Hidden In Him Posted April 7, 2018 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 12 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 449 Content Per Day: 0.18 Reputation: 423 Days Won: 1 Joined: 07/21/2017 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/16/1964 Share Posted April 7, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, KiwiChristian said: Wow. how offensive. What do you mean? I'm simply leveling with you that you come off as contentious. If someone tells me that, I apologize for giving them that impression, and in a Spirit of love reassure them that's not the case with me at all. Edited April 7, 2018 by Hidden In Him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frienduff thaylorde Posted April 7, 2018 Group: Mars Hill Followers: 17 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 13,256 Content Per Day: 5.35 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 62 Joined: 07/07/2017 Status: Offline Birthday: 03/25/1972 Share Posted April 7, 2018 2 hours ago, KiwiChristian said: Yeah, they have no idea of languages. The Catholic religion says the word translated "brother" should be "cousin". Wrong. The word "cousin" is clearly found in the scripture and it means--you've got it--cousin! Luke 1:36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. Luke 1:58 And her neighbours and her cousins heard how the Lord had shewed great mercy upon her; and they rejoiced with her. The N/T was translated into greek and they have specific words for Actual blood relative and cousin.Mark 6:3-4 these were his literal brothers and sisters because the word for brother is "Adelphos" literal blood relative. The word for Cousin is " Anepsios" not used here. So Jesus had literal brothers and sisters according to the bible, this refutes Rome's teaching that Mary remained a perpetual virgin all her life. Romes false doctrines are exposed by the truth of Scripture amen Their is actual proof that mary KNEW JOSEPH , but only AFTER the birth of JESUS . and he knew her not TILLLLLLLLLL after the birth of JESUS . IF he had never known her , it would never have said And he knew her not TILL it would have at the least said HE KNEW HER NOT . but it said TILL AFTER the birth . very specific. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walla299 Posted April 7, 2018 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 9 Topic Count: 92 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,164 Content Per Day: 0.66 Reputation: 1,727 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/19/2015 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/10/1961 Share Posted April 7, 2018 3 hours ago, Willa said: A friend of my grandmothers was very bigoted toward Jews. When I reminded her that her Savior is Jewish, she went into a rage yelling "No He's not! He's a Moabite! Ruth was a Moabite!" There was nothing left for me to say. You can't reason with that. No, you can't. That's the point where you just have to walk away and pray the Lord will open their eyes to the truth. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiChristian Posted April 7, 2018 Group: Members * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 176 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 870 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/23/2017 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/22/1968 Share Posted April 7, 2018 4 hours ago, frienduff thaylorde said: Their is actual proof that mary KNEW JOSEPH , but only AFTER the birth of JESUS . and he knew her not TILLLLLLLLLL after the birth of JESUS . IF he had never known her , it would never have said And he knew her not TILL it would have at the least said HE KNEW HER NOT . but it said TILL AFTER the birth . very specific. Yes. They re-define words to fit their warped theology. The key word is "till" as you have mentioned. In other words "until", meaning up until that point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiChristian Posted April 7, 2018 Group: Members * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 176 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 870 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/23/2017 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/22/1968 Share Posted April 7, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, Butero said: I was meaning that the original Textus Receptus manuscripts are not available anymore as they were to the KJV translators and those of the Geneva Bible. As such, I would prefer to just take my KJV English Bible and translate that into other languages before using what is out there in Greek and Hebrew. Anyway, I said this would put me in the category of having a "strange" belief. Great, Yes, the textus receptus or RECEIVED text. As opposed to the corrupt codex vaticanus ( found in a TRASHCAN! how apt! ) and the westcott and hort nonsense. Start with the CORRECT texts and you cant go wrong. Edited April 7, 2018 by KiwiChristian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts