So if a person is biblically orthodox -- that presents a problem for you?!
-
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!
The KJV’s respect for God’s Words
- Thread starter stilllearning
- Start date
So if a person is biblically orthodox -- that presents a problem for you?!
BB Warfield would most certainly not have been considered a heretic by folks back then. You have no clue. Do you know Church History at all? You spout-off things which you have no idea about.
stilllearning
Active Member
Hi Rippon
You said.........
This is what happens, when you cherry pick parts of a 1300 word response;
(If you read it again, you will see that I rejected both of these ideas.)
--------------------------------------------------
Next you said.........
(They did a good enough job of this themsleves.)
Have you seen the kind of “Christians” they were?!?
--------------------------------------------------
Next.....
--------------------------------------------------
And your last “question”.........
I don’t want to slam anybody.
It’s just that they need to be slammed!
You said.........
This is what happens, when you cherry pick parts of a 1300 word response;
(If you read it again, you will see that I rejected both of these ideas.)
--------------------------------------------------
Next you said.........
I don’t have to dishonor these two men.
(They did a good enough job of this themsleves.)
Have you seen the kind of “Christians” they were?!?
--------------------------------------------------
Next.....
Yes it does; i.e. literal
--------------------------------------------------
And your last “question”.........
I don’t want to slam anybody.
It’s just that they need to be slammed!
stilllearning
Active Member
In response to Rippon
You said......
“So if a person is biblically orthodox -- that presents a problem for you?!”
It certainly does!
Orthodox meaning, “Approved by the people”.
Galatians 1:10
“For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.”
You said......
“So if a person is biblically orthodox -- that presents a problem for you?!”
It certainly does!
Orthodox meaning, “Approved by the people”.
Galatians 1:10
“For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.”
No. It means the right, or correct belief.
You invent meanings of words. Since you don't like orthodoxy -- are you in favor of heterodoxy?
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Rippon, you crack me up! You get upset at what someone is posting, then you proceed to do the very thing you got upset with them for! :laugh::laugh:
Last edited by a moderator:
Joseph shall add
Member
I is interesting then a people fight over which bible to use. Actually it is foolish. The Original manuscriptes are in hebrew aramic and script are found in the dead sea roles. So no bible is going to be 100 percent right. Because all men error even translators. We go by the spirit of the word and not the writen word. Translations works by the spirit of the word also, thus a translator makes a call as to what word best reflects the spirit of the original document to get the point across.
The KJV of the bible is not better or worst then any other bible version. As long as the spirit of the original is maintained in the translation. The American bible is a very good bible. The NKJV is a very good bible. But there are some forms are that are not as good. The Mormon version of the bible is a joke.
A greater understanding is when people are pushing the KJV only they are unbalanced and with out understanding. The JKV is not a very good translation and does not fit today very well because people do not speak like that anymore. Now 3oo years ago it was a good bible people could understand it. But lets say a young person was trying to read the JKV well he would be lost for the most part. Thy, thow Them and Thus. So Let me get this right lets give them the word of God that they can't read. Sounds stupid right and it is.
The catholic church keep the word of God out of the hands of the people for 1300 years. Shall be come the new catholic church, I think not.
Is there a difference in thou shall not and you shall not. No not really both mean the same thing, Don't do that. Is there a differentence in the spirit of those two ways of saying it. No.
Legalisem is to try and make something more then it is. The bible is surely the word of God. But God is not a legalist, he is spirit and his word is spirit. So the writens word is endowed with the spirit of God. God is not a english God and he is not a American God and he is not Hebrew, his spirit transends all that and he effects his word not us. So read the bible God puts on yur spirit to read and he will speak through it.
The KJV of the bible is not better or worst then any other bible version. As long as the spirit of the original is maintained in the translation. The American bible is a very good bible. The NKJV is a very good bible. But there are some forms are that are not as good. The Mormon version of the bible is a joke.
A greater understanding is when people are pushing the KJV only they are unbalanced and with out understanding. The JKV is not a very good translation and does not fit today very well because people do not speak like that anymore. Now 3oo years ago it was a good bible people could understand it. But lets say a young person was trying to read the JKV well he would be lost for the most part. Thy, thow Them and Thus. So Let me get this right lets give them the word of God that they can't read. Sounds stupid right and it is.
The catholic church keep the word of God out of the hands of the people for 1300 years. Shall be come the new catholic church, I think not.
Is there a difference in thou shall not and you shall not. No not really both mean the same thing, Don't do that. Is there a differentence in the spirit of those two ways of saying it. No.
Legalisem is to try and make something more then it is. The bible is surely the word of God. But God is not a legalist, he is spirit and his word is spirit. So the writens word is endowed with the spirit of God. God is not a english God and he is not a American God and he is not Hebrew, his spirit transends all that and he effects his word not us. So read the bible God puts on yur spirit to read and he will speak through it.
stilllearning
Active Member
Orthodox: (Adhering to what is commonly accepted, customary, or traditional.)
Like I said, “Approved of by man”!
--------------------------------------------------
Every one of God’s men in the Bible, along with the Lord Jesus Himself, were all as unorthodox as could be:
But yet here, orthodoxy is looked up to.
Like I said, “Approved of by man”!
--------------------------------------------------
Every one of God’s men in the Bible, along with the Lord Jesus Himself, were all as unorthodox as could be:
But yet here, orthodoxy is looked up to.
Wow! Someone have a modern English translation for this post? 
Wow! Someone have a modern English translation for this post?
SLOBBOVIAN might work better!
Well, I trust someone will put you together again. Seriously, read my post numbered 105 again and then tell me you spoke in haste.
franklinmonroe
Active Member
Have you ever known of any reader of the KJV aloud to alert the listening audience that a particular word just spoken was italicized?
stilllearning
Active Member
Hello franklinmonroe
Yes........all the time, at our Church!
Yes........all the time, at our Church!
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
I have heard it many times and do it myself.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
You do know that your definition is acceptable, but not preferred?
SOURCE
You may be speaking of what we might call 'popular orthodoxy' which would mean conforming to a popular opinion?
When the rest of us use the word in this context we mean Biblical orthodoxy, which means conforming to opinions based on the word of God.
Yes, I do look up to Bible orthodoxy.
Last edited by a moderator:
stilllearning
Active Member
You may be right, C4K;
But I am a little prejudice, since it was the orthodox crowd, that turned my Lord over to be crucified.
But I am a little prejudice, since it was the orthodox crowd, that turned my Lord over to be crucified.
franklinmonroe
Active Member
Perhaps I was not precise. Agreed, I have heard exegetes single out an italicized word in the course of a sermon to make a point.
But personally, I have never heard a speaker of the Bible (KJV or other versions) while publically reading a lengthy passage disrupt the flow of that text with statements such as "Oh, that last word was italicized" or "Please note, this next word is italicized". It would be inconvenient, destroy the rhythm of the language, add to the length of time, and potentially cause the storyline or main idea to become obscured. That is what I meant. Now, is that really the practice you are familiar with?
When people recite a passage from memory I do not witness them interupt their speech; or even add a disclaimer at their completion of speaking aloud to identify all of the translator's inserted (italicized) words.
In addition, most people fail to indicate the italicized words when they write a letter, email, or post online.
Last edited by a moderator: