What do Baptists believe?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jane_of_Arc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
chadair said:
. . . .So he few days later after he gave me a KJV bible (and told me it was the ONLY bible I needed, and when I asked what makes that one the 'ONLY" bible, he says “cause I said it is”.) . . .
Click to expand...
chadair,

I posted this information on another thread. It might be helpful in discussing the King James Bible issue.

Most King James Bibles, in the hands of Christians today, are not the original 1611 Version.

I think the KJVO proponents might be offended by the Introduction in the 1611 Version which begins: “To the most high and mightie Prince, James by the grace of God King of Great Britaine, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c. . . .”

There is an interesting commentary on betterbibles.com regarding the King James Bible. These are some of the errors noted in the early editions:

1716 edition:
John 5.14 said, “sin on more” rather than “sin no more.”

1792 edition:
Luke 22.34 said Philip denied the Lord three times instead of*** Peter***.

**1795: **
Mark 7.27 said, “Let the children first be killed” rather than “Let the children first be filled.”

1807 Oxford edition:
Heb 9.14 said, “Purge your conscience from good works” rather than “Purge your conscience from dead works."

1653 edition:
1 Cor 6.9 said, “the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God.”

1631 edition:
(my personal favorite 😉 )
Rendered the 7th of 10 Commandment as “Thou shalt commit adultery.”
betterbibles.com/2005/08/24/kjv-editions-and-some-humorous-errors/

Also, the King James Bible contained the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical Books for nearly 300 years.

For those who claim the KJV is the only inerrant Bible, I would ask: How long does it take God to get an “inerrant” version right? I don’t recall Moses taking the Ten Commandments back up the mountain for corrections.

Peace,
Anna
 
Anna_Scott said:
chadair,

I posted this information on another thread. It might be helpful in discussing the King James Bible issue.

Most King James Bibles, in the hands of Christians today, are not the original 1611 Version.

I think the KJVO proponents might be offended by the Introduction in the 1611 Version which begins: “To the most high and mightie Prince, James by the grace of God King of Great Britaine, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c. . . .”

There is an interesting commentary on betterbibles.com regarding the King James Bible. These are some of the errors noted in the early editions:

1716 edition:
John 5.14 said, “sin on more” rather than “sin no more.”

1792 edition:
Luke 22.34 said Philip denied the Lord three times instead of*** Peter***.

**1795: **
Mark 7.27 said, “Let the children first be killed” rather than “Let the children first be filled.”

1807 Oxford edition:
Heb 9.14 said, “Purge your conscience from good works” rather than “Purge your conscience from dead works."

1653 edition:
1 Cor 6.9 said, “the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God.”

1631 edition:
(my personal favorite 😉 )
Rendered the 7th of 10 Commandment as “Thou shalt commit adultery.”
betterbibles.com/2005/08/24/kjv-editions-and-some-humorous-errors/

Also, the King James Bible contained the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical Books for nearly 300 years.

For those who claim the KJV is the only inerrant Bible, I would ask: How long does it take God to get an “inerrant” version right? I don’t recall Moses taking the Ten Commandments back up the mountain for corrections.

Peace,
Anna
Click to expand...
Inerrancy of Holy Writ applies to the original autographs–which have not yet been discovered. The translators, even with thousands of copies, were not capable of inerrancy. They also made typos–just like we doo.

Re: Apocryphal writings bound with the Holy Writ-- make for a handy comparison of doctrinal deviations from the God breathed to those most holy but not necessarily moved by the Spirit of God.

The vital factor in understanding what Scripture says is spiritual discernment–i.e. being born from above. Nicodemus, a right reverend doctor of divinity had a lack of spiritual discernment. See John 3: 1-21.

Re: Moses and the Ten Commandments–did he not throw down the tablets, having seen Israel worshipping a golden calf?

I am not a KJVO.

Peace,

James Least
 
James_Least said:
. . .Re: Moses and the Ten Commandments–did he not throw down the tablets, having seen Israel worshipping a golden calf?

I am not a KJVO.

Peace,

James Least
Click to expand...
James,
But he didn’t do it because they contained errors.

Anna
 
James_Least said:
Inerrancy of Holy Writ applies to the original autographs–which have not yet been discovered. . . . .
Click to expand...
James,
The Southern Baptist Church believes the Bible is inerrant in the original autographs.

Some other Baptist denominations believe the King James Bible is inerrant.

You are right, no autographs are known to be in existence today. We have copies of copies of copies, etc.

Anna
 
Yes, there are some KJVO. My main aim is to introduce the fact that there two streams of scripture: the received text and the critical text. They vary seriously. Look up two streams of scripture on the www.

Peace,

James Least
 
James_Least said:
Inerrancy of Holy Writ applies to the original autographs–which have not yet been discovered. The translators, even with thousands of copies, were not capable of inerrancy. They also made typos–just like we doo.

Re: Apocryphal writings bound with the Holy Writ-- make for a handy comparison of doctrinal deviations from the God breathed to those most holy but not necessarily moved by the Spirit of God.

The vital factor in understanding what Scripture says is spiritual discernment–i.e. being born from above. Nicodemus, a right reverend doctor of divinity had a lack of spiritual discernment. See John 3: 1-21.

Re: Moses and the Ten Commandments–did he not throw down the tablets, having seen Israel worshipping a golden calf?

I am not a KJVO.

Peace,

James Least
Click to expand...
Jim,
Having been around KJVO people in the past I know their arguments. So let me play Devil’s Advocate here.😉
They would say “we don’t have the original autographs, so what do we have to trust?” “If we cannot trust the KJV than we can’t trust the Bible” “This Bible was fine for 400 years, why change it now?” “The other translations have errors and are not as close to the original as is the KJV”
The big one is “The KJV contains no errors”.
 
The KJVO conclusions are based on false premise and supposition. The KJV of 1611 was edited numerous times during the 17th century. The KJV translators were not without their own religious biases. e.g. They did not translate baptizo(Gk.), into to immerse(Eng.), but rather transliterated: to baptize. Why? Probably because they did not practice immersion in the Church of England at that time-- neither did Henry VIII’s ex-church when Henry got “excommed” for unauthorized divorcements. Sorry, I changed kings in the middle of this. James I and Henry VIII have a religion and a throne in common, as well as the ancestry to corroborate their place in secular history.

Another e.g.–The word pascha was not translated correctly. Easter was used instead of passover. Easter has been pagan ever since Astoreth, Nimrod and some of that crowd–some of whom many still worship even today–the names have been changed perhaps–still the same origin. Conclusion: translators are not inspired–unlike original authors receiving God-breathed revelations.

This all boils to: there are two streams of scripture which have come into King’s English and many other languages even through our time. These streams are known as the Received Text and the Critical Text. One of them is corrupted–seriously corrupted–by over zealous scribes and others seeking to control Divine Fiat.

We will all be judged by The Book. Are we ready?

Peace,

James Least
 
Apparently we are using different etymology books. Nimrod’s proximity to Noah in geneology has nothing to do with paganism. Was it not Nimrod who built a tower reaching toward heaven? Did not God knock the tower down? He also created some jobs for translators.

Before Nimrod, Cain changed the worship from blood sacrifice to fruits of the field. Pagan idolatry–first family. We still have a problem with that today. We live in a Narcissistic, Hedonistic, Humanistic world. We worship the creation more than the Creator. We are in love with ourselves and all the things we lust after. We love money–and the things it will buy. We seem to be living with impunity. However, it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the Living God–the One who created us–and all our stuff which all belongs to Him. God will soon be asking: What have you done with My stuff? More importantly: What have you done with My Son?

I believe the point was: Translators inject a religious bias–e.g. the word Easter is of pagan origin, regardless of how we may change the letters. Pagan is pagan regardless of the disguise. Thank you for the soapbox opportunities.

Now what?

Peace,
James Least
 
Indeed.

How does one get judged by A Book anyway? :confused: It sounds like Bibliolatry to me, but perhaps James Least could expound upon what he means by this.

And, again, I wonder how this belief came about?
 
Anna_Scott said:
peace2u2,
I’ve been wanting to buy a Catholic Study Bible (and an Eastern Orthodox Study Bible.)

I have The Catholic Comparative New Testament—great for study and comparing translations. However, I want a Catholic Bible with more commentary. The IGNATUS CATHOLIC STUDY BIBLE NEW TESTAMENT, 2ND EDITION sounds like a good option. I am a fan of Scott Hahn and have read three of his books.

Thanks for the recommendation, though it was not directed to me. 😃

Peace,
Anna
Click to expand...
Dear Anna Scott,

Your welcome.

In Christ’s Love,

Peace2U2 :bible1:
 
Patavium said:
:D:popcorn::rotfl:

So true ! 👍
Click to expand...
I like your offer:

Come take a Walk with me. Grab my hand, and accompany me. I am walking towards Jesus. Please join me.

. . . gladly! Your quote made me think of a song titled, “Follow Me There” by Third Day.

You need a place where you can find some shelter
Follow me there, follow me there
You want a hand to hold, someone to help you
Follow me there, come on, follow me there

Where love, like a river, flows
Peace like you’ve never known
And joy never ending lives
A place where faith can find
Hope that will never die
Follow me there, come on, follow me there

You need a place to be your sanctuary
Follow me there, come on, follow me there
Where you can lay down all those burdens you carry
Follow me there, come on, follow me there

Where the lost can find salvation
And the lonely finds a friend
Where the sinner finds forgiveness
Won’t you follow me there
Won’t you follow me there
 
Sorry, I thought the subject is: What do Baptists Believe?

This question is a bit ambiguous from the start. This is evidenced by the generalities and stereotypes implied in the replies. There are dozens of groups called: Baptist. Following the word Baptist through the last 2000 years will lead to many false trails.

True Baptists were not part of the many denominations which came out of the so-called Protestant Reformation fathered by one Fr. Martin Luther who was defrocked for his protests. Another reformer, John Calvin, aka Jon Chauvin, had his own form of state religion. The reformers, so-called, were not friends with the Baptists–in fact Baptists had no respite from persecution, refusing to bow to any state religion. They also refused to baptize their infants.

In as much as True Baptists do not belive in Creeds, Councils and Halos, they have run amuck with all of the religious powers that be, state or otherwise. True Baptists believe the only rule of faith and practice is the Word of God. Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone, not of works lest anyone should be able to boast. This is the Gospel, the Good News, Jesus died to save sinners-- the preaching of which is for every believer–I do it in cyberspace daily-- until Jesus returns. He said He would never leave nor forsake His little flock to which He has given The Kingdom. He has kept His promise. This is not about a name of a denomination–it is about a faith and practice which predates Nicea–all the way back to the shores of Galilee when Jesus said, “Come, follow me, I will make you fishers of men”.

This faith and practice has had several names, mostly derisive.

We are still out here, as Jesus promised.

Peace,

James Least
 
James_Least said:
Sorry, I thought the subject is: What do Baptists Believe?
Click to expand...
Sure it is. But you posted something earlier–are you (I hope) now willing to retract it?
James_Least said:
We will all be judged by The Book. Are we ready?

Peace,

James Least
Click to expand...
Otherwise, if you stand by this statement, could you answer 2 questions:
  1. What do you mean by this? How are we to be judged by The Book? Is that not Bibliolatry and assigning to an object that which belongs to God alone?
  2. Where do you get this belief “We will all be judged by The Book” from?
 
peace2u2 said:
I like your offer:

Come take a Walk with me. Grab my hand, and accompany me. I am walking towards Jesus. Please join me.

. . . gladly! Your quote made me think of a song titled, “Follow Me There” by Third Day.

You need a place where you can find some shelter
Follow me there, follow me there
You want a hand to hold, someone to help you
Follow me there, come on, follow me there

Where love, like a river, flows
Peace like you’ve never known
And joy never ending lives
A place where faith can find
Hope that will never die
Follow me there, come on, follow me there

You need a place to be your sanctuary
Follow me there, come on, follow me there
Where you can lay down all those burdens you carry
Follow me there, come on, follow me there

Where the lost can find salvation
And the lonely finds a friend
Where the sinner finds forgiveness
Won’t you follow me there
Won’t you follow me there
Click to expand...
Glad to have you join me,

God Bless!👍
 
James_Least said:
Sorry, I thought the subject is: What do Baptists Believe?

This question is a bit ambiguous from the start. This is evidenced by the generalities and stereotypes implied in the replies. There are dozens of groups called: Baptist. Following the word Baptist through the last 2000 years will lead to many false trails.

True Baptists were not part of the many denominations which came out of the so-called Protestant Reformation fathered by one Fr. Martin Luther who was defrocked for his protests. Another reformer, John Calvin, aka Jon Chauvin, had his own form of state religion. The reformers, so-called, were not friends with the Baptists–in fact Baptists had no respite from persecution, refusing to bow to any state religion. They also refused to baptize their infants.

In as much as True Baptists do not belive in Creeds, Councils and Halos, they have run amuck with all of the religious powers that be, state or otherwise. True Baptists believe the only rule of faith and practice is the Word of God. Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone, not of works lest anyone should be able to boast. This is the Gospel, the Good News, Jesus died to save sinners-- the preaching of which is for every believer–I do it in cyberspace daily-- until Jesus returns. He said He would never leave nor forsake His little flock to which He has given The Kingdom. He has kept His promise. This is not about a name of a denomination–it is about a faith and practice which predates Nicea–all the way back to the shores of Galilee when Jesus said, “Come, follow me, I will make you fishers of men”.

This faith and practice has had several names, mostly derisive.

We are still out here, as Jesus promised.

Peace,

James Least
Click to expand...
Mr Least, can I assume that you are a landmarker?
 
The trail of blood, landmarker theory has been rejected a historical fantasy by the huge majority of Baptists.

I find it very near to “the great controversy” by SDA prophetess Ellen G White, all mistruths.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top