A Look at Theology and Textual Criticism vs. Having Faith in God and Believing Bible Study |
Below the wallpapers: I let a modern Christian scholar update you about more radical changes that Reason-wielding theologians are trying to incorporate into Christianity in the name of “progress” and textual criticism. Theology is a major reason Christians have lost interest in learning the Bible; they've been convinced the word of God no longer means what it actually says, and they've been convinced that old-fashioned Bible study and the Holy Spirit have - in practice - been replaced by theology. |
Hello,
friends, Dr. P.H. Dee here. As a result of
advancements in learning, my
theological associates and I have been adding new and
exciting changes to our
many previous accomplishments. We are so very proud,
and this update is to show
you that we continue to work behind the scenes to
improve Christianity.
We
theologians agree that the perfect word of God was
given to man in various original-language
manuscripts, which no longer exist. The challenge we
face is the fact that
God’s Bible is full of errors because it has been
copied and translated
countless times by well-intentioned but fallible men.
Nobody really knows which
different readings are correct, and many that we know
to be incorrect have
wrongly caused societal prejudices. Therefore we must
continue learning from
history, archeology, and science, and apply our
learning to the old original
Hebrew and Greek languages in an ongoing effort to
reduce the amount of
“interpretive ambiguity” among theologians. By better
understanding the
historical, moral, and religious context within which
the original manuscripts
were written, we can improve our Bible translations
and keep pace with the
ongoing evolution of human languages and values. We
modern theologians also
know early translators made numerous mistakes because
of their misapplication
of linguistic etymology and cognation, internal
structure, old mistranslations,
and misunderstood metaphors. Well, if you lack a
formal theological degree, I’m
probably already way over your heads,
so I’ll get right to it:
Lev 18:21 And
thou shalt
not let any of thy seed pass through the
fire to Molech,
neither shalt
thou profane the name of thy God: I am the
LORD.
(KJV)
Lev 18:22 Thou shalt not
lie with mankind as with womankind in
the temple of Molech: it
is an abomination. (QJV)
As good as
the Queen James Version is,
we are
in the final stages of producing an even better Bible
version. You noticed
above that Lev 18:23 condemns human sexual
relationships with animals. That
archaic taboo is, like the old bias against LBGT
Christians, the unfortunate
result of unqualified Bible translators bungling texts
because they didn’t put
them into proper context. The fact is, having sex with
animals is perfectly
fine as long as
it’s not done as part of
pagan worship ceremonies! As a result, theology’s
latest and most reliable
Bible translation, the King Kong Version,
properly renders Lev 18:23
as:
A
qualified theologian is one who has graduated from an
approved educational
institution that has a well-rounded curriculum that
gives a man or woman a
deeper understanding of Christianity. This deeper
understanding must be based
on a thorough familiarity with the original Hebrew and
Greek languages and
manuscripts, and supplemented by knowledge gained from
science, archeology, and
history. In order to hold down tuition debt it is not
absolutely necessary that
the curriculum include courses in church finances,
preaching techniques, sermon
building and sources, church music, entertainment and
social functions,
comparative religions of the world, psychology,
marriage counselling
and church weddings, member behavioral problems
(alcohol and drug abuse,
battered wives and children, adultery, sexual
deviancy), establishing and
managing a church school, establishing and financing a
local and international
missions outreach, successful Vacation Bible School
programs, etc.
I am a
qualified theologian (as defined above) with a PhD,
and I am a licensed pastor.
I am aware that many other theologians actively
discourage Bible study by
church members with no formal theological
training...but I don’t go quite that
far. I believe in some cases Bible study can be
helpful in getting lay
Christians excited about acquiring a proper
theological education. Yes, Bible
study can be good – as long as
it
is viewed as a first step toward a legitimate degree
in theology.
For those
who are serious about religion I recommend getting a
theological degree at a
Bible institution as soon as possible. There is no
need to study the Bible
first; let the pros teach you about Christianity right
from the start. I happen
to disagree with many theologians with advanced
degrees who look down on
Christians whose theological studies ended when they
graduated from Bible
school. There’s nothing wrong with having a low-level
theological degree.
However, I recommend not only obtaining advanced
degrees in theology, but I
strongly urge you to maintain a continuing program of
“Lifelong Learning”. I
have continued, on my own, my theological research –
and I expect to continue
learning about archeology, history, Greek syntax,
etc., for as long as I live.
Whenever I can afford them I buy books on various
topics, subscribe to
Christian magazines and theological journals, purchase
home courses, and attend
seminars and field trips (including a wonderful
cruise) I see advertized in
those magazines and journals.
In order
to be a pastor, evangelist, or religious teacher you
must not be a so-called
“lay minister” whose religious education consists
solely of Bible study. A lay
Christian is unqualified to preach and teach, and he
or she is both substandard
and illegitimate as a Christian leader. Lay preachers
can also be dangerous
without knowing it because their lack of formal
training in the original languages
and manuscripts tends to make them too dogmatic about
the wording in their
favorite Bible version and too close-minded toward
Christians who hold broader
views. Qualified leaders with theological degrees also
have the ability to
inspire young zealous Christian men and women to work
towards the goal of
acquiring a theological degree and then continually
updating their scholastic
knowledge.
Greetings,
Bible believers, in the name of our Lord and Saviour,
Jesus Christ. Although
the above “findings” of modern theology are laughable,
they are true and they
accurately illustrate how much leeway theologians can
find when they tinker
with the old Bible manuscripts. The QJV actually
exists, but the “King Kong Version”,
of course, is fictitious and is merely used to give
you some new “findings”
that most theologians think should be “temporarily
withheld” until they deem
modern Christianity “more capable of handling advanced
theological truths”.
One who
reads and believes God’s word because he accepts the
KJV’s unique inerrancy as God’s proof that His
inspired Holy Bible really does exist today. A Bible
believer is one who
believes the Book in his hand actually is the inspired
word of God as defined by
God.
A
theologian is anyone who
uses the old manuscripts or any other theological
reference books to “correct”
his Bible. No formal training is necessary to be a
theologian. All you have to
do is...
·
“believe”
that no existing manuscript or Bible version is God’s
inerrant word, which
“belief” is proven when you
·
consult any theological reference book
to
“correct” any Bible version.
THEOLOGY, DOCTRINE, and the
10
th
COMMANDMENT (Covetousness)
When I run across and read news about
the latest “findings” of
theology I am often surprised at how doctrinally
immature theologians are
(whether they are preachers and pewsters with formal
training or no
training)...until I remember that their faithless
unbelief in both God’s power
and in the existence of His inerrant word renders them
blind. A perfect example
is their gross failure to understand the doctrinal
significance of the
difference between the 8th Commandment
(don’t steal) and the 10th
Commandment (don’t covet). I say “gross” failure
because understanding
covetousness is an important, basic, and fundamental
necessity if we are to
ever understand sin, servanthood, rebellion, and the
inner struggle between our
new man and our old man. Let’s break sin down into
it’s
three parts:
·
TEMPTATION:
Temptation is
not a sin; it is a prelude to sin. It is when “Lust A”
makes us want to have or
do something that we shouldn’t. Examples include
wanting to rob God of His
prerogative as Head to decide, or wanting
to commit adultery, or wanting to steal someone’s
wallet when he isn’t looking.
Being tempted by sinful things like that is a normal
part of our Christian
walk, and as long as we resist those temptations we
have avoided sin.
·
COVETING: When
we give in
to temptations by deciding
to commit adultery or
take that wallet our sinless “Lust A” has become “Lust
B”, which is the sin of covetousness. Even though we
have
not touched either the wife or the wallet we
have already sinned because we internalized
normal temptations and
made the sinful act part of who we are. When the
husband walks in before we can
take his wife and his wallet and we therefore abort
our sinful plan it’s too late –
we have already sinned.
The problem with coveting is it’s
hard to visualize, conceptualize, and understand.
That’s why God gave us the law...such as the
8th
Commandment.
·
STEALING:
Stealing is
merely the actual commission of our already-existing
plan/decision to
sin/take/steal what isn’t ours. Stealing is an
undeniable act
that exists so we’ll know what sinners we are and
realize we need to repent.
The first 9 Commandments are rules we are supposed to
follow, and the 8th
Commandment is the key to understanding more than just
the 10th
Commandment.
At first we don’t really understand the
10th
Commandment. Like theologians and other Bible
rejecting Pharisees we tend to
think coveting and stealing are fairly redundant. Then
we realize the first 9
Commandments are all fairly specific actions.
And later we realize the 10th Commandment
is not a specific action,
it’s a foundational concept or an inner evil
characteristic. Foundational
because it is a soul-level
decision that makes harmless Lust A temptation turn
into the evil of Lust B
covetousness...and without that decision to surrender
to Lust B we would never
actually take the wallet or the wife. And covetousness
is a concept
because, when we apply it to the
first nine Commandments we realize covetousness
applies not just to those nine,
it applies to all sins because covetousness is
the head/new man yielding
control to the body/old man; it is Self before God. It
is carnal independence
as opposed to submission and obedience. Covetousness
is us when we do what Self
wants rather than what God
wants. An example:
Lk 22:42
Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this
cup from me: [Christ was sorely tempted to
yield to His own will.]
nevertheless
not my will, but thine, be
done. [But He avoided the
sin of covetousness by not yielding to what
He wanted.]
Why do I not find it surprising that
the Commandment that is the
root of all evil (as in: Lucifer’s coveting /
love of money, which is
what got this war started back in the garden of God)
and is so important to our
understanding of our deceitful and wicked hearts is the very Commandment theology thinks should
not be in the Bible!?
Q
As
interesting and/or horrifying as the latest “findings”
of theology are as
revealed in the two above modern versions, the
harmfulness of the Queen James
and the King Kong versions falls far short of the harm
to Christianity done by
the “more respectable” modern Bible versions such as
the New American Standard,
the New International, the New King James, the English
Standard, etc. Why is
that true? Because no sincere Christian is going to be
affected by the QJV or
KKV – but the errors in the NAS, NIV, etc., have already subverted the faith of multitudes
of sincere Christians by convincing them that the word
of God as He
defines it no longer exists
on this planet. Therefore, informed Bible believers
should not waste precious
time ranting about the QJV and the KKV (the above info
notwithstanding) because
those fringe versions are not a fraction as harmful as
are the “respectable”
modern versions! Think about that the next time
you hear a brother whip out
a theological reference book to “correct” Thus
saith the
Lord.
Go with
God, comrade...and walk circumspectly.