New video teaching by Bible believing Brother Will Kinney

[Biblebeliever]

Okay, now where are those words today???

Everywhere

They are proclaimed from pulpits, shared on the streets, shown with actions, printed on T-shirts, printed in Bibles ...

God's words are found in the King James Authorized Bible.

God's words do not contradict each other.

My old self has been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me. So I live in this earthly body by trusting in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
Galatians 2:20

If we are daily walking and living by faith in Christ then most of our actions, words, and deeds proclaim God's Word! AMEN! We represent Christ.

So we are Christ's ambassadors; God is making his appeal through us. We speak for Christ when we plead, "Come back to God!"
2 Corinthians 5:20

God spoke to men of old. These men wrote things down and today we have a copy. We speak English, our copy is a translation. Some men wrote letters, like Paul, and those letters were saved. We know God spoke to him, just like the prophets.

Above all, you must realize that no prophecy in Scripture ever came from the prophet’s own understanding, or from human initiative. No, those prophets were moved by the Holy Spirit, and they spoke from God.
2 Peter 1:20-21

Note what I underlined in 2 Peter 1:19, "Because of that experience, we have even greater confidence in the message proclaimed by the prophets. You must pay close attention to what they wrote, for their words are like a lamp shining in a dark place—until the Day dawns, and Christ the Morning Star shines in your hearts."

It says what THEY wrote.

I believe the Bible is God's Word, but it is God's word written down and shared by Holy Men of Old. THEY wrote down what God moved them to write. These words are needed, important, Holy, and from God ... BUT ... they are also words shared by MEN.

Tim, which Bible do you believe is God's written word?

So - I might be wrong. But, perhaps we put too much emphasis on the Bible and the idea of WORD for WORD dictation from GOD. I believe it is Dynamic Inspiration more than anything. This idea allows for wiggle room, translations, slight variations ... and honestly, this can be seen today when two preachers preach a sermon, slightly different, but the same message is shared. We must focus on THE GOD NEWS and not the physical words. Both are important, but one is much more important and powers perhaps the other.

Tim, there should not be any room for wiggle room. And while we should focus on the Glad Tidings and the Good News of the Gospel. We also need to focus on the words of Almighty God. FOr He promised to preserve them (Psa. 12:6-7).

 

[Biblebeliever]

It doesn't. You are defending Kinney and you don't even have knowledge of him. He is a MEMBER of a church he refuses to attend. What kind of absurd and twisted rationale is that? Why does a person judge the rest of us as denying authority, when he is in fact doing that himself?

Here is the thing Admin, brother Will Kinney does submit to Authority. He submits to the Authority of the written word of God (King James Bible).

And while brother Kinney is not perfect, just like you and I are not perfect. At least he and I believe God kept His promise to preserve His words, and at least we want to submit to the Final Authority of the word of God.

The KJVO is smug. He/she will prattle on about the importance of "authority," and many of the most prolific KJVOs on forums today deny the most basic of authority!

Admin, the "originals only" crowd; the Alexandrian heretical group is smug.

The Authority is God's word. We King James Bible believers submit to Final Authority.

 

[Biblebeliever]

Wow! Really?! You are asking this? I will let Ransom answer. I am dumbfounded that this is even a question.

However, you are certainly not alone. We have other apostates who believe in KJVOism who frequented this forum.

Admin, the apostates who frequent this forum are those who reject the Absolute Authority of the King James Holy Bible.

 

[subllibrm]

God perfectly preserved His word for the world. It just took Him 1600 or so years to find the right guys to do it for HIm.  :

 

[Ransom]

Admin, the apostates who frequent this forum are those who reject the Absolute Authority of the King James Holy Bible.

Accepting the "Absolute Authority of the King James Holy Bible," or the "King James Authorized Bible," or the "King James Super-Duper Cool Bible," or whatever superlatives we're supposed to call it today, was never part of the faith to begin with. You cannot apostasize from a faith that was never delivered to the saints.

If you can't get Christianity 101 right, there's no reason for us to take you seriously. When you get that, you'll be much happier, and righteously mocked much less frequently.

 

[subllibrm]

Admin, the apostates who frequent this forum are those who reject the Absolute Authority of the King James Holy Bible.

Accepting the "Absolute Authority of the King James Holy Bible," or the "King James Authorized Bible," or the "King James Super-Duper Cool Bible," or whatever superlatives we're supposed to call it today, was never part of the faith to begin with. You cannot apostasize from a faith that was never delivered to the saints.

If you can't get Christianity 101 right, there's no reason for us to take you seriously. When you get that, you'll be much happier, and righteously mocked much less frequently.

Can you imagine all the potential apostates before 1611 who missed the chance to depart the faith because the KJV didn't exist yet. Wow, they dodged a bullet!    8)

 

[Biblebeliever]

Biblebeliever, are you a member of a church and do you seek to minister in a church?

I do not attend a "church building." But I am a member of the one true Church; the Body of Christ ( 1 Cor. 12:27).

 

[Ransom]

do not attend a "church building."

Well, knock me over with a feather. Who guessed that Bibleburner was yet another morally superior KJV-only zealot who doesn't want to mingle with the smelly Christians in a church? I mean, apart from everyone?

KJV-onlyists . . . obsessed with "defending" infallible Scripture they can't be bothered to obey themselves.

Hypocrite!

 

[Biblebeliever]

It's not "clear" at all. What a silly thing to say.

The context is very clear. Paul is writing to Hebrews in the time of Jacob's trouble.

The Law of Moses is even mentioned in the passage of Hebrews 10.

"Brothers"? Are unbelieving Jews in the future the brethren of the Christian author of this book?  Do unbelieving Jews have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus? Is he their great priest? Can they, in their unbelief, have full assurance of faith? Is their heart sprinkled clean from an evil conscience?

By no means!

Scott, I think your missing something. Do I need to remind you that Paul refers to unsaved Jews as his brethren in Romans 9:3?

Romans 9:3-5

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4 who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 5 whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

Therefore, Paul is writing to the Hebrews (his brethren according to the flesh) in the time of Jacob's trouble.

One other thing Scott, there are NO Christians in the time of Jacob's trouble. The Body of Christ is not appointed to the wrath of God (1 Thess. 1:9-10). Therefore, the body of Christ is not going to be in the time of Jacob's trouble.

Again Scott, Paul is not writing to the Body of Christ in the book of Hebrews, he is writing to Jews in the time of Jacob's trouble (Daniel's 70th week). You need to get yourself a King James Bible and start studying it.

Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful.

N.B.: "our" hope. Christians and unbelievers do not share the same hope, the promise of resurrection and eternal life. Christ made no such promise to unbelievers, Jewish or otherwise.

You are not quoting from the right Bible. Here is what God's true word says in Hebrews 10:23:


Hebrews 10:23

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised


Now why does Paul say let us hold fast the profession of our faith? Well again; keep what you are reading in context. The context is Jews in the tribulation period. A Jew will have to hold fast his profession of faith by keeping the commandments of God. For a Jew to be made a partaker of Christ and to gain entrance into the Millennial Kingdom, that Jew must hold out faithful unto the end(Matt. 24:13 7 Mk. 13:13), and he does that by not taking the mark of the beast.

Notice Paul also says "without wavering." Why must a Jew not waver? Well because the security of his salvation and profession of faith are at stake! If a Jew in the time of Jacob's trouble wavers and ends up taking the mark of the beast, it will cost him everything, including his salvation. You see, a Tribulation saint can lose their salvation if they do not endure unto the end. Salvation in the time of Jacob's trouble is by Faith AND Works (James 2:14-26).

The letter to the Hebrews was not written to futuristic Jews. They have no hope in Christ. It was written to Hebrews who had placed their faith in the work of Christ their Messiah, who were undergoing persecution in the here and now, and needed the encouragement of this letter to stay strong in the faith.

Well Hebrews does have an historical application. And the historical application of Hebrews is where Paul is seeking to convince both lost and saved Jews that Jesus Christ's atoning death established the New Covenant and that the New Covenant is superior to the Old Covenant of the Mosaic Law.

But as far as who Hebrews is written to Doctrinally, it is definitely Hebrews in the time of Jacob's trouble where Israel will once again be the object of God's main dealings.

It comes in the immediate next verse:

And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.

The Hebrew Christians of the first century could be confident of their ability to enter the holy places, since he had made a way for them through the shedding of his blood, since they had a superior high priest who interceded for them before their heavenly Father, since they had been washed clean of their sins, since they could hold to their confession of the faith. Therefore,  the author instructs them to do two further things:

First, to encourage one another to meet together. He also instructs them not to follow the habit of those who had given up assembling with their fellow Christians. In light of the present persecution they were experiencing, and in light of the pending Day of the Lord, it was all the more important for them to gather, to pray for one another, and to encourage one another to stay strong. In fact this is a pattern we see frequently in the book of Acts: in the earliest days of the church, when they felt the persecution of the Jewish leaders, the Hebrew Christians gathered together and prayed, even as the apostles were being led of to jail or even death.

Second, he tells them to encourage one another to love and good works. Paul speaks more at length about spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians, where he teaches that they are to be exercised in the body, that is, the visible church. An amputated limb cannot function without the body, and a schismatic "Christian" cannot serve God effectively without the church.

Bibleburner, you can try to tell us that this is not a teaching of Jesus, but by doing so all you prove is your own unbelief, by denigrating the integrity of Scripture. The book of Hebrews, if not written by Paul himself, was written by one of his close associates; the theology is unmistakeably Pauline. Paul was one of Jesus' hand-picked messengers to spread the gospel after his ascension. Those who write the Scripture, therefore, have the Christ-given authority to instruct the church as well as to interpret Jesus' own teachings. Moreover, all Scripture is God-breathed and its authors pen the very words of God as given to them by the Holy Spirit (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:20-21). Therefore, to say that Jesus' teaching is authoritative, but the author of Hebrews' is not, is to pit Christ against his own Holy Spirit. Again, this is a denigration of the unity of the Godhead, and a symptom of rank unbelief.

Once again Scott, that verse you quoted is Doctrinally pointed at Jews in the time of Jacob's trouble.

In the tribulation period, Jews will need to assemble together and they will need to provoke one another to good works as they see the Day (Second Coming of Jesus Christ) approaching.

Again; Doctrinally, Hebrews is written do Jews in the time of Jacob's trouble (Daniel's 70th week). It is not written to Christians today.

There are no Christians in the time of Jacob's trouble. You need to get the Dispensations right.

Having said that; there are still spiritual truths which we can apply for instruction in righteousness for us today in the Church Age. But Doctrinally, Hebrews is written to Hebrews. And not the Body of Christ.

The Body of Christ will be in Heaven during the time of Jacob's trouble.

 

[Ransom]

The context is very clear. Paul is writing to Hebrews in the time of Jacob's trouble.

The "context" says no such thing, and is therefore not clear. Hence the entire remainder of your post is completely irrelevant.

Boy, you really wasted your time on that.

You are oblivious, apostate, and incapable of understanding Scripture.  Please explain why any of us should give a rip what you claim?

 

[Biblebeliever]

I suggest you watch both of these videos Scott.

They both refute your reasoning as well as Admin's.

Are House Church Christians Violating Hebrews 10:25? Part 1

Are House Church Christians Violating Hebrews 10:25? Part 1


Are House Church Christians Violating Hebrews 10:25? Part 2
Are House Church Christians Violating Hebrews 10:25? Part 2

 

[Ransom]

I suggest you watch both of these videos Scott.

They both refute your reasoning as well as Admin's.

Why? I can fight my own battles; why can't you?

I know what you think "refute" means. I'm not going to watch some crank say "is too!" a lot.

 

[logos1560]

The Authority is God's word. We King James Bible believers submit to Final Authority.

The authority for God's Word existed before 1611 so it is not the 1611 edition of the KJV with its known, proven errors. 

By definition, the final or ultimate authority is independent of and above all other authorities. By definition, the final authority is the first and foremost authority, before and above all others and beyond which there is no other.  The final authority has primacy, pre-eminence, predominance, and power over all other authorities.  The final authority for the Scriptures had to have existed before 1611.  The final authority is not dependent on anything else for its text and authority.  The true ramifications of a proper definition of final authority and of a translation conflict with the KJV-only claim that a translation in 1611 can be the final authority.   Since the final authority for the Scriptures on earth existed before 1611, what was that authority in pure, perfect, inerrant, tangible form that could be used for the making of secondary or lesser authorities such as translations?  The translation cannot give power, authority, credence, or inspiration to its underlying sources or texts.  The derived nature of a translation does not permit it to be an independent, final authority, superior to its sources.  The inherent nature and qualities of a translation after A. D. 100 cannot be greater than the inherent nature of  the texts from which it was translated or the earlier translations of which it was a revision.  If an inherent quality is supposedly absent from the underlying original language texts, how can it be present in a translation of those texts?  The underlying texts or sources must have greater authority than the translation since that translation is derived from those texts and acquires its authority from them.  A translation must be built on its foundation [the texts from which it was translated] and should not be separated from it.  A translation rests on the foundation of its underlying texts, and not the foundation on the translation.  The words of a translation built on and made from the preserved Scriptures in the original languages is not more fixed and solid than their underlying foundation.  A translation may be and should be representative of its underlying texts, but it cannot have greater authority than them or be superior to them.  By virtue of its origin as a translation by men that were not directly inspired of God and that did not receive direct revelation or Scriptures by direct inspiration, it is clear that such a translation cannot be correctly regarded to be the final authority beyond which there is no other.  By the proper standard of the greater authority of the original language words, the derived authority of a translation will be justified.  From the rules or laws of good and necessary consequence and of non-contradiction and from the correct and true sense of the terms “translation” and “final authority,“ it can be correctly deduced and understood that a translation is not the final authority beyond which there is no other.  Translations of something must all alike be compared to that something. 

    A fundamental fallacy in the KJV-only view is the assumption that a lower, lesser, dependent, or secondary authority (a translation) can act as the final authority over a higher or greater primary authority (God's preserved Word in the original languages).  The backwards reasoning of the KJV-only view denies the greater authority of the antecedent sources while it tries to assert the authority of the consequent translation.  The extent of authority claimed for the KJV usurps for it a superior or greater appointment and designation than for its underlying original language texts.  The KJV-only view reverses the proper order of authority when it implies that a translation printed in 1611 is greater in authority than its underlying, antecedent original languages texts.  This reversal is clearly evident in the fact that no meaning is permitted to be understood from the preserved words in the original languages that is not in effect sanctioned by the interpretation of the actual secondary authority [the KJV].  If KJV-only advocates actually begin with the preserved Scriptures in the original languages as the proper and greater authority before 1611 and before coming to its translation into various languages, the KJV-only view’s claim that a translation (the KJV) should now be considered the final authority is denied in the very process.  The Bible does not teach that the Scriptures that God gave in the original languages by inspiration to the prophets and apostles will be nullified and replaced by a subsequent translation in 1611.  It is God who chose and determined in which languages He would give the Scriptures by inspiration to the prophets and apostles.  Thus, it was God who established the source of authority from which translations were to be made.  It is the greater authority of the preserved Scriptures in the original languages that grants, substantiates, or establishes the proper derived authority of a translation.  God never ordained the irrational, incoherent, ludicrous, or contradictory idea of a supposed absolute infallible translation that does not need to conform to the sources from which it was translated.   According to the law of non-contradiction, would a translation need to be compared to and evaluated by its underlying texts from which it was translated and from which it derives its authority or would a translation need to be made irrationally into an independent and final authority?     

If KJV-only advocates have submitted themselves properly to the authority of the Scriptures, why do they reject scriptural truths in order to cling to the fallacies, unjust divers measures, and opinions of men evident in KJV-onlyism and why do they avoid presenting any positive, consistent, sound, scriptural case for their KJV-only claims?

 

[Biblebeliever]

Accepting the "Absolute Authority of the King James Holy Bible," or the "King James Authorized Bible," or the "King James Super-Duper Cool Bible," or whatever superlatives we're supposed to call it today, was never part of the faith to begin with. You cannot apostasize from a faith that was never delivered to the saints.

Let me ask you Scott, what was the faith which was once delivered to the saints???

Doesn't faith come by hearing and hearing by the word of God?? (See Rom. 10:17).

The word of God back in the early centuries could be found in the Old Latin Bibles as well as the Waldensian Bibles.

And today; the word of God is the King James Holy Bible. Therefore; when one starts to reject the word of God and its Absolute Authority, he becomes an apostate.

If you can't get Christianity 101 right,

The Core Doctrines and Beliefs concerning the Christian Faith are found in the word of God. We are to get our Doctrine from the word of God. Period.

 

[Biblebeliever]

The "context" says no such thing, and is therefore not clear. Hence the entire remainder of your post is completely irrelevant.

Yes it does Scott. You simply cannot discern the dispensational distinction that is given in the Scriptures concerning the book of Hebrews. You need to rightly divide the word of truth.

In Hebrews 3, we are told that for one to become a partaker of Christ, he must hold fast his confidence and hope firm unto the end.

Why? Because in the time of Jacob's trouble, salvation will be by faith AND works. A tribulation saint must hold out faithful unto the end by not taking the mark of the beast.

Today in the Church Age though; for a person to become a partaker of Jesus Christ, all one has to do is be saved. (See 1 Cor. 12:13, 27; and Eph. 5:30).

At the very moment of conversion, that man is baptized into the Body of Christ by the Holy Ghost (1 Cor. 12:13). And he is sealed unto the day of redemption (Eph. 4:30).

You see; today in the Church Age, there are no works involved for our salvation. It is simply by Grace through Faith WITHOUT ANY WORKS (See Eph. 2:8-10, Rom. 4:4-7, and Titus 3:5).

The Gospel we preach today is the Gospel of the Grace of God.

And the Gospel which will be preached in the time of Jacob's trouble will be the Gospel of the Kingdom (See Matt. 24:14). The Gospel of the Kingdom is a Gospel of Endurance.You need to get the differences.

You are oblivious, apostate, and incapable of understanding Scripture.  Please explain why any of us should give a rip what you claim?

No Scott, I am not an apostate. I believe what I profess to believe.

I say that I believe that the Holy Bible is the perfect, pure, inerrant and infallible word of God.

And I absolutely do believe that.

You see Scott, an apostate is one who abandons a position, or professtion to which he before adhered to.

Also I do understand a lot of the Scripures, and that is by the grace of God. The Holy Spirit is the one who teaches me.

And in regard to your question about what I claim. It is rather simple Scott. If what I show you lines up with the teaching of the Scriptures, and you still decide to reject it, then shame on you.

What I showed you regarding Hebrews 3 is a Scriptural truth. The Holy Scriptures do have natural divisions in it; and that is why we are commanded to rightly divide them as we study them (See 2 Tim. 2:15).

You need to acknowledge these important dispensational truths from the Scriptures which I showed you concerning Hebrews and the time of Jacob's trouble.

 

[Ransom]

Let me ask you Scott, what was the faith which was once delivered to the saints???

The content of the teaching of the Christ, Moses, the prophets, the apostles, etc.

Doesn't faith come by hearing and hearing by the word of God?? (See Rom. 10:17).

Jesus, save us from idiots who blather nonsense in your name.

Why are you KJV fools too stupid to tell the difference between "the word of God" and "the KJV alone"? 

And today; the word of God is the King James Holy Bible.

You forgot the word "exclusively." That's wrong, but at least it is expressing your fool opinion honestly.

 

[Ransom]

Yes it does Scott.

You moron. Did it take you nearly a month away from this forum to come back with the same, inane "Is too!" arguments you always vomit out?

 

[Biblebeliever]

Are you a member of a church with a pastor(s)/deacon(s). Do they celebrate the Lord's Supper and practice believer's immersion? Are you also involved in the ministry of that church?

I am a member of the Church (the Body of Christ).

But at this time; I do not attend a "church building" because many of them these days are apostate. It's all about money and politics. In fact; many of the so called "churches" in America today are 501c3 corporations, so it's no wonder that so many of them are corrupt and apostate. And there is an abundant number of hirelings and false prophets which all they care about is their 501c3 babel buildings.

I listen to Bible believing preachers. I plug into online ministries mainly because thats where you have to go these days to find real Bible preaching.

I look on Sermon Audio and listen to King James Bible believing preachers on there such as Reg Kelly,  Lester Roloff, Gregory Miller, Bryan Denlinger,  David Peacock,  Richard Sowell, and Peter S. Ruckman. I also access a lot of these faithful Bible preachers on YouTube as well. So I do listen to Bible preaching and teaching on a regular basis.

And concerning the ministry; I am regularly involved in the ministry of reconciliation. I am involved in it through Tracting,  Door to Door, Gospel Signs, and supporting Foreign Missions.

 

[Ransom]

Are you a member of a church with a pastor(s)/deacon(s). Do they celebrate the Lord's Supper and practice believer's immersion? Are you also involved in the ministry of that church?

I am a member of the Church (the Body of Christ).

You knew what admin meant. Why can't you be honest and just answer "no"?

But at this time; I do not attend a "church building" because many of them these days are apostate.

Please tell us what steps you have taken to find one that was not apostate. How many churches in your area did you visit? Did you consider moving? Etc.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Biblebeliever]And concerning the ministry; I am regularly involved in the ministry of reconciliation. I am involved in it through Tracting,  Door to Door, Gospel Signs, and supporting Foreign Missions.[/quote]

:-X

(Full Disclosure: The church my family and I attend is a group of us meeting together on a bi-weekly basis for a potluck dinner, bible study, prayer, and a sense of community. We are accountable to each other and minister to one another spiritually, emotionally, and financially while actively encourage each individual to search for opportunities outside the gathering to do the same.)