Truth and heresy

[Kaliani]

Hi all. I have a question that is very personal to me.

Is discernment earned through academic studies? I have not the most sophisticated intellect and many important doctrines seem to require great erudition to understand. It frightens me that Christians keep calling doctrines - eucharist, rapture, and many others - heresies. Yet they are put forward by other Christians.

I need discernment. Who are the blind leading the blind? Where is the truth?

 

[thightower]

Right there with you, not the most sophisticated of intellect either. What I have found out, the more I spend in the word, the easier it is to discern false doctrine. When I listen to a preacher, teacher or evangilist, I put them up to the word of God to see if what they are teaching is true.

 

[Atonement]

Hi all. I have a question that is very personal to me.

Is discernment earned through academic studies? I have not the most sophisticated intellect and many important doctrines seem to require great erudition to understand. It frightens me that Christians keep calling doctrines - eucharist, rapture, and many others - heresies. Yet they are put forward by other Christians.

I need discernment. Who are the blind leading the blind? Where is the truth?

Kaliani -


Greetings to you tonight in our Lord Jesus Christ

Discerning of spirits is the supernatural ability given by the Holy Spirit to perceive the source of a spiritual manifestation and determine whether it is of God (Acts 10:30-35), of the devil (Acts 16:16-18), of man (Acts 8:18-23), or of the world. It is not mind reading, psychic phenomena, or the ability to criticize and find fault.

Not everyone has this attribute (gift) but it does not mean we can not acquire this gift; this gift comes from studying the Word, prayer and obedience.

How to Test a Spirit ​

You can discern or test whether or not a spirit is of God by the following three ways:

1. Observing what a person does. In Matthew 7:15-20, Jesus explains that false prophets are known by their fruit - by their conduct and actions.

2. Observing whether or not a person exalts Jesus Christ as the Son of God and as Lord and Savior (I Corinthians 12:3).

3. By listening to what a person says (I John 4:1-3). Does their confession line up with the truth of God's Word?

Has this helped you? I pray it has

LJ

 

[Butch5]

Hi all. I have a question that is very personal to me.

Is discernment earned through academic studies? I have not the most sophisticated intellect and many important doctrines seem to require great erudition to understand. It frightens me that Christians keep calling doctrines - eucharist, rapture, and many others - heresies. Yet they are put forward by other Christians.

I need discernment. Who are the blind leading the blind? Where is the truth?

Hi Kaliani,

There is a lot of doctrine that you'll hear about from Christians that simply is not Christian. You must be careful of who you listen to and check everything against the Scriptures. I'd be happy to help you if I can.

 

[Kaliani]

Hello thightower, LJ and Butch.

Thank you each for replying.

I will study scripture. Do you guys find one translation of the Bible more suitable than the others? I am a very serious spiritual seeker. I have the King James version, Knox version, New Jerusalem Bible (this one has more books for some reason - Tobit, Maccabbees, and more), and many other translations.

Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

 

[Carolyn]

The New Jeruselem Bible contains extra books, the Old Testament Aprocrapha, which were largely history that are not considered holy scripture by the Jews. They were not considered inspired by the Holy Spirit. The protestants did not include them except as "good to read", but not as part of the cannon.

While many on this forum only read the authorized King James Version. I like the New King James Version and compare it with the New American Standard Version. They all put words in italics that were supplied by the translators for clarity. I also use Kenneth Wuest's New Testament, (an expanded translation). It sometimes does a better job of translating tenses of Greek that do not easily translate into English because we don't have such tenses. Another example is the many meanings of the word love. The Greeks had a half dozen words for it that all meant a different kind of love whereas we have one word. He trys to resolve this by expanding the meaning.

I agree that getting familiar with Scripture is the best way to discern truth from error. Also, pray for God's enlightenment before you read . Use scripture to understand scripture. Look up center column references and always look at the context. I always read with a crayon highlighter and I make notes in my Bible, too. The things that are meaningful to me are the things I highlight. I also found that the more scripture I applied to my life, the more God opened up to my understanding.

 

[Kaliani]

Hello Carolyn. Thank you for your helpful answer.

I have a Bible that is translated to my mother tongue, but since I will be discussing scripture with you guys now, I will put it aside.

I think I will study the Jerusalem Bible. The English is not very complicated and English is not my first language. Also, it points out 'glosses' and makes clarifications in small notes at the bottom of the page which help me understand.

Thank you all. This has been really helpful.

 

[jasoncran]

who uses the new jerusalem bible?

and well the maccabees is a historical recording of the maccabees though not inspired. its like reading a commentary.

 

[Kaliani]

who uses the new jerusalem bible?

and well the maccabees is a historical recording of the maccabees though not inspired. its like reading a commentary.

I suspect you would prefer it if I read another translation? Please, just make your suggestion then.

 

[Atonement]

I suspect you would prefer it if I read another translation? Please, just make your suggestion then.

Kaliani -

Greetings in the Lord

I rather you read any translation of the Word of God then reading nothing at all

 

[jasoncran]

I suspect you would prefer it if I read another translation? Please, just make your suggestion then.

no, i was stating that those books while extrabiblical arent all that bad.

it gives on a background to the jewish feast of channukah and what the aod was and these myriads of debates on matthew 24.

if one wants to be closest to the literal rendering then i suggest the greek interlinear and the masoretic texts. the kjv and nkjv uses the later and the former is a bible itself chiefly the new testament.

 

[thightower]

Hello thightower, LJ and Butch.

Thank you each for replying.

I will study scripture. Do you guys find one translation of the Bible more suitable than the others? I am a very serious spiritual seeker. I have the King James version, Knox version, New Jerusalem Bible (this one has more books for some reason - Tobit, Maccabbees, and more), and many other translations.

Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

When picking a translation you need to be careful of the way it was translated. The KJV, NASB and Geneva was translated word for word. Some of the other versions were translated thought for thought, those are the ones you need to watch out for. The little research I have done, I would definately stay away from any version of the NIV.

 

[Drew]

I believe that there is simply no substitute for hard, careful, rigourous study of both the Bible and the cultural matrix in which it was written. Occasionally, you will run across people who dismiss efforts at understanding the historical and cultural setting in which the Scriptures were written. I politely suggest that that such people are taking the easy road, the path of least resistance, as it were.

In this case, I believe the cliche does indeed apply: nothing good comes easy.

 

[Atonement]

When picking a translation you need to be careful of the way it was translated. The KJV, NASB and Geneva was translated word for word. Some of the other versions were translated thought for thought, those are the ones you need to watch out for. The little research I have done, I would definately stay away from any version of the NIV.

I do agree.. I have got rid of ALL the NIV Bibles in my house a long time ago.

If you guys don't mind, I would like to share just a few difference between the KJV and the NIV?

(Luke 9:56)

(KJV) "For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village."

(NIV) "and they went to another village."

(Matt. 18:11)

(KJV) "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."

(NIV) (whole verse omitted) as in not there

(Matt. 9:13)

(KJV) "...I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."

(NIV) "...I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

(Col. 1:14)

(KJV) "In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:"

(NIV) "in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins."


And so many many more, it's a pathetic version of the Bible!

 

[Free]

When picking a translation you need to be careful of the way it was translated. The KJV, NASB and Geneva was translated word for word. Some of the other versions were translated thought for thought, those are the ones you need to watch out for. The little research I have done, I would definately stay away from any version of the NIV.

I think we need to be careful in making such claims. Dynamic equivalence (thought-for-thought) translations actually can be more accurate in conveying what the author intended than formal equivalence (word-for-word) translations. The reason is that, as anyone who has learned or tried to learn a second language knows, there is often very little that actually translates word-for-word. If everything in the Bible, even in formal equivalence translations, were literally translated word-for-word, it would be nearly unreadable and very difficult to understand.

As such, the NIV is actually quite good and makes some things clearer then the KJV. For good, proper study, using many translations, both dynamic and formal equivalence, is the best way to.

But that is all I will say on that since it is not the topic.

I believe that there is simply no substitute for hard, careful, rigourous study of both the Bible and the cultural matrix in which it was written.

Agreed.

Kaliani, it takes both what Drew says and much prayer.

 

[dadof10]

Hi all. I have a question that is very personal to me.

Is discernment earned through academic studies? I have not the most sophisticated intellect and many important doctrines seem to require great erudition to understand. It frightens me that Christians keep calling doctrines - eucharist, rapture, and many others - heresies. Yet they are put forward by other Christians.

I need discernment. Who are the blind leading the blind? Where is the truth?

Jesus sent the Holy Spirit upon His Church and promised that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. Jesus didn't commission the writing of books and letters, nor did He teach anyone to privately interpret Scripture in order to discern Truth. This is the reason for so many different denominations. In fact, we are told that private interpretation can lead to error.

"So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures." (2Pt. 3:15-16)

We are to humbly submit to the teaching of the apostles, and the Church founded by Christ. Find this Church and you will find the Truth.

 

[dadof10]

Hi Kaliani,

There is a lot of doctrine that you'll hear about from Christians that simply is not Christian. You must be careful of who you listen to and check everything against the Scriptures. I'd be happy to help you if I can.

Where is this doctrine taught in Scripture?

 

[dadof10]

The New Jeruselem Bible contains extra books, the Old Testament Aprocrapha, which were largely history that are not considered holy scripture by the Jews. They were not considered inspired by the Holy Spirit. The protestants did not include them except as "good to read", but not as part of the cannon.

They were considered inspired by Jesus and the apostles, though. It was the Septuagint, which contains the "apocrypha", that was used by Greek speaking Jews of the first century. In fact, most NT quotes come from the Septuagint.

"[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]Septuagint - Influence on Christianity
The Septuagint was also a source of the Old Testament for early Christians during the first few centuries AD. Many early Christians spoke and read Greek, thus they relied on the Septuagint translation for most of their understanding of the Old Testament. The New Testament writers also relied heavily on the Septuagint, as a majority of Old Testament quotes cited in the New Testament are quoted directly from the Septuagint (others are quoted from the Hebrew texts). Greek church fathers are also known to have quoted from the Septuagint. Even today, the Eastern Orthodox Church relies on the Septuagint for its Old Testament teachings. Some modern Bible translations also use the Septuagint along side Hebrew manuscripts as their source text."

http://www.septuagint.net/

If it's good enough for Jesus and the apostles, it's good enough for me. [/FONT]

 

[dadof10]

no, i was stating that those books while extrabiblical arent all that bad.

Extra-Biblical according to whom? All of Christianity accepted them from 313 AD (when the canon was set) until the Reformation. I submit they are inspired and they were taken out of the Bible by the Reformers who didn't like what they said.

 

[dadof10]

I think we need to be careful in making such claims. Dynamic equivalence (thought-for-thought) translations actually can be more accurate in conveying what the author intended than formal equivalence (word-for-word) translations. The reason is that, as anyone who has learned or tried to learn a second language knows, there is often very little that actually translates word-for-word. If everything in the Bible, even in formal equivalence translations, were literally translated word-for-word, it would be nearly unreadable and very difficult to understand.

True. Have you ever tried to read Young's Literal Translation? Sheesh...It's good for reference, but not to actually read.