Recruiting Forum Off Topic Thread III

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1,426
#1,426
bignewt said:
The variants are why you have dozens of different churches all under the "christian" umbrella.
Click to expand...

That’s not true for the most part. Most of the different churches are doctrinal differences on different interpretations, not variants.

In fact, I’m sure there could be more, but the only church I can think of that has based its thinking off of a textual variant are the snake handling churches. Jesus never said the statement in Mark 16 that those churches use to support that practice.

But other than them, the main difference between churches are simply differing interpretations on various scriptures. For example, Presbyterians and Baptists differ on the doctrine of baptism. Has nothing to do with a variant. But both are Christian because they have both believed the gospel. The gospel determines who is a Christian, not negotiable doctrines like baptism and eschatology
 
Last edited:
#1,427
#1,427
Bassmaster_Vol said:
Your last statement captures it perfectly
Click to expand...

I can't help those who don't want it. There are a lot decent people who are unbelievers, and we have to live peaceably with all men. I found a long time ago that arguing with someone that the Spirit of God is not drawing to Christ is an exercise in frustration and futility. You mostly just do more harm than good. I try to always be there when conviction is on someones heart.
 
#1,428
#1,428
The Dog said:
How about all the missing books left out of the Bible, that's editing. It's a proven fact that Constitine altered the Bible. Plus, it's widely known that Shakespeare rewrote some of the book of Psalms in the 17th century
Click to expand...

You would have to give me examples of missing books. There aren’t any by the way. Most of the books people mention like the gospel of Thomas or Judas or something like that are known to have been written a hundred to 2 hundred years after the person died that they are named after. They reflect gnostic heresies that developed later and are known fakes.

The idea that Constantine edited the Bible is simply fake history. While you might read that on some atheist website, If you read someone who cares about telling the truth they will not lie to you like that. The canon was not edited by Constantine. In fact, Nicae in 325 ad did not have to do with the Canon, but with the defense of the doctrine of Christ in the face of the heresy of Arianism.

I’ve never heard that Shakespeare statement, and me having never heard of it means something, even tho you don’t know me and that may not mean much to you. But we have documents of the Psalms long predating Shakespeare. That’s just nonsense.

Be careful who you read man. That Constantine and Shakespeare stuff is as fake as it gets. Complete faux history.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,429
#1,429
Ulysees E. McGill said:
I can't help those who don't want it. There are a lot decent people who are unbelievers, and we have to live peaceably with all men. I found a long time ago that arguing with someone that the Spirit of God is not drawing to Christ is an exercise in frustration and futility. You mostly just do more harm than good. I try to always be there when conviction is on someones heart.
Click to expand...

You’re right. I don’t intend to argue with anyone, but if I can correct some of the lies they’ve been told or read, like the Bible being edited by Constantine and that stuff, it’s worth the discussion.

I’m not arguing with anyone and I feel we can have an important discussion like this without arguing. I’m just trying to help. Tho I can see how my sarcastic comments in response to hole could come across the wrong way. I just get frustrated when people act as tho joel represents the church at large.
 
Last edited:
#1,430
#1,430
Bassmaster_Vol said:
That’s not true for the most part. Most of the different churches are doctrinal differences on different interpretations, not variants.

In fact, I’m sure there could be more, but the only church I can think of that has based its thinking off of a textual variant are the snake handling churches. Jesus never said the statement in Mark 16 that those churches use to support that practice.

But other than them, the main difference between churches are simply differing interpretations on various scriptures. For example, Presbyterians and Baptists differ on the doctrine of baptism. Has nothing to do with a variant. But both are Christian because they have both believed the gospel. The gospel determines who is a Chrisitan, not negotiable doctrines like baptism and eschatology
Click to expand...

To me a difference in interpretation equals a difference in the text. Also there are other texts out there other than the King James version...albiet a british guy who ordered it rewritten and uniformed 1600 years after Christ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,431
#1,431
Ulysees E. McGill said:
I can't help those who don't want it. There are a lot decent people who are unbelievers, and we have to live peaceably with all men. I found a long time ago that arguing with someone that the Spirit of God is not drawing to Christ is an exercise in frustration and futility. You mostly just do more harm than good. I try to always be there when conviction is on someones heart.
Click to expand...

Matt 7:6
 
#1,432
#1,432
bignewt said:
To me a difference in interpretation equals a difference in the text. Also there are other texts out there other than the King James version...albiet a british guy who ordered it rewritten and uniformed 1600 years after Christ.
Click to expand...

Jesus still on the cross.
 
#1,434
#1,434
bignewt said:
To me a difference in interpretation equals a difference in the text. Also there are other texts out there other than the King James version...albiet a british guy who ordered it rewritten and uniformed 1600 years after Christ.
Click to expand...

How is it a difference in the text when fallible humans read the same thing and have different interpretations of it?

You have just written something on a public forum. If me and and someone else read it and come away with two different interpretations, Is that a problem with your post, this site, or is one of us reading it wrong?

I don’t know what you’re talking about when you mention the KJV? I never mentioned it, and it has nothing to do with the variants in the manuscripts of the Bible. Unless you want to talk about Erasmus’ textus receptus that was the Greek manuscript used in the translation of the KJV New Testament.

I use the ESV and NASB myself, not a KJV onlyist, but the KJV Bible has nothing to do with this discussion. It is a fine translation but I’m not sure what point you are tying to make.

Oh, and the reason why king James wanted to have his own English Bible is because the church at the time was using the Geneva Bible which came from the reformers, notably John Knox. There were study notes in that bible that taught that Christ is head of the church. King Jimmy didn’t like that so he ordered a new translation without those study notes. Doesn’t have anything to do with this discussion, as we are talking about ancient manuscripts and not a 1611 English Bible, but fun history nonetheless
 
#1,436
#1,436
volfanngatorland said:
This.

It’s all that matters.
Click to expand...

Actually Jesus is at the right hand of the Father in heaven. But I know what you mean.

But textual criticism and apologetics are also important, especially in the face of criticism. “Always be ready to give a defense (apologia or apologetics) for the hope that is within you” 1 Peter 3:15
 
Last edited:
#1,437
#1,437
Bassmaster_Vol said:
You’re right. I don’t intend to argue with anyone, but if I can correct some of the lies they’ve been told or read, like the Bible being edited by Constantine and that stuff, it’s worth the discussion.

I’m not arguing with anyone and I feel we can have an important discussion like this without arguing. I’m just trying to help. Tho I can see how my sarcastic comments in response to hole could come across the wrong way. I just get frustrated when people act as tho joel represents the church at large.

My apologies hole.
Click to expand...

I get the frustration...trust me I do. Just keep learning and be there with the Truth when the opportunity arises to lead people to the Well.

Remember Jesus said in St.John "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me" and in 6:44 he adds more to that with this key phrase "No man cometh unto me, except the Father which has sent me draw him"...Knowing HOW to teach the truth is the easy part, knowing WHEN is the tricky part. That is where your faith in the unseen hand of God comes in.
 
#1,438
#1,438
Bassmaster_Vol said:
Actually Jesus is at the right hand of the Father in heaven. But I know what you mean.

But textual criticism and apologetics are also important, especially in the face of criticism. “Always be ready to give a defense (apologia or apologetics) for the hope that is within you” 1 Peter 3:15
Click to expand...

I’m saying in all the different versions of the Bible as far as I know Jesus is still on the cross.
 
#1,439
#1,439
BigZiti09 said:
I’m saying in all the different versions of the Bible as far as I know Jesus is still on the cross.
Click to expand...

Oh I got you. So you’re saying, no matter which version you read, the gospel message is present? This is very true and a great point.

If all we had was the gospel message it would be enough to save us. Absolutely.
 
#1,441
#1,441
Bassmaster_Vol said:
Oh I got you. So you’re saying, no matter which version you read, the gospel message is present? This is very true and a great point.

If all we had was the gospel message it would be enough to save us. Absolutely.
Click to expand...

I think that was both Ziti and I’s point.

Thats the beauty of it.
 
#1,445
#1,445
Reformed Reader said:
#Thoon
Click to expand...

A little off topic, but I saw Mike Tyson at Disney last December in Epcot. He looked very bad. Was extremely shaky and sweating profusely. If more boxers saw him now, they would probably never step foot in the ring. I was astonished at how bad he looked, and genuinely felt very sorry for him.
 
#1,446
#1,446
Bassmaster_Vol said:
You would have to give me examples of missing books. There aren’t any by the way. Most of the books people mention like the gospel of Thomas or Judas or something like that are known to have been written a hundred to 2 hundred years after the person died that they are named after. They reflect gnostic heresies that developed later and are known fakes.

The idea that Constantine edited the Bible is simply fake history. While you might read that on some atheist website, If you read someone who cares about telling the truth they will not lie to you like that. The canon was not edited by Constantine. In fact, Nicae in 325 ad did not have to do with the Canon, but with the defense of the doctrine of Christ in the face of the heresy of Arianism.

I’ve never heard that Shakespeare statement, and me having never heard of it means something, even tho you don’t know me and that may not mean much to you. But we have documents of the Psalms long predating Shakespeare. That’s just nonsense.

Be careful who you read man. That Constantine and Shakespeare stuff is as fake as it gets. Complete faux history.
Click to expand...

We will just have to agree to disagree. People always get mad during religion discussions and I'm going to just drop it. But, do some research about the Shakespeare-Psalms rewrites, some even think he snuck his name in the King James version of the Bible. Interesting stuff
 
#1,447
#1,447
The Dog said:
We will just have to agree to disagree. People always get mad during religion discussions and I'm going to just drop it. But, do some research about the Shakespeare-Psalms rewrites, some even think he snuck his name in the King James version of the Bible. Interesting stuff
Click to expand...

I’m not mad at all. But there’s nothing to agree to disagree about.

This is a factual discussion about history. There is no evidence for anything having to do with Constantine or Shakespeare altering the Bible. It didn’t happen.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#1,448
#1,448
That is where the problem comes in. RELIGION. That is why catholics killed protestants for hundreds of years and protestants killed catholics. Why they both killed jews and any and all native person they found as they explored for the glory of their God.

Religion and faith are two different things. Religion is a human construct interpreted hundreds of ways and is inherently faulty. Most baptists I know follow King James bible that is why I mentioned it and it was created to translate the greek, latin and hebrew texts into english by the english scholars of the Church of England. Whenever humans get their grubby hands on something, it becomes tainted.

In its simplest form faith is a beautiful thing and I do not need a bible in any form to tell me why.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#1,449
#1,449
Bassmaster_Vol said:
I’m not mad at all. But there’s nothing to agree or disagree about.

This is a factual discussion about history. There is no evidence for anything having to do with Constantine or Shakespeare altering the Bible. It didn’t happen.
Click to expand...

I'm obviously not going to change your mind, so u believe what u want and I will believe what I want. Some of the people that wrote the books of the Bible and translated the Bible had agendas whether u want to believe it or not. Because they were MEN and MEN sin
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top