Theology Club: Is MAD doctrine correct?

heir

TOL Subscriber
Are you KJVO? This is another problem that MAD tends to rely on. KJV is not the way to do exegetical work and formulate theology.
I believe the words of the Lord ARE pure words,

Psalms 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

that all scripture IS GIVEN by inspiration of God.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

I believe the Bible means what it says, as it says it and to whom it says it. The word of God is my final authority.

This was one problem I had with 'The Plot' (relied too much on NKJV that fell apart when looking at original languages).
The Plot is not the Bible.
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
This was one problem I had with 'The Plot' (relied too much on NKJV that fell apart when looking at original languages).
The NKJ is corrupted. For one, it changes the faith OF Jesus Christ into faith IN Jesus Christ.

Galatians 2:16 (KJV)

16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Galatians 2:16 (NKJperVersion)

16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
I believe the words of the Lord ARE pure words,

Psalms 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

that all scripture IS GIVEN by inspiration of God.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

I believe the Bible means what it says, as it says it and to whom it says it. The word of God is my final authority.

The Plot is not the Bible.

These are KJV-only proof texts that are misusing Scripture, begging the question/circular reasoning.

I am 100% sure you are wrong about KJVO (there is much evidence against the myth) and MAD.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
The NKJ is corrupted. For one, it changes the faith OF Jesus Christ into faith IN Jesus Christ.

Galatians 2:16 (KJV)

16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Galatians 2:16 (NKJperVersion)

16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.

Again, you display ignorance of translation theory and the nuanced complexity of the genitive (which takes up dozens of pages in Daniel Wallace's intermediate Greek grammar).

KJV alone=Word of God alone is a big mistake when it comes to exegesis.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
He never finished reading The Plot.

Guilty as charged. I am used to reading credible, conservative, evangelical scholarship. It became apparent early on that it used flawed arguments and principles. I am still interested in reading it and do agree with some of it. I like Enyart, but he admits he is not a scholar (being a radio preacher does not make you an expert on all things theological; some of the biggest errors in our circles come from the guys who are self-taught, on TV, above criticism, anti-intellectual, etc...not saying true about Bob).
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
KJV alone=Word of God alone is a big mistake when it comes to exegesis.
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Timothy 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Guilty as charged. I am used to reading credible, conservative, evangelical scholarship. It became apparent early on that it used flawed arguments and principles. I am still interested in reading it and do agree with some of it. I like Enyart, but he admits he is not a scholar (being a radio preacher does not make you an expert on all things theological; some of the biggest errors in our circles come from the guys who are self-taught, on TV, above criticism, anti-intellectual, etc...not saying true about Bob).
Bob is not just a radio preacher; he's an actual pastor.

And who are you to talk about people being anti-intellectual? You're the most anti-intelligent person on TOL.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Timothy 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

These verses are true, but it would be anachronistic to apply them to the KJV (possibly even the later closed canon at the time).

Point? It has nothing to do with KJVO.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
anything, but the word of God, huh rulz?

The Word of God is the authority, but it is not limited to KJV. The Bible is why I reject MAD.

Argumentum ad hominem.

MAD is also more paradigm than proof text.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Bob is not just a radio preacher; he's an actual pastor.

And who are you to talk about people being anti-intellectual? You're the most anti-intelligent person on TOL.

I know that, but he is not an expert on original languages by his own admission. I am suggesting that MAD proof texts fall apart if you know hermeneutics and exegesis that goes beyond KJV, NKJV.
 
Top