Jump to content

Photo

Balancing The Christian Life


  • Please log in to reply
158 replies to this topic

#21 OLD fashioned preacher

OLD fashioned preacher

    Termite in a yoyo

  • Moderators
  • 1,854 posts
724
Excellent
  • Locationunder a rock, but crawl out occasionally

Posted 24 January 2014 - 01:31 PM

This is legalism.

Whether it is or not is not the point -- the point is that it is an OB rule. Just as if you do electrical work with me you do not cuss or change my truck's music or you do not have a job.

We have others on here that are not KJV only or even KJV preferred but adhere to the rule (whether they agree with it or not) because it is an OB rule just as I follow rules in some other places that I don't agree with.

 

Also, nothing said it was or wasn't a sign of spirituality to use the KJV here, it was stated that OB has a KJV posting rule.



#22 Alimantado

Alimantado

    Super Contributor

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,431 posts
252
Excellent

Posted 24 January 2014 - 01:39 PM

I don't know what your point is but I was addressing his violating OB rule #3. Everything in my post to him that follows the colon in the first sentence is a direct C/P quote of the rule.

 

This is legalism.

 

No it isn't, it's pragmatism. Asking everyone to use the same version so that discussions don't get sidetracked by arguments about translation is just good sense.



#23 Alimantado

Alimantado

    Super Contributor

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,431 posts
252
Excellent

Posted 24 January 2014 - 01:55 PM

Are you telling me you cannot read and understand the AV text as it stands?

 

Hi AVBibleBeliever. Since you worded that question in such a leading way, I think I'll be the first (perhaps only) on this thread to say that yes, I cannot read and understand the AV text as it stands. I admit that I have always struggled with the AV's sentence constructions and words, and I often have to use a dictionary. Perhaps part of this is owing to unfamiliarity, because I think and write in a different style of English to the AV.



#24 TheSword

TheSword

    Senior Member

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 840 posts
664
Excellent

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:23 PM

The word “legalism” does not occur in the Bible... If we remember these guidelines and apply them in love and mercy, we will be safe from both legalism and heresy.

 

You make some good points, but I would add that there are two sides of the legalism coin. Strictly defined, legalism is the strict literal adherance to a law or set of rules rather than the spirit of them. Often times people will tout verses on liberty and ones that offer enough ambiguity so as to allow for wiggle room and justify behavior that is otherwise deemed unacceptable. To use an example that others in this thread have touched on from the other perspective, many people who want to drink alcohol will quote Ephesians 5:18 and point at that it says not to get drunk but doesn't say not to drink at all. A strict adherence to the lack of definitive commandment not to drink despite the spirit of multiple Scriptures regarding alcohol is a textbook form of legalism as well. 



#25 HappyChristian

HappyChristian

    Waiting patiently (ahem) for grandchildren...

  • Moderators
  • 17,567 posts
1,920
Excellent

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:29 PM

Hi AVBibleBeliever. Since you worded that question in such a leading way, I think I'll be the first (perhaps only) on this thread to say that yes, I cannot read and understand the AV text as it stands. I admit that I have always struggled with the AV's sentence constructions and words, and I often have to use a dictionary. Perhaps part of this is owing to unfamiliarity, because I think and write in a different style of English to the AV.

And that is true of most people, Al.  Folks who have been saved for a lot of years and studied and read (and been taught) the AV can understand it by just reading it.  Folks who get saved as adults don't always have that ability. Yes, the Holy Spirit teaches us as we read it - but nowhere in scripture does it tell us we are sinning if we get help outside scripture to understand the historical aspect of the verse(s), the meanings of the words in Hebrew or Greek, etc. (and someone who lambastes another for doing so has a real problem) 

 

It used to be said that the KJV was written in such a way that a 6th grader could understand it. And that was true (actually, younger than that, too).  But with the dumbing down of teaching (not saying you were dumbed down!!!), kids have a struggle understanding what was understood two generations ago by their same-age counterparts.

 

All of us think and write in a different style than that KJV.  It is a learning process to convert our thought processes to the KJ English.  Hang in there - you've certainly come a long way in your growth process. I really enjoy your posts (and your humor cracks me up!  :icon_smile: ).



#26 GraceSaved

GraceSaved

    Daughter of the King of kings

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 540 posts
136
Excellent
  • LocationU.S.A.

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:29 PM

One example: I've heard at least half-a-dozen people on this forum say that they wouldn't fellowship or stay in a church with people who had 'reformed' beliefs, What do you say about just that issue?

Sadly, Christians are known for splits and strife.  First of all, fellowship is important.  We need each other for encouragement, edification and to provoke each other unto good works.  This should go beyond our church building.  If possible, we are to seek to live at peace with everyone.  We are not to judge and argue over opinions but walk in love.  We are first and foremost accountable to God and need to walk out or own faith.

 

However, in order to preserve our own spiritual lives, fellowship may be broken with an unrepentant brother/sister and it should be done in order to restore them back into fellowship.  We have instructions on how to deal with those who sin against us.  First, we are to go that person alone.  Second, If that doesn't work, we are to take two or three witnesses.  If that doesn't work, the last step would be to take him/her before the church. 

 

Why would we break fellowship?  As I stated above, it shouldn't be over minor disagreements or matters of opinions.  There are more specifics such as a professing Christian's immoral involved in sexual sin, drunkeness, idolatry, abuse, foul tongue, theivery, etc.  Anything we do to limit our contact with them is an unfortunate result of their actions.     



#27 Alimantado

Alimantado

    Super Contributor

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,431 posts
252
Excellent

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:40 PM

While there's plenty of sound advice in there, GS, at the same time you haven't really taken my point on-board or answered the question I asked. My point is, you were saying that telling the fundamentals (ok to divide over) apart from the "minor disagreements or matters of opinions" (not ok to divide over) was a no-brainer and I'm saying I'm not convinced it's that easy.



#28 Alimantado

Alimantado

    Super Contributor

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,431 posts
252
Excellent

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:41 PM

And that is true of most people, Al.  Folks who have been saved for a lot of years and studied and read (and been taught) the AV can understand it by just reading it.  Folks who get saved as adults don't always have that ability. Yes, the Holy Spirit teaches us as we read it - but nowhere in scripture does it tell us we are sinning if we get help outside scripture to understand the historical aspect of the verse(s), the meanings of the words in Hebrew or Greek, etc. (and someone who lambastes another for doing so has a real problem) 

 

It used to be said that the KJV was written in such a way that a 6th grader could understand it. And that was true (actually, younger than that, too).  But with the dumbing down of teaching (not saying you were dumbed down!!!), kids have a struggle understanding what was understood two generations ago by their same-age counterparts.

 

All of us think and write in a different style than that KJV.  It is a learning process to convert our thought processes to the KJ English.  Hang in there - you've certainly come a long way in your growth process. I really enjoy your posts (and your humor cracks me up!  :icon_smile: ).

 

Such a helpful response. Thanks HC!



#29 GraceSaved

GraceSaved

    Daughter of the King of kings

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 540 posts
136
Excellent
  • LocationU.S.A.

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:41 PM

No it isn't, it's pragmatism. Asking everyone to use the same version so that discussions don't get sidetracked by arguments about translation is just good sense.

I believe in the preserved word but not in the KJVO.  However, if I post scriptures, I will use KJ out of respect for the forum rules.  I usually paraphrase.



#30 GraceSaved

GraceSaved

    Daughter of the King of kings

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 540 posts
136
Excellent
  • LocationU.S.A.

Posted 24 January 2014 - 02:45 PM

While there's plenty of sound advice in there, GS, at the same time you haven't really taken my point on-board or answered the question I asked. My point is, you were saying that telling the fundamentals (ok to divide over) apart from the "minor disagreements or matters of opinions" (not ok to divide over) was a no-brainer and I'm saying I'm not convinced it's that easy.

Sorry.  I'm not clear on your question.  I thought you were adressing breaking fellowship with those that have reformed beliefs. What "reformed" beliefs are you referring to?



#31 OLD fashioned preacher

OLD fashioned preacher

    Termite in a yoyo

  • Moderators
  • 1,854 posts
724
Excellent
  • Locationunder a rock, but crawl out occasionally

Posted 24 January 2014 - 03:21 PM

I believe in the preserved word but not in the KJVO.  However, if I post scriptures, I will use KJ out of respect for the forum rules.  I usually paraphrase.

That's fine, when I paraphrase or allude to a verse without directly quoting (which I sometimes do) I don't use quotation marks lest someone think it is non-KJ. Just a thought.



#32 AVBibleBeliever

AVBibleBeliever

    A True AV Bible Believer

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,299 posts
285
Excellent
  • LocationCentral Virginia

Posted 24 January 2014 - 03:39 PM

Colossians refers to the OT law.  What is legalism today?  Excessive conformity to a religious code that restricts free choice.  Dress, type of music, church activity, spiritual disciplines.  This is just a band-aid and do nothing to attack the real problem of a sinful heart tempted to trust ourselves through laws and rules. We are not subject to fundamental principles.  Christianity is not a list of do's and don'ts.  It is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

 

Mentioning Law doesn't make the context legalism.

 

Look again at the Context in the AV.

 

Are you saying you can't read and understand what the AV text says in Colossians Chapter two?

 

"Dead" is connect to "from the Rudiments" by "with Christ"   Do you not see that Rudiments is mentioned earlier and it is not connect to the OT law but to False religions and beliefs of the world.  It is about not being led astray and while legalism could be used to lead people astray the it was the admixture of their religious culture they were adding to their life in Christ that was the problem that Paul feared.

 

count how many changes there are in this small set of verse from the AV and these changes alter the meaning and understanding.


Edited by AVBibleBeliever, 24 January 2014 - 03:51 PM.


#33 GraceSaved

GraceSaved

    Daughter of the King of kings

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 540 posts
136
Excellent
  • LocationU.S.A.

Posted 24 January 2014 - 03:52 PM

Mentioning Law doesn't make the context legalism.

 

Look again at the Context in the AV.

 

Are you saying you can't read and understand what the AV text says in Colossians Chapter two?

 

"Dead" is connect to "from the Rudiments" by "with Christ"

 

count how many changes there are in this small set of verse from the AV and these changes alter the meaning and understanding.

Perhaps you could look up the word legalism (laws) and rudiments (fundamental principles).  We are dead to them.



#34 Jeffrey

Jeffrey

    Resident Liberal

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 605 posts
  • LocationChicago suburbs

Posted 24 January 2014 - 11:35 PM

"Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die:  it shall be, a statue for ever throughout your generations:  And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean." ~ Leviticus 10:9-10  

A deep study of the KJV will reveal the other 104 texts that talk about abstaining from wine and strong drink

Actually the verse you stated is a command for the priest not to drink on duty and a deep study in the KJV will reveal that alcohol is a sign of blessing from the Lord; but we have discussed that to death here

 

The question I would like to ask is, If you are using the KJ or another translation, how is that effecting your walk with Christ?, which will effect your community. I think we miss this sometimes when we get into these debates. 



#35 Jeffrey

Jeffrey

    Resident Liberal

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 605 posts
  • LocationChicago suburbs

Posted 24 January 2014 - 11:49 PM

It used to be said that the KJV was written in such a way that a 6th grader could understand it. And that was true (actually, younger than that, too).  But with the dumbing down of teaching (not saying you were dumbed down!!!), kids have a struggle understanding what was understood two generations ago by their same-age counterparts.

 

All of us think and write in a different style than that KJV.  It is a learning process to convert our thought processes to the KJ English.  Hang in there - you've certainly come a long way in your growth process. I really enjoy your posts (and your humor cracks me up!  :icon_smile: ).

I believe what I have read and understood that the Gospel was written so that a plowboy could understand it. 

As some have said, the KJ uses archaic language in that, even in America, we never spoke in an Elizabethan language, look at the Declaration of Independence.If you choose to use the KJ, fine. I think people cross the line to say that it is the only Bible that should be used, it is Bibliolatry in my opinion



#36 HappyChristian

HappyChristian

    Waiting patiently (ahem) for grandchildren...

  • Moderators
  • 17,567 posts
1,920
Excellent

Posted 25 January 2014 - 12:14 AM

I believe what I have read and understood that the Gospel was written so that a plowboy could understand it.
As some have said, the KJ uses archaic language in that, even in America, we never spoke in an Elizabethan language, look at the Declaration of Independence.If you choose to use the KJ, fine. I think people cross the line to say that it is the only Bible that should be used, it is Bibliolatry in my opinion

And you are welcome to that opinion. I don't agree with you because I know I don't worship the Bible. I don't know anyone who does, actually. Believing that God preserved His Word for us and that the penultimate preserved work is the KJB isn't bibliolatry. Mayhap I believe that those who are so quick to accept any version that's modern or "the best scholarship" is versionolatry. Lol - I know that's not a word (but neither was bibliolatry at one time). My point is that anyone can accuse anyone of idolatry...it doesn't make them right. ;-)

When Tyndale had the desire to translate, he wanted even plowboys to be able to read it. But that to which I refer is accurate as well. The KJB may be written in Elizabethan english, but it can be understood. And it used to be understood better and earlier in age than now. But that was back in the days when education was just that:education. Kids have a hard time understanding it now because so many can't even read anything, or at least not much. When children are raised reading the KJV, their thought processes are sharper precisely because of the way it is written. And they understand it earlier than those who weren't raised reading it. The same is true (sharper mental acuity) for those who learn foreign languages or instruments (especially piano) at a young age. It exercises the mind in ways that just normal reading - while great - doesn't. But with the KJV, it isn't just the mind that's exercised. Its the heart and the spirit, too.

#37 ASongOfDegrees

ASongOfDegrees

    Super Contributor

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,085 posts
675
Excellent

Posted 25 January 2014 - 01:13 AM

Legalism is adding rules to the gospel in an attempt to stay in God's saving grace or perfect your salvation. This is what the Judaizers were doing to the Galatians.  It has nothing to do with standards, rules, church by-laws, statement of faiths, etc. That's a modern manipulation of the term  by Christians who don't want anyone telling them what to do at all.



#38 DaveW

DaveW

    Resident Aussie and general dumb bloke

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,286 posts
1,828
Excellent
  • LocationI'm a West Aussie

Posted 25 January 2014 - 01:25 AM

Legalism is adding rules to the gospel in an attempt to stay in God's saving grace or perfect your salvation. This is what the Judaizers were doing to the Galatians. It has nothing to do with standards, rules, church by-laws, statement of faiths, etc. That's a modern manipulation of the term by Christians who don't want anyone telling them what to do at all.


Now that I do agree with!!!!

By the way, some of the words used by the KJV translators were archaic WHEN THEY USED THEM!
But they were masters of language and knew they were the best words to use.......

#39 Jeffrey

Jeffrey

    Resident Liberal

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 605 posts
  • LocationChicago suburbs

Posted 25 January 2014 - 08:10 AM

And you are welcome to that opinion. I don't agree with you because I know I don't worship the Bible. I don't know anyone who does, actually. Believing that God preserved His Word for us and that the penultimate preserved work is the KJB isn't bibliolatry. Mayhap I believe that those who are so quick to accept any version that's modern or "the best scholarship" is versionolatry. Lol - I know that's not a word (but neither was bibliolatry at one time). My point is that anyone can accuse anyone of idolatry...it doesn't make them right. ;-)

I dont know, do you look around here? Some people are more concerned with Bible translations more than justice, mercy and more important seeing people come to Christ which is our mission



#40 Jeffrey

Jeffrey

    Resident Liberal

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 605 posts
  • LocationChicago suburbs

Posted 25 January 2014 - 08:17 AM

Legalism is adding rules to the gospel in an attempt to stay in God's saving grace or perfect your salvation. This is what the Judaizers were doing to the Galatians.  It has nothing to do with standards, rules, church by-laws, statement of faiths, etc. That's a modern manipulation of the term  by Christians who don't want anyone telling them what to do at all.

You mean Jesus was wrong for attacking the Pharisees?

Matthew 23:1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2 Saying , The scribes and thePharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe , that observe anddo ; but do not ye after their works: for they say , and do not. 4 For they bind heavy burdens andgrievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move themwith one of their fingers.#rl 5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men : they make broadtheir phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, 6 And love the uppermost rooms atfeasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, 7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called ofmen, Rabbi, Rabbi. 8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all yeare brethren. 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is inheaven. 10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. 11 But he that isgreatest among you shall be your servant. 12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased ;and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted . 13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees,hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves,neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in . 14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees,hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer : therefore ye shallreceive the greater damnation.#rl 15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for yecompass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made , ye make him twofold morethe child of hell than yourselves.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

The Fundamental Top 500IFB1000 The Fundamental Top 500