A hypotethical situation

[RCruise]

Ok,

Perhaps a more narrowed quote from your post that first caught my eye:

you said;

QUOTE

Furthermore, the Bible you have in your hands is a translation. It is a translation by men, whose theological bent is present in the translation be it, the NIV, RSV, KJV, NASB, or whatever.

You seem to be asserting that none of the translations in English we have today, are without flesh theological influence of the men who did the translation. Am I correct in this?

The human element cannot be factored out of any of the translations we are in possession of. I am not going to get into a KJV only debate if that is where you are headed. Any attempt to bait me into debate about which translation is THE Word of God will simply be ignored, as it would end up hijacking the purpose of the thread. I suggest if your agenda is to get into a debate about translations, that you look elsewhere, as I know what I believe, and you will not change my mind.

Did I even attempt to lean that way??? I was asking you to clarify what you were saying. You did not seem to understand what I was asking in relation to your earlier post so I narrowed it down to that specific quote and then simply put forth what I understood you to be saying and even asked you if that was correct! So, take it easy Shilo. Not a problem. There was never even a hint of KJV only debate and I did not even bring up the KJV in my posts except for your list quoted from you. sheesh. I asked you originally if your stance was that ALL the versions or translations were tainted with man's theological stances.

If you cannot defend your position without getting riled and defensive and throwing false accusations at me, I guess that pretty much sums it up and answers all my questions.

Blessings in Christ Jesus,

Brother Ron Cruise

[eric]

Consider the following situation

Two missionaries, totally unfamiliar with each other, plan to preach and teach the Word of God along the banks of the Amazon river in Brazil. One takes the left bank and one takes the right bank but neither is aware of the missionary on the opposite bank.

These two brave souls have no denominational ties of any sort, hence they are completely free of all the doctrines and traditions of men. All they have is the Word of God and the Holy Spirit. They are both totally dependant on the Holy Spirit to understand the Word of God since neither of them has a theological background. They are totally on their own and totally unaware of each other. Their only teacher is the Holy Spirit which teaches both equally throughout their long journey up the Amazon.

These two missionaries continue up the Amazon to the very headwaters of the mighty Amazon only to find that the headwaters of the Amazon is nothing but a small stream at this point. Both missionaries stay on their respective banks without ever crossing and thereby run the risk of meeting each other. Finally, they come to a tribe that freely hunts and lives on both banks of the Amazon headwaters. The left bank missionary as well as the right bank missonary continue to teach the Word of God to the members of this tribe, each thinking that they are the only missionary teaching the members of this tribe.

What would be the outcome of these two separate teaching styles, one from the left bank missionary and one from the right bank missionary on this tribe that is common to both banks of the river? Remember, both missionaries were guided solely by the Holy Spirit and had only the Word of God to teach from and both are totally lacking in any of the doctrines and traditions of any denomination. When the tribal people began to compare notes on what the two missionaries taught, would there be two distinct versions of the Word of God taught, the left bank version and the right bank version, or would both versions be identical?

This is my first post in this thread and I'll take a shot at it.

So no theological knowledge, no doctrinal or denominational influences, Just the word of God and the holy spirit to lead them. Well I suppose that the way each presented their message which came from guidance from the h/s. Given that the H/S can only lead you to the truth. the message being delivered is made clearer by some preachers, depending on their preference to which parts of the gospel appeals to them as being more important from their viewpoint. It's not so much in the translation of scripture but the way the translation is applied to each situation.

I have heard the same message from preachers who have different styles and some are more impressive than others and some have edified me immensely and some have been lacking in clarifcation.

So I would say that the two versions need not be necessarily identical. The way the H/S quickens certain truths to me may differ to way He quickens it others, but it is still the truth.

For instance L may be trying to emphasise something he thinks is more important to understand scripture, R might think another. And it also applies to the audiences and the way they understand the message......difficult indeed.

[Guest shiloh357]

Did I even attempt to lean that way??? I was asking you to clarify what you were saying. You did not seem to understand what I was asking in relation to your earlier post so I narrowed it down to that specific quote and then simply put forth what I understood you to be saying and even asked you if that was correct! So, take it easy Shilo. Not a problem. There was never even a hint of KJV only debate and I did not even bring up the KJV in my posts except for your list quoted from you. sheesh. I asked you originally if your stance was that ALL the versions or translations were tainted with man's theological stances.

If you cannot defend your position without getting riled and defensive and throwing false accusations at me, I guess that pretty much sums it up and answers all my questions.

I did not throw false accusations at you so you can relax.

You opened up with in your last repsonse to about translations and whether or not we have one that is untainted by human theological leanings. That line of questioning around here is usually how the KJV only folks lead into their attack. It is simply hinted that you might be headed that way I did not accuse you of anything, but I simply headed off what I saw as a KJV translation debate, at the pass. We have only had about a million people jump on our boards and argue that the KJV is a pure translation and untainted and is the only "Word of God in English. So, your question raised a suspicion that was not at all unfounded from where I sit.

As to your question again, I already said that the human element cannot be factored out of anything we do for the Lord. God's message is pure, and without flaw, but our understanding is flawed, and as such God has managed to perserve the truth put forth in the Word through imperfect vessels. We are incapable of producing an English translation that is completely flawless, but God has amazingly been able to preserve the integrity and force of the doctrines and teachings He inspired to be present in the Scriptures.

[Smalcald]

Of course the hypothetical situation described has never existed and never will in our future. There is no human being alive who has not been influenced by some human element in addition to the Holy Spirit. This is not all bad as Shiloh has pointed out God has used that human element and those traditions in the past to bring us the Word itself. But like I said earlier it is very suspicious indeed and in fact unbiblical for me to claim that no, I am pure, and I have the pure Holy Spirit guiding me and thus ALL of my doctrine is perfect and clear and if everyone would just follow me they would be pure also, but since you don't you are not spiritually mature in the Holy Spirit, that is simply well junk. This is the problem and this is the reason we have umpteen thousand little clubs we call congregations who can't get along.

In reality in that hypothetical and in the real world, the essence of the Gospel of Christ IS and would be preached and many people would be saved, many people are saved today, even with the human element of sin infecting our teachings. The Holy Spirit has preserved this Word and it does ring forth throughout the world. But no human being has the pure and total truth. I do think the Roman Catholic view is that the Pope when speaking as the Pope on doctrinal issues does have the pure truth, but we do not have this view in the Protestant Churches.

[Guest lnj]

Would the Holy Spirit contradict ItSelf? I don't think so.

Would the personalities of each missionary shine forth when teaching the tribes people?I think so.

Would the foundation of the Word be shakey if the Holy Spirit was the 2 missionaries guide and teacher? I'd say not.

I believe the basic essence of the Word would be solid as a Rock but the teaching styles would be different. It's bound to be.

[Kabowd]

Did I even attempt to lean that way??? I was asking you to clarify what you were saying. You did not seem to understand what I was asking in relation to your earlier post so I narrowed it down to that specific quote and then simply put forth what I understood you to be saying and even asked you if that was correct! So, take it easy Shilo. Not a problem. There was never even a hint of KJV only debate and I did not even bring up the KJV in my posts except for your list quoted from you. sheesh. I asked you originally if your stance was that ALL the versions or translations were tainted with man's theological stances.

If you cannot defend your position without getting riled and defensive and throwing false accusations at me, I guess that pretty much sums it up and answers all my questions.

I did not throw false accusations at you so you can relax.

You opened up with in your last repsonse to about translations and whether or not we have one that is untainted by human theological leanings. That line of questioning around here is usually how the KJV only folks lead into their attack. It is simply hinted that you might be headed that way I did not accuse you of anything, but I simply headed off what I saw as a KJV translation debate, at the pass. We have only had about a million people jump on our boards and argue that the KJV is a pure translation and untainted and is the only "Word of God in English. So, your question raised a suspicion that was not at all unfounded from where I sit.

As to your question again, I already said that the human element cannot be factored out of anything we do for the Lord. God's message is pure, and without flaw, but our understanding is flawed, and as such God has managed to perserve the truth put forth in the Word through imperfect vessels. We are incapable of producing an English translation that is completely flawless, but God has amazingly been able to preserve the integrity and force of the doctrines and teachings He inspired to be present in the Scriptures.

This is correct. The way the Bible has been explained to me, is that the original texts, as they were written under inspiration, are flawless and inerrant. While our modern translations (most) can be trusted, this does not mean that our translations are inerrant. The human mind is flawed due to the fall. This will affect everything. To assert that any modern translation is inerrant is to imply that each person involved in translating undergoes "divine inspiration" each time they translate a word.

[RCruise]

Did I even attempt to lean that way??? I was asking you to clarify what you were saying. You did not seem to understand what I was asking in relation to your earlier post so I narrowed it down to that specific quote and then simply put forth what I understood you to be saying and even asked you if that was correct! So, take it easy Shilo. Not a problem. There was never even a hint of KJV only debate and I did not even bring up the KJV in my posts except for your list quoted from you. sheesh. I asked you originally if your stance was that ALL the versions or translations were tainted with man's theological stances.

If you cannot defend your position without getting riled and defensive and throwing false accusations at me, I guess that pretty much sums it up and answers all my questions.

I did not throw false accusations at you so you can relax.

You opened up with in your last repsonse to about translations and whether or not we have one that is untainted by human theological leanings. That line of questioning around here is usually how the KJV only folks lead into their attack. It is simply hinted that you might be headed that way I did not accuse you of anything, but I simply headed off what I saw as a KJV translation debate, at the pass. We have only had about a million people jump on our boards and argue that the KJV is a pure translation and untainted and is the only "Word of God in English. So, your question raised a suspicion that was not at all unfounded from where I sit.

As to your question again, I already said that the human element cannot be factored out of anything we do for the Lord. God's message is pure, and without flaw, but our understanding is flawed, and as such God has managed to perserve the truth put forth in the Word through imperfect vessels. We are incapable of producing an English translation that is completely flawless, but God has amazingly been able to preserve the integrity and force of the doctrines and teachings He inspired to be present in the Scriptures.

Fair enough! Was that so hard?

For the record, I have been a member since 2003, was absent for a little less than 2 years. And I am a KJV person but don't argue or debate over it. I believe however that what you put forth in your original post about factoring these flaws in, is not the way to All Truth in Christ. James said it best:

James 1:5-8 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

I do believe the KJV is pure and true to every exact detail and meaning of the Received Text and that greater scholars and linguists than ourselves have proven that. But, that is my personal conviction and wisdom from The Lord. I used the NIV and other versions in times past but found the conflicts. It was when I saw this verse in James that I realized God WILL answer if asked in exact accordance of Faith as James has put forth. And not just about "versions/translations" which are nominal in importance but on every level and detail about Himself and our directions in His Will and Ways. But in agreement with you about debates and arguments I do agree and say they are unprofitable and lead to more damage and no good thing.

[Guest]

James 1:5-8 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

Amen!

PS: I'd better "Amen" in this crowd

[Kabowd]

Did I even attempt to lean that way??? I was asking you to clarify what you were saying. You did not seem to understand what I was asking in relation to your earlier post so I narrowed it down to that specific quote and then simply put forth what I understood you to be saying and even asked you if that was correct! So, take it easy Shilo. Not a problem. There was never even a hint of KJV only debate and I did not even bring up the KJV in my posts except for your list quoted from you. sheesh. I asked you originally if your stance was that ALL the versions or translations were tainted with man's theological stances.

If you cannot defend your position without getting riled and defensive and throwing false accusations at me, I guess that pretty much sums it up and answers all my questions.

I did not throw false accusations at you so you can relax.

You opened up with in your last repsonse to about translations and whether or not we have one that is untainted by human theological leanings. That line of questioning around here is usually how the KJV only folks lead into their attack. It is simply hinted that you might be headed that way I did not accuse you of anything, but I simply headed off what I saw as a KJV translation debate, at the pass. We have only had about a million people jump on our boards and argue that the KJV is a pure translation and untainted and is the only "Word of God in English. So, your question raised a suspicion that was not at all unfounded from where I sit.

As to your question again, I already said that the human element cannot be factored out of anything we do for the Lord. God's message is pure, and without flaw, but our understanding is flawed, and as such God has managed to perserve the truth put forth in the Word through imperfect vessels. We are incapable of producing an English translation that is completely flawless, but God has amazingly been able to preserve the integrity and force of the doctrines and teachings He inspired to be present in the Scriptures.

Fair enough! Was that so hard?

For the record, I have been a member since 2003, was absent for a little less than 2 years. And I am a KJV person but don't argue or debate over it. I believe however that what you put forth in your original post about factoring these flaws in, is not the way to All Truth in Christ. James said it best:

James 1:5-8 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

I do believe the KJV is pure and true to every exact detail and meaning of the Received Text and that greater scholars and linguists than ourselves have proven that. But, that is my personal conviction and wisdom from The Lord. I used the NIV and other versions in times past but found the conflicts. It was when I saw this verse in James that I realized God WILL answer if asked in exact accordance of Faith as James has put forth. And not just about "versions/translations" which are nominal in importance but on every level and detail about Himself and our directions in His Will and Ways. But in agreement with you about debates and arguments I do agree and say they are unprofitable and lead to more damage and no good thing.

I guess shiloh had you pegged correctly as a KJV-Only-er It'll be hard for this not to turn into one of those debates in light of the comments you made above. But if you want to advocate that the KJV is inerrant, that should probably be left for another thread.

[Guest shiloh357]

Did I even attempt to lean that way??? I was asking you to clarify what you were saying. You did not seem to understand what I was asking in relation to your earlier post so I narrowed it down to that specific quote and then simply put forth what I understood you to be saying and even asked you if that was correct! So, take it easy Shilo. Not a problem. There was never even a hint of KJV only debate and I did not even bring up the KJV in my posts except for your list quoted from you. sheesh. I asked you originally if your stance was that ALL the versions or translations were tainted with man's theological stances.

If you cannot defend your position without getting riled and defensive and throwing false accusations at me, I guess that pretty much sums it up and answers all my questions.

I did not throw false accusations at you so you can relax.

You opened up with in your last repsonse to about translations and whether or not we have one that is untainted by human theological leanings. That line of questioning around here is usually how the KJV only folks lead into their attack. It is simply hinted that you might be headed that way I did not accuse you of anything, but I simply headed off what I saw as a KJV translation debate, at the pass. We have only had about a million people jump on our boards and argue that the KJV is a pure translation and untainted and is the only "Word of God in English. So, your question raised a suspicion that was not at all unfounded from where I sit.

As to your question again, I already said that the human element cannot be factored out of anything we do for the Lord. God's message is pure, and without flaw, but our understanding is flawed, and as such God has managed to perserve the truth put forth in the Word through imperfect vessels. We are incapable of producing an English translation that is completely flawless, but God has amazingly been able to preserve the integrity and force of the doctrines and teachings He inspired to be present in the Scriptures.

Fair enough! Was that so hard?

For the record, I have been a member since 2003, was absent for a little less than 2 years. And I am a KJV person but don't argue or debate over it. I believe however that what you put forth in your original post about factoring these flaws in, is not the way to All Truth in Christ. James said it best:

James 1:5-8 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

I do believe the KJV is pure and true to every exact detail and meaning of the Received Text and that greater scholars and linguists than ourselves have proven that. But, that is my personal conviction and wisdom from The Lord. I used the NIV and other versions in times past but found the conflicts. It was when I saw this verse in James that I realized God WILL answer if asked in exact accordance of Faith as James has put forth. And not just about "versions/translations" which are nominal in importance but on every level and detail about Himself and our directions in His Will and Ways. But in agreement with you about debates and arguments I do agree and say they are unprofitable and lead to more damage and no good thing.

Yes, so my suspicion which you tried to pretend was out in left field was not so far off after all...

So was it just what I said about the translations that you had a problem with? I was addressing comments made by the person who opened up the thread with a scenario based more on the ideal, than the real world. Was there something else in my response that troubled you?