When the translators had to add words for sentence structure they are in italics.

The NIV uses “dynamic equivalence”. Rather than a word for word translation, they add, change and subtract to make the verse say what they “thought” it should! The Preface to the NIV even says, “. . .they have striven for more than a word-for-word translation. . .”

Why would publishers print so many different Bible versions?

The King James Bible is the ONLY Bible that is not OWNED by men!

That’s right! The King James Bible has no Copyright ownership and it can be published by anyone, anytime, with no need to ask for permission!

So if you’re a publisher and you want to have exclusive copyrights to maximize your profits, you have to produce new versions of the Bible, such as the NIV.

Lucifer seeks to deceive Christians and non-believers, and the modern versions of the Bible only serve to confuse people.

By having different versions that conflict with one another, people don’t understand why they should believe that the Bible is the Word of God and not the words of men.

And when they remove the deity of Jesus, his redeeming blood sacrifice and the Holy Trinity, they remove Christians ability to prove that these things are true.

REFERENCES: http://www.christianitybeliefs.com

]]>
Comment on Christianity Is under Attack‽ by Rick Beckman https://rickbeckman.org/log/christianity-under-attack/#comment-827033 Sat, 15 Apr 2017 03:36:08 +0000 https://rickbeckman.org/?p=3908#comment-827033 If God is not real, why do we not just live like animals?

Well, we do live like animals; human animals. And typically, humans desire a certain level of functioning society, which our laws and values facilitate. If you need a God to tell you that you need to not kill or do drugs or whatever, then that says more about you than it does me. Without God, I’m free to murder, rape, defile, and pillage exactly as much as I want to, which is “none”; should I choose to actually do so, then I deal with the fallout within my society — imprisonment, for example.

]]>
Comment on Christianity Is under Attack‽ by Nicholas Brantley https://rickbeckman.org/log/christianity-under-attack/#comment-827032 Sat, 15 Apr 2017 03:31:46 +0000 https://rickbeckman.org/?p=3908#comment-827032 If your sayings are true, why not live like animals, there would be no law, why respect, why live, why not do drugs, defile your body, why not just take what you want, you say you don’t believe, but you follow the law. If you remembered the law was made for sinners. 1st Timothy 1:9, Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers. To say that you follow the law is to say you follow religion, therefore proof you are fool according to God’s word, the fool has said there is no God, since you don’t believe in the law. I pray that you may follow Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, the Great I Am, the Door, the Light, the Truth, the Messiah, the Bread of Life.

]]>
Comment on “Easter” in the KJV: Argument Settled? by Rick Beckman https://rickbeckman.org/log/easter-in-the-kjv-argument-settled/#comment-826772 Mon, 27 Mar 2017 04:52:52 +0000 http://archive.timothysburden.com/2006/10/18/easter-in-the-kjv-argument-settled/#comment-826772 So your assumption is that in 400 years, no scholar has been able to exceed the translators of King James’ Bible, a Bible which was openly “translated” using language which was had no business being in there, such as “bishop,” but which fit the church polity of the king.

]]>
Comment on “Easter” in the KJV: Argument Settled? by Cassey Dooley https://rickbeckman.org/log/easter-in-the-kjv-argument-settled/#comment-826771 Mon, 27 Mar 2017 02:23:46 +0000 http://archive.timothysburden.com/2006/10/18/easter-in-the-kjv-argument-settled/#comment-826771 If anyone compares the greek words instead of the english it is obvious that easter does not belong.
If you read the letter to the readers which was written by the 1611 translators. They openly admit they done their best and it is not perfect but as close as they could get.
Any further argument is vain!!!!

]]>
Comment on “Easter” in the KJV: Argument Settled? by Jim Gramm https://rickbeckman.org/log/easter-in-the-kjv-argument-settled/#comment-826760 Sat, 25 Mar 2017 17:49:40 +0000 http://archive.timothysburden.com/2006/10/18/easter-in-the-kjv-argument-settled/#comment-826760 So Ed, you have proven the KJV is flawed, after is an error and amid is correct. Hmmm. And furthermore you now have the text saying something really weird.
You have the text saying: intending amid Easter to bring him forth to the people. That does not even make any sense. Of course one could argue that it could read: intending amid passover to bring him forth to the people. How does one do something “amid Easter”. KJV is just simple wrong, incorrect and in error. It is not perfect. I used to be a KJV onlyist once myself, but I repented of that and now know better. Praise YWHW he has shown me the truth.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Stephen Dalrymple https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-826691 Tue, 07 Mar 2017 18:31:05 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-826691 I wasn’t careful in editing my last comment. The comment should read like this:

If you believe the 1611 KJV is the inspired Word of God then the King James that you own is not the inspired Word of God because it varies from the 1611 version . For the vast majority of true believers on the planet (those who have accepted Jesus Christ as Savior) the KJV is not the inspired word of God. It is one of thousands of versions of God’s inspired Word of God.

The following changes from 1611 to today’s current KJV show that if you are committed to the KJV being the only inspired Word of God, only one or the other can be considered the inspired Word of God.

Ezekiel 24:5 – “let him seethe” vs. “let them seethe” [who will seethe?]
Ezekiel 24:7 – “powred it vpon the ground” vs. “poured it not upon the ground” [was it poured or not poured?]
Ezekiel 48:8 – “which they shall” vs. “which ye shall” [who shall?]
1 Corinthians 15:6 – “And that” vs. “After that” [simple conjugation or statement of order of events?]
1 John 5:12 – “the Sonne, hath” vs. “the Son of God hath” [making the translation more accurate]

Thank God, that He has preserved His Word, long before the King James Version of the Bible came into being. Variations between versions are a very minor problem. Doctrinal differences from believers spring from interpretation, not from textual variants.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Stephen Dalrymple https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-826690 Tue, 07 Mar 2017 18:28:40 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-826690 If you believe the 1611 KJV is the inspired Word of God then the King James that you own is not the inspired Word of God because it varies from the 1611 version (see the above . For the vast majority of true believers on the planet (those who have accepted Jesus Christ as Savior) the KJV is not the inspired word of God. It is one of thousands of versions of God’s inspired Word of God.

The following changes from 1611 to today’s current KJV show that if you are committed to the KJV being the only inspired Word of God, only one or the other can be considered the inspired Word of God.

Ezekiel 24:5 – “let him seethe” vs. “let them seethe” [who will seethe?]
Ezekiel 24:7 – “powred it vpon the ground” vs. “poured it not upon the ground” [was it poured or not poured?]
Ezekiel 48:8 – “which they shall” vs. “which ye shall” [who shall?]
1 Corinthians 15:6 – “And that” vs. “After that” [simple conjugation or statement of order of events?]
1 John 5:12 – “the Sonne, hath” vs. “the Son of God hath” [making the translation more accurate]

Thank God, that He has preserved His Word, long before the King James Version of the Bible came into being. Variations between versions are a very minor problem. Doctrinal differences from believers spring from interpretation, not from textual variants.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Rick Beckman https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-826670 Tue, 07 Mar 2017 02:48:33 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-826670 Revisions aren’t the original; saying they are means you don’t know what the words mean. Your new, modified gun is a 2013 replica, not a 1911 gun.

If you don’t believe me, try to pass it off as a 1911 to any collector. Their value is different because they are different.

Not that hard unless you have no grasp of reality.

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Chris E https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-826669 Tue, 07 Mar 2017 02:45:35 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-826669 I bought a Colt model 1911 45 hand gun in 2013. Yes it had been modified, yes it is new, and yes it is “NOT” the ORIGINAL 1911, but it is still a Colt 1911 45 Hand Gun. I do not see what the issue is between the 1611 and the 1769. The King James A.V. 1611 Bible I bought in 2013 is still a KJV 1611. Not that hard unless you are an unbeliever.

Christopher

]]>
Comment on KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769: The KJV-onlyist’s Dilemma by Latoya Gauthier https://rickbeckman.org/log/kjv-1611-vs-1769/#comment-826588 Wed, 01 Mar 2017 08:21:34 +0000 http://timothysburden.com/2007/03/24/kjv-1611-vs-kjv-1769/#comment-826588 It’s so sad how we GODs family take things so small in the text and argue . And make a big issue ..The point is Jesus was born of a virgin ..died on the cross for our sins and was Resurrected….and living with in he’s people today ……when the Bible your reading leave this out …there is a problem ….it don’t matter if each Bible use different words to really mean the same thing… this is the work of the devil to cause confusion to feed in uncertainties that we deal with ..in these trying times . Stay prAyed up….grounded in faith..stop wasting time in confusion…trust inGODs promises and abilities …

]]>