Philip -- Correction here. I said below: Then you have the KJV and all the other counterfeit so-called "bibles" which say that the world was made "through" Him. (Like somebody else really made everything and Jesus was a tool in their hands.) It was a typo. I meant to say Then you have the New KJV and all other counterfeit so-called "bibles". I cerrtainly didn't mean to say the KJV was a counterfeit. Anything but. Cheryl ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cheryl B." <c.battles@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 6:05 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moon phases > Philip -- Not to be argumentative with you, but there is no such thing as a > modern KJV, or as you say 21st century KJV. People can put any kind of > label they want on thing, but a rose is still a rose, and a rotton apple is > still a rotton apple. The so-called "New King James" is a rotton apple-- > or, rather, a laughable counterfeit. It, along with all the other > counterfeits, changes words and meanings all over, introducing all kinds of > error and blasphemy as it sanitizes and genericizes and strips Jesus of His > diviinity. Case in point, the Gospel of John. The authorized KJV (I mean > the real thing) says Jesus is the Creator of everything, that everything > that was made was made BY Jesus. Then you have the KJV and all the other > counterfeit so-called "bibles" which say that the world was made "through" > Him. (Like somebody else really made everything and Jesus was a tool in > their hands.) > > As I said, anyone can put any kind of name they want on something, but that > doesn't make it so. The "New" King James may be new but it's anything but > King James. And despite its claims, it does not use the same manuscripts > for translation. > > As I said before and now it's being demonstrated on this forum -- it is > important to have an authority. Either God gave us a Bible we can believe > and trust, or He did not. If He did not, then what is the use of trying to > prove what He says is true re geocentrism/geostatism -- if we don't even > know what He said? > > From what I've read about geocentrism, most all the adherents to > geocentricity are people who love and trust their KJVs, who know they hold > in their hands the real thing, the true Word of God that is perfect and > inerrent. > > You won't see people with these other fuzzy New Age translations relying on > much of anything when it comes to "every jot and tittle." They have to read > their "bibles" -- and I use that word very loosely -- with their eyes > squinted from a distance hoping to maybe get an approximate glimpse of truth > from distance. These are the people who will tell you either that ALL the > translations are correct (which of course can't be true) or that NONE of > them are. > > I would as soon rely on the Geneva Bible, or the Bishops Bible, or William > Tyndale's translation as any of these laughable New Age "bibles." We may as > well pick up the JW's bible as any of these, and in many respects they are > very similar. > > We need to have an authority we can rely on if we are going to check > Scripture for the answers. Otherwise, we will all be speaking a different > language to each other. > > Cheryl > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 12:32 AM > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moon phases > > > > A more serious talk on the language of the Bible, specific to the sun.. In > my jest to Gary, I discovered something...that might be important.. > > I noticed that the modernist s have changed Ecclesiastes 1verses 4 and > 5... Look at what the 21st century KJV said. (now I am not being > denominationally argumentive here, the modern Catholic Bible has done worse) > > > > 4One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh; but the earth > abideth for ever. > > 5The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteneth to his place > where he arose. > > > > That word "also" .. See how if applied to verse 5, in the same manner as > verse 4, then they can say that the bible is speaking with the meaning given > to "riseth" as when a generation dies and another comes, "into being" .. > This is a subtle way to attack the geocentric claim. > > > > Because the 1899 DR bible says, > > > > 4One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth > standeth for ever. 5The sun riseth, and goeth down, and returneth to his > place: and there rising again > > > > There is no "also " > > > > Now take a look at the KJV This is the 1611 version, 1987 print, not the > modern 1975 translation called the New KJV. , and quite distinct from the > 21st century KJV. > > > > 4One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth > abideth for ever. 5The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth > to his place where he arose. > > > > There is that added word... also Perchance a heliocentrist influence > in 1611 > > > > Just for fun lets see what the 1987,new KJV translation said. This was > commissioned by Thomas Nelson, publishers said to be from the original??? > Greek Hebrew and Arabic texts.. Funny how these seem to be available, when > they were not available to the 17th century, when they relied heavily on St. > Jeromes Vulgate. > > > > 4One generation passes away, and another generation comes; But the earth > abides forever. 5The sun also rises, and the sun goes down, And hastens to > the place where it arose... > > > > So thats 3 to 1 against geocentrism in the use of the word riseth... it > being merely also as a generation cometh and goeth.etc. > > > > I have no Latin.. perhaps someone can tell us if riseth is here, and if > "also" is there as well, Here is Jeromes words.. > > 4generatio praeterit et generatio advenit terra vero in aeternum stat > > > > 5oritur sol et occidit et ad locum suum revertitur ibique renascens > > > > > > > > Philip. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Gary Shelton > > To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 12:20 PM > > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moon phases > > > > > > Philip, > > > > You were quick to jump on this like a BA-er would, and it is > > plausible...sounding. But, you are comparing apples to oranges, don't > you > > think? > > > > That the sun does rise is a proper geocentric term taken literally. > > > > That the moon is "new" each month is also a proper geocentric term taken > > literally. > > > > I make this statement due to the sense of the use of the word "new". > Here > > in the states it is a common thing to say one has a "new" car. Now that > car > > may be a 1992 clunker, but if it's something that person just purchased, > > then it is still called "new". It is understood that the car is not > really > > "new" by the parties involved. > > > > Likewise, you seem to only be allowing Jack one definition for the word > > "new" here. The moon is new each month. That doesn't mean God created > it > > brand spanking "new" at that time. It is not a phenomenological > language > > issue at all; it is the simple fact that "new" has more than one > dictionary > > denotation. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Gary > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 4:37 PM > > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moon phases > > > > > > > Dear Gary, > > > Does the Bible not mention 'new Moon' somewhere? > > > Jack > > > > > > Now who said the Bible has to be taken literally, and not in the > > vernacular, i e The sun "rises?" in the east,, is only an expression > of > > what is seen... > > > > > > What we call a "new" moon is not new at all, is it.. ? So must we > look > > literally for an old moon? > > > > > > There is a new moon in the bible Jack then you might have just made a > big > > argument against us re the written word of God, not being literal, but > uses > > our figures of speech.... > > > > > > 1 Kings 20-5 > > > 4 kings 4-23 > > > psalm 80 > > > Ezechial 46 > > > > > > Philip. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.4.0 - Release Date: 2/22/05 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.4.0 - Release Date: 2/22/05 > > > > > > > >