[Mathew Ward]

Originally Posted by George

Aloha Brother Matthew Ward,

I took a brief look at your “Blog”, and I liked what I read.

I agree with your take on “Personal Discipleship”.

As to: “Guilt, Fear & Intimidation” - I have taught for several years that many “leaders” (pastors/elders) in today’s “Fundamentalist” churches are not only using “worldly methods” to win the lost, they also are adopting the world’s “TACTICS” to keep the brethren “in line”: The world (governments, institutions, religions, etc.) primarily uses FEAR - INTIMIDATION and COERCION; and if these fail, they will resort to – FORCE! I believe, as I think you do, that none of these “tactics” have any place in Biblical Christianity.

As to your concerns over: “KJVO vs. MV … will there ever be a cease fire?” I think that you might be a bit naïve on this issue. I believe that you are sincere in desiring to see peace within the body of Christ, and that your motive for wanting “UNITY” amongst believers is good; but after having been a King James Bible believer since 1968, I can tell you that there is absolutely NO CHANCE that there will be a “cease fire” between the two “camps”.

Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

The only way that there will ever be “UNITY” between us and the MV’ers, is IF one of us COMPROMISES! And as far as I personally am concerned – that will never happen on my part, and I am pretty sure that it won’t happen on their part (at least most of them).

This is an “issue” that will only be “settled” at the judgment seat of Christ. Although people on both sides of the issue are “sincere”, we both cannot be right - one of us is wrong – terribly wrong; and God will reveal (and “deal”) with those who are wrong at the Judgment Seat of Christ. Until then, the battle of “Which Bible?” and WHAT constitutes God’s FINAL AUTHORITY on earth will continue, unabated, as it has ever since W&H introduced their corrupt “Greek Text” upon which the “great grand-daddy” of all modern versions (MV’s) was based, i.e. the “original” English “Revised Version”.

I ask that you ponder this one thing (at least for now): If you will notice – we have a steady stream of MV’ers who join our little Forum, and who (once they "join" up) are constantly “baiting” us; drawing us into “arguments” and “debates”; and generally making a nuisance of themselves, trying to undermine our faith in the King James Bible. My question is: WHY is it that they continually COME HERE (on our Forum) and engage in these destructive “tactics”; and those of us here on the AV1611 Forums refuse to go to THERE (to their Forum) and engage in the very same nefarious “tactics”?

Just exactly WHAT is it that “compels” them to COME HERE and stir up trouble? And WHY is it that we DO NOT DO THE SAME? WHAT do they hope to “accomplish” by COMING HERE? WHAT is their MOTIVE for COMING HERE? Is it to EDIFY the brethren, or is it to DIVIDE us, or worse - possibly DESTROY us?

Romans 14:19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.

2 Corinthians 10:8 For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed:

Romans 15:2 Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification.

I leave it up to you to “judge”. Are those of us on the AV1611 Forums trying to DESTROY the brethren’s faith in the Holy words of God? Are we trying to “edify” and “build up” the brethren, or are we trying to “destroy” and “tear down”? You decide.

It is my sincere desire that you will be able to settle this matter in your heart and mind; and that the belief and conviction you settle on will be from God, and NOT from man.

George...thank you for taking the time to read my blog, I appreciate your comments.

As far as having to compromise with those on the other side of the MV vs KJV debate, I honestly do not believe one has to. Your assessment of some that come here to stir up trouble and cause strife and doubt is very true and I am sure you have seen many on the KJV side stir up trouble as well (maybe not on this forum). However I have learned over the years that I would rather discuss the truths of the Bible then to argue which Bible. Many may see that as a compromise, but if I agree with someone in 90% of doctrine, why do we have to argue the 10%? It can be a civil discussion (the Bible issue) and if I believe that I have the Word of God and that their Bible contains the Word of God, we are still talking about the Word of God!

If we would practice what is written in the Bible, the many verses you quoted, we would be much better off.

Originally Posted by Mathew Ward

However I have learned over the years that I would rather discuss the truths of the Bible then to argue which Bible. Many may see that as a compromise, but if I agree with someone in 90% of doctrine, why do we have to argue the 10%? It can be a civil discussion (the Bible issue) and if I believe that I have the Word of God and that their Bible contains the Word of God, we are still talking about the Word of God!

Well I agree that argument is not the best way and things can certainly be civil. And I would rather discuss the truths also. However, if we cannot agree on WHICH BIBLE, then we cannot agree on WHAT IS TRUTH. The author of that type of confusion is not God.

From what I have seen, most members of this forum are very patient with the "Bible correcting brethren" who are honestly seeking truth, however since the 10 percent we are talking about impacts the entire platform of authority, I think we have a position worth defending with vigor. After all, it takes just a small percentage of leaven to leaven the whole lump.

[Mathew Ward]

Originally Posted by Bro. Parrish

From what I have seen, most members of this forum are very patient with the "Bible correcting brethren" who are honestly seeking truth, however since the 10 percent we are talking about impacts the entire platform of authority, I think we have a position worth defending with vigor. After all, it takes just a small percentage of leaven to leaven the whole lump.

Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

If people are patient and kind in honestly discussing the issue, then I think Christ is honored. However, I think at times in our vigor we violate what the Bible we are defending teaches.

Matthew, you can post all the verses you want, but we're not going to stop defending the King James Bible. As I already stated, I think we CAN keep things civil and I think that is important. However, if we cannot agree on WHICH BIBLE, then we cannot agree on WHAT IS TRUTH—so it's a critical issue. Many of today's Christian colleges and churches are EATEN UP with modern versions and liberal confusion, and they are passing this on to their members and students, who often come here asking questions designed to cause division and strife. It's sad, but it is what it is... rather than argue or allow them to spread their leaven, the administrator of this forum first warns them, then simply bans them. I think it keeps things on track.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Bro. Parrish

Matthew, you can post all the verses you want, but we're not going to stop defending the King James Bible. As I already stated, I think we CAN keep things civil and I think that is important. However, if we cannot agree on WHICH BIBLE, then we cannot agree on WHAT IS TRUTH—so it's a critical issue. Many of today's Christian colleges and churches are EATEN UP with modern versions and liberal confusion, and they are passing this on to their members and students, who often come here asking questions designed to cause division and strife. It's sad, but it is what it is... rather than argue or allow them to spread their leaven, the administrator of this forum first warns them, then simply bans them. I think it keeps things on track.

Brother Parrish, we get 3 types of people in here: The hardened KJV defenders like us, the obvious spies who come in and make trouble, then we get those who seem to be in the middle.

I believe that middle group is sincere and are searching for the truth, and booting and banning and booting and banning and booting and banning is not going to give them the answers. Though I am a fundamentalist Christian, that is the reason I am not now and never will be a Baptist: That bloodcurdling, Pharisaic, separationist authoritarianism I found manifest in the Ruckman forum on Yahoo in 2005-6.

The second thing is something a bit disquieting to me, it's a pattern I first noted in the water baptism thread and it is this: When someone disagrees with you and they quote Scripture to you in order to make their position known, you object to it. Why is that?

Grace and peace brother.

Tony

Originally Posted by tonybones2112

Brother Parrish, we get 3 types of people in here: The hardened KJV defenders like us, the obvious spies who come in and make trouble, then we get those who seem to be in the middle.

I believe that middle group is sincere and are searching for the truth, and booting and banning and booting and banning and booting and banning is not going to give them the answers.

Yes, well I think we can agree on this to a point, I actually made a post about it here a while back, let me know if you want it and I'll find it for you. As for the banning, you'll have to take that up with the owner of the site, because I never banned any of them. However I must admit I have been relieved to see some of the trouble makers get canned. Plenty of other forums for spreading leaven and arguing.

Originally Posted by tonybones2112

Though I am a fundamentalist Christian, that is the reason I am not now and never will be a Baptist: That bloodcurdling, Pharisaic, separationist authoritarianism I found manifest in the Ruckman forum on Yahoo in 2005-6.

Eh??? Let me read your post again; are you saying that because Brandon chooses to ban people he is a "Pharisaic separationist" and that's why you're not a Baptist? LOL, whatever... here's what I think; we all know the reason you will never be a Baptist has a lot more to do with doctrine than it does Ruckman or any forum. And you seem to be stereotyping all Baptists as bloodcurdling Pharisees, which I assure you is not the case. At any rate, WHO CARES if you are a Baptist or not? Certainly not me, so why bring it up? Unless you simply have a problem with Baptists... At any rate, your post is quite peculiar.

Originally Posted by tonybones2112

The second thing is something a bit disquieting to me, it's a pattern I first noted in the water baptism thread and it is this: When someone disagrees with you and they quote Scripture to you in order to make their position known, you object to it. Why is that?

Well maybe I can comfort you a little. Actually I have no "objection" with quoting or referencing scripture at all, (I often do this myself) UNLESS it being done to spread false teachings. Don't forget—cults do it all the time, and some of them use the KJV same as us! (2 Pet. 3:14-16)

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by Bro. Parrish

Eh??? Let me read your post again; are you saying that because Brandon chooses to ban people he is a "Pharisaic separationist" and that's why you're not a Baptist?

I think you might need to read it a third time -- I didn't read it the way you did. I'm pretty sure he was talking about some defunct forum I had nothing to do with.

This forum is actually quite open, but I do have my limits. People who want a septic tank to play in can go over to the triple-flunky forum.

[Brother Tim]

A "septic tank"? They call it a sandbox. The problem is that someone has let too many cats (aka MVers) into the playground. Now it is too full of (cat dung) to play in. (p.s. and some of these cats are not going to be resurrected any time soon. )

[George]

Originally Posted by Mathew Ward

George...thank you for taking the time to read my blog, I appreciate your comments.

As far as having to compromise with those on the other side of the MV vs KJV debate, I honestly do not believe one has to. Your assessment of some that come here to stir up trouble and cause strife and doubt is very true and I am sure you have seen many on the KJV side stir up trouble as well (maybe not on this forum). However I have learned over the years that I would rather discuss the truths of the Bible then to argue which Bible. Many may see that as a compromise, but if I agree with someone in 90% of doctrine, why do we have to argue the 10%? It can be a civil discussion (the Bible issue) and if I believe that I have the Word of God and that their Bible contains the Word of God, we are still talking about the Word of God!

If we would practice what is written in the Bible, the many verses you quoted, we would be much better off.

And your "reply" to brother Parrish after he said:

Originally Posted by Bro. Parrish
From what I have seen, most members of this forum are very patient with the "Bible correcting brethren" who are honestly seeking truth, however since the 10 percent we are talking about impacts the entire platform of authority, I think we have a position worth defending with vigor. After all, it takes just a small percentage of leaven to leaven the whole lump.

Your reply:

Aloha brother Matthew,

Now brother, I believe that "you mean well", if I didn't, I wouldn't be spending my time trying to reason with you. So I am asking you not to be offended by what I am going say in this Post (if we were "face to face" you would be able to perceive my intentions far better - although I do come across, quite often, as a crotchety old curmudgeon even with my immediate family )

The Holy Bible says: "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" [Amos 3:3] Now the obvious, and only reasonable, answer to the question is - NO they can't! If I want to go to Florida and my wife insists on going to California, is it possible for us to "walk together, except we be agreed?" And the answer is simply - of course not! (That's the "problem" with most marriages in the U.S.A.)

Now, she can't go with me 10% of the way or even 50% of the way. She is either going to "walk" with me ALL of the way, or we aren't going to be walking TOGETHER for very long!

Your "analogy" just won't work! Your desire to see the brethren in Christian Unity & Charity is admirable, BUT if you check out the New Testament - often times there were "differences" between the brethren: Jame & John vs the rest of the Disciples; Barnabas vs Paul; Paul vs many of the brethren in Jerusalem; Peter vs Paul; etc.; etc. There are going to be "differences" between Christian brethren (sometime so "sharp" that they no longer "walk together" i.e. Barnabas & Paul)

Acts 15:36 And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do.
37 And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark.
38 But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work.
39 And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;
40 And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God.
41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches.

The WHAT? "the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other:" If Paul and Barnabas had problems getting along, do you honestly believe that we can do "better" - without SOMEONE COMPROMISING?

YOU SAID: "if I agree with someone in 90% of doctrine, why do we have to argue the 10%?" I have an "analogy" for you: IF someone offers to feed your child with nutritious "milk" (a "type" of the word) and it ONLY has 1% Strychnine or 1% Arsenic in it would you allow them them to give it to your child? Would you allow your child to drink it? Of course NOT!

IF, as we believe, the modern versions are "corrupt", and newborn Christians need wholesome "milk": "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:" [1 Peter 2:2] Are we to stand by and allow the modern version proponents "poison" Christians in order to get along? {Without saying anything?}

IF, being born again is dependent upon the "incorruptible" word of God[1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.] Are genuine Bible believers supposed to stand by while Christians "corrupt" the Holy word of God, and in addition also attack and malign it?

IF, we are to live "by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."[Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.] Shouldn't we take as many steps as we can to insure that that "Bread" is fresh & "wholesome" and NOT STALE and MOLDY? [Galatians 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.] Is it just a "LITTLE" LEAVEN (not even 10%) that LEAVENS THE WHOLE LUMP or does the Bible say it takes a LOT OF LEAVEN?

And IF, the HOLY Bible says that "the word of the Lord is RIGHT" - and the modern versions can be PROVEN to be "corrupt" (i.e. WRONG) Are we not obligated to "stand fast" and SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT? [Psalms 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.]

Your desire for Christian "unity" is an honorable one, however, there is too big a "gap" between those of us who have trusted God to have preserved His Holy word (exactly as he wants it) in the King James Bible and those who don't believe that God has preserved His word in "ANY" SINGLE BOOK.

I can "fellowship" with Christians that do not believe as I do about the King James Bible - I CANNOT "fellowship" with those "Christians" who SUBTRACT from it; or ADD to it; or CHANGE it. And I especially want NOTHING TO DO with those "Christians" who will ATTACK it; RIDICULE it; and MALIGN it.

I ask you (once again) compare this Forum (the AV1611 Bible Forums) with the FFF - can you not "SEE" a "DIFFERENCE" in the "ATTITUDE" of the those people on the FFF who continually engage in malicious attacks on the King James Bible; and who are constantly ridiculing those of us here on this Forum? [1 Corinthians 10:15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.] I am NOT judging "them" - I am judging WHAT they say and HOW they conduct themselves. God will judge "them", just as He will judge us (at the Judgment Seat of Christ); in the meantime I will continue to judge their words & their conduct according to the Holy Bible.

"Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" [Amos 3:3] The answer is emphatically - NO, not while I draw breath in my body! The Holy words of God are far too "precious" to me [1Samuel 3:1], that I should COMPROMISE them in order to have "unity" and "fellowship" with those people who "correct" and "attack" my Bible on the FFF. {It's NOT worth it!}

Isaiah 66:5 Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.

Originally Posted by Diligent

I think you might need to read it a third time -- I didn't read it the way you did. I'm pretty sure he was talking about some defunct forum I had nothing to do with.

Okay well after reading it a third time, I still see it the same way. His context was WE, US, this forum, it was a direct reply to my comment about banning members on this forum (post 144). At that point his post blew a gasket, lost a bearing and spun off into an attack on Baptists who were stereotyped as "bloodcurdling, Pharisaic, separationists."
Hmmm, maybe I need to read it a fourth time...