Rightly dividing the Bible

[Claire Rousseau]

I'm not offended. I just don't know if I really take you seriously or not. You have one of the most unusual combinations I have seen, almost like a liberal version of a Southern Baptist. I just don't know that I have seen you demonstrate anything that would make me feel inclined to listen to you nit pick me on something like this. I mean you are entitled to your opinion, but I am entitled to reject your opinion completely, which I do basically.

I know I have explained my understanding of what this verse means just fine. The version is irrelevant when I know that my conclusion does not create conflict even if you are a king james onlyist or any other particular combination of whatever. Nothing is added to my understanding by changing make to study except that I would join the KJV only club; or, rather I would join your particular club because you don't belong to any KJV only club that I know.

This is entirely why denominations continue to form and the church continues dividing. So I will repeat myself one more time and after that, I really don't see that there is anything else I can say. Your particular brand of Christianity is like a controlling Baptist with liberal inclinations.

I would suggest that you spend more time discussing what you actually gain from studying scripture, which I have seen little of. Like for example, do you have anything to cross-reference this verse with in your course of study? Isn't that what you are suggesting that we are supposed to do, cross reference this verse with something. Of course, this is only a suggestion.

I had an example of this from the book of Job. So maybe make is a better word to use than study. It seems to produce results rather than vain babbling.

Anyways, I will repeat, the English language is much larger than the Greek language. There are many other words we could translate the original Greek word into besides make or study. Both words mean taking action in a particular way. If we make a quilt. We have to assemble something in a particular way. Most people don't like sleeping with a blanket in the shape of a triangle. There is a particular way to "make" a quilt.

In the same way, the standard definition of study is to learn something in a particular way so that if you were going to take a test, you are not going to answer that the sky is green when the book you studied says it is blue. That would be the wrong answer.

I don't know if many people have a very broad vocabulary with the English language sometimes that they get so thrown over things like this. Substituting make for study is not even the real argument that you are trying to make about the versions. You seem to be under the impression that using make instead of study means that they are being translated from different original texts and that is not what it means, but I'm sure you didn't actually investigate any of this. So you're suggesting that there is something to be concerned with is based more on superstition regarding some vague familiarity with the present debate over which text to use in translating modern versions.

If you have something that you would like to introduce that would suggest that the version that I am using for this particular verse used a different original text than the King James, I would expect a more thought out response than suggesting that make and study change the meaning of what the verse is saying because it doesn't unless you are trying to complicate things.

It is conversations like this that I was talking about when I was including the verse the follows the verse in the book of Timothy. This sort of thing was exactly what I was suggesting it was saying to not do. We have now successfully wasted a whole lot of time on nothing. You have judged my understanding based on the version of the Bible that I use rather than the description of my understanding of the difference in the words used that I have given twice now.

You continue to cling to this notion that it is wrong to use this version instead of demonstrating that anything more may be gained from your approach by giving some kind of response to the interpretation that I am getting, which I requested of you. If your version is right, then how does the right version give a better answer than the one I have given? How do you respond to the verse in context with the following verse as a whole when make is changed to study.

You didn't recognize this because you probably thought it would make a better argument to continue rattling on about how the King James Version is not corrupted even though the King James Version has been revised and the language was never updated. The King James Version was never supposed to be something plain to the reader. The King James Version changed the English language in many ways and when people learned this language and it continued changing, the King James Version just sat back and seemed to hope people would forget about it. The Authorized King James Version was a political move of King James who was almost killed when he inherited England from Queen Elizabeth.

One of the challenges of being a follower of Christ who says His kingdom is not of this world. We are left to endure kings and other authorities who do not follow Christ even if they allow for the translation of the Bible.

So unless you have a dispute with the conclusion I am getting, keep your comments about what version I use to yourself. As far as I'm concerned, you have completely proven my point.

2 Timothy 4:
2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

4 And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

 

[Claire Rousseau]

I'm not offended. I just don't know if I really take you seriously or not. You have one of the most unusual combinations I have seen, almost like a liberal version of a Southern Baptist. I just don't know that I have seen you demonstrate anything that would make me feel inclined to listen to you nit pick me on something like this. I mean you are entitled to your opinion, but I am entitled to reject your opinion completely, which I do basically.

I know I have explained my understanding of what this verse means just fine. The version is irrelevant when I know that my conclusion does not create conflict even if you are a king james onlyist or any other particular combination of whatever. Nothing is added to my understanding by changing make to study except that I would join the KJV only club; or, rather I would join your particular club because you don't belong to any KJV only club that I know.

This is entirely why denominations continue to form and the church continues dividing. So I will repeat myself one more time and after that, I really don't see that there is anything else I can say. Your particular brand of Christianity is like a controlling Baptist with liberal inclinations.

I would suggest that you spend more time discussing what you actually gain from studying scripture, which I have seen little of. Like for example, do you have anything to cross-reference this verse with in your course of study? Isn't that what you are suggesting that we are supposed to do, cross reference this verse with something. Of course, this is only a suggestion.

I had an example of this from the book of Job. So maybe make is a better word to use than study. It seems to produce results rather than vain babbling.

Anyways, I will repeat, the English language is much larger than the Greek language. There are many other words we could translate the original Greek word into besides make or study. Both words mean taking action in a particular way. If we make a quilt. We have to assemble something in a particular way. Most people don't like sleeping with a blanket in the shape of a triangle. There is a particular way to "make" a quilt.

In the same way, the standard definition of study is to learn something in a particular way so that if you were going to take a test, you are not going to answer that the sky is green when the book you studied says it is blue. That would be the wrong answer.

I don't know if many people have a very broad vocabulary with the English language sometimes that they get so thrown over things like this. Substituting make for study is not even the real argument that you are trying to make about the versions. You seem to be under the impression that using make instead of study means that they are being translated from different original texts and that is not what it means, but I'm sure you didn't actually investigate any of this. So you're suggesting that there is something to be concerned with is based more on superstition regarding some vague familiarity with the present debate over which text to use in translating modern versions.

If you have something that you would like to introduce that would suggest that the version that I am using for this particular verse used a different original text than the King James, I would expect a more thought out response than suggesting that make and study change the meaning of what the verse is saying because it doesn't unless you are trying to complicate things.

It is conversations like this that I was talking about when I was including the verse the follows the verse in the book of Timothy. This sort of thing was exactly what I was suggesting it was saying to not do. We have now successfully wasted a whole lot of time on nothing. You have judged my understanding based on the version of the Bible that I use rather than the description of my understanding of the difference in the words used that I have given twice now.

You continue to cling to this notion that it is wrong to use this version instead of demonstrating that anything more may be gained from your approach by giving some kind of response to the interpretation that I am getting, which I requested of you. If your version is right, then how does the right version give a better answer than the one I have given? How do you respond to the verse in context with the following verse as a whole when make is changed to study.

You didn't recognize this because you probably thought it would make a better argument to continue rattling on about how the King James Version is not corrupted even though the King James Version has been revised and the language was never updated. The King James Version was never supposed to be something plain to the reader. The King James Version changed the English language in many ways and when people learned this language and it continued changing, the King James Version just sat back and seemed to hope people would forget about it. The Authorized King James Version was a political move of King James who was almost killed when he inherited England from Queen Elizabeth.

One of the challenges of being a follower of Christ who says His kingdom is not of this world. We are left to endure kings and other authorities who do not follow Christ even if they allow for the translation of the Bible.

So unless you have a dispute with the conclusion I am getting, keep your comments about what version I use to yourself. As far as I'm concerned, you have completely proven my point.

Are you saved?

 

[elsbet]

The King James Holy Bible is NOT a “copy”. It is a direct translation from the Hebrew & Greek Textus Receptus into English.
It IS inspired as the translators were moved by the Holy Spirit.
WHY on earth would I need commentaries from men who I don’t even know if they were saved or not?

I prayed and received clear affirmation that the King James Holy Bible IS God’s perfect Word.

I am born again, have the Holy Spirit inside me and since the Bible is spiritually discerned, the Holy Spirit leads me into truth.

Who better to teach me God’s Word than the Holy Spirit?

Romans is clear on this matter, and I'll leave it at that.

 

[elsbet]

Are you saved?

Do you also wear head covering?

 

[Claire Rousseau]

Do you also wear head covering?

What does that have to do with salvation??

I’ll ask you as well....are you saved?

 

[elsbet]

What does that have to do with salvation??

Nothing. I'm just curious how far out you really are, since you take issue with what is essentially a dictionary / index created for the KJV.

The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, generally known as
Strong's Concordance, is a Bible concordance, an index of every
word in the King James Version (KJV)...​

It's included in many KJV bibles-- why don't you know that?
And yes I am--
Soo, do you also avoid church since that would technically be "man's word"?

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

I just compared two passages - they read very similarly to me...

1 Corinthians 13 KJV

"1Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

4Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;6Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; 7Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things."

And now in the NIV

"1If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,b but do not have love, I gain nothing.

4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."

 

[rainerann]

It is unfortunate that this is turning into a debate over versions and we are losing the unity that was studying the verse from Timothy.

 

[Claire Rousseau]

Nothing. I'm just curious how far out you really are, since you take issue with what is essentially a dictionary / index created for the KJV.

The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, generally known as
Strong's Concordance, is a Bible concordance, an index of every
word in the King James Version (KJV)...​

It's included in many KJV bibles-- why don't you know that?
And yes I am--
Soo, do you also avoid church since that would technically be "man's word"?

“How far out you really are”?
No need to be impolite. I have been civil & have not been disrespectful toward you, so I ask that you do the same. Thank you.

I’m aware of the concordance, (which I did use when I first got saved & began to really study the Bible) but it is not really necessary, either, because the Holy Bible actually defines itself......if you go back to the first time a word appears in the Bible, that first appearance is when God defines the word.

At any rate, what we were discussing is the issue of accuracy of modern Bible “versions”.

I do not understand why this is such an offensive subject. I have no problem with anyone here, personally.

I am NOT attacking anyone, I am only trying to show you that there are MAJOR differences between versions.

It is definitely a relief to hear that you are saved. How did you get saved?

I go to church 2-3 times weekly & soul winning 1-2 times weekly.

The church I attend does NOT teach doctrine of the words of man.

EVERYTHING preached from the pulpit is proven directly from the KJB.

I do not believe that encouraging Christians to think & research where/how you got your Bible is a bad thing, or means I am far out.

 

[Claire Rousseau]

I just compared two passages - they read very similarly to me...

1 Corinthians 13 KJV

"1Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

4Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;6Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; 7Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things."

And now in the NIV

"1If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,b but do not have love, I gain nothing.

4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."

The NIV is one of the worst, love.
It’s missing the following verses:

1- Matthew 17:21"Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting."



2- Matthew 18:11"For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."



3- Matthew 23:14"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation."



4- Mark 7:16"If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."



5- Mark 9:44"Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."



6- Mark 9:46"Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."



7- Mark 11:26"But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses."



8- Mark 15:28"And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors."



9- Luke 17:36"Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left."



10- John 5:4"For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had."



11- Acts 8:37"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."

^^^This one is very important to understand that baptism means nothing if one does not ALREADY believe.



12- Acts 15:34"Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still."



13- Acts 24:7"But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,"



14- Acts 28:29"And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves."



15- Romans 16:24"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."



16- I John 5:7"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

 

[Claire Rousseau]

It is unfortunate that this is turning into a debate over versions and we are losing the unity that was studying the verse from Timothy.

Maybe you missed my last post to you.

Are you saved?

 

[floss]

Maybe you missed my last post to you.

Are you saved?

I’m 100% sure she is saved. While I agreed that the KJV is THE word of God. I believe God can used any version for the Gentiles to obtain salvation. But if anyone want to dig deeper on doctrines, KJV is the way to go for sure.

 

[elsbet]

“How far out you really are”?
No need to be impolite. I have been civil...

No, you haven't.

I’m aware of the concordance, (which I did use when I first got saved & began to really study the Bible) but it is not really necessary, either, because the Holy Bible actually defines itself......if you go back to the first time a word appears in the Bible, that first appearance is when God defines the word.

At any rate, what we were discussing is the issue of accuracy of modern Bible “versions”.

I wasn't discussing any such thing, and I question your awareness.

You have a problem with my use of the original Greek definitions, calling them the words of man-- but you insist the KJV is the best because it was translated from..... wait for it .... the Greek!

Either you have some serious work to do, or you're a troll. Way too much magical thinking in your posts for you to be authentic.

 

[Todd]

Mentality like Claire’s is why I started the “have Christians made an idol out of the scriptures” thread.

 

[Thunderian]

I’m 100% sure she is saved. While I agreed that the KJV is THE word of God. I believe God can used any version for the Gentiles to obtain salvation. But if anyone want to dig deeper on doctrines, KJV is the way to go for sure.

Amen.

I know of a woman who went to see Jesus Christ Superstar and was so convicted she asked Jesus to save her right in the theatre. I wouldn't recommend it for doctrine, but God can use anything, even a corrupt and incomplete version of the Bible.

 

[elsbet]

Amen.

I know of a woman who went to see Jesus Christ Superstar and was so convicted she asked Jesus to save her right in the theatre. I wouldn't recommend it for doctrine, but God can use anything, even a corrupt and incomplete version of the Bible.

I love this.
Whatever it takes to get you in the door.
♡

 

[Thunderian]

I think it means to keep it simple and don't overcomplicate what scripture is saying.

I guess it depends on what you mean by overcomplicating.

I want to know what each verse in the Bible means and where it fits. Sometimes the explanation of a verse isn't simple.

For instance, what on earth does this verse mean?

Matthew 24:28 - For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.​

The Bible says it is the glory of God to conceal a thing, and there are things concealed in the Bible that are just wild.

The simple message of the Bible is "believe on Jesus Christ to be saved", but the hidden treasures that are there keep refining our faith and showing us the glory of God.

 

[elsbet]

Mentality like Claire’s is why I started the “have Christians made an idol out of the scriptures” thread.

There is that, yes. Ironic considering the topic of this thread.

 

[Claire Rousseau]

I’m 100% sure she is saved. While I agreed that the KJV is THE word of God. I believe God can used any version for the Gentiles to obtain salvation. But if anyone want to dig deeper on doctrines, KJV is the way to go for sure.

Well that’s good, I’m happy to hear that she is saved.
I was hoping I got an answer from raineann directly.

 

[Claire Rousseau]

I’m 100% sure she is saved. While I agreed that the KJV is THE word of God. I believe God can used any version for the Gentiles to obtain salvation. But if anyone want to dig deeper on doctrines, KJV is the way to go for sure.

Well that’s good, I’m happy to hear that she is saved.

No, you haven't.


I wasn't discussing any such thing, and I question your awareness.

You have a problem with my use of the original Greek definitions, calling them the words of man-- but you insist the KJV is the best because it was translated from..... wait for it .... the Greek!

Either you have some serious work to do, or you're a troll. Way too much magical thinking in your posts for you to be authentic.

When have I EVER been disrespectful towards you??

You continue being impolite to me & I have not said ANYTHING rude to you. Yet now you call me a troll & continue making fun of me? Do you think that is a proper way to communicate with a sister in Christ?

Also, the Words of men I spoke of was referring to the COMMENTARIES. Those are written by theologians that may or may not be saved, but either way they are NOT God’s Word & are extra-biblical.

As far as going back to the Greek, what is the point if you (and other readers of this board) are not fluent in Koine Greek?

God promised to preserve His Word for all generations. I have faith that He HAS.

Seeing as God is the one who created different languages, there is no reason to think that He hasn’t preserved it in English as well.

Have a blessed evening.