| FAQ |
| Calendar |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
 |
Menu
| Bible Versions Questions and discussion about the Bible version issue. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
| Bible Versions Questions and discussion about the Bible version issue. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
07-05-2009, 11:34 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Titus 3:10 Are you a heretic or "divisive"?
Titus 3:10 Heretic or A Divisive Person?
The idea for this article comes from brother Teno Groppi, who is a strong King James Bible believer and has a wonderful ministry teaching about creation versus evolution. Here is his homesite: http://www.baptistlink.com/godandcountry/index.html A heretic (modern spelling) is defined in Webster's 1999 dictionary as 1. a professed believer who maintains religious opinions contrary to those accepted by his or her church. 2. anyone who does not conform to an established view, doctrine, or principle. Heresy is defined as 1. religious opinion at variance with opinion or doctrine. 2. any belief or theory that is at variance with established beliefs, customs, etc. The Authorized King James Holy Bible says in Titus 3:10 "A man that is an HERETIC after the first and second admonition reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself." The Greek word found here in all texts is haireticos, and it is used only one time in the New Testament. Not only does the KJB correctly translate the word as HERETIC, but so also do the Latin Bibles of 425 A.D., Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Geneva Bible 1557 to 1602, the 1582 Douay-Rheims, the English Revised Version of 1881, Green's Modern KJV, the Spanish Las Sagradas Escrituras 1589, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909 (hombre hereje), the Italian Diodati 1649 (uomo eretico), the French Martin 1744 and the French Ostervald 1996 both read exactly like the KJB with - “Rejette l'homme hérétique”, Daniel Mace N.T. 1729, Wesley's N.T. 1755 translation, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, Darby 1890, Webster's 1833 translation, Green's Modern KJV 1998, the 21st Century KJV 1994, the Third Millenium Bible 1998, and even the New English Bible of 1970. There is another directly related Greek word - hairesis - which means a "sect" or a "heresy". Examples of the use of this word are Acts 24:14 where the apostle Paul is defending his new belief in Christ before the court and his accusers. He says: "But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call HERESY, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets." Another use is found in 1 Corinthians 11:19. The Corinthian church had lots of problems and some were even denying there was a resurrection (1 Cor. 15:12). Paul writes: "For there must be also HERESIES among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you." In Galatians 5:20 one of the works of the flesh is listed as "heresies". Finally in 2 Peter 2:1 this word is used in a very significant way. There the apostle Peter tells us: "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable HERESIES, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction." According to such Greek lexicons as Liddell & Scott, Bauer, Arndt & Gingrich, and Kittle, the words hairetikos and hairesis mean one who is a member of a sect or who promotes heresy. Thayer's Greek- English Lexicon, 19th printing 1978 on page 16 says the meaning of the Greek word hairetikos in Titus 3:10 means "a follower of false doctrine" and he specifically mentions Titus 3:10. The Modern Greek Dictionary, which has nothing to do with the Bible, tells us that hairetikos means "heretical, a heretic." This is the only definition listed. Kittle's Theological Dictionary of the N.T. says of the word haipetikos (Titus 3:10) in Volumn 1 on page 184: "In Christianity it seems to have been used technically from the very first, and denotes the "adherent of heresy." John Calvin translates Titus 3:10: "HERETICUM hominem post unam et secundam correptionem devita " He then comments: "We must now see what he means by the word heretic. There is a common and well-known distinction between a heretic and a schismatic. But here, in my opinion, Paul disregards that distinction: for, by the term "heretic" he describes not only those who cherish and defend an erroneous or perverse doctrine, but in general all who do not yield assent to the sound doctrine which he laid down a little before. " John Gill says: "A man that is an heretic… "An heretic, according to the notation of the word, is either one that makes choice of an opinion upon his own judgment, contrary to the generally received sense of the churches of Christ, and prefers it to theirs, and obstinately persists in it; separates from them, forms a party, and sets himself at the head of them, whom he has drawn into the same way of thinking with himself: or he is one that removes and takes away a fundamental doctrine of Christianity, which affects particularly the doctrine of the Trinity, the deity, and personality of Father, Son, and Spirit, and especially the doctrines relating to the person, office, and grace of Christ; one that brings in, or receives damnable doctrines; speaks or professes perverse things, and draws away disciples after him;... he makes a rent in the doctrine of Christ, and makes parties and divisions in his church; and such are not always to be contended and disputed with, but to be avoided and rejected." Adam Clarke comments: " A man that is a heretic "Generally defined, one that is obstinately attached to an opinion contrary to the peace and comfort of society, and will neither submit to Scripture nor reason. Here it means a person who maintains Judaism in opposition to Christianity, or who insists on the necessity of circumcision, meaning of the word heretic in the only place in which it occurs in the sacred writings." Jamieson, Fausset and Brown say: " heretic--Greek "heresy," originally meant a division resulting from individual self-will; the individual doing and teaching what he chose, independent of the teaching and practice of the Church. In course of time it came to mean definitely "heresy" in the modern sense; and in the later Epistles it has almost assumed this meaning." Though many of the modern versions like the NKJV, NASB, NIV, ESV, Holman Standard have all drastically changed the meaning of Titus 3:10, it is to be noted that the NKJV has correctly translated the Greek word as "heresies" in 1 Cor. 11:19, Galatians 5:20 and 2 Peter 2:1. So too do the NASB, NIV, ESV and Holman Standard all translate the word as "heresies" in 2 Peter 2:1. Brother Teno Groppi relates this parable regarding the change from "heretic" to "a divisive person". A certain church was visited by some "Heaven's Gate Jim Jones Grape Kool-Aid" cultists. The pastor, trying to be a good shepherd to his flock, warned them about the visitors. He told them that these people were cultists and heretics and that his people should reject them after admonishing them to receive Christ and get right with God. Of course this caused no small stir among the Kool-Aid cultists, who accused the pastor of not showing Christian love or tolerance, and being divisive. The pastor stood his ground. His congregation appreciated his steadfastness and protection, and they killed a fatted calf and celebrated as most Baptists are wont to do. Amen. Now let's look at how many modern versions render this verse. Some of the versions try to make the "archaic" King James English "easier to understand" by using "factious", but that's a synonym for "divisive". NIV - Titus 3:10 Warn a DIVISIVE person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him. NASB -Titus 3:10 Reject a FACTIOUS man after a first and second warning, NLT- Titus 3:10 If anyone is causing DIVISIONS among you, give a first and second warning. After that, have nothing more to do with that person. RSV- Titus 3:10 As for a man who is FACTIOUS, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, ESV- Titus 3:10 As for a person who STIRS UP DIVISION, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him. NKJ -Titus 3:10 Reject a DIVISIVE man after the first and second admonition. A really bad one is the New International Reader’s Version 1998, put out by the IBS who also bring us the NIV, says: “Warn ANYONE WHO TRIES TO GET BELIEVERS TO TAKE SIDES AND SEPARATE INTO THEIR OWN LITTLE GROUPS." These modern versions would have you reject the pastor for causing division and being factious and intolerant, instead of avoiding the heretics! But wait, it gets worse. Mat 25:31-32 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd DIVIDETH his sheep from the goats: Luke 12:51 Suppose ye that I (Jesus) am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather DIVISION: John 7:43 So there was a DIVISION among the people because of him (Jesus). John 9:16 Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a DIVISION among them. John 10:19 There was a DIVISION therefore again among the Jews for these sayings (of Jesus). Jesus was and continues to be a divisive man, but He was not a heretic. The King James Bible tells us to avoid heretics. The modern versions, including the NKJV, tell us to avoid and have nothing to do with a divisive man, and, if we follow the logic of simple words, this would include Jesus! Let's apply the difference in meaning between a heretic and a divisive person to the supremely important issue of the inerrancy of the Holy Bible. Very recently a new poll came out that tells us that the majority of modern Christian leaders do not believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God. At a discussion Forum I belong to a brother posted the following poll results: I was listening to my radio today, and happened to catch Pastor Michael Youseff's Message on His "Leading The Way" program. The title of todays message was "The Bible, The World's Most Relevant Book. In his message he gave statistics of a poll that was conducted. Here is what the poll revealed: 85% of students at America's largest Evangelical Seminary don't believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. 74% of the Clergy in America no longer believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. If the above stats are even close to being accurate, then the church of America is in sad shape today. At a certain Bible Forum on the internet I participate in from time to time there are over a thousand Christian members. I started a discussion called Do you Really Believe The Bible is the Inerrant word of God?. The vast majority of all the Christian members of this club admit that they do not believe any Bible or any Hebrew or Greek text is the inerrant word of God. They tell us that No Bible is perfect and all have errors in them. When I defended the King James Bible as being the providentially preserved, inerrant and inspired words of God, one of the moderators of this Forum (who himself does not believe in an inerrant Bible) actually called me "an apostate, an idolater, like Satan..causing confusion and divisiveness, making a mockery of God's word, following a myth, and a master of deception." Apparently he thinks it is "heresy" to believe in an inerrant Holy Bible, but it is "orthodox" to believe that there is no such thing. So in his view, I am being "a divisive person" by upholding the Authorized King James Bible as being the pure and perfect word of God. I have also found several big websites on the internet that now list King James Bible Onlyism under their section titled "Heresies". In today's messed up and apostate world the every day Bible believing Christian is labeled DIVISIVE simply because he or she insists that Jesus Christ is the ONLY way of salvation from sin, death and hell, and will not go along with the rest of the group that tells us there are many ways to God, be it New Age, Hinduism, Buddhism, the Islam religion or whatever. Funny how things get turned upside down, isn't it? By changing the meaning of a single word, these new versions allow for an interpretation that is the exact opposite of what the Holy Ghost intended. Hey, but no essential doctrines are changed, right? Think about it. Will Kinney |
|
#2
07-05-2009, 12:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Greetings, Brother Will. Once again, you've given some good edification. And it's troubling indeed...but expected.
2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; About one month ago, I asked a few college age individuals (about ten) the questions: Do you believe we have in our possession today the preserved, perfect, written word of God in the English language today? If so, which Bible? NONE said yes. And all thought it was okay to use something other than the outdated, archaic King James Bible. My children (4) all use the KJB...and I hope and pray they never depart from it. |
|
#3
07-05-2009, 12:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
heretic or 'divisive'
Quote:
The Barna Research Group reported in 1996 that among American adults generally: 58% believe that the Bible is "totally accurate in all its teachings"; 45% believe that the Bible is "absolutely accurate and everything in it can be taken literally." "Support dropped between that poll and another taken in 2001. Barna reported in 2001 that: 41% of adults strongly agrees that the Bible is totally accurate in all that it teaches." "Seminary students, future pastors and leaders in the church, show very little support for the inerrancy of the Bible position. What does that foretell about the future of the church? Undoubtedly, just as the poll results show in the 1996 - 2001 time frame, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE BELIEVING THE BIBLE IS INERRANT WILL DROP." Well, I will win any bet that if we actually get a chance to push people to the wall about what they REALLY believe about the Bible we will find that anybody who is not a King James Bible onlyist does not believe that any single Bible in any language IS the inspired and 100% true Bible against all others that differ from it in both texts and meanings. So this means that probably around 95% of present day Christians are not Bible believers but Bible doubters and Bible agnostics. "When the Son of man cometh, shall He find faith on the earth?" Luke 18:8 Will K |
|
#4
07-05-2009, 12:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I also knew as a young Christian this to be true. I tried the easier to read, up to date, and modernized versions...but my inner man rejected them. They were dead...lifeless. My choice to use only the KJB was not from historical fact, pastoral persuasion, videos, films, or books. Just the KJB and the Holy Spirit speaking to my heart. "Thus saith the Lord." 
|
|
#5
07-05-2009, 01:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: " Titus 3:10 Are you a heretic or "divisive"?"
Aloha brother Will,
Thanks (once again) for another edifying study. The Polls that you cited clearly demonstrate the perverse influence HUMANISM has had on modern day "Christians"!  Without a "FINAL AUTHORITY" in a person's life: Judges 17:6 In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes. Judges 21:25 In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes. Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise. Proverbs 21:2 Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts. With today's Christians' emphasis on a "Formal Education" as being the only "legitimate" way to determine whether a man is fit (eligible) for the ministry, these downward "trends" are certain to continue!  The Biblical "requirements" for a bishop (pastor/elder) are: 1 Timothy 3:1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. I didn't see any requirement for a B.D., M.Div., D.D., D.Min., or a Th.D.! A "Christian education", "Christian schooling", a "high I.Q.", or "knowledge of the Bible" is NO "guarantee" that someone has any spiritual discernment, spiritual understanding, or spiritual wisdom; or that they are genuinely "called" of God to the ministry; or that they have been fit ("gifted") by God for the ministry! The "ministry" today has become a "CAREER", i.e. a "PROFESSION" - NOT A CALLING!  1 Timothy 1:12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry; HOW can a man be called of God to the "ministry" - IF he doesn't know WHAT the word of God is, and IF he doesn't know WHERE to find it? HOW can a man be called of God to the "ministry" - IF he has NO "LOVE of the truth" [2 Thessalonians 2:10]; and IF he is NOT "VALIANT for the truth" [Jeremiah 9:3]? Acts 6:4 But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word. |
|
#6
07-05-2009, 02:46 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Excellent points George. Thanks for all the Scripture to back them up too. Good stuff.
Will K |
|
#7
07-05-2009, 10:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Jesuits. Grace and peace brother, and thank you for your messages. Tony |
|
#8
07-05-2009, 10:26 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=60350
Hi Will. I was googling AV1611 and found this result: "A question about AV1611.com" so I was curious and clicked on it. A member called Thermodynamic started the thread and says he's been checking out AV1611.com and "It certainly does seem like they are worshipping the KJV and there has been atleast one man who was a staunch KJV who said that the "Word" in John 1:1 shows that God is the KJV. .....". In his second post on the thread he says "I did not mean to suggest that all (or even most) people who hold a KJVO position worship the King James Bible. However, there does appear to be this "lunatic fringe" out there who have crossed the line into outright idolatry. I find it offensive that they would claim perfection for a translation that was crafted by purely human effort. I also find it sad that other groups, like the Trinitarian Bible Society, who hold a moderate KJVO/KJVP position would find themselves lumped into the same class as the idol worshipers at AV1611.com." I guess you must see a lot of that. Thanks for all the great information you provide, Will. Jen |
|
#9
07-06-2009, 01:18 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
As far as opinions of me as "KJVO" or slanderous comments about the forum, I used to put dead babies back together in funeral homes, they neither concern nor bother me. A trip up High Street or Fifth Street would level their karma. We don;t worship a book, we worship He Who preserved it for us. I read the thread and all I see are a gaggle of apostate "baptists" who worship their own opinions, like our Stamite "brethren". This forum is one of the few places on the web that has people who will stand in someone's face and say, if you don't hold to the standard of a perfect and complete Bible in your hands, you are apostate. Every word in a King James bible is there because God put it there. Sure, we have the Constitutional right to "use the NASB alongside the KJV". Kewl. Why are you using a Catholic bible if you are "baptist"? Because you are not a Baptist, a Grace believer, a Methodist, you're an apostate. Their comments on us "worshiping" the KJV is the same any Catholic priest will say to you. They worship their own opinions, which are not alive, the words in a KJV are. If they have a problem with "bibliolatry" let them read Psalms 119 and take up the issue with David ben Jesse. My local Catholic priest once got me in front of a group of people in a local used book store and said I had a Paper Pope. I said I sure do, it is sinless and infallible, your's aint. Grace and peace sister Tony |
|
#10
07-06-2009, 05:43 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thanks for the response, Tony. The ironic thing is that this worship of the Holy Bible instead of Christ argument was what I was debating some chrisitan who gained support in his argument from a new age person on another forum the same night I found this site. The ignorance of some people is astounding! Then, I had never even heard or considered that the KJV itself is an inspired translation. Maybe Riplinger taught that in her Age Bible Versions which I read back in the late 90's but I didn't pick up on it or believe it then. After being exposed to the idea here I find that is the position I hold. Nothing else is possible.
In Christ, Jen |
|
|
Linear Mode
