Are We All Called to Evangelize?

[Blammo]

... IT IS UNIMPORTANT WHAT IN THE HECK THE KJV SAYS. NNE IN THE ACADEMIC COMMUNITY PUTS ANY STOCK IN THE RELIABILITY OF THE KJV, OKAY! ...

No one in the academic community puts any stock in the reliability of the word of God? Does that include all of the English versions, or just the KJV? I can understand a modern version preference, but, the KJV is unreliable?

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

No one in the academic community puts any stock in the reliability of the word of God? Does that include all of the English versions, or just the KJV? I can understand a modern version preference, but, the KJV is unreliable?

My point is that we in the academic community do not rely on translations like DHK does reading Darby or whomever. We get it straight from the original source. Having to rely on a translation to get your theology is like kissing your bride through the veil. DHK does not have the ability to comprehend that tradition has nothing to do with it and what you call the office is not the point. Call them Slaves if you want but the office of Slave/Servant/Deacon is recognized in the Bible not just through history and church tradition. The Bible recognizes the office of deacon first in ACTS 6, then Paul refers to the office in Phil. 1 and there are qualifications given for the office of Servant/Slave/Deacon in 1 Timothy 3. There is very little debate about this in the church or otherwise. DHK does not have a leg to stand on biblically or historically or academically.

 

[Blammo]

My point is that we in the academic community do not rely on translations like DHK does reading Darby or whomever. We get it straight from the original source. Having to rely on a translation to get your theology is like kissing your bride through the veil. DHK does not have the ability to comprehend that tradition has nothing to do with it and what you call the office is not the point. Call them Slaves if you want but the office of Slave/Servant/Deacon is recognized in the Bible not just through history and church tradition. The Bible recognizes the office of deacon first in ACTS 6, then Paul refers to the office in Phil. 1 and there are qualifications given for the office of Servant/Slave/Deacon in 1 Timothy 3. There is very little debate about this in the church or otherwise. DHK does not have a leg to stand on biblically or historically or academically.

You have access to the "originals"? Shall we all throw out our faulty English translations, and follow you and others, who actually have the "original source"?

 

[On the Edge]

No one in the academic community puts any stock in the reliability of the word of God? Does that include all of the English versions, or just the KJV? I can understand a modern version preference, but, the KJV is unreliable?

I'm gonna chime in on that note. This is a little off, but the people who did the word for word translation were men who spoke many languages fluently. several knew at least a dozen languages. So If i were to put stock on who knew more greek, i'd take their translation. Translation of the Bible is a preference. That's up to you.

As for the whole, deacon and such, first of all, what does this have to do with "are we called to envangelize" but secondly Ephesians 4:11-12 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

These separate people are for the building up of the church specifically. The church has these people to mature (perfect) the saints so they can do the work of the ministry (ministry of reconciliation) for the building up (edifying) of the church. a deacon is appointed to help take care of the widows. Unfortunately through our traditions we have lost the true meaning of a deacon. the meaning of the word office that would be used there is "a particular duty."
"And let these also first be proved; then let them use the particular duty of a deacon, being found blameles" Deacons have a special particular duty that is not completly for the building up of the church.

We are all servants of Christ. That is the truth, but deacons have a special duty and are appointed for a specific purpose within a church. Their duty is important because it allows others who go out to evangelize to do their work. And I believe that they are a servant and have a large part in the work of the church.

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

You have access to the "originals"? Shall we all throw out our faulty English translations, and follow you and others, who actually have the "original source"?

I am not sure if you are aware of it but you may learn Greek just like the rest of us. So I am not keeping the original source from you. And yes the original source is found within the Greek NT. Many folks doubt that but we have a 98% certainty that the text before us is as it was originally handed down in the first century. It is not as if we are missing 2% though. The fact is that there are scribal errors or variants that have crept in over the first four hundred years of the texts existence. They make for alternate readings. In fact we have 110% of the text available to us. There are less than 2% of the variants that are even doctrinally significant. In this case the matter of Acts 6, Phil. 1, and 1 Tim. 3 are not in question from a textual criticism standpoint.

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

I'm gonna chime in on that note. This is a little off, but the people who did the word for word translation were men who spoke many languages fluently. several knew at least a dozen languages. So If i were to put stock on who knew more greek, i'd take their translation. Translation of the Bible is a preference. That's up to you.

As for the whole, deacon and such, first of all, what does this have to do with "are we called to envangelize" but secondly Ephesians 4:11-12 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

These separate people are for the building up of the church specifically. The church has these people to mature (perfect) the saints so they can do the work of the ministry (ministry of reconciliation) for the building up (edifying) of the church. a deacon is appointed to help take care of the widows and the fatherless. Unfortunately through our traditions we have lost the true meaning of a deacon. the meaning of the word office that would be used there is "a particular duty."
"And let these also first be proved; then let them use the particular duty of a deacon, being found blameles" Deacons have a special particular duty that is not completly for the building up of the church.

We are all servants of Christ. That is the truth, but deacons have a special duty and are appointed for a specific purpose within a church. Their duty is important because it allows others who go out to evangelize to do their work. And I believe that they are a servant and have a large part in the work of the church.

I could not agree more.

 

[Blammo]

I am not sure if you are aware of it but you may learn Greek just like the rest of us. So I am not keeping the original source from you. And yes the original source is found within the Greek NT. Many folks doubt that but we have a 98% certainty that the text before us is as it was originally handed down in the first century. It is not as if we are missing 2% though. The fact is that there are scribal errors or variants that have crept in over the first four hundred years of the texts existence. They make for alternate readings. In fact we have 110% of the text available to us. There are less than 2% of the variants that are even doctrinally significant. In this case the matter of Acts 6, Phil. 1, and 1 Tim. 3 are not in question from a textual criticism standpoint.

You have copies of the word of God in the original languages. I do not doubt the accuracy of such. Neither do I doubt the accuracy and reliability of some English translations. Especially the ones translated by people who knew more about Greek, Hebrew, and English, than anyone alive today.

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

You have copies of the word of God in the original languages. I do not doubt the accuracy of such. Neither do I doubt the accuracy and reliability of some English translations. Especially the ones translated by people who knew more about Greek, Hebrew, and English, than anyone alive today.

When it comes to arguing the finer points of the theology you must have enough authority to work with the original languages to have academic credibility. We have to have a common source to agree on. We can all go out and find a translation that agrees with us but that does not mean that the translators are correct. I would not want to take the NIV or NRSV or NewNIV as accurate or faithful to what the original language says. Are there reliable translations? You bet, ESV, NASB, NKJV, etc. Am I going to be impressed with someone who can only tell me they like the way that Darby translated it? Not especially. Now what is the difference if we have the original wording or the original wording on the original material it was recorded on? The point is that we have the original wording....

 

[DHK]

When it comes to arguing the finer points of the theology you must have enough authority to work with the original languages to have academic credibility. We have to have a common source to agree on. We can all go out and find a translation that agrees with us but that does not mean that the translators are correct. The point is that we have the original wording....

If you are such an expert in this field then take your NT Greek, and translate it. I have challenged you now three times. Take verses one, ten and thirteen where the word "office" is used. Demonstrate through your own translation how the word office is there. Don't just explain it away through your own eccelsiastical tradition. Give an accurate translation. I have been waiting for this for the last how many pages now? You can't do it can you?
DHK

 

[richard n koustas]

As for the whole, deacon and such, first of all, what does this have to do with "are we called to envangelize"

Don't know, but it sure makes interesting reading:wavey:

 

[Blammo]

I'm gonna chime in on that note. This is a little off, but the people who did the word for word translation were men who spoke many languages fluently. several knew at least a dozen languages. So If i were to put stock on who knew more greek, i'd take their translation. Translation of the Bible is a preference. That's up to you.

Either I am misunderstanding you, or you missed the question marks included in my post.

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

DHK,

I knew you were not a Greek student but I thought for sure you could read English since you are a moderator of this board. (Emphasis now added for greater effect)

Okay, I am now getting frustrated with you. But let me one more time make it clear. IT IS UNIMPORTANT WHAT IN THE HECK THE KJV SAYS. NNE IN THE ACADEMIC COMMUNITY PUTS ANY STOCK IN THE RELIABILITY OF THE KJV, OKAY! My understanding of the office of deacon is not dependent on the word office being found or not found within the original language. I gave you a sample of a translation of each of the first several words of 10 just to show you that I unlike you actually know Greek. If you insist on a full translation of 10 here you go, "And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless." There you go. I hope this helps but keep in mind if you read my previous posts at no point did I make my argument based on what the KJV stated. So you are creating a straw man that does not exist. Go back and deal with the substance of what I have stated. That you have not done...

 

[John of Japan]

Don't know, but it sure makes interesting reading:wavey:

Hey, Richard, pretty good attitude for someone whose thread has now been completely and totally hijacked, derailed, kidnapped, held for ransom, buried and sent away by UPS! :laugh:

Oh, and by the way, did you notice that in one post one of the kidnapper/hijackers even said something like "You are getting off topic" to another criminal as he continued the hijack.

 

[El_Guero]

Hijackin' happens all the time nowadays.

Hey, Richard, pretty good attitude for someone whose thread has now been completely and totally hijacked, derailed, kidnapped, held for ransom, buried and sent away by UPS! :laugh:

Oh, and by the way, did you notice that in one post one of the kidnapper/hijackers even said something like "You are getting off topic" to another criminal as he continued the hijack.

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

Hey, Richard, pretty good attitude for someone whose thread has now been completely and totally hijacked, derailed, kidnapped, held for ransom, buried and sent away by UPS! :laugh:

Oh, and by the way, did you notice that in one post one of the kidnapper/hijackers even said something like "You are getting off topic" to another criminal as he continued the hijack.

Did you not know that there is honor among theives....:tongue3:

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

-- Eph 4:11&12

Are we all called to evangelize? or just some?

Yes, back to the question at hand... what was the question? Oh yes, the answer is yes.

 

[John of Japan]

Yes, back to the question at hand... what was the question? Oh yes, the answer is yes.

And I agree!:thumbs: :jesus:

 

[El_Guero]

If we believe . . . can we do anything else?

Big if.

And I agree!:thumbs: :jesus:

 

[On the Edge]

LOL, yeah hijacked topic, very nice. the end answer is yes we are all called to evangelize. Just read 2 Corinthians 5 about how we have been given the ministry of reconciliation. It is important for all of us to evangelize, because as it says in 2 Corinthians 4:3 if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

 

[El_Guero]

Uh . . . what happened to russia?

LOL, yeah hijacked topic, very nice. the end answer is yes we are all called to evangelize. Just read 2 Corinthians 5 about how we have been given the ministry of reconciliation. It is important for all of us to evangelize, because as it says in 2 Corinthians 4:3 if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: