Discord among the brethren

Terry,

Are you saying you are going to sow discord among the brethren?

[ March 30, 2003, 01:30 PM: Message edited by: Faith, Fact & Feeling ]

 

Terry --

I usually stay away from this area, because rather
than giving factual information, it tends toward
mere ambages. However, your initial post caught
my eye. I did not find it to be inflamatory in any
way but a statement of concern. I appreciated it
as well as Deekay's and others' notes.

Over the last few weeks, I have been wondering:
Do we choose our manner of faith based purely
upon the Word of God and His conviction, or do
we choose it based upon personality as well.

The reason I have asked is that it seems that the
more contentious persons I have known over the
years have been drawn toward certain sets of
religious ideals, while those not so contentious
are drawn elsewhere. It seems, too, that those
with few stable religious opinions are drawn to yet
another area.

Could it be that this is the way it is with firm,
immovable choices of Bibles -- that those who
are more naturally contentious tend to choose a
belief system which is contentious?

 

Terry,

You seem like a nice guy. I debate very vigorously my belief in the KJB being the word of God for the English speaking people of the last days here on the BB Bible versions debate forum. In practice, I have many friends that use MVs. I have even made some friends on here that use MVs. I firmly believe what I believe, but I realize that Baptists stand for a great deal I am also passionate about. Some examples of this would be salvation by grace through faith alone, that someone must be miraculously born again by God and become a new creature, that simply reforming this corrupt flesh is not enough. I believe in the eternal security of the believer, salvation is of the Lord, not of man, anyone who trusts in God’s righteousness and not man’s righteousness will have eternal security. I believe in the second coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I believe what He said about it, what Paul said about it, what Peter said about it, and what John said about it. I thank God I do not have to worry about bringing the kingdom in, or having to straighten out this awful mess in this present evil world. What a glorious thing the wisdom from above is. If you believe these things, and other Baptist distinctives, then we have a lot to fellowship about regardless of your stance on the Bible. As I have said before, the Bible version issue is a disagreement between family, not mortal combat with criminals. When dealing with people in the church and at work, my ministry is centered around the great and eternal truths of God’s Holy words. Most forums (virtual and actual) are not fitting for the discussion we have here. This forum is set up for exactly what it says. It is a debate forum for this issue, and involves people who want to debate the issue.

With regard to churches, I can feel comfortable worshiping with MV users as long as they or I do not bring up the issue. All to often though this issue is central. After all, a church should be centered around the Bible, if there is disagreement around that issue, this constitutes a very bad starting point for the body of believers. If someone believes, as many do today, that a translation cannot be the inerrant word of God, or a derivation of this that only the messages are inspired, not the actual words, then they have to choose between passages that render different meanings. I believe, as do many born again Christians, that God preserved his literal words, and he did this in the language of today, English, and not a long dead language like Greek. Believing you have God’s perfect literal words in your hand is something you have to experience.

Much of the discussion around this board is about how the facts of church history and manuscript evidence dispel this as a falsehood. I wholeheartedly reject this. Sure there are 5400 some pieces of manuscript evidence. This seems like such a mess to most folks, but I believe God can preserve his perfect “words” even through that mess. One thing I know, no one on this board, or on this planet, can prove otherwise. Many here setup strawman arguments about scriptural or historical proof against my position. There are just as many facts around my position as there is theirs. If they think otherwise, they are simply deceiving themselves. Creation science is my primary ministry. After believing in evolution for 20 years I came to the conclusion that neither evolution or six day creation can be proven conclusively by the facts. I hated that. I wanted that factual smoking gun that was irrefutable by all I encountered. It just doesn’t exist. I remember a sermon illustration about a woman who was seriously ill. The doctor came in and said “madam, I’m sorry to say this, but we have exhausted all of our medical resources for your condition, I guess it’s just in the Lord’s hands now”. Her response was “oh no, has it come down to that”. I know just how she felt. After 20 years of studying a subject I had to relinquish my minds search of man’s wisdom for the smoking gun of proof. I had to just trust what God said about creation. Now I can offer tons of evidence for the creation and the flood, I can also refute tons of evidence against it, but I cannot prove one over the other conclusively based on the accumulated knowledge of humanity. The information is just not there. Now many of my fellow believers, many of whom are Baptists, believe evolution and criticize my stance there. So be it, I believe what I believe.

The tie in this has with Bible versions is the reliance on man’s wisdom by MVrs. One thing I see over and over here is a reliance on man’s wisdom to prove God did not preserve his literal words. Some of these folk could not stomach stepping out on faith on this issue. Like I spent 20 years studying evolution, I have now spent 6 years studying the Bible version issue. I have looked at church history, manuscript evidence, textual criticism, and translation methods. There are literally millions of facts and theories in this realm. Now I know there are those that have spent more or less time than I have on this, and those folks are arrayed on both sides of the issue, but no one here is going to take God’s preserved words from me with their faith in the facts of men. I have seen the facts on both sides. You want to trust the facts of man, or someone’s interpretation of those facts, help yourself, it’s a free country, and after all we are Baptists. But don’t tell me the facts have proven the KJB is not the preserved literal words of the living God. If you want to make that your ministry Terry, go right ahead. Start praying now, because you going to need a lot of faith in that belief, because the facts will not win this case for you.

The church I presently attend is KJBO. The fact they use the KJB exclusively is on their sign. If you use a MV and would feel comfortable there, you would certainly be welcome. I have attended many Baptist churches and I have visited 40 or so. The church I am at now is simply amazing. We have only about 100 attending worship, so it is a small church, but we have so much going on. We have a Bible college with about 17 students. 10 or so of these are KJBO preachers that come here to get Bible centered degrees. We have planted churches in the Knoxville area, we have many that have surrendered to become foreign missionaries and preachers out of the church. There is literally more spiritual life in this church than anything I have seen anywhere regardless of church size. We have a KJBO website www.learnthebible.org that ranks near the top of most of the major ranking services (I’m the web admin). We even had a teacher from Moody Church visit us. He is separating from Moody because of its liberalism. He found our website information very helpful and instrumental in his making this decision.

I have been in so many churches that use different versions, and the rendering of a verse can be so drastically different it is difficult to follow a SS lesson or sermon if you do not have the same version they use. I believe that a local body of believers who use multiple versions in their services will create considerable confusion. For me, a KJBO church eliminates a great hindrance to not have to worship with those who are always pointing out a perceived error in your Bible, or offering multiple rendering of a passage that often confuse the meaning more than clarify it. My church is made up of people who are serious about their Bible. Many home school and these children do not have trouble understanding the Bible. I believe the reason our children today do not understand the Bible is because it was removed from the school system. Couple this with watching TV 4 hours a day and seeing fornication and violence glorified multiple times a day and it is not hard to understand why kids don’t understand the Bible. By and large the Bible has left the hearts of the American people. I believe the introduction of MVs that teach people to doubt words, passages, and whole sections of God’s word based on man’s science are the fruit of Godless Bible rejecting age. I believe these manuscripts and the non-faith based science of textual criticism we have today are the fulfillment of the warning to beware oppositions of science falsely so called (1 Timothy 6:20).

At my church it is different. The average believer in the SBCs I attended could hardly put two verses together from the Bible. The average person at this Church has a better grasp of doctrine than many SBC pastors I talk to. My local church believes they have God’s inerrant word before them. We treat it with reverence and fear, as the very words of the almighty. This creates a spiritual strength I simply cannot find in MV churches. Certainly many will disagree with me, but after all, this is my testimony. This is my personal experience. You have yours, I have mine.

 

I would just like to point out my personal testimony of attending a SBC school for seminary. We are extremely Bible centered and very focused on a very well-rounded education for those entering into the ministry. That is one thing that has impressed me about SEBTS, the Bible is held up as God's inerrant, infallible Word and the Lord Jesus Christ is exalted. I am encouraged by the dedication and mindset of most of the students here that will be ministers tomorrow. People are focused on spreading the Gospel and living by God's Word. It is awesome!

Neal

 

Pastor Larry said, "we prefer to have the word of God in the language we speak." Then why not take the Bible that was there and change the "thee's" and "thou's" and leave it at that. Why change word meanings, why leave out entire verses???

 

The word meanings changed because the langauge has changed. The verses haven't been "left out." The evidence shows that they were more likely added in. Our loyalty is not to a particular English version authorized by the english crown. Our loyalty is to God's word.

However, the point remians that the doctrine and teaching is the same. No one has ever shown a difference in the doctrine. The most they can come up with is verses or phrases or words excluded because of marginal support. However, the doctrine supposedly affected by those words is clearly found in other places. This is plainly a straw man that has kept the church from focusing on her mission of disciple making.

 

why not take the Bible that was there and change the "thee's" and "thou's" and leave it at that. Why change word meanings

I had made some points in a different thread regarding just that point, some of which I'll reinterate here. In the KJV, "let" meant "prevent". Today, "let" means "to allow", while in the KJV "suffer" often meant "to allow". Also, the KJV in several places referrs to brass, but the proper translation is bronze (brass had not been invented yet). In the KJV, you'll find references to "corn", but "corn" was not the crop we know of, but grain in general.

There are a lots of instances of language change in the KJV.

 

You want discord - read some of Dr. Peter Ruckman's stuff - he's not on this board - as least I hope he's not.

The stuff here is tame in comparison to Ruckman.

 

You seem to be equating MVs (sic) with confusion about the Bible or lack of being focused on the Bible. This is a non-sequitur and sheer fallacy.

Again, a fallacy.

Ad hominem?

This is another fallacy. Trot out these folks who don't believe the Word of God. Is it Pastor Larry? Of course not. Me? Ridiculous. Ransom? Hardly. So where are they?

Physician, heal thyself

non-sequitur.

If it's on their sign, I seriously doubt someone could stroll in with a NIV or NASB and be welcomed

This is a tired bromide. It's like saying that you won't eat a hamburger at Wendy's because it's a different hamburger than at McDonald's. Or it's like saying that people don't watch TV because the channels are different.

Agreed. And it's worse here in the KJVO belt. The liberalism of laziness and laxity has gripped these churches.

More ad-hominem. I could just as easily prove that the IFB, KJVO churches' believers were spiritually ignorant.

More ad-hominem

This is the essence of liberalism: you have your theory, I have mine. Do you mean this? I doubt it, friend.

[ April 02, 2003, 09:42 AM: Message edited by: TomVols ]

 

So, what really happen is people(Wescott/Hort) came along that did not like/understand or whatever they thought, and decided to create a new bible. Obviously since there were newer MSS they had to be better than the old. Yeah right!
Instead of having faith in the Bible they had and praying for wisdom, they decided to do it themselves. Personally, I think all the MV's are the work of the spirit of the antichrist. Just as he gave Eve 90% of the truth in the garden, he is doing the same today.

What happens if someone finds another MSS today? Should we write another bible? Are all MV's good? What is their final authority?

 

... or Erasmus or the KJV translators...

Yep. That's what they did. But to be fair, Erasmus first Bible was an interlinear with his beloved RCC Latin Vulgate.

Yep. Erasmus and the KJV translators used very late mss evidence, translations, and the Latin Vulgate to form their Bibles.

Exactly. Of course, Erasmus didn't exclusively do it himself. He got the endorsement of the Pope.

Unlike the TR produced by an unrepentant RC clergyman? Unlike a translation produced by CoE scholars that were guilty of persecuting Baptists?

... and far less than that if you can't understand the translation and won't use another for fear of KJVO legalists.

Your avg member of KJVO churches are losing far more than 10% because of the peculiar language of the only Bible they're allowed to use.

If it gets us closer to what God inspired from the beginning... What would you say? If a 1st century mss were discovered that proved the TR to be the closest text to the original would you celebrate it or reject it? Would you allow yourself to be guided by the facts or would your decision be based on your presuppositions?

No. But it might justify a new translation of the Bible.

No.

God as revealed through His Word.

 

What? The IFB church I attend allows whatever version you wish. They do however encourage, preach and teach from nothing but the King James. They also proclaim the King James to be God's infallible, inerrant, perfect Word of God.

Well, since there are no orginals to cross reference, I will stick with the King James Bible.

What is the final authority you based your decision on?

 

What is the final authority you based your decision on?

Translations have no authority at all. They are only translations of the authoritative word.

 

Then they proclaim an extrabiblical false dogma... that is your prerogative.

No.</font>[/QUOTE]

What is the final authority you based your decision on? </font>[/QUOTE]First, God's proclaimations and promises in scripture. Second, the historical facts that give evidence to what the originals said.

Now that I have answered, will you do the same?

Since we do not have the originals to cross reference, on what do you base your KJVO beliefs?... no circular reasoning please.

Unless you are ready to prove somehow that God directly inspired Baptist hating Anglicans then you cannot use their peculiar translational choices for your final authority.

 

We've veered off topic and now are on 3 pages. 24 hour rule is in effect. Let's wrap this up.

 

Because of the convicting power it has. I put my faith in God that he would keep his promise of preserving His Word for us today and through every generation to come. And since all other versions seem to attack it, there must be something peculiar about that Bible. Even the Mormons and JW's use this book, why, because they know it is God's Holy Word.

I hold it dear to my heart. The King James Bible is alive and it speaks to me daily.

 

MV's also have convicting power. This characteristic belongs to the Word of God, not a particular translation.

As do I. However, you are evading the question. What is your source of authority for declaring that the KJV is the single fulfillment of that promise?

Where and when have other versions attacked the KJV? They haven't. In fact, this statement really doesn't make any sense. It would be accurate to say that other versions disagree with the KJV in places... but then you are left with the objective question- "Which one is correct and why?"

You consider the testimony of Mormon's and JW's to carry weight with a Bible believer? These are both heretical movements and yes they both "distort" the Word of God as presented in the KJV. When any version is interpretted the way these groups interpret the Bible, it ceases to be the Word of God.

That makes a terrific case for being KJV preferred. It makes a very poor case for saying that everyone else must share your affections or else they are deceived. Your feelings as strong as they may be are not binding on anyone else and you should never attempt to make them so be declaring KJVOnlyism.