Independent Baptists in Australia?

praise_yeshua said:
Yes. Asking all the teachers to use the same version in a lesson is MANIPULATION!!!!

I have nothing against influence. This type of influence is WRONG!!!!

For the record. I generally carry a KJV bible with me. However, I do have bible apps on various devices I carry and can easily reference just about any translation ANYONE might want to reference. Its not hard. Its called using technology for GOOD!!!!

So, you are all for influence, just not Bible influence?

Apps can be useful, but, when the speaker does not tell you which version they are choosing to reference, it becomes difficult to guess.  There have been several times that a speaker references a verse, it sounds vaguely familiar and I want to see it myself.  I want to glean the chapter and gain the context.  I want to check if that is really what the Scripture is stating.  However, unless I am familiar with the passage enough to interpret it into a version I have, I can't look it up.  This means that I must rely on the speaker, not the Scripture.  Confusion.
 
praise_yeshua said:
IF that VERSION is WRONG.... they learn a LIE? You don't trust any teacher. You trust the Scriptures themselves..... and the KJV gets it wrong in MANY areas. MANY!!!

What's more important to you?

That people learn a lie from a bad translation or people get a consistent message? Being consistently WRONG... DESTROYS people. Paul talked of how the Jew has a zeal for GOD but it wasn't according to KNOWLEDGE.

Why are you choosing to teach from a translation that is incorrect?

Sorry, I happen to find the KJV a very accurate translation.  We had a thread asking for passages that may be incorrect or difficult in the KJV.  We got like, what, 20 responses?  Typically, with a contextual reading, the difficulty fades.  Sometimes, other resources are needed.  However, this is true of every translation - others even more so.

Failing to use a standard text for teaching where young disciples can follow along promotes a reliance upon the instructor, instead of Scripture, which allows the introduction of error.

Your rants are becoming simply rants.
 
Binaca Chugger said:
Why are you choosing to teach from a translation that is incorrect?

Your rants are becoming simply rants.

Juxtaposition speaks volumes.

You do not glean the idea of causation from the KJV's "becometh a snare."

I gave a solid exposition on Pro 29.25 and that was for a group of teens. None who expressed confusion. In fact, their faces and reaction was priceless. I love seeing teens, beaten down with a fear of man, understand they no longer need to build their own snare. They can trust the LORD who will make them inaccessible to the world.

If that is a rant, I suppose I am guilty of your definition of a rant.
 
RED HERRING ALERT!

FSSL said:
Binaca Chugger said:
FSSL said:
Malarkey. What approach treats the text better? Running all over Scripture finding verses in Strongs or digging into the meanings of the words of a particular verse?
Why not give the exact same lesson, only using one version that every one can see?  Then, the student sees the truth for themself in the Scripture that they take with them rather than just in your lesson.  AND, the next time a speaker reads that same passage, the lesson is triggered in their mind so that they can build and deepen thair understanding of that Scripture.  The multiple version method does not promote memory recall of the verse, but the lesson.  I would rather Scripture be paramount over my assemblance of study tools.
I used the NIV as the basis of this lesson. I even wrote the verse on the board and circled words.

You don't get it. Scripture is KING when you exposit it word-by-word. Even the NIV did not make it clear what "prove." It is better than the KJVs "bringeth." The Hebrew is clear. Did I need to read the Hebrew Bible to the teens?

The memory recall thing does not overthrow a proper understanding of the verse. There are many AWANA kids out there today who can cite Ephesians 2.8-9 and have no understanding of what it actually means.



In this thread, we are discussing if asking the teachers to use a common version does, by itself, define the pastor as a controlling, manipulative MOG.  I have maintained that there is great benefit in using a common version throughout the church ministries for teaching purposes.  I have not tried to prove the KJV to be a more sure word of testimony.  I understand that stating my preference for the KJV will bring out every hate possible from most of the posters here.  I really don't understand the hatred and disdain for this work of translation among so many posters.  Personally, I think the hatred of the KJV stems from the association of it to past abuse, but, I don't know your stories.

Please do expound the Scripture.  Please don't forget the "macro" while studying the "micro."  My point is that, whatever version your church is using, use it.  If you are speaking as a guest in a church, tell the people which version you will be using so they can associate the text and use their devices to follow along.  If you feel the need to further expound a word or passage, tell the people the source.  In teaching a multi-version class, I would often state something like: "Some versions use _____, while other versions state _______ or _______.  I like the wording in this version which states _______ because it most closely aligns with the context of this passage and the majority theme of the Scripture."  At least I am telling them where to find it.  Still, I find it most effective when an entire group is studying from the same translation with the same wording.

AWANA verse memorization is your response?  You mean to tell me that 6-12 year old kids don't fully comprehend the significance of the verse they memorized?  Seriously?  What's next?  Are you going to tell me that I don't fully comprehend molecular physics?  DUH!

Let's first talk about memorization.  Why should we memorize any Scripture if we can change it any way we want and call it a different version?  Example:  God loved, Jesus died, I go to heaven. - John 3:16  Obviously this is lacking in theology and could quite possibly teach heresy.  Yet, if we don't need to memorize because any version will do, why is my version wrong?  You see, this promotes confusion and even heresy.

Now, memory recall.  I don't think you understood my point.  When you teach a lesson to your class about Prov 29:25, they will associate that lesson with that passage.  A month later, another pastor references Prov 29:25 from a different lesson.  They will associate the passage that was quoted and the lesson learned with the lesson that you have already taught.  The mind will not as automatically perform this association when they hear the second lesson taught from a different version, because it sounds different.  Hence, people do not gain the deeper understanding of Scripture and how all the parts tie together that they would have if the same version was used.  This I know because of my work with Learning Disabilities, Cognitive Therapy and my own life experience from now attending a church that does not normally use the KJV.  A multitude of references promotes confusion, or, at least, a lack of understanding.
 
I have two extremely dyslexic children who are not confused by multiple versions. In fact, my youngest told me she really likes the NLT. Praise God! She is reading God's word... not succumbing to a tradition of one version onlyism.
 
FSSL said:
Binaca Chugger said:
Why are you choosing to teach from a translation that is incorrect?

Your rants are becoming simply rants.

Juxtaposition speaks volumes.

You do not glean the idea of causation from the KJV's "becometh a snare."

I gave a solid exposition on Pro 29.25 and that was for a group of teens. None who expressed confusion. In fact, their faces and reaction was priceless. I love seeing teens, beaten down with a fear of man, understand they no longer need to build their own snare. They can trust the LORD who will make them inaccessible to the world.

If that is a rant, I suppose I am guilty of your definition of a rant.

The "Rant" line was directed at PY, not you.  Your responses are well reasoned and typically respectful, even though I may disagree.

I am not criticizing your lesson's majority premise.  It built upon itself.  In the classroom, a teacher could use the outline to expound upon the truth and help some kids.  If I continue to teach teens, I will look through your materials. 
 
Okay. ;)
I appreciate that... we simply differ on a preference.
 
FSSL said:
I have two extremely dyslexic children who are not confused by multiple versions. In fact, my youngest told me she really likes the NLT. Praise God! She is reading God's word... not succumbing to a tradition of one version onlyism.

So do I!  I do ALOT of work with dyslexic students and other LDs.  Mine likes the KJV.  She has a tablet with the Bible loaded where she can easily reference passages and have a large font color coded to help her Irlen syndrome.  It drives her crazy that the teacher reads from various versions and won't even tell her which one.  Her statement: "I hate this!  Why won't they read what the Bible says!?!"  She struggles enough to apply her rules and read along.  It makes her question herself when she can't read along with the teacher because the teacher keeps changing.
 
Binaca Chugger said:
.  It drives her crazy that the teacher reads from various versions and won't even tell her which one. 

Yes. That is a problem. We stick with the NIV as our main text. If a different version makes better sense, we explain what the version is, how it reads in other popular translations and how it makes the sense more clear.

Expository preaching demands that the meaning is understood. When it comes to delivery, making it clear where you get the reading is important.

What is funny is that our SS teacher uses the NASB. He is from Mississippi and between his pronunciations and glosses as he reads, it took me three weeks to realize what version he was using.
 
May I point out that the KJV translators quoted Augustine.

I am in agreement with the translators and Augustine.

"Variety of translations is profitable for finding out the sense of the Scriptures."

To which I say a hearty amen.

I always consult several versions when teaching any text.

In my SS class we make the use of Bible apps such as My-Sword for Android a normal part of the class. I encourage the students to be real Bereans not trained parrots, to read and study the Bible for themselves and not just take my word for it. Trust but verify.

Members can read in any version they choose to open on their phones or carry in leather covered paper.

Individual soul liberty in practice, I am a convinced and practicing Immersionist after all.
 
Binaca Chugger said:
praise_yeshua said:
You know. I really grow tired of the old.... "you must be hurt" defense!!!! You're being entirely dishonest. WHY are you acting as if you know me and you know my "pain" is affecting my judgement and beliefs?

You don't know me. Don't pretend you do.

Okay.

It does seem to me that any mention of anything somewhat related to an IFB brings out a screaming (all caps), random rant which spews forth vitriol.  But, if you say you are all okay, okay.

I don't use "CAPS" for screaming. I use them for "EMPHASIS". Its a common practice in many different area. Learn your material before you assume anything,
 
Binaca Chugger said:
praise_yeshua said:
IF that VERSION is WRONG.... they learn a LIE? You don't trust any teacher. You trust the Scriptures themselves..... and the KJV gets it wrong in MANY areas. MANY!!!

What's more important to you?

That people learn a lie from a bad translation or people get a consistent message? Being consistently WRONG... DESTROYS people. Paul talked of how the Jew has a zeal for GOD but it wasn't according to KNOWLEDGE.

Why are you choosing to teach from a translation that is incorrect?

Sorry, I happen to find the KJV a very accurate translation.  We had a thread asking for passages that may be incorrect or difficult in the KJV.  We got like, what, 20 responses?  Typically, with a contextual reading, the difficulty fades.  Sometimes, other resources are needed.  However, this is true of every translation - others even more so.

Failing to use a standard text for teaching where young disciples can follow along promotes a reliance upon the instructor, instead of Scripture, which allows the introduction of error.

Your rants are becoming simply rants.

If you choose to teach from the KJV, you are teaching from a translation that's incorrect.

Who is the "we" you speak of? I remember someone esle starting a thread in the HAC forum along those lines and you only got 20 responses because the original poster didn't take it seriously. I don't remember you dealing with any of the issues presented. None of you that "prefer" the KJV take anything said against the KJV seriously. None of you. If you want a serious discussion about it, I'll be glad to point more than 20 issues with the KJV. Serious issues. Any lie.... is a serious issue.

Your "standard" text argument is a joke. Who sets the "standard"???

You? I don't know if you noticed or not.... but God. Himself, hasn't chosen one particular English translation to "rule" them all.

By the way, I don't know of ANYONE that quotes from multiple version without detailing which version they are referencing. NO ONE.
 
Binaca Chugger said:
praise_yeshua said:
IF that VERSION is WRONG.... they learn a LIE? You don't trust any teacher. You trust the Scriptures themselves..... and the KJV gets it wrong in MANY areas. MANY!!!

What's more important to you?

That people learn a lie from a bad translation or people get a consistent message? Being consistently WRONG... DESTROYS people. Paul talked of how the Jew has a zeal for GOD but it wasn't according to KNOWLEDGE.

Why are you choosing to teach from a translation that is incorrect?

Sorry, I happen to find the KJV a very accurate translation.  We had a thread asking for passages that may be incorrect or difficult in the KJV.  We got like, what, 20 responses?  Typically, with a contextual reading, the difficulty fades.  Sometimes, other resources are needed.  However, this is true of every translation - others even more so.

Failing to use a standard text for teaching where young disciples can follow along promotes a reliance upon the instructor, instead of Scripture, which allows the introduction of error.

Your rants are becoming simply rants.

Actually multiple errors were pointed out that were summarily ignored. ;)
 
praise_yeshua said:
While IFB are "independent"....

The old saying still holds true.... "birds of a feather, flock together".

When you say the church you attend isn't cultish or controlling..... but only uses the KJV and only sings hymns..... well. Those are two contradictory statements. Nothing wrong with using a different English version of the Scriptures. Nothing wrong with sing CCM music in praise to God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ.

You're being "controlled".

Who cares who the come from. Open your eyes and see WHAT THEY ARE.... right in front of you.

Historical Christianity is more important than the "flavor of the moment" denomination that claims to teach it. The historical "Scriptures" is what you need. :)

I think by they he means the Bible teachers use only the KJV not every one in the congregation. I can assure you not every one in KJV churches use that version and most don't police it.
 
brianb said:
I think by they he means the Bible teachers use only the KJV not every one in the congregation. I can assure you not every one in KJV churches use that version and most don't police it.

Yep that's excatly correct.

Looks like I created a bit of a stir here haha.

Out of curiosity what percentage of IFB churches in the USA would you estimate as being KJVO or KJVP? After reviewing the statements of faith of a wide variety of IFB churches across different states in Australia I estimate here its between 80% to 90%.
 
Jet said:
brianb said:
I think by they he means the Bible teachers use only the KJV not every one in the congregation. I can assure you not every one in KJV churches use that version and most don't police it.

Yep that's excatly correct.

Looks like I created a bit of a stir here haha.

Out of curiosity what percentage of IFB churches in the USA would you estimate as being KJVO or KJVP? After reviewing the statements of faith of a wide variety of IFB churches across different states in Australia I estimate here its between 80% to 90%.
Big difference between KJVO & KJVP. Most churches don't have the kahoonas to regulate their Elder/Pastors Bible bible versions as most men are real men, who wouldn't all such childlike control over them.
But anyhow, now that you see the problem, I would jet away from the IFB movement all together. Go Non Denominational instead
IFB & SBC. They have nothing to offer you  8)
 
The non denom crowd in my region of the states teach baptismal regeneration.  A great big no for me.
 
Jet said:
brianb said:
I think by they he means the Bible teachers use only the KJV not every one in the congregation. I can assure you not every one in KJV churches use that version and most don't police it.

Yep that's excatly correct.

Looks like I created a bit of a stir here haha.

Out of curiosity what percentage of IFB churches in the USA would you estimate as being KJVO or KJVP? After reviewing the statements of faith of a wide variety of IFB churches across different states in Australia I estimate here its between 80% to 90%.
If they are part of the NADD IFB, 100% are KJVO.  Some here have claimed there are other types of IFB, but I have not found them yet. 
 
rsc2a said:
Binaca Chugger said:
praise_yeshua said:
IF that VERSION is WRONG.... they learn a LIE? You don't trust any teacher. You trust the Scriptures themselves..... and the KJV gets it wrong in MANY areas. MANY!!!

What's more important to you?

That people learn a lie from a bad translation or people get a consistent message? Being consistently WRONG... DESTROYS people. Paul talked of how the Jew has a zeal for GOD but it wasn't according to KNOWLEDGE.

Why are you choosing to teach from a translation that is incorrect?

Sorry, I happen to find the KJV a very accurate translation.  We had a thread asking for passages that may be incorrect or difficult in the KJV.  We got like, what, 20 responses?  Typically, with a contextual reading, the difficulty fades.  Sometimes, other resources are needed.  However, this is true of every translation - others even more so.

Failing to use a standard text for teaching where young disciples can follow along promotes a reliance upon the instructor, instead of Scripture, which allows the introduction of error.

Your rants are becoming simply rants.

Actually multiple errors were pointed out that were summarily ignored. ;)
Not ignored.  I read and considered, but did not spend the energy to debate.
 
"I read and considered but couldn't find up with any reasonable response wouldn't  contradict my KJVO dogma so I ignored them."
 
Back
Top