creativemechanic

Advanced Member
  • Content count

    285
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

238 Excellent

1 Follower

About creativemechanic

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

996 profile views
  1. That's just the thing. My church used the kjv and I mainly use it too. I agree it's an excellent of not one of the best translations. But I don't see it as the untouchable infallible only God inspired translation as people put it as . But what amuses me at the reaction i get I'd when I point out some of its issues( as all translations do). People put it on par as a sign of backsliding
  2. Hmmmmm... well ok. well if thats the case then point taken. However, claiming peole who dont endorse the kjv as haters and saying that they will lie is inappropriate. You're ascribing dishonesty to people because of them not preferring the version you prefer which is wrong.
  3. Not ridiculing those who see it as the translation of choice. Its aimed at those who make it as THE only one that we should ever use and that its the one and only time God inspired man to translate the bible
  4. to explain myself. im not saying the kjv is a bad translation. its actually excellent from all accounts. however, some people believe fiercely that it is the only version to be used and act like any other version is an abomination of it , which is pretty much ridiculous, seeing as it itself is a newer version
  5. But we dont use the 1611 version now. we use the 1769 one,
  6. Is it just me or does anyone else find it hilarious that people of this movement support a translation of the scripture which is a 1769 update from the 1611s originals archaic language but who then condemn any further updates to that versions language? Kinda double standards doncja think?
  7. I think it depends on how it is done. If something is sold after the service kid food or drinks then no problem. But if u r using the church to advertise and time is taken from the service to do so . Or the service is used ti advertise then no
  8. We all know that polygamy violates God original purpose of marriage. But yet God allowed several men of God to have multiple wives- Abraham, Jacob, David etc which had disastrous results.m My question is yes its generally accepted that polygamy is out of bound for Christians and while I do agree that it should be one man one wife. At what point in scripture was it established that from here on now- no more multiple wives? Purpose is im trying to find the exact scripture to justify these principles not aruge against them
  9. must resist..... cant say it....
  10. See now heres where I find it ridiculous. If you support Trump and his policies and think theyre best for America then tyou have every right to. But when you put some godly, cleansing attribute to him and then call those opposing him or whom he opposes names like paedophiles, and sodomites thats where you step off of - take this person seriously and put him in the rabid cultlike supporter bracket which cant be taken seriously. Those sound like ramblings of a madman. Replace Trump with hitler and you have a perfect neo nazi speech , seriously
  11. If Obama really wants to sabotage Trump all hes gotta do is sit and let him continue on his path.... Ultimate sabotage. Whats hilarious is while Obama wasnt no saint Trmup makes a few chrstian matching saints and we got christians proclaiming him as the great rescuer and ignore all the rest of nonsense he says and does.
  12. Actually i know the young lady in question. There was no actual showing of a change of heart. We didnt know,she was living like that. In a sunday school class,she when asked about how she was doing she casually told us that shes pregnant as if it was a new job she had go tten
  13. She was a professed christian and had been so for years
  14. A friend of mine told me a story that happened to him. Hes the director of a church camp and was prepping for that years one when he got a message from a young woman who had counselled the year previous- She said shes just letting him know she's pregnant but will still be available to counsel. This led him to check around because he didnt remember hearing of her getting married. Turns out she wasnt. He then had to figure out how to diplomatically let her know she wouldnt be able to counsel because of that . My question is , while I do agree wih that position, where do we draw the line at who and who cannot participate in church ministry activities based on their lifestyles? Its something I had to struggle with before. I woud be having programmes and certain young people who were known to be in lots of unsavoury activities (drinking, partying etc) would want to have roles and i wondered if I should let them have it. Position 1- They represent the church and by extenson God, what impact could they have doing certain unchristianlike things and then being seen onstage reperesenting us. Position 2- You yourself are not perfect, while you may yourself ot do what they do, you are a sinner as they are so its hypocritical to want to bar them when you are sinful as well. What do you think?
  15. Really how?