The Cause of Divisions in the Church and Modern Versions

[Andrew1]

18 For first of all I hear that when you come together in the church, there are schisms among you. And in part I believe it.
19 For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved may be made manifest among you. (1Corinthians 11:18-19 KJV)

The Key phrase here is "For there must be also heresies". Paul was saying here that the reason there were schisms among the Corinthians was because there were also heresies, that is heresies were the underlying cause of divisions in the Church.
But look at what the NIV does:

[SUP]18 [/SUP]In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. [SUP]19 [/SUP]No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval. (NIV)

It changes heresies to differences and removes the words "for" and "also" effectively removing the underlying cause of divisions in the Church. Here's what the ESV says:

[SUP]18 [/SUP]For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part,[SUP]19 [/SUP]for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. (ESV)

Hmm, This says that the reason for the divisions among the Corinthians was factions, but divisions and factions are the same thing. Can the cause of a problem be the problem itself? (The NKJV also says "factions" in verse 19)

The Message Bible is the Most atrocious, it reads:

[SUP]7-19 [/SUP]Regarding this next item, I’m not at all pleased. I am getting the picture that when you meet together it brings out your worst side instead of your best! First, I get this report on your divisiveness, competing with and criticizing each other. I’m reluctant to believe it, but there it is. The best that can be said for it is that the testing process will bring truth into the open and confirm it. (The Message)

Again it only mentions divisiveness without addressing the underlying cause.

I detect an ecumenical agenda in the modern versions which makes it easier to accuse people who point out false doctrines in the Church of divisiveness when in light of the King James Bible they're being the exact opposite of divisive by trying to draw all Christians under the umbrella of the truth of God's word.

 

[crossnote]

18 For first of all I hear that when you come together in the church, there are schisms among you. And in part I believe it.
19 For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved may be made manifest among you. (1Corinthians 11:18-19 KJV)

The Key phrase here is "For there must be also heresies". Paul was saying here that the reason there were schisms among the Corinthians was because there were also heresies, that is heresies were the underlying cause of divisions in the Church.

Seems that you are making a faulty leap in logic by saying, "the reason there were schisms among the Corinthians was because there were also heresies,".
Paul is saying there are both heresies and schisms but one does not necessarily cause the other. When they act carnally that is the result.

 

[ember]

Is this about the virtues of the KJV as opposed to all other Bibles or is it acutally about what you say is the underlying cause of divisions?

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

18 For first of all I hear that when you come together in the church, there are schisms among you. And in part I believe it.
19 For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved may be made manifest among you. (1Corinthians 11:18-19 KJV)

The Key phrase here is "For there must be also heresies". Paul was saying here that the reason there were schisms among the Corinthians was because there were also heresies, that is heresies were the underlying cause of divisions in the Church.

No one here is interested in the dead horse of KJV Onlyism. I will point out, however, that you're on the wrong foot here right from the start.

The word airesiß (hairesis) in the Greek does not carry the modern English concept of theological, doctrinal, or biblical heresy. That Greek word simply meant "factions, divisions," usually along political lines. The proper translation of the word in this context is "factions," as rendered by the NASB, HCSB, and the NIV is accurate in also translating it "differences" because that is what Paul is referring to here. That is obvious from a further reading.

1 Corinthians 11, KJV
20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.
21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry , and another is drunken .
22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.​

I normally quote from the NASB. It's a better translation. But to favor your preferred version, I've quoted from it to show that, by removing the verses you quoted from context, you have also perverted Paul's meaning and attempted to make a Greek word mean something it does not mean. And no, the KJV is not an "inspired" English version.

Primarily, this is for the next member who comes onto your thread, not you. You won't accept it. But this will avoid a whole big unnecessary brouhaha over a battle that doesn't need to be fought again, given there are never any victors -- only casualties. And the first is always Peace.

One more word of caution -- again, not one you are likely to heed. Worship Christ, not the KJV.

 

[Andrew1]

The word "For" indicates the reason the divisions existed. I'm curious how you interpret the meaning of the word "For" in verse 19.

 

[ember]

and the KJV only debate? is that where you were going?

 

[flob]

I appreciate the translations 'divisions' and 'parties' respectively.
That's the sense in which the Greek 'heresies' was used in the NT.
Not as we use it today. Today it's first sense in English isn't division but derivatively
a seriously false teaching. As in seriously, pertaining to the person or work of Christ,
or salvation. At least in the time of 1 Cor, the church situation apparently hadn't degraded to sects, separated, like we
have today and for the last how many centuries, among believers. But the Lord knew this would happen.

In regard to the word 'bible' in the Bible, I thought it is 2 Tim or so.

 

[Andrew1]

The word "For" indicates the reason the divisions existed. I'm curious about what your interpretation of the word "For" is in verse 19

 

[flob]

That 'for' almost sounds 'future, therefore,' because of the following 'that'----the sovereign reason there are
parties is that 'those who are approved may become manifest among you'

 

[valiant]

18 For first of all I hear that when you come together in the church, there are schisms among you. And in part I believe it.
19 For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved may be made manifest among you. (1Corinthians 11:18-19 KJV)

The Key phrase here is "For there must be also heresies". Paul was saying here that the reason there were schisms among the Corinthians was because there were also heresies, that is heresies were the underlying cause of divisions in the Church.
But look at what the NIV does:

[SUP]18 [/SUP]In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. [SUP]19 [/SUP]No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval. (NIV)

It changes heresies to differences and removes the words "for" and "also" effectively removing the underlying cause of divisions in the Church. Here's what the ESV says:

[SUP]18 [/SUP]For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part,[SUP]19 [/SUP]for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. (ESV)

Hmm, This says that the reason for the divisions among the Corinthians was factions, but divisions and factions are the same thing. Can the cause of a problem be the problem itself? (The NKJV also says "factions" in verse 19)

The Message Bible is the Most atrocious, it reads:

[SUP]7-19 [/SUP]Regarding this next item, I’m not at all pleased. I am getting the picture that when you meet together it brings out your worst side instead of your best! First, I get this report on your divisiveness, competing with and criticizing each other. I’m reluctant to believe it, but there it is. The best that can be said for it is that the testing process will bring truth into the open and confirm it. (The Message)

Again it only mentions divisiveness without addressing the underlying cause.

I detect an ecumenical agenda in the modern versions which makes it easier to accuse people who point out false doctrines in the Church of divisiveness when in light of the King James Bible they're being the exact opposite of divisive by trying to draw all Christians under the umbrella of the truth of God's word.

but the word hairesis means divisions. So how can that translation be simply rejected?
hah'ee-res-is αἵρεσις
From
G138; properly a choice, that is, (specifically) a party or (abstractly) disunion. ("heresy" is the Greek word itself.):

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

The word "For" indicates the reason the divisions existed. I'm curious about what your interpretation of the word "For" is in verse 19

For is the word eijß (eis) and it means what it always means: "For, because, because of." It can be used in place of the word "therefore," which in the Greek is oun (oun), but I believe in this case is better thought of as "because of" as in "because of factions" among you, "so that those among you who are accepted may become more evident among you."

Do you really understand what's going on here, Andrew? I think not. Paul is chastising the church members at Corinth for separating themselves by class, the rich and idle (who are also occasionally drunks) coming to show themselves off while the poor come to eat, because they have not had anything to eat all day. Neither faction is right in coming to worship and partake of the Lord's Supper in these fashions. Paul calls them all to repent and worship properly.

It has nothing to do with false teaching, which is what Paul call "heresy" just as flob pointed out.

 

[ChosenbyHim]

No one here is interested in the dead horse of KJV Onlyism. I will point out, however, that you're on the wrong foot here right from the start.

The word airesiß (hairesis) in the Greek does not carry the modern English concept of theological, doctrinal, or biblical heresy. That Greek word simply meant "factions, divisions," usually along political lines. The proper translation of the word in this context is "factions," as rendered by the NASB, HCSB, and the NIV is accurate in also translating it "differences" because that is what Paul is referring to here. That is obvious from a further reading.

1 Corinthians 11, KJV
20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.
21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry , and another is drunken .
22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.​

I normally quote from the NASB. It's a better translation. But to favor your preferred version, I've quoted from it to show that, by removing the verses you quoted from context, you have also perverted Paul's meaning and attempted to make a Greek word mean something it does not mean. And no, the KJV is not an "inspired" English version.

Primarily, this is for the next member who comes onto your thread, not you. You won't accept it. But this will avoid a whole big unnecessary brouhaha over a battle that doesn't need to be fought again, given there are never any victors -- only casualties. And the first is always Peace.

One more word of caution -- again, not one you are likely to heed. Worship Christ, not the KJV.

The NASB is a wicked perversion.

The KJV rendering is right and the one in the NASB is wrong.

There is no need to go to the Greek, now if one wants to, then that is them. But God has given us His perfect and pure word in the English language, therefore one does not need Hebrew or Greek.

And the only thing that is a "dead horse" concerning this issue of the Bible Version Controversy, is as brother Peter Ruckman calls it, is: Dead Duck Otherism (the use and preference of the modern versions in other words).

Stick to the Standard. The PERFECT Standard. Which is the Authorized King James Holy Bible.


How I Know That The King James Bible Is The Word Of God by James Melton

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

The NASB is a wicked perversion.

The KJV rendering is right and the one in the NASB is wrong.

There is no need to go to the Greek, now if one wants to, then that is them. But God has given us His perfect and pure word in the English language, therefore one does not need Hebrew or Greek.

And the only thing that is a "dead horse" concerning this issue of the Bible Version Controversy, is as brother Peter Ruckman calls it, is: Dead Duck Otherism (the use and preference of the modern versions in other words).

Stick to the Standard. The PERFECT Standard. Which is the Authorized King James Holy Bible.


How I Know That The King James Bible Is The Word Of God by James Melton

That's the quickest route to my ignore list I've ever seen anyone take. I do not abide worshipers of the works of men. Nor do I abide people who unreasonably reject scholarship because it so intently denies their deeply held wrong conclusions.

 

[ember]

The NASB is a wicked perversion.

The KJV rendering is right and the one in the NASB is wrong.

There is no need to go to the Greek, now if one wants to, then that is them. But God has given us His perfect and pure word in the English language, therefore one does not need Hebrew or Greek.

And the only thing that is a "dead horse" concerning this issue of the Bible Version Controversy, is as brother Peter Ruckman calls it, is: Dead Duck Otherism (the use and preference of the modern versions in other words).

Stick to the Standard. The PERFECT Standard. Which is the Authorized King James Holy Bible.


How I Know That The King James Bible Is The Word Of God by James Melton

There is no need to go to the Greek, now if one wants to, then that is them. But God has given us His perfect and pure word in the English language, therefore one does not need Hebrew or Greek.

No need to look both ways before you cross the busy street either...after all, we all know that pedestrians have right away and even if a car runs them over, well, the car is wrong

The total lack of ability to understand what a Bible actually is, is underscored and screaming please help me from your post

 

[directline2iam]

Andrew1: Yes.
The word of God should be simple to understand and not less informative in truth.
It should read in any translation/version: I hear when you come together in church there are disagreements in doctorine that the Lord is not pleased with. For there must be false doctorine in order to make known those people approved by God to share the true doctorine as truth always prevails.

 

[Andrew1]

I'm a little embarrassed, but I accidentally quoted from the Duoay Rheims Catholic Bible, in my post. Fortunately in this case it says nearly the same thing as the KJV the proper reading is:

18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. 1Corinthians 11:18-19

 

[Utah]

The NASB is a wicked perversion.

The KJV rendering is right and the one in the NASB is wrong.

There is no need to go to the Greek, now if one wants to, then that is them. But God has given us His perfect and pure word in the English language, therefore one does not need Hebrew or Greek.

And the only thing that is a "dead horse" concerning this issue of the Bible Version Controversy, is as brother Peter Ruckman calls it, is: Dead Duck Otherism (the use and preference of the modern versions in other words).

Stick to the Standard. The PERFECT Standard. Which is the Authorized King James Holy Bible.


How I Know That The King James Bible Is The Word Of God by James Melton

Let's hope the Book of Life is also a KJV otherwise we're all doomed.

 

[Andrew1]

No one here is interested in the dead horse of KJV Onlyism. I will point out, however, that you're on the wrong foot here right from the start.

The word airesiß (hairesis) in the Greek does not carry the modern English concept of theological, doctrinal, or biblical heresy. That Greek word simply meant "factions, divisions," usually along political lines. The proper translation of the word in this context is "factions," as rendered by the NASB, HCSB, and the NIV is accurate in also translating it "differences" because that is what Paul is referring to here. That is obvious from a further reading.

1 Corinthians 11, KJV
20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.
21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry , and another is drunken .
22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.​

I normally quote from the NASB. It's a better translation. But to favor your preferred version, I've quoted from it to show that, by removing the verses you quoted from context, you have also perverted Paul's meaning and attempted to make a Greek word mean something it does not mean. And no, the KJV is not an "inspired" English version.

Primarily, this is for the next member who comes onto your thread, not you. You won't accept it. But this will avoid a whole big unnecessary brouhaha over a battle that doesn't need to be fought again, given there are never any victors -- only casualties. And the first is always Peace.

One more word of caution -- again, not one you are likely to heed. Worship Christ, not the KJV.

" I will point out, however, that you're on the wrong foot here right from the start. The word airesiß (hairesis) in the Greek does not carry the modern English concept of theological, doctrinal, or biblical heresy. That Greek word simply meant "factions, divisions," usually along political lines. The proper translation of the word in this context is "factions," as rendered by the NASB, etc.. HCSB, and the NIV is accurate in also translating it "differences" because that is what Paul is referring to here."

Yet The NASB, HCSB and NIV all translate the same word as "heresies" in 2Peter 2:1 which fits in with the context of that passage. So either these translations are in error in 2Peter 2:1 or at the very least the word "haireis" can be translated as heresies in the context of the English meaning of the word.

"That is obvious from a further reading.
1 Corinthians 11, KJV
20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. 21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry , and another is drunken . 22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not."

And then starting in verse 23 on Paul proceeds to correct their heresy by pointing out the true doctrine of the Lords supper.

"One more word of caution -- again, not one you are likely to heed. Worship Christ, not the KJV"

And I will provide a word of caution for you: be careful when you make accusations, You don't know me and have never seen me bow down to my King James Bible and pray to it. I never said anything in my post that would suggest that I worship the King James Bible or that anyone should do likewise. I also believe that God's holy angels are perfect. Do you suppose that I worship them as well?
God bless.

 

[posthuman]

There is no need to go to the Greek,

pardon me, but isn't determining whether the following statement is true or not exactly demonstrating a great need to actually "go into the Greek" ???

The NASB is a wicked perversion.

The KJV rendering is right and the one in the NASB is wrong.

 

[posthuman]

the proper reading is

my friend, i think technically "the proper reading" is:

Πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ συνερχομένων ὑμῶν ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ, ἀκούω σχίσματα ἐν ὑμῖν ὑπάρχειν, καὶ μέρος τι πιστεύω. Δεῖ γὰρ καὶ αἱρέσεις ἐν ὑμῖν εἴναι, ἵνα οἱ δόκιμοι φανεροὶ γένωνται ἐν ὑμῖν.
​

. . and i am quite grateful that many of my brothers and sisters before me have gone to such lengths to translate this to my native language, and to continue to refine that translation over the centuries in order to faithfully reproduce to me what the scriptures literally say in a way that i can understand.
i also thank God for those people here in this forum who are able to read and comprehend the original Greek, and the understanding i've gained through their faithful posting, criticism and discussion!!