Replies

>>Sorry if I touched a nerve.<<

A nerve? You had me laughing. The snide remark about “Obviously, the KJV of the Bible would downplay that” was so incredibly wrong.

>>As I said, we also believe the Holy Spirit comes to all of us, but to the Apostles and their successors in a special way.<<

Well, you can disagree with the Holy Spirit speaking through Peter all you want.

Acts 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them All the rest of those verses you listed do NOTHING to change what Peter said in Acts 15:8.

>>We follow Scripture very closely<<

Now there is a statement that has been proven false innumerable times in these threads.

>>Are you denying that parts were deleted from the original Scripture text to form the King James bible?<<

Oh here we go with the apocrypha again. Let’s just let Paul explain what was in the Old Testament as scripture.

"Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2 Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God," (Rom. 3:1-2).

Guess what. NO apocrypha included. Not to mention even the many of the RCC church fathers didn’t recognize it as scripture. Jerome didn’t even translate it into Latin believed that the Jews recognized and established the proper canon of the Old Testament.

>>Peter said that sentence in reference to the Gentiles.<<

Um dude. We are all Gentiles. You surely aren’t suggesting the so called “magesterium” are the only Gentiles are you?

>>As I stated before: the Spirit comes to all of us in different ways.<<

Ok, you’re going to have to furnish scripture to prove that one.

>>The gifts of the Spirit are unique to each of us, as we know.<<

Now that’s a different subject. The gifts are different to each but not the Holy Spirit given to each. Again:

Acts 15:8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them >> In Acts 1:20 we see the office of leadership passed on.<<

No way does Acts 1:20 establish Apostolic succession other than replacing a lost episcope. An overseer or it could be the office of bishop or elder. No apostolic succession.

>> If you choose to read a version that some earthly King or disgruntled Priest or Billy Bob slashed parts out of, that’s your choice.<<

Nice try but the “original” as Paul explained in Romans was set by the Jews and proclaimed by Jesus and the apostles and had no apocrypha.

>>I would assert we love it most because we believe it as the Spirit inspired it to be written and we don’t presume to alter it in any way.<<

The RCC alread “altered” it by adding the apocrypha to what the Jews had already established as the Old Testament canon. Don’t deny what Paul said.