“Brain washed by NASA” flat earther claim

Flat earthers often accuse normal people of being “brain washed by NASA” because we believe that the earth is a globe.

First of all, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration was founded in 1958...and the globe earth was a well established fact before 1958. Secondly, most people do not know anything about NASA and have never kept up with the administration’s research, so how could we be “brain washed” by them? Thirdly, who cares? NASA is a cool agency and they have a lot of smart people working for them. Great people to learn from.

Meanwhile, this lunatic is who the flat earth crowd is following...Mr. (or Mrs.???) Eric Dubay

So yeah, I’ll stick to following NASA. When Eric takes off the dress and gets a hair cut then maybe I’ll listen to his so called 200 Proofs the Earth is not a Spinning Ball. The main proponents of the flat earth are weirdos making YouTube videos in their basements...and they see a problem with us “following” NASA. Give me a break.

Answers in Genesis “Falling Flat” by Dr. Danny Faulkner

For those of you that don’t know, the idea that the earth is flat and not a globe has risen in popularity in the past few years. More people now believe the earth is flat than they have in 2,000 years. It is a free country and you can believe what you want, but I think the flat earth idea is completely ridiculous and it is embarrassing that there are so many fellow Christians that believe the earth is flat.

Dr. Danny Faulkner (MS Physics from Clemson University, MA and PhD Astronomy from Indiana University) of Answers in Genesis has written an excellent book on the topic covering the biblical, historical, and scientific evidence refuting the idea that the earth is flat.

https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/falling-flat/?sku=10-2-519

There is no verse in the Bible that says the earth is flat. None.

Hope Bible Church Q/A “What is the firmament”

The truth about tithing

Very good post on what the Bible says about tithing

https://hopebiblechurchga.com/the-truth-about-tithing/

Hell: an unpleasant truth

The believer’s walk - Tony Caldwell

Does the “first resurrection” refute the Pre-Tribulation rapture?

Why animal sacrifices in the Millennium?

Genesis Flood Explains Bloat-and-Float Dinosaurs

https://www.icr.org/article/genesis-explains-bloat-and-float-dinosaurs

New blog page on James White's "The King James Only Controversy"

I recently made a page of compilations of articles and videos responding to James White's The King James Only Controversy. 

https://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/p/james-whites-king-james-only-controversy.html 

To be honest Steven Anderson has done the best response to book (besides Dr. Ruckman's Scholarship Only Controversy) which I posted to the page. It is a chapter by chapter response to James White's book. Those videos are very good in my opinion (of course I do not agree with everything in them though.

Baptism into Christ: operation of God or man?

I recently received this feedback regarding Romans 6:1-4 on my post "Baptism into Christ". 

"Baptism is represented by Paul as a "LIKENESS" of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus – Romans 6:3-5. There is no other thing that is so represented like this baptism.

Not faith.
Not repentance.
Not confession.
Only (water) baptism.

In (water) baptism, the old man of sin within us is buried, just as Christ was buried, and is transformed and resurrected by God as a new creature. It is then, and not until then, that we are "free from sin." Only then are we fit to be called "servants of righteousness" (Rom. 6:17-18).

This text, Romans 6:3-5, also presents a serious problem for those who teach that salvation precedes any baptism (water OR HS). These people have Paul “burying” people that are ALIVE. Where I live, that is a bit backward – we usually bury the DEAD people!! But this is not the problem I will address for this thread – I just want to examine and see that the baptism that Paul describes here in Romans 6 MUST be WATER BAPTISM and cannot be Holy Spirit baptism.

Paul describes baptism as a "burial" and likens it to the death and burial of Christ. Yet all the HS baptism pundits fail to illustrate HOW HS baptism is “LIKE” unto the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ that Paul clearly, plainly, and succinctly states that this baptism IS here in Romans 6. Why is that? Well, we know why that is – only WATER baptism can be “likened” unto a death, burial, and resurrection – HS baptism cannot !

Do not miss another important point Paul makes here. Paul tells us that this (water) baptism is OUR death, burial, and resurrection (D/B/R). WE die to sin / that is, we "put off" sin in our lives - the old sinful man – WE are buried (in water) like as Christ was buried, and then WE are resurrected (like Christ was resurrected) to walk in a new life! Paul is describing WATER baptism in Romans chapter 6 – not any other baptism !!!

(The purpose of HS baptism was never to do this !!! If fact, HS baptism was never for the remission of sins, and no one was ever told to baptize anyone with the HS - this was never commanded or authorized !)"

1.) Nobody is made "free from sin" through water baptism. Paul just stated in Romans 1:16-17, 3:19-31, 4:1-8, 5:1. Salvation is "to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness" (Rom. 4:5). Romans 6:3-4 refers to baptism INTO Christ. Water is not in the whole chapter. 

2.) If words mean anything, baptism into Christ and baptism with water unto repentance are different things.  Water baptism is always said to be done by a man, but baptism into Christ is always said to be done by the Holy Spirit...

1 Corinthians 12:
[12] For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
[13] For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
[14] For the body is not one member, but many.
[15] If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
[16] And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
[17] If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?
[18] But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.

Colossians 2:
[10] And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
[11] In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
[12] Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. 

Water baptism is a physical water ceremony. Being in the church which is the body of Christ is a spiritual relationship where we are joined to the Lord and made one spirit with Him. Spiritually we are crucified, buried, risen, and seated with Christ in heaven because we are "joined" with Him and "one spirit" with Him. 

1 Corinthians 6:
[15] Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
[16] What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
[17] But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Ephesians 2:
[5] Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
[6] And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
[7] That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
[9] Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Dunking someone in a tank of water does not resemble being buried. We do not grab dead bodies and push them down into dirt. How does grabbing someone and pushing them down into a tank of water picture a burial? And where is the likeness of us sitting in heavenly places with Christ? 

Clearly baptism into Christ is spiritual. In this baptism into Christ there is neither male/female, Jew/Gentile, bond/free (Gal. 3:26-28, Col. 3:10-11). That can only be spiritual. When you physically put someone in water and raise them back up, they are still male/female and Jew/Gentile.

3.) Water baptism has nothing to do with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. John the Baptist and the 12 apostles baptized for years without knowing anything about the death, burial, and resurrection...

John 4:1-2  When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,) 

Luke 18:
[31] Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished.
[32] For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on:
[33] And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again.
[34] And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things which were spoken. 

Obviously the apostles were not baptizing people saying "this symbolizes the death, burial, and resurrection". They did not even know about it! The Bible tells us why they baptized, to manifest Christ to Israel (John 1:31). It was a symbolic purification (John 3:25-27, Acts 22:16).

4.) Under grace we do not have priests. There is nobody that has to do anything for us in order for us to come to God and be saved (contrast with the law--Lev. 16:30). Under grace, there is one mediator between us and God, Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 2:5 "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;"). We do not have to go to a man and get him to baptize us so that we can be saved. Salvation is by faith in Christ. "In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise," (Eph. 1:13).

5.) Paul said that Christ sent him "not to baptize". 

1 Corinthians 1:
[13] Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
[14] I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
[15] Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
[16] And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
[17] For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

What was Paul sent to do?

Acts 26:
[15] And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
[16] But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
[17] Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
[18] To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

If Paul was sent to the Gentiles to "open their eyes", "turn them from darkness to light", "from the power of Satan unto God", "that they may receive forgiveness of sins" but was sent NOT to baptize....then water baptism does not have anything to do with any of those things. In fact, water baptism is not even a work meet for repentance under grace, since Paul was sent to shew them works meet for repentance but not to baptize (1 Cor. 1:17, Acts 26:19-20). 

6.) The comment says, "The purpose of HS baptism was never to do this !!! If fact, HS baptism was never for the remission of sins, and no one was ever told to baptize anyone with the HS - this was never commanded or authorized !". There is no such thing as "Holy Spirit baptism". That phrase never appears in the Bible. There is "baptism with the Holy Spirit" and then there is baptism into Christ that is done "by one Spirit". But there is no generic "Holy Spirit baptism". 

But is is true that "no one was ever told to baptize anyone with the Holy Spirit"...only Christ can baptize with the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:11). Man cannot do this (obviously). This baptism was not for salvation, it was for power (Acts 1:8). Those signs and powers were for the Jews and apostles and no longer in use today (1 Cor. 1:22, 13:8-13). After the book of Acts ended, there became only "one baptism" for the present age (Eph. 4:1-6) and that is baptism into Christ (Col. 2:10-12). 

7.) The "likeness" of Romans 6 is not the death, burial, and resurrection compared to a water ceremony...the verse tells us what the likeness is. "like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life". When we get saved we are dead to sin, then we should walk in newness of life reflecting that spiritual truth. 

Seven baptisms

What about racial prophecy?

Did the witch really bring up Samuel?

Did Old Testament believers have eternal security?

Why use the KJV?

Excellent resources (articles/books/notes) written by Pastor Bryan Ross on preservation of scripture and the King James Bible

http://gracelifebiblechurch.com/why-use-the-kjv/

Is Your Bible The Right One? by Pastor Richard Jordan

By Richard Jordan

"For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God..." (II Corinthians 2:17)

For over 350 years the Authorized Version, commonly known as the King James Bible, was used by the Body of Christ at large and confidently believed to be the Word of God. In the last 3 or 4 decades all this has changed.

Now we are faced with a variable Babel of confusion over the various Bible versions and English translations continuously being introduced on the market. There is a serious question which must be faced: Are these modern versions really reliable - are they really versions or, as many have come to claim, perversions of the Word of God?

Our examination of this important subject will by no means be exhaustive, given the space available to us here, but we hope to give the reader enough information that as an informed believer you can make a sound decision as to which Bible is reliable and which version in not.

A bit of background to begin with: In 1881 there was introduced into public circulation a new Bible text. It came through the work of the Revision Committee which produced the (English) Revised Version, 1881, and the American Standard Version, 1901.

This new Greek text developed by the Revision Committee, under the leadership and pressure of Westcott and Hort, is the basis of modern translations. It has been used to replace the Received Text of the KJV and its predecessors. There is, however, a growing awareness that this new Greek text is not reliable-and more and more are returning, we have, to the KJV.

As we compare verses, we will see why this is true. We have objective evidence as the reliability of the KJV as opposed to the new bible versions-overwhelming evidence that new versions are not simply better translations. Nor are they simply revisions of the KJV. Rather they are new and different Bible texts which often question, discredit and water down important and vital truths basic to the Christian faith (cf. Genesis 3:1).

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE
Let's start by understanding that there is a great deal of difference between the KJV and the modern versions. This difference is not simply a translations difference. It is in fact a basic textual difference: they are translations of two different lines of Greek texts. A few examples must suffice:

In Matthew 1:25 the words "her firstborn son" are consistently omitted by modern versions. In Matthew 6:13 the ending of "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen" is omitted. This explains why the Protestant version of this prayer is more lengthy than the Roman Catholic rendition. The KJV is the text of the Protestant Reformation while the new versions embrace the Roman reading.
Verses such as Matthew 17:21 and 23:14 are omitted entirely, while in Matthew 24:36 the words "nor the Son" are added.

There are literally hundreds of these type textual alternations which have nothing to do with translation. They come because of the difference in what is being translated-the Greek texts being used are substantially different. And the difference is by no means insignificant.

In the modern versions numerous verses have been changed in such a way as to affect truths basic to the Christian faith. While many are quite subtle, they nonetheless provide the type of objective evidence which convicts these new versions of perverting God's Word. Again, space allows only a few examples:

In John 1:27 the words "is preferred before me" are omitted, so that John is made to say only that Christ came after him. In John 6:47 "he that believeth on me hath everlasting life" is changed to read: "he who believes has everlasting life" (NIV) The words "on me" are left out [footnote 1] .

John 6:65, 14:12 and 16:10, have Christ calling to God "the Father instead of "my Father," as in KJV. In Revelation 1:11 the phrase "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last," referring to Christ-and an obvious proof that Jesus Christ is the Jehovah of Isaiah 44:6-is omitted. Other titles of Christ which indicate His deity are regularly omitted or altered in such a way as to not connote deity (e.g., Matthew 27:64, 9:35; I Corinthians 15:47, 16:22; Romans 9:6, 14:10; Colossians 1:2; II Timothy 4:22, etc.).

Other vital truths are also affected. For examples, in I Corinthians 5:7 the words "for us" are omitted, affecting the doctrine of the vicarious death of Christ by suggesting merely that He was sacrificed and did die, but not necessarily "for us" (see also I Peter 4:1). It isn't surprising that Hebrews 1:3 omits the words "by Himself" from the phrase: "When He had by Himself purged our sins." There is also Colossians 1:14 where the clause "through His blood" is omitted, casting doubt on the necessity of the shedding of Christ's blood for redemption.

Then there is Luke 2:33 where the words "Joseph and his mother" are changed to read: "The child's father and mother," implying that Christ was not virgin-born. Not even a note of explanation is given. Surely the evidence for such an important change should have been offered.

In Luke 24:51 the words "And carried up into heaven," referring to our Lord's ascension, are omitted. In John 16:16 the words "because I go to the Father" are omitted.

By now it should be obvious that the new versions are not simply "better translations" or a revision of KJV. Rather they are new and different Bible texts. Nor is it true that they contain only minor changes which do not affect basic meanings.

The great number of passages (we have given only examples) altered or omitted so as to water down or attack the very truths the Bible teaches, especially where the person and work of Christ are concerned, is clear evidence that modern versions are dangerous to spiritual health.

1. We are using the New International Version for comparison quotes because of its present popularity. What is true of it however, is consistently true of other versions.

SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Because of the subtle nature of the deception used to corrupt God's Word, we want to offer three examples of the absolute devastation caused by these new versions. The complacent nature of current thinking in regard to these issues has caused some to pass off as only a minor irritant the numerous passages which are altered so as to eliminate or dilute statements on the deity of Christ, the virgin birth, the vicarious atonement, etc. Because of this, and the emotional allegiance often attached to those recommending the modern versions, we ask our readers to consider the impact of these three passages on their faith. These three passages are irrefutable, objective evidence that modern versions are unsafe.

1. Matthew 5:22: Often it is difficult to grasp the impact of what seems to an innocent omission. Here is a verse where this syndrome is demonstrated to be a subtle trap leading to spiritual destruction. In KJV the verse reads,

"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."

The NIV renders the verse thus:
"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell."

Did you catch the omission? The phrase "without a cause" is omitted from the statement "Whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment." This does not seem to be too very consequential at first glance. But for a Bible student who is serious about believing and honoring the Word of God, this verse is devastating.

If the reader is diligent it will not be long before he comes upon Mark 3:5, were we are told about our Lord:
"And when he had LOOKED ROUND ABOUT ON THEM WITH ANGER, BEING GRIEVED FOR THE HARDNESS OF THEIR HEARTS..."

The problem is obvious: If the NIV reading is to stand, our lord is condemned by His own words.
This is no small matter! By this seemingly unimportant omission in Matthew 5:22 the modern versions have destroyed the sinlessness of the Lord Jesus Christ and established him as a sinner, condemned for failure to live by His own declaration.

2. Mark 1:2: This verse brings up the dementia associated with the use of modern versions. The following change is so amazing that we doubt anyone would believe it if the record was not clear. In KJV the verse reads,
"As IT IS WRITTEN IN THE PROPHETS, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee."

The NIV rendering is consistent with other modern versions:
"IT IS WRITTEN IN ISAIAH THE PROPHET: I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way."

Any reference edition or center column reference will quickly establish the problem for modern versions: The quotation in Mark 1:2 is not from Isaiah. It is from Malachi 3:1. Mark 1:3 is a quote from Isaiah 40:3. Thus two prophets are being quoted, not one. The statement in NIV (and other new versions) is simply false.
This is simply a case of the Greek text and resultant English translation being wrong. It is a mistake, plain and simple. No amount of sophistry can argue around it. Notice the verse does not say, "It was spoken in Isaiah" (as in the case of Matthew 27:9's quote of Jeremiah). No. The quote is clearly said to have been "written in Isaiah."

Two possibilities exits: Either Isaiah, as we have it, is incomplete, omitting the quote (and thus the Bible itself so not complete), or Mark is mistaken, having given the wrong reference (which would mean that the Holy Spirit made a mistake writing the Scripture).

These two choices leave us in the unenviable position of having to adjust our understanding of Biblical infallibility. The doctrine of infallibility will not stand the test if the reading of the new versions is accepted.

3. Hebrews 3:16: We add this reference because it too seems to be too impossible to be real. Unfortunately it is all too real-and illustrative of the caliber of modern versions. KJV renders the verse this way:
"For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit NOT ALL THAT CAME OUT OF EGYPT BY MOSES."

The verses changed in NIV to read:
"Who were they who heard and rebelled? WHERE THEY NOT ALL THOSE MOSES LED OUT OF EGYPT?"

In others words, KJV says that "not all that came out of Egypt by Moses" rebelled while NIV indicates that "all those Moses led out of Egypt" did rebel. Any junior in Sunday School knows which of the two is right!
After four decades of wilderness wanderings, Moses addressed Israel as she prepares to enter the promised land. Deuteronomy 29:2 tells us,

"And Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them, Ye have seen all that the Lord did BEFORE YOUR EYES IN THE LAND OF EGYPT UNTO PHARAOH..."
(cf. Deuteronomy 1:30).

Obviously some of these who were in Egypt and saw with their own eyes what God had done there also entered into the promised land, having not rebelled in the wilderness. As we said, any junior aged boy or girl could name two of them: Joshua and Caleb! One wonders what the translators of the NIV and other versions have been reading.

Why should we accept a Bible version that is not true-especially when we have one that is? Why would we accept a Bible that openly denies the sinlessness of our Lord and that makes the doctrine of Scriptural infallibility a falsehood?

THE BOOK WILL DEFEND ITSELF

We do not fear for God's Word, He'll take care of it! We fear only for its readers. These new versions are simply unsafe to rely on.

We trust this information will help our readers to understand this issue more clearly. Compare the verses for yourself and you will see that we do have a reliable, dependable copy of the Word of God in our own language. God has preserved His Word and made it available to us in our own language in an absolutely dependable form, the King James Bible.

Kingdom of God in Luke 17:21

Pastor O’Steen of Hope Bible Church in Locust Grove, Ga. Q/A on Luke 17:21

Luke 17:
[20] And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
[21] Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
[22] And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.
[23] And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them.
[24] For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.

What about Darby and Scofield?

By Pastor O’Steen of Hope Bible Church. Locust Grove, GA.