A Scripture Fable

A Scripture Fable: I was taught and for many years believed and taught to others the following….

The “sign gifts” such as apostles, prophets, prophecy, tongues, interpretation, healings, miracles, wisdom, knowledge, discerning of spirits etc all passed away when the scriptures were complete and have not been in operation among believers of the Body of Christ since that time. This false teaching is never stated in scripture but is deduced from I Cor.13:8-13 where it is falsely assumed that “that which is perfect” was the completion of the scriptures before the end of the first century A.D.  Scripture clearly teaches otherwise!  Therefore this is another false teaching of which I had to repent and reject even though many close friends disagree with me. This teaching divided me for far too long from saints who simply take God at His word and believe what the Bible says for itself.

Check out a blog post on this subject by clicking on the following link That which Is Perfect I Corinthians 13:8

41 comments on “A Scripture Fable

  1. Galen says:

    Funny, the very ones who want to be rid of apostles and prophets, exalt themselves as pastors and teachers, and want you and me to become evangelists who fill their elephant barns with passive tithe payers. If those gifted folk whom God gives to every church no longer exist, then who are these clerical stuffed shirts who want our money? Seriously, every congregation has many apostles, prophets, evangelist, shepherds and teachers whom the clergy and the theologians will not allow to do anything. “Come out of her, ye my people!”

    Like

    • Funny indeed, brother! Something else that I find funny (as in peculiar and not humorous) is that the scripture passage which is so often used to tell people that they ought to “go to church” is totally ignored when it specifically designates what is on God’s agenda for His people when they do assemble together! That agenda is clear in that passage (Hebrews 10:24,25)

      Like

  2. mcollings says:

    When you change titles to roles, this changes the way the body of Christ functions. But this is foreign to most believers and even when we leave denominational structures the wolves are still there. This title issue is something we must unlearn in order to understand how the body functions. Real humility, which is the quality of the servant, comes from the transformation of the person by Christ, not bible study and role playing.

    Like

  3. mike allen says:

    I would like to find out your and any other participant’s definition of “inspiration” and “revelation”

    mike a.

    Like

    • Hey Mike,
      Thanks for stopping by with an excellent question! I’m convinced that scripture is it’s own best dictionary and that how the Holy Spirit has used any word in all of it’s contexts is the best way to define any scriptural word. As I’m just accessing the internet at our local library, I won’t be able to answer this right now but will get back to you on this tomorrow in the will of the Lord.

      I’d encourage you and others to do a similar search with a Strong’s Concordance or any online Bible program which uses the Strong’s Concordance numbers to identify the original Hebrew or Greek words and then search them out throughout the Bible. Personally I have found that the most comprehensive single sentence statement in scripture which contains any Biblical word is most often an excellent scriptural summary of that particular doctrine.

      Try this out for yourself with “inspiration”, “inspired”, “reveal”, “revealed” and “revelation” etc!
      Let’s compare notes together and see what we can learn.

      Bruce

      Like

    • Mike,

      Hi Mike,
      You asked how I would define inspiration and revelation.

      First of all when we deal with scriptural subjects, I believe it is best to let scripture speak for itself. As I gathered together all scriptural references to “inspiration” or of “God breathing” (the Greek word THEOPNEUSTOS is translated “inspiration of God” and the Hebrew word NESHAWMAW is translated: “blast”, “breath”, “breatheth”, “inspiration”, “spirit” and “soul”.)
      I found that the most comprehensive single sentence statement of this subject in scripture is II Timothy 3:16,17 “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, (or “is God-breathed”) and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.”

      No claims like this can be made of any other human writing!

      Thus we see that all scripture is a message communicated by God to men by means of inspiration, i.e. God speaking His words to men who wrote it down for the benefit of other men. Peter describes God’s communication in this way in II Peter 1:21, “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”

      So we can say that the means by which God communicates a verbal or written message to men is by inspiration, that is the Holy Spirit moves holy men of God to speak and then write His message.

      Each such message from God to men is called a prophecy and thus the men through whom God communicates His message are called prophets.

      However, even when God’s message has been spoken or written in human language, it is not necessarily understood by men! Paul explains this in I Corinthians 2:10-14. “But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

      This is why revelation is necessary. Scripture consistently teaches that “revelation” always comes from God and that His revelation is absolutely essential if one is to understand God’s word. The words “revelation”, “reveal” or “revealed” are translated from the Greek words APOKALUPTO (the verb) to take off the cover- is translated: “reveal” and “revealed” and APOKALPSIS (the noun) disclosure – is translated: “appearing”, “coming”, “lighten”, “manifestation”, “be revealed”, and “revelation”
      Thus revelation is the “apocalypse”, “the uncovering”, “the disclosure”, “the manifestation” of something or someone which was previously covered, hidden, or not apparent. In scripture revelation is always an act of God whereby He uncovers or manifests to people something which was previously covered, hidden from or not apparent to their understanding.

      God is intensely interested in revealing, manifesting or making known His Son, the Lord Jesus in a variety of ways:
      (1) in the scriptures of which He is the central theme: In Luke 24:27 as the risen Lord spoke with the disciples on the road to Emmaus, we read, “And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.”
      (2) in His people: In Galatians 1:15 & 16 the apostle Paul writes of God’s purpose to reveal Christ in him, one who had formerly persecuted the Lord! “But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:”
      (3) in flaming fire: In II Thessalonians 1:3-10 the apostle Paul also writes of a future day in which the Lord Jesus will be fully revealed or manifested. (This passage of scripture, by the way, is the most comprehensive single sentence scriptural statement of the doctrine of revelation!… “We are bound to thank God always for you, brethren, as it is meet, because that your faith groweth exceedingly, and the charity of every one of you all toward each other aboundeth; so that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure: which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer: seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; and to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed (appear, be uncovered, be manifested) from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

      To summarize what I have learned…Inspiration is an act of God the purpose of which is communication with us. Revelation is also an act of God the purpose of which is to uncover, reveal or give us clear understanding of His communication.

      How does this compare with what you have learned about these two subjects?

      Bruce

      Like

  4. Clyde says:

    Thank you for your keen insights Bruce. I have always found that whenever I have questions or problems I can always turn to the words of scripture for guidance. The words were put there very specifically and interpret themselves for those who are willing to mine their depths.
    I appreciate your steadfastness in using the true word of God in an age when many others have abandoned it in favor of a more liberal and diluted text.

    Like

    • Clyde, I appreciate your comments and observations that “we can always turn to the words of scripture for guidance”. I do use and prefer the KJV over any other translation and think that it is likely the best translation we have. But I do not believe that inspiration extends to any translation of the scriptures. There were a number of unscriptural restrictions placed upon the KJV translators by the King , himself. As a result there are a number of unfortunate and misleading words. ideas and concepts communivated in the KJV which are contrary to God’s word. So I am not what many would call a “KJV only man”!

      That may disappoint you and may be applauded by others, but I do not seek the applause or acceptance of men.

      I trust we may all benefit by taking a fresh look at what scripture actually says!

      Your brother in Christ,
      Bruce

      Like

  5. Clyde says:

    I have no doubt that the Holy Spirit gave guidance beyond any restrictions placed by men. For it is He that gave guidance to their hands and placed each word in its exact spot despite any mere man’s rules.
    That is why we are able to test scripture by scripture itself, and not by our depraved culture or man made dictionaries. God’s wisdom is not man’s wisdom!

    No other translation shows a better representation of the original documents than the King James Version or stood the test of time like the King James Version!

    It is not just “likely” the best translation we have, all evidence shows that it IS the best translation that we have!

    There is no doubt that this shows both God’s divine hand in its heritage and his approval of its continued use.

    It is no accident that God has placed this truth within your very heart.
    If we are to be followers of God’s Holy Word, then let it only be the version that has his holy blessing and his divine fingerprint upon its pages!

    Hold strong to the faith brother.
    Clyde

    Like

    • Dear brother Clyde,

      You believe that God guided the choice of every translated word in the KJV, but I believe the evidence is to the contrary!

      Just two examples of many for your consideration:
      -Take the word “DIAKONOS” which is properly translated “servant” or “minister” as it is many times in the KJV. But because of King James’ restriction on the translators not to upset the apple cart of the traditions of the Church of England, they could not translate that word when ever it had to do with men perceived by the church as “holding office”! In all such instances the KJV translators were forbidden to actually translate the word and so they simply transliterated it and made “DEACON” out of the Greek “DIAKONOS”! Also in this connection, they had to insert the word “office” in a number of places when the Greek text gave no such word to translate! They were compelled to insert such words to maintain the Church of England “status quo”!

      I cannot blame such deceitful practices on divine guidance!

      -Take the word “baptize” in all its forms. This too is NOT a translation but a transliteration of the Greek word “BAPTIZO”. To actually translate the word (as the Dutch translators did in faithfulness to the text of the Greek text) the KJV translators would have translated the word “dip” or “place into”. But in order not to rock the C of E boat (which had long embraced the heresy of infant baptism) they were forbidden to translate the word! Also when ever they did encounter the word “baptizo” in all of its forms in the context of what we know as “baptism” today, they wrongly translated the preposition “EN” as “with” rather than “in”! The Church of England did not dip believers in water as scripture has always taught, but they rather sprinkled babies “with” water. Thus the KJV translation has wrongly taught that baptism is “with” water rather than “in” water.

      I could cite many more such examples but let these suffice for now. I trust these may give you reason to doubt your claim made above and to not any longer put your trust in a translation as if it were actually divinely inspired.

      A brother in Christ who values God’s truth too highly to be bound by a translation which is not inspired, Bruce

      Like

  6. Clyde says:

    It may supprise you to know that very learned men of God have already asked and answered these questions. I am supprised that you havent looked into this matter more fully since you seem quite adept at understanding words and finding the inner truth of their meenings. Do not let the devil decieve you!

    In any case the Holy Ghost has held you to using the inerrant recieved text. Even if you struggle with some of the words, your spirit is in line with the majority of christians who have used these texts and the sound doctrine that has flowed from them through the ages.

    A man who pickes and chooses which version he likes for each situation is on shaky ground indeed! I urge you to ground your faith in the truth, and it will set you free!
    I pray that you avoid the slippery slope of following corrupted texts that man has tainted to support their own twisted doctrines. And I pray that our heavenly Father may help you remove all doubt to trust in his inspired word.
    your brother
    Clyde.

    Like

    • Hi Clyde,
      I’m always willing to learn. If you can direct me to what “very learned men” have written on these specific subjects (i.e. the transliteration of the words “baptizo” and “diakonos” when the actual translations would have rocked the church of England’s boat ) I’d be most happy to read them.

      Have their answers satisfied you?

      I’ll look forward to reading such articles when you direct me to them.

      Also, re a claim that a certain translation is “the inspired word”, if you are right…what marks would clearly distinguish an inspired translation from one that was uninspired?

      A brother in Christ,
      Bruce

      Like

  7. Michael Curtis says:

    Why do you guys think that the kjv is best?
    Ive read it and found it difficult to understand. Is that the point?
    I actually know some people who pray in king james. I find it very pretentious and off-putting.
    My opinion is that people hide behind smart sounding talk so people wont question them. It comes across as condesending.

    Mike.

    Like

  8. Clyde says:

    Certainly Bruce.

    As well as a slew of well written websites that are easy to find all over the Internet, I could direct you to authors like; D A Waite, Edward Hills, Gail Riplinger, Jasper Ray, Ian Paisley, and many others.
    I pray that you do take the time to check these out, and I am pleased to see that you continue to use the King James in the meantime.

    Mike,
    It is not that we are trying to be pretentious, we just want to reflect the beauty and holiness of God’s sovereign Word in the way that he has prescribed it to us without diluting it with modern heresies.
    Clyde

    Like

    • Hi Clyde,
      As we do not have internet access at home and my time online is limited to an hour or so 5 days a week, I don’t have time for endless online searches. PLEASE, as I requested, would you direct me to specific articles on the subjects I mentioned? Would you also tell me if these articles have satisfied YOU with the answers they give?

      Looking forward to receiving the links requested.

      Your brother in Christ,
      Bruce

      Like

    • Larry says:

      Michael, There definitely are some archaic words in the KJV, this should not deter from using it. It is beautiful language and not difficult with a tiny bit of effort on the readers part. 2Tim. 2:15 says STUDY (not just read).
      .

      Clyde, I see from your list of authors that you have done some research into the KJV controversy. I would add Vance publications and The Revision Revised by Burgon,who was a contemporary of westcott & Hort. These 2 unbelieving air heads have done tremendous damage to the truth.
      For me it’s like this; If it’s not all truth,then it’s not truth at all. If it’s not all true then who am I going to depend on to tell me what parts to believe and which parts to ignore? Now having said that, here’s the rub, if you will.

      I used to think the difference between the 1611 and 1769 were printer errors, updating of spelling and punctuation. Consequently, I had no problem demanding “exact sameness” as my definition of inerrancy.
      However there are differences between the Oxford and Cambridge edition of the 1769 text. I didn’t like that but we must face the facts. My conclusion is this: inerrancy does not require “exact sameness” but that the words reflect the true meaning of the original.
      There are many places where Christ quotes from the OT but does not use the exact same language….please compare:
      Matt.2:18 – Jer.31:15
      Matt 22:31-32 – Exodus 3:6
      Matt 26:31 – Zech 13:7
      Mark 7:6 – Isa. 29:13
      Lk. 4:16-19 -Isa. 61:1,2
      Take any number. change the font size, write it in bold,or italics,scientific notation, binary, roman or whatever, it’s still the same number (has the exact same meaning)
      Modern versions err in that the words have been altered so drastically that their meaning is changed. (I might add, added or omitted) I could give a list but this is already too long.
      Of coarse the underlying text is a major issue and the main cause of all the perversions;
      Some of my reason with sticking to the KJV..
      No. 1 (and most important) IT WAS TRANSLATED FROM THE (CORRECT) PRESERVED TEXT
      2 it was translated using the correct methodology; literal equivalance
      3 it was translated by the most educated and qualified group of men ever assembled (believers, which W & H were not)
      4 it was translated with methodology that require checks and balances to ensure accuracy
      5 It was translated during the height of the English Renaissance by men who were products of the literary culture, who tried and tested every word to ensure the exact meaning.
      It saddens me that this is even an issue and I am fearful of where the church (which is His body) is going to end up when the truth simply becomes…..well my bible doesn’t say that….it says this and preachers who I’ve heard say “well that’s an unfortunate translation there”
      May His Spirit led us unto the truth which is Christ

      Like

      • Hi Larry,

        Re your reasons for sticking to the KJV, you wrote:
        “Some of my reason with sticking to the KJV..
        No. 1 (and most important) IT WAS TRANSLATED FROM THE (CORRECT) PRESERVED TEXT
        2 it was translated using the correct methodology; literal equivalance
        3 it was translated by the most educated and qualified group of men ever assembled (believers, which W & H were not)
        4 it was translated with methodology that require checks and balances to ensure accuracy
        5 It was translated during the height of the English Renaissance by men who were products of the literary culture, who tried and tested every word to ensure the exact meaning.”

        I would generally agree with you except on your numbers 4 and 5. There may well have been “checks and balances with the intent to insure accuracy, and these translators may have wished to test every word to ensure the exact meaning, but King James’ rule #3 for the translators undermined this!

        That rule bound them to “retain the old ecclesiastical words such as “church” and not to use “congregation”. It is these old ecclesiastical words such as “baptize”, “deacon”, “apostle”, “bishop”, “office” etc and “baptize with” rather than “dip in” which have introduced false and unscriptural concepts and teachings into the Biblical text of the KJV (most of which are still copied in even the newer translations today!!!!

        Your brother in Christ,
        Bruce

        Like

  9. Clyde says:

    Sorry that you don’t have much time for the Internet Bruce. In your case you would probably do better to stick to the authors that I mentioned. Since you are in a library that should make things a lot easier.

    And yes, I was convinced!
    These authors were able to confirm what we already know to be true.

    Like

    • Clyde,
      I have read a lot of material from some of the authors you mentioned and never found the specific questions I raised answered. If you know they did answer such please refer me to specific articles on specific sites or specific page numbers in the books. YOU claimed they addressed and answered such so please verify your own claim with specifics.

      Thanks, brother. Bruce

      Like

      • Clyde says:

        With only a few minutes of work I was able to find these sites for you. 
        http://www.kjvtoday.com/
        http://brandplucked.webs.com/thechurchandbishops.htm
        I hope that they will help stabilize your faith as you continue in your journey. 
        It is apparent that you have fallen into some common modern lies that are being used to try to discredit the KJV. Remember that Gods Word is not a wishy washy book full of lies and contradictions! When we entertain lesser, weaker versions we tend to become more like them. When we begin to doubt the Word of God, then our faith will begin to fall apart too. While these websites and other books may be helpful to you, there is actually only one book that you must agree with!

        Like

      • Hi Clyde,
        Thanks for directing me to 2 sites which partly addressed my questions. First, neither of them even mentions King James’ rules with which the translators had to comply, so they do not even address his rule number 3! Secondly they don’t address why the translators failed to translate the words “baptizo” or “deacon” but simply transliterated them when ever they are used in a “church” or “religious” context! The KJV translators DID translate these words elsewhere whenever they were not in a “church” or “religious ” context. So it is very evident that they were complying with King James’ restrictions upon them!

        The authors of both sites have a prior presupposition to maintain and defend at all costs, i.e. that the KJV is the preserved and inerrant Word of God (a claim BTW which scripture never makes!)

        You may have been satisfied with such articles (as you have the same presupposition to maintain), but they certainly did not satisfy or provide any reason for me to adopt the “KJV preserved and inerrant” stance.

        But thank you for bringing these sites to my attention.
        Your brother in Christ,
        Bruce

        Like

  10. Michael Curtis says:

    Hi guys,
    Why do you keep refering to the kjv as being the correct preserved text? Is it the original?
    Mike.

    Like

  11. Clyde says:

    My dear friend Michael,
    To put it quite simply, the King James Version was taken from the Textus Receptus, or the “recieved text”. Though the original manuscripts of the bible are gone, the Holy Spirit has preserved the true copies of the original through the ages and we have “recieved” the inerrant copy of the original “text”.
    therefore any other text that does not agree with the RT, we know to be a man made mix of lies that has been concocted to rationalize sin and promote ungodly agendas!
    The greatest gift that God has ever sent us is his Holy Scriptures and we dare not tamper with even the smallest stroke of the pen!
    Like it says in 2 timothy 2:15 we must study it dilligently and follow it completely if we hope to be saved. The hard work we put into understanding it now will certainly pay off in eternity.

    Clyde

    Like

    • Larry says:

      Clyde, I am in agreement with regard to the TR..
      I am concerned however with this statement:: The greatest gift that God has ever sent us is his Holy Scriptures. and this,, follow it completely if we hope to be saved. All Christianity (even those with whom we may have disagreements) would (i think) agree that following scripture completely is definitely NOT the way to salvation. (I cannot do that and I don’t believe you can either) God greatest gift is His offer of salvation to sinners through belief in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, Even the Westcott & Hort folks may be saved.. Larry

      Like

      • Clyde says:

        Larry, if we didn’t have the scriptures how could we know about Gods offer of salvation to sinners?  Your argument is illogical because quite simply the Holy Scriptures are essential to knowing about salvation in the first place.  Romans 10:14 – 17  says quite plainly,
        How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the WORD OF GOD.

        Like

    • Clyde,
      You wrote above, “Like it says in 2 timothy 2:15 we must study it dilligently and follow it completely if we hope to be saved. The hard work we put into understanding it now will certainly pay off in eternity.”

      What version are you reading here, brother??? Certainly NOT the KJV! Do you believe in works salvation?

      Bruce

      Like

      • Clyde says:

        most assuredly 2 tim 2:15 in the King James Version says
        Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a WORKman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
        And also James 2:17-18 in the King James Version says
        Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
        I trust that you understand that scriptures do not teach us not to work.

        Like

  12. Larry says:

    Bruce, I find “baptize with” only 2 places. Jn.1;26 & 33

    John answered saying, I dip in water…….
    33– he that sent me to dip in water ????

    I’m sticking with my original thought; If I can’t believe it all then I may as well burn it. And make God whatever my feeble mind wants Him to be. or rely on the educated elite to tell me what parts are His word and what is not. Which is simply a revised form of Gnosticism.
    It’s going to be very difficult to “dispel confusion” when no one is even sure they have Gods word.
    Larry

    Like

    • Larry,

      I didn’t mean simply the word “Baptize” but all of its forms, “baptized”, “baptism”, “baptizing” etc. Also if you have a Septuagint you can check all the places in the OT where the same word is used and also its Hebrew equivalents which are translated “dip”, “dipped”, “plunge” etc.

      By the way, “dipping” was exactly what John was doing with those who came to him to be “baptized”!

      Bruce

      Like

  13. Michael Curtis says:

    Why do you say that the Holy Spirit only preserved the TR? Is there some evidence for this? Is it possible that some other text was preserved?

    Like

  14. Clyde, Larry, Michael,

    Recent discussions here have gotten entirely off topic for the page where they have been posted. (i.e. A discussion of the KJV has “taken over” from the original intent of the page “A Scripture Fable”) That is not the purpose of this blog so I would encourage you to continue these discussions on another forum such as personal emails. I realize that you do not have each other’s email addresses but with your permission, I will share those with the ones who wish to continue the discussion. Just email me at bwood4d@gmail.com to indicate your willingness to share your e address with the others and I will provide it to those who wish to continue that discussion.

    Please be advised that any further discussions of the KJV controversy will be deleted from this blog.

    Like

  15. Larry says:

    Hey Bruce yer right sorry

    Like

    • Thanks Larry! Just don’t want to get sidetracked down rabbit trails which lead away from the subject matter the blog addresses, even though there certainly is merit in discussing other sibjects.

      Like

  16. Clyde says:

    I see that you haven’t taken down this KJV thread yet Bruce.
    Is it because the minority text does represent a scripture fable?

    Like

    • Hi Clyde,

      There is no “KJV thread” here. The page this discussion is on has to do with the fable that “The “sign gifts” such as apostles, prophets, prophecy, tongues, interpretation, healings, miracles, wisdom, knowledge, discerning of spirits etc all passed away when the scriptures were complete and have not been in operation among believers of the Body of Christ since that time.” The KJV discussion was a sidetrack from that subject and that’s why I stopped it. This whole blog is about fables which are taught which profess to be scriptural doctrines but which are not taught in scripture. I don’t think anyone claims that scripture names and designates a particular family of manuscripts as the divinely preserved text. Certainly discussions re translations and the transmission of God’s Word are needed and many want to discuss them, they simply do not fall within the parameters of the stated purpose of this blog.

      I am concerned here with bringing into the light fables which have been presented as sound scriptural teaching but which cannot be stated in the pure words of God (Ps.12:6); cannot be stated apart from words additional to the pure words of God (Prov.30:5,6)and which cannot be stated in words which the Holy Spirit teaches but must be stated in words which man’s wisdom teaches.(I Cor.2:13)

      I hope this answers your question.
      Bruce

      Like

  17. Desmond says:

    It looks like what Bruce is trying to say is that this thread is for discussing the errors and heresy of cessationism and the importance of prooftexting combined with pneumatology.

    Like

  18. Michael curtis says:

    Hey guys, I still have a lot of questions about the facts surrounding the KJV. Could you give your email addresses to Bruce to pass on to me so that I could get your help finding some of these answers? Bruce was able to help me with some opinions but if there is anyone else that could help I think we both would really appreciate it.

    Like

  19. Michael curtis says:

    These guys really led me on a bunch of wild goose chases and they eventually admitted to knowing nothing about any facts. None of their “research” had any historical validity and they really only use the KJV because they believe people won’t really understand what it says.

    I am extremely disappointed!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s