What may dwell within? Why is it that so many would have a spiritual takeover from God one minute and still want to maintain free will in the next? Why is there an inconsistency in teaching how the Spirit dwells within us (we so much want a physical presence)? We are told that God does not dwell with man yet we would still have it to be so.
For My people have committed two evils: they have forsaken Me, the fountain of living waters, and hewn themselves cisterns, broken cisterns that can hold no water. (Jeremiah 2:13)
On Halloween we learned of an assembly whose leader was tossing copies of the scriptures into a fire. “Marc Grizzard, of Amazing Grace Baptist Church in Canton, North Carolina, says that the first King James translation of the Bible is the only true declaration of God’s word and that all others are ‘satanic.'”
An old fellow once said of the KJV, “If it was good enough for Moses, it’s good enough for me!” Inconsistency is just everywhere.
Too bad Jeremiah’s broken cisterns won’t hold any water, we might use it to douse that fire. Let us pity poor Mr. Grizzard and his like who, try though they may, cannot so much as find the very assembly they attend, a Baptist church, ever mentioned in a KJV or in any of the versions these folks may have relegated to the flames. Yet he has made a boast to its truth and superiority, while no attention apparently is being paid to what is actually found on the printed page.
As noted: you will not find the word Baptist in the plural in any translation. The only person ever called a Baptist in any Bible (and that would of course be John THE Baptist), said he was to be going out of business soon. According to what I read, it happened just like he had said. As has also been posted here previously, the Apostle Paul said John the Immerser (let’s coin a word shall we?) had finished his course; and you will not find a church, some other organization that he was head over, not a store or a mission or anything else bearing his nickname inÂ any Bible.
You will not find anyone ever laying any claim in any way to his mantle in all of history until you reach the 17th Century. That would be about the same time the KJV first appeared. And if you do not call upon John for your inspiration, then why would you wear the moniker he alone was called by? Jesus said, I will build my church and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. We have never seen or read of “Ed the Baptist” or “Shirley the Baptist,” have we? Perhaps it is that Baptists in North Carolina do not wish to be called such or as the Immerser Church or Baptist Christians (other unknown forms)? Paul was told to get up and be immersed, to wash away (your) sins, calling upon the name of the Lord. These folks may also miss the intent of the second part of that charge where Paul was to be calling upon the name of the Lord. Then again, most Baptists teach that sins are remitted prior to immersion, upon repentance and being overwhelmed by the Holy Spirit. And that immersion only acts to bring you into fellowship within the assembly. Many today don’t concern themselves with immersion at all, though they still cling to the name. Try finding any of that in the Old King James or anywhere else in any version of God’s Book. Perhaps they should appeal to Shakespeare concerning names, rather than to Jesus. They might read Brent’s recent post on what Martin Luther said of those who would wear his name.
Unfortunately, I suspect that this gentleman will still have full pews in front of him tomorrow morning. This is a popular form of delusion. And he is not the only nut on the tree.
I don’t care a thing for Baptist teaching, as I can’t find either it or them in the NT. And I can’t find any Mormons there, not Methodists or Episcopalians, to name but a few. I do find believers and disciples, who were called Christians. And it is the Bible, any Bible worth having, which defines just exactly who is a Christian and how they got to be called that. It doesn’t say a thing about Baptists or the rest. It lists only churches or assemblies of Jesus Christ (who is God); but nobody else’s name ever made the cut.
I don’t have a thing against the KJV, which does contain the truth and in an easy enough form that millions have found it within its pages. I can certainly name a few versions that I would suggest are clearly inferior to it. I can also name some that are its equal, and that others would argue are superior to it. No matter which end of the rope you hold onto, no one should suggest that it (or any of the rest) is the only heaven approved version of God’s Word.
The question remains — can you take up a version, any version whether old, new, or not so new of the Word of God, read it and study it to the salvation of your own soul? Countless thousands have done so. If you can, then that is good. And that version is a good one. If you can’t understand what you read, like the eunuch of old, you may need a teacher, or you may need to find a more readily understood version of the Gospel. That would not be so good. And it may be time for you to trade up and do exactly that. If you are just reading without ever bothering to stop to think while humming softly Do You Know My Jesus, all the while never actually paying any mind to what has been commanded; then you may one day end up feeling the heat from your very own fire. That would also not be good. At that point it will not matter which version you made your stand upon, which you may have thrown in a fire, which you may have clutched to your side, or which you might have held aloft in the air wringing with emotion and great enthusiasm. The Bible is from one end to the other a book of DOING. If you don’t do what God has said; it simply won’t matter what version you believe is the one that God approved.