FREE FROM STRIFE AND DISPUTES?

Where did I say that?

 

I'll help you out, since I don't want to be here all day. I said

Maybe you misunderstood me, because I did not write it in greek. There is a forum for version debates. You obviously have a bone to pick with the KJV and it's use of the word compass, which you feel is too hard to understand for modern man. I agree, modern man can't understand the need to study to show himself approved, why should he understand the need to use a dictionary every once in a while.

No, the board is not free of disputes. I said this forum (the Baptist Theology forum) was free from 'such'(version) disputes. There is a version forum for this argument, I am merely asking why you feel the need to take the version debate from it's assigned forum and bring it into the theology forum. Is this a theological issue? Or is it nitpicking over translations?

 

Did you read my next post?

 

Allright brother, I repent of having spoken of it to you. The theological implications of compass are astounding. I am sure there is a cult somewhere that believes the Israelites invented time travel and used modern camping gear while roaming the wilderness for 40 years. As for the deep study of God's word, I go to church, which is the pillar and ground of the truth (1Tim 3:15). What biblical basis do you have for presuming the only way to learn the deeper truths of the bible are to go to a seminary? That truth must have been lost in translation somewhere.

 

Well brother, I tend to agree with Bro Carl on the KJV, but not for the same reasons I'm sure. He is a strange one in my eyes. He believes that God preserved the Bible in English, but thinks most of it only applies to the Jews.

I think our common bond in Christ is a good starting point. As brothers in Christ, we should be able to discuss the deeper issues of faith in charity. I apologize if I came across in an accusatory manner before, I was not sure what to make of you and I suppose my flesh may have gotten the better of me. I understand that there are many people who do not think the KJV is inspired above any other version. I disagree, but I am willing rather to lay the issue aside to talk of more important things. I would love to discus with you the accountability of a Christian at the judgment seat of Christ. I'm sure at some point we would disagree on what the Bible says and then we would have to draw swords and fight over words, but we could at least try to be friendly about it.

 

Disputes are not necessarily bad. Debate helps us sharpen our understanding. It is all a matter of how the arguments are handled. When they become petty, personal and vindicative, then they are wrong.

UZThD is right. The version debate enters into almost every theological question. We cannot eliminate the version issue from our theological discussions in whatever thread.

Finally, please allow me to say that UZThD is knowledgeable, intelligent, and well educated. He is also fair-minded and sincere in his passionate love for the Word of God and truth. If this makes him opinionated, then more power to him. We can't be sentimental and mealy-mouthed about God's truth. I don't agree with him many times but I do respect him. He will wear his newly conferred doctorate well.

 

I am not trying to be contentious, so I hope this is perceived as a fair question. One of the arguments for using multiple versions and part of the average MVers' line of reasoning is that "No doctrines are affected" by using an NIV, NAS, etc. So my question is, If no doctrines are affected, then why does the KJV debate come up in "almost every theological question"?


Lacy

PS. This has been a most charitable thread on all sides.

1Pe 4:8 And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

 

I am not trying to be contentious, so I hope this is perceived as a fair question. One of the arguments for using multiple versions and part of the average MVers' line of reasoning is that "No doctrines are affected" by using an NIV, NAS, etc. So my question is, If no doctrines are affected, then why does the KJV debate come up in "almost every theological question"?

Lacy

PS. This has been a most charitable thread on all sides.

1Pe 4:8 And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins. </font>[/QUOTE]It’s okay to disagree. But, we can disagree without being contentious.

IMHO, you are making a basic presupposition here: “No doctrines are affected.” There are those who would disagree. Doctrines are affected by versions, texts, and translation. The advent of the RSV in the 1950’s was seen as a challenge to the doctrine of the Virgin Birth even though one could find support elsewhere other than the contested verses.

The NIV, for example, does have a theological bias in its translation of certain passages and it is generally known and admitted by its supporters. I would argue that all translations have the theological bias of the translators. On the other hand, the consulting of multiple versions does not average out the bias because one will naturally prefer one or the other translation in inclination toward his own theological predisposition. With humans, there is no eliminating of biases.

Regarding Scripture texts and translations, there are the underlying epistemological questions of authority and inspiration. Having answered these affirmatively, we struggle with their application as to which text is authoritative. Since our theological debates are premised upon Scriptural authority, the textual issue is inherent to every theological dispute. To which text do we appeal to as authoritative in our theological discussions? (Remember that we have not established to everyone’s satisfaction that there’s no doctoral difference in versions. This, itself, is a point of contention. Therefore, it cannot be used as an argument until it has been established by force of argument.)

Therefore, I conclude that in every theological discussion, the question of text or translation is a potential point of debate. Would you agree?