It needs to be remembered that when you reduce the Bible to nothing more than a book of error, all your religious claims (which are based on that Bible)Message 1 of 1 , Oct 5, 2009View Source"It needs to be remembered that when you reduce the Bible to nothing more than a book of error, all your religious claims (which are based on that Bible) become nothing more than error."
I gave him the KJV, and all he could say was that most scholars say that it is the worst translation. Well...I wouldn't say "most scholars" say that. I would say that "all liberal scholars" or those who don't care anything about Bible authority or inspiration say that, but then they fit right in along with the atheist/agnostic and the skeptic. I guess this is where this person fits.
Oh, but wait, this person has the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. My question is "How does he know he has the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?" He has been asked for proof a number of times and he has failed to give proof. He says his gifts are "non-miraculous" so he can't be expected to give any proof there. So where is his proof? Oh, the Bible says he does! Where does the Bible talk about the Baptism of the Holy Spirit? In the book of Acts! But Luke, who was an uninspired writer (according to this person) wrote the Book of Acts, thereby (according to this person) making the Book of Acts a non-inspired book. So once again I ask for his proof: Where is his proof for his Baptism of the Holy Spirit? I think his baptism of the Holy Spirit is like the missing link.
In Christ Jesus
Let's put McDonald to the test. OK Jerry, where is it. I want to see it.
Okay, we have to take a trip through textual criticism, is this person prepared for that?
1. Textual criticism involves looking at the manuscripts to see what they have to say.
2. Textual criticism involves looking at the ancient versions to see what they have to say.
3. Textual criticism involves looking at the writings of the early church Fathers to see what they have to say.
4. Textual criticism involves looking at the writings of those closest to those who wrote the originals.
5. Textual criticism involves taking all of these things into consideration to see what the scriptures say on variant passages.
The King James Version is the most accurate translation that we have. Where we have problems with the text, we look at textual criticism to solve them. The perfect Bible is the KJV along with textual criticism for any problems that we may find in it. However, the only problems you will find in it will be small and insignificant problems.
In Christ Jesus
--- End forwarded message ---
Below is Jerry's answer. OK Jerry, now that's been done--where is your "perfect" Bible. Or is it still "work in progress" with no perfect Bible yet?
Jerry's problem is that humans don't agree on after they have done all these things. So, who should men listen to for this "perfection." You guessed it---JERRY. Or maybe he's saying we should listen to CoC so called "preachers." Wait a minute--they don't agree either. I guess that does indeed leave just Jerry.
There you have it. Jerry McDonald cannot produce his "perfect" Bible. He tells us how he thinks it should be produced but not the Bible. His method of producing the "perfect" Bible is what has been done to create the many versions we see today--which do not agree.
Jerry goes on to say that the KJV is the best version we have today. Most scholars will tell you that the KJV is one of the worst versions of the Bible so there we have disagreement and imperfection already.
I was ready and willing to look at Jerry's "perfect" Bible. I stood ready to test his spirit and his claim.. However, he can't place this Bible in my hand. He can't give me a link to look it up. He can't tell me where it is.
Jerry McDonald's perfect Bible is like evolution's missing link--it hides.
When you actually find a copy--let me know
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]