Compass College and Seminary

[aleshanee]

HukNCluck from a previous thread

......... You should be careful about that type of mentality. There are a couple people on this forum who were judging you pretty harshly not long ago—people who are now cheering your behavior on, but remember that fickle people are always fickle…just need the wind to change direction and you’ll see.

Hey @Ekklesian - remember that pesky, shifting wind I warned you about View attachment 4941

shows how little you know about the wind or human behavior either one...... ... whether or not a ship finds favor in the wind or flounders, has little to do with the direction of the wind and everything to do with the angle of it;s rudder and the set of it;s sails...... but then i wouldn;t expect someone whose only dealings with the ocean involve shallow water ponds to know that anyway..... keep hunting your ducks and backwater fish huk..... like i told you before - everybody should have something they are good at...

by the way.... that picture looks like a kid that just got done digging his nose and is trying to show the booger on his finger to his mom..... ..its like... "look mom... i picked this one just for you.... "...... .. ... i;m sure she would be impressed... but it would have the same effect on the rest of us as the majority of your recent posts do.......

 

[FSSL]

When it came to versions of the bible, if they did not dot the i or cross the t like us when it come to the KJV being the inspired word of God then they were not ones to fellowship with

Yes. It really wasnt until the 1970s when this new separation was practiced.

The Sword of the Lord even advertised other translations pre 1970s. John R Rice liked the RSV.

 

[abcaines]

Yes. It really wasnt until the 1970s when this new separation was practiced.

The Sword of the Lord even advertised other translations pre 1970s. John R Rice liked the RSV.

Interesting .

I've suspected this to be a fairly recent phenomenon in Fundy circles... Just another distraction to get even the most faithful veered off course.

 

[Dr. Huk-N-Duck]

shows how little you know about the wind or human behavior either one...... ... whether or not a ship finds favor in the wind or flounders, has little to do with the direction of the wind and everything to do with the angle of it;s rudder and the set of it;s sails...... but then i wouldn;t expect someone whose only dealings with the ocean involve shallow water ponds to know that anyway.

You’re right, my only experience with the ocean is shallow waters. That’s just the geography of where I grew up and live, so I don’t take that as an insult.

keep hunting your ducks and backwater fish huk..... like i told you before - everybody should have something they are good at

Well thanks, although many are much better. I just consider myself average, and probably below average in the duck hunting category.

by the way.... that picture looks like a kid that just got done digging his nose and is trying to show the booger on his finger to his mom..... ..its like... "look mom... i picked this one just for you.... "...... .. ... i;m sure she would be impressed... but it would have the same effect on the rest of us as the majority of your recent posts do......

That one made me laugh about the booger. As for my posts, sorry you feel that way. Hope you have a great day!

 

[ALAYMAN]

We do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the King's speech, which he uttereth in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King's speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere. For it is confessed, that things are to take their denomination of the greater part; and a natural man could say, Verum ubi multa nitent in carmine, non ego paucis offendor maculis, etc. A man may be counted a virtuous man, though he have made many slips in his life, (else, there were none virtuous, for in many things we offend all) [James 3:2] also a comely man and lovely, though he have some warts upon his hand, yea, not only freckles upon his face, but also scars. No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it.​

​

--The Translators to the Reader, Authorized Version (1611)​

Not trying to be obtuse. Just trying to understand your citation connection as a refutation to the Chicago Statement claiming inspiration for only the autographs. Put differently, how does the translators statement establish an alleged claim that their/any English Bible is inspired?

 

[aleshanee]

You’re right, my only experience with the ocean is shallow waters. That’s just the geography of where I grew up and live, so I don’t take that as an insult.

Well thanks, although many are much better. I just consider myself average, and probably below average in the duck hunting category.

That one made me laugh about the booger. As for my posts, sorry you feel that way. Hope you have a great day!

nice attempt at deflecting from the issue by trying to make the illustration i used to make an analogy the issue.... glad you thought the booger comment was funny.... ... ...but since you continue to play dumb - i;ll ask you straight out.... who are you talking about when you claim "fickle" people are cheering on the bad behavior of another poster here?.... . was that written about obscure and anonymous college students too?.... or did you have specific people in mind?...

and who are you referring to when you made this post below about newcomers needing the approval of the queen bee and a king mustafa ?

Who said newbies need the approval of the Queen Bee and the King Mufasa?I think the old timers need the approval of the newbies.

any answers huk?.... are the "queen bee and the king mufasa" obscure college students somewhere else too?..... someone mentioned that other poster burning bridges... well you are burning a few yourself..

 

[ALAYMAN]

Cassidy, God rest his soul, lost me with all of the "others don't have personal standards stuff" over and over again.

Yeah, he was kind of crusty (militant fundy-ish), and then at times charming. The thing that perplex me was when I was first looking into defense of the KJVO a lot of his writing seemed to favor that, but at some point, he seemed to pivot away from defense of that position.

Scripture is authoritative because it has the quality of inspiration.

Hmmm, I may like that, but I think I would ask for further clarification on what it means, lol.

 

[Dr. Huk-N-Duck]

any answers huk?.

Sure. If I’m not directly responding to you or you’re not mentioned specifically, don’t assume my posts to other people are about you. There are other people on this forum who respond (both positively and negatively) to my posts.

 

[aleshanee]

Sure. If I’m not directly responding to you or you’re not mentioned specifically, don’t assume my posts to other people are about you. There are other people on this forum who respond (both positively and negatively) to my posts.

ok.... then who were you talking about specifically when you said a couple of people here were cheering ekks behavior on?.... care to name them?....... ..and what is this "bad" behavior you are talking about?.. ... ... i don;t have a problem naming the people i am talking about here if have a real problem or disagreement with them...and i have no problem adressing them directly.. ... .neither does anyone else here as far as i can tell..... .. why are you so intentionally vague and dishonest about it?

 

[Ekklesian]

Interesting .

I've suspected this to be a fairly recent phenomenon in Fundy circles... Just another distraction to get even the most faithful veered off course.

I was introduced to it reading tracts and comics by Jack Chick. Loved the format and the artwork, and at the time (pre-teen through early teens), all the content.

Chick.com: Sabotage? - by Jack T. Chick

32-PAGE, FULL COLOR COMIC BOOK - See the struggle through the ages to keep God’s Word pure, and learn which Bible can be trusted... and why!

www.chick.com

Loved this one,

Chick.com: King of Kings - by Jack T. Chick

64-PAGE, FULL COLOR COMIC BOOK - Teaches many major Bible stories, from Genesis to Revelation.

www.chick.com

because it's basically the Bible story in brief comic form. But it's cosmology and eschatology is rubbish. For years after my growth into Reformed theology, I wondered why the fringe elements had the best art work. Remember the Bible Story Books? They're put out by the Seventh Day Adventists.

So I got a real buzz when I stumbled upon this copy of Revelation in graphic novel format: https://www.fundamentalforums.org/threads/revelation-the-graphic-novel.12956/

 

[Dr. Huk-N-Duck]

ok.... then who were you talking about specifically when you said a couple of people here were cheering ekks behavior on?.... care to name them?....... ..and what is this "bad" behavior you are talking about?.. ... ... i don;t have a problem naming the people i am talking about here if have a real problem or disagreement with them...and i have no problem adressing them directly.. ... .neither does anyone else here as far as i can tell..... .. why are you so intentionally vague and dishonest about it?

If I said something negative about Ekk, then it seems he should be calling me out for it, not you. Go kick rocks….

 

[4everfsu]

Yes. It really wasnt until the 1970s when this new separation was practiced.

The Sword of the Lord even advertised other translations pre 1970s. John R Rice liked the RSV.

This was during the 70s, say late 69 to 71, at least when I left for BJU.

 

[FSSL]

Hmmm, I may like that, but I think I would ask for further clarification on what it means, lol.

The reason God's Word has authority is because it is God's very words -- inspired.

The topics of authority and inspiration go hand in hand.

 

[aleshanee]

If I said something negative about Ekk, then it seems he should be calling me out for it, not you. Go kick rocks….

that;s not what i;m calling you out for..... ..and you know it.....is there any honesty in you at all?.... ... i want to know who you
were talking about when you said a "couple of people here" were cheering ekk on...... and what it is you are calling this "cheering on".... what constitutes cheering someone on in your book..... . care to post a link to a specific post?.... ...... ....

i expected you would try to deflect from it again.... ... what;s the matter huk?... are you afraid to name the people you were making reference to?.... ... you asked ekk if he was afraid of gringo when a few days went by before he answered a post...... . are you scared of somebody here huk?.....

you can;t name a suspect... and you can;t identify the offense.... ..but you carry on with slander and accusations of "certain" persons you refuse to name, and vague references to an offense anyway..... .. even the trump prosecutors could do better than that.... ..... answer if you can summon the courage later on.. ..or don;t.... i don;t care either way.. ..but if i can go kick rocks - then you can walk towards the water until your hat floats.....

 

[Ekklesian]

If I said something negative about Ekk, then it seems he should be calling me out for it, not you. Go kick rocks….

Whom did you mean by 'Queen Bee', Huk?

And no one is cheering me on as much as they're just disagreeing with you.

 

[Baptist Renegade]

It is technically incorrect to say the doctrine of inspiration extends to translations.

Inspiration occurs only once during transmission of the "Originals" which are no longer in existence. The word of God is not "re-inspired" every time it is copied or translated into a new language. It doesn't have to be because it is already inspired.

Now the question is Do you believe the Bible you are holding in your hands is the "Word of God?" Why or why not?

I primarily use the King James Version in my teaching and preaching and regard it as the authoritative Word of God which is sufficient to make one wise unto salvation.

I believe that the modern versions are also the inspired and authoritative word of God. I just happen to prefer the KJV although I do keep my ESV close by.

The argument is against the so-called "Double Inspiration" of the Ruckmanites who believe that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Ghost in their translation of the King James Bible and with this English translation, they have "Corrected" any errors or discrepancies that may have been transferred with the copies over the course of time. This is PCC's main beef with the Ruckmanites who are camped across town from them (along with them courting and marrying girls enrolled at PCC).

The Ruckmanite position therefore undermines the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.

 

[Dr. Huk-N-Duck]

Whom did you mean by 'Queen Bee', Huk?

And no one is cheering me on as much as they're just disagreeing with you.

Whom did I mean by King Mufasa? It’s called a figure of speech. (I think I was actually being nice to you in that post).

 

[Ekklesian]

The topics of authority and inspiration go hand in hand.

That is true. Let me amplify what I think is meant by that.

Paul's letters are authoritative, not because he was taking dictation from the Holy Spirit in writing them, but because he was an Apostle. A true Apostle. Full of the Holy Ghost and power, called of Christ directly, and taught by Him directly. Not a mere messenger or representative, but truly a vicar of Christ. Not all his letters of instruction made it into the canon, not because they were less authoritative than the ones that did, but because the ones that did were copied more and circulated more widely, probably because of a more universal application to the churches world wide, resulting in their preservation.

By the authority of his office, his letters to the churches are the words of God, and any reliable copy or translation thereof, bears that same authority, despite variations in readings due to translation and despite copyist errors, and is therefore the 'word of God.'

I'm talking about the New Testament, of course, and specifically about the apostolic epistles and Gospels. Revelation may have some dictation in it, as in the letters to the churches, but it is mostly descriptive of a vision. John was told to write down the things that he saw, he wasn't told to use certain words, and the Holy Spirit didn't take control of his pen.

And then there are the synopses of Mark and Luke, which, if there is such a thing as derivative authority or inspiration, then these Gospels derive their authority from the fact that Mark and Luke were close associates of the Apostles, and may have even carried the title of Apostle themselves. They definitely had a good report of the Apostles, and some think Paul was quoting from Luke's account when he said the "laborer is worthy of his hire."

Regardless, their Gospels were copied and widely circulated among the churches as well as Matthew's and John's, again, resulting in their preservation. It's obvious their Gospels were recognized by the church as the truth about Christ, and therefore carried the authority of the 'word of God.'

Now the question is Do you believe the Bible you are holding in your hands is the "Word of God?" Why or why not?

Yes, I see it as the final authority in faith and practice, embossed with the seal of the King of Kings. In other words, bearing His authority, as if He moved the pen on the paper Himself, because it is a reliable translation of copies of the originals.

The Word of God is a Person. The Bible contains the words about the Word.

The Truth is a Person. The Bible is the truth about the Truth, but not the Truth Himself.

Scholarship and the comments of preachers and teachers are the truth about the truth about the Truth, but not the truth about the Truth itself.

This parsing is not mine. It's a variation of how a Lutheran preacher, who had suffered 14 years in Communist prisons in Romania for the Testimony of Christ, said it once. And I can't think of a better way to say it.

 

[Ransom]

Not trying to be obtuse. Just trying to understand your citation connection as a refutation to the Chicago Statement claiming inspiration for only the autographs. Put differently, how does the translators statement establish an alleged claim that their/any English Bible is inspired?

I was responding to your request for a citation, not to your quotation of the Chicago Statement.

What the KJV translators wrote in that passage in the preface was basically a statement of derivative inspiration. A translated work is recognizably the same work as its source. Hence a copy of the English king's speech translated into French remains the king's speech--it's not someone else's--and similarly the word of God translated remains the word of God.

It stands to reason that since an English Bible, reliably translated, contains the same content as the Hebrew and Greek testaments, it has equal authority. Just as the translation is derived from the original, so is its authority.

 

[Baptist Renegade]

By the authority of his office, his letters to the churches are the words of God, and any reliable copy or translation thereof, bears that same authority, despite variations in readings due to translation and despite copyist errors, and is therefore the 'word of God.'

I would be very careful with such a statement. You are almost sounding like a Catholic here who believes that it is the Church that gives its authority to the scriptures rather than the other way around! I do not believe you intended this intentionally though.
Not all apostles wrote epistles which ended up in the NT canon. Furthermore, not every NT writer held the official office of an apostle! James and Jude come to mind as well as Luke and Mark.

Paul's epistles found in the NT are the word of God because he "Spake as he was moved of the Holy Ghost" as was the case with every other writer of the scriptures. God used Paul's thoughts, observations, research methods, and writing style to write what we know of today as the Pauline Epistles. The method of inspiration God primarily used was "Verbal Plenary Inspiration" whereby the writings are Paul's but inspired by God and are therefore the very words of God.

I'm talking about the New Testament, of course, and specifically about the apostolic epistles and Gospels. Revelation may have some dictation in it, as in the letters to the churches, but it is mostly descriptive of a vision. John was told to write down the things that he saw, he wasn't told to use certain words, and the Holy Spirit didn't take control of his pen.

There are some instances of "Mechanical Inscription" but I cannot think of any examples outside of the writings of Moses where God gives specific dimensions for the ark of Noah as well as the tabernacle and its furnishings or dictating what was to become the written law. There may be a few others.

And then there are the synopses of Mark and Luke, which, if there is such a thing as derivative authority or inspiration, then these Gospels derive their authority from the fact that Mark and Luke were close associates of the Apostles, and may have even carried the title of Apostle themselves. They definitely had a good report of the Apostles, and some think Paul was quoting from Luke's account when he said the "laborer is worthy of his hire."

God used Mark and Luke according to his sovereign will and good pleasure! It had nothing to do with their affiliation with Paul although being Paul's traveling companions, it did give them the necessary experience and exposure to oral and written records whereby they were able to write their respective gospel accounts.

Just to make sure things are quite clear: Paul had ABSOLUTELY NO authority of his own aside from when God inspired him to speak or write canonically. Once the words were written and established, Paul himself was obligated to obey these words as well!

Regardless, their Gospels were copied and widely circulated among the churches as well as Matthew's and John's, again, resulting in their preservation. It's obvious their Gospels were recognized by the church as the truth about Christ, and therefore carried the authority of the 'word of God.'

Their Gospels were recognized by the church as the word of God because they were divinely inspired as were the writings of Matthew and John. It was God who gave his authority to these scriptures which was thus recognized by the Church.

Yes, I see it as the final authority in faith and practice, embossed with the seal of the King of Kings. In other words, bearing His authority, as if He moved the pen on the paper Himself, because it is a reliable translation of copies of the originals.

I'm glad we agree here.

The Word of God is a Person. The Bible contains the words about the Word.

The Truth is a Person. The Bible is the truth about the Truth, but not the Truth Himself.

Scholarship and the comments of preachers and teachers are the truth about the truth about the Truth, but not the truth about the Truth itself.

Once again, you have to be very careful here. Yes, Jesus is the Word of God. He is the Word of God INCARNATE as the scriptures are they which testify of him (Jn 5:39).

We do not worship scripture as we worship Jesus who is called the "Word of God" but it is the scriptures which reveal the one who we do worship!

My main point here though is that there is a statement which declares "We believe the Bible does not just 'contain' the word of God but IS THE VERY word of God in its entirety!" This is very important because if one just says the Bible contains the word of God, they can then pick and choose what they believe is and is not the actual words of God and such is the foundation for liberalism and the slide into apostacy.

One again, not saying this is what you meant but words mean things and we have to be very careful how we use them!

I'm trying to make sense of your quotation of this Lutheran preacher. The comments and scholarship of preachers and teachers may be the truth about the truth about the truth but the Word of God most certainly is the truth about "The Truth" (The Lord Jesus Christ) and is THE TRUTH by which we all must stand and give account!