Interlude No.1
In the summer of 1977 my parents pulled me out of George Washington Carver High School in Montgomery, Alabama, and enrolled me into a private Catholic School. The military is famous for integrating its children into the most... diverse of schools-- I can only assume it builds both character and a better understanding of the many different cultural and socio-economical differences in this great country of ours. Maxwell AFB in the summer of '76 was no exception, and as a result, my sophomore year at GWC was unpleasant at best.
Montgomery Catholic High School was beyond different. I could walk the halls and not worry about getting into a fight because I was white. I didn't have to worry about chicks pulling knives on me in Biology demanding my frog (we were dissecting... long story). Not only did I not have to worry about my safety, I got to express myself creatively and intellectually in a way I was never able to do before. On top of all this was the mandatory religion classes.
My junior year in Fr. McDevitt's Old Testament review was enlightening. Well, enlightening after the fact; at the time I was merely confused. Suddenly this young Baptist was being compelled to pray to Mary-- which I did, not knowing any better --and being forced to sit meekly by while the good Father systematically boiled down the miracles of God in the Exodus story to a distillate of natural phenomenon; nothing miraculous at all.
I've related all this to say the following: Billy Joel's "The Stranger" was a popular Album around school in those days. "Only the Good Die Young" however, was banned by all the pop radio stations in Montgomery because of a strong-- and vocal --Catholic Diocese. But here's the point: One line in that particular song has been ringing in my head all evening long while trying to get this installment to gel in my mind.
But that's not right! I immediately realize. Mr. Joel sings, "sooner or later it comes down to fate..," but I still can't get that subconscious substitution out of my head and I know exactly where it comes from.
What we choose to believe about God, ultimately comes down to faith. And here's the difficult part... We don't have faith enough to believe in God[1]... He gives us the faith to believe.
Do we take Him at his word? Or do we reject Him altogether? There is no middle ground with God, and this is why scripture is so important. What are we to believe? What doctrine? What truth...? Pilate asked that question once, but that was nothing new; man has been asking that question throughout his entire existence. And were it not for God Himself revealing the truth to us, through His word, we would still be ignorant of His Mercy, His Grace, His lovingkindness toward us, and His greatest work of redemption; the salvation of any man willing to accept it through belief in Christ Jesus.
The Jews kept and guarded God's word flawlessly, through careful and deliberate attention to accuracy in each copy they made of the Old Testament scriptures. They pretty much had their form down to a science. Perhaps that's why the Gospels refer to those perfectionistic artisans as "Scribes."
New Testament scribes, however, were not as assiduous in their work; they were not as careful. The letters and Gospels in the early days of the church were read over and over, voraciously, and in due time became worn and in need of duplication. Because of the early copyists' lack of careful attention to their work, heresies inevitably began to creep in. Copyist's began to correct word usage, and portions of scripture they perceived as being inconsistent with previous passages, or their own idea of what the scriptures meant. Some went so far as to rewrite, or delete altogether, whole passages; again, to reflect their own idea of what the scriptures meant, often drastically changing a passages meaning.
At the Council of Nicea in 325 AD, the task was given-- supposedly by the Emperor Constantine --to define the overall requirements of belief... a creed, if you will... that Christianity, which seemed was showing some distressing signs of heresy, might be soundly codified. Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" would have the world believe that the Council was to vote specifically on the issue of the Deity of Christ, and that the vote was very close.
If signatures are to be construed as "votes" then it was a blow out. Out of more than 300 Bishops, only 2 failed to sign the document. Note also that Nicea is located in what is now Turkey, where Greek Orthodoxy would later be established and find its seat in the city of Constantinople-- modern day Istanbul. The Majority Text, or Texus Receptus, from which the KJV was translated, is derived from this area of Christendom... not Rome. Rome gets her translation from Alexandria, Egypt. As do most modern translations such as the NIV, NASB, RSV, etc. et al.
In the Bible, "Egypt" connotes anything but good images... death, bondage, plagues, polytheism... Nothing good comes from Eygpt. Why then would anyone accept a translation based on a codex that had it's origins in Egypt, of all places?
But the Council of Nicea has little relevance to this discussion other than historic. The Church eventually split into East and West, Greek and Roman, each with their own translation, and doctrine, and belief.
Next:
Detour, Part 4 - Comparing Translations to Established Christian Doctrines
Previously:
Detour, Part 3 - Manuscripts, Translations, and "Why the KJV?"
Detour, Part 2 - The Nature and Limits of God... and why this is important
Detour, Parenthetical - "What Will Shortly Follow"
Detour, Part 1 - "Preamble"
Warning: Detour Ahead
Montgomery Catholic High School was beyond different. I could walk the halls and not worry about getting into a fight because I was white. I didn't have to worry about chicks pulling knives on me in Biology demanding my frog (we were dissecting... long story). Not only did I not have to worry about my safety, I got to express myself creatively and intellectually in a way I was never able to do before. On top of all this was the mandatory religion classes.
My junior year in Fr. McDevitt's Old Testament review was enlightening. Well, enlightening after the fact; at the time I was merely confused. Suddenly this young Baptist was being compelled to pray to Mary-- which I did, not knowing any better --and being forced to sit meekly by while the good Father systematically boiled down the miracles of God in the Exodus story to a distillate of natural phenomenon; nothing miraculous at all.
I've related all this to say the following: Billy Joel's "The Stranger" was a popular Album around school in those days. "Only the Good Die Young" however, was banned by all the pop radio stations in Montgomery because of a strong-- and vocal --Catholic Diocese. But here's the point: One line in that particular song has been ringing in my head all evening long while trying to get this installment to gel in my mind.
"Sooner or later it comes down to faith..."
But that's not right! I immediately realize. Mr. Joel sings, "sooner or later it comes down to fate..," but I still can't get that subconscious substitution out of my head and I know exactly where it comes from.
What we choose to believe about God, ultimately comes down to faith. And here's the difficult part... We don't have faith enough to believe in God[1]... He gives us the faith to believe.
Do we take Him at his word? Or do we reject Him altogether? There is no middle ground with God, and this is why scripture is so important. What are we to believe? What doctrine? What truth...? Pilate asked that question once, but that was nothing new; man has been asking that question throughout his entire existence. And were it not for God Himself revealing the truth to us, through His word, we would still be ignorant of His Mercy, His Grace, His lovingkindness toward us, and His greatest work of redemption; the salvation of any man willing to accept it through belief in Christ Jesus.
The Jews kept and guarded God's word flawlessly, through careful and deliberate attention to accuracy in each copy they made of the Old Testament scriptures. They pretty much had their form down to a science. Perhaps that's why the Gospels refer to those perfectionistic artisans as "Scribes."
New Testament scribes, however, were not as assiduous in their work; they were not as careful. The letters and Gospels in the early days of the church were read over and over, voraciously, and in due time became worn and in need of duplication. Because of the early copyists' lack of careful attention to their work, heresies inevitably began to creep in. Copyist's began to correct word usage, and portions of scripture they perceived as being inconsistent with previous passages, or their own idea of what the scriptures meant. Some went so far as to rewrite, or delete altogether, whole passages; again, to reflect their own idea of what the scriptures meant, often drastically changing a passages meaning.
At the Council of Nicea in 325 AD, the task was given-- supposedly by the Emperor Constantine --to define the overall requirements of belief... a creed, if you will... that Christianity, which seemed was showing some distressing signs of heresy, might be soundly codified. Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" would have the world believe that the Council was to vote specifically on the issue of the Deity of Christ, and that the vote was very close.
"...there certainly was no vote to determine Jesus' divinity: this was already a matter of common knowledge among Christians and had been from the early years of the religion.
"The bishops did, however, have to decide whether or not to sign the statement the Council drafted which clarified their understanding of the historical and biblical teaching concerning Jesus' nature[2]..."
If signatures are to be construed as "votes" then it was a blow out. Out of more than 300 Bishops, only 2 failed to sign the document. Note also that Nicea is located in what is now Turkey, where Greek Orthodoxy would later be established and find its seat in the city of Constantinople-- modern day Istanbul. The Majority Text, or Texus Receptus, from which the KJV was translated, is derived from this area of Christendom... not Rome. Rome gets her translation from Alexandria, Egypt. As do most modern translations such as the NIV, NASB, RSV, etc. et al.
In the Bible, "Egypt" connotes anything but good images... death, bondage, plagues, polytheism... Nothing good comes from Eygpt. Why then would anyone accept a translation based on a codex that had it's origins in Egypt, of all places?
But the Council of Nicea has little relevance to this discussion other than historic. The Church eventually split into East and West, Greek and Roman, each with their own translation, and doctrine, and belief.
Next:
Detour, Part 4 - Comparing Translations to Established Christian Doctrines
Previously:
Detour, Part 3 - Manuscripts, Translations, and "Why the KJV?"
Detour, Part 2 - The Nature and Limits of God... and why this is important
Detour, Parenthetical - "What Will Shortly Follow"
Detour, Part 1 - "Preamble"
Warning: Detour Ahead
from the mind of... Eric | 9:17 PM
9 Comments:
I'm not sure I get your point....
Qualification, TT.
It requires faith to believe in God, and since none of us prior to conversion had faith, God must give it to us.
The same is true of the scriptures. It takes faith to cling to the "truths" found in scripture. Some versions of scripture, however, are truer than others.
By changing or dropping a single word in a single verse, the entire meaning can change; that or the verse loses efficacy.
Consider Acts 20:28 in the KJV...
"Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." [Emphasis mine]
This clearly states that it was God's own blood that purchased his church. But wait! Wasn't it Christ that shed His blood on the cross? Is then Christ God? This verse is a declaration of the Deity of Christ.
Now let's look at the same verse from the American Standard Version...
"Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood." [Again, emphasis mine]
Do you see the difference? Intellectually you may already believe that Jesus was God in the flesh, but what about someone new to the faith? This version steals the doctrine of Christ's Deity from the new believer. Jesus is Lord... but not God. That's what this version says.
This verse alone is enough to make me reject every other version that does not agree with the King James. And guess what? There are thousands of verses that are warped or ruined altogether by these modern, so-called "better" translations.
This is the point of the detour I'm on. By establishing this, I prove that God has kept His word to us all by keeping His Word-- or at least the essential doctrines contained therein --pure and undefiled... and therefore superior to, say, the Quran.
Remember, this detour finds its impetus in the many disagreements between Jamal and myself.
but if you look at history, constantine was not always a good guy. and had very stong views against the jews.
also as far as his conection with christians goes he was associated with the pope.
there was another church leader named Arius with a large following who was persecuted and exiled. all their books were burned.
it says in scripture this will happen to christians. how do christians persecute themselves?
and from this the views of the catholic establisment became almost a law.
I believe "satan" or what ever you like to call it will always try to keep the true nature of god hidden from us which is why we are to always search for truth.
also to translate scripture into english sometimes there just isnt a word. no translation is ever completly accurate.
Im am not discrediting the new testament...but as a christian I feel you should not be so concerned with old testament laws.
you should only follow jesus. really you could just pick the book of matthew and read nothing else.
My only concern for The Law is its use as a "school master" to show the sinner his need for a savior. The Christian is not under Law, but rather Grace. But we find grace through the knowledge of our sin as defined by the Law of God, for God is Holy and cannot suffer sin to stand in His presence.
My concern for the Law, in this respect, is wholly justified. Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Our hearts are brought to conviction by hearing the word of God. The Holy Spirit uses the Law to make the sinner acknowledge his/her guilt; by use of the Law the Holy Spirit tells the sinner specifically what he/she has done to offend God.
It will seem foolishness to the sinner, this idea that he/she must repent, if the sinner doesn't see him/herself as "that bad of a person." Nevertheless, repentance is required for salvation. Without repentance, Christ could die on the cross every Sunday afternoon and the sinner would never find forgiveness. It's like an unlit candle in ones right hand and a match in the left. All it takes is a willingness to strike that match to light that candle, and so banish the darkness.
Instead of Matthew-- in terms of this comment --I choose John...
"And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
"For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
"But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." John 3:19-21
No man is perfect... Least of all me... but every man must try if s/he's to escape what's coming otherwise. Many people choose to stumble around in the dark. I'm choosing to strike the match.
personally, It's not the translations of men in which I have faith--my faith is in God who is able to preserve his word for posterity.
There is a real attack by secularists and people of little or no faith on the Word of God at this point in history. It's not those of faith, however, who are vulnerable to the secular revisionists--it's those of little or no faith who are vulnerable.
D-- I agree with the sentiment that faith is under increasing attack; more, I believe, than at any time in the past. But remember, we are to "earnestly contend for the faith."
God has kept/preserved His word, but with so many different translations out there, which one should we take "as Gospel?"
This is the point of the detour, and the next installment addresses the specific differences-- in terms of doctrine --in the various translations available today.
"The Gospel" is neither "The Bible" nor its nickname, "The Word of God," which is way different than "the Word" in John 1:1. I'll never understand how the Bible came to be confused with the Logos.
The "Gospel" is the good news that Jesus sets us free. Repentence, IMHO, is the chief result and ongoing process that comes as a result of a saving encounter with God through Jesus. I do not understasnd how anyone can repent *without* grace.
The woman found in sin, about to be stoned. She encoutnered Jesus. He saved her. THEN, he said "go sin no more," that is, "repent."
ER-- Welcome.
You are, of course, correct. What I meant by, "as gospel" is: a truth undeniable. What you describe as "The Gospel" is right on the money... but you didn't need me to tell you that.
The fact that Jesus died for us; that our sin might not be held against us on the day of judgment, thereby bridging the gulf between man and God and making us acceptable in His sight, THAT is the greatest truth any man could ever discover.
<< Home