Place your banner ad here.           See all banner ads

...ConcernedMembers.com ...About ...Links Library ...Sunday School in Exile ...Help Warn Others

Where is my NewThisWeek Email subscription?......Click Here

Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

Respond to this messageReturn to Index
Original Message
  • Re: Back to basics
    • ConcernedMembers
      Posted Jan 14, 2004 8:54 AM

      It's important not to just repeat something from someone trying to sell you their wares. The publishers of the modern versions will tell you anything. Study of this subject is neccessary to understand the ccusations against the King James Are False.

      Baptism was the correct translation, as indicated in the link below;


      "The first of these decisive factors is that every Bible written in English from that of John Wycliffe's version,(56) the very first English Bible (c. 1384),(57) to that of the Rheims New Testament,(58) the Roman Catholic version of the English New Testament and the last English Bible to be produced prior to the King James Version (1582), all use either the exact words "baptism" and "to baptize" or their contemporary equivalents in their texts.
      What did the users of these Bibles take these words to mean?
      The study of the baptismal mode in England indicated that they all understood them to mean "immersion" and "to immerse."

      This web site will give you the study history on the word baptism;
      http://www.llano.net/baptist/baptisminkjv.htm
    Login Status
  • You are not logged in
    • Login
      Password
       

      Optional
      Provides additional benefits such as notifications, signatures, and user authentication.


      Create Account
    Your Name
    Message Title
    Message Text
    Options
    Enable formatted text (what's this?)
     
    Notice: This is a moderated forum. Your post will not show up until a moderator approves the message. If you regularly have full posting privileges, you may have to login first.