Monday, December 25, 2006
Monday, December 18, 2006
The Most Important Lessons I have Learned While at College
Hey Everybody!
Seeing that I am about head off to my last final of the semester, and that I have only one more (!) semester to go, I think it's a good idea to write down the most important life lessons that I have learned at college. These are ten life lessons that I know will help me later on in life
1. God will ALWAYS provide all that you need. For those of you who don't know my testimony, I grew up in a home with Christian parents who demonstrated Christ to me and my siblings. Starting in kindergarten, and continuing through twelfth grade, I attended the private Christian School run by the church that my father pastors. When it came time to choose a college, I prayed to the Lord that I would only be accepted into the college that He wanted me to attend. I applied to two colleges. The University that I attend accepted me, while the other school I applied to wait listed me. I took that as a sign that I was to attend the college, so I did, and after 3 1/2 years here, I am confident I made the right decision.
Now, the college I attend is a public university in the Northeast. I come from an Evangelical Christian home. My family is morally, socially, and politically conservative. My campus is NOT. In fact, it's claim to fame is Spring Weekend, when the vast majority of the students get hammered, and start riots. It's also ranked as one of the most gay-friendly campuses in the country. As I told some people, going to college from my home was like traveling from Jerusalem to a mixture of Babylon, Ancient Rome and Sodom. (You get the picture!)
I was, and still am, an outspoken person when it comes to my faith in Jesus. I would, and still do on occasion, walk around my campus singing old hymns and gospel music at the top of my lungs while on my way to class in the morning. Many of my floormates were incredibly hostile to me and my faith in Jesus. A group of them tried everything they could to destroy me, including lying about me and vandalizing my property, but by the grace of God, I was able to show love to these young men, and God is drawing some of them to Him. There were times when I was sorely tempted to smash some people's faces in, but instead I went to the Lord in prayer, and He gave me the strength and grace that I needed to go through.
2 While God will provide all that You need, He will not always provide all that you want. There are certain things that I have wanted that God has said no to because they were not and are not in His plan for my life. While this lesson has been painful at times, I am happy because learning these lessons now is better than learning them later
3 Listen to your parents- especially if you have parents who are saved- Chances are they will probably be right. I am so grateful that Mom and Dad taught me about the Lord, because I was able to rely on my relationship with Him when times got tough. I am also thankful for the standards that Dad and Mom put up. I have never been to a college party in my 3 1/2 years because my parent's standards have become my own in many situations. Actually the standards are not my parent's or mine, but the Lord's. My Parents taught me well. I just hope that I can be as good a parent to my children (Should the Lord tarry) when I get married and have a family
4 I went to college with the delusion that all Conservative Republicans (correction-most Republicans) were Godly people who loved Jesus and had high moral standards and that most Democrats were evil, tree worshiping hippies who hated God and had no moral standards. College very quickly removed that idea from my head. I have met many a dedicated Christians who happen to be Democrats and have met many Republicans who are mean, nasty vile people who do not show the love of Jesus I guess the life lesson I learned was that Conservative Republican does not equal righteous, and Liberal Democrat does not equal evil necessarily. Yes I have met some Liberals who hate God and his standards, but I've also met some who truly love the Lord and dont agree with the Liberal posittions on issues like abortion and gay marriage
5 The last important lesson I have learned at college is the importance of Christian fellowship. When I was attending the Christian High School I did nt have many friends my age who were following the Lord, but it was ok because I had my parents and the adults at my church there to encourage me to do what is right. When I got to college and I was the only Christain on my floor and one of two Christians that I knew in my dorm, it was lonely until I went to the Campus Crusade meeting and met others who were following God. The brothers and sisters at Crusade were a tremendous blessing to me and they were in many ways my lifeline as the provided much of the on-campus support that I needed in my walk. Just getting to know these folks and knowinng that I was not alone was a huge encouragement to me.
These are the five major life lesson sthat I have learned while I have been at collge. I know that there are other lessons that God will have to teach me. My prayer is that I learn them quickly and that He teaches me me all that I need to know in His time
Seeing that I am about head off to my last final of the semester, and that I have only one more (!) semester to go, I think it's a good idea to write down the most important life lessons that I have learned at college. These are ten life lessons that I know will help me later on in life
1. God will ALWAYS provide all that you need. For those of you who don't know my testimony, I grew up in a home with Christian parents who demonstrated Christ to me and my siblings. Starting in kindergarten, and continuing through twelfth grade, I attended the private Christian School run by the church that my father pastors. When it came time to choose a college, I prayed to the Lord that I would only be accepted into the college that He wanted me to attend. I applied to two colleges. The University that I attend accepted me, while the other school I applied to wait listed me. I took that as a sign that I was to attend the college, so I did, and after 3 1/2 years here, I am confident I made the right decision.
Now, the college I attend is a public university in the Northeast. I come from an Evangelical Christian home. My family is morally, socially, and politically conservative. My campus is NOT. In fact, it's claim to fame is Spring Weekend, when the vast majority of the students get hammered, and start riots. It's also ranked as one of the most gay-friendly campuses in the country. As I told some people, going to college from my home was like traveling from Jerusalem to a mixture of Babylon, Ancient Rome and Sodom. (You get the picture!)
I was, and still am, an outspoken person when it comes to my faith in Jesus. I would, and still do on occasion, walk around my campus singing old hymns and gospel music at the top of my lungs while on my way to class in the morning. Many of my floormates were incredibly hostile to me and my faith in Jesus. A group of them tried everything they could to destroy me, including lying about me and vandalizing my property, but by the grace of God, I was able to show love to these young men, and God is drawing some of them to Him. There were times when I was sorely tempted to smash some people's faces in, but instead I went to the Lord in prayer, and He gave me the strength and grace that I needed to go through.
2 While God will provide all that You need, He will not always provide all that you want. There are certain things that I have wanted that God has said no to because they were not and are not in His plan for my life. While this lesson has been painful at times, I am happy because learning these lessons now is better than learning them later
3 Listen to your parents- especially if you have parents who are saved- Chances are they will probably be right. I am so grateful that Mom and Dad taught me about the Lord, because I was able to rely on my relationship with Him when times got tough. I am also thankful for the standards that Dad and Mom put up. I have never been to a college party in my 3 1/2 years because my parent's standards have become my own in many situations. Actually the standards are not my parent's or mine, but the Lord's. My Parents taught me well. I just hope that I can be as good a parent to my children (Should the Lord tarry) when I get married and have a family
4 I went to college with the delusion that all Conservative Republicans (correction-most Republicans) were Godly people who loved Jesus and had high moral standards and that most Democrats were evil, tree worshiping hippies who hated God and had no moral standards. College very quickly removed that idea from my head. I have met many a dedicated Christians who happen to be Democrats and have met many Republicans who are mean, nasty vile people who do not show the love of Jesus I guess the life lesson I learned was that Conservative Republican does not equal righteous, and Liberal Democrat does not equal evil necessarily. Yes I have met some Liberals who hate God and his standards, but I've also met some who truly love the Lord and dont agree with the Liberal posittions on issues like abortion and gay marriage
5 The last important lesson I have learned at college is the importance of Christian fellowship. When I was attending the Christian High School I did nt have many friends my age who were following the Lord, but it was ok because I had my parents and the adults at my church there to encourage me to do what is right. When I got to college and I was the only Christain on my floor and one of two Christians that I knew in my dorm, it was lonely until I went to the Campus Crusade meeting and met others who were following God. The brothers and sisters at Crusade were a tremendous blessing to me and they were in many ways my lifeline as the provided much of the on-campus support that I needed in my walk. Just getting to know these folks and knowinng that I was not alone was a huge encouragement to me.
These are the five major life lesson sthat I have learned while I have been at collge. I know that there are other lessons that God will have to teach me. My prayer is that I learn them quickly and that He teaches me me all that I need to know in His time
Saturday, December 09, 2006
Final Thoughts on KJV vs NIV
I was talking to a few of my friends here at college on the issues that were discussed in my last post a few days ago and I realized that I was not very clear in what I wanted to say, so here are my modifications. To refresh your (and my) memory, the verses we were discussing:
In the KJV
Matthew 5:31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
In the NIV
31"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.'32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.
The difference in these two passages is the translation of the Greek word Porneia. The King James Version translates Porneia as fornication, the NIV translates porneia as marital infidelity.
The Strong's concordance definition of Porneia is as follows:
G4202
πορνεία
porneia
por-ni'-ah
From G4203; harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively idolatry: - fornication.
This is the point where I was unclear, so allow me to clarify: I believe that while the word porneia can mean "Marital Infidelity or Unfaithfulness" (adultery), in the context of the Jewish law, and the rest of the what the Word says about divorce and remarriage, porneia in this setting is refering to premarital sexual activity, and it does not in this case refer to adultery.
Allow me to explain why.
A footnote in my friend's NIV Study Bible states that marital infidelity was a lifestyle of immoral sexual behavior after the marriage. The problem with that is the book of Hosea. Hosea, an OT prophet, was told by God to marry a prostitute. After they were married, Mrs Hosea continued her prostitution, and Hosea was not allowed to divorce her. God said that he had to take her back every time. Now I realize that God was using Hosea to make a point about the Isrealites' unfaithfulness to God, but if anyone should have been allowed to divorce someone based on marital infidelity, it should have been Hosea.
Secondly, Jesus says in Mark 10 and in Luke 16 that divorce and remarriage is a sin and there are no caveats in either of these two passages
This is why I have said that the translators of the NIV have mistranslated the word porneia in this Scripture
As to the comment that people can use this Scripture to defend remarriage after a divorce being baloney, I know people who have done exactly that. They have tried to justify remarriage after a divorce by using this exact Scripture-They failed of course, but this was the Scripture they quoted.
Also allow me to be clear on two more things
One. While I lean towards KJV only, (More and More as I have looked into the thing I am discussing) I am not going to sit here and say that the KJV is the only valid English translation, because I know people who are following God and are commited to Jesus who came to Christ while reading the NIV Bible. God can use whatever and whoever he wants to fulfill His purposes
Two. I am not trying to start a war, or to cause any conflict with these posts. I just simply want to have a lively discussion about all of this, because these are issues we all must think about
In the KJV
Matthew 5:31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
In the NIV
31"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.'32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.
The difference in these two passages is the translation of the Greek word Porneia. The King James Version translates Porneia as fornication, the NIV translates porneia as marital infidelity.
The Strong's concordance definition of Porneia is as follows:
G4202
πορνεία
porneia
por-ni'-ah
From G4203; harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively idolatry: - fornication.
This is the point where I was unclear, so allow me to clarify: I believe that while the word porneia can mean "Marital Infidelity or Unfaithfulness" (adultery), in the context of the Jewish law, and the rest of the what the Word says about divorce and remarriage, porneia in this setting is refering to premarital sexual activity, and it does not in this case refer to adultery.
Allow me to explain why.
A footnote in my friend's NIV Study Bible states that marital infidelity was a lifestyle of immoral sexual behavior after the marriage. The problem with that is the book of Hosea. Hosea, an OT prophet, was told by God to marry a prostitute. After they were married, Mrs Hosea continued her prostitution, and Hosea was not allowed to divorce her. God said that he had to take her back every time. Now I realize that God was using Hosea to make a point about the Isrealites' unfaithfulness to God, but if anyone should have been allowed to divorce someone based on marital infidelity, it should have been Hosea.
Secondly, Jesus says in Mark 10 and in Luke 16 that divorce and remarriage is a sin and there are no caveats in either of these two passages
This is why I have said that the translators of the NIV have mistranslated the word porneia in this Scripture
As to the comment that people can use this Scripture to defend remarriage after a divorce being baloney, I know people who have done exactly that. They have tried to justify remarriage after a divorce by using this exact Scripture-They failed of course, but this was the Scripture they quoted.
Also allow me to be clear on two more things
One. While I lean towards KJV only, (More and More as I have looked into the thing I am discussing) I am not going to sit here and say that the KJV is the only valid English translation, because I know people who are following God and are commited to Jesus who came to Christ while reading the NIV Bible. God can use whatever and whoever he wants to fulfill His purposes
Two. I am not trying to start a war, or to cause any conflict with these posts. I just simply want to have a lively discussion about all of this, because these are issues we all must think about
Sunday, December 03, 2006
KJV and NIV continued
I was not planning to respond to Physics Geek's criticism of my position on the issue of Bible translations However, I have decided to respond now for two reasons. One, I have thought things through a little more. And secondly, I have found more things in the NIV that I have serious issue with.
First though, My response to Geek's criticism.
First of all, I recognize that the King James Version of the Scriptures is a translation. What sets the King James apart from previous English translations is that it went back to the Original Greek and Hebrew texts, while the Wycliffe and Geneva Bibles were translated from the Latin Vulgate, not the Original Greek and Hebrew.
I also have never said that God cannot use the NIV or any other translation, because clearly He can, because He is sovereign.
HOWEVER, I firmly believe that the KJV is stronger on matters of theological doctrinal significance, as I outlined in my previous post on this issue.
Mr Geek did point out one Scripture where the KJV seems to obscure Paul's meaning- Galatians 5:12. However, It would seem to me that the doctrine of the Trinity or the issue which I will discuss momentarily are more theologically, doctrinally significant than whether or not Paul was calling for the castration of those who were preaching that one must be circumcised in order to be saved. Notice that Paul does not say that this was God's wish. Instead he says that it was His wish because he was frustrated that some in the Galatian church were listening to them instead of to the right doctrines that Paul was preaching.
Ok onto more of my beef with the NIV
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus has this to say regarding the issue of divorce and remarriage
In the KJV, Jesus says this:
Matthew 5:31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
The NIV says it this way
Matthew 5:31 It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.
5:32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.
The difference? "saving for the cause of fornication", vs "except for marital unfaithfulness"
Now this is extremly significant, and I'm going to get to why in a minute, so bear with me. Before we get into why this is extremely important, lets take a look at the Greek word for "Fornication" and its definition
The definitions are from the Strong's concordance
FORNICATION
G4202
πορνεία
porneia
por-ni'-ah
From G4203; harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively idolatry: - fornication.
I looked up G4203
G4203
πορνεύω
porneuō
porn-yoo'-o
From G4204; to act the harlot, that is, (literally) indulge unlawful lust (of either sex), or (figuratively) practise idolatry: - commit (fornication).
From these two defintions we see that the Greek word pornia and its related words do not simply deal with adultery, but indeed with all forms of immoral sexual acts, including, incest, adultery, homosexuality, and fornication.
Fornication's basic defintion is sex between two people who are not married to each other. While adultery is a form of fornication, not all fornication is adultery.
Now why is all of this significant?
Because the NIV gives people an excuse for divorce and remarriage, which the Bible calls adultery. People can use this Scripture, with the caveat "marital infidelity", to say that God allows divorce and remarriage, which is not true. Jesus says in multiple passages in the Gospels (Matthew 5:31-32, Matthew 19:9, Mark 10:11-12, Luke 16:18) that remarriage after a divorce while the divorced spouse is still alive is adultery against that spouse.
In Mark 1, and Luke 16, there is no caveat regarding fornication, but in both Mattew 5 and Matthew 19, there is this caveat regarding fornication. Why is this caveat there?
Matthew was the Gospel written for a primarily Jewish audience. This is why the Gospel Matthew begins by tracing Jesus' lineage back to King David, and back to Abraham. It is also why Matthew says "This happened to fulfill Scripture" at least 14 times in his Gospel. He is trying to convince the Jews that Jesus is their Messiah.
In Jewish law regarding marriage, the engagment was a very serious thing. One could not break off the engagement, unless there was evidence of fornication (ie, pregancy. This is why Joseph was going to end the engagement with Mary before God spoke to him). The Jewish Law considered the breaking of the engagement to be divorce even though the engaged couple was not yet married. This is why Jesus says to His Jewish audience that premarital fornication, not adultery or "marital infidelity" was a valid reason for divorce.
People have used the this caveat found in Matthew 5 and Mathew 19 to justify sin, and the NIV makes it a whole lot easier with its word choice of "marital infidelity" or "marital unfaithfulness" instead of fornication
The translators of the NIV show a lack of understanding regarding Jewish law and custom that I find disturbing. They should have known the difference between fornication and adultery.
First though, My response to Geek's criticism.
First of all, I recognize that the King James Version of the Scriptures is a translation. What sets the King James apart from previous English translations is that it went back to the Original Greek and Hebrew texts, while the Wycliffe and Geneva Bibles were translated from the Latin Vulgate, not the Original Greek and Hebrew.
I also have never said that God cannot use the NIV or any other translation, because clearly He can, because He is sovereign.
HOWEVER, I firmly believe that the KJV is stronger on matters of theological doctrinal significance, as I outlined in my previous post on this issue.
Mr Geek did point out one Scripture where the KJV seems to obscure Paul's meaning- Galatians 5:12. However, It would seem to me that the doctrine of the Trinity or the issue which I will discuss momentarily are more theologically, doctrinally significant than whether or not Paul was calling for the castration of those who were preaching that one must be circumcised in order to be saved. Notice that Paul does not say that this was God's wish. Instead he says that it was His wish because he was frustrated that some in the Galatian church were listening to them instead of to the right doctrines that Paul was preaching.
Ok onto more of my beef with the NIV
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus has this to say regarding the issue of divorce and remarriage
In the KJV, Jesus says this:
Matthew 5:31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
The NIV says it this way
Matthew 5:31 It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.
5:32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.
The difference? "saving for the cause of fornication", vs "except for marital unfaithfulness"
Now this is extremly significant, and I'm going to get to why in a minute, so bear with me. Before we get into why this is extremely important, lets take a look at the Greek word for "Fornication" and its definition
The definitions are from the Strong's concordance
FORNICATION
G4202
πορνεία
porneia
por-ni'-ah
From G4203; harlotry (including adultery and incest); figuratively idolatry: - fornication.
I looked up G4203
G4203
πορνεύω
porneuō
porn-yoo'-o
From G4204; to act the harlot, that is, (literally) indulge unlawful lust (of either sex), or (figuratively) practise idolatry: - commit (fornication).
From these two defintions we see that the Greek word pornia and its related words do not simply deal with adultery, but indeed with all forms of immoral sexual acts, including, incest, adultery, homosexuality, and fornication.
Fornication's basic defintion is sex between two people who are not married to each other. While adultery is a form of fornication, not all fornication is adultery.
Now why is all of this significant?
Because the NIV gives people an excuse for divorce and remarriage, which the Bible calls adultery. People can use this Scripture, with the caveat "marital infidelity", to say that God allows divorce and remarriage, which is not true. Jesus says in multiple passages in the Gospels (Matthew 5:31-32, Matthew 19:9, Mark 10:11-12, Luke 16:18) that remarriage after a divorce while the divorced spouse is still alive is adultery against that spouse.
In Mark 1, and Luke 16, there is no caveat regarding fornication, but in both Mattew 5 and Matthew 19, there is this caveat regarding fornication. Why is this caveat there?
Matthew was the Gospel written for a primarily Jewish audience. This is why the Gospel Matthew begins by tracing Jesus' lineage back to King David, and back to Abraham. It is also why Matthew says "This happened to fulfill Scripture" at least 14 times in his Gospel. He is trying to convince the Jews that Jesus is their Messiah.
In Jewish law regarding marriage, the engagment was a very serious thing. One could not break off the engagement, unless there was evidence of fornication (ie, pregancy. This is why Joseph was going to end the engagement with Mary before God spoke to him). The Jewish Law considered the breaking of the engagement to be divorce even though the engaged couple was not yet married. This is why Jesus says to His Jewish audience that premarital fornication, not adultery or "marital infidelity" was a valid reason for divorce.
People have used the this caveat found in Matthew 5 and Mathew 19 to justify sin, and the NIV makes it a whole lot easier with its word choice of "marital infidelity" or "marital unfaithfulness" instead of fornication
The translators of the NIV show a lack of understanding regarding Jewish law and custom that I find disturbing. They should have known the difference between fornication and adultery.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)