Knee-Mail: “Kent and Dr. Luke”

From: Kent Hovind
Sent: January 19, 2008
To: Dr. Luke
Subject: Through the Storm
First read: Acts 27:1-20

KH: Excuse me, Dr. Luke (Colossians 4:14), what is the problem here (Acts 27:20)?

Dr. Luke: Oh it looks pretty serious! I’ve been traveling with Paul the
Apostle since we left Ephesus (Acts 20:1) and now we are in a ship of Alexandria (Acts 27:6) headed for Rome. There are 276 of us on board (Acts 27:37) and we are caught in a really huge storm (Acts 27:14-20).
We have been driven by this fierce wind for almost two weeks now without seeing the sun or stars.

KH: That means you can’t tell your longitude or latitude since you don’t have a GPS on board, right?

DL: We have no clue where we are, and what’s a GPS?

KH: Never mind. That would take a while to explain and it won’t be invented for about 1,900 years anyway.

DL: Oh…we can’t wait that long! No one has eaten for fourteen days (Acts 27:33) and we’ve thrown about everything we can think of overboard to lighten the ship (Acts 27:19). As of now, we have no hope whatsoever (Acts 27:20).

KH: No hope…what an awful feeling!

DL: It sure is! Most of these sailors don’t know the Lord and will go to hell where there is really no hope (Revelation 20:13,14)!

KH: So what is Paul doing during the storm?

DL: He’s down below praying or sleeping.

KH: How can he sleep through this storm?

DL: Oh, Paul’s been through all kinds of trials (II Corinthians 11:23-29). He has learned to trust God and “go with the flow.”

KH: I guess I haven’t learned that one yet.

DL: Oh, Kent, you have to learn that lesson! Sometimes we get caught in currents or winds in life that are way bigger than we can fight. If we hoisted our sail in this wind, it would be torn to shreds in a few seconds. Some things you just can’t fight.

Jesus showed us that. He was born, grew up, and did His entire ministry while Israel was under Roman control. He was working for a different kingdom so he mostly ignored or avoided them. He never fought them. All political currents eventually play themselves out; so sit back, be patient, and go with the flow.

KH: That’s great advice, Dr. Luke. When Matthew Maury read Psalms 8:8 about the “paths of the seas,” he was inspired to map the ocean currents. When ship captains learned to sail with the current, even if it looked to be a longer route, they found that it was actually faster and saved billions of dollars.

DL: Ah, who’s Matthew Maury and what’s a dollar?

KH: Never mind. He hasn’t been born yet. Anyway, you are in a hopeless situation. What are you going to do?

DL: I think Paul will be coming up soon to talk with everyone (Acts 27:21). I’ll just listen to his advice. God seems to lead him in times like these. I’ll just do what he says.

KH: Good idea, Luke. It will take supernatural leadership to get out of this storm!

DL: Yes, lots of Bible characters learned to trust God when they were caught in a current too strong to fight against. Moses learned it many times. He followed the cloud just like God said (Exodus 13:17-22) even though he knew it wasn’t leading them the shortest way to the promised land. If God hadn’t lead them the way He did, Pharoah wouldn’t have been destroyed at the Red Sea and probably would have attacked Israel later to get his slaves back.

When Moses got to the Red Sea and was stuck on the beach, he was caught in a current of events way bigger than he could ever control. He learned to “stand still” (Exodus 14:13) and watch God show off His power and plan.

KH: I know, and what power it was, too! If the crossing was 9 miles from Nuweiba to Arabia with a maximum depth of 900 feet, that means each wall of water had over 21 million square feet or over 490 acres of water held vertically on each side! At 64 lbs/cubic foot for water (a little more for salt water) it would require nearly 1.4 billion pounds of pressure on each side to hold the water up—not even factoring in the fact that the pressure is greatly compounded with depth. The lateral pressure is more likely an average of 28,800 lbs/square foot or over six hundred billion pounds of pressure (600,000,000,000 of pressure) on each side that God exerted to hold those walls of water up for His people to pass over! That’s mind boggling!

DL: You are strange, Kent. Have you been to a doctor lately?

KH: Well…you are a doctor.

DL: Not the kind you need. Anyway, we see from Moses’ story that even though we are caught in a situation way bigger than us, it’s never bigger than God.

KH: I’m getting a lesson in that myself.

DL: Good. There are plenty of godly examples to follow and learn from. Hezekiah faced an impossible situation (II Kings 18:13-37; II Chronicles 32:1-22) but in one night, God fixed it all (II Kings 19:35). Esther faced a royal problem that God fixed in one night (Esther 6:1)!

Joseph’s jail term was completely reversed in one hour (Genesis 41:14). Job spent months in agony but God fixed it all (Job 7:3;42). God specializes in turning around impossible situations. Jesus can step in and stop the storm (Luke 8:22-24) or He can see you through it (Daniel 3:25). Either way, you’ll be fine.

KH: So what should I do now?

DL: Hey, this wind is too strong. Let God take care of it. Relax, sleep, read a book, talk to God, and rest in Him (Matthew 11:29). By the way, Kent, God told me to give you a message.

KH: Yes, and I know what it is. “He’s got my back.”

DL: Right! How did you know?

KH: He keeps reminding me because I keep forgetting.

63 Comments

  1. pabramson April 12, 2008 10:25 am Reply

    The Kings of the East

    Revelation 16:12 “And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.”

    “Why China is the REAL master of the universe”
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=559133&in_page_id=1811

    This is a very interesting editorial, with a summary of historical power shifts.

    From Article: “… the late 19th century, when waving the Union Jack was a simple pleasure, people sang: “Rule Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves” without any irony. It was a statement of fact.

    “A quarter of mankind lived under the British flag in the largest empire the world had ever known.

    “And many of those parts that weren’t under Britain’s rule – such as the U.S. – had been created by Britain. …

    “Britain was the workshop of the world, dominating science, manufacturing and trade. …

    “What would those Victorian masters of old have made of the fact that Chinese security men were on the streets of London this week, ordering our own police about and fighting running battles with British protesters while bewildered athletes carried the Olympic torch on its relay through the capital?

    “It was a brazen display of how confident China has become of its new place in the world, just as the British Government’s failure to take a firm stand on Chinese abuses of human rights shows how craven we have become.

    “The dire warnings from the International Monetary Fund this week that the West now faces the largest financial shock since the Great Depression, while the Asian economies are still powering ahead, simply underlines our vulnerability in this new world order.

    “The desperately weakened American dollar appears to be on the verge of losing its global dominance, in the same way as sterling lost it a lifetime ago. …

    “China is spending 35 times as much on crude oil as it did eight years ago, and 23 times as much on copper.

    “As it builds gleaming skyscrapers on its fields, China alone consumes half the world’s cement and a third of its steel.

    “What is happening is so extraordinary that economists have had to invent a new word for it – this is not an economic cycle, but a supercycle, a shift in the world economy of historic proportions. …

    “The cost of living in Britain is now rising faster than wages, making the British on average poorer year on year….”

    http://www.creationism.org

  2. pabramson April 12, 2008 11:59 am Reply

    Dear 4truthsetsufree,

    A major portion of St. Paul’s writings were geared towards knocking down the teachers who wanted to keep the Law in place, cheapening Grace.

    I asked you about salvation, a couple of times. I also discussed the Law vs. Grace.

    http://www.cseblogs.com/?p=135#comments
    (pabramson – on April 10th, 2008 at 1:45pm )
    “What if Abraham kept the Sabbath for every single Saturday for 172 years (he lived to 175; Genesis 25:7). But for three of those years, … say when he was around 110, he did not keep the Sabbath. Would God still accept him into His Kingdom?”

    You answered, (4truthsetsufree – on April 10th, 2008 at 10:31pm)
    “I apologise if you feel offended by my writings, in particular about Sunday keeping. Maybe God is tucking at your heart, who knows? You are a Sunday keeper right? …

    “I said this before, Jesus did more than just die for us. He set an example for us to follow (just like baptism). He kept the Ten Commandments. This should be our desire as well. Because we love Him.

    “Please stop the feeble excuses to validate Sunday keeping. We’ve been through the whole Bible. The Sabbath stands. It never fell away, it never will. Jesus kept it, Paul kept it, the gentiles kept it, even in the life hereafter, all flesh will keep it.”

    No, no tugging to go back to the Law. Sorry.

    We are saved by Grace. We can add nothing to what God has done. Did you read the Scripture reference that I included about Abraham’s salvation – by grace?

    You seem to not address challenges to your beliefs, when one uses Scripture, as ENDTIMES has done many times in the past few weeks. And you do not seem to understand what grace means.

    It seems like your attitude is: “Oh yeah, we are saved by grace. But even better is to then go back under the Law too. Yes, and keep the Sabbath. Be good, just to make sure. God’s grace is not sufficient, if you are not ‘good’ enough.”

    You wrote: “Please stop the feeble excuses to validate Sunday keeping. …”

    I … didn’t mention that in any past messages to you, did I?

    Again, I feel no “tugging” to go back under the Law.

    Is that why you are here? To try to get others pulled down into works?

    Instead, why don’t you let us help to lift you up into grace?

    I know that many SDAs are vegetarian. (Perhaps all.) But of course, the New Covenant has freed us to eat any foods. Do you agree with this? Do you recall Peter’s vision (Acts 10:10-16)?

    1 Corinthians 8:8-13 “But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak. For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol’s temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols; And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.”

    As I read the passage above – the one who abstains from meat is NOT the strong one, but rather the weaker brother.

    1 Corinthians 6:13a “Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them.”

    And finally, this verse seems to directly speak to the excesses of SDA beliefs:

    Colossians 2:16 “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days.”

    Paul Abramson

    http://www.creationism.org

  3. bluemoose April 12, 2008 12:07 pm Reply

    Here are some open-ended questions to everyone regarding the polygamist ranch you mentioned earlier:

    Did those people have their religious rights violated? Should they have the right to raise their children according to their religious beliefs? If they hadn’t been forcing some rather unsavory situations with children, should they have been raided nonetheless for promoting polygamy? Many of the children have been raised to believe that the outside world is nothing but evil. Should the children be allowed back with their own mothers, who may continue to raise them the way they were before, or placed under the care of the scary outsiders?

  4. for Jesus’ name: Phillip-George (c)1974 April 12, 2008 6:03 pm Reply

    Dear GaryMurray, Ekkman, Dr Bouw[if Ekkman cares to pass it on]

    starlight/ SN1987A is the biggest reason evolutionists have for rejecting God. If they could take us to a place on this earth and point to any organic or geological feature and tell us that “must” have taken over 6000 to form they would. the fact is they cannot take us to such a geological feature. they cannot take us to millions upon millions of transitional forms. they cannot take us to any laboratory and demonstrate spontaneous abiogenesis.

    all they can do is point to SN1987A [exempli gratia]

    but then which one of them seriously engaged Dr. Bouw as just one [and only one] of many examples of alternative paradigms in cosmology; a mushrooming internet physics topic. SN1987A thus becomes something to cling to as if your life depended on it. “Hey God I rejected you because I have good scientific evidence against your written testimonies” ie. they are “dead men walking” as the Texas Death Row slang goes and in agreement with the usage of ‘dead’ in the KJV lexicon and specifically dead in Gen. 2.17

    Yet is anything about it really demonstrated in the Francis Bacon scientific sense – either deductively or inductively. QED? Did electrons weigh what they now do when it [SN1987A] formed/ was created? Was light traveling at the speed it appears to now? Is the red shift quantized? Does the universe have a centre of gravity? what shape is the universe? Have pioneer 10 and 11 mysteriously decelerated? How much of the so called red shift is due to motion through space and how much due to expansion of space? When did inflation stop and why? was the Michelson Morley experiment really negative? How much dust and dark matter is there and what is the distribution of any dark stuff out there? How many different gravitational gradients does light pass in transit between galaxies?

    from the Christian perspective and a biblical exegesis when did the stretching of the heavens take place? how many stretching events were there? what happened at the curse / subjection of this creation to “futility”? what aspect of the universe is wearing out as the bible says?

    Dr Bouw, quoted in these blogs, has suggested that evolutionists don’t understand their own theories. Br. Kent has said in the series you need to explain to evolutionists what it is they believe. Watch them then wriggle and side step and redefine words and shift topics and simply deny evolutionisms. this blog is a case in point. we could discuss the evolutionists here as a vivisectionist would – but it would get a bit boring.

    in fact there are too many supernova events/ remnants too close to the earth and not enough of them in total. Supernova are another anomaly to big bangers.

    Jesus gave an endorsement of good scientific method in several sermons. ie, He verified causal relationships and reproducibility and inductive thinking.

    What Evolutionists are really rejecting is the resurrected Jesus.

    cheers from the deep south

  5. for Jesus’ name: Phillip-George (c)1974 April 12, 2008 6:12 pm Reply

    WW_ I’m just point out that Barbara Eden was a beautiful young woman who looked all that more beautiful when she called her man master. Sarah was mysteriously beautiful in old age when she called her man Lord.

    To very many men My Fair Lady is a favourite.

    Not to discriminate against Liz Hurley in Austin Powers or Catherine Zets Jones in Zoro – there is something very beautiful about a woman who can conjure a meal by command and goes back in the bottle when you want her to.

    Can a man look at a beautiful woman and simply worship God?

  6. EndTimes April 12, 2008 6:59 pm Reply

    bluemoose
    Said this on April 12th, 2008 at 12:07pm:
    Here are some open-ended questions to everyone regarding the polygamist ranch you mentioned earlier:

    Did those people have their religious rights violated? Should they have the right to raise their children according to their religious beliefs? If they hadn’t been forcing some rather unsavory situations with children, should they have been raided nonetheless for promoting polygamy? Many of the children have been raised to believe that the outside world is nothing but evil. Should the children be allowed back with their own mothers, who may continue to raise them the way they were before, or placed under the care of the scary outsiders?

    Dear bluemoose,

    Certainly the outside world is evil of no doubt, yet the evil that was perpetrated by those that were entrusted to raise them according to God’s word has been totally violated. If the mothers are able to protect them from those abusive adult sexual encounters, then the mothers should have the opportunity to show that they can do this. Since this cult has brain washed them so much, that may not be possible.

    On the other hand, the horrific crimes that are perpetrated against those in the foster care system has likewise been well documented. It looks like a tough road ahead for these kids. They need our prayers.

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  7. djhouk April 12, 2008 7:45 pm Reply

    GaryMurray
    Said this on April 11th, 2008 at 1:25pm:
    ——————————————————————————–

    Samphire
    Said this on April 11th, 2008 at 1:02am:

    . Paul wrote: ”Why SN1987A in particular?”

    Simply because it does not involve the speed of light. The distance to the supernova is accurately known (plus or minus a percent or two) by direct measurement and not by inference.
    _________________________________________________

    Regardless what the articles and research tell us, there is one thing stellar science does teach us. Nothing is ‘accurately known’ as there is no one standing on the other side with the end of the tape measure, no Samphire not even within 1 to 2 percent. I know its a revelation to some of you but just try and stay focused. There is a number, there is a range, but there isn’t necessarily any way (without making those fundamental, man-made, fallible assumptions) to know with any certainty that first, the method conducted to find the range such as radiometries and quantum mechanic calculations, as well as the samples taken and tested are as accurate as the engineers conducting the tests. I quote one scientist who once said “It’s all best guess” meaning none of it is absolute.

    I’ve heard the SN1987A argument over and over again to the point where its redundancy makes me hurl like the tilt-a-whirl at a county fair. As I have asked so many misguided easy believing science nits in the past, I ask the same question to you guys with a follow statement…
    Question… In the entire incalculable known and UNKNOWN universe, where a plethora of stars, planets, novas, dark holes and unnamed anomalies are in abundance and have been studied and tested (some not yet discovered) from everything to distance to land surface for the past few hundred years, why is it that out of this enormous field of stellar study this tiny, small, insignificant super-nova (while large to us simply a spec when equated to the rest of the universe) seems to be (to the anti-creationists) all that is needed to persuade them (and you) that ‘They Have Got It!’??
    Statement… If the SN1987A is the anti-creationists claim to a definitive conclusion to prove their (age old evolved universe) theories out of an entire universe of unpredictable results and studies, it would seem to this creationist, that it would take more faith to believe in that spec of dust on the universal map, rather than a creator God who made it all in His way, in His time and most importantly in HIS understanding.


    Gary,

    The reason SN1987A is such an important point in the age-of-the-universe debate is actually very simple. Because of its unique geomertry, its distance was calculated directly using nothing more than standard trigonometry. No standard candles, reference stars, brightness magnitudes or any other method. Trigonometry is simple to understand and used thousands of times a day here on planet earth (it’s a fundamental tool in land surveying, for example). It’s very hard to argue that with the trigonomic result of 168,000 light years distance for SN1987A. It’s also worth pointing out that the trig result compares well with the value obtained from the other standard methods of measuring astronomical distances, increasing confidence in those measures. I have yet to hear a YEC explanation for the SN1987A observation.

  8. Three Crosses April 12, 2008 9:53 pm Reply

    To the posters on this blog and RobG in response to:RobG
    Said on April 11th, 2008 at 10:13pm:
    First of all I’d like to address some of your points individually

    1.)”The fatal error is that the Bible wasn’t written, nor published by members of the Catholic church, to prove anything except that: God loves us and He want us to be with Him in Heaven and that He sent His only begotten Son to die for our sins in order to make that possible. Why do people misinterpid things in the Bible? The easy answer is: to do the work of the Devil; to make money; to mislead people who are searching for salvation; because they don’t have the Catholic church to lead them to the truth.”

    TC: This looks like you are giving credit for the “Holy Bible” to the catholic church. You also seem to be asserting the infallibility of the catholic church. I believe Jesus was the truth ,not the catholic church. You state “His only begotten Son” then later you state “The only Son of God and is Himself The God”. So which is it “only begotten Son” or “only Son”? The New testament states “begotten” five times. I could not find “only son” when referring to Jesus. They are different. Why would we need the catholic church to lead us to the truth? When Jesus sent the Holy Spirit (the comforter, the Spirit of truth) from John 14:26.

    2.)You state “the Catholic Church is the true way to salvation.”

    TC: Is this not placing the catholic church above Jesus Christ? “And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;” (II Peter 3:15)

    3.)”There isn’t one Catholic that believes the Pope is above God.”

    TC: You say this, yet in the catechism of the catholic church which is distributed to children and perspective members it states, the pope is to be called “holy father”. Then the catechism states the definition for father, is God. Would you prefer that catholics believe the pope is God? Instead of above God?

    4.)”We follow the leader of our church just as other denominations do their self appointed leaders. But to put the Pope above God?”

    TC: How is an elected pope better than a self appointed pope?

    5.)”Yes, we do respect her and pray to her for help. Why? Several reasons, One: She is the Mother of Jesus and He gave her to the church as our mother and we were all told to “Honor our father and mother” Second: At the weddign feast of Canna, when His mother asked Jesus to help, he did not deney her request even though He told her it wasn’t His time to be revealed. He did what she asked. So we ask her to ask Him for what we need! There is a big difference in honoring and worshiping.And to pray to some one to interceed for us rather than expect them to be able to do it themselves.”

    TC: I didn’t find any references to Jesus giving his mother Mary to the catholic church. I also didn’t find your quote ““Honor our father and mother””. Are you interpreting “honour” as “to pray to”? Concerning intercession: Please read (Romans 8:26, 8:27, 8:34 and Hebrews 7:25). All of these seem to be specific and none make mention of Mary.

    6:)”the Catholic Church. Yes, the Church, being ran by humans sometimes made mistakes, these errors continue to be corrected. Our religion is “The Living Body of Christ” it grows and learns. The problem with other denominations is that they threw out the baby with the bath water. They lost the True Church and thereby lost the correct teachings which might prohibit their entering into Heaven.”

    TC: Wait a minute. First the catholic church is infallible. Now it makes mistakes. Which is it? What mistakes did Jesus Christ make? Where does scripture state the catholic church is “The Living Body of Christ”? Was supporting Hitler the right thing to do?

    7.)”Many Protestants don’t realize that the Catholic Church has many more books and writings in storage (many were used in the earliest churches but the Catholic Church decided that they were not inspired by God. Some of these books have been released to be read by theologians and even printed in versions available to us, others haven’t been released)Catholics believe that Protestants follow a misinterpreted version of the Catholic bible. We also believe that all history isn’t written down, even in the KJV it says that all things that Jesus said and did aren’t written down in the Bible. You can’t take everything you read as Truth!”

    TC: So are you telling us you don’t think the Bible is true? Which part/parts? How do you determine what you do and don’t believe? Is it by what is convenient? Was the church infallible when it used “books and writings” “not inspired by God”? I really don’t understand the last line you wrote here. It seems to contradict everything else you wrote.

    8.)” I was wondering, if you knew that in order to be really be a Catholic you must believe in the “True Presence” of Jesus in the Eucharist? This means that we “must” believe that we actually drink Jesus’ blood and eat His flesh every time we receive communion!”

    TC: Yes a lot of people would say that this is an example of a catholic priest being able to force the spirit of Jesus into a ?????.

    9.)”The Catholic Church can lay claim to the fact that Jesus empowered our Church to bring his True presence into the Mass.”

    TC: They seem to lay claim to a lot of things. How about a reference in scripture?

    10.)”I think that you really have to be a pratical Catholic to actually experience the true presence of Jesus and to truly know Him.”

    TC: I don’t know what to say. I’m a Christian. I realize that my Bible, my interpretation, and my views aren’t the only way to Jesus. I have however; no idea, how anyone could think the catholic church has any power over anything/one. Have you ever read the Bible or the Gospel? Do you rely on whatever any priest tells you to be fact? Do you know who the Lutherans are? Have you ever read “The Trail Of Blood”?

    11.)”What does the Catholic Church do to “correct” this problem? Our leader, the Pope, writes and tells us that” “It is that simple, we don’t rely on our own consciences to determine what is Truth. That is the Pope’s job!”

    TC: If you believe in God, Jesus, and The Holy Spirit. Why do you need a politically elected pope? Are you saying that any sin you commit that is OK with the pope, isn’t a sin? Let’s use the “new” sins listed by the pope. These weren’t sins until the pope said they were?

    12.)”As Jesus’ reprensative on earth, he is our shepard.”

    TC: Why? What scripture? I thought you said you believe in The Holy Spirit. WHEN DID JESUS SAY, I WILL APOINT A MAN AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL TO RULE OVER YOU ???(he didn’t)

    13.)”Protestants look to the Bible and find a passage that supports what they want to believe. You can find passages to support anything you want to include cannibalism, adultry, whatever so long as if you disregard the other parts of scripture.”

    TC: Do you mean Christians. To be a catholic, it seems you must also disregard a lot of scripture. Do you replace it with the traditions of man? Since when do more wrongs make it right? I plead with you to read the catechism of the catholic church. I plead with you to ask “why Jesus’ sacrifice only covers sins that aren’t designated heresy by the catholic church”. I plead with you to ask “if the catholic church is infallible, what were all those mistakes we admit they made?” I plead with you to ask ” why does the catechism tell me not to ask questions.” Most of all I plead with you to read the words Jesus said, rather than taking some one’s word for it.

    With love and concern three crosses.

    P.S. Paul Abramson a lot of thought time and love went into this but if you think it should be edited down or out I understand.

  9. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:26 pm Reply

    RobG
    Said this on April 11th, 2008 at 10:13pm:

    Eugene Posted this on April 5th, 2008 at 7:51am to Ekkman: Quoting the SDA

    “12) “They believe that the Papacy is the antichrist, as Catholism is the only political/church entity that regards the Pope as being above God and who has changed God’s Laws during the “Counter reformation”.”

    1) “My protestant friends, I am a practical Catholic. I am writing this to tell you a little bit about myself and my religion. I have seen all of Dr Kent’s tapes and think he is correct in many things he believes(Not paying taxes isn’t one)! Much of his hypothesis aren’t any more provable than the other theories. Not being there, we don’t actually know what occured. And in the final analyzes, it isn’t really important for our salvation. Bottom line: Jesus saves! Kent and others use the Bible to prove their points, The fatal error is that the Bible wasn’t written, nor published by members of the Catholic church, to prove anything except that: God loves us and He want us to be with Him in Heaven and that He sent His only begotten Son to die for our sins in order to make that possible. Why do people misinterpid things in the Bible? The easy answer is: to do the work of the Devil; to make money; to mislead people who are searching for salvation; because they don’t have the Catholic church to lead them to the truth.”

    Dear RobG,

    Thank you for the interesting post that touches upon a multitude of issues to discuss. I hope that you will continue to post in response to these discussions.
    Question, is it really the Catholic church that will lead to truth or is it instead the Holy Spirit? (John 16: 7-14)

    Further, the historical truth that the Roman Catholic not only banned the reading of the Bible but also tortured and killed millions who did read the Bible, is this the truth that you are telling us the Catholic church shall lead us to? What about the inquisition? Is this the truth you are speaking of?

    Catholic Religion Prohibited Bible Reading

    http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/nobible.htm
    http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/inquis1.htm

    Catholic Inquisition and The Torture Tools

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx8PdvOELvY

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  10. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:28 pm Reply

    RobG

    Said this on April 11th, 2008 at 10:13pm:

    2) “There isn’t one Catholic that believes the Pope is above God. In fact, many of us would be shocked to think that someone actually believe that we did. That is so stupid! We do follow the Bible, it is one of our sources of strength. About the Pope being above God, the first commandment says it all! We have no other God!”

    Dear RobG,

    Speaking of commandments, would you please list the Roman Catholic church version of the ten commandments.

    Peter

    Catholic Religion Purposely takes out
one of God’s Ten Commandments 


    They shall go to confusion together that are makers of idols.
    Isaiah 45:16

    http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/tencomma.htm

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  11. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:29 pm Reply

    RobG

    Said this on April 11th, 2008 at 10:13pm:

    3) “Now, remember what Jesus said? “Thou are Peter,and upon this rock I shall build My Church” Being the true Christian church, able to trace its roots all the way back to St.Peter,the first Pope.”

    Dear RobG,

    I would ask of in what context did Jesus state?: “and upon THIS rock I will build my church; . . .”

    Peter

    http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/unbroken.htm

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  12. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:33 pm Reply

    RobG

    Said this on April 11th, 2008 at 10:13pm:

    4) “Next, you will probably tell me that Catholics worship Mary! We don’t do that at all. We believe in the Trinity; Father Son and Holy Spirit. God is not a Quadruplet! Yes, we do respect her and pray to her for help. Why? Several reasons, One: She is the Mother of Jesus and He gave her to the church as our mother and we were all told to “Honor our father and mother” Second: At the weddign feast of Canna, when His mother asked Jesus to help, he did not deney her request even though He told her it wasn’t His time to be revealed. He did what she asked. So we ask her to ask Him for what we need! There is a big difference in honoring and worshiping.And to pray to some one to interceed for us rather than expect them to be able to do it themselves. I am also always amazed that Protestants use our own Catholic documents to attack our religion.”

    Dear RobG,

    Should we as followers of Christ, obey the Bible or doctrines of men that make the commandments of God of none effect. Take a look at I Tim 2:5:
    “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

    Now, if that is a true statement for God’s Holy Word, then the doctrine by the Catholics is not true, since the Bible states that there is ONLY ONE mediator, not two.

    What is your response to such an issue?

    Peter

    MARY MEDIATRIX OF ALL GRACES
    http://lullianarts.net/mdtrx.htm

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  13. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:34 pm Reply

    RobG

    Said this on April 11th, 2008 at 10:13pm:

    5) “The KJV was edited from part of the Approved Catholic Bible. In the begining the Catholic Church decided what books being used in worship services were inspired by God. They colected these into one book to be used through out the Catholic, christian world. Many Protestants don’t realize that the Catholic Church has many more books and writings in storage (many were used in the earliest churches but the Catholic Church decided that they were not inspired by God. Some of these books have been released to be read by theologians and even printed in versions available to us, others haven’t been released)Catholics believe that Protestants follow a misinterpreted version of the Catholic bible. We also believe that all history isn’t written down, even in the KJV it says that all things that Jesus said and did aren’t written down in the Bible. You can’t take everything you read as Truth! (That capital T indicates things that are not subject to interpretation) If the entire Bible was Truth as we use the word only 144,000 Jews from the 12 tribes of Israel will be in Heaven and all we do is for naught. Yes, the Bible is Truly the word of God, but much of it must be interpreted in order to be understood. Lucky for Catholics our church also has oral tradition and many other church documents that we can refer to in order to better understand what God wants us to know for us to obtain salvation. Lucky for Protestants, there is the Catholic Church’s teachings available to follow and obtain information from.”

    Dear RobG,

    Yes, there are many Catholic and Protestant and even Baptist people that teach about the “canonization” of the Scriptures. Yet, did a group of men sitting around in a counsel a few hundred years after the fact really decide what was God’s Word, or did God already ordain from before the foundation of the world what was His Word alone? Further, how do you explain John 1:1 in light of the traditional teaching on the canon of scripture?

    In the love of Christ,

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  14. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:36 pm Reply

    RobG

    Said this on April 11th, 2008 at 10:13pm:

    6) “I was wondering, if you knew that in order to be really be a Catholic you must believe in the “True Presence” of Jesus in the Eucharist? This means that we “must” believe that we actually drink Jesus’ blood and eat His flesh every time we receive communion! Yes, both Our Bible and the KJV state that you must drink His blood and eat His flesh in order to enter the Kingdom of God. Jesus said that unless you do you can not enter the Kingdom of heaven. We believe it, why don’t most Protestant dominations? As true followers of the first apostles and Pope, The Catholic Church can lay claim to the fact that Jesus empowered our Church to bring his True presence into the Mass. I have often wondered why many Protestants don’t believe in the true presence of Jesus in their communion. Maybe it is because they can’t “feel” the true presence of Jesus in their communion services because to many of them it is only a memorial service, not an actual joining with Jesus and the Apostles at the “first” Last Supper. I think that you really have to be a pratical Catholic to actually experience the true presence of Jesus and to truly know Him. At least, nothing else has worked for me. I was also amazed to find out that many people who would identify themselves as Catholic don’t believe in the “True Presence” and don’t follow all the precepts of our Religion. Yet, they still consider themselves to be Catholics (The last I read it was around 53% and growing). It is probably from being too close to the Protestant influences of our culture. What does the Catholic Church do to “correct” this problem? Our leader, the Pope, writes and tells us that if we don’t believe in the “true Presence” we aren’t Catholic. He also said that if we support abortion, in any way, we are excummunicated. (No longer a member of the body of Christ e.g. Catholic). It is that simple, we don’t rely on our own consciences to determine what is Truth. That is the Pope’s job!He must keep our religious beliefs true to the teachings of Jesus and keep the people focused on Jesus and to correct us when we are lead astray. As Jesus’ reprensative on earth, he is our shepard.

    
Protestants look to the Bible and find a passage that supports what they want to believe. You can find passages to support anything you want to include cannibalism, adultry, whatever so long as if you disregard the other parts of scripture.”

    Dear RobG,

    Is there not a conflict in your doctrine of the Eucharist where according to Catholic teaching, at the mass the “divine victim” Jesus is literally sacrificed again and that the mass, the last supper and the crucifixion are all one and equal to each other, which conflicts with Hebrews 9:24-28 where it tells us that Christ would not be offered many times, but only once?

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  15. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:37 pm Reply

    RobG

    Said this on April 11th, 2008 at 10:13pm:

    7) “I actually don’t judge anyone, nor their religious beliefs. I believe that at the final judgement, I will be judged on the things that I did, neglected to do and judged other people on. However, I do challenge people who are misguided and try to show them the error of their beliefs. God would expect no less of me. We each must travel our own path. God warns us that many will be lost, and about following false prophets, some just don’t listen, or refuse to believe. We were warned of that also. I just pray that they do fine their way into Heaven.
To learn more “Truths” about the Catholic Church go to http://www.Catholic.com and http://www.Catholicity.com. I promise it won’t hurt! In closing,I would like to leave you with one of my favorite quotes: “The best thing to give to your enemy is forgiveness; to an opponent, tolerance; to a friend, your heart; to your child, a good example; to a father, deference; to your mother, conduct that will make her proud of you; to yourself, respect; to all men, charity.” –Francis Maitland Balfour”

    Dear RobG,

    Are you aware that the Vatican II documents reaffirmed all of the decisions of the Council of Trent. Have you ever read the canon law from the Council of Trent by which the Roman Catholics put millions to death for simply following the Bible. Take a look at the laws that are completely counter to the Bible listed in the next few links. Is this the truth that you are stating we should follow?

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  16. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:43 pm Reply

    The Council of Trent
    The Sixth Session
    The canons and decrees of the sacred
    and oecumenical Council of Trent,
    Trans. J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848), 30-53.

    ON JUSTIFICATION

    CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.

    CANON II.-If any one saith, that the grace of God, through Jesus Christ, is given only for this, that man may be able more easily to live justly, and to merit eternal life, as if, by free will without grace, he were able to do both, though hardly indeed and with difficulty; let him be anathema.

    CANON III.-If any one saith, that without the prevenient inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and without his help, man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent as he ought, so as that the grace of Justification may be bestowed upon him; let him be anathema.

    [Page 45] CANON IV.-If any one saith, that man’s free will moved and excited by God, by assenting to God exciting and calling, nowise co-operates towards disposing and preparing itself for obtaining the grace of Justification; that it cannot refuse its consent, if it would, but that, as something inanimate, it does nothing whatever and is merely passive; let him be anathema.

    CANON V.-If any one saith, that, since Adam’s sin, the free will of man is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing with only a name, yea a name without a reality, a figment, in fine, introduced into the Church by Satan; let him be anathema.

    CANON VI.-If any one saith, that it is not in man’s power to make his ways evil, but that the works that are evil God worketh as well as those that are good, not permissively only, but properly, and of Himself, in such wise that the treason of Judas is no less His own proper work than the vocation of Paul; let him be anathema.

    CANON VII.-If any one saith, that all works done before Justification, in whatsoever way they be done, are truly sins, or merit the hatred of God; or that the more earnestly one strives to dispose himself for grace, the more grievously he sins: let him be anathema.

    CANON VIII.-If any one saith, that the fear of hell,-whereby, by grieving for our sins, we flee unto the mercy of God, or refrain from sinning,-is a sin, or makes sinners worse; let him be anathema.

    CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.

    CANON X.-If any one saith, that men are just without the justice of Christ, whereby He merited for us to be justified; or that it is by that justice itself that they are formally just; let him be anathema.

    [Page 46] CANON XI.-If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema.

    CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.

    CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that it is necessary for every one, for the obtaining the remission of sins, that he believe for certain, and without any wavering arising from his own infirmity and disposition, that his sins are forgiven him; let him be anathema.

    CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.

    CANON XV.-If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; let him be anathema.

    CANON XVI.-If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end,-unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema.

    CANON XVII.-If any one saith, that the grace of Justification is only attained to by those who are predestined unto life; but that all others who are called, are called indeed, but receive not grace, as being, by the divine power, predestined unto evil; let him be anathema.

    CANON XVIII.-If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.

    [Page 47] CANON XIX.-If any one saith, that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments nowise appertain to Christians; let him be anathema.

    CANON XX.-If any one saith, that the man who is justified and how perfect soever, is not bound to observe the commandments of God and of the Church, but only to believe; as if indeed the Gospel were a bare and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observing the commandments ; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXI.-If any one saith, that Christ Jesus was given of God to men, as a redeemer in whom to trust, and not also as a legislator whom to obey; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXII.-If any one saith, that the justified, either is able to persevere, without the special help of God, in the justice received; or that, with that help, he is not able; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXIII.-lf any one saith, that a man once justified can sin no more, nor lose grace, and that therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or, on the other hand, that he is able, during his whole life, to avoid all sins, even those that are venial,-except by a special privilege from God, as the Church holds in regard of the Blessed Virgin; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXIV.-If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXV.-If any one saith, that, in every good work, the just sins venially at least, or-which is more intolerable still-mortally, and consequently deserves eternal punishments; and that for this cause only he is not damned, that God does not impute those works unto damnation; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXVI.-If any one saith, that the just ought not, for their good works done in God, to expect and hope for an eternal recompense from God, through His mercy and the merit of Jesus Christ, if so be that they persevere to the end in well [Page 48] doing and in keeping the divine commandments; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXVII.-If any one saith, that there is no mortal sin but that of infidelity; or, that grace once received is not lost by any other sin, however grievous and enormous, save by that of infidelity ; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXVIII.-If any one saith, that, grace being lost through sin, faith also is always lost with it; or, that the faith which remains, though it be not a lively faith, is not a true faith; or, that he, who has faith without charity, is not a Chris taught; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXIX.-If any one saith, that he, who has fallen after baptism, is not able by the grace of God to rise again; or, that he is able indeed to recover the justice which he has lost, but by faith alone without the sacrament of Penance, contrary to what the holy Roman and universal Church-instructed by Christ and his Apostles-has hitherto professed, observed, and taugh; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXX.-If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema.

    CANON XXXI.-If any one saith, that the justified sins when he performs good works with a view to an eternal recompense; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXXII.-If any one saith, that the good works of one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, as that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, by the good works which he performs through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose [Page 49] living member he is, does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life,-if so be, however, that he depart in grace,-and also an increase of glory; let him be anathema.

    CANON XXXIII.-If any one saith,that,by the Catholic doctrine touching Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from, and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.

    http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct06.html

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  17. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:47 pm Reply

    The Council of Trent
    The Seventh Session
    The canons and decrees of the sacred
    and oecumenical Council of Trent,
    Trans. J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848), 53-67.

    ON BAPTISM

    CANON I.-If any one saith, that the baptism of John had the same force as the baptism of Christ; let him be anathema.

    CANON II.-If any one saith, that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some sort of metaphor, those words of our Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost; let him be anathema.

    CANON III.-If any one saith, that in the Roman church, which is the mother and mistress of all churches, there is not the true doctrine concerning the sacrament of baptism; let him be anathema.

    CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the baptism which is even given by heretics in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, with the intention of doing what the Church doth, is not true baptism; let him be anathema.

    CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is free, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.
    CANON VI.-If any one saith, that one who has been baptized cannot, even if he would, lose grace, let him sin ever so much, unless he will not believe; let him be anathema.

    CANON VII.-If any one saith, that the baptized are, by baptism itself, made debtors but to faith alone, and not to the observance of the whole law of Christ; let him be anathema.

    CANON VIII.-If any one saith, that the baptized are freed from all the precepts, whether written or transmitted, of holy Church, in such wise that they are not bound to observe them, unless they have chosen of their own accord to submit themselves thereunto; let him be anathema.

    [Page 57] CANON IX.-If any one saith, that the resemblance of the baptism which they have received is so to be recalled unto men, as that they are to understand, that all vows made after baptism are void, in virtue of the promise already made in that baptism; as if, by those vows, they both derogated from that faith which they have professed, and from that baptism itself; let him be anathema.

    CANON X.-If any one saith, that by the sole remembrance and the faith of the baptism which has been received, all sins committed after baptism are either remitted, or made venial; let him be anathema.

    CANON XI.-If any one saith, that baptism, which was true and rightly conferred, is to be repeated, for him who has denied the faith of Christ amongst Infidels, when he is converted unto penitence; let him be anathema.

    CANON XII.-If any one saith, that no one is to be baptized save at that age at which Christ was baptized, or in the very article of death; let him be anathema.

    CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that little children, for that they have not actual faith, are not, after having received baptism, to be reckoned amongst the faithful; and that, for this cause, they are to be rebaptized when they have attained to years of discretion; or, that it is better that the baptism of such be omitted, than that, while not believing by their own act, they should be bapized in the faith alone of the Church; let him be anathema.

    CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that those who have been thus baptized when children, are, when they have grown up, to be asked whether they will ratify what their sponsors promised in their names when they were baptized; and that, in case they answer that they will not, they are to be left to their own will; and are not to be compelled meanwhile to a Christian life by any other penalty, save that they be excluded from the participation of the Eucharist, and of the other sacraments, until they repent; let him be anathema.

    [Page 58]
    ON CONFIRMATION

    CANON I.-If any one saith, that the confirmation of those who have been baptized is an idle ceremony, and not rather a true and proper sacrament; or that of old it was nothing more than a kind of catechism, whereby they who were near adolescence gave an account of their faith in the face of the Church; let him be anathema.

    CANON II.-If any one saith, that they who ascribe any virtue to the sacred chrism of confirmation, offer an outrage to the Holy Ghost; let him be anathema.

    CANON III.-If any one saith, that the ordinary minister of holy confirmation is not the bishop alone, but any simple priest soever; let him be anathema.

    http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct07.html

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  18. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:49 pm Reply

    The Council of Trent
    The Thirteenth Session
    The canons and decrees of the sacred
    and oecumenical Council of Trent,
    Ed. and trans. J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848), 75-91.

    ON THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE EUCHARIST

    CANON I.-If any one denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue; let him be anathema.

    CANON lI.-If any one saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood-the species Only of the bread and wine remaining-which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation; let him be anathema.

    CANON III.-If any one denieth, that, in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist, the whole Christ is contained under each [Page 83] species, and under every part of each species, when separated; let him be anathema.

    CANON IV.-If any one saith, that, after the consecration is completed, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are not in the admirable sacrament of the Eucharist, but (are there) only during the use, whilst it is being taken, and not either before or after; and that, in the hosts, or consecrated particles, which are reserved or which remain after communion, the true Body of the Lord remaineth not; let him be anathema.

    CANON V.-If any one saith, either that the principal fruit of the most holy Eucharist is the remission of sins, or, that other effects do not result therefrom; let him be anathema.

    CANON VI.-If any one saith, that, in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, is not to be adored with the worship, even external of latria; and is, consequently, neither to be venerated with a special festive solemnity, nor to be solemnly borne about in processions, according to the laudable and universal rite and custom of holy church; or, is not to be proposed publicly to the people to be adored, and that the adorers thereof are idolators; let him be anathema.

    CANON VII.-If any one saith, that it is not lawful for the sacred Eucharist to be reserved in the sacrarium, but that, immediately after consecration, it must necessarily be distributed amongst those present; or, that it is not lawful that it be carried with honour to the sick; let him be anathema.

    CANON VIII.-lf any one saith, that Christ, given in the Eucharist, is eaten spiritually only, and not also sacramentally and really; let him be anathema.

    CANON IX.-If any one denieth, that all and each of Christ’s faithful of both sexes are bound, when they have attained to years of discretion, to communicate every year, at least at Easter, in accordance with the precept of holy Mother Church; let him be anathema.

    [Page 84] CANON X.-If any one saith, that it is not lawful for the celebrating priest to communicate himself; let him be anathema.

    CANON XI.-lf any one saith, that faith alone is a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; let him be anathema. And for fear lest so great a sacrament may be received unworthily, and so unto death and condemnation, this holy Synod ordains and declares, that sacramental confession, when a confessor may be had, is of necessity to be made beforehand, by those whose conscience is burthened with mortal sin, how contrite even soever they may think themselves. But if any one shall presume to teach, preach, or obstinately to assert, or even in public disputation to defend the contrary, he shall be thereupon excommunicated.

    http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct13.html

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  19. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:53 pm Reply

    ON THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF PENANCE

    CANON I.–If any one saith, that in the Catholic Church Penance is not truly and properly a sacrament, instituted by Christ our Lord for reconciling the faithful unto God, as often as they fall into sin after baptism; let him be anathema.

    CANON II.–If any one, confounding the sacraments, saith that baptism is itself the sacrament of Penance, as though these two Sacraments were not distinct, and that therefore Penance is not rightly called a second plank after shipwreck; let him be anathema.

    CANON III.–If any one saith, that those words of the Lord the Saviour, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained, are not to be understood of the power of forgiving and of retaining sins in the Sacrament of penance, as the Catholic Church has always from the beginning understood them; but wrests them, contrary to the institution of this sacra ment, to the power of preaching the gospel; let him be anathema.

    [Page 108] CANON IV.–If any one denieth, that, for the entire and perfect remission of sins, there are required three acts in the penitent, which are as it were the matter of the sacrament of Penance, to wit, contrition, confession, and satisfaction, which are called the three parts of penance; or saith that there are two parts only of penance, to wit, the terrors with which the conscience is smitten upon being convinced of sin, and the faith, generated by the gospel, or by the absolution, whereby one believes that his sins are forgiven him through Christ; let him be anathema.

    CANON V.–If any one saith, that the contrition which is acquired by means of the examination, collection, and detestation of sins,–whereby one thinks over his years in the bitterness of his soul, by pondering on the grievousness, the multitude, the filthiness of his sins, the loss of eternal blessedness, and the eternal damnation which he has incurred, having therewith the purpose of a better life,–is not a true and profitable sorrow, does not prepare for grace, but makes a man a hypocrite and a greater sinner; in fine, that this (contrition) is a forced and not free and voluntary sorrow; let him be anathema.

    CANON VI.–If any one denieth, either that sacramental confession was instituted, or is necessary to salvation, of divine right; or saith, that the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone, which the Church hath ever observed from the beginning, and doth observe, is alien from the institution and command of Christ, and is a human invention; let him be anathema.

    CANON VII.–If any one saith, that, in the sacrament of Penance, it is not necessary, of divine right, for the remission of sins, to confess all and singular the mortal sins which after due and diligent previous meditation are remembered, even those (mortal sins) which are secret, and those which are opposed to the two last commandments of the Decalogtie, as also the circumstances which change the species of a sin; but (saith) that such confession is only useful to instruct and console the penitent, and that it was of old only observed in order to impose a [Page 109] canonical satisfaction; or saith that they, who strive to confess all their sins, wish to leave nothing to the divine mercy to pardon ; or, finally, that it is not lawful to confess venial sins ; let him be anathema.

    CANON VIII.–If any one saith, that the confession of all sins, such as it is observed in the Church, is impossible, and is a human tradition to be abolished by the godly; or that all and each of the faithful of Christ, of either sex, are not obliged thereunto once a year, conformably to the constitution of the great Council of Lateran, and that, for this cause, the faithful of Christ are to be persuaded not to con fess during Lent; let him be anathema.

    CANON IX.–If any one saith, that the sacramental absolution of the priest is not a judicial act, but a bare ministry of pronouncing and declaring sins to be forgiven to him who confesses; provided only he believe himself to be absolved, or (even though) the priest absolve not in earnest, but in joke; or saith, that the confession of the penitent is not required, in order that the priest may be able to absolve him; let him be anathema.

    CANON X.–If any one saith, that priests, who are in mortal sin, have not the power of binding and of loosing; or, that not priests alone are the ministers of absolution, but that, to all and each of the faithful of Christ is it said: Whatsoever you shall bind upon earth shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven; and, whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained; by virtue of which words every one is able to absolve from sins, to wit, from public sins by reproof only, provided he who is reproved yield thereto, and from secret sins by a voluntary confession; let him be anathema.

    CANON XI.–If any one saith, that bishops have not the right of reserving cases to themselves, except as regards external polity, and that therefore the reservation of cases hinders not but that a priest may truly absolve from reserved cases; let him be anathema.

    [Page 110] CANON XII.–If any one saith, that God always remits the whole punishment together with the guilt, and that the satisfaction of penitents is no other than the faith whereby they apprehend that Christ has satisfied for them; let him be anathema.

    CANON XIII.–If any one saith, that satisfaction for sins, as to their temporal punishment, is nowise made to God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, by the punishments inflicted by Him, and patiently borne, or by those enjoined by the priest, nor even by those voluntarily undertaken, as by fastings, prayers, almsdeeds, or by other works also of piety; and that, therefore, the best penance is merely a new life; let him be anathema.

    CANON XIV.–If any one saith, that the satisfaction, by which enitents redeem their sins through Jesus Christ, are not a worship of God, but traditions of men, which obscure the doctrine of grace, and the true worship of God, and the benefit itself of the death of Christ; let him be anathema.

    CANON XV.–If any one saith, that the keys are given to the Church, only to loose, not also to bind; and that, therefore, priests act contrary to the purpose of the keys, and contrary to the institution of Christ, when they impose punishments on those who confess; and that it is a fiction, that, after the eternal punishment, has, by virtue of the keys, been removed, there remains for the most part a temporal punishment to be discharged; let him be anathema.

    ON THE SACRAMENT OF EXTREME UNCTION

    CANON I.–If any one saith, that Extreme Unction is not truly and properly a sacrament, instituted by Christ our Lord, and promulgated by the blessed apostle James; but is only a rite received from the Fathers, or a human figment; let him be anathema.

    [Page 111] CANON II.–If any one saith, that the sacred unction of the sick does not confer grace, nor remit sin, nor comfort(h) the sick; but that it has already ceased, as though it were of old only the grace of working Cures; let him be anathema.

    CANON III.–If any one saith, that the rite and usage of Extreme Unction, which the holy Roman Church observes, is repugnant to the sentiment of the blessed apostle James, and that is therefore to be changed, and may, without sin, be contemned by Christians; let him be anathema.

    CANON IV.–If any one saith, that the Presbyters of the Church, whom blessed James exhorts to be brought to anoint the sick, are not the priests who have been ordained by a bishop, but the elders in each community, and that for this Cause a priest alone is not the proper minister of Extreme Unction; let him be anathema.

    http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct14.html

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  20. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:55 pm Reply

    The Council of Trent
    The Twenty-Second Session
    The canons and decrees of the sacred
    and oecumenical Council of Trent,
    Ed. and trans. J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848), 152-70.

    ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.

    CANON I.–If any one saith, that in the mass a true and proper sacriflce is not offered to God; or, that to be offered is nothing else but that Christ is given us to eat; let him be anathema.

    CANON II.–If any one saith, that by those words, Do this for the commemoration of me (Luke xxii. 19), Christ did not institute the apostles priests; or, did not ordain that they, and other priests should offer His own body and blood; let him be anathema.

    CANON III.–If any one saith, that the sacrifice of the mass is only a sacrifice of praise and of thanksgiving; or, that it is a [Page 159] bare commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross, but not a propitiatory sacrifice; or, that it profits him only who receives; and that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead for sins, pains, satisfactions, and other necessities; let him be anathema.

    CANON IV.–If any one saith, that, by the sacrifice of the mass, a blasphemy is cast upon the most holy sacrifice of Christ consummated on the cross; or, that it is thereby derogated from; let him be anathema.

    CANON V.–If any one saith, that it is an imposture to celebrate masses in honour of the saints, and for obtaining their intercession with God, as the Church intends; let him be anathema.

    CANON VI.–If any one saith, that the canon of the mass contains errors, and is therefore to be abrogated; let him be anathema.

    CANON VII.–If any one saith, that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety; let him be anathema.

    CANON VIII.–If any one saith, that masses, wherein the priest alone communicates sacramentally, are unlawful, and are, therefore, to be abrogated; let him be anathema.

    CANON IX.–If any one saith, that the rite of the Roman Church, according to which a part of the canon and the words of consecration are pronounced in a low tone, is to be condemned; or, that the mass ought to be celebrated in the vulgar tongue only; or, that water ought not to be mixed with the wine that is to be offered in the chalice, for that it is contrary to the institution of Christ; let him be anathema.

    http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct22.html

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  21. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:57 pm Reply

    The Council of Trent
    The Twenty-Third Session
    The canons and decrees of the sacred
    and oecumenical Council of Trent,
    Ed. and trans. J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848), 170-92.

    ON THE SACRAMENT OF ORDER.

    CANON I.–If any one saith, that there is not in the New Testament a visible and external priesthood; or that there is not any power of consecrating and offering the true body and blood of the Lord, and of forgiving and retaining sins; but only an office and bare ministry of preaching the Gospel, or, that those who do not preach are not priests at all; let him be anathema.

    [Page 174] CANON II.–If any one saith, that, besides the priesthood, there are not in the Catholic Church other orders, both greater and minor, by which, as by certain steps, advance is made unto the priesthood; let him be anathema.

    CANON III.–If any one saith, that order, or sacred ordination, is not truly and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord; or, that it is a kind of human figment devised by men unskilled in ecclesiastical matters; or, that it is only a kind of rite for choosing ministers of the word of God and of the sacraments; let him be anathema.

    CANON IV.–If any one saith, that, by sacred ordination, the Holy Ghost is not given; and that vainly therefore do the bishops say, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; or, that a character is not imprinted by that ordination; or, that he who has once been a priest, can again become a layman; let him be anathema.

    CANON V.–If any one saith, that the sacred unction which the Church uses in holy ordination, is not only not required, but is to be despised and is pernicious, as likewise are the other ceremonies of Order; let him be anathema.

    CANON VI.–If any one saith, that, in the Catholic Church there is not a hierarchy by divine ordination instituted, consisting of bishops, priests, and ministers; let him be anathema.

    CANON VII.–If any one saith, that bishops are not superior to priests; or, that they have not the power of confirming and ordaining; or, that the power which they possess is common to them and to priests; or, that orders, conferred by them, without the consent, or vocation of the people, or of the secular power, are invalid; or, that those who have neither been rightly ordained, nor sent, by ecclesiastical and canonical power, but come from elsewhere, are lawful ministers of the word and of the sacraments; let him be anathema.

    CANON VIII.–If any one saith, that the bishops, who are assumed by authority of the Roman Pontiff, are not legitimate and true bishops, but are a human figment; let him be anathema.

    http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct23.html

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  22. EndTimes April 12, 2008 10:59 pm Reply

    RobG
    Said this on April 11th, 2008 at 10:13pm:

    Eugene Posted this on April 5th, 2008 at 7:51am to Ekkman: Quoting the SDA
    “12) “They believe that the Papacy is the antichrist, as Catholism is the only political/church entity that regards the Pope as being above God and who has changed God’s Laws during the “Counter reformation”.”
    1) “My protestant friends, I am a practical Catholic. I am writing this to tell you a little bit about myself and my religion. I have seen all of Dr Kent’s tapes and think he is correct in many things he believes(Not paying taxes isn’t one)! Much of his hypothesis aren’t any more provable than the other theories. Not being there, we don’t actually know what occured. And in the final analyzes, it isn’t really important for our salvation. Bottom line: Jesus saves! Kent and others use the Bible to prove their points, The fatal error is that the Bible wasn’t written, nor published by members of the Catholic church, to prove anything except that: God loves us and He want us to be with Him in Heaven and that He sent His only begotten Son to die for our sins in order to make that possible. Why do people misinterpid things in the Bible? The easy answer is: to do the work of the Devil; to make money; to mislead people who are searching for salvation; because they don’t have the Catholic church to lead them to the truth.”

    Dear RobG,
    Thank you for the interesting post that touches upon a multitude of issues to discuss. I hope that you will continue to post in response to these discussions.
    Question, is it really the Catholic church that will lead to truth or is it instead the Holy Spirit? (John 16: 7-14)
    Further, the historical truth that the Roman Catholic not only banned the reading of the Bible but also tortured and killed millions who did read the Bible, is this the truth that you are telling us the Catholic church shall lead us to? What about the inquisition? Is this the truth you are speaking of?
    Catholic Religion Prohibited Bible Reading
    http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/nobible.htm
    http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/inquis1.htm
    Catholic Inquisition and The Torture Tools
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx8PdvOELvY

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  23. The Welders Wife April 13, 2008 7:55 am Reply

    ENDTIMES

    Dr Peter, you provide some serious laughter, & that’s good medicine! Does your wife ever kick you under the table? If she does, you need to admonish her to do so more often! The canyons of your mind run so deep, you don’t see the horizontal perspective. (& you probably don’t communicate as well as you think you do with the females around you.) You wander around deep in those canyons. Um, does your wife, or daughter, or female co-workers ever stand on the edge & look down into the chasm, & say among themselves, “There he is! He’s way, way down there! The canyon’s too deep to flush him out, so how are we ever going to get him out of there?”

    Ok, now for the next thought: This is a rope I’m throwing down to maybe help pull you out of that canyon a little bit. It’s probably not going to work, but here goes… What does the Bible say about women submitting to their husbands? You’re the boss & your wife is to submit to you, right? It also means that she is to defer to your opinion, even when she’s got one of her own. It also says something about wives adapting themselves to their own husbands. Hang on to this rope tight now & maybe I can pull you out of this canyon….

    The code for a woman who is a wife applies to her whole life & every thing she does… Are you hanging on tight to the rope? Guys on this blog are not under the orders from the LORD to submit to their wives’ authority, defer to their opinion, etc. The opposite applies when one’s position in life is that of a wife on this blog. Are you still hanging on to the rope?

    A while back I said, “A certain welder has told me that the best way to deal with somebody who is a died in the wool KJVer who continually beats somebody else over the head, is to just let them go because they aren’t willing to hear anyone’s else’s side of the story.”
    Peter are you at the top of the canyon yet?

    Have you ever noticed that almost every time I say anything, about anything, to anybody, I get attacked by Danny? It’s been that way for months! And by the way, have you noticed any other women on this blog in several months talking about Creation Science? Do you think women like being attacked? Guys love to do ‘the clashing of swords things’. They’re into watching ‘Die Hard 1-3 & all future Die Hards… like Die Hard 22 & 47 & 56 and? & Ramboo [trust me, it’s not ‘Rainbow!’], & Bruce Willis, & any other gorilla warfare battle flick that comes along. We even have ratings for them…Guy Flicks & Chick flicks…Whoops! Wait a minute! You might let go of the rope, so I’d better get back to the subject: If somebody beats me over the head continually, do you think I have the common sense to avoid a direct hit?

    Ok, now here’s something really tricky…. Guys can only think one thought at a time. Women can think 3 or 4 thoughts simultaneously…… You have to try to think like me just this once… If I am to defer to my husband[That’s thought one] & I am avoiding a direct hit [thought two]& and keeping the LORD’s command not to return evil for evil[thought three] & guard my mind & keep my focus on the LORD[thought four]& I could add a few more thoughts but you’re on over load already… Do you think I read all those realms & realms of posts from Danny? [I have my own copy of ‘In Awe of Thy Word’… all 5 books on 3 CD-ROMS! from AV publications. Whoops, wait a minute, that’s still mixing up too many thoughts for you to handle…]

    Ok, lets try that one again…um.. Never mind! I’m just letting go of the rope!

  24. The Welders Wife April 13, 2008 8:05 am Reply

    PETER,
    here’s another rope… I’m not the one doing the attacking. The only way you’re going to see that is to look at things horizontally.
    Your sister in Christ,
    The Welder’s wife.

  25. CampusPreacher April 13, 2008 9:22 am Reply

    For bluemoose and others regarding the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints:

    1. Joseph Smith stated in “Doctrines and Covenants” that whoever did not practice polygamy would be damned, “as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—…For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned;…”
    Doctrines and Covenants 132 page 1-62.

    These people are real Mormons, except for the forced marriage to underage girls. “if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.” Doctrines and Covenants 132ff.

    Things they do that are correct:

    1. The hair and dress modesty of the women and girls at the ranch is Biblical. I hope the state does not influence them to change this aspect.

    2. Considering the world outside their compound to be “evil” is quite correct. However, we are to go to the world and preach the Gospel, but not be of the world, like the world, or governed by the secular world-view.

    3. The Bible never condemned plural marriage in an absolute sense.

    4. It was the US gov’t that made them stop polygamy.

    Things they do that are not correct:

    5. The Mormon Jesus and Jehovah is “not” the Jesus and Jehovah of the Bible.

    I can continue with this if anyone is interested

    The Campus Preacher

    [EDITOR’S NOTE: Oh – okay, I saw what you intended and made the fix.

    And separately, you stated: “The Bible never condemned plural marriage in an absolute sense.”

    So would this give place to Jacob’s multiple marriages to Rachel & Leah? They ARE the three parents … of the 12 Tribes of Israel, of course. And David and Solomon had many, many wives each, of course. P.A. ]

  26. pabramson April 13, 2008 10:09 am Reply

    PG74 said: “…woman who looked all that more beautiful when she called her man master.”

    Now PG74, I know that you are being completely objective when you state that. There sure is something to this perspective, I am certain of that!

    I think … I had better be quiet now.

    http://www.creationism.org

  27. pabramson April 13, 2008 11:08 am Reply

    The Welders Wife – on April 13th, 2008 at 7:55am:
    “Have you ever noticed that almost every time I say anything, about anything, to anybody, I get attacked by Danny? It’s been that way for months! And by the way, have you noticed any other women on this blog in several months talking about Creation Science? Do you think women like being attacked? …”

    Dear WELDERS WIFE,

    For months it had seemed to me that EKKMAN was being overly critical of anything you said. But his nature seems to be that way.

    Back in January, with COOKSTER, he hammered, and hammered, and hammered. It did go both ways for awhile. But even after COOKSTER left, EKKMAN made several more long strong posts. (EKKMAN recently stated that it was only after I came down confirming EKKMAN’s side, that COOKSTER left. I cannot claim that I was not involved. …But I was not as daily verbally insistent, I would contend.)

    I apologize that it took me several months to see how his rebuttals to (?) almost everything … that you wrote were hitting at you.

    I am now conscious of this and watching. (I did see his recent negative posts to you):

    http://www.cseblogs.com/?p=133#comments
    Ekkman – on April 2nd, 2008 at 7:48pm:
    (Quoting WW):“As I’m writing, I’m laughing, ’cause I’ll probably get nailed for this one…

    “For those of you who are beginning to think about summer ministries…and you are not dyed in the wool KJVers…………….

    “Right now at WalMart they are selling little pocket New Testaments for 75% off. It’s an after Easter sale. …”

    (EKKMAN Wrote): ” You won’t be laughing when you stand before God. …

    “…No matter what you paid, they ‘short changed’ you. In other words, no matter what you paid for them for they cheated you. They should have gone to the garbage where the manuscript evidence came from to help produce them. …”

    — And anothe EKKMAN message, a few minutes later:

    Ekkman – on April 2nd, 2008 at 7:57pm:
    “Doctrine is super important. My Christian brothers and sisters are super important to me because doctrine is important to me. I don’t want to see them fall to the wayside and that is what a lot of false doctrine is doing to a lot of believers, causing them to leave the faith, I almost did. …

    “… For sure but you only cut one of my ears off, I still have the other one. Slow down and think about what you are doing, even a poorly translated paper sword can cut you. Words can kill. Even ‘fearless older ones’ are causing a lot of damage to the body of Christ. Paul calls the ones who do not agree with the ‘fearless older ones’ bullies and ‘meannies’ but he has it confused who is seeking to throw their ‘weight’ around with ‘original’ languages and the like.”

    ====

    Some people are perfectionists; some see everything as black and white. Others see areas of gray too. How does one best compromise customs, but without at all compromising principles?

    I think though that there are reasons why God’s truths are distributed out into the books of the Bible. There is overlapping and emphasis, a verse here, and a verse there on a particular doctrine.

    The story of the Good Samaritan is an interesting one. Here is the context – in Luke 9 Jesus is racially discriminated against for being Jewish.

    Luke 9:52-56 “And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elijah did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.”

    You are tired; it’s been a long day. “Hey, your kind is not welcome here. Move along, fella! You and your disciples.” You start walking down the dusty road. There will be another village after an hour or so, about 3-4 miles away.

    Then in Luke 10, Jesus answers a Levites’ question. (First, the TWO Commandments are emphasized.)

    Luke 10:26-37 [Jesus speaking at first] “He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live. But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbor? And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee. Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbor unto him that fell among the thieves? And he said, He that showed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.”

    Jesus has the two religious leaders, each respected in their houses of worship, just pass on by. But who does the right thing? One of those Samaritans!

    Having “correct doctrines” is good. But how a person treats others is very important.

    Paul Abramson

    http://www.creationism.org

  28. EndTimes April 13, 2008 11:34 am Reply

    RobG
    Said this on April 12th, 2008 at 9:54pm:

    “It is only where there are what we call TRUTHS (things that must be believed) [Such as Mary being born without sin, that she had a “virgin birth” and had no other children, was taken into Heaven body and soul] where some Protestants have problems, and all cults do. Informed Catholics are able to defend their faith. The trouble with many Protestants is not that they’re ignorant about the Catholic Faith; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t true. That is why meaningful debates with any logical religious person not only possible, but necessary to learn the Truth. Or as we say in Texas, Go around to the front end of the Horse.

    Dear RobG,

    Here is the down and dirty of the issues that “Protestants” have or have had with the Roman Catholic Church that the doctirnes of the RCC are not based on the Bible, but on their own private theology. For instance, Mary needs a Saviour as much as any other man, woman or child and it is heresy to state that Mary was born without sin and that is why Jesus is sinless. Jesus is sinless because He was born of God, not an earthly father. The “Immaculate Conception” is greatly misunderstood, but when it is pointed out that it is not a doctrine of the sinless birth of Christ, but the allegedly sinless birth of Mary. Yet in Luke 1:47, Mary rejoiced in “God my Saviour.” Yes, even Mary is a sinner that is saved by grace.

    Second, Mary did have other children and the names of the brothers of Jesus are “James, Joses, Juda and Simon and His “sisters” which means Mary had at least 6 other children beside Jesus. (Mark 6:3) So, either the Roman Catholics are correct, or the Bible is correct.

    Third, Mary is not the “Queen of Heaven” as the Assuption of Mary incorrectly teaches. This is complete heresy once again.

    These are just three reasons that there is no concord between Roman Catholicism and true Bible believing Christians.

    Now, that being said, I spent many years studying with the Roman Catholics at a Roman Catholic College. I further spent one year working as a cook at the college monastary and developed many close friendships with these men to include the president of my college. I harbor no ill will toward any of them or of you, yet your teachings and doctrine are not of God or of the Bible. Further, you truly need to study from the Bible alone why many as myself believe confidently that the woman atop the scarlet colored beast is none other than the Vatican as the city that reigns over the kings of the earth. In Revelation 18:4, God warns all to come out of her my people lest you share in her plagues. This is my prayer for you and all Roman Catholics. In fact, my wife has come out of Roman Catholocism and is grateful to have learned the truth.

    May God grant you the wisdom to see the truth of the Bible alone RobG.

    In the name of Christ,

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  29. EndTimes April 13, 2008 1:52 pm Reply

    Dear Welder’s Wife,

    I simply offered a truce by both sides of the issues on the KJV issue and the Jehova issue. In point of actuality, Ekkman does have excellent points of which I concur. It simply appears that both of you have continued to post the same arguments over and over again, not just Ekkman, since you as well have placed many posts from Jewish sites on the Yaweh issue. In all of this, the issues have nothing whatsoever to do with you being a woman. It has to do with whether the KJV is a proper translation with the rendering of Jehova. In fact it is. You state that you do have Riplinger’s book “In Awe of Thy Word” which is very negative against using Greek and Hebrew lexicons. She further sides with Ekkman on this point as well that the correct rendering is Jehovah of which which she offers historical and scholarly sources. Perhaps Ekkman has gone into excess on these issues if only in the repetive nature, but not in the content.

    Thus, all that I offered was a brokered truce which it appears is not what you wish to have. In such, then Ekkman certainly has the right to post on these subjects as he wishes. Once again, I do not see Ekkman attacking you on the King James issue because you are a woman but instead because you uphold alternative texts which do not have the authenticity that the KJV manuscripts have. In such, Riplinger has much information on this subject of which people should pay more attention.

    Yet again, I was simply holding up a truce and not declaring a “winner” for the sake of other issues that are of great importance on this blog such as countering outright evangelizing by people with false gospels. It was not my intent to fuel any further disputations, but instead simply to acknowledge an agreement to disagree. I am a little taken aback by your response which actually may escalate the dispute further, instead of diminishing it. Further, I would still hope that both of you can agree to disagree, I do not think that this is pie in the sky, nor am I hanging from a cliff in offering this. But, if you do not wish to consider it, so be it, I will simply let it rest. Once again, it is not a woman thing to disagree with using the Greek and Hebrew, or to disagree with the Yaweh issue or many of the other issues. There have been a few woman that come here and wish to so state that woman should be preachers, when instead the Bible states that is not the case. Thus, it then comes down to an issue of obeying the commandments of the Bible or not. Nevertheless, if you think that these comments are lost in some canyon, so be it, but the issue of the name of the Lord has nothing to do with gender of those that support it or not.

    In kindness,

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  30. 4truthsetsufree April 13, 2008 2:11 pm Reply

    Dear Paul,

    Here is the perplexing situation. You choose to follow futurism, (the Jesuit inspired idea, that most of the prophecies in the books of Daniel and Revelation still pertain to the future). Therefore, you misinterpret Mat 24:15. You probably also believe that everything from Rev 4 onwards, is all in the future.

    If you “resonate” with Chuck Missler, you most likely believe in the “literal interpretation” of prophecy, and try to interpret things literally (fleshly). However, the entire book of Revelation contains “symbolism” which can only be “discerned spiritually” according to 1Co 2:14. This is the problem that Nicodemus had, a brilliant scholar indeed, just like Chuck Missler. For example, you believe in a literal “mark” and a literal “beast” (man). Again, if you “resonate” with Chuck you also believe that the promises of God pertain to literal Israel, “Israel after the flesh” as Paul calls them (1Co 10:18).

    Along with Chuck, you don’t believe in “spiritual Israel” (Israel of God, Gal 6:16) which consists of all true believers in Christ, regardless of race, including Jews. Yet Paul makes the clear distinction, “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel” Rom 9:6. Paul is talking about two Israel’s, the fleshly Jews (in the middle East) and the spiritual Jews (body of all true believers in Christ). “But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” Rom 2:29.

    Chuck calls this “replacement theology” (spiritual Israel replacing literal Israel). And then there is the doctrine of “separation”, whereby Chuck, along with other self proclaimed prophecy teachers teach that the Jews and the gentiles are to be kept separate (in order for the pre-trib rapture theory to work) yet Paul clearly talks of one body of true believers in Christ consisting of both Jews and gentiles. “For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us” Eph 2:14.

    Chuck Missler also teaches that the gentiles is “above the law”! All I can say to that is WOW!

    So perplexing isn’t it? No wonder we can’t agree on prophecy.

    Paul, you wrote the following: “For Bible prophecy matters, I would defer to you (Endtimes) or to Chuck Missler (as you’ve heard me reference in the past).” (April 4th, 2008 at 10:03am).

    The Bible warns “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears, and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2Tim 4:3-4). Could this be what you are doing? I pray that Jesus will open your eyes.

    God bless
    Pieter

    http://www.myspace.com/4truthsetsufree

  31. CampusPreacher April 13, 2008 5:37 pm Reply

    WW, Paul A., Danny aka Ekkman et al,

    I’m taking up for Ekkman here a little bit. WW keeps posting messages and comments laced with leaven, and we are just suppose to swallow everything hook, line and sinker. If you remember in months past, I had a run in with WW and was blasted by her and Paul A. She’s pushing loose translations, trying to put everyone under the yoke of Messianic, Hebrew Roots, etc. version of churchianity which, in my opinion, exalts the Old Covenant and modern day Judaizers and church femanists. You can go back and keep all the Levitical customs and traditions and if you think that merits you a bonus with God, forget it. The only things that carry over to the New Covenant are those things listed in the New Testament.

    I visited a very large “Messianic Jewish” congregation in the former USSR. One of the prominent “women” of that group used to visit our family often. Can you guess what her most thrilling subject to talk about was?—circumcision—! She asked to see my 1 yr. old boy’s circumcision!

    I’ll quit here before…

    The Campus Preacher

    PS. Thanks Paul A. for repairing my previous post.

  32. The Welders Wife April 14, 2008 7:23 am Reply

    for Jesus’ name: Phillip-George (c)1974 Said this on April 12th, 2008 at 6:12pm:
    WW_ I’m just point out that Barbara Eden was a beautiful young woman who looked all that more beautiful when she called her man master. Sarah was mysteriously beautiful in old age when she called her man Lord.
    To very many men My Fair Lady is a favourite.
    Not to discriminate against Liz Hurley in Austin Powers or Catherine Zets Jones in Zoro – there is something very beautiful about a woman who can conjure a meal by command and goes back in the bottle when you want her to.
    Can a man look at a beautiful woman and simply worship God?

    AUSSIE BRO,

    Are you saying babes without attitudes are far more beautiful than babes with attitudes?
    What a concept! That means there’s hope for Godly women!!

    For a long time I’ve had this idea that Noah’s wife, although a knock-out as far as beauty goes, probably squatted down to attended to Noah’s shoes while he sat & petted the dogs. While she either put on or removed his shoes, she might have gotten licked in the face on occasion, or smacked by a tail…it happens! (And maybe the cat hid under the chair at the same time.) She probably also cut his toe nails too. With what I’m not sure…. It’s been a debate under our roof for a long time. Did she bite them off or did she have some other kind of toe-nail clipping device?

  33. The Welders Wife April 14, 2008 7:25 am Reply

    NOAH’S BIRTHDAY & EXITING THE ARK:

    [I wrote this a long time ago. It’s being told from Shem’s wife’s perspective! I used the Hebrew version of their names because I’m convinced that Hebrew was the original language. In Hebrew Noah is Noach, the ch being like the ch in Bach. Japheth is Yafet( both the a & the e are short) & Ham is Cham, same ch as Noach. I picked YAHWEH because I am of the notion that that is the way that it was originally pronounced. If you prefer to say it a different way, go ahead. The pronunciation is not nearly as important as the meaning. The letters in YAHWEH are a picture of Messiah being nailed to the execution stake. The scriptures say (Rev 13:8) that He is the Lamb who was slain from the foundation of the world. Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I AM.”]

    A few days later, it was my Father-in-law’s 601 birthday. For some reason, everyone was in the kitchen that morning for breakfast, even the dogs! Noach’s previous birthday had been a time of terrible grief. Now he had been vindicated, and he had grandchildren on the way! The Flood had completely destroyed those who had murdered our friends and family. The Ark was full of new life. My sister-in-law and my sister, and I sat at the table discussing how our babies kicked inside our wombs. While Mama Noach tied on Dad’s shoes, the dogs sat on either side of him and begged to have their backs scratched! He obliged them for a while, and then put his empty plate and bowl down on the floor for them to lick up the remains of his breakfast. (The female dog was very pregnant!) Then Noach leaned with his chair tilted against the wall and sipped his shakah[morning beverage!]. He had this look about him that gave us all the impression that he was up to something!
    “So Dad, what do you have in mind to do today?” Shem asked.
    “I am going to go to one end of the Ark and break open a hole in the roof, and then climb up and peek over the side to see what’s going on,” he answered matter-of-fact.
    The brothers all set their cups down and went and got the tools!
    It took quite a bit of doing to get the covering loose enough so that it could be removed. Finally Noach was able to turn the covering aside and then look out over the edge of the Ark to the ground below. The surface of the ground was dry! The wind was still blowing, and it was cold. After everyone had a good look, they put the covering back in place, and secured it so that the wind couldn’t blow it away.
    A couple days later, the female dog had puppies. At the same time, calves, lambs, kids (the goat kind!), and other baby four legged creatures began appearing all over the Ark! It gave them a chance to become strong before they left YAHWEH’S treasure chest, because it wasn’t until fifty-seven days after Noach’s birthday that YAHWEH said we could exit. It was during the time when the spring flowers were beginning to grow. The dandelions and other such flowers would be pulling calcium out of the ground so that the nursing mothers would be able to use it to build strong bones in their young. YAHWEH had told us to build ‘nests’ & bring them into the Ark by pairs. When they exited the Ark, they left by families!
    It was now one year and ten days since The Flood had begun. By now the daylight hours had increased even more. We were all sitting at the table, and we had just finished eating breakfast, when my Father-in-law made the announcement: “Elohim said, “Go out of the Ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons’ wives with you. Bring out with you every living thing of all flesh that is with you, birds and animals, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, that they may breed abundantly on the earth, and be fruitful and multiply on the earth.”
    We all got up at once, and went down stairs, and then began to untie and unbolt the door. Then we pulled it open!
    At first we stood there and stared as our eyes got use to the light. The ground was covered in grass and wild flowers. It was also littered with piles of logs and broken branches. That was to be expected, but there was something totally new to us as well: Rocks! They were everywhere! (Before The Flood there were no rocks except in areas where there were quarries or in mining operations. People had made bricks and things out of clay. In some riverbeds and near the sea shore one could find rocks, but never in the middle of meadows or fields, or places where people were suppose to live.)
    Next, with the help of the elephants, we slid the ramp out and locked it into place. It was a beautiful spring morning. The men and the male dog went down the ramp first, followed by Mama Noach. Her three pregnant daughter-in-laws were waddling behind her! Outside the Ark all was still and quiet. The raven sat patiently waiting on a log for its mate to be let out. Coming from the inside of the Ark was a concert of noise! About that time the elephants exited on their own accord! The little twins were running as fast as their little legs could carry them, following right behind their mother. We all started laughing.
    My Father-in-law walked around for a few minutes. He began picking up, one by one, the rocks that had been hewn from The Flood, and examining them carefully. Shem also picked one up to see what it was made of.
    “What are you thinking?” he asked his Father.
    “I was examining it to see if there were any dead things incased in it. Somehow the dirt has been hardened, and then broken down into lumps.” He picked up another one that didn’t have any jagged edges. “This one the waters must have rolled back and forth in the sand and mud, grinding it down smooth.” He picked up a third one that was almost square, and examined it carefully. Then he handed it to Shem.
    Shem then examined it carefully.
    “What do you think? Do you see any dead things incased in it?” asked Noach.
    Shem shook his head. “I think it would be clean material to build an altar with.”
    Then my Father-in-law carried it to a certain spot that he had carefully chosen. (He must have thought about it for days as he looked out the window.) “Here’s where we will build the altar after we turn everything loose. Be sure to set aside the ones we have chosen for the sacrifice.”
    At that, Shem and his Father marked the place out with some more rocks. They arranged them in the outline of the altar after carefully examining each one. When the place was clearly marked, they turned their attention to other things.

  34. The Welders Wife April 14, 2008 7:26 am Reply

    NOAH’S BIRTHDAY & EXITING THE ARK: continued

    In the mean time, Yafet and Cham had been examining the piles of logs and debris to see if there was a possibility of arranging them into temporary corrals for the domestic animals. There was even an area nearby that we had viewed from the Ark that had that potential. Actually, there were a couple places that would be good for makeshift corrals and there were piles of logs and debris that were bunched up here and there that made natural fences. It wouldn’t take much effort to work these areas into corrals.
    While the guys were doing that, the women were picking flowers and decorating each other’s hair with them! We hadn’t seen flowers in over a year, and even though these ones weren’t quite as exotic as the ones we had been use to before The Flood, we treasured them as if they were the most beautiful ones we had ever seen in our lives! They were tokens of a new beginning.
    The female dog and her puppies exited the Ark next. Then the adult dogs began to run back and forth wildly, but the puppies sat at the bottom of the ramp and looked at the grass! Some of them even cocked their heads. They weren’t too sure about that green stuff! Every once in a while the adult dogs would run circles around us. The puppies barked and whined, and then they began to howl! Their mother came back and licked them excitedly, and then ran off again. After a while, their curiosity got the best of them, and they ventured into the grass. A few minutes later, the adult dogs came back and began to roll on their backs in it, trying to cover their whole bodies with it’s smell. In the meantime, the critters still in the Ark were protesting loudly because they wanted to be let out into the new world too!
    My cats sat at the top of the ramp and sniffed the air. Then they began to walk down the ramp, twitching their tails. They jumped off the side of the ramp before they met the puppies. Near the bottom of the ramp, they found a log to sharpen their claws on. After that was accomplished, they began to slink through the grass, stopping to sniff here and there. When the adult dogs began to run in their direction, they ran for cover into the pile of logs!
    Next, some of the smaller animals that we had allowed to run about the Ark freely, appeared at the door, and then they too began to exit with their little ones. The caged ones continued to protest loudly! At the same time, the birds that were kept uncaged, found their way to the door, and began to fly out.
    I too picked up rocks and examined them in wonder. I thought to myself “Surely YAHWEH ELOHIM has made these to always remind the generations to come about The Flood, after all the mud is gone.”
    Soon the guys came back to the Ark. They had decided that the makeshift corrals were ready to be used, because YAHWEH had arranged them that way! The raven continued to sit, patiently waiting. My Father-in-law disappeared back inside the Ark. Then he reappeared with the other raven and let it go at the top of the ramp. Both ravens took to flight. They called to each other as they circled the canyon. Then they flew off together, the first freed raven leading the way, and disappeared.
    Then Noach brought the mate to the dove that had previously brought the olive leaf to us, and turned him loose. As he called out to his mate, we heard her from somewhere in the distance. He took off flying in that direction, and we never saw him again either. Then he turned some of the other clean birds loose, except the ones that we wanted to use to breed for sacrifices, and those that had already been selected to be the first sacrifices (They were the best of the first ones hatched on the Ark). After that, we began to let the rest of the birds loose. It was a marvelous sight to watch. They flew off in all directions, many of them chattering excitedly.
    As I said before, most of the pairs of animals now had offspring, so we sent them all out of the Ark by families. We also had to be careful how we let the animals out. We had to make sure that we kept certain animals separated, and not let them out at the same time. Before The Flood, there were certain scavengers that would eat the carcasses of other animals. They were God’s clean-up crew! It happened because after Adam sinned, everything died sooner or later, and the bodies had to be taken care of. There were other animals that kept vermin down, like my cats. All the animals ate vegetation, but there were a few who were also known to eat other critters when given the chance! We made sure those kinds of animals were well fed before we turned them loose. Outside of the Ark there were plenty of carcasses for them to eat. It was the same way with the birds and the bats. The Pterodactyls were scavengers. They would be well fed for many years to come, as they were good at digging up carcasses. In the past they had even been known to dig up the graves of people who had been buried in haste after a Nephelim war had passed through. The pair that we had on the Ark enjoyed eating sheep jerky mixed with dried berries when they weren’t hibernating. (We waited till after dark to turn them loose, along with the other bats.)
    When we turned the bears loose, they ran down the ramp and began to romp around in the meadow with their cubs. The big cats (Lions, cheetahs, saber tooth tigers, etc.), on the other hand, generally stood at the door, twitching their tails, while sniffing the doorframe and the outside air, as cats do. The cheetahs even sat at the top of the ramp and stared at the outside world for a while. Then suddenly one got up and ran down the ramp, and the others followed it. They frolicked in the grass for a long time, and then disappeared.
    The behemoth [Something like a brontosaurs or an apatosaurus] ambled down the ramp and into the meadow below, just enjoying life in general! They weren’t predators. They ate grass like the cows and sheep. They weren’t afraid of anything, and they grew to be huge! They were the biggest land critters that God ever made! (The ones we took on the Ark were very young.) After a while, they too, disappeared down the mountainside.
    When it came time to turn the snakes loose, all three of us mothers-to-be ran to the upper level of the Ark and refused to come down till the snakes were gone!
    Yafet grumbled. “What is the matter with my wife? She never used to be afraid of snakes.”
    My Father-in-law consoled him saying, “She’s pregnant! YAHWEH has put it into her to be afraid of danger. It’s a gift from Him. Mothers are that way. They need to be for the survival of their children.”
    We slept in the Ark that night!

  35. pabramson April 14, 2008 7:29 am Reply

    Dear 4truthsetsufree,

    Thank you for your comments of – April 13th, 2008 at 2:11pm.

    Actually your synopsis of Dr. Chuck Missler’s teachings on prophecy do not resemble what he teaches. Where did you hear of how and what he actually teaches?

    One thing that I have heard him discuss is that Revelation is actually a very Old Testament book. Its 404 verses (in the 22 chapters) have about 800 Old Testament references.

    Christians preserving a book for 2000 years, for the Jews of the future. God does things in interesting and mysterious ways.

    You stated: “…try to interpret things literally (fleshly).”

    Since the spiritual realms are more real than the physical, let me turn your accusation right-side up and correct it to: “…try to interpret things literally (spiritually).”

    There is a lot of symbolism in Revelation.

    During WWII, most (but not all) Bible prophecy experts in America looked at Adolf Hitler’s hatred of the Jews and that he was putting Europe back together under himself, one leader, and saw in him the Anti-Christ.

    Do you at least agree with us that the SDA went astray with the 1844 prophecy stuff?

    Or … ;-) … would that be too “fleshly” for you to admit?

    Symbolism can be … malleable.

    If “you and yours” now have it all worked out. Then bully for you. But please do not misquote the teachings of other. Please answer others (like ENDTIMES) when they challenge you with clear Scriptural references. And please do not misquote Scripture, putting your group’s consensus above a spiritual, literal interpretation of what the Bible says.

    You also stated: “Chuck Missler also teaches that the gentiles is ‘above the law’! All I can say to that is WOW!”

    No, he doesn’t. Where?

    Now then, Saint Paul does teach that we are no longer under the Law. Have you read any of the Scriptures that I have quoted?

    Is it the New Testament that you find disagreeable to your doctrines?

    Do not believe men above a literal reading of what the Bible says:

    Romans 3:19-23 “Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”

    Romans 7:6 “But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.”

    Paul Abramson

    http://www.creationism.org

  36. pabramson April 14, 2008 7:38 am Reply

    Dear CampusPreacher,

    Thank you for your comments of – April 13th, 2008 at 5:37pm.

    You stated: “She’s pushing loose translations, trying to put everyone under the yoke of Messianic, Hebrew Roots, etc. version of churchianity which, in my opinion, exalts the Old Covenant and modern day Judaizers and church femenists. …”

    Hmmm … the place for liturgy, for traditions, for external reminders….

    You see, (also referencing RobG’s recent posts,) it seems to me that Protestants have reacted against all that was/is in the traditional Catholic Church, perhaps to excess?

    Symbolism. …Icons….

    We have very little liturgy in the modern Protestant churches. There is baptism, and the taking of the sacraments, the bread and the wine. But so many other things are absent. Is that necessarily good or bad?

    I will have to pray about this and write more later.

    CampusPreacher, I apologize if I “blasted” you in a disagreement.

    Paul Abramson

    http://www.creationism.org

  37. pabramson April 14, 2008 11:10 am Reply

    Dear BlueMoose,

    Thank you for your comments of – April 12th, 2008 at 12:07pm.

    You stated: “…regarding the polygamist ranch you mentioned earlier:

    “Did those people have their religious rights violated? Should they have the right to raise their children according to their religious beliefs? If they hadn’t been forcing some rather unsavory situations with children, should they have been raided nonetheless for promoting polygamy? Many of the children have been raised to believe that the outside world is nothing but evil. Should the children be allowed back with their own mothers, who may continue to raise them the way they were before, or placed under the care of the scary outsiders?”

    I am surprise that only ENDTIMES tried to tackle this one.

    I’d expect “religious” folks to be intensely interested in how this all gets handled.

    Is “government” good or bad?

    My opinion is that government can be good and that religious authorities (in our fallen human condition) should not be absolute.

    As you know, I began a run for public office a few months ago. It is a legitimate way to serve in the community or region or country.

    Some of the most prominent persons in the Bible were ones who served in a political or governmental capacity: Joseph, Moses, David, Daniel, and others.

    For freedom of speech in America, it is not an absolute. We, as a society, have determined that yelling “fire” in a crowded theater is not included in appropriate freedom of speech rights.

    For the Second Amendment, often “under fire” in these times, it remains a basic right in most places. A person should have the right to self-defense. And why not? Delegating personal defense to professionals that are 5 or 10 minutes away (if “9-1-1″ can even be called right away) is not always sufficient. But many public locations and persons insist that the right of others to keep and bear arms near them needs to be regulated. Many government buildings restrict even regular pocket knives.

    Is freedom of religion absolute?

    What if a religious order arose that demanded human sacrifice? Would that be okay? Would “we” as a society have any say about their particular beliefs? What if they combed hospital wards, promised $25,000 to the families of terminally ill patients and no pain, if they’d agree to be sacrificed during the next full Moon?

    I realize that this is an extreme example. (I hope that this blog does not become fodder for next week’s pulp newspapers. A headline: “Feeling queasy today? Get sacrificed and your name on a plaque; your family gets $25 grand!”)

    So, back to the question at hand, should a “polygamist cult” have their children taken away without warning?

    This is from the Deseret News (a Mormon publication), 4-13-2008:

    “First look inside YFZ Ranch: Quiet is unnerving as FLDS members seek answers”
    http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695270108,00.html

    From Article: “Nancy was at the ranch when Texas rangers and other authorities began taking away the children. She said they knocked on the door of her home, walked in, separated the children, began interviewing ‘and didn’t give us an explanation of what they were doing,’ she said.

    She and other mothers declined to answer the officers’ questions about which child belonged to who. ‘They told us we’re going to take the children unless you tell us who are their mothers. But we still weren’t saying anything,’ she recalled. Then she heard them call for backup.

    Nancy, who was holding a baby in her arms, said one officer ‘poked their face into our face’ and loudly said, ‘Give me that baby!’ “

    No explanation? No rights for suspects? Strangers with guns enter and demand your children?

    Later in Article: “When she was finally allowed to return to her home on the ranch, because of an ongoing search of the property by authorities, she said nothing was the same.

    ‘Can you imagine what it’s like to come back to nothing? Empty, ransacked homes, many things were taken, no pictures left.’

    She was able to find some pictures of when her children were younger, but all others were confiscated.”

    Folks, I recommend the video, “Waco: The Rules of Engagement” (by Gifford, et al) it is available at many public libraries.
    http://www.amazon.com/Waco-Rules-Engagement-Dan-Gifford/dp/B0000DIJOO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1208194825&sr=8-1

    What the media reported about Waco and the actual sequence of events – was extremely different!

    In the Deseret News article (above) one woman said that the government officials gave no explanation. They entered and started rounding up the “property of the state” (… the children? …) Whose were they, again?

    Does God give children to parents, or to the state?

    When the first attack happened at Waco, the “Waco: The Rules of Engagement” documentary states that the government forces came with guns blazing. No warrant was presented, no assumption of innocent until proven guilty. But the BATF side ran out of ammo. When they did, they asked for a truce. The religious folks in the compound – let them go, of course. The video shows the embarrassed BATF men backing away that day. They had attacked without warning, but the Branch Davidians had later let them leave, after the men assaulting the compound’s ammunition had run out.

    But, not to be told “no”, more forces soon returned. Please watch this documentary; it is interesting. Which side was civilized; which one was not? And why, oh why, did the media report the ongoing story the way that it did!?

    Freedom is not a given in any society nor at any time. It must be worked for or persons who like power will gather more unto themselves.

    In this instance, I certainly hope that the Texas Rangers are sensitive to the human side and allow mothers to be with their children during this traumatic time. The children have never known any other life. And the same is true for most or all of the women….

    Paul Abramson

    http://www.creationism.org

  38. pabramson April 14, 2008 11:36 am Reply

    “U.S. Housing Collapse Spreads Overseas” – April 14, 2008
    http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/13/business/housing.php

    Please pray (atheists – you too!), get your house in order, as you can. This situation is very, very dangerous.

    There are so many LEVERAGED and non-traditional (like “derivatives”) investments floating around out there.

    From Article: “For countries like Ireland, where prices were even more inflated than in the United States, it has been a painful education, …

    “That reality is spreading. Once-sizzling housing markets in Eastern Europe are cooling rapidly, as nervous West Europeans stop buying investment properties in Warsaw, Estonia and other former real estate Klondikes.

    “Even further east, in India and southern China, prices are no longer climbing. …”

    http://www.creationism.org

  39. EndTimes April 14, 2008 12:09 pm Reply

    Oh my, so much for putting an end to the Jehovah/Yahweh debate with Welder’s Wife’s last raid into this discussion. I do not recall, but correct me if I am wrong, that there has been an actual link to Riplinger’s comments on this issue from In Awe of Thy Word. Riplinger defends Ekkman’s position on this. So, I guess instead of wrapping up, “It goes on Judah.” (Famous line from Ben Hur)

    CHAPTER 11
    Jesus and Jehova
    or [email protected]

    http://www.eversince1611.com/watchmen/books/Awe/Awe11.pdf

    Please note her use of the original Hebrew as well as historical and scholarly references in defence of this position.

    (It goes on Ekkman!!)

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  40. The Welders Wife April 14, 2008 12:28 pm Reply

    Brother Peter,
    I appreciate your efforts for a truce. But you still don’t understand what I’m saying. I stopped debating Danny a long time ago. I don’t read his posts & I don’t answer his posts. I’m not at war with him! He on the other hand continues to attack me.
    You really are deep in those canyons, Brother!

    I have 2 options:
    1st option is to never blog on to this blog again. Um, that option is out, because as long as Brother Hovind is in prison, I’m going to do what ever I can for him & CSE, which includes blogging on this blog. It may or may not be helpful, but at least I can try, with God’s help.

    2nd option is to keep blogging on & duck for cover whenever necessary! I already stated who I am & where I’m coming from. I don’t expect to be accepted by everybody. That’s just part of life.

    If the LORD brings to mind something to say, I’m going to say it. Brother Hovind is in prison for saying what the LORD put on his heart to say. Since when am I suppose to have it any easier?

  41. pabramson April 14, 2008 12:44 pm Reply

    Dear EndTimes,

    Thank you for your comments of – April 14th, 2008 at 12:09pm.

    As a student of Hebrew (…along with some German, Japanese, and a smattering of other languages), I see an odd thing on page 2 of the PDF file you referenced.

    http://www.eversince1611.com/watchmen/books/Awe/Awe11.pdf

    On Page 2, Dr. Riplinger changes the Hebrew “yod” letter to a non-existent “jod” letter. Where did that come from?…

    Here are a few Hebrew alphabets. Where is the “jod”? …

    http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/alephbet.html

    http://www.jewfaq.org/alephbet.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_alphabet

    http://www.hebrew4christians.com/

    (And from this last one above, “Names of G-d”)
    http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/names_of_g-d.html

    Paul Abramson

    http://www.creationism.org

  42. pabramson April 14, 2008 2:41 pm Reply

    “Food Costs Rising Fastest in 17 Years”
    http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080414/inflation_squeeze.html?.v=4

    From Article: “U.S. households still spend a smaller chunk of their expenses for foods than in any other country — 7.2 percent in 2006, according to the USDA. By contrast, the figure was 22 percent in Poland and more than 40 percent in Egypt and Vietnam.

    “In Bangladesh, economists estimate 30 million of the country’s 150 million people could be going hungry. Haiti’s prime minister was ousted over the weekend following food riots there.

    “Still, the higher U.S. prices seem eye-popping after years of low inflation. Eggs cost 25 percent more in February than they did a year ago, according to the USDA. Milk and other dairy products jumped 13 percent, chicken and other poultry nearly 7 percent.”

    http://www.creationism.org

  43. The Welders Wife April 14, 2008 3:10 pm Reply

    Brother Peter,
    I’m sorry, but I think your ‘truce’ is that you don’t want me to say anything unless it totally agrees with your opinion, which is KJV only etc. That’s a one sided truce. The only thing that it convinces me of is that I don’t ever, ever want to be associated with Independent Baptists because they beat everybody over the head with the KJV Bible. Is that really what Independent Baptists are all about? Is that who you & Danny represent? Is that who Campus Preacher represents too? My estimation of Independent Baptists is probably totally unfair, but that’s the picture that you guys present. Is that what you want the rest of those in Christ to think about your denomination? I don’t think Brother Hovind would appreciate that!
    Brother Peter, you guys have got to learn to walk in God’s grace towards other Believers. If you don’t, the LORD is going to nail you, imho.

  44. The Welders Wife April 14, 2008 3:43 pm Reply

    Paul,
    concerning about your post on the housing market, let me give you a report first hand from the logging industry in Montana:
    Normally this time of year the logging industry shuts down for about a month because as the snow melts the logging roads on the mountains where the trees are, become too muddy to maneuver around on etc. Everybody in the logging industry expects this, & so they prepare for it. It’s the Spring Melt. What’s different about it this year is that nobody knows when the industry is going to start back up again, because at the moment it costs more money to harvest the logs than what can be earned from selling them. Normally the logging machinery is left standing in the forest till after Spring Melt, & then it’s there for when work starts back up. That’s not the case this year. It’s all been brought back to the shop, & almost everybody has been laid off, except those who do maintenance on the equipment. It’s pretty much the same story with all the local logging companies. Everybody is holding their breath..

    One other thing: the price of flour has doubled.

  45. Hubert April 14, 2008 4:43 pm Reply

    Hello Kent, I am just writing to tell you I’m still praying for you and that my son is enjoying the tape on basic plumbing put on by your son Eric and Bill Seaman I think it is. He has also enjoyed the one on electricity. The plumbing one is good timing for us as we are getting ready to put in a whole new bathroom. Thanks, Hubert

  46. Ekkman April 14, 2008 6:48 pm Reply

    Samphire,
    Here is his answers to your question…

    “There are several ways to measure the one-way speed of light.

    1. send light along the length of a metal bar which simultaneously sends a
    sharp sound wave through the bar.

    2. Marinov’s coupled mirrors experiment measures the one-way speed of
    light over a short distance.

    3. Mapping the time delays of an atomic clock signal from a satellite
    orbiting an airless satellite of Jupiter over the course of a year. This
    is a variant of Roemer’s determination of the speed of light.

    Danny Bunn, B.A. wrote:
    > What are your thoughts on this post?
    >
    >
    > Samphire
    > Said this on April 10th, 2008 at 4:22pm:
    >
    > Ekkman wrote: There is only one experiment that can resolve the issue, but
    > no one dares to undertake it, and that is to measure the one-way speed of
    > light in various directions. All determinations of the speed of light thus
    > far involve the light making a round-trip.”
    >
    > Is it possible to measure the speed of light in one direction only? If so,
    > how?
    >
    >
    > In His Majesty’s Service,
    > Danny D. Bunn, B.A.
    > The Lord Jesus Christ said, “…Ye must be born again.”
    > http://www.ekkcom.net
    > [EDITED]

    Ekkman

    http://www.ekkcom.net

  47. Ekkman April 14, 2008 6:50 pm Reply

    PA, Welder’s Wife,
    I will be answering your posts as soon as I can. Hopefully this weekend. Things are getting worse around me. Oh well! Praise the Lord anyhow!

    Ekkman

    [EDITOR’S NOTE: How should folks best pray for you? P.A. ]

    http://www.ekkcom.net

  48. Ekkman April 14, 2008 7:02 pm Reply

    Dear Hebrew-Only folks,
    Are you sure that you are reading the correct Hebrew? And you will need a whole lot more than two classes to learn anything to really talk about. Stay away from Kittel’s Revised Hebrew. Poor fellow, he is in trouble with God. Everything that I see from reading a lot of papers from people who know Hebrew, YAHWEH cannot possibly be God.
    Did anybody read the PDF link that I sent over last week? It seemed to be a really enlightening article. I still haven’t read it all but I will soon hopefully.

    Ekkman

    http://www.ekkcom.net

  49. Ekkman April 14, 2008 7:14 pm Reply

    EndTimes,
    I tried to find your post on “hot, cold and lukewarm”, I wanted to ask you about it since I read it a few times and it didn’t seem to make sense what you were saying. I will find it later, I guess. I have to leave this place for now.

    Ekkman

    http://www.ekkcom.net

  50. EndTimes April 14, 2008 11:39 pm Reply

    Dear Paul,

    Yes, this appears to be the central issue in the Jehovah vs. Yahweh discussions. Riplinger goes into a lengthy explanation of Yod vs Jod. I also came across another very well written article on the same issue which has an excellent presentation of not one JOT or TITTLE shall pass from the word. Yes, is it Yod or is it Jod? I do concur that the “popular” teaching is Yod, yet which is correct? I stand firm that the KJV translators got it right on all issues. I suspect that you and I will however, most likely not come to a common agreement, so unless there are other issues that either of us have not posted from opposing views, I am quite willing to let stand these posts and move on to the coming economic crises that perhaps shall soon be upon us and the spiritual repentance that God calls all people to accomplish before Him. Yes, time is short and we all need to Watch and be Ready.

    There is certainly a part of all of us that enjoy this life we have now and it is quite easy to put off eternity since we must first part from this life to go to eternity which is only through death or better, through the Rapture, yet it is clearly a time of great uncertainties and great world wide changes and challenges. I believe that discussion of end times events is probably a much more edifying discussion than Jod or Yod for all here on CSE, even though it is not in the least an unimportant topic as well, it is just not as temporally relevant.

    Thank you as always for the information and links that you are willing to spend time devoted to our benefit. May God have mercy on all throughout this great world as the impending crises appears to be on the horizon. “Return, O Lord, how long? and let it repent thee concerning thy servants.”

    Yes Lord, return and show us your mercy and grace,

    In the love of Christ,

    Peter

    In Defense of Jehovah

    http://www.biblestudy.org/maturart/in-defense-of-jehovah-as-name-of-god.html

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  51. EndTimes April 14, 2008 11:46 pm Reply

    Dear Paul,

    I am not sure why such an obvious occurance is front page news on Yahoo, yet it does go with the other subjects on the economy and the growing food crises as you have posted. Yes, the signs of the times of the Bible are the front page news articles. It is sometimes a difficult to know whether we should have the bunker mentality or the prepare for the years to come mentality. We are often taught to be ready today for the end, but live as if we have many years and plan for retirement and other such events. Yet, it is a step back to look at the actual headlines while keeping in mind that we are told that we shall see the day approaching. (Hebrews 10:24-25) Yes, no man shall know the hour or the day, yet we are not in darkness and we are to be sober and vigilant because Jesus will not come as a thief to us, yet only to those that sleep and are drunken in the night. (I Thess 5:1-10) Yes, it is a difficult thing to be able to focus on both with the headlines before us daily.

    May the Lord give us wisdom and knowledge and most especially give us the will and desire to go forth into the fields of harvest for the time is short indeed.

    May God keep us and preserve us in these times.

    Peter

    Forecast: Big quake likely in Calif.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080414/ap_on_sc/california_quakes

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  52. EndTimes April 15, 2008 12:42 am Reply

    4truthsetsufree
    Said this on April 13th, 2008 at 2:11pm:

    Dear Paul,
    Here is the perplexing situation. You choose to follow futurism, (the Jesuit inspired idea, that most of the prophecies in the books of Daniel and Revelation still pertain to the future). Therefore, you misinterpret Mat 24:15. You probably also believe that everything from Rev 4 onwards, is all in the future.

    Dear Pieter, yes, Rev 4:1 states very clearly “hereafter” which is from the faithful witness, Jesus Christ who told John to write what he has seen (Rev Chapter one and the glorified Saviour before him), the things which are (Rev Chapter two and three which are the seven church ages which are prophetic of the church age) and then in Rev chapter 4, John is shown the “hereafter.” Yes, absolutely, by the faithful witness who is Jesus Christ, we can and do know that this is the start of eternity when the believers are translated into the eternal kingdom.

    In kindness,

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  53. EndTimes April 15, 2008 12:46 am Reply

    4truthsetsufree
    Said this on April 13th, 2008 at 2:11pm:

    If you “resonate” with Chuck Missler, you most likely believe in the “literal interpretation” of prophecy, and try to interpret things literally (fleshly). However, the entire book of Revelation contains “symbolism” which can only be “discerned spiritually” according to 1Co 2:14. This is the problem that Nicodemus had, a brilliant scholar indeed, just like Chuck Missler. For example, you believe in a literal “mark” and a literal “beast” (man). Again, if you “resonate” with Chuck you also believe that the promises of God pertain to literal Israel, “Israel after the flesh” as Paul calls them (1Co 10:18).

    Dear Pieter,

    Here you are being very disingenuous since the SDA use a literal but Historic interpretation of the book of Revelation not a literal but Future interpretation that you take issue with. However, from the vantage point of John in the first century, the SDA church likewise has a futuristic interpretation, yet your interpretations do not in the least match the events of Revelation and do not in the least line up with the OT prophetic books as well. In such, you get Daniels 10 toes in the upper thigh. What kind of a beast is it that the SDA folks have dreamed up? It has nothing to do with the reality literally represented by the symbols of Revelation.
    It would be interesting if you would tell folks several things in Revelation such as what are the seven vials, the seven trumpets, the seven kings of Revelation 17 and the many other “literal” representations of the symbols of Revelation that the SDA church has indeed written on. Come on out and show us so that I don’t have to quote all of your very strange and also false private interpretations which you will then falsely state that I have not accurately represented what you believe. Please, do tell us what Doug Batchelor teaches on all of these issues of instance.

    With little patience Pieter, you continue to hide and evade, yet come out with doubtful disputations on issues that are easily seen and understood fromt the Bible alone.

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  54. EndTimes April 15, 2008 12:49 am Reply

    4truthsetsufree
    Said this on April 13th, 2008 at 2:11pm:

    3) Along with Chuck, you don’t believe in “spiritual Israel” (Israel of God, Gal 6:16) which consists of all true believers in Christ, regardless of race, including Jews. Yet Paul makes the clear distinction, “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel” Rom 9:6. Paul is talking about two Israel’s, the fleshly Jews (in the middle East) and the spiritual Jews (body of all true believers in Christ). “But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” Rom 2:29.

    Dear Pieter,

    Here you enter into a great heresy on the false boasting by SDA against the branch of Israel that some have been cast away. I would recommend that instead of just picking and choosing what fits your false doctrines, that you read the rest of the story. Let’s go to Romans 11:18 which tells us that since the SDA cult boasts against the fallen people of Israel, that you thus do not bear the root which is Jesus. Further, cutting to the chase with Romans 11:24-27 tells us very clearly that Jesus shall keep His covenant with His chosen people and will deliver them. Yes, the covenant that you keep interpreting falsely is still in effect but only for the people of Israel who shall one day stand before Jesus at the end of the battle of Armageddon where they shall know Him and shall call upon His name, and He shall hear and call them His people in the flesh who shall live and die a hundred years old still as a child in the millenium. Once again, read Zech 12, 13 and 14. Yes, Jesus shall come back for His people of the nation of Israel in the flesh. The SDA teachings on Spiritual Israel are complete heresy. No, Jesus is NOT done with Israel on this earth. Please Pieter, read your Bible in completeness.

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  55. EndTimes April 15, 2008 12:50 am Reply

    4truthsetsufree
    Said this on April 13th, 2008 at 2:11pm:

    4) Chuck calls this “replacement theology” (spiritual Israel replacing literal Israel). And then there is the doctrine of “separation”, whereby Chuck, along with other self proclaimed prophecy teachers teach that the Jews and the gentiles are to be kept separate (in order for the pre-trib rapture theory to work) yet Paul clearly talks of one body of true believers in Christ consisting of both Jews and gentiles. “For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us” Eph 2:14.

    Dear Pieter,

    You are misinterpreting this verse. the wall of partition was broken down between Man and God, not between the Jews and the Gentiles. Please give us links to your doctrine so that all can look and see for themselves what you are really stating. Al that you are really doing here so far is engendering confusion which is NOT of God.

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  56. EndTimes April 15, 2008 12:57 am Reply

    4truthsetsufree
    Said this on April 13th, 2008 at 2:11pm:

    5) Paul, you wrote the following: “For Bible prophecy matters, I would defer to you (Endtimes) or to Chuck Missler (as you’ve heard me reference in the past).” (April 4th, 2008 at 10:03am).

    The Bible warns “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears, and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2Tim 4:3-4). Could this be what you are doing? I pray that Jesus will open your eyes.

    God bless 
Pieter

    Dear Pieter,

    You come here to a Baptist site and then try to gain converts to your false religion founded by a woman who is best known for her false prophecies on the 1844 return of Jesus. When this failure became so evident, some repented and admitted that they were mistaken, yet your false prophetess instead came up with a wild idea that Jesus DID return but secretly to the “sanctuary in heaven” that has allegedly been defiled by our sins and thus He must clean it up and figure out who is going to be saved or not in the “investigative judgement” during “Probation” while the “Great controversy” continues on below on this earth.

    Give us a break Pieter, this is not a SDA website. If you wish to believe all of this nonsense, there is nothing that I can do to help you, but please, come here and discuss your strange doctrines openly and with links so that people can understand what you are talking about so that they can give an informed opinion of what you are talking about, but please refrain from posts designed to confuse and not edify.

    Yet once again, all that you are able so far to offer to this site is post after post that gives doubt to God’s plain and simple Word in the same form of Satan in the garden, “Yea, hath God said?,” yet offer absolutely no concrete explanations of your own doctrines for those that do not understand these doctrines to be able to compare them to the Bible which is our only standard.

    So, once again, are you willing to explain openly the “Great controversy,” “Probation,” “the Investigative Judgement,” “the Seal of God,” and the “Mark of the Beast” all according to SDA beliefs? We are going on now about two months without even a single response to any of my challenges even though I have spent many hours to find selected pro SDA websites on these issues to help others know exactly what you mean in your confusing posts. When Pieter shall you stand and defend OPENLY all of these very strange and unbiblical doctrines? Or shall we just get more and more posts designed to bring doubt upon very simple and very well documented doctrines that come not from Jesuits as you repeatedly and falsely assert, but from Jesus Christ Himself, especially the Pre-trib Rapture which Jesus spoke of in Mathew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 17 and 21. When Pieter shall you debate in an open manner so that both sides can be compared and contrasted openly? When indeed?

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  57. Hubert April 15, 2008 10:18 am Reply

    Thanks Peter for trying to speak the truth in love. I hope people realize that is what you are trying to do. I enjoy your posts. Even though I have skimmed alot for lack of time. I believe God will take care of his elect but I am still trying to figure out where the “rapture” is according to scripture. I am trying to figure out the when in sequence of the seals and trumpets and bowels. I don’t have time to go into it. Will try later. Hubert

  58. EndTimes April 15, 2008 11:01 am Reply

    The Welders Wife

    Said this on April 14th, 2008 at 3:10pm:

    Brother Peter,

    I’m sorry, but I think your ‘truce’ is that you don’t want me to say anything unless it totally agrees with your opinion, which is KJV only etc. That’s a one sided truce. The only thing that it convinces me of is that I don’t ever, ever want to be associated with Independent Baptists because they beat everybody over the head with the KJV Bible. Is that really what Independent Baptists are all about? Is that who you & Danny represent? Is that who Campus Preacher represents too? My estimation of Independent Baptists is probably totally unfair, but that’s the picture that you guys present. Is that what you want the rest of those in Christ to think about your denomination? I don’t think Brother Hovind would appreciate that!

    Brother Peter, you guys have got to learn to walk in God’s grace towards other Believers. If you don’t, the LORD is going to nail you, imho.

    Dear Welder’s Wife,

    Yes, I understand that you are not at all in favour of the King James Bible and you don’t have very kind remarks for people that hold to the evidence in favour of the King James Bible as does Ekkman which is why he has gone to such lengths I suspect defending the truth of the KJV Bible. Historically, the manuscript evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of the KJV and the textus receptus. Further, the illogic contentions of textual critisism where they “venerate” textual varients which do not even agree with each other and instead ridicule textual agreement in the over 5000 manuscripts that make up the “majority text” is one of the most amazing frauds I have ever seen in church circles. Lastly, the last person that anyone takes into account in this entire debate is Jesus Christ. Is it possible that Jesus has already spoken on this issue 1900 years ago? I actually believe that He has.

    Rev 3:8-9 speaks of “Keeping” God’s Word, and the Synagogue of Satan that say that they are Jews and are not but do lie which can only be fulfilled by the Roman Catholic church and then these people will worship at the feet of a man. Yes, that is what these verses are telling us. Further, it is a red letter section which means Jesus Himself is speaking so the person that is worshipped is not Jesus as some believe. Are there any people that could lawfully be worshipped without violating the commandments? Yes, they are called Kings. Romans 13 tells us to give honour unto whom honour is due. If you stand before the Queen of England, as a Christian, would you be allowed to bow before her? Of course, give the customary honour to the king as the governor of the land.

    Thus, King James was the first king to give God’s Holy Word to the common man from a faithfully copied translation and who also by the effects of the failed Gun Powder Plot did have the Roman Catholics in his country worship at his feet by power of an oath of supremecy denouncing the pope’s right to be able to depose kings. I have a brief article on this that I have posted before. I fully contend that Jesus has already declared that King James was His man and the work that he did was by the Lord Himself.

    Now, I readily admit that many will not accept this interpretation. In such, my only retort is for them to then explain when and by whom was Rev 3:8-9 fulfilled if not by King James?

    Lastly, I believe that we have all posted on this issue with much information and once again, are there any other issues to be contended that have not already been contended? I think not. Thus, where do I declare a “winner” in this issue which is now becoming doubtful disputations on CSE? I have stated that we disagree and that I am willing to let the issue rest. Now, are you likewise willing to let the issue rest and move onto the defense of the gospel as was once delivered to the saints that is being attacked on CSE by two people right now, Pieter and RobG? As I stated to Paul, it is not likely that we shall come to an agreement, so the next best thing is to move on.

    Now, you have spoken of your disdain for Independant fundamental Baptists who defend the King James Bible, but have you not heard Kent Hovind and his comments on this subject? He calls the NIV the Non Inspired Version and the RSV the Reviled Substandard Version and he actively promotes the King James Bible. That is his public statement on this subject. All of his seminars use the King James Bible for quotations and he has given his testimony on the other versions in his seminars. Ekkman believes that this is a very important issue as do I, yet for the sake of harmony, I am willing to let it go if it is done in a mutual fashion which is what the Bible would have us to do since we are not going to come to an agreement here.

    So, once again, I believe it is time to give this issue rest as both sides have already stated the same arguments over and over without resolution among us. If there is some evidence on either side that has not been put forth, then let it be put forth. If all the arguments have already been placed, then it is time, it is more than time to give it rest here at CSE so that we can all concentrate on much more important discussions on end times events and in defense of the gospel.

    In the love of Christ,

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/Slide29.html

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  59. EndTimes April 15, 2008 12:08 pm Reply

    Hubert

    Said this on April 15th, 2008 at 10:18am:

    Thanks Peter for trying to speak the truth in love. I hope people realize that is what you are trying to do. I enjoy your posts. Even though I have skimmed alot for lack of time. I believe God will take care of his elect but I am still trying to figure out where the “rapture” is according to scripture. I am trying to figure out the when in sequence of the seals and trumpets and bowels. I don’t have time to go into it. Will try later. Hubert

    Dear Hubert,

    You are taking on a very big area of study IF you follow the common teachings and disputations. On the other hand, it is actually a relatively simple study IF you read ONLY the Bible, and know and understand what it is speaking to you in Spirit and in Truth. Instead of going into a big discussion, let me give you the outline that I use myself to organize how the scriptures fit together. The most important thing is first to come before God in a spirit of prayer, and secondly, for Bible prophecy studies, I have looked at what the NIV and other texts state on important verses, and you will really need to stick to the KJV for these studies. There are many important clues that are changed or left out of the other texts.

    A) I start all of my end times Bible prophecy not with Daniel’s 70 weeks like many, but instead, I go all the way back to Leviticus chapter 23 and the seven feast days which are all prophetic of events that Jesus will fulfill literally in person. I have an outline of the OT prophecies and the NT fulfilments of these prophecies on my web page. I believe if you study out all of the scriptures listed on this outline, you will begin to be able to place events in the proper perspective, including the Rapture. Please let me know if you have any questions on this outline as you go into your study.

    The Shadow and the Fulness

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/Slide16.html

    B) Now, the difficulty with the Trumpets and where they all fit together with Matthew 24:31, I Thess 4:13-18, I Cor 15:51-52, and the seven trumpets of Revelation is to first understand the differences in the Rapture and the Second Coming. In such, the Trumpet of Matthew 24:31, is this the trumpet of the Rapture? No, this is when Jesus will come to gather Israel. How do I know this? Look first at Joel 2:31-32 where the sun is turned into darkness and the moon into blood just as we see in Matthew24:29, and THEN the trumpet sounds for the ELECT (Joel 2:32) Further, God will gather them by the four winds. Turn to Ezekiel 37:910 and you will see that the four winds are gathering Israel. Further, in Rev 7:1 we see the four winds once again being held until the 144,000 martyrs and evangelists from the 12 tribes of Israel are sealed. My point is to not mix Matthew 24:31 with the Rapture as do the pre-wrath or Rosenthal folks.

    C) The book of Revelation is actually written in a very straight forward and chronological manner which most commentators overlook. Yet, if we are to listen to Jesus Himself, He states that John was to write what he has seen, (The glorified Jesus before him in Chapter one), the things which are, (the seven churches of the church age in chapters two and three) and the things which shall be hereafter which starts with a rapture verse in Revelation 4:1. From this, the saints undergo judgement for their rewards or lack thereof in chapter 5(I wept much because no man was FOUND WORTHY), the seven seals starting the tribulation then commences in chapter 6 with the seventh seal opening the seven trumpets, which are further tied together chronologically by the three woes (I never hear of anyone talking about the three woes, but they tie this section together in a chronological order) with the seventh trumpet followed by the seven thunders which we are not told what they are followed by the seven vials which brings the tribulation to an end.

    Now, the other area that people confuse themselves with in the Revelation is failing to understand that the basic outline chronologically is the seven seals, the seven trumpets, the seven thunders and the seven vials while at the same time there is an ongoing commentary on several characters which have their own separate chronology. I like the analogy of a marathon race televised on the Olympics. In such, you have an ongoing chronology of the race itself but interspersed amongst the race are shots of the leaders at various points and commentaries on the background and history of the leaders of the race. We do not confuse the chronology of the race with the chronology of the leaders of the race. Yet, most commentators on the book of Revelation do confuse these two separate running commentaries. Thus, the two witnesses, the dragon, the woman with child, the beast from the sea, the beast from the earth and the woman atop the scarlet coloured beast are commentaries ADDED to the set chronology of the seven seals, the seven trumpets, the seven thunders and the seven vials. Once you are able to see the progression of the timeline of Revelation separated from the timeline of the individual characters, I do believe that much will fall into place with very little effort and you will now be doing exactly what Jesus stated would be your blessing back in Rev 1:3:

    “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.”

    This is the great “secret” of understanding the book of Revelation: simply read, hear and understand what is in the book alone. I hope that this gives you a framework for reading and believing what is written therein. I have another article on this very subject on my website that I believe is a must read for all those that have read dozens of prophecy books with so many “expert” opinions on what this book states, when in fact all that they have done is led to confusion and kept people from hearing what is therein. Yes, the book of Revelation is NOT the most complicated and difficult book in the Bible prophetically. I still puzzle greatly over parts of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah and most especially Amos and other books. On the other hand, there is so much of the Book of Revelation that has second witness testimony throughout giving literal explanations of what they are speaking of such as the “four winds” for instance, that I no longer believe that the Revelation is difficult to understand a majority of its text. Yes, there are parts left to the mystery of God which shall not be reveiled until the end of the seven vials, yet there is so much of it that is absolutely easy and openly known if you will only Keep that which is Written THEREIN. IN other words, the answers are in the text itself.

    May God Bless,

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  60. EndTimes April 15, 2008 12:23 pm Reply

    Dear Hubert,

    Sorry, I forgot to give the link on my chapter, The Faithful Witness, which gives the outline of the Book of Revelation as testified by Jesus, the Faithful Witness in Revelation chapter one. I believe that putting this together with the Shadow and the Fulness, the pattern of Bible prophecy will have a table, or a platter in an outline form on which you can begin to build the rest of your understanding, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little.

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/Slide06.html

    May God bless,

    Peter

    http://www.kjv1611revealed.com/.

  61. The Welders Wife April 15, 2008 5:51 pm Reply

    Peter,

    My pastor is a KJV er. I’ll use him as my example. He is also a student of Greek. If he feels the need to bring out the Greek meaning of something, he does. {And when he presents his sermon, it’s obvious to all of us who are in his assigned congregation, that he’s been in the presence of the LORD!}

    Likewise, if I feel that it is necessary to bring out the Hebrew meaning of something in the presentation of both Creation Science & the Gospel, I’m going to do so. As for my personal study Bible, I use the NKJV.

    And because I’m in a Jewish outreach, if I see an opportunity to present a Jewish explanation of something because it just might give somebody a better understanding of how to present the Gospel to Jewish people, or maybe provides some insight for somebody who is looking for an open door for taking the Creation Science message to them, I’m going to do it.

    I know that’s not the terms of your truce, but that’s my assignment from the LORD. I don’t have a truce with Him. He’s my Boss.

    Change of subject:
    I watch people’s hearts. When a person walks close to the LORD they have a Christ like attitude towards all things. When somebody is on their face before the LORD, He takes away the dross. You can’t be on your face before the LORD & have an attitude. When you are on your face before the LORD, His presence breaks you up into little pieces!

    When Moses came down from the mountain, his face reflected the glory of God. Apparently the further the span of time from being in God’s presence, the more the reflection of God’s glory faded from his face. Then when he went before the LORD, his face shone again. (Exodus 34 & 2 Cor 3:13)

    For more than a year now I’ve watched peoples’ hearts who blog on to this blog. I’ve seen quite a few hearts who reflect God’s glory & some that don’t. I’ve also seen warriors staggering around this blog like it’s a bloody battle field, who haven’t touched base with their CAPTAIN in a long time.

    I also watch you Peter, because you say that you are a man of prayer.

  62. bluemoose April 16, 2008 4:35 pm Reply

    WW-
    Even if I don’t necessarily agree, I love reading your posts. Keep it up!

  63. Sade Tennyson May 29, 2008 9:23 am Reply

    Brother Kent Hovind,

    There is no storm that our mighty Jesus can not calm.
    This storm is bound to pass over.
    I pray the Lord will continually grant you the grace to endure the storm.
    Jesus is with you in the storm, He has promised never to leave nor forsake you.
    Heb 13:5 Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.
    You are not forgotten in the storm. Man may forget you but Jesus Christ will never forget you.
    Know that few are still faithfully praying for you…
    The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you Brother.
    Nothing is too hard for our God Brother Kent. Jer 32:27 Behold, I am the LORD, the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?
    The strom will soon pass over in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

    Sade Tennyson

Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Social Widgets powered by AB-WebLog.com.