[Manny Rodriguez]

The question is simple. Do you consider Dr. Shelton Smith, Editor of the Sword of the Lord, to be a true King James Bible-believer?

Now before you answer, please read this article by Shelton Smith:

http://swordofthelord.com/issueandconflict.htm

No this is not a set up or anything. And yes I have an answer of my own to the question (which I will share at some point on this thread). But I am really interested in the consensus of other Bible-believers out there concerning Shelton Smith's position on the KJB.

God bless.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Manny Rodriguez

The question is simple. Do you consider Dr. Shelton Smith, Editor of the Sword of the Lord, to be a true King James Bible-believer?

Now before you answer, please read this article by Shelton Smith:

http://swordofthelord.com/issueandconflict.htm

No this is not a set up or anything. And yes I have an answer of my own to the question (which I will share at some point on this thread). But I am really interested in the consensus of other Bible-believers out there concerning Shelton Smith's position on the KJB.

God bless.

This page reads good, but I take it there is more and I will be waiting to read your response on it.

Grace and peace

Tony

[Diligent]

I can't imagine why this question would be asked if there were not another shoe about to drop.

[Luke]

I don't really care to be honest.. when you start separating from people who are fundamental, non calvinist, Bible believers who happen to differ on a small point (such as whether they think the Greek and Hebrew are also the word of God today), you end up eliminating a lot of potential friends, and find yourself alone in the battlefield. The Christian warfare is more than just holding a King James Bible.

[Manny Rodriguez]

Originally Posted by Diligent

I can't imagine why this question would be asked if there were not another shoe about to drop.

Well I guess I better give my opinion because I really don't have something up my sleeve. I just really want to know what others opinions are on Shelton Smith's position on the KJB.

Personally, I say YES. He is a Bible-believer according to what he wrote in the article. However, I keep hearing from others that Shelton Smith is not a Bible-believer or that he is just taking a compromising position on the KJB that doesn't go far enough. Yet this doesn't jive with what I'm reading in Shelton Smith's writings. So the reason I made this thread is simply to hear (read) the opinion of some of the good brethren here as to what it is that they may think Shelton Smith is lacking in his position that would qualify him to be a true KJB believer (all the way - 100%). Because again, I'm reading his stuff and he is clearly stating that he believes the KJB is the inspired, infallible, preserved, pure words of God in English. So what is that I'm missing?

[Luke]

It depends who you ask. From my experience, it seems that those who don't follow the Ruckman/Gipp/Walker/Stauffer crowd in rightly dividing, are labelled as not real Bible believers. I tend to stay away from that kind of division.

On the flipside, Shelton smith would probably deny those men fellowship, on the grounds of their rightly dividing.

I myself don't care. I agree with most when it comes to rightly dividing, but I don't want to distance myselves from those conservative believers who are free grace, yet don't believe in rightly dividing.

[Brother Tim]

Manny, the most notable observation that I made was that the KJB does not appear to be his final authority. He steps back to the original languages to define his words, and he is far too broad with his position on the TR. I would venture to say that if asked, he would defer to the extant original language manuscripts over the KJB. He also does not indicate any exclusivity with respect to other English versions.

[Manny Rodriguez]

Hi Brother Tim,

Shelton Smith on the original languages:

HEBREW, GREEK AND ENGLISH

I love the Hebrew Old Testament! I love the Greek New Testament! I love the English King James text! Yes, I love all three of them, and here’s the reason why: they (all three) are the Word of God!

If you do not know Hebrew and Greek and if you choose not to learn them, that’s fine. You have the English Bible, and you do not have to have Greek and Hebrew.

But let’s also be careful that we not diminish or dismiss them either. Remember, they too are the Word of God.

Very simply, if there were no Hebrew and Greek Word of God, you would have no English Word of God. Remember, that’s where we got the English text (from the Hebrew and Greek).

Using the Hebrew and Greek in your study or in your preaching doesn’t make you a “Bible corrector” unless you have a mind to correct the text. If one “corrects” the text, the problem is not the text, but rather it is he who misuses his tools. You can use a dictionary, a commentary or your preaching to “correct” the text if you are so inclined. It is, however, the sacred responsibility of all of us to handle the Word of God respectfully.

There is a vast difference between defining and explaining the text and correcting it. We take the position upfront that the text is correct and as a preacher or teacher we are obliged to declare it with full explanation. That’s why we call it Bible preaching!

Remember, there is no conflict between the Hebrew/Greek text and the English Bible, because they are all the perfect Word of God. Any perception of a problem is our lack of understanding and not a problem with the text.

Notice he doesn't say that you HAVE to go the Greek and Hebrew because you have the KJB. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with referencing the Greek and Hebrew when studying the definition of a word in the KJB. Now I believe the best way to define a word is to study the word in its context, cross reference it, and apply the law of first mention in the KJB itself. But I don't have a problem with someone ALSO looking at the definition of the word in the Greek and Hebrew just like I don't have a problem with someone referencing the 1828 Webster's Dictionary. Even Dr. Ruckman has stated in his book How To Teach the Bible that referencing the Greek and Hebrew is a viable option when studying a word. He's done it himself in some of his commentaries. Yet I've noticed that students of Dr. Ruckman will make the mistake of labeling EVERYONE AND ANYONE who makes any kind of reference to the Hebrew and Greek as a Bible correcter. This is not right.

Shelton Smith on authority:

It Is Authoritative!

Because it is the Word of God, it is not mere suggestion or optional counsel. It is the Almighty’s authoritative Word. When we lessen it, we make it easy for men to disrespect it and dismiss it.

When we espouse its authority, then it becomes the rule of faith and practice for all we do.

None of this (authenticity, accuracy, authority) could be achieved apart from inspiration.

Seems pretty plain to me.

[Manny Rodriguez]

Originally Posted by Luke

It depends who you ask. From my experience, it seems that those who don't follow the Ruckman/Gipp/Walker/Stauffer crowd in rightly dividing, are labelled as not real Bible believers. I tend to stay away from that kind of division.

On the flipside, Shelton smith would probably deny those men fellowship, on the grounds of their rightly dividing.

I myself don't care. I agree with most when it comes to rightly dividing, but I don't want to distance myselves from those conservative believers who are free grace, yet don't believe in rightly dividing.

Bro. Luke, I agree. I believe as one preacher friend of mine said that if at the end of the day we are standing for the KJB we are on the same team though we may differ on some details and mechanics.

[George]

Aloha brother Manny,

I'll go along with brother Tim's "concerns":

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Manny, the most notable observation that I made was that the KJB does not appear to be his final authority. He steps back to the original languages to define his words, and he is far too broad with his position on the TR. I would venture to say that if asked, he would defer to the extant original language manuscripts over the KJB. He also does not indicate any exclusivity with respect to other English versions.

But on the other hand, the man has testified strongly and clearly enough, that I wouldn't argue with him over his stand, or openly "criticize" or "fault" him for his stand. Nor would I hesitate to extend the right hand of fellowship to him. I have no right to demand that all King James Bible believers hold the exact same convictions that I hold, and I don't want to end up being a "gnat" strainer, but I also believe that brother Tim's "concerns" are valid.

Unless or until he proves otherwise, I will accept that Shelton Smith is a "Bible believer".