'Reverend' and 'Senior Pastor', confused, angry
A 'Reverend' complains:
But I'll tell you this: there are people dear to me who stop short of being willing to study the Bible with me, not because I wouldn't be willing to use a translation they were comfortable with, but because I don't think the KJV is the ONLY place where God's Word is reliable. Isn't that tragic?
No, it's not tragic, 'Reverend', you just ran into some individuals who have been regenerated by the Word and the Spirit, what you would mockingly call "born again Christians." We are rare. You happened to encounter some. They obviously didn't have a lot of confidence you had any understanding that can only come from something called the Holy Spirit if you can't even bring yourself to not fear and revere man more than God and if you can't even discern the pure and whole Word of God, i.e. the Voice of the Shepherd. It would have been good for you if you'd have been able to learn from them. Fat chance, though, eh, 'Reverend'?
A 'Senior Pastor' replies to what his colleague the 'Reverend' wrote:
That is not only ridiculously tragic, it is sinful and needs to be repented of, not just "dropped as a position."
Yes... "How dare you hold to a position I wasn't taught in 'seminary'? Who are you to affect an ability to discern truth? Who are you to affect to fear God and not man? Some men you MUST fear! Ordained clerics! AND IF YOUR SUPERIORS EDUCATED IN ACCREDITED SEMINARIES *TELL YOU* WHAT BIBLE TO ACCEPT YOU DAMN WELL BETTER ACCEPT IT!"
Quick, somebody take this horse whip out of my hand before I get into trouble... Oh, never mind. He just ran away. They always run away! Confront the devil, and he will run...
If you don't accept the received Traditional Text Word of God (and you know the difference) you are man-centered and a man-fearer.
Believing Christians know God preserves His Word, every Word, and that the Traditional Text *received* by believing Christians through history, through persecution, through martyrdom, the very text of God's Word hated and hunted and burned by the Beast of Rome itself shows itself by Church and historical and Spirit-discerned witness to be the very Word of God pure and whole.
+ + +
The subject was raised above regarding KJOs, or Traditional Text in sound translation onlists, believing that one can't be regenerated by a corrupt version.
Doctrine of regeneration and the Holy Spirit being able to work outside of Scripture but ordinarily not and all that aside...
I, for one, don't back down on saying the Traditional Text regenerates, but one has to see it this way: if a person reads the Bible innocently, like a child, not knowing issues of the underlying manuscripts, *but sees the Bible as something that is above them* then they are approaching it in a manner that potentially causes the seed of the Word to fall into fertile ground, even if they are taking in that seed from an imperfect version.
On the other hand, if a person continually reads a 'Bible' thinking it is imperfect, and that man is needed to determine its content, and thus is in effect *seeing the Bible as something that is below them*, i.e. something *they and scholars and man in general determine, ultimately, what it is to be* then that person is in no position to receive even a partial amount of seed (living language) in anything resembling fertile ground. That person is still operating under the internal tyranny of their vanity and worldly pride, and rebellious self-will.
How you approach Scripture effects your inner state. It is like the difference between being God-centered and man-centered.
The dead or sterile orthodoxy, the unbalanced intellectualism (which is even itself shallow), the resort to degrees of sacerdotalism, and the resort to academic man-fearing and respecting of persons and just adopting unbiblical academic models for the faith that we see in Reformed environments these days are a result of these individuals having an approach to Scripture that is not as a child, looking up, recognizing and valuing its authority but looking down on it, as scholars, determining what it will be, treating it as any other document from the past.
I do believe the innocent person described above who sees the Word as something that is above them will eventually gravitate to the pure and whole Traditional Text Word of God. In our era there does not seem to be many choices for that in English, does there?
I would also argue that the Authorized Version is a most unique and remarkable production as a translation and in terms of language itself, *refined* rather assiduously through time, but that is a different subject on top of the subject of the underlying manuscripts.
Want to make academic Christians giggle? say "dark forces of evil"
Part of an email exchange where me and some others (with low opinions of genre fiction in general) were discussing the popularity of the fantasy/quest genre:
Another draw that the fantasy/quest genre has for people is it actually describes our world more honestly, in its own way, that anything else. I mean, in one there are evil Trollucs. Like fiercely evil trolls. Well, when you see M13 gang members, that come from over the horizon and infiltrate communities, spreading violence and fear and bad things, then what the hell are those beings? They are like fierce Trollucs. Or trolls, or whatever. Just say it. They are evil beings. An evil force.
And the big evil that is Islam, rising from wherever it was before its latest rising. The Dark Lord. Want to venture into their grasp any time soon? These are elemental forces and manifestations that humans paint language over to disguise them or make them more complicated than they are. The universal themes in the fantasy genre - especially the depictions of dark forces and evil - bring them to light. Where else is it even accepted to talk of dark forces and evil? Not even in modern day theology.
****** always hit on a good point regarding the Bible that is along these lines too: he kept saying that the Bible is really very simple in terms of good and evil and manifestations of both. I.e. under different names and symbols and words you basically find the devil and his spirit. Just as you see God in so many types and so forth. It can seem confusing unless you step back and see the elemental types in it.
Along the same lines what captures the word image "Dark Lord" better than those fierce, resentful, glowering, turbaned Muslim religious leaders with their dark visage and scowls giving instruction to their followers to do evil all over the world?
People can't see such obvious things. They can't see, first of all, that that is evil manifesting in this world; and even if some can see it they can't speak it without getting a howling tornado of pious outrage and mocking from the world.
At this stage of the game the people that are evil in this world and who support the evil in this world are going to stay evil. God has already gathered the vast majority of His own into His Kingdom. We live in the final uprising of the devil and his legions of followers. God has a small remnant left here. I don't get a sense evangelism is going to change the numbers we see right now. The fulness of time of the evil will reach its apex, and God will once and for all come down on them and usher in the new heavens and earth.
Which way is he wobbling now?
False teachers come in many varieties. Some are more vain than evil. Some more dumb than consciously mischievous. Some more shallow and self-absorbed than in active rebellion to their Creator. It doesn't really matter because when you set yourself up as a teacher and leader of Christians and you are not teaching truth you are just as condemned as if you were playing the devil himself.
Here is some evidence that James White is not really very bright. That he is able to talk out of both sides of his mouth pretty much with no self-awareness he is doing it. That he is capable of veering pretty much any which way depending on how he feels any particular day. Here is a comment from one of his fellow Critical Text scholars that exposes White rather starkly. (Keep in mind White has recently attempted to move to the 'center' between the secular Critical Text scholars in academia and Reformed/Calvinist critics of those scholars and their corrupt manuscripts. The Reformed/Calvinists have recently reached something of a tipping point in cornering Critical Text cheerleaders like White who try to have it both ways: to claim they believe God preserved His Word but then also say that a God-preserved text doesn't exist (but is currently being 'discovered' by 'scholars'); to claim to be 'confessional' but to then disregard the confessions regarding the preservation of Scripture and to pretend that the reformers didn't use the Received Text in direct battle with the Romanists and their corrupt manuscripts which are the same manuscripts used by Critical Text scholars today.)
Here is the other contradiction (White has recently said New Testament Textual Criticism has veered into too secular territory when it attempts to give motives to nameless scribes):
Here's where I do not understand Dr. White at all: he objects that some text-critics are "mind-reading," and "Once you turn to speculation about what someone was thinking was back when, the entire field – including the original words and intentions of the authors -- becomes just so much 'speculation.'"
So assigning motives to nameless copyists is a bad speculative thing, right?
Where is the Dr. White who wrote the following: if you were a scribe who had memorized Eph. 1:2, when writing Colossians 1:2, "You start into verse 2 of chapter 1. "Grace to you and peace . . . ." "Ah, I know this one!" you think to yourself. And so you write out the whole phrase." And, "Perhaps you look back at the original you are copying and notice that it does not say "and the Lord Jesus Christ." "That is strange," you might think. "It /should/ say that! . . . I'll fix it." (see KJV-Only Controversy, p. 38.)
On pages 43-46, Dr. White states that the Byzantine Text "gives evidence of what might be called the 'expansion of piety.' That is, additions have been made to the text that flow from a desire to protect and reverence divine truths." He restates this on p. 196: "The later manuscripts show evidence of the "expansion of piety" that flowed from the understandable desire to maintain respect and reverence for the Lord Jesus." This concern to show proper reverence "was shared by a scribe working on a manuscript of the New Testament."
On p. 167, after stating that KJV-Onlyists object to the reading "Isaiah the prophet" in Mark 1:2 on the grounds that Mark /couldn't/ have written that because it would be a mistake, Dr. White writes, "It is quite certain that some scribes early on in the transmission of the text of the New Testament had the very same thought." No mind-reading here! And commenting on Luke 2:7, Dr. White wrote, "A scribe, undoubtedly zealous for orthodox doctrine," inserted the word "firstborn." No mind-reading here! I don't see how any consistency can be salvaged from a comparison of Dr. White's statement on his blog and the statements in his book. Perhaps he could clarify this.
Notice White is also a typical doctrinal 'wobbly.' "Hey, it looks like James White is beginning to see the truth! Oh, no, now he is mocking the Traditional Text that Christians gave their lives to defend. Oh, now he is separating from the secular Critical Text establishment! No, he's back to mocking 'Truly Reformed' who hold to a God-preserved, received Traditional Text." On and on. The vain, juvenile, and proud unregenerate will wobble all over the place (usually in the direction that will give them the most attention that particular day). In White's case, though, it's also his need to maneuver and to shore up his quickly eroding stronghold built on sand.
These people - Critical Text scholars - are more inane than angry Darwinians.
A flea feeding off the ass of an Erasmus or Beza had more understanding of biblical texts - and what they actually are and are for - than a conference room full of these pretentious imbeciles.
Funny to see the crossfire commence on James White as he stakes out his new in-between position. In-between the inane, secular, 'Christian' academy and the pure and whole Traditional Text Word of God (in English the Authorized, King James, Version) as defended and received by God's unashamed remnant in all eras of the history of redemption.
Darwinians laugh at us; atheists laugh at us; Critical Text scholars laugh at us; the world laughs at us... It's good to be laughed at by such people.
I don't think the devil is laughing at us, though. As a foe defeated by our King he knows better.
The viciousness, you'll get worse when Jesus returns
It's occurred to me why I so like to delve into the history of the Reformation and the doctrinal battles and so on. It's because it is spiritual warfare that broke out into visible history in a big way. But the fact alone that it involves spiritual warfare, and hence the 'sides' involved in spiritual warfare is what draws my interest. This also explains my viciousness on Plain Path Puritan. The subjects I write about are subjects of spiritual warfare, and in that realm you make no compromises and give no quarter. All you have to do is imagine yourself in hell and sitting next to you are the people whose opinion you 'feared' or were too ashamed to confront and separate yourself from, and now you see they are either pure grinning devils laughing at you or are soulless zombies of one sort or another. "I was listening to them? I was afraid of them? I conformed to their demands?"
James White's ever-descending flame-out
A necessary turning point has arrived in the tactical approach of representative Critical Text scholar James White in his endeavor to defend the indefensible. Having been exposed by conservative, unashamed Bible-believing Christians in his own camp (White is a self-identified Reformed Christian, Baptist in his case) he is now busily staking out new ground between his camp of shallow Critical Text academics (which he is pretending to turn against now) and what he disdains as unashamed Bible-believing Christians: the 'Truly Reformed' or true believers, Christians who see Scripture as something that is above us and that God has preserved *supernaturally* in the Traditional Masoretic/Received Text, always available, which has the authority of God in it, the text that the Papists despise and that the liberal academic Protestant 'christians' despise, and that our brothers and sisters in all eras of the history of redemption have defended and handed down against vicious persecution from the world and the devil.
In other words: White can no longer run interference for and defend his own camp, so he is now staking out a position between the secular scholars and the true believers (White and the world in general consider the phrase 'true believer' to be something that is embarrassing and something you call a person when you want to mock them, but of course to God's remnant being true believers is just what we are). Good luck, Mr. White. You couldn't have just come over to the side of God's remnant though? Apparently that is too much to ask a person still under the tyranny of his vanity, worldly pride, and too-pleasurable rebellious self-will who demands to dictate to God what His Word is.
By the way: why do Papists and atheist academics hate the God-preserved Masoretic/Received text? Because it carries the authority of God in it. When people fear and revere God they cease to fear and revere man. The world and the system of the Beast need people to fear and revere man and the word of man. They know when they are able to replace the God-preserved text with the ever-changing text of the scholars, full of holes and corruptions, then there is nothing for people to fear and revere *other than* the word and authority of man.
Regeneration is the main thing
Look at how this paedo-baptist leaves out regeneration in his outline on paedo-baptism.
The first response to him innocently points this out (God bless her, though I suspect she is so engrafted into the culture of man-fearing that site and the churches of the people who populate that site promote that she will be easily put off from what the Spirit is telling her).
Notice also how the guy who wrote the initial post changes a basic Reformed understanding of the faith: he writes: "Grace precedes faith." The usual formula is: "Regeneration precedes faith." The change is both unconscious and intentional on his part. He can't speak of regeneration because it cuts the legs out from under his sacerdotalism (and it also convicts his man-fearing).
Regeneration is the main thing. It is what makes true believers. It is what happens to God's own. The problem with discussing it is you are committing the greatest supposed crime in the village of morality where most Christians reside by even mentioning regeneration. It stings them simply because they are currently unregenerate; and because they are nominal Christians it convicts them even more as man-fearing and proud unregenerate. There are innocent unregenerate human beings, and there are the proud unregenerate. The latter make up most of the leadership of so-called 'churches' as well as most of their congregations.
Regenerate Christians don't baptize babies because we know what baptism is: it is regeneration by the Word and the Spirit. It is not ritual. Ritual water babtism is a visual performance signifying nothing to an infant, and very little to an already regenerated by the Word and Spirit believer. The Bible is not clear on so-called 'sacraments' because they are not part of the faith. They are what the unregenerate use to put people into the bondage of the system of the Beast.
Real Christians, Christians regenerated by the Word and the Spirit, must commit themselves to no longer fearing upsetting these unregenerate, prideful fools who self-identify as Christian. Give them the Word of God *straight.* Show no fear in *upsetting* their precious selves. Yes they will ban you from their environments, in cyberspace and elsewhere, but so what. No real Christian desires to be in such sick environments.
Give them the Word of God, over and over.
One can't regenerate oneself or anyone else, but the pure and whole Word of God is the active agent when it does happen. Give the currently unregenerate the external shock of the living, quickening Word of God. Do it through all their mocking, spitting, kicking, and accusing. Then don't think you can make the planted seed grow, only God can do that.
God has marked the false teachers in our midst
Listen. There are filthy, satanic Jesuits parading around as Reformed Christians. How do you know them?
Well, what does God do to false teachers? I'll tell you what God does to false teachers: He marks them.
God marks false teachers.
How do you spot the false teachers self-identifying as Calvinst/Reformed today?
They follow the teachings of Westcott and Hort. And they can't help but follow the teachings of Westcott and Hort. God decrees that they follow such satanic teaching. They are false teachers.
You can't follow the teachings of Westcott and Hort and be a Reformed Christian. Period.
You can't be liberal on the most foundational thing for a Christian, the very Word of God, and be Reformed.
What's more, if you hold to the teachings of spotted Westcott and spotted Hort and you accept their filthy, corrupt 'bibles' you simply do not have the Spirit of Christ in you. You have no discernment that can only come from the Holy Spirit. You are not regenerated by the Word and the Spirit. You are not born again.
And when you mock believers who are able to discern the pure and whole Word of God (who know the voice of the Shepherd) and who value that pure and whole Word of God, preserved supernaturally by God, and you mock the Bible Christians value and have given their lives in defense of throughout the history of redemption you are no more a Christian than any mocking atheist.
Again, you can't hold to the teachings of Westcott and Hort and be a Reformed Christian any more than you can hold to the teachings of Charles Finney and be a Reformed Christian.
God has marked the false teachers in our midst: they follow the teaching and promote the filthy, poisonous, satanic 'bibles' of Westcott and Hort.
May they receive their just reward.
Man-fearers, respecters of persons, ashamed of the name of Christ
Oh, Mr. Clark ['Dr.' R. Scott Clark of Westminster Seminary California]. You give yourself away. You delete my comment that says “Jesus saves” because it embarasses you in the presence of the world [in this case a representative of a publishing house]. You are truly an *academic* Reformed Chrsitian. I.e. an unregenerate man-fearer and respecter of persons. Perhaps also you see potential $$$ in getting published by Wiley and Sons.
This publisher, Wiley and Sons, is currently in the news for it's politically correct actions in censoring a work on Christianity due to complaints by liberals and muslims. I wrote a response to their representative who posted on Clark's blog. Clark deleted it. It was a very Christian response (I referenced the name Jesus which causes liberal academic self-identified Reformed Christians to turn red in the face when in the presence of the world, i.e. when it means something). Clark is also like all academics a respecter of persons. A representative of a publishing house is worth more than a lowly Christian every time in Clark's ridiculous, scared world.
Note also that Clark's colleague, Michael Horton, has recently written a book where he refused to sound like a Christian for fear of embarrassing himself in the face of liberal academics.
Both Clark and Horton, it goes without saying, despite their claims to be Reformed and confessional, mock the Reformation and the reformers and theologians such as Turretin and Owen and hold to the teachings of liberal, unbelieving scholars like Westcott and Hort on the most foundational thing for a Christian, the received, pure and whole Word of God.
And notice no criticism dents these fools. They've got books to publish, and "true believers" to mock.
Update: Clark writes: "I deleted your comment not because you said that Jesus saves. I deleted your comment because you are being rude. The doctrine of justification is not justification for being an ass.
Keep it up and I’ll ban you from the HB."
"Ban me. You’re not a Christian when you make excuses for deleting statements of Christians who face up to the Satanic forces of the world. You are no Christian. You’re ashamed of the name Jesus. You are a respecter of persons like all fools in academia. You are a liberal academic who fears man more than you fear God. Good riddance, fool."
We are not doing these boys any favors by not talking in terms of regeneration and not hitting them on their acceptance of the devil's Alexandrian manuscripts and the corrupt versions based on them. The fact that they have no discernment or defense when in their ridiculous 'seminaries' against their liberal professors who programed all this into them, along with the heavy dose those same liberal professors give them of demanding they fear man and the authority of man and not God, means they entered those ridiculous institutions without having been born again. Now they put themselves as authorities on the Word of God and Christianity in general. Again, we are doing these fools no favors by being diplomatic towards them and attempting to not 'upset' their precious self-estimates and views of themselves. They are as lost as any mocking atheist. Give them the truth boldly. Give them the Word of God boldly. Tell them to their face that when you hold to corrupt manuscripts for the sole benefit of being able to *look down* on God's Word and dictate to it what it will be you are unregenerate. You don't value the Word of God as something above you. You are under the tyranny of your vanity, your worldly pride, and your rebellious self-will. Now it is high time to awake out of sleep.
The political left and anti-Christ
The moronic and evil leftwing news editors at yahoo.com had a headline up (for about three minutes) suggesting the ferocity of the bush fires in Australia are due to "climate change."
Here is the truth.
If you don't care to go to the link it describes how leftwing academics and "Green" politicians allowed the areas now burning to build up fuel, against all the advice of the people who have taken care of it.
The political left is part of the worldwide anti-Christ uprising. May they get their just reward and burn in hell for eternity. I am serious and know what I say when I write that. May they all burn in hell for eternity.
James White's Muslim argument
James White uses the argument that one must accept the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts so as not to be a hypocrite when telling the Muslims their own book the Koran is corrupt. This not only exposes White and all Critical Text scholars as putting the Word of God at the same level of any other book (Koran, Tacitus, etc.), but it shows how White is ashamed of the supernatural. Just like a Christian who adopts theistic evolution because he is ashamed of the supernaturalism that is inherent in a six day creation White is ashamed of the supernaturalism inherent in a God-preserved text. White also exposes himself as not believing in the uniqueness of Christianity and the Word of God. White also shows that he has no faith in the power of the Word of God delivered boldly into the face of a mocking and accusing fallen humanity.
James White is schooled by a student and melts down
James White is currently a mess. He and his Egyptian dung beetle 'bibles' (the furry Westcott and Hort modern versions based on the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts so loved by Jesuits and academic Protestants) have been exposed to such a degree now that the pushers of them can no longer get away with defending them with their usual sophistic and dishonest methods. And they are now taking fire from conservative Reformed Christians.
God's own know the voice of the Shepherd, and God's own fear God and not man. God's own also know where authority is, and it's not in the word of man. It is in the pure and whole Traditional Text (Masoretic Hebrew/Received Text Greek) Word of God, in English the Authorized - King James - Version. Fear God, it is the beginning of wisdom.
And give the Bible-corrupters like James White no quarter. Jesus won't.
The power of biblical doctrine
Having said what I said [in an email, talking about how whole works of theology are not necessarily the best way to get biblical doctrine, i.e. you get it from a thousand different sources], there is real power in apostolic biblical doctrine, and in theologians who express it in an on-the-mark way.
Take sola Scriptura. That is the biblical teaching to fear God and not man. Fear/revere God alone, not the word or opinions or authority of man. That is foundational and powerful.
Sola fide. Justification by faith alone. That means don't rely on your own works to save yourself. That is vain. Don't self-justify yourself. In the big sense as well as in the all the little acts we engage in self-justification.
Christ alone. One Mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ. This keeps us out of the bondage to the General Law, the system of the Beast.
Grace alone. Sola gratia. This has to do with seeing God's will vs. self-will. Real will vs. self-will. When we realize we have nothing and could not have awakened to truth except via God's grace alone we start to see our own so-called 'freedom' for what it is: bondage to the Kingdom of Death. Vanity, worldly pride, rebellious self-will. False personality. Imaginary 'I'.
To the glory of God alone. This is a deep realization. We're created in the image of God, but everything in the plan of God is to glorify God. Since God is infinitely good (and everything else) and infinitely higher than us (I'm rambling on this one I admit) it means when we use the glory of God as our goal and our focus it draws everything upward in a way that makes everything to be in harmony and to be right.
Those are the five solas, and they are the heart of the biblical message.
The five points of Calvinism are called the doctrines of grace, and I describe those as the sort of 'chains' of redemption that when accepted it reorientates us internally from being man-centered to being God-centered.
Then classical Covenant - Federal - Theology is the overall arching Plan of Redemption from eternity to eternity.
All this is powerful and when in understanding is the armor of God itself.
You get it all from classic sources, when you do get it. And it is necessary. Along with the complete readings of the Bible itself.
Read slowly, read carefully, come out of the darkness
Here is a quote from a debate about church polity and how many 'offices' there should be in a church:
The real answer (I believe). . .is that there are respected exegetes and theologians who teach a three-office view and there are respected exegetes and theologians who teach a two-office view.
Anyone who believes that they can definitively show from Scripture the three- or two-office view to the exclusion of the other is fooling himself. . .this is not a battle that will be "won" this side of glory.
Now substitute 'credo' baptism and 'paedo' baptism for 'three-office view' and 'two-office view'; then also substitute all the different views on the so-called Lord's Supper and insert them into the same quote above.
Why are these matters of ecclesiology and sacramentology not clear in Scripture? Because God intentionally made them not clear in Scripture.
Man and the world sees these issues as their way to insert the fear of man and to insert worldliness into the Church of which Christ is King. The Bible tells them otherwise. But you can't keep a good unregenerate fool down. Fools want worldly power, in all areas of life, including what they deem to be 'churches.'
Are you a born again (by the Word and the Spirit) Christian? Then you are a prophet, a priest, and a king. When some 'pastor' or 'minister' or 'reverend' or 'elder' - or worldly follower of such people, i.e. man-fearers - mock that reality and tell you differently know you are in the presence of an unregenerate fool, and act accordingly.
God kept such issues unclear in Scripture because in the history of redemption different approaches are needed in different eras. In this era the devil has a stranglehold on the so-called 'churches.' They've replaced the Word of God itself with the word of man (they've replaced the God-preserved Masoretic and Received Text with the Westcott and Hort Egyptian scarab beetle known as the Alexandrian texts favored by the Vatican and all heretics since apostolic times), and God's elect are kept out so that the devil's ministers can lord it over the currently unregenerate and keep the Word and the Spirit away from them to play for time - the only tactic, vain though it is, available to them - until they and their father the devil receive their long-due reward.
* * *
I forgot to mention that the Bible is not even clear on the Sabbath. When the Bible is not dogmatically clear on something it is intentionally not clear on it. Don't fear the word of man, fear the Word of God. Fear God, it is the beginning of wisdom.