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!
Hope of Glory said:You denigrate those who actually study the words that God has given us
mmetts said:There has to be a way to reconcile scholars and humility together. I am going to seek this out. Surely, there is a way.
I think this is true of most people on here. I don't know that we could say that of all folks on here or that have been on hereMaybe, but I don't think forums are conducive to good communications. Pack the same people in a room and you'd get a whole different set of dynamics. You might not end up friends, but I think discussions would go quite differently.
mmets I think the problem with scholarship is that everyone has their "pet" scholar and sometimes it just comes down to a "my scholar is a better scholar than your scholar."There has to be a way to reconcile scholars and humility together.
Amy.G said:Christ died for even THAT sin ("the" sin) and since I have put my trust in His work and not my own, I'll be with the Lord.
J. Jump said:mmet[t]s I think the problem with scholarship is that everyone has their "pet" scholar and sometimes it just comes down to a "my scholar is a better scholar than your scholar."
I think teachers are important, but I think that it is equally as important to study for ourselves to show ourselves approved.
For example I don't know how much you have kept up with this thread over the last several days, but lines were drawn in the sand, and rightfully so, over what the Greek word aionios means. Most all translations translate the word as eternal or everlasting in some cases.
However there are a number of "scholars" that say the word can never mean eternal in the sense that we use the word eternal these days meaning without beginning and without end. Then you have another side that says the word does in fact mean without beginning and without end because that's what our "scholars" say.
And it boiled down to well if you don't trust Strong's then there is no hope for you.
So at some point we have to set aside tradition (because it's not infallible) and just look at the Scripture and allow the Spirit to lead us and guide us down the right path.
But when it's all said and done there is a correct and then there is everything else, because the Holy Spirit only leads in one direction.
I think we put ourselves in a very dangerous position when we rely so heavily on "scholars" and "tradition."
Don't know if that even addresses your point now that I'm done rambling, but that's just .02 and some say it's not even worth that. I pray you will keep studying the matter out for yourself and come up with your own conclusion. Don't take anybody's word for anything. Test it ALL against the Scriptures because they only lead to Truth!
Hehe, this is really funny..J. Jump said:...it just comes down to a "my scholar is a better scholar than your scholar."
Amy.G said:Because of that one little word, "the" I (and all the Bible translators) have misinterpreted the scriptures and am following a false doctrine of salvation of the spirit and soul, of which neither will be spend the millennium in hell.
That is not the case, but you can't stick your head in the sand and say that the translations are infallible. And you can't assume that everything that was translated in 1611 meant the same thing it does some 400 years later.Well, I guess I need to go toss all my Bibles in their various translations in a box and place it in storage until I complete my edumacation in Greek.
J. Jump said:If you don't want to agree that's one thing, but don't act like you are better than someone else
I don't know if the KV1611 says the sin or not. Mine does not say "the".J. Jump said:That is not the case, but you can't stick your head in the sand and say that the translations are infallible. And you can't assume that everything that was translated in 1611 meant the same thing it does some 400 years later.
Even npetreley understands this later truth as evidenced in one of his postings in the tranlsation section.
Which again strikes me as funny, but not surprising.
And bottom line is I'm not sure how you all think with all your wise cracks and smart elic responses that we are supposed to be even more convinced that you are right.
We constantly are giving you Scriptures and every time we do you thumb your nose with another one-liner.
Now just so I'll set the record straight on this I know that I have used some wise cracks, but I don't espouse a drop your theology and believe me because I say so either.
If you don't want to agree that's one thing, but don't act like you are better than someone else because we actually want to know what the original words were and what they meant so we can enhance our understanding of Scripture.
Nobody has told you that you have to, but I think enough has been shown that because of the handing down of bad teachings over the years a return to the original langauges will do nothing but help not hinder our understanding.
Amy.G said:It seems, so far as I've seen, the only way you can make your KS doctrine work is to make the scriptures too complicated for the average person to understand and must rely on your interpretation to "get it".
29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.
Amy.G said:But, the point I am trying to make is this, you have made it impossible for someone (the average Bible reader) to understand basic doctrines of Christianity
That must be why this doctrine has eluded me. I don't use the KJV. Yes, it's true. I have one, but if I want a KJ reference, I usually look it up on Blue letter Bible. I use the NKJV and the NASB.Hope of Glory said:Have you ever seen the little notes in the KJV, usually in the center column? Know why those are there? To further expound upon the text; to explain the underlying text. The KJV translators themselves do this. (A good example is the 10 virgins in which the text says their lamps are "going out", but the KJV says "gone out". There's a note from the perfet, infallible KJV translators that explains that it is "going out".)
And, you keep saying that no translators translate the definite article. There are plenty who have. However, if I were trying to do a word-for-word translation, probably would not include it in the text, and use a textual apparatus to denote the definite article (as some translators do) or use a textual note (as some translators do). Why? Because we're told that the sin is lawlessness. They are synonymous, but they are not the same word. "Lawlessness" is "anomia". So, the wages of the sin is thanatos death, and the sin is lawlessness. Lawlessness is doing what is right in your own eyes.
Line upon line.
BTW, all lawlessness is sin, but not all sin is lawlessness. Unless you think there's only one sin in the Bible.
No the blame goes to all the pastor/teachers that have departed from "the" faith and taught doctrines that tickle people's ears such as it doesn't matter what you do in this life if you are saved you will get a piece of paradise pie just like the next person, only your slice may be a little smaller. Or the equally as false doctrine of if you don't have works then you aren't really saved in the first place. Or if you stop believing you really didn't believe the first time.But, the point I am trying to make is this, you have made it impossible for someone (the average Bible reader) to understand basic doctrines of Christianity because you and HoG have repeatedly made reference to the "root" of a word or the tense or doman.
There is no possible way this line can be true. If that were the case there would be no need to warn believers to not quench the Holy Spirit. The Spirit must have our cooperation in the sanctification process. There's so many more examples that could be given to show you this is as about a false a statement as there is.And He does it in an unbroken line without any help from man.
What do your pastor and fellow church members think of ME?J. Jump said:No the blame goes to all the pastor/teachers that have departed from "the" faith and taught doctrines that tickle people's ears such as it doesn't matter what you do in this life if you are saved you will get a piece of paradise pie just like the next person, only your slice may be a little smaller. Or the equally as false doctrine of if you don't have works then you aren't really saved in the first place. Or if you stop believing you really didn't believe the first time.
Had the pastor/teacher continued in the Scriptures instead of following away after their own lusts we wouldn't be having these conversations. Now that is really not the case today, because you have genuine and sincere people that trully believe these things to be true, but it's because that's what they've been taught over the years.
The blame does not lie with people that are trying to return to the originals. That doesn't even make sense. How can you be worse off studying the original words than studying what man says the original words say? Do you see the illogic in that?