Безопасен ли biblebelievers.com?

I thought I'd look through this site to see how much of its information is actually factual. Everything below was noted down as I read through the site. It's surprising that he fuses KJV-onlyism with an opposition to Catholicism. The King James Bible was translated by Anglican Churchmen (who belonged to a religion which prides itself as sitting on the fence as regards Protestantism and Catholicism - ***** It should also be noted that King James believed that Jesus was literally present in the communion host, and for this reason wanted his Presbyterian subjects to kneel before it. He also sent a Baptist named Thomas Helwys to prison for the remainder of his life, and had the Baptist Edward Wightman burned at the stake for heresy. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_I_of_England_and_religious_issues#Pur...) However, I was impressed that, despite being a KJV-only site, they accept that Spanish speakers may, in fact, use Spanish Bibles, but since this site is mostly just a collection of writings from other sources, this same conclusion is contradicted in the article "THE AV 1611: Purified Seven Times" in which Mr. Vance concludes "The Wycliffe, Taverner, and Douay-Rheims Bibles, whatever merits any of them may have, are not part of the purified line God "authorized," of which the King James Authorized Version is God's last one -- purified seven times." Needless to say, the 1865 Spanish Bible (254 years after God supposedly stops making translations) is considered to be the best in another article. The fact that the KJV was authorized (as the name may imply) not by God, but by James I, is passed over, as is the fact that there is no line of seven to support the Spanish translation, and the fact that earlier translations in this line of seven weren't authorized themselves. The articles were clearly produced by persons with essentially divergent views, and what seems to be deep but very confined understanding. The article "Katrina: Mother Nature or Act of God?" presents that God caused that disaster to punish us. Mr. Watkins cites several scriptures (Exodus 10:19 ; Exodus 14:21 ; Isaiah 11:15 ; Jeremiah 51:1) where God used wind to punish his enemies. But he forgets that there was warning beforehand, and in the instance of the last two they aren't history, but PROPHECY, Jeremiah didn't rise up after Babylon was destroyed and say that it was God's wrath, he told them a very long time beforehand. Nonetheless, he also cites Matthew 10:29 to indicate that, since God sees everything, he must cause everything. But this is contrary to what Jesus himself said after a tragedy " Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?" (Luke 13:4) Job's two comforters made similar arguments, but they were reproved by God. Claiming that God causes natural disasters, and that all who suffer under them are being punished, does not glorify God, it slanders Him. Another article, "The Dangers of Moderate Drinking" by Mr. Gough cites various practical reasons for complete abstinence. But it doesn't cite a single scripture, and gives the odd impression (being on the site "Bible Believers") that the Bible prohibits alcohol, when it does not. At one instance in 1 Timothy 5:23 it was actually encouraged. Other portions (e.g. Matt 5:29) would indicate that some persons OUGHT to abstain if they couldn't maintain moderation, but, again, the Bible nowhere prohibits the drinking of alcohol. There coverage of what Mormons believe in the article "The Plain Truth about the Mormons" is, overall, fairly good, but there are a few points they got wrong. For one, they claim that Mormons deny "Deity of Jesus Christ". However, he fact that this religion doesn't accept the trinity as defined in the Athanasian creed ("three divine persons in one God") doesn't indicate that they deny this doctrine. In fact, the title page of every 'BoM' calls Jesus "the eternal God." Another verse I was able to find puts it even more bluntly " I have reason to bless my God and my Savior Jesus Christ," (3 Nephi 5:20) and the Book of Mormon goes on like that. Smith, beyond all doubts, considered Jesus to be God, and he wrote as much fairly consistently. (It is noteworthy that William Whiston, a prominent Josephus and Bible scholar, was an outspoken Arian, yet at the time found the Baptist Church to be preferable to the Anglican Church regarding this point, and was gladly accepted as a convert. So I must question how recently this doctrine became "fundamental." He is still considered to be a prominent English Baptist - ***** This is his coup de grâce: "The Mormons deny the Trinity and the existence of a literal burning Hell, yet they promote polytheism (many gods), baptism for the dead, and the notion that Jesus and Satan were originally spirit brothers!" Their missionaries will claim to believe the trinity, but since what he MEANS is the Athanasian trinity, this is a true statement - they deny it. But they do believe in a burning hell (2 Nephi 28:23 ; 33:6 ; 1 Nephi 14:3 ; Jacob 7:18- it was actually one of Smith's favorite subjects) , and a state somewhat like purgatory, in which there is also burning according to one of their books, "Gospel Principles" called "the Telestial Kingdom." They DO TEACH POLYTHEISM, but term it "plurality of gods", presumably to make it sound less pagan. This can be found in some parts of "Doctrine and Covenants" and throughout their "Book of Abraham." The other two accusations are also true. He goes on to say "There is no way to cover all of the Mormon heresies in a tract this size. For further reading, we recommend our publication, The Bible Believer's Handbook of Heresies," but it should be noted that this tract is a mix of fact and error itself, as the book probably is as well. A cursory glance of wikipedia would tell you the same things about them, and with REFERENCES, not just someone's good word. Overall, since the areas that I'm able to gauge seem to be badly researched at a consistent rate, (though not entirely untrue) I would consider this to be an untrustworthy and poor source of information on anything that can't be externally corroborated. In other words, there's really no use of going here. But I am shocked that the Vendor Reliability, Privacy, and Child Safety ratings are so low. There are no viruses or explicit images on this site. I put them as excellent.

The purpose of this Web site is to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ and magnify the words of God. We seek to maintain a vast storehouse of sound, Bible-believing, information for those seeking the truth, the newly saved, and those who have been instructed in the word of God. This Web site contains hundreds and hundreds of articles, books, biographies, podcasts, audio messages, music files, and a church directory.