Members Steve Schwenke Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Am I a Christian? Yes, and I am not ashamed of that label, and use it frequently when witnessing. At the same time, it was our ENEMIES who gave us the name "Baptist" as a derogatory term, just as the term "Christian" was a derogatory term to the early followers of Christ. I associate myself, and gladly take the name "Baptist" because history shows that it was the Baptists who most closely adhered to the Bible and Bible Doctrine. Yes, today, as we move closer and closer to the return of our Lord Jesus Christ, there is much apostacy in the Baptist ranks...but there are still many who remain faithful and true to the word of God. I might occasionally find a "Bible" church that is very sound on there doctrine, but not on their practice (i.e. allowing rock music, and generally unseparated, etc.) I might occasionally find a "Bible" church that is straight all the way across the board - KJV, separation But these are by far the exceptions. Everywhere I have lived, the ones who are closest to the truth are the independent Baptists. If we were to identify the local churches across the country that are closest to the truth in doctrine AND practice, the overwhelming majority of those churches would be Baptist churches, and a few scattered "Bible" churches and maybe even a few "non-denominational" churches mixed in. That is why I (gladly) continue using that name (among other reasons.) So it IS important to know where we came from, and understanding our history, and why we are what we are. It does not mean that ALL IFB churches are right....but that are much closer than your average unseparated, non-KJV non-denominational church or "Bible" church is. I would rather put up with some of the nonsense of the IFB's than the leaven of false doctrine from the others. Laura, as far as the KJV, I think there is plenty on here about it, and it should be enough to convince you that it IS GOd's perfect word without error. If you have not noticed any "discrepancies" it is because you have not looked very hard, or have glossed over the major discrepancies, and justified them with the corrupt Greek NT. A few major discrepancies are as follows: The last 12 verses of Mark, John 8:1-12. I Timothy 3:16, I John 5:7, Luke 4:4, Acts 8:37, and many others that deal directly with the deity of Christ and salvation. Food for thought...not wanting to debate you on it, just letting you know there is much more to this than you allow. Either God keeps his promises, or He is a liar. The promises given extend to every single word for all generations. Ps. 12:6-7, Prov. 30:5-6, Matt. 24:35, II Tim. 3:16 (ALL Scripture IS...present tense...). In Christ, HappyChristian, candlelight and OLD fashioned preacher 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Am I a Christian? Yes, and I am not ashamed of that label, and use it frequently when witnessing. At the same time, it was our ENEMIES who gave us the name "Baptist" as a derogatory term, just as the term "Christian" was a derogatory term to the early followers of Christ. I associate myself, and gladly take the name "Baptist" because history shows that it was the Baptists who most closely adhered to the Bible and Bible Doctrine. Yes, today, as we move closer and closer to the return of our Lord Jesus Christ, there is much apostacy in the Baptist ranks...but there are still many who remain faithful and true to the word of God. I might occasionally find a "Bible" church that is very sound on there doctrine, but not on their practice (i.e. allowing rock music, and generally unseparated, etc.) I might occasionally find a "Bible" church that is straight all the way across the board - KJV, separation But these are by far the exceptions. Everywhere I have lived, the ones who are closest to the truth are the independent Baptists. If we were to identify the local churches across the country that are closest to the truth in doctrine AND practice, the overwhelming majority of those churches would be Baptist churches, and a few scattered "Bible" churches and maybe even a few "non-denominational" churches mixed in. That is why I (gladly) continue using that name (among other reasons.) So it IS important to know where we came from, and understanding our history, and why we are what we are. It does not mean that ALL IFB churches are right....but that are much closer than your average unseparated, non-KJV non-denominational church or "Bible" church is. I would rather put up with some of the nonsense of the IFB's than the leaven of false doctrine from the others. Laura, as far as the KJV, I think there is plenty on here about it, and it should be enough to convince you that it IS GOd's perfect word without error. If you have not noticed any "discrepancies" it is because you have not looked very hard, or have glossed over the major discrepancies, and justified them with the corrupt Greek NT. A few major discrepancies are as follows: The last 12 verses of Mark, John 8:1-12. I Timothy 3:16, I John 5:7, Luke 4:4, Acts 8:37, and many others that deal directly with the deity of Christ and salvation. Food for thought...not wanting to debate you on it, just letting you know there is much more to this than you allow. Either God keeps his promises, or He is a liar. The promises given extend to every single word for all generations. Ps. 12:6-7, Prov. 30:5-6, Matt. 24:35, II Tim. 3:16 (ALL Scripture IS...present tense...). In Christ, Here is the NIV version of 1 Timothy 3:16. 16 Beyond all question, the mystery from which true godliness springs is great: He appeared in the flesh,was vindicated by the Spirit,[a] footnote vindicated in the Spiritwas seen by angels,was preached among the nations,was believed on in the world,was taken up in glory. Here is the KJV 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. Show me that what is being said is different between the two versions. I am not asking to debate but am wanting to be open minded. I only had time to look up one verse for now. I will look up the others later. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Steve Schwenke Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Laura, NIV says "He appeared in the flesh..." KJV says "God was manifest in the flesh..." It is a significant change, and the KJV has it right. If you do the homework behind the translation, the verse was consistently translated in line with the KJV up until the days of Westcott and Hort. They invented a problem, and insisted that it said "he" despite all claims from all previous commentators who had studied the manuscripts. Now, you might say that the context makes it apparent that the "he" in the NIV refers to Jesus Christ, and I won't argue with you on that. The problem is that the KJV does not say "Jesus Christ" was manifest in the flesh, but that GOD was manifest in the flesh, making Jesus Christ equal with God. I have had many conversations with the JW's over the years, and they can generally weasel their way out of many passages in the gospel of John (John 10:30 for instance), but I have NEVER heard any JW give any reasonable explanation for the KJV rendering of I Timothy 3:16. They cannot refute it. So, I will take the KJV over the NIV any day of the week because it consistently promotes the deity of Christ, and in this passage makes the case so clearly that those who believe Jesus Christ is NOT JEHOVAH cannot answer this verse. I hope you understand what I am attempting to communicate here....again, not argumentatively, just trying to help.... In Christ, heartstrings, HappyChristian, candlelight and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Christian means one who is a follower of Christ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Steve Schwenke Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 I think we all know what the word "Christian" means, John. I am not convinced that it was the early "Christians" who decided to call themselves by that name. I believe it was their detractors who labeled them with this, and they did not mean it as a compliment, but rather as an attack, much like the other "Christians" called us "Baptist" out of derision and hatred. candlelight 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Laura, NIV says "He appeared in the flesh..." KJV says "God was manifest in the flesh..." It is a significant change, and the KJV has it right. If you do the homework behind the translation, the verse was consistently translated in line with the KJV up until the days of Westcott and Hort. They invented a problem, and insisted that it said "he" despite all claims from all previous commentators who had studied the manuscripts. Now, you might say that the context makes it apparent that the "he" in the NIV refers to Jesus Christ, and I won't argue with you on that. The problem is that the KJV does not say "Jesus Christ" was manifest in the flesh, but that GOD was manifest in the flesh, making Jesus Christ equal with God. I have had many conversations with the JW's over the years, and they can generally weasel their way out of many passages in the gospel of John (John 10:30 for instance), but I have NEVER heard any JW give any reasonable explanation for the KJV rendering of I Timothy 3:16. They cannot refute it. So, I will take the KJV over the NIV any day of the week because it consistently promotes the deity of Christ, and in this passage makes the case so clearly that those who believe Jesus Christ is NOT JEHOVAH cannot answer this verse. I hope you understand what I am attempting to communicate here....again, not argumentatively, just trying to help.... In Christ, When I read "he appeared in the flesh" I understand it to mean God appeared in the flesh in the form of Jesus. The reason I get that is from the first sentence Beyond all question, the mystery from which "true godliness" springs is great. I will look up another scripture you gave me to compare. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Steve Schwenke Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 (edited) Laura, I think you missed the point. I anticipated and acknowledged your conclusions before you gave it. However, you can show a JW the NIV, and there is nothing there to prove to them that Jesus Christ and God are one and the same. You have no leg to stand on when you talk with them. But when you show them that same verse out of a KJV, they can't change the subject or leave quick enough...they have no answer, because in the KJV it is clear that the "God" in the passage is none other than Jesus Christ. Again, I have NEVER heard any JW refute this verse. They can get around the NIV because it does not specifically state "GOD." So we are not talking about how YOU read it. We are talking about the text itself. If you show a JW the NIV, and then tell them what you think it means, they simply respond by saying, "That is just your interpretation." But they can't do that with the KJV, because the text clearly says "GOD" and it is clearly reference to "JESUS CHRIST." The KJV is superior in every sense of the word. Further, I have ample evidence from the Greek that the KJV is right, and that all the versions that change that verse are not only wrong, but are wrong based upon the deceitful workings of men who simply did not like the verse. Should we then overlook that, and accept the new versions, even though they have no solid support for their renderings? In Christ Edited December 8, 2013 by Steve Schwenke candlelight 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Luke 4:4 KJV And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. NIV Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone.’[a]”Footnote Deut. 8:3 I see they omitted "but by every word of God"...but that's the reason for the footnote which says... He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your ancestors had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Steve Schwenke Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Luke 4:4 - they left out the most important part of the verse!!! Does that not concern you? If we don't live by bread alone, then by what means do we live??? The NIV does not tell you! As to the footnote, everyone knows (or should know) that the footnotes are yours to take or leave. Who decides then if it is actually scripture? The editors obviously did NOT think it was Scripture, otherwise they would have included it in the text. They put it in the footnote so that YOU can have the "option" to take it as Scripture or NOT...who decides??? heartstrings, Standing Firm In Christ, candlelight and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 I understand a footnote to be further information...not a choice to omit or not omit. I will look up the other scriptures you gave me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members No Nicolaitans Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Forgive me for chiming in...I hope this doesn't distract from Bro. Steve. Sis. Laura, please look at Revelation 8:13 in the NIV, and then look at it in the KJV. candlelight 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Steve Schwenke Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Laura, again, I am trying to be argumentative, so please do not interpret my responses as being such. Footnotes might be "additional information," but the question is whether or not those footnotes are SCRIPTURE. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, but FOOTNOTES are not SCRIPTURE. Can you see the difference, and how the NIV has made a mess out of Luke 4:4? They took the most important part of the verse out of the text of Scripture and put it in the footnote. So what are they implying? 1. That the phrase "but by every word of God" is NOT Scripture 2. That the Christian is not to live by "bread alone" but we are not actually sure what we are to live by 3. They were kind enough to give you the "additional information" but they have already decided that the "additional information" is NOT SCRIPTURE. 4. So where does that leave you? Is it SCRIPTURE or is it NOT Scripture. If it is NOT Scripture, then the footnote is irrelevant. If it IS Scripture, then why is it not in the text??? candlelight and HappyChristian 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Acts 8:37 KJV And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. NIV Some manuscripts include here Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” The eunuch answered, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” Again, another footnote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Forgive me for chiming in...I hope this doesn't distract from Bro. Steve. Sis. Laura, please look at Revelation 8:13 in the NIV, and then look at it in the KJV. Are you referring to NIV-eagle rather than KJV-angel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted December 8, 2013 Members Share Posted December 8, 2013 Ok...I get it...I get it. Just needed to be shown the scriptures and compare. I wasn't finding them on my own. I am now a KJV believer! :-) I gotta show my brother now. :-) candlelight, HappyChristian, Steve Schwenke and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.