Do you then acknowledge that other English translations can be good? If you deny the positive degree and claim that other English translations cannot be good, you would also be denying the comparative and superlative degree and your claim that the KJV is the best translation. Are you claiming that the KJV has the best rendering of every word and verse when compared to the preserved Scriptures in the original languages or are you claiming that the KJV is the best overall translation but acknowledging that another English translation may have a better, clearer, or more accurate rendering at some verses?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Hyles Anderson College
- Thread starter Preacher Boy88
- Start date
DeafPosttrib
New Member
Dr. Hyles' early life back in 1950's and 1960's. He was not KJV Onlyism. Alhtough, he uses KJV. When he wrote a small book "Let's study Revelation". That book was written copied from his teaching from other baptist church in Texas. He said of few verses of Revelation in KJV, "it should be better translated", I am no doubt that he spoken of RSV or ASV to correct KJV. Because Late Dr. John R. Rice wrote his commentary of Revelation. He said, RSV corrects KJV, it should better translated into...
I read Hyles' sermon at www.baptist-city.com on "Enemy of Soul-Winning". He said, a person reads through whole RSV Bible, he cannot be saved. Hyles spoken of RSV is corruptible.
I strongly disagree with him.
Back in 1988, before I became saved. I was desire seeking the truth and answers from the Bible about the future things. I read in Revelation in New English Version. I didn't know that NEV have errors or missing verses few years later after I found out.
But, I believe God uses ANY versions to touch person to became saved.
In August 17, 1988, when I read in Revelation chapter 20 and 21. Revelation chapter 21 is my favorite passage about new heaven, new earth, and New Jerusalem. But, Rev. 20:11-15 made me so scared and guilt, that I do not want go to the lake of fire. I realized that I do not want to miss Jesus, and New Jerusalem. So, I bow down and praying to Jesus in my bedroom at my parent's house. I talked to Jesus by sign language for 30 minutes. I told Jesus, that I do not want go to the lake of fire, and miss Jesus. I asked Jesus to wash all my sins away through his blood(I know Lutheran's doctrine well, because I was Lutheran in my teen years, that Christ's blood forgived my sins through Calvary). After I finish pray, I felt so joyful and peace from Jesus in my heart, then go to bed at 11:35 pm.
Then 12 hours later, I took drive lincense test, and I passed it 12 hoours after my salvation.
I believe Rev. 1:3 promises us, when I read this book will receive blessing.
NO one witness me how to become saved. I was saved by read Bible(NEV) in Rev. 20:11-15.
Also, my precious deaf sister in Christ(she is in the heaven). She told me, she read through whole NIV from Genesis to Revelation several times. I visited her house, I was so amazing that she have lot of Bibles on the shelf in the living room. She shows me of her NIV Bibles, that she wrote them the date that she already complete read through whole NIV Bible from Genesis to Revelation several times. I lost the count how many times she already read through whole NIV.
One day, she attended Sunday School at an independent fundamental baptist church. A Sunday School teacher told her, that she must use KJV all the times, and forced her to read KJV. So, she started to read KJV. But, she told me, she understands KJV so very clear, because NIV helps her reading through it lot.
While she read NIV Bibles, she was baptist for over 15 years. Till she was forced to read KJV about 5 years ago.
That Sunday School teacher is obivously KJV Onylist.
I believe several Christians shared their testimony that any versions did help them growing in the Lord.
I do BELIEVE God uses any versions to guide or touch person to became saved or growing in the Lord. Any versions are consider God's Word. Because, many versions talk on Jesus Christ, cross, salvation, etc.
Hyles' sermon on 'Enemy of Soul Winning' about the corruptile of God's Word does not make a sense to me. Obivously, he was strong KJV Onlyist.
I went to Hyles' furneral. I was invited at deaf's house. A deaf lady told me, Dr. Hyles preached on KJV during 2000 Pastors' School. Dr. Hyles jump, jump, jump, and shout said, "KJV!" "KJV!" KJV!". It made me laugh(but I does not show my face express toward a deaf lady while she was talking to me same time).
That is partially of cult, because of KJV Onlyism.
Again, I am telling you, that an ex-deaf evangelist of First Baptist Church of Hammond told me, he had to obey his boss(Hyles), ask for the approval what the name of church he will go for the revival. Hyles demands him go to church only with KJV. He cannot go to any church which do not use KJV. I disagree on Hyles. Many deaf ministries in America need revival despite the issue of Bible translation issue. Also, he does not have enough support from any churches because of KJV, and obey his boss situation. That why he got divorced about 2 years ago.
I want to telling you the truth, I do believe KJV is the best version, because it is more close to Greek (Textus Receptus).
BUT...... all Christians CAN use ANY versions, because they have the same doctrines as KJV does. Many versions mentioned on Jesus Christ, cross, salvation, etc. same as KJV does.
I consider Hyles and Ruckman both really damaged many baptist churches of America because of KJV Onlyism. KJV Onlyism is a dangerous movement. Because, KJV Onlyism caused many churches into division or split over the silly issue.
We have to focus on God's Word for to preaching, teaching the doctrines to the people to growing in the Lord, not debate on the hotly issue.
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
I read Hyles' sermon at www.baptist-city.com on "Enemy of Soul-Winning". He said, a person reads through whole RSV Bible, he cannot be saved. Hyles spoken of RSV is corruptible.
I strongly disagree with him.
Back in 1988, before I became saved. I was desire seeking the truth and answers from the Bible about the future things. I read in Revelation in New English Version. I didn't know that NEV have errors or missing verses few years later after I found out.
But, I believe God uses ANY versions to touch person to became saved.
In August 17, 1988, when I read in Revelation chapter 20 and 21. Revelation chapter 21 is my favorite passage about new heaven, new earth, and New Jerusalem. But, Rev. 20:11-15 made me so scared and guilt, that I do not want go to the lake of fire. I realized that I do not want to miss Jesus, and New Jerusalem. So, I bow down and praying to Jesus in my bedroom at my parent's house. I talked to Jesus by sign language for 30 minutes. I told Jesus, that I do not want go to the lake of fire, and miss Jesus. I asked Jesus to wash all my sins away through his blood(I know Lutheran's doctrine well, because I was Lutheran in my teen years, that Christ's blood forgived my sins through Calvary). After I finish pray, I felt so joyful and peace from Jesus in my heart, then go to bed at 11:35 pm.
Then 12 hours later, I took drive lincense test, and I passed it 12 hoours after my salvation.
I believe Rev. 1:3 promises us, when I read this book will receive blessing.
NO one witness me how to become saved. I was saved by read Bible(NEV) in Rev. 20:11-15.
Also, my precious deaf sister in Christ(she is in the heaven). She told me, she read through whole NIV from Genesis to Revelation several times. I visited her house, I was so amazing that she have lot of Bibles on the shelf in the living room. She shows me of her NIV Bibles, that she wrote them the date that she already complete read through whole NIV Bible from Genesis to Revelation several times. I lost the count how many times she already read through whole NIV.
One day, she attended Sunday School at an independent fundamental baptist church. A Sunday School teacher told her, that she must use KJV all the times, and forced her to read KJV. So, she started to read KJV. But, she told me, she understands KJV so very clear, because NIV helps her reading through it lot.
While she read NIV Bibles, she was baptist for over 15 years. Till she was forced to read KJV about 5 years ago.
That Sunday School teacher is obivously KJV Onylist.
I believe several Christians shared their testimony that any versions did help them growing in the Lord.
I do BELIEVE God uses any versions to guide or touch person to became saved or growing in the Lord. Any versions are consider God's Word. Because, many versions talk on Jesus Christ, cross, salvation, etc.
Hyles' sermon on 'Enemy of Soul Winning' about the corruptile of God's Word does not make a sense to me. Obivously, he was strong KJV Onlyist.
I went to Hyles' furneral. I was invited at deaf's house. A deaf lady told me, Dr. Hyles preached on KJV during 2000 Pastors' School. Dr. Hyles jump, jump, jump, and shout said, "KJV!" "KJV!" KJV!". It made me laugh(but I does not show my face express toward a deaf lady while she was talking to me same time).
That is partially of cult, because of KJV Onlyism.
Again, I am telling you, that an ex-deaf evangelist of First Baptist Church of Hammond told me, he had to obey his boss(Hyles), ask for the approval what the name of church he will go for the revival. Hyles demands him go to church only with KJV. He cannot go to any church which do not use KJV. I disagree on Hyles. Many deaf ministries in America need revival despite the issue of Bible translation issue. Also, he does not have enough support from any churches because of KJV, and obey his boss situation. That why he got divorced about 2 years ago.
I want to telling you the truth, I do believe KJV is the best version, because it is more close to Greek (Textus Receptus).
BUT...... all Christians CAN use ANY versions, because they have the same doctrines as KJV does. Many versions mentioned on Jesus Christ, cross, salvation, etc. same as KJV does.
I consider Hyles and Ruckman both really damaged many baptist churches of America because of KJV Onlyism. KJV Onlyism is a dangerous movement. Because, KJV Onlyism caused many churches into division or split over the silly issue.
We have to focus on God's Word for to preaching, teaching the doctrines to the people to growing in the Lord, not debate on the hotly issue.
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
DeafPosttrib
New Member
Askjo,
I am aware that there are so much debate about Bible translation, Manuscript, KJV issues. KJV Onlyists saying that many Versions omit many important words, or whole verses from the Bible. They are right. KJV Onlyists saying the reason that many Versions omit many words or whole verses because of the doctrine.
For example, KJV Onlyists often saying many Versions omit word, 'blood' from the Bible. They might be right. Yes that is true. KJV Onlyists saying NIV is the worst Version, which omit so many important words & whole verses. They might be right. Yes that is true.
But, KJV Onlyists have to be opening their mind.
NIV does have truths in it.
I want to show you few comparings of NIV with KJV on verses.
John 3:16 NIV "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
John 3:16 KJV "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life."
KJV Onlyists argue that NIV changed or twisted a word - "only begotten", that NIV says, "one and only". Actually, use in our common sense, that NIV believes Jesus Christ is the deity of God, also, NIV believes Jesus Christ is the way, the life, truth (John 14:6). There is no big deal between "begotten" & "one and only", both are similiar almost same meaning.
Romans 10:9 NIV "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."
Romans 10:9 KJV "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
There are no difference between NIV & KJV on Romans 10:9, both are speaking the same doctrine. Because NIV believes Jesus is the Lord, just as KJV believes Jesus is the Lord.
KJV Onlyists saying NIV omits 'blood' from God's Word. They might be right. Yes that is true. But, they have to opening their mind.
What about Ephesians 1:7?
Ephesians 1:7 NIV "In him we have redemption through his BLOOD, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace."
Ephesians 1:7 KJV "In Whom we have redemption through his BLOOD, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;"
Both of Ephesians 1:7 telling us, we are redeemed through Christ's blood according to the riches of God's grace. There are no difference between them of Eph. 1:7, both telling the same doctrine.
There are so plenty of comparings verses of NIV and KJV, both are same doctrines.
Please opening your mind.
By the way, of course, I do have a book "New Age Version". It shows of the parallels comparing with different versions and KJV. I already read them. I know that.
KJV Onlyists stress that many Versions omit many important words and whole verses, because of the doctrines purpose. They might be right. I agree with them. But, notice, many KJV Onlyists seem have their narrow mind, not willing to opening their mind.
I am now attending church. That pastor preaches from his Bible during the service. He uses ASV. But, I have no problem with him. Because He BELIEVES we are saved by through Christ's blood literally. He BELIEVES we are saved by the faith through the grace only. He BELIEVES Jesus Christ is the deity of God. He BELIEVES the virgin birth of Christ literally.
At that church, many members brign their own Bibles, not every members use KJV, some use ASV, some use NIV, some use RSV, some use KJV. That church have NO problem, because they all believe the same doctrine of Jesus Christ of salvation. That is the most important that we all believe the basic fundamental doctrine, as what many IFB churches believe. That church is not KJV Onlyism. Also, that church is NOT legalism. That church is a very warm friendly with truly love.
I am not comfortable with legalism church, because they have no true love, they are spirit cold. I am serious, no kidding. I did visited that church is a legalism. I was not comfortable with them. They were not friendly toward me, and show no respect. That why I am not visit that church again next time.
Askjo, please opening your mind toward many Christians include baptists, who use different Versions beside KJV, they believe the same doctrines just as what you believe. Please respect them.
Never know some baptist churches which use different Versions, are better spiritual than KJV Onlyism baptist churches.
Even, there are many SBC churches are better spiritual than IFB churches.
I am not saying that IFB churches are awful terrible spiritual. I know many IFB churches' spiritual are wonderful.
Also, not all IFB churches are legalism, KJV Onlyism. Depend on their standards.
Every baptists and Christians have to opening their mind, show their true love toward others, who believe the same doctrines of Jesus Christ, as what they believe.
Today, many baptists often judge, attack, criticizing, rumours against other baptists or Christians who use different Versions. But they are too many hyrocrite. Their spirit attitude are awful terrible. God knows their heart.
I would like to see many baptists have to respect other baptists, who use different Versions, because, others believe the same doctrine of Jesus Christ base upon salvation same as what baptists believe.
Dr. Ruckman actually destroyed so many baptist churches because of KJV issue, because he have no truly love and respect. Also, he divorced THREE TIMES! Many baptist churches follow Ruckman, that why so many baptist churches are split, create into divisions among them today.
Sorry, this post seems off the track. I am trying to telling you, why I do not agree with Hyles-Anderson College. Because, Hyles always stress on KJV all the times, no question, he was obivously himself KJV Onlyist. I am no longer respect him, because he already spoiled deaf evangelist's life and his family because of KJV situation.
We need focus on Jesus Christ, teaching them the doctrines from God's Word, teaching them to growing in the Lord. Witness gospel to lost people about the good news of Jesus Christ from God's Word.
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
I am aware that there are so much debate about Bible translation, Manuscript, KJV issues. KJV Onlyists saying that many Versions omit many important words, or whole verses from the Bible. They are right. KJV Onlyists saying the reason that many Versions omit many words or whole verses because of the doctrine.
For example, KJV Onlyists often saying many Versions omit word, 'blood' from the Bible. They might be right. Yes that is true. KJV Onlyists saying NIV is the worst Version, which omit so many important words & whole verses. They might be right. Yes that is true.
But, KJV Onlyists have to be opening their mind.
NIV does have truths in it.
I want to show you few comparings of NIV with KJV on verses.
John 3:16 NIV "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
John 3:16 KJV "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life."
KJV Onlyists argue that NIV changed or twisted a word - "only begotten", that NIV says, "one and only". Actually, use in our common sense, that NIV believes Jesus Christ is the deity of God, also, NIV believes Jesus Christ is the way, the life, truth (John 14:6). There is no big deal between "begotten" & "one and only", both are similiar almost same meaning.
Romans 10:9 NIV "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."
Romans 10:9 KJV "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
There are no difference between NIV & KJV on Romans 10:9, both are speaking the same doctrine. Because NIV believes Jesus is the Lord, just as KJV believes Jesus is the Lord.
KJV Onlyists saying NIV omits 'blood' from God's Word. They might be right. Yes that is true. But, they have to opening their mind.
What about Ephesians 1:7?
Ephesians 1:7 NIV "In him we have redemption through his BLOOD, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace."
Ephesians 1:7 KJV "In Whom we have redemption through his BLOOD, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;"
Both of Ephesians 1:7 telling us, we are redeemed through Christ's blood according to the riches of God's grace. There are no difference between them of Eph. 1:7, both telling the same doctrine.
There are so plenty of comparings verses of NIV and KJV, both are same doctrines.
Please opening your mind.
By the way, of course, I do have a book "New Age Version". It shows of the parallels comparing with different versions and KJV. I already read them. I know that.
KJV Onlyists stress that many Versions omit many important words and whole verses, because of the doctrines purpose. They might be right. I agree with them. But, notice, many KJV Onlyists seem have their narrow mind, not willing to opening their mind.
I am now attending church. That pastor preaches from his Bible during the service. He uses ASV. But, I have no problem with him. Because He BELIEVES we are saved by through Christ's blood literally. He BELIEVES we are saved by the faith through the grace only. He BELIEVES Jesus Christ is the deity of God. He BELIEVES the virgin birth of Christ literally.
At that church, many members brign their own Bibles, not every members use KJV, some use ASV, some use NIV, some use RSV, some use KJV. That church have NO problem, because they all believe the same doctrine of Jesus Christ of salvation. That is the most important that we all believe the basic fundamental doctrine, as what many IFB churches believe. That church is not KJV Onlyism. Also, that church is NOT legalism. That church is a very warm friendly with truly love.
I am not comfortable with legalism church, because they have no true love, they are spirit cold. I am serious, no kidding. I did visited that church is a legalism. I was not comfortable with them. They were not friendly toward me, and show no respect. That why I am not visit that church again next time.
Askjo, please opening your mind toward many Christians include baptists, who use different Versions beside KJV, they believe the same doctrines just as what you believe. Please respect them.
Never know some baptist churches which use different Versions, are better spiritual than KJV Onlyism baptist churches.
Even, there are many SBC churches are better spiritual than IFB churches.
I am not saying that IFB churches are awful terrible spiritual. I know many IFB churches' spiritual are wonderful.
Also, not all IFB churches are legalism, KJV Onlyism. Depend on their standards.
Every baptists and Christians have to opening their mind, show their true love toward others, who believe the same doctrines of Jesus Christ, as what they believe.
Today, many baptists often judge, attack, criticizing, rumours against other baptists or Christians who use different Versions. But they are too many hyrocrite. Their spirit attitude are awful terrible. God knows their heart.
I would like to see many baptists have to respect other baptists, who use different Versions, because, others believe the same doctrine of Jesus Christ base upon salvation same as what baptists believe.
Dr. Ruckman actually destroyed so many baptist churches because of KJV issue, because he have no truly love and respect. Also, he divorced THREE TIMES! Many baptist churches follow Ruckman, that why so many baptist churches are split, create into divisions among them today.
Sorry, this post seems off the track. I am trying to telling you, why I do not agree with Hyles-Anderson College. Because, Hyles always stress on KJV all the times, no question, he was obivously himself KJV Onlyist. I am no longer respect him, because he already spoiled deaf evangelist's life and his family because of KJV situation.
We need focus on Jesus Christ, teaching them the doctrines from God's Word, teaching them to growing in the Lord. Witness gospel to lost people about the good news of Jesus Christ from God's Word.
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
Posted by Logos1560: Do you then acknowledge that other English translations can be good?
I a saying that although a person can get saved through other versions, it doesn't mean that you can take anything away from the KJV. I do believe it to be the best version out there.
Posted by Logos1560: Are you claiming that the KJV has the best rendering of every word and verse when compared to the preserved Scriptures in the original languages or are you claiming that the KJV is the best overall translation but acknowledging that another English translation may have a better, clearer, or more accurate rendering at some verses?
I am saying the KJV is the best overall translation. Of course there may be verses in other translations that make the KJV rendering easier to understand. But I stick to what has been tried and proven. I believe there are problems with most of the other versions but you are welcome to use them as you will and I will not look down on you for doing so. I will use the KJV beleiving it has been preserved as God would have it. Yours? I dunno.
Posted by Deafposttrib: NIV does have truths in it.
So does everything in life.
Posted by Deafposttrib: For example, KJV Onlyists often saying many Versions omit word, 'blood' from the Bible. They might be right. Yes that is true. KJV Onlyists saying NIV is the worst Version, which omit so many important words & whole verses. They might be right. Yes that is true.
Case and point!
Look, I am no Ruckmanite! I do not believe the men who translated the KJV were inspired. I do beleive they were men of prayer and that God blessed their work. However, I know it is only a translation. But I believe it to be the best out there. Use whatever you want. No hardfeelings here.
I also know there is the KJVO crowd that beats you guys like yard dogs' for using other versions. I belong to a KJO church but we are not militant on the issue other than for ourselves.
I a saying that although a person can get saved through other versions, it doesn't mean that you can take anything away from the KJV. I do believe it to be the best version out there.
Posted by Logos1560: Are you claiming that the KJV has the best rendering of every word and verse when compared to the preserved Scriptures in the original languages or are you claiming that the KJV is the best overall translation but acknowledging that another English translation may have a better, clearer, or more accurate rendering at some verses?
I am saying the KJV is the best overall translation. Of course there may be verses in other translations that make the KJV rendering easier to understand. But I stick to what has been tried and proven. I believe there are problems with most of the other versions but you are welcome to use them as you will and I will not look down on you for doing so. I will use the KJV beleiving it has been preserved as God would have it. Yours? I dunno.
Posted by Deafposttrib: NIV does have truths in it.
So does everything in life.
Posted by Deafposttrib: For example, KJV Onlyists often saying many Versions omit word, 'blood' from the Bible. They might be right. Yes that is true. KJV Onlyists saying NIV is the worst Version, which omit so many important words & whole verses. They might be right. Yes that is true.
Case and point!
Look, I am no Ruckmanite! I do not believe the men who translated the KJV were inspired. I do beleive they were men of prayer and that God blessed their work. However, I know it is only a translation. But I believe it to be the best out there. Use whatever you want. No hardfeelings here.
I also know there is the KJVO crowd that beats you guys like yard dogs' for using other versions. I belong to a KJO church but we are not militant on the issue other than for ourselves.
I myself went to Piedmont Baptist College in Winston-Salem NC.In my opinion it is a good, balanced, fundamental Baptist school. Later I attended Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, a conservative SBC school. My first pastorate was a sbc congregation. Later God called me into missions. I took the Independent Baptist road out of conviction. I mentioned all that to say this. After serving the Lord for quite a few years now. Being in all kinds of churches due to deputation. I have noticed one thing. God uses all kinds of folk from all kinds of backgrounds. I can honestly say I've met some folk who have went to Hyles and they are just downright odd. Others, are sincere people who have great desire for soulwinning. I've met folk from some colleges with a Calvinistic bent who are dry as a desert but they bring something "to the table" that is different from the "hyles" folk but both can be used for the cause of Christ.
Now the fellow that says H.Anderson is the "most elite college in the world" either had that attitude when he arrived at the school or the school fostered the notion. I don't know but that was a immature, silly kind of a statement.
If we truly believe we are being led of God into the calling of a particular ministry. Then we should trust God to lead us to the proper school.
I can't stand it when a guy says I wish I had not went to such an such school. Like they're embarrassed or something. If it was a good experience or a bad one. A highly academic school or a so-so school if God is truly leading then we should roll with the punches and count it all as preperation for what God ultimatly has called us to do for Him. For me personally, I'm more concerned if a fellow is Spirit filled than I'am with what kind of GPA he had in school. I sat in Dr. Paige Patterson's office after I had to resign from my first pastorate before being fired.
He said "I don't respect a man until he has been fired at least once." Furthermore, He was the President of the seminary. A highly educated, man at that. I was concerned about not finishing my degree due to the strain of a family and financial problems. He said "Son, God doesn't have a degree and He operates just fine. HA!
I said that to say this. For a young man going into the ministry, the REAL education doesn't start until he enters the ministry. HA! In the particular context were talking in, where you went to school is not nearly important as whether or not your SOLD OUT to the master or not! Is your life pure? Is your quiet-time with God consistent? Is your faith strong? Those are the things that are gonna see you through the valleys of the ministry. It really isn't going to mean diddly where you went to school. If it was Harvard or Hyles or where ever!
Now the fellow that says H.Anderson is the "most elite college in the world" either had that attitude when he arrived at the school or the school fostered the notion. I don't know but that was a immature, silly kind of a statement.
If we truly believe we are being led of God into the calling of a particular ministry. Then we should trust God to lead us to the proper school.
I can't stand it when a guy says I wish I had not went to such an such school. Like they're embarrassed or something. If it was a good experience or a bad one. A highly academic school or a so-so school if God is truly leading then we should roll with the punches and count it all as preperation for what God ultimatly has called us to do for Him. For me personally, I'm more concerned if a fellow is Spirit filled than I'am with what kind of GPA he had in school. I sat in Dr. Paige Patterson's office after I had to resign from my first pastorate before being fired.
He said "I don't respect a man until he has been fired at least once." Furthermore, He was the President of the seminary. A highly educated, man at that. I was concerned about not finishing my degree due to the strain of a family and financial problems. He said "Son, God doesn't have a degree and He operates just fine. HA!
I said that to say this. For a young man going into the ministry, the REAL education doesn't start until he enters the ministry. HA! In the particular context were talking in, where you went to school is not nearly important as whether or not your SOLD OUT to the master or not! Is your life pure? Is your quiet-time with God consistent? Is your faith strong? Those are the things that are gonna see you through the valleys of the ministry. It really isn't going to mean diddly where you went to school. If it was Harvard or Hyles or where ever!
Good post, Shannon. A minister is not limited by the school he attends, so long as he is Spirit-led. I went to a school that I considered to be liberal and I learned only a few things while in the classroom. I learned more outside of the classroom and from my own experiences as a deaf evangelist. Even many of the liberal professors had a decent amount of personal experiences to share, and I think we all learned from them.
My problems with Hyles-Anderson College are not few. I never liked the pedestal that Dr. Hyles was put on. I never liked the way people pledge blind allegiance to him and his staff. Many CRAZY things were said and done and nobody dared question the school. I dont like how they do soul-winning simply because I dont think they include repentance in their presentation and they sure do win a lot of souls that they cannot account for in follow up.
I have some good friends over there and I do respect the deaf leader, but I would not attend and i would not send my children or give recommendation to anyone to go there at this time.
Good points? Hmm.... they have produced some good preachers and missionaries who have gone on to do well. Most of the younger grads that I know have continued to walk a straight line (regardless of what motive)and have not fallen away like so many young folks do today.
I never met Hyles and I do not know Schapp. I trust that their actions, good and bad, will be judged by the Lord.
My problems with Hyles-Anderson College are not few. I never liked the pedestal that Dr. Hyles was put on. I never liked the way people pledge blind allegiance to him and his staff. Many CRAZY things were said and done and nobody dared question the school. I dont like how they do soul-winning simply because I dont think they include repentance in their presentation and they sure do win a lot of souls that they cannot account for in follow up.
I have some good friends over there and I do respect the deaf leader, but I would not attend and i would not send my children or give recommendation to anyone to go there at this time.
Good points? Hmm.... they have produced some good preachers and missionaries who have gone on to do well. Most of the younger grads that I know have continued to walk a straight line (regardless of what motive)and have not fallen away like so many young folks do today.
I never met Hyles and I do not know Schapp. I trust that their actions, good and bad, will be judged by the Lord.
I prefer the KJ over other versions. Most of the churches I receive support from are KJ only some are militant about it some are not. As a missionary on deputation one of the first things I'm asked: "Do you use the KJV"? I prefer it. It is what I read from, study from. I do not make it a matter of seperation like some IFB do.
I will admit that you can tell alot about a fellow or church's philosophy of ministry by the Bible they choose to use. Not that I'm one of those people. But it will give you an indication as to the style of worship in the church etc...
I believe that is one of the reasons as a missionary I get asked those questions.
Also, I think it is healthy for a church to decide on the version they are going to use as a church. What one uses in private is their business it just helps in a service if everyone is looking at the same thing.
I will admit that you can tell alot about a fellow or church's philosophy of ministry by the Bible they choose to use. Not that I'm one of those people. But it will give you an indication as to the style of worship in the church etc...
I believe that is one of the reasons as a missionary I get asked those questions.
Also, I think it is healthy for a church to decide on the version they are going to use as a church. What one uses in private is their business it just helps in a service if everyone is looking at the same thing.
KINGSDAUGHTER
New Member
Here's where Christians tend to get in trouble: putting our faith in man, not in Christ. I have seen other posts on this forum regarding Catholics, and unscriptural beliefs: If we put our faith in Hyles, the pope, or in scooby doo, it is wrong, and evil. We are Called to follow the Lord, not man.
S
Sounddoctrine04
Guest
#1. I am a graduate of HAC
#2. I never have been, and never will be a "camp" Baptist...such leanings are carnal.
#3. Just as there are different types of Baptist churches who are being used of God for His glory, there are different types of Baptist colleges, institutes, seminaries, whatever, being used of God for His glory.
#4. Seek God's will and do it, no matter what college He might lead you to.
#2. I never have been, and never will be a "camp" Baptist...such leanings are carnal.
#3. Just as there are different types of Baptist churches who are being used of God for His glory, there are different types of Baptist colleges, institutes, seminaries, whatever, being used of God for His glory.
#4. Seek God's will and do it, no matter what college He might lead you to.
S
Sounddoctrine04
Guest
1 Corinthians 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
1 Corinthians 3:4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; ARE YE NOT CARNAL?
13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
1 Corinthians 3:4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; ARE YE NOT CARNAL?
D
Dave Ekstrom
Guest
I'm a 1983 grad of HAC. Worst decision I ever made. Did well there as far as grades, etc. Kept my nose clean. Was never in trouble there. People were nice to me there. I've got no axes to grind. That being said HAC was a waste of time. Regardless of denials, Hyles IS worshipped there. Did it myself for a long time. KJVO is bogus. Bible teaching? HAH! Practical teaching on how to build a church? HAH! You learn how to build a bus route, which I didn't need to go to college to learn. I was a better soul-winner before I went to HAC.
For the most part, I define Christianity in terms OTHER THAN what is expounded at HAC. I define my role as a pastor almost as a photographic negative of Jack Hyles.
There are hundreds and hundreds of former grads like me who feel the same way. Who ever heard of a college, ANY college of ANY kind where such a large percentage of its graduates repudiate it?
For the most part, I define Christianity in terms OTHER THAN what is expounded at HAC. I define my role as a pastor almost as a photographic negative of Jack Hyles.
There are hundreds and hundreds of former grads like me who feel the same way. Who ever heard of a college, ANY college of ANY kind where such a large percentage of its graduates repudiate it?
D
Dave Ekstrom
Guest
I posted on an earlier page so I'm not sure if my post will be found. I'm a 1983 grad of HAC. Did well there, everyone was nice to me there, got no axes to grind. I'm really not convinced that Hyles committed adultery with Nischik's wife. Still I would say that HAC was the biggest waste of my time. I define my pastoral ministry now as a photographic negative of Jack Hyles. The numbers are lies. The "bible" teaching there is a joke. The only thing you will learn at HAC is how to run a bus route. Do you need to go to college to learn that?
That being said, some of the anti-HAC stuff is nasty and mean-spirited. I'm not anti-Hyles but I would hate to see any young man or woman who wanted to serve the Lord waste their time and money there. There's a lot of good places to go.
BTW, I'm not alone. There are hundreds and hundreds of former HAC grads who feel the same way. Have you ever heard of a college, any college, that is repudiated by a good percentage of its own graduates?
That being said, some of the anti-HAC stuff is nasty and mean-spirited. I'm not anti-Hyles but I would hate to see any young man or woman who wanted to serve the Lord waste their time and money there. There's a lot of good places to go.
BTW, I'm not alone. There are hundreds and hundreds of former HAC grads who feel the same way. Have you ever heard of a college, any college, that is repudiated by a good percentage of its own graduates?
Jarthur001
Active Member
This KJV only is so far off the deep end and it is tearing the church apart. We have tons of people that do not have a inkling what they are talking about, and never take the time to look and see if what they read in some book is accurate or just a bunch of lies.
The biggest problem I have with the KJV only cult is the lies they convey. They speak as if they KNOW the facts but demonstrate they have not looked into everything with the words they speak and write. Many have never read the Greek nor could they if you handed them a copy of a MSS. So where do they come off being such an expert? You can tell they read a book or two. They quote others that have written on the KJV only, and believe the writer as if it is gospel. Where did the writer get his information? Did he read the Greek?
I was introduced to the TR/KJV debate long ago. In 1976 a preacher came to our church and address this subject and I for the 1st time not only heard it, but believed it. It made sense to me. I was amazed! I never know all this had happen to my Bible. The world must know this about my Bible they are trying to do away with was my battle cry.
Later at the age of 19 just out of high school I took a summer job at Word Of Life Bible camp in upstate NY. While there, someone preached from the ASV and I was upset. Had they not heard? Did they not know? I had by now read 2 books myself on the subject and had a better understanding of the text. Or I thought. I went to this preacher after the meeting and like a fool tried to enlighten him. He showed a lot of grace to me and told me that there was more to it then I thought.
I went back home later that year knowing for sure I was right. I had read up on this and knew. But maybe I needed to be better educated. I read more books, the more the better. It all came down to this. This made things worse not better. Most of the KJV only writers did not even know Greek. They stated feelings and said it has always been like this, and made up lies to prove the KJV was the only Bible. Lies? Yes…tons of them. However, this did not stop me.
Since no one that I had read that spoke in favor of KJV only knew Greek I thought the best thing for me to do is to study Greek myself. Little did I know what a under taking this was. I will not bore you with this, for I still do not call myself an expert.
OK..you know a little Greek. So what is the point?
This is the point. In one famous KJV only book called “Which Bible?” Wilson made this statement.
When someone says..”All scholars agree. I went to know who these scholars are and what makes them scholars and what they did to become scholars.”
I say to you now…who wrote these KJV only books and what made them experts?
Do the writiers know Greek? For the most part NO!! How can they be experts on something they do not know? I’ll not go into all the lies they tell, but why should they tell any lie? If God is behind this KJV only then why lie at all? Do you think God needs help? Maybe God is not behind it this debate after all.
Let me say this I love the KJV. I carry it. I use it. I study with it I have no reason to change to another version. The KJV is a very good version. I do not like the NIV. The NIV is ok if you want to read to children. The NIV flows a bit better than the KJV and that makes it easy for light reading. The Greek has a woody sound to it. It sounds choppy to me. Te KJV is more like the Greek then the NIV. The ASV is more like the Greek too. For Bible study the NIV took way to many liberties’s in its translation. As a matter of fact I would not call the NIV a version, but rather a paraphrase. This does not mean it does not have a place. In fact it does have a place. Paraphrases have been used for years. Part of the New Testament was wrote using an Old Testament paraphrase. Jews read paraphrases when they met to worship. But that is another subject.
Anyway, lets look at one verse from the book I happen to be studying right now. Lets look at the book of Romans. You do not have to know Greek on this one. Just read and make up your own mind.
Romans 9, 25 KJV
25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. KJV
Who is Osee? If you were to not look outside the KJV you would have no idea who Osee is on your own. KJV only cult says you need to throw out the Greek now that we have the KJV. They rank the KJV over the Greek. For the life of me, I can not see where they get this.
What does the NIV say?
25 As he says in Hosea:
"I will call them 'my people' who are not my people;
and I will call her 'my loved one' who is not my loved one," NIV
NIV says Hosea. Which is right the KJV or NIV? NIV has to be wrong….it is a bad translation from a bad Greek MSS. Ok let’s look at NKJV
25 As He says also in Hosea:
"I will call them My people, who were not My people,
And her beloved, who was not beloved." NKJV
Ok something is wrong there. NKJV comes from the TR as does the KJV. If you are a KJV only person you may say…”YOU SEE!!! You can’t trust the NKJV..only the KJV.” Both the NKJV and the KJV came from the same Greek text. So something is wrong here. By the way, nearly everyone translates this word to Hosea and not Osee. Lets look at the Greek and see what it says. You do not know greek? No worry. This will be easy.
25 ?? ??? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?????????? ??????????
This is from Westcott-Hort New Testament 1881
You say..”I have no idea what that says. And besides if I did, it’s that bad greek I have read about. Show me the good stuff…show me the TR.”
Ok here you go…
25 ?? ??? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?????????? ??????????
It looks like the same text does it not? You know why? It is the same text.
So where did this Osee come from?
I’m glad you asked. Let me show you.
25. as he saith in Osee, I shall call not my people my people, and not my loved my loved, and not getting mercy getting mercy [and not having mercy having mercy]
This is Wycliffe New Testament. This is where a lot of the language came from in the KJV. Its not a Holy language. It’s Wycliffe eary English.
The KJV was not the 1st English version. The KJV is not word for word the same as Wycliffe’s NT. I can show you many words that were changed from Wycliffe to the KJV. If we are to never update the English langrage why did we do it with the KJV? If we can update the langrage…and we need to go back to the Greek to do so…we must do it the best we can with what God has given us.
I think the KJV men did that very thing. They had a English Bible but the English langrage had changed. I have no idea why they did not change this one word (Osee). It maybe that at the time that the KJV tranlation, Osee and Hosea were both used. Should it be change now? YES! No one, not even the KJV uses Osee. That is clear in the text and that is clear in the KJV.
This in no way is to suggest that the KJV is bad. The KJV translators did a good job of updating the version back then after the English langrage changed. They were lead by God to do so. Can others today be lead by God? Yes. Can we update? Yes. Will I change? Maybe sometime, but for now I feel no need to change from the KJV. If a new version helps someone else…go for it.
I would like to add this. You can make a point that the TR is better then the WH. I’m not saying that I agree with that point and I’m not say that I do not. All I’m saying is that is where if any debate should be. Please do not worship a version. I know some that have changed their church name to have KJVonly church included in it. That, my friend, is a cult!!!
In Christ…james
The biggest problem I have with the KJV only cult is the lies they convey. They speak as if they KNOW the facts but demonstrate they have not looked into everything with the words they speak and write. Many have never read the Greek nor could they if you handed them a copy of a MSS. So where do they come off being such an expert? You can tell they read a book or two. They quote others that have written on the KJV only, and believe the writer as if it is gospel. Where did the writer get his information? Did he read the Greek?
I was introduced to the TR/KJV debate long ago. In 1976 a preacher came to our church and address this subject and I for the 1st time not only heard it, but believed it. It made sense to me. I was amazed! I never know all this had happen to my Bible. The world must know this about my Bible they are trying to do away with was my battle cry.
Later at the age of 19 just out of high school I took a summer job at Word Of Life Bible camp in upstate NY. While there, someone preached from the ASV and I was upset. Had they not heard? Did they not know? I had by now read 2 books myself on the subject and had a better understanding of the text. Or I thought. I went to this preacher after the meeting and like a fool tried to enlighten him. He showed a lot of grace to me and told me that there was more to it then I thought.
I went back home later that year knowing for sure I was right. I had read up on this and knew. But maybe I needed to be better educated. I read more books, the more the better. It all came down to this. This made things worse not better. Most of the KJV only writers did not even know Greek. They stated feelings and said it has always been like this, and made up lies to prove the KJV was the only Bible. Lies? Yes…tons of them. However, this did not stop me.
Since no one that I had read that spoke in favor of KJV only knew Greek I thought the best thing for me to do is to study Greek myself. Little did I know what a under taking this was. I will not bore you with this, for I still do not call myself an expert.
OK..you know a little Greek. So what is the point?
This is the point. In one famous KJV only book called “Which Bible?” Wilson made this statement.
When someone says..”All scholars agree. I went to know who these scholars are and what makes them scholars and what they did to become scholars.”
I say to you now…who wrote these KJV only books and what made them experts?
Do the writiers know Greek? For the most part NO!! How can they be experts on something they do not know? I’ll not go into all the lies they tell, but why should they tell any lie? If God is behind this KJV only then why lie at all? Do you think God needs help? Maybe God is not behind it this debate after all.
Let me say this I love the KJV. I carry it. I use it. I study with it I have no reason to change to another version. The KJV is a very good version. I do not like the NIV. The NIV is ok if you want to read to children. The NIV flows a bit better than the KJV and that makes it easy for light reading. The Greek has a woody sound to it. It sounds choppy to me. Te KJV is more like the Greek then the NIV. The ASV is more like the Greek too. For Bible study the NIV took way to many liberties’s in its translation. As a matter of fact I would not call the NIV a version, but rather a paraphrase. This does not mean it does not have a place. In fact it does have a place. Paraphrases have been used for years. Part of the New Testament was wrote using an Old Testament paraphrase. Jews read paraphrases when they met to worship. But that is another subject.
Anyway, lets look at one verse from the book I happen to be studying right now. Lets look at the book of Romans. You do not have to know Greek on this one. Just read and make up your own mind.
Romans 9, 25 KJV
25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. KJV
Who is Osee? If you were to not look outside the KJV you would have no idea who Osee is on your own. KJV only cult says you need to throw out the Greek now that we have the KJV. They rank the KJV over the Greek. For the life of me, I can not see where they get this.
What does the NIV say?
25 As he says in Hosea:
"I will call them 'my people' who are not my people;
and I will call her 'my loved one' who is not my loved one," NIV
NIV says Hosea. Which is right the KJV or NIV? NIV has to be wrong….it is a bad translation from a bad Greek MSS. Ok let’s look at NKJV
25 As He says also in Hosea:
"I will call them My people, who were not My people,
And her beloved, who was not beloved." NKJV
Ok something is wrong there. NKJV comes from the TR as does the KJV. If you are a KJV only person you may say…”YOU SEE!!! You can’t trust the NKJV..only the KJV.” Both the NKJV and the KJV came from the same Greek text. So something is wrong here. By the way, nearly everyone translates this word to Hosea and not Osee. Lets look at the Greek and see what it says. You do not know greek? No worry. This will be easy.
25 ?? ??? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?????????? ??????????
This is from Westcott-Hort New Testament 1881
You say..”I have no idea what that says. And besides if I did, it’s that bad greek I have read about. Show me the good stuff…show me the TR.”
Ok here you go…
25 ?? ??? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?????????? ??????????
It looks like the same text does it not? You know why? It is the same text.
So where did this Osee come from?
I’m glad you asked. Let me show you.
25. as he saith in Osee, I shall call not my people my people, and not my loved my loved, and not getting mercy getting mercy [and not having mercy having mercy]
This is Wycliffe New Testament. This is where a lot of the language came from in the KJV. Its not a Holy language. It’s Wycliffe eary English.
The KJV was not the 1st English version. The KJV is not word for word the same as Wycliffe’s NT. I can show you many words that were changed from Wycliffe to the KJV. If we are to never update the English langrage why did we do it with the KJV? If we can update the langrage…and we need to go back to the Greek to do so…we must do it the best we can with what God has given us.
I think the KJV men did that very thing. They had a English Bible but the English langrage had changed. I have no idea why they did not change this one word (Osee). It maybe that at the time that the KJV tranlation, Osee and Hosea were both used. Should it be change now? YES! No one, not even the KJV uses Osee. That is clear in the text and that is clear in the KJV.
This in no way is to suggest that the KJV is bad. The KJV translators did a good job of updating the version back then after the English langrage changed. They were lead by God to do so. Can others today be lead by God? Yes. Can we update? Yes. Will I change? Maybe sometime, but for now I feel no need to change from the KJV. If a new version helps someone else…go for it.
I would like to add this. You can make a point that the TR is better then the WH. I’m not saying that I agree with that point and I’m not say that I do not. All I’m saying is that is where if any debate should be. Please do not worship a version. I know some that have changed their church name to have KJVonly church included in it. That, my friend, is a cult!!!
In Christ…james
Jarthur001
Active Member
oops...sorry. I guess you can't post greek on the server. Oh well. My bad. Maybe i can place it on a website for those that would like to see.
I Am Blessed 24
Active Member
This thead is not about KJV. You should have posted your post in the "Bible Versions/Translations" forum.
Maybe a moderator of this forum will move it for you.
Maybe a moderator of this forum will move it for you.
As the post is on the tenth page, I can't just move it. Nor am I going to delete it. I have pm'd the poster informing him of his faux pas.
Keith
Keith