Theory of Final Authority
- Thread starter Makahiya2028
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
This is truly amazing the education that you have had.....But please remember that most of us have not had that kind of education and we are your audience. So at least for the Blond you might have to dumb down some of your ideas as I can promise you I don't think like you do and have not been educated as you have.
I do however love to read God's word the Bible and have not read a lot of other theology books....So my mindset will most always take the final authority as God and His word.... But truly impressive education.
I do however love to read God's word the Bible and have not read a lot of other theology books....So my mindset will most always take the final authority as God and His word.... But truly impressive education.
How are we doing in here? any answers ? or more questions?...You have a numerous amount of years invested in Higher education from two schools who don't agree with each other I might add, yet I am not sure if I have learned more about you, by knowing that, or based on what I have seen in here more about what I have learned about higher education...
I believe highly in education..I have been employed in it myself for 31 years, yet I do not value it enough to claim it as my merits. Knowing Christ is my merit...in addition scripture kind of gives teachers and Pharisees; laws and knowledge a bad rep- if you have read the scriptures we have been talking about in here...
.I hate to think I would be a Pharisee in the Luke Gospels, and come up to Jesus and rebuke the author of our salvation, and tell him, as he entered the temple, Excuse me Jesus I merit more than the lady on the floor spreading perfume on your feet, who has washed your feet with her hair and tears...because after all I am a Bachelor of science grad at Sea of Galilee state college....smile.
Blond here....Sir, kind sir....could you please not type to me in that bold lettering because it makes me feel like you are lording over me and I believe that we are equal human sinners, both in need of a Savior and I would so appreciate your indoor voice....Thanks...as to what Bible I read I have many different versions in my home, KJV, NKJV, NIV, Clear Word, Amplified...I don't remember the others off hand... however, any version I would want is at my fingertips on the internet available to me...
Oh Indeed,! another wise discerning Servant! ---------> your post mmm kind of like this! ---------------------------->
In that Hour Jesus rejoiced in Spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of Heaven and earth, that Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast Revealed them unto Babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in Thy Sight. Luke 10
In that Hour Jesus rejoiced in Spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of Heaven and earth, that Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast Revealed them unto Babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in Thy Sight. Luke 10
God Preserved His Holy Word in His Only Begotten! the Christ, God manifest in the flesh, He is the WORD OF GOD, LIVING LOGOS, He is Alive Today, I attest to that ... alive after being Physically Dead! LOGO'S , the Word without the Inspiration and Enlightenment of the Spirit of Truth... is just that 'Words on Paper'... no different today and it resembles the doctors of the Law and zealous Pharisee's of Jesus Day, running around bragging on their 'education' and 'knowledge in the Word'.. measuring themselves by themselves and looking down on others because of the accolades in the Word.. but when the Word of God stood before them, they DID NOT KNOW HIM.. same today!
Do you believe Jesus Christ showed himself alive after the resurrection
with infallible proofs or with convincing proofs ?
KJV Acts 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion
by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days,
and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
KJV Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish
ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
KJV 2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God:
but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.
NIV Acts1:3 After his suffering, he showed himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs
that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God.
WNT Acts 1:3 He had also, after He suffered, shown Himself alive to them with many sure proofs,
appearing to them at intervals during forty days, and speaking of the Kingdom of God.
ASV Acts 1:3 To whom he also showed himself alive after his passion by many proofs,
appearing unto them by the space of forty days,and speaking the things concerning the kingdom of God:
NCV Acts 1:3 After his death, he showed himself to them and proved in many ways that he was alive.
he apostles saw Jesus during the forty days after he was raised from the dead,
and he spoke to them about the kingdom of God.
MSG Acts1:3 After his death, he presented himself alive to them in many different settings
over a period of forty days. In face-to-face meetings, he talked to them about things concerning the kingdom of God.
with infallible proofs or with convincing proofs ?
KJV Acts 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion
by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days,
and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
KJV Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish
ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
KJV 2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God:
but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.
NIV Acts1:3 After his suffering, he showed himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs
that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God.
WNT Acts 1:3 He had also, after He suffered, shown Himself alive to them with many sure proofs,
appearing to them at intervals during forty days, and speaking of the Kingdom of God.
ASV Acts 1:3 To whom he also showed himself alive after his passion by many proofs,
appearing unto them by the space of forty days,and speaking the things concerning the kingdom of God:
NCV Acts 1:3 After his death, he showed himself to them and proved in many ways that he was alive.
he apostles saw Jesus during the forty days after he was raised from the dead,
and he spoke to them about the kingdom of God.
MSG Acts1:3 After his death, he presented himself alive to them in many different settings
over a period of forty days. In face-to-face meetings, he talked to them about things concerning the kingdom of God.
Last edited:
J
Not sure that's worth getting one's shorts in a bunch over. To my mind, proof is proof, if fallible or unconvincing, that wouldn't even be proof.
You need to cite a juicy example, like leaving out the blood of Christ, or diminishing His deity, leaving our whole verses, which there are enough of, sprinkled around in various translations. You don't come to a gunfight with a knife! If anything, some of the translations, in this instance, more demonstrate, "See! What difference does it make?"
You need to cite a juicy example, like leaving out the blood of Christ, or diminishing His deity, leaving our whole verses, which there are enough of, sprinkled around in various translations. You don't come to a gunfight with a knife! If anything, some of the translations, in this instance, more demonstrate, "See! What difference does it make?"
okay, i'm sorry i missed some pages of excitement 
p)
and i was with you up through #7
but on #8, it seems like there is no reason (indeed no reason is stated) that the KJV English translation in particular is exclusively in agreement with "academic theology" - nor is "academic theology" supported by any of the first 7 points as any basis for authority; in fact the first 7 points lead to authority not resting in man at all.
was not expecting this to go this way (?)
point 9 seems incongruous with point 8, but more in line with 1-7, where i thought this might be headed - that authority ultimately comes from God, by His Spirit, working in and through His people - and there isn't any reason to believe that only the KJV translators were led by the Spirit of God, and no other men who have ever undertaken the work of translation.
the remaining points - so what if America was founded by men who by some majority (see your previous post on percentiles) knew the KJV bible? in fact a great number of them had the Geneva bible, which predates the KJV by some 50 years. i am not aware of the actual distribution (KJV or Geneva) among early settlers, and not aware of why it should matter.
i don't see an argument for KJV-only-ism here developed at all, but inserted rather abruptly. maybe you can explain to me how it follows from the first 7 points? i hope so.
but (as an aside) - a point that i always feel important to consider when version exclusivity is discussed - what shall i do if i am not an English speaker? the first bible ever published in America was Eliot's Algonquin Indian language bible. it was not KJV. it was not even English. so did the Algonquins have scripture, or no? perhaps the largest area of growth and evangelism in the Christian church (church proper - meaning the actual body of believers) today is in China. they have a small number of variants of the scripture (dare we call it that?) in their native language. it is not KJV; it is one of two or three Chinese language versions. should we say, "the Chinese do not have scripture" if they do not first learn to read Victorian English? i sincerely doubt we can make such a demand. after all, if this is what is right, then we should indeed affirm that we should be learning Greek and Hebrew ourselves before we can say "we have heard the word of God" - and drop this whole KJV exclusivity right away like an over-warm tuber.
thank you for your patience in thinking this through and laying all this out.
and your patience with me. i'm not trying to assault you or your thoughts; just giving you my own and my impression of where your logic is leading.
p) and i was with you up through #7
but on #8, it seems like there is no reason (indeed no reason is stated) that the KJV English translation in particular is exclusively in agreement with "academic theology" - nor is "academic theology" supported by any of the first 7 points as any basis for authority; in fact the first 7 points lead to authority not resting in man at all.
was not expecting this to go this way (?)
point 9 seems incongruous with point 8, but more in line with 1-7, where i thought this might be headed - that authority ultimately comes from God, by His Spirit, working in and through His people - and there isn't any reason to believe that only the KJV translators were led by the Spirit of God, and no other men who have ever undertaken the work of translation.
the remaining points - so what if America was founded by men who by some majority (see your previous post on percentiles) knew the KJV bible? in fact a great number of them had the Geneva bible, which predates the KJV by some 50 years. i am not aware of the actual distribution (KJV or Geneva) among early settlers, and not aware of why it should matter.
i don't see an argument for KJV-only-ism here developed at all, but inserted rather abruptly. maybe you can explain to me how it follows from the first 7 points? i hope so.
but (as an aside) - a point that i always feel important to consider when version exclusivity is discussed - what shall i do if i am not an English speaker? the first bible ever published in America was Eliot's Algonquin Indian language bible. it was not KJV. it was not even English. so did the Algonquins have scripture, or no? perhaps the largest area of growth and evangelism in the Christian church (church proper - meaning the actual body of believers) today is in China. they have a small number of variants of the scripture (dare we call it that?) in their native language. it is not KJV; it is one of two or three Chinese language versions. should we say, "the Chinese do not have scripture" if they do not first learn to read Victorian English? i sincerely doubt we can make such a demand. after all, if this is what is right, then we should indeed affirm that we should be learning Greek and Hebrew ourselves before we can say "we have heard the word of God" - and drop this whole KJV exclusivity right away like an over-warm tuber.
thank you for your patience in thinking this through and laying all this out.
and your patience with me. i'm not trying to assault you or your thoughts; just giving you my own and my impression of where your logic is leading.