[geocentrism] Re: Plenum and firmament
- From: "Cheryl B." <c.battles@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:35:48 -0500
Philip -- You said: "Whats with the KJV Is God then an Englishman....Gods
chosen people! Are all the other countries pagan if they do not conform to
King James of England?"
God is not an Englishman, but He certainly does care about His Word, that it
be preserved. He used the early church (if you want to call it Catholic) to
preserve the Canon and He used the England's King James and the genius
linguists of that time who were "appointed for such a time as this" (as in
the book of Esther) -- to preserve the translation.
As you know, there are many, many manuscripts, many "books" -- not all of
these are scripture. Part of God's "divine intervention in the affairs of
man" was first and foremost to preserve His Word. Just as God chose to
interact with mankind at a certain time and place (in Rome 2000 years ago),
so did He choose the times and places to preserve his Word.
At the time of the translation of the Bible, the printing press had just
been invented (how convenient) and William Tyndale had succeeded in his
translation and dissemination. The earlier incomplete versions were all
considered and incorporated with awe and humility by the KJV translators.
These men, about 50 of them, were totally God-fearing, and very much aware
of their mission. They knew they were called of God as well as by the state
to perform this service. These were a group of men assembled by God and
equipped and annointed by Him as could not be an accident. (it would be a
similar comparison to the group of men God assembled at the time of the
American Revolutionary War, a group of men unlike any others we've ever
seen.)
I am not Calvinistic by any means at all, but I am also not a deist. It's
quite obvious to me from the Scripture that God does intervene in the
affairs of man, especially when it comes to preserving and propagating His
Word.
Yes, English is a special language, quite obviously. That doesn't mean that
God isn't intervening in the translations of the Bible in other languages,
guiding those translators to the right manuscripts and annointing people
He's called to effect those translations.
Either we have a Bible we can believe in and trust or we don't.
I've read Gail Riplinger's book, New Age Bible Translations. Before that, I
loved and trusted my KJV. After reading her book, I now see that these
other "bibles" are counterfeits inspired by Satan and brought forth by
Satan's annointed dupes in order to introduce the idea that there is no real
Bible, to obfuscate and confuse, water down and sanitize, and eventually
produce the generic bible that everyone can read of all religions and find
their own "truth" there.
The KJV is the only Bible that credits Jesus with the Creation of the
Universe. The only one. That is enough reason for me, right there, to
chuck all the others.
Scripture says that God used the Holy Spirit to move holy men of old to
write the Scriptures. Well, once those Scriptures were written down on a
parchment, do you really think God was going to turn his back and leave it
up to man (and Satan) to preserve His words?
Logic?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 5:12 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Plenum and firmament
> Gary and Cheryl.. Whats with the KJV Is God then an Englishman....Gods
chosen people! Are all the other countries pagan if they do not conform to
King James of England?
> Please,
>
> and then what of the Billions before the Press , 1,600 years of no
Bible... No New testament that is.. All handwrittten in languages most
could not read, let alone speak. And certainly not afford to buy.. And there
would never be enough of them?????
>
> They were so valuable that only the richest Catholic Churches, had them on
display for the faithfull to read, Chained to the platform of course..
Devout faithful were prone to fanaticism , and stealling things like
incorrupt saints body parts was common....
>
> Of course the New testament alone handwritten was available to the poorer
churches...
>
> Anyone who could read at all in Europe could read latin, long before they
could read their native tongue.... Latin was the vernacular of Europe.. The
first handwritten translation in English of the NT was authorised in England
circa 900 Ad. I challenge any Englishman today to understand or read it. It
still exists in a museum somewher in England..
>
> All of this is confirmed in Protestant Historian sources...
>
> Henry and other kings set up National religions, Jesus did not. He
established a universal Church, that was a kingdom that was not of this
world.
>
> Philip.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gary Shelton
> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 6:09 PM
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Plenum and firmament
>
>
>
> Cheryl,
>
> Don't sell yourself short. You'll be up to speed with me in no time. I
> haven't a very long history with this subject at all. I kind of see us
> coming from a similar background. As a born and raised 45 year old
Baptist,
> I also tend to say KJV, but it's this thing of inerrancy that still has
me
> bugged, I'll tell you. Yes, Dr. Bouw's a purist as far as the KJV goes
and
> believes to be inerrant. But I don't know. I wonder how we can say the
KJV
> is anything without specifying the exact KJV we are talking about?
>
> Did you know that when the 1611 KJV was printed it included the
Apocrypha?
> So what gives that we now do not have that in the KJV? If we are going
to
> ascribe some clearer connection to God for the translators of our Bible
> version, hadn't we better learn just what the true product is they came
up
> with?
>
> I have read that our KJV came into existence about 1881. Again, I'm no
> expert. But I do know that I own two KJV's. One renders the Psalm (I
> believe it's 93:1 here) as "stablish" while the other as "establish".
>
> That's not a big deal perhaps, but it goes to show you there are
differences
> between even the modern printings of the KJV. I'm sure there are vastly
> more erudite folks to talk about this than myself, however.
>
> No, I haven't read Gordon Bane. I'll google him when I get the chance.
>
> See, you're already asking the same question I have about the plenum and
the
> firmament. Perhaps Robert or the others will chime in here.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gary Shelton
>
>
> > Gary -- I've not read your links yet, but I will. Being a woman, my
brain
> > doesn't work like the rest of yours. I don't get the engineering,
math
> and
> > physics stuff the way you all seem to so easily grasp it all. But I
have
> > intuition, a sense of where to look for the truth, an intuitive sense
of
> > what it is when I recognize it. I am also logical. We all need logic
and
> > humility, a willingness to accept the truth once we find it. I do
have
> some
> > biases/presuppositions -- I believe in God and I believe God is Good,
and
> I
> > believe His Word is contained in the KJV only as Scripture.
> >
> > Other than that, I will consider anything as possible as long as it
lines
> up
> > with the other three suppositions/biases I have.
> >
> > Have you read any of Gordon Bane's stuff, The Geocentric Bible? He
says
> > all the answers to cosmology are in the scriptures. He believes every
> > scripture has a mate, that there's another scripture located somewhere
> > between the two covers that explains and fulfils any other scripture.
> >
> > He speaks continuously of the plenum and the firmament. It is true,
is it
> > not, that the Copernican people don't believe in either one of these
> > concepts? Is it not true also that a proper understanding of both of
> these,
> > plenum and firmament, will answer all the other questions?
> >
> > Is there agreement in this list/group as to what exactly the plenum
and
> the
> > firmament is? If so, could you explain it to me kind of the way you
did
> the
> > geocentric model?
> >
> > Cheryl
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gary Shelton" <garylshelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 2:58 AM
> > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moon landings?
> >
> >
> > > Cheryl,
> > >
> > > I have provided the following link before. But it is a very good
link
> to
> > a
> > > heated discussion between Gary Hoge and Robert Sungenis. Mr. Hoge
> firmly
> > > believes that the geo satellites (synchronous and stationary and
polar)
> > > solidly prove the earth is turning. Mr. Sungenis denies that.
> > >
> > > You'd have to give Mr. Hoge the prize for this particular debate,
but I
> > > don't think it's by any means the end of the debate.
> > >
> > > That link is:
> > > http://catholicoutlook.com/gps1.php
> > >
> > > Read and learn all of this and you'll be very knowledgeable indeed.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > > Gary Shelton
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.1.0 - Release Date: 2/18/05
>
>
>
Other related posts:
