Why so many theologies?

[francisdesales]

1. Really…I know it is God and the Spirit that changes but he uses his written word.

First of all, God can use His TRUE Word, Jesus Christ Himself. We know that where two or more are gathered in His name, Christ is present, even if they don't have a bible with them... Thus, you only bring up ONE of many ways that the Spirit comes to man to convert Him.

Secondly, the Bible doesn't say that the Spirit changes us through His "written" word. It is through the Gospel preached and HEARD - part of which was later written down. Your implications are false in that God only speaks to us through the written word.

And finally, what does this have to do with the KJV Only argument??? I can get the "written word of God" in a number of good translations, even in Protestant translations, albeit incomplete. So really, you have not addressed point 1 at all - that the KJV has magical qualities and only IT provides the "written word of God"...

a. Is the word of God needed for Salvation?

You are preaching to the choir. Of course we need God's Word of salvation. The problem your long winded post fails to address is that it limits God's Word to the written. NOWHERE does the Bible confine God to written syllables on a piece of paper. Thus, the whole argument is moot.

This is where we disagree – You believe the MVs are just another translation of God’s word and thus they are God’s words – I do not hold to that. I believe the MVs are counterfeits, corrupt translations, and really just corrupt interpretations of God’s words by apostates or the lost so therefore they have little or no power.

Yes, you have said your "heart" tells you so. Sorry, that isn't a whole lot of objective evidence, is it? No doubt, Joseph Smith and his followers also follow that "burning in their breasts" to lead them to what they claim is truth, "truth" that you and I refute because the objective evidence is not there. The King James version, while well-meaning, is not devoid of "corruption" in translation.

And to change our focus on the big picture, note that God did not leave an "Authorized and Approved version" of Sacred Scriptures - God left Apostles given authority to preach the Gospel. They and their successors were given authority to interpret the teachings of God, both oral and written. Thus, you can wring your hands over "corruptions" of words, denying all the errors in translations, etc., but you'll never find a "perfect and infallible" translation, because God has never vouched for such a thing. He vouches for the Church, the People of God, through the infallible Holy Spirit - not a book APART from the Church.

b.. Is the word of God needed for spiritual growth?

Off topic and obvious that we agree on, so I won't comment.

Now you understand why I am so rabid AV (#a above) today.

Based upon false presumptions, which I have detailed above. If "thou's" and "thee's" make your heart "sense" that you are hearing God's Word (and saying that other bibles are not God's Word because of this) makes you happy, good for you. But I find not a single verse that verifies or vouches for such an argument. The Word of God is not dependent upon "correct" translation but upon the Holy Spirit working within the believer. IF it was dependent upon the words alone, then atheists would be converted by reading KJV bibles. They aren't converted anymore than reading NIV or NAB.

2. Already discussed this – the translators put it in between the OT and NT saying it was not scripture only included for general historical reading.

The translators are expressing human opinions, not God's will. Apparently, you have no problem with particular men TAKING AWAY part of God's Word, which you earlier say is necessary for salvation. Did these same men determine the entirety of Scripture by themselves? Yet, they have the ability to judge certain books as not inspired? Has it occured to you that these men were mistaken?

3. The English AV is the standard.

According to you. Was there no Scriptures before the AV? What did the first Christians do before King James came along???

Now Francis – I’ve dealt with you before so understand I am not trying to convince you of nothing here – I am using your wore out arguments for those who are reading and interested in getting the issue of authority settled. So, keep up the good work – you provided good material.

Sorry I can't say the same for you. It is quite easily refuted, just as your "Walmart theology" on the history of the Church... Authority is not the KJV bible, as this states that there was NO authority until the KJV was written!!! The Word of God is not dependent upon English scholars who thought they translated without error God's written Word.

Jesus states clearly where final authority on earth is found - within the Church. See Matthew 18:16-17 in your KJV bible. It is the CHURCH that is the pillar and foundation of the truth, not the Bible. IF you really believe in the Word of God for more than just proof-texting your theories, you will promptly drop this KJV only idea and look to the Church as the last point of authority among Christians on earth. You provide a tradition of men and that, my friend, is something that I will refute here everyday of the week.

In case there is someone out there who desires to hear the truth. Naturally, I can present all the logical arguments in the world, but they won't do any good for someone who has closed the door.

Regards

 

[AVBunyan]

In case there is someone out there who desires to hear the truth. Naturally, I can present all the logical arguments in the world, but they won't do any good for someone who has closed the door.Regards

Thank you for displaying your "knowlege/logic" on the issue - I pray that folks will compare your posts with mine real close.

Good day.

 

[francisdesales]

In case there is someone out there who desires to hear the truth. Naturally, I can present all the logical arguments in the world, but they won't do any good for someone who has closed the door.Regards

Thank you for displaying your "knowlege/logic" on the issue - I pray that folks will compare your posts with mine real close.

Good day.

Which ones? The "KJV Only" argument based upon your "heart telling you", denying that other Bibles also preach the Word of God?

...or the non-biblical beliefs of God's Word found ONLY in Scripture while denying what the Bible ACTUALLY says about the Church...

Well, good luck with those... and good day to you, as well.

 

[Vic C.]

Play nice boys or the Soup Nazi will revoke your soup privvies. ;-)

 

[stranger]

Hi folks

The reproduction of historical heretical paradigms. . .

'Why so many theologies' reflect all the past and present heresies in various stages of development. A paradigm shift is subtle indeed and can be seen in the way people talk - I believe in the Word of God compared with I believe in the incarnate Word our Lord Jesus Christ. The former believes in scripture but this does not automatically translate into a belief in the God of scripture. There is room for the Pharisaical Jew here and any number of cultic belief systems. Since recognising this danger, to which I fell victim, I now want to affirm the incarnate Word Jesus Christ - a belief in the Person NOT a belief in doctrine about the person apart from the person.

A web definition of a Pharisaical Jew is given below:
1. Pharisaic also Pharisaical Of, relating to, or characteristic of the Pharisees.
2. Hypocritically self-righteous and condemnatory.

All the labels have to be laid upon the table and to ask: To what have I, as a Protestant, fallen victim? Unless we ask this question with 'fear and trembling' the log will forever remain in our own eye.

 

[dadof10]

I am thoroughly convinced that if there was a final authority for all and that authority was the AV then most of these different theologies would go away.

There is no way I can possibly respond to all the subjectivism in this post. The above gets to the heart of the OP.

Does everyone who reads the AV1611 and believes it is the ONLY true version and prays for Truth come to the same conclusion on doctrine as you do? Aren't there various denominations who all claim to rely only on the AV? If so, how do you seriously hold the above position? After all, it still comes down to INTERPRETATION, which is the main reason why there are so many theologies.

 

[francisdesales]

I am thoroughly convinced that if there was a final authority for all and that authority was the AV then most of these different theologies would go away.

I am convinced that this is the most self-serving argument I have heard in quite some time... Not a word said about Matthew 18, which is found in the KJV bible. Apparently, you ignore the parts of the "final authority", so it really isn't the final authority for you, is it?

By placing one's opinion as the ultimate authority, you can come up with lots of strange ideas. Man can become "convinced" of lots of strange ideas. Doesn't make them true, no matter your personal conviction.

Regards

 

[stranger]

I am thoroughly convinced that if there was a final authority for all and that authority was the AV then most of these different theologies would go away.

I am convinced that this is the most self-serving argument I have heard in quite some time... Not a word said about Matthew 18, which is found in the KJV bible. Apparently, you ignore the parts of the "final authority", so it really isn't the final authority for you, is it?

By placing one's opinion as the ultimate authority, you can come up with lots of strange ideas. Man can become "convinced" of lots of strange ideas. Doesn't make them true, no matter your personal conviction.

Regards

Greetings francis,

Personal opinion is a result of personal reasoning. In the past I have raised the role of reason in interpreting scripture.

IF I examine a scripture and arrive an interpretation, or agree with an existing interpretation and thereby reject mutliple other interpretations, AND claim I rely upon the Holy Spirit to teach me AND the Holy Spirit hasn't THEN I have actually elevated my reason ABOVE scripture.

The above sentence is a little clumsy - but conveys the heart of the danger inherent in Protestantism. Why so many theologies? Because men raise reason above scripture (by using their judgment/reason to validate what they believe is the correct interpretation) as the higher source of authority.

When I hear the words submitting 'reason to scripture' I am not easily convinced that we are any better of except to say that something is being acknowledged here.

 

[AVBunyan]

I have always said but few get it – it gets down to what is your final authority?

Mine is a King James Bible – any one will do – go to Walgreens and get one – that will do just fine. My final authority is not my pastor, my mother, my church, or “Greek and Hebrew†– It is the book I hold in my hands and read. God, by his grace, gave me his Holy Spirit to lead and guide and Paul told me to study. If I were stranded on a desert island with food and water and my AV then I’d be fine.

Some of you on the other hand have your final authority in an earthly church and your proof text is Matt 16:18. If you were stuck on a desert island without your church you’d probably be in a mess – very sad.

Bottom line – I have a book – you have a church.

 

[AVBunyan]

By placing one's opinion as the ultimate authority,

Mercy - you take the opinion of your church - :crazyeyes:

 

[stranger]

I have always said but few get it – it gets down to what is your final authority?

Mine is a King James Bible – any one will do – go to Walgreens and get one – that will do just fine. My final authority is not my pastor, my mother, my church, or “Greek and Hebrew†– It is the book I hold in my hands and read. God, by his grace, gave me his Holy Spirit to lead and guide and Paul told me to study. If I were stranded on a desert island with food and water and my AV then I’d be fine.

Some of you on the other hand have your final authority in an earthly church and your proof text is Matt 16:18. If you were stuck on a desert island without your church you’d probably be in a mess – very sad.

Bottom line – I have a book – you have a church.

Hi AV,

Think about how you reason and therefore interpret the scriptures, and what 'traditions' you have been exposed to that have been formative in your life. It won't cost you anything to reflect on your Christian experience. My guess is that the fellowship I attend is not to dissimilar to the one you attend where the KJV bible is used, though I read the NASB.

Blessings

 

[francisdesales]

Mine is a King James Bible – any one will do – go to Walgreens and get one – that will do just fine. My final authority is not my pastor, my mother, my church, or “Greek and Hebrew†– It is the book I hold in my hands and read. God, by his grace, gave me his Holy Spirit to lead and guide and Paul told me to study. If I were stranded on a desert island with food and water and my AV then I’d be fine.

According to you. I hope you are not put in that situation. People who say "I'd do this if I was in that situation" are really not in a place to make such promises. People say such things about combat or when put in a life threatening situation - and find out the hard way they were wrong.

Some of you on the other hand have your final authority in an earthly church and your proof text is Matt 16:18. If you were stuck on a desert island without your church you’d probably be in a mess – very sad.

The Catholic Church was established by a divine person - if you believe Jesus was God. Do you really believe that Jesus would be able to ensure His Church would survive and continue to spread His Gospel? That is our belief, but apparently not yours.

It seems Jesus' church blew away and the big bad Catholic Church took over with "Constantine", according to you. What an imagination. If we believe the Scriptures are the Word of God and not just writings of men, then we must believe that Jesus would protect His Church, a visible Church with visible people, visible leaders, visible beliefs, visible gatherings, etc... Otherwise, you do not believe Jesus was God. Quite simple.

So your comments about "earthly church" are meaningless. Nor do we rely on Matt 16 - although I note you continue to ignore Matt 18 and the powerful implications.

Bottom line – I have a book – you have a church.

You have a book given to you by my Church. The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ. In addition, the "opinion" of the Church is fine by me, since it happens to be the pillar and foundation of the Truth. Feel free to read my signature line, rather than making your false dichotomy between the Church and Christ. The Church is the Bride of Christ. Christ is the Groom who is not about to leave His Bride. You cannot separate what God has brought together, the Church and Christ.

Again, you are confounded by the Scriptures. If you really take your belief seriously, you will consider God's Word and not reject the parts you don't like.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Greetings francis,

Personal opinion is a result of personal reasoning. In the past I have raised the role of reason in interpreting scripture.

Hello, Stranger. Hope all is well.

I have no problem with personal reasoning and reading Scriptures. It is critical that we approach the Scriptures with our minds and intellect. What I wonder about, though, is when man must find it necessary to take the Scriptures, the Book of the Church, and set the Book against the Church. As you know, men of the Church wrote the Bible, inspired by God, so that the future men of the Church could know the teachings of God, but not APART from the teachings that explain this Book. I do not think Paul was writing to the Corinthians so that future Corinthians would proof text Paul's letters to bring about schism!!!

IF I examine a scripture and arrive an interpretation, or agree with an existing interpretation and thereby reject mutliple other interpretations, AND claim I rely upon the Holy Spirit to teach me AND the Holy Spirit hasn't THEN I have actually elevated my reason ABOVE scripture.

I believe the final reference is the Church, since Christ promised to protect His Bride from error and false teachings. Note the many times the NT speaks about false teachings - and that would could avoid such things by remaining within the community and to adhere to the teachings once given.

The above sentence is a little clumsy - but conveys the heart of the danger inherent in Protestantism. Why so many theologies? Because men raise reason above scripture (by using their judgment/reason to validate what they believe is the correct interpretation) as the higher source of authority.

Yes, I think people have always desired to place themselves in the ultimate position of authority.

When I hear the words submitting 'reason to scripture' I am not easily convinced that we are any better of except to say that something is being acknowledged here.

Sentences in a book, even the Bible, are subject to numerous interpretations, so I think having a living authority is important to help interpret difficult areas or concepts. Jesus Himself told us to "take it to the Church" when two or three Christians disagree. He Himself established an authority that was given the power to bind and loosen these Christians.

But people do not want to accept authority, a gift of service, and rather see it as chains. The problem is - "what does this authority keep people from doing?" "What does the Church autority get in the way of?" From crowning themselves with authority. It's all about me...

Thus, people rebel against such, not realizing that authority is given as a service to the Church to protect people from error.

Regards

 

[AVBunyan]

You have a book given to you by my Church. Regards

Out of all that rhetoric the above is the only thing I will refute. I didn’t get my King James Bible from your church. There are two lines of bibles – One came from Asia Minor (God’s line of fruit and revival) and the other line (yours) came from Egypt (little fruit and much darkness and confusion). Below is where your book came from.
A quick history lesson showing the Origen of all modern versions: Many people have been sold a bill off goods – they’ve been taught that the new versions are just updated King James Bibles with new information. The Roman bible and all modern versions can be traced back to a lost philosopher named Origen in the 3rd century A.D. A few comments were added for interest – some may find them worthless but that’s fine.

1. Origen – 3rd century philosopher (Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit,) – Origen – 6 letters – number of man

2. Origen was from Alexandria, Egypt – 5 letters – number of death - (a type of the world, God called His Son out of that country; Joseph didn’t even want his bones to stay in Egypt)

3. Origen ran a school of philosophers (Col. 2:8).

4. Origen’s beliefs – didn’t believe the first three chapters of Genesis were literal, questioned the deity of Christ, works salvation, allegorized most of Bible

5. Decided to get into the Bible translation business; came up with a 5-column hexaphala (5 – the number of death) – had 4 of his philosophers (Col. 2:8) to help him – 4 being the number of the world. Each philosopher (Col. 2:8) took a column and put down what he thought the Old Testament said. Origen’s column was the 5th (5 – the number of death). The translations were written in Classical Greek (more complicated), not Koine Greek (the common spoken language which the Bibles of the real New Testament were written in).

6. This hexaphala sat around stinking up the place because nobody wanted it until Constantine was looking for some Old Testament Bibles for his new ecumenical denomination. He asked his bootlicker, Eusebius, where he could get some new Bibles. Esebius got all excited and said, “I know just the place!†So, he scampers down to Egypt, like a snake slithering down a drainpipe and asks Origen about where he could get some new versions. Origen says, “I’ve done some translating here, take a look at my 5th column.†(5 – the number of…you guessed it)

7. Eusebius takes 50 copies of Origen’s 5th column and brings them back to Constantine. Vaticanus and Sinaiaticus most likely came from these. They were written on velum scrolls, which is why they stayed in tact so long, plus, nobody read them – God didn’t have His hand on them. The scriptures were written on papyrus and wasted away because people read and copied them – in other words God used them.

8. From here they end up in Rome with its religion (Catholic).

9. From here they circulate around Italy, Spain, and France (Roman Catholic).

10. In 1400’s or so these manuscripts become the Duoy Rheims (Roman Catholic).

11. From there the Catholics take their version and go about conquering with the sword to the Americas.

12. The rest of the “Alexandrian bibles†stay locked up in Rome and monasteries. God didn’t want them circulated to the common people anyway.

13. These “bibles†were available to the KJV translators in 1611 and they ignored them because they knew junk when they saw it.

14. In 1881a conference was called to “update†the AV1611. Two “Christian†bible critics (Westcott and Hort) said they had the best and oldest manuscripts. Where do you think they got them? You got it – Vaticanus and Sinaiticus type stuff. They snuck them into the revision committee saying these were the best of the bunch and sold them as fish wraps disguised as manuscripts.

15. From this committee you got the RV 1881

16. America joined in the fun with their committee in 1901 – they used the same junk the RV came from and they came up with the RV1901 – from there it went to the RSV, NASV, Good News, Living Bible, NRSV, the New New New RSV, NIV, and all the rest of the new versions.

Well there it is – I’m sure there will be some grumbling in the barracks and I’m sure many will dispute my history but that is how I see it – the new versions are basically Catholic bibles – I’m sure Rome is tickled.

My AV did not come from the above line!!!

Different bibles help produce different theologies.

 

[francisdesales]

My AV did not come from the above line!!!

Different bibles help produce different theologies.

Whatever. More smoke screens. Paul and Peter and James and John were part of the Catholic Church writing to "Catholics" throughout the ancient world... Until you prove otherwise, you got your "Romans" from a Catholic.

The fact of the matter is this. If we both use the KJV bible, we will come to different conclusions on various assundry doctrines. This defeats your premise that "If everyone adhered to the KJV Bible, we wouldn't have disagreements". That is pretty naive to even advance such an idea. The translation is inconsequential, if we realize that people using the same book come to different conclusions. That is why the CHURCH is the pillar and foundation of the truth, not a book, even if it is the KJV.

Regards

 

[AVBunyan]

This defeats your premise that "If everyone adhered to the KJV Bible, we wouldn't have disagreements". Regards

Show me where I used the word "disagreements". Taking liberties here?

 

[francisdesales]

This defeats your premise that "If everyone adhered to the KJV Bible, we wouldn't have disagreements". Regards

Show me where I used the word "disagreements". Taking liberties here?

No. Here's what you claim...

"I am thoroughly convinced that if there was a final authority for all and that authority was the AV then most of these different theologies would go away."

Dream on. I don't care what version of the bible you use, there will be "different theologies" as long as men refuse to follow the Will of God. If I use the KJV bible, I will still find Matthew 18:16-17 that tells me the Church is the final earthly authority, not the KJV Bible. But you will not have it... What more can be added to show you refuse to follow the Word of God expressed in the very book you claim is the Word of God?

Regards

 

[AVBunyan]

If I use the KJV bible, I will still find Matthew 18:16-17 that tells me the Church is the final earthly authority, not the KJV Bible. But you will not have it... What more can be added to show you refuse to follow the Word of God expressed in the very book you claim is the Word of God?Regards

Best I can tell you never answered one scripture I gave you regarding the issues that you brought up.

With all due respect - you are just not worth my time.

My dealings with you have ended - feel free to get the last word in.

 

[francisdesales]

If I use the KJV bible, I will still find Matthew 18:16-17 that tells me the Church is the final earthly authority, not the KJV Bible. But you will not have it... What more can be added to show you refuse to follow the Word of God expressed in the very book you claim is the Word of God?Regards

Best I can tell you never answered one scripture I gave you regarding the issues that you brought up.

With all due respect - you are just not worth my time.

My dealings with you have ended - feel free to get the last word in.

Why am I not surprised? You bailed out last time we talked, as well. Are you going to leave the forum for another few months again?

I addressed your posts and points throughout our conversations... Regarding your Scripture posts, please see my post dated Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:22 am. If you will recall, they were all non-sequitars and had nothing to do with the topic.

I understand your desire to quit again, ignoring the implications of my point in my last post leaves you with little choice. The choices are: either accept the Word of God as it is point out most clearly or pretend you are not aware of the false teachings and continue following yourself instead of the what the KJV (and other Bibles) say. You have chosen the later. Again.

Have a nice day - you have been worth my time, for the sake of others reading these posts.

 

[Imagican]

There IS only ONE truth so far as God and Christ are concerned. That there are SO MANY different religions is due to so few EVER even discovering this FACT.

God has left it upon each and every one of us to learn WHO He is and develope a relationship with HIM through His Son.

There is not ONE person on this planet that is able to develope THAT relationship FOR someone else. It is up to US, as INDIVIDUALS to accept God into our lives and develope a PERSONAL relationship with the Father through The Son.

Organizations will RARELY if EVER offer such insight into the TRUTH. They would be void of ANY importance if they did. So in order to maintain or create a 'need' in individuals for themselves they perpetuate or create 'religions' in which THEY are the 'creators'.

The Bible IS a source for us to FIND the truth. It IS the Word of God. Regardless of WHO He chose to record it the PURPOSE was for those that read it to be ABLE to discern TRUTH.

MEC