This Blog was originally created for addressing frequent questions that have arisen during my discussions about the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on discussion boards on the Internet—hence the title of the Blog. I am now using it mainly as my personal Blog to discuss matters of doctrinal, theological, or personal interest. I am an independent blogger and do not speak officially for the LDS Church.
Disputed Topics ...
The contents of my book: Disputed Topics in the Theology of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is now freely available online at: https://antumpub.blogspot.com/
I have been much amused and entertained lately by watching exchanges taking place on YouTube between Dr. Jordan B. Cooper (Lutheran), and Dr. Leighton Flowers (non-Calvinist) about their respective theological beliefs. The exchanges seem to have begun with Dr. Cooper posting a video message in which he criticises Leighton Flowers for being a Pelagian! To this Flowers gives a couple of video responses denying the accusation; to which Cooper again replies by restating the accusation! The exchanges can be seen here:
https://youtu.be/Yn567CKLTes https://youtu.be/qaluwlmLccw I have a solution to the impasse. Instead of throwing labels around, why not define clearly, in biblical terms, what each side’s theological position is, and how they compare? Throwing around labels can be interpreted as an exercise in hostility, rather than a sincere engagement in theological understanding.
I am neither a Lutheran nor a Calvinist; but I have an issue with Lutheranism which I don’t have with Calvinism. Calvinism has a very clear and well-defined theology. You know exactly what it teaches. It doesn’t leave you in any doubts about that. It may be wrong (and it is); but it doesn’t leave you in any doubts about what it is—so you can make up your mind whether you agree with it or disagree. The same cannot be said of Lutheranism. Nobody seems to know exactly how it distinguishes itself from other Protestant traditions theologically. Is becoming a Lutheran merely adopting a new cultural tradition, and becoming part of a new congregation; or does it entail a change in one’s theological thinking as well? If so, what is that theological difference, and on what scriptural basis is it framed?
If someone was a Calvinist, and wanted to become a Lutheran, what would he have to stop believing as a Calvinist, and start believing as a Lutheran (on scriptural grounds), in order to become a Lutheran? Or if someone was a Lutheran, and wanted to become a Calvinist, what would he have to stop believing as a Lutheran, and start believing as a Calvinist (on scriptural grounds), in order to become a Calvinist? Nobody seems to know for sure. There are ambiguous answers to that question, but not clear ones. I have searched the Internet, including Dr. Cooper’s own videos, for a clear answer to that question, and so far found none.
He has a video on his site titled: “Why Is Lutheran Theology Unknown Among Christians,” which can be seen here. The answer to that question is, Because nobody knows for sure what it is! I know exactly what Calvinist theology is—and therefore can decide whether to agree with it or not. The same cannot be said of Lutheran theology. So I think Dr. Jordan Cooper would be doing himself a special favor by defining clearly what his (Lutheran) theological position is, and how it is distinguished from other Protestant traditions (notably Calvinism), and on what authoritative basis, before throwing pejorative labels at others, who at least seem able to articulate their theological positions better and more clearly than he seems able to do.
I found another interestingvideo, an interview with Dr. Cooper in which he identifies himself as a convert from Calvinism to Lutheranism; but he seems to have a hard time articulating the theological distinction between the two. The most central, distinguishing feature of Calvinism is predestination and justification by faith alone; and everything else (i.e. TULIP) follows logically from that. And as far as I know, it was Martin Luther who first came up with that theological foundation rather than John Calvin. It is Luther who gets the credit for introducing that theology into Protestantism. Calvin got that idea from him. And everything else, including TULIP, follows logically from that. Luther laid the foundation, and Calvin built upon it, and carried it to its logical conclusion. So it seems that Calvinism vs. Lutheranism is a distinction without a difference. The only difference between them seems to be that Calvinism is more honest about its theology than Lutheranism is. Calvinists are not scared to go where the foundational premises leads them to; whereas Lutherans want to keep the foundational premises (without which they couldn’t exist), but don’t like to look down the abyss where it logically leads to. If you start with “predestination” and “justification by faith alone,” then “TULIP” becomes the inevitable consequence. It is the only logical conclusion. There is no way to escape the conclusion from the given premises. The only way to escape the conclusion, is to ditch the premises upon which it is based—both of which are heretical and false—and both of which are foundational to both Lutheranism and Calvinism. If you eliminate predestination and justification by faith alone from either Calvinism or Lutheranism, both religions would cease to exist. Both religions would vaporize and disappear into oblivion. It is foundational to either religion. The only difference between them is that Calvinists are honest about where it logically and theologically leads to, whereas Lutherans are not.
I came across the above interesting debate between Dr. Michael Brown, a Charismatic Pentecostal who believes in a continuation of the miraculous gifts mentioned in the Bible, such as the gifts of tongues, healing, prophecy etc.; and Sam Waldron, who is a “cessationist,” meaning that he believes in a cessation of such gifts after the days of the Apostles. There is an interesting Wikipedia article on the subject which can be seen here. After watching the video, I found that while they were both presenting good scriptural arguments for their side of the debate, neither side was convincing to the other, because they were talking past each other by ignoring a third option presented in the Bible, but which, if acknowledged, would undermine each of their respective theological positions.
Both sides are right on some aspects of their arguments, while being wrong on others. On the one hand, the Bible does indeed teach a continuation of spiritual gifts. It does not teach cessationism. So Dr. Michael Brown has a valid point on that. Where he goes wrong is that he assumes that just because the Bible does not teach cessationism, it therefore follows that anybody making such claims, such as the Pentecostal Charismatics, must be genuine, which does not logically follow. The Bible also teaches that it is possible to be deceived, or make false claims. Just because the Bible does not teach a cessation of the miraculous gifts, it does not logically follow that the Pentecostal Charismatic claims must be genuine. That is where Dr. Brown errs in his theology.
But on the other hand, Sam Waldron also has a valid point, in arguing that if those gifts were to be continued, then the callings of prophets and Apostles should also be continued; and the canon of scripture should be open, as it was in their time. It does not make logical sense to retain some of the gifts, while claiming the cessation of the others. To be consistent, you either retain all of the gifts, including prophets, Apostles, and an open canon of scripture; or you claim cessation of all of the gifts—not retain the bits you like, and discontinue the ones you don’t. You either keep all the gifts, or discontinue all the gifts. In presenting that argument, Sam Waldron also has a valid point. The mistake that he makes is that he assumes that just because those gifts and callings appear indeed to have ceased among Christians, that they were therefore meant to be discontinued or ceased, which is not a required conclusion.
There is a third option that both sides have missed, because to acknowledge it would undermine both their respective theological positions. The third option is that those spiritual gifts and callings were indeed never meant to be discontinued, like it says in the Bible. The reason why they have been, and are no longer to be found in the Christian churches today (in spite of the false claims or pretenses of the charismatics), is because early Christianity apostatized, and lost the divine, priesthood, and Apostolic authority which it once possessed, which needed to be restored. The Book of Mormon provides us with the right perspective on the subject (punctuation revised):
Mormon 9:
7 And again, I speak unto you who deny the revelations of God, and say that they are done away; that there are no revelations, nor prophecies, nor gifts, nor healing, nor speaking with tongues, and the interpretation of tongues.
8 Behold, I say unto you, he that denieth these things knoweth not the gospel of Christ; yea, he has not read the scriptures; if so, he does not understand them.
9 For do we not read that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever; and in him there is no variableness, neither shadow of changing?
10 And now, if ye have imagined up unto yourselves a god who doth vary, and in whom there is shadow of changing, then have ye imagined up unto yourselves a god who is not a God of miracles.
11 But behold, I will show unto you a God of miracles; even the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; and it is that same God who created the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are.
12 Behold, he created Adam, and by Adam came the fall of man; and because of the fall of man came Jesus Christ, even the Father and the Son; and because of Jesus Christ came the redemption of man.
13a And because of the redemption of man, which came by Jesus Christ, they are brought back into the presence of the Lord. 13b Yea, this is wherein all men are redeemed; because the death of Christ bringeth to pass the resurrection, which bringeth to pass a redemption from an endless sleep, from which sleep all men shall be awakened by the power of God when the trump shall sound. 13c And they shall come forth, both small and great; and all shall stand before his bar, being redeemed and loosed from this eternal band of death, which death is a temporal death.
14 And then cometh the judgment of the Holy One upon them. And then cometh the time that he that is filthy, shall be filthy still; and he that is righteous, shall be righteous still. He that is happy, shall be happy still; and he that is unhappy, shall be unhappy still.
15 And now, O all ye that have imagined up unto yourselves a god who can do no miracles; I would ask of you, have all these things passed, of which I have spoken? Has the end come yet? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; and God has not ceased to be a God of miracles.
16 Behold, are not the things that God hath wrought marvelous in our eyes? Yea, and who can comprehend the marvelous works of God?
17 Who shall say that it was not a miracle that by his word the heaven and the earth should be; and by the power of his word man was created of the dust of the earth; and by the power of his word have miracles been wrought?
18 And who shall say that Jesus Christ did not do many mighty miracles? And there were many mighty miracles wrought by the hands of the Apostles.
19 And if there were miracles wrought then, why has God ceased to be a God of miracles, and yet be an unchangeable Being? And behold, I say unto you he changeth not; if so, he would cease to be God. And he ceaseth not to be God; and is a God of miracles.
20 And the reason why he ceaseth to do miracles among the children of men, is because that they dwindle in unbelief, and depart from the right way, and know not the God in whom they should trust.
21 Behold, I say unto you that whoso believeth in Christ, doubting nothing, whatsoever he shall ask the Father in the name of Christ, it shall be granted him; and this promise is unto all, even unto the ends of the earth.
22 For behold, thus said Jesus Christ, the Son of God, unto his disciples who should tarry; yea, and also to all his disciples, in the hearing of the multitude: Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature;
23 And he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
24 And these signs shall follow them that believe: in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
25 And whosoever shall believe in my name, doubting nothing, unto him will I confirm all my words, even unto the ends of the earth.
26 And now behold, who can stand against the works of the Lord? Who can deny his sayings? Who will rise up against the almighty power of the Lord? Who will despise the works of the Lord? Who will despise the children of Christ? Behold, all ye who are despisers of the works of the Lord, for ye shall wonder and perish.
27 O then, despise not, and wonder not; but hearken unto the words of the Lord; and ask the Father in the name of Jesus for what things soever ye shall stand in need. Doubt not, but be believing, and begin as in times of old; and come unto the Lord with all your heart; and work out your own salvation with fear and trembling before him.
28 Be wise in the days of your probation. Strip yourselves of all uncleanness. Ask not, that ye may consume it on your lusts; but ask with a firmness unshaken, that ye will yield to no temptation, but that ye will serve the true and living God.
Moroni 7:
12 Wherefore all things which are good cometh of God; and that which is evil cometh of the devil. For the devil is an enemy unto God, and fighteth against him continually; and inviteth and enticeth to sin, and to do that which is evil continually.
13 But behold, that which is of God inviteth and enticeth to do good continually. Wherefore everything which inviteth and enticeth to do good, and to love God, and to serve him, is inspired of God.
14 Wherefore take heed, my beloved brethren, that ye do not judge that which is evil to be of God; or that which is good and of God to be of the devil.
15 For behold, my brethren, it is given unto you to judge, that ye may know good from evil; and the way to judge is as plain, that ye may know with a perfect knowledge, as the daylight is from the dark night.
16 For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man that he may know good from evil; wherefore I show unto you the way to judge: for everything which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ, wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God;
17 But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God; then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil. For after this manner doth the devil work. For he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.
18 And now my brethren, seeing that ye know the light by which ye may judge, which light is the light of Christ, see that ye do not judge wrongfully; for with that same judgment which ye judge, ye shall also be judged.
19 Wherefore I beseech of you, brethren, that ye should search diligently in the light of Christ that ye may know good from evil; and if ye will lay hold upon every good thing, and condemn it not, ye certainly will be a child of Christ.
20 And now my brethren, how is it possible that ye can lay hold upon every good thing?
21 And now I come to that faith, of which I said I would speak; and I will tell you the way whereby ye may lay hold on every good thing.
22 For behold, God knowing all things, being from everlasting to everlasting, behold he sent angels to minister unto the children of men, to make manifest concerning the coming of Christ; and in Christ there should come every good thing.
23 And God also declared unto prophets, by his own mouth that Christ should come.
24 And behold, there were divers ways that he did manifest things unto the children of men, which were good. And all things which are good cometh of Christ; otherwise men were fallen, and there could no good thing come unto them.
25 Wherefore by the ministering of angels, and by every word which proceeded forth out of the mouth of God, men began to exercise faith in Christ; and thus by faith they did lay hold upon every good thing; and thus it was until the coming of Christ.
26 And after that he came, men also were saved by faith in his name; and by faith they become the sons of God. And as surely as Christ liveth, he spake these words unto our fathers, saying, Whatsoever thing ye shall ask the Father in my name, which is good, in faith believing that ye shall receive, behold it shall be done unto you.
27 Wherefore my beloved brethren, have miracles ceased because Christ hath ascended into heaven, and hath sat down on the right hand of God, to claim of the Father his rights of mercy which he hath upon the children of men?
28 For he hath answered the ends of the law; and he claimeth all those who have faith in him; and they who have faith in him will cleave unto every good thing. Wherefore he advocateth the cause of the children of men; and he dwelleth eternally in the heavens.
29 And because he hath done this, my beloved brethren, have miracles ceased? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; neither have angels ceased to minister unto the children of men.
30 For behold, they are subject unto him, to minister according to the word of his command, showing themselves unto them of strong faith and a firm mind in every form of godliness.
31 And the office of their ministry is to call men unto repentance; and to fulfil and to do the work of the covenants of the Father, which he hath made unto the children of men, to prepare the way among the children of men, by declaring the word of Christ unto the chosen vessels of the Lord, that they may bear testimony of him.
32 And by so doing the Lord God prepareth the way that the residue of men may have faith in Christ; that the Holy Ghost may have place in their hearts, according to the power thereof; and after this manner bringeth to pass the Father the covenants which he hath made unto the children of men.
33 And Christ hath said, If ye will have faith in me, ye shall have power to do whatsoever thing is expedient in me.
34 And he hath said, Repent, all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me, and be baptized in my name, and have faith in me, that ye may be saved.
35 And now my beloved brethren, if this be the case, that these things are true which I have spoken unto you—and God will show unto you, with power and great glory at the last day that they are true—and if they are true, has the day of miracles ceased?
36 Or have angels ceased to appear unto the children of men? Or has he withheld the power of the Holy Ghost from them? Or will he, so long as time shall last, or the earth shall stand, or there shall be one man upon the face thereof to be saved?
37 Behold, I say unto you, Nay. For it is by faith that miracles are wrought; and it is by faith that angels appear and minister unto men. Wherefore if these things have ceased, wo be unto the children of men, for it is because of unbelief, and all is vain.
38 For no man can be saved, according to the words of Christ, save they shall have faith in his name; wherefore if these things have ceased, then has faith ceased also, and awful is the state of man; for they are as though there had been no redemption made.
39 But behold, my beloved brethren, I judge better things of you; for I judge that ye have faith in Christ, because of your meekness; for if ye have not faith in him, then ye are not fit to be numbered among the people of his church.
These guys have theological degrees and PhDs and God knows what, and have read thousands of books. Too bad they don’t know how much smarter they would be if they studied and took more seriously the Book of Mormon! They don’t even need to become Latter-day Saints, or join the LDS Church! All they need to do is to recognise the book for what it is, and learn great doctrine and theology from it. đŸ˜ƒ In the restored Church of Jesus Christ the canon of scripture is indeed open, and the Book of Mormon is a powerful witness to that claim. It cannot be ignored or sidelined. Denying it, turning a blind eye to it, or making jokes about it will not make it go away.
I found this very interesting debate between a Christian and a Muslim over the doctrine of the Trinity; and if I had to act as an impartial referee, I would have to conclude that the Muslim guy won the debate. I am not agreeing with his theology; but I think that overall he presented the stronger, more logical arguments.
I came across the above lengthy video (over 2 hours long) in which Leighton Flowers debates with a Calvinist named David Louis; and if I were to act as an impartial referee, I would have to conclude that the Calvinist guy won the debate. He debates and presents his arguments in a very reasonable, friendly, amiable (and logical) way; and Leighton Flowers is not doing very well in responding to him. He dodges and dismisses his arguments without giving them an appropriate reply. It seems he doesn’t have good answers to give, so he dodges it instead, which is a pity, because David Louis appears to be a very reasonable guy and a good debater, and presents good arguments, which deserve to be properly answered. I will discuss only one of his comments. At around 46:20 minutes into the video he makes the following comment in response to Leighton Flowers:
“I will be the first Calvinist to admit there are, let’s call them tensions—I would want to call them that because it is my position—but … what I would push back on you is, there is also issues in the other framework; so for example, if God created the universe, knowing that there would be rape; yet he created that universe anyway, knowing that, isn’t he still somewhat responsible, even from your view, of ordaining it? Now, you can remove it one step, right? and say, ‘Well, he didn’t create it directly; you Calvinists say, He causally ordained it.’ Okay, granted; but in every other theistic system, don’t you have to deal with the problem that God created the universe where there would be rape? Couldn’t he have not created that universe? Couldn’t he have created a perfect universe? He chose to create a universe where that stuff is happening. So part of my problem as a Calvinist listening to … Arminians in general, is they want to act like us Calvinists are the only ones that have the problem with this theodicy issue. ‘You Calvinists, God is on the hook for you in your system; in ours he is not.’ Well, wait a minute, yes he is, because if he created a universe where he knew there would be rape, but he did it anyway.”
Those are legitimate questions which deserve an appropriate reply. There are several issues raised in there that need to be separated. The first is, What does he mean by “universe”? The “universe” is a very big place. This earth is a tiny speck of dust compared to the rest of the “universe”. To equate what is happening in this world (at this brief period of time) with what is happening in the rest of the “universe” (for the rest of eternity) is not a reasonable assumption. This earth is not only a tiny speck of dust compared to the rest of the “universe,” it also stretches over a time-span which is less than a tiny speck of dust compared with the rest of eternity. The time-span of this earth is approximately a few thousand years. How long is that compared to the rest of eternity? It doesn’t even compare. So the first thing he needs to do is to add some perspective to his question. The way the question is framed makes it sound as though what is happening in this world, at this brief period of time, is what is happening in all the rest of the “universe,” and for all the rest of eternity, which of course is not an accurate description of what is happening.
Having added some perspective to the question, we next come to the question of why does God allow evil to exist in this brief period of mortality? But before giving the answer to that question, there is another perspective that we need to get right. Evil is not the only thing that is happening in this world. There is also a lot of good that is happening in the world. If you talk to Calvinists, you come away thinking that nobody ever does any good, and nothing good is happening in the world at all, which of course is not biblical, and is not true. There are lots of people who are doing good in this world—as well as a lot of people who are doing evil. I would hazard a guess that there is more good being done in the world than evil. But the question being asked is, Why does God allow the evil to take place in the world? That is a question that is very clearly answered in scripture. It leaves no room for ambiguity or misunderstanding. The scriptures that give the explanation are these:
John 5:
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
Revelation 20:
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
(See also Psalm 9:7-8; 96:12-13; 98:8-9; Matt. 16:27; 25:31–46; Acts 17:31; Rom. 14:10–12; 2 Cor. 5:10; Rev. 22:12) How could God “judge” people according to their “works” (“good” or “bad,” and reward them accordingly), if they had no power to do evil; or if the choice between good and evil didn’t exist? There are several implications to those scriptures. The first is that people are free to choose between good and evil. If that freedom didn’t exist, and they were like robots, and were preprogrammed to choose good or evil (as in Calvinism), they could not be “judged” for their actions either. That would be a mockery of justice. “Judgement” implies culpability, which implies (and necessitates) complete libertarian freewill. How can you “judge” someone for their “actions” if they had no control over their actions, and were preprogrammed like robots to do as they did? Calvinists try to get round it by saying that we freely choose what we want, but our wants and desires are predetermined by God, which is absurd logic and a dodge. If our wants and desires are predetermined, then our choices are not freely made. Another implication of those scriptures is that this brief period of mortality is a testing ground. It is a period of trial to see if we would choose good or evil, right or wrong—and be rewarded accordingly. It is not something which is going to continue indefinitely, and for the rest of eternity (which is what his question is implying). To be “free,” people must be permitted to make wrong choices as well as right choices. When they make wrong choices, innocent people are going to get hurt. That is a necessary and inevitable part of this mortal experience. The good news is that it won’t last very long. And at the end of it we will enter into judgement where all wrongs will be put right, and everyone will receive a just reward for all the right (or wrong) which they have done—and those who have innocently suffered will be fully compensated. After that we have the rest of eternity to look forward to, where the present condition no longer applies.
Another interesting question that arises from this discussion is, What role does the Atonement of Jesus Christ play in all of this? The answer is that the Atonement makes it possible for people who have done wrong to repent of their sins and be forgiven, so that they will not be held accountable for it on judgement-day. Repentance is a universal concept. You don’t have to be a Christian to repent. Anybody of any faith, culture, or religion who genuinely repents (i.e. recognizes that he has done wrong, puts it right where possible, and determines to never do it again), will be forgiven, even if they have never heard of Jesus Christ. They will be forgiven by virtue of the Atonement, even if they don’t know it themselves. “Imputed righteousness” is a Calvinistic invention. There isn’t any such thing. The correct theology is forgiveness and remission of sins, by virtue of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, through faith and repentance. “Faith alone” doesn’t save anyone. But faith coupled with genuine repentance does. But the answer to the original question is a simple one, and is given in the scriptures cited. What is happening in this world, at this present time, is not what is happening in the rest of the “universe,” and will not be continuing forever for the rest of eternity neither. It will last only for this brief (very brief) period of mortality. It is a test, a trial, to see who will be faithful and obedient to the will of God, and who will not be. At the end of it everyone will be “judged,” and will receive their “wages” according to how they have (freely) chosen to live their lives in this world—and thereafter will either be happy or unhappy accordingly for the rest of eternity to come. And nobody is “predestined,” nor “preprogrammed” to do evil or good (according to the heresy of Calvinism). That is the simple and correct answer to the original question. The scriptures cited permit of no other explanation. Calvinists claim to be biblical. If they are, and want to be honest with themselves, they have to admit this, that that is the only explanation possible from the scriptures cited (and possibly others that could be given).
I came across the above video by Dr Michael Brown, speaking in defense of the Pentecostal Charismatic movement, which he apparently adheres to, who believe in (and claim) the continuation of the miraculous gifts mentioned in the Bible, such as the gifts of tongues, prophecy, and healing etc. His argument is that there is nothing in the Bible that says that such gifts should be done away, notably quoting the words of Paul in 1 Cor. 14:39, “Wherefor, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.” His argument basically is that the Bible does not say that such gifts should be done away, therefore the Pentecostal Charismatic claims to possessing such gifts are true. That is not a valid logical argument. Just because the Bible does not say that such gifts should be done away, it does not logically follow that anybody making such claims (including the Penticostal Charismatics) must therefore be genuine and true. The Bible also teaches that it is possible for people to make false claims; and it is also possible for some to be deceived. Jesus says, “Take heed that no man deceive you.” (Matt. 24:4) And John wrote, “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God.” (1 John 4:4) To Timothy Paul wrote, “But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.” (2 Tim. 3:13) To the Thessalonians Paul writes, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1 Thes. 5:21) In the same chapter of Paul that he quotes from, verses 32 and 33, Paul also says, “And the spirit of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” (1 Cor. 14:32–33) And again in verse 40 he says, “Let all things be done decently and in order.” (1 Cor. 14:40) The kind of erratic, uncontrolled, and abnormal (even dangerous) behavior sometimes manifested by those who make such claims in the charismatic movement is evidence that they are not genuine. They are at best false pretenses, and at worst evidence of demonic possession. We are required to “try the spirits,” to see if they be “of God;” and not believe “every spirit” (1 John 4:1). “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1 Thes. 5:21–22.) Paul further says, “But the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,” (Gal. 5:22.) And again, “For the fruit of the Spirit is all goodness and righteousness and truth; proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.” (Eph. 5:9–10.) The spirit manifested by these folks contradicts that, therefore it cannot be of God. The erratic and abnormal (even dangerous) behaviors sometimes manifested by those who make such claims in the charismatic movement are telltale signs that their claims are not genuine.
Following my previous post, in which I had commented on Dr Michael Brown’s critique of the KJV, I found another interesting video in which Dr James White is interviewed and quizzed on the KJV controversy, which is worth watching. He discusses the subject a little bit more intelligently than Dr Michael Brown does, but not much better. I don’t intend to discuss everything that was said in the video; but only to briefly comment on another example of a supposedly “faulty translation” in the KJV that he provides. At around 13:47 minutes into the video he quotes Acts 5:30: “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.” as an example of faulty translation, suggesting that the word “and” in that context is incorrect, because it implies that they killed Jesus first, and then they hanged him on a tree afterwards! But that is a failure on his part to read the KJV in its proper historical context, rather than a fault of the KJV. The word “and” in that context is used idiomatically to mean something like, “... whom they killed, and did so by hanging him on a tree”. This reading is confirmed by all contemporary translations, as the following examples will demonstrate (starting with the earliest):
Tyndale Bible 1534:
The God of oure fathers raysed vp Ie Iesus whom ye slewe and hanged on tre.
Coverdale Bible 1535:
The God of oure fathers hath raysed vp Iesus, who ye slewe, and hanged on tre.
Matthew’s Bible 1537:
The God of our father raysed vp Iesus whom ye slewe and hanged on tree.
The Great Bible 1539:
The God of oure fathers raysed vp Iesus, whom ye slewe, and hanged on tre.
Geneva Bible 1560:
The God of our fathers hath raised vp Iesus, whom ye slewe, and hanged on a tree.
Bishops Bible 1568:
The God of our fathers raysed vp Iesus, whom ye slewe, & hanged on tree.
King James Bible 1611:
The God of our fathers raised vp Iesus, whom yee slew and hanged on a tree.
King James Bible 1769:
The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
Webster’s Bible 1833:
The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree:
So none of these guys were smart enough to figure this out, and we had to wait for the superior intelligence of James White, and our modern translators to come to that momentous realization? I don’t think so. They were translating according to the contemporary idiomatic usage of their time. The word “and” carries the implied meaning of, “and did so by …”. And none of that means that we should now “change the KJV”. The KJV is written in the idiomatic language of its time, and is best appreciated in the form that it was originally written. If somebody prefers to read a more modern translation, there is nothing wrong with that, and there are plenty to choose from. But I have yet to find a serious criticism of the KJV that is not more a reflection of the ignorance and bias of the critics, rather than a genuine issue with the KJV. James White isn’t faring any better than the rest. They are all tearing their brains out in order to find fault with the KJV, and all they succeed in doing is exposing their own ignorance instead.
The quotes from early Bible translations, by the way, came from a site called Textus Receptus Bibles, which is a great site for studying and comparing the early Bible translations. They also provide eBook editions of many of the old Bibles very cheaply, which are worth buying.
