The IFB Off-Ramp
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 лип 2024
- Nathan Cravatt joins me as we seek to offer counsel to some of the people we serve in KJV-Onlyism: should you stay (maybe!) or should go (maybe!)? If you go, where should you go? What does the Bible say?
These are sobering questions. Nathan and I don't enjoy encouraging people to leave churches; I don't often do it, frankly. But there are sometimes when this becomes sadly necessary. I pray that our discussion can provide some wisdom for those who are on the IFB off-ramp.
🎁 Help me end Bible translation tribalism, one plow boy at a time:
✅ / mlward
✅ buymeacoffee.com/mlward
📖 Check out my book, Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible:
amzn.to/2r27Boz
🎥 Watch my Fifty False Friends in the KJV series:
• 50 False Friends in th...
👏 Many, many thanks to the Patreon supporters who make my work possible!
Name, James Duly, Robert Gifford, Lanny M Faulkner, Lucas Key, Dave Thawley, William McAuliff, Razgriz, James Goering, Eric Couture, Martyn Chamberlin, Edward Woods, Thomas Balzamo, Brent M Zenthoefer, Tyler Rolfe, Ruth Lammert, Gregory Nelson Chase, Ron Arduser, Caleb Farris, Dale Buchanan, Jess English, Aaron Spence, Orlando Vergel Jr., John Day, Joshua Bennett, K.Q.E.D., Brent Karding, Kofi Adu-Boahen, Steve McDowell, Kimberly Miller, A.A., James Allman, Steven McDougal, Henry Jordan, Nathan Howard, Rich Weatherly, Joshua Witt, Wade Huber, M.L., Brittany Fisher, Tim Gresham, Lucas Shannon, Easy_Peasy , Caleb Richardson, Jeremy Steinhart, Steve Groom, jac, Todd Bryant, Corey Henley, Jason Sykes, Larry Castle, Luke Burgess, Joel, Joshua Bolch, Kevin Moses, Tyler Harrison, Bryon Self, Angela Ruckman, Nathan N, Gen_Lee_Accepted , Bryan Wilson, David Peterson, Eric Mossman, Jeremiah Mays, Caleb Dugan, Donna Ward, DavidJamie Saxon, Omar Schrock, Philip Morgan, Brad Dixon, James D Leeper, M.A., Nate Patterson, Dennis Kendall, Michelle Lewis, Lewis Kiger, Dustin Burlet, Michael Butera, Reid Ferguson, Josiah R. Dennis, Miguel Lopez, CRB, D.R., Dean C Brown, Kalah Gonzalez, MICHAEL L DUNAVANT, Jonathon Clemens, Travis Manhart, Jess Mainous, Brownfell, Leah Uerkwitz, Joshua Barzon, Benjamin Randolph, Andrew Engelhart, Mark Sarhan, Rachel Schoenberger
As a Pentecostal youth pastor, I really enjoy your insight and conversation Mark. Keep up the great content and work. God bless.
Many thanks! I'm honored!
Great interview! Loved the testimony! This made me get teary eyed because of the Church I grew up in & I now do not feel their doctrines are sound. However, so glad for growing in knowledge through God’s Holy Spirit, His Word; and I am so grateful for my Saviour, Jesus Christ! “Prove all things, hold fast that which is good”. I Thes. 5.21. Yes, I still love my KJV but I also love my ESV, NIV, … 👍🏻
I still love my KJV, too!
I'm just now seeing this interview. Really enjoyed it.
Thank you!
All I can say is “amen” ... but I will say more. I love how you two acknowledge that God’s plans for each individual are unique and Sovereign. Just because one person may need to leave... doesn’t mean everyone should. And just because one person may stay... doesn’t mean everyone should. He is the potter. We are the clay. Allow the Holy Spirit to form the vessel of your life. My mind can’t help but think of the Puritans and the Separatists within the Church of England. Were the Puritans following the Lord? Yes. We’re the Separatists following the Lord? Yes. And we can look at historical good from both movements. But the choices they made were diametrically different. This isn’t our Body... it is Christ’s. We are just blessed to be His members. Thank you two for this video.
This is a great point: I love the Puritans, I hail from the line started by the separatists. I think God is permitted to call people to purify and to separate. I believe I've done both myself.
I left the Beachy Amish-Mennonite and was an IFB evangelist for 20 years. When my daughters turned 4, we went back to the Beachy Amish-Mennonite Church to protect them from the worldliness in the IFB.
I myself go to an IFB church, i would say that I agree with most of Baptist doctrine but thanks to videos like yours and others I am moving away now from KJV-Onlyism. One thing that really got my attention with the KJV only issue was that the 1611 KJ and the 1769 didn't just have spelling differences but verses were different. Also i have heard some KJVO complain about footnotes in Modern translations but i heard the 1611 KJ has footnotes as well. Also the claim that "Modern Bibles attack Jesus diety" has issues because the Modern versions i heard have verses that show the diety of Christ better. I don't want King James to be my primary translation anymore I am now reading and liking the ESV and I use NLT at times to help me. God Bless you and all the others for shedding light on the issue of KJV-Onlyism! Like yourselves, Im not bashing the KJV but I am choosing not to use it as my primary translation anymore
The footnotes are in fact in the 1611 edition and in the forward to the readers the translators make a strong point that they are there for a reason--they are important. Too often today KJVO people seem to think they know more about the work of the KJV than the translators did. And you made an excellent choice with the ESV.
I’m in therapy, UNindoctrinating & recovering from my experience in the IFB church. Thankfully, I have not turned away from God & I’m pursuing another church. Although I did learn some good things, I’ve seen many fall & turn away from Jesus & church. In my opinion, it’s done more harm than good including causing brain health issues (mental illness), abuse & addiction, & even suicide. I’ve seen families ripped apart & friendships challenged or lost. Then there is the pain of rejection & isolation when leaving. There’s no discussion; just invalidation,gas-lighting, lip service & more indoctrination. I left only to return & left “silently” (w/o dividing) a second time.
I think we do a disservice when we don’t at least try to confront in love or try to warn others. Btw, I’ve gotten terrible “godly” advice from within the church that actually delayed me from doing what God wanted me to do & kept me doing what He didn’t want me to do.
I don’t hate IFBers, but I do pray for & pity them. “Father forgive them , for they know not what they do”-
Angela, my heart goes out to you. I urge you to be as gracious and forgiving as you can (I love the parable of the unforgiving servant when I need to forgive!) while not refusing to call sin sin. I simply didn't have your negative experience in my KJV-Only IFB church in high school. I've never been in a church of any kind where I suffered abuse. May the Lord help you, sister, to find stability and growth!
Thank you for introducing me to Nathan Cravatt! Also...
1:06:45 - Everyone, don't miss this! It convinced me I have to get closer to my church family.
He’s a gracious brother. Got to see him in person just two days ago!
Part of the reason I like watching theological debates is because the spirits are exposed in a way unique to the format. One sided videos can be straw man persuasive. It’s not until the two face off that the positions and spirit can be revealed.
That really is a profound point. I'll have to give some thinking to this.
Mark, good vid. I appreciate your spirit and the work you do. I would love to see Nathan's organization change its name to something less demeaning to the IFB faithful. "Recovering" is commonly used for sinful vices and applying the term to Bible believing Christians/churches is more apropos to the enemies of the cross. Your ministry is special and done so well. I appreciate the sensitivity that you have. The average believers in fundamental Baptist churches are sincere brethren and demeaning them with broad strokes is unhelpful and can be unloving. I also would tend to respect the common dress expectations of a church (when invited as a speaker) rather than to parade differences on things of lesser significance. Keep placing the emphasis on lovingly, respectfully but courageously affirming the truth regarding our precious Book.
I totally understand where you're coming from. I think I've made my peace with the name, because as an internet writer (blogs and UA-cam) I have come-a bit reluctantly-to realize that some amount of "clickbait" in one's headlines is part of the game. I say some amount because me and my old editor at the Logos Blog agreed we would never promise something that didn't come true. But we knew we were fighting for eyeballs. You can see that in my video title here: "The IFB Off-Ramp." That's probably a bit more attention-getting that strictly necessary.
Also, the RFP guys come from a really messed up portion of the IFB, not the portion that I came from in high school (which was more moderate even though KJVO) or the portion that I still pretty much come from, the BJU portion. They really did have some abuses to recover from.
Thank you for your gracious comment; I'm sympathetic to you, I am! And I FULLY agree that the average believers in IFB churches are sincere and should not be demeaned.
Is there a link to the video interview from a year ago that they talked about at the beginning? Or a link to Nathan's podcast?
ua-cam.com/play/PLq1Aq0ucgkPCTdxSQ6crNn1f5P4GbS_QH.html
I don't see how the IFB can be pinned down , because their all over the spectrum. Steven Anderson , Peter Ruckman , Grace doctrine, freewill doctrine, etc. Our IFB assembly is what's referred to as Calvanist but not the replacement , post tribulation kind. I was never able to grow until I came to the doctrine of Grace and found expository preaching. The only thing negative about expository preaching is the pew bibles wear out . My job is repairing those 14$ Lockman NASB95 with glue , binder tape etc .
Ha! What an awesome problem to have! I love the doctrines of grace and expository preaching!
Do you have this content in podcast form? It is easier for me to listen than to watch.
This is the link to the KJV debate they refer to.
ua-cam.com/video/OxgiW2WLxwo/v-deo.html
Glenn and Ben, if I had a staff-or just more demand-I might be up for this. You might want to check out an app called Downie. I use it all the time! I hate watching YT videos myself! I prefer to listen!
I grew up in an IFB church. It took so long to leave but I did. There are some things that I think they got right and I miss so mucy that I can't find in any other churches. What a shame that, at least in our area, I cannot find a good or theological sound church that has some of the characteristics that some IFB churches have. I appreciated this broadcast. Thanks.
I'm about to execute a church search for the first time since I was 16. My own church just voted to close after the Lord moved about half our church away, including our dear pastor!
I do like your attitude. "So" often I find people that have "left" the IFB church they grew up in, that seem to wear it as a "badge of honor" and think it is their duty and mission to vilify ALL IFB churches.....not ALL IFB churches are alike......some are like Mark here describes as a KJVO church that is IFB.....and there are IFB churches that are not KJVO and distance themselves from those...............
Mark,
I sent you an email through your website if you could take a quick glance at it when you get a chance.
God bless you
Buried right now! Hope to get to it!
Some ppl commenting on leaving this church say they're atheist or no longer Christian, so I didn't listen to those!
Right!
Brother Ward, I am a 66 year old retired police Sgt. From a suburban Detroit agency. I am a born again Christian saved when I was young. I also have been in an IFB church since 1986. However my Pastor a graduate of BJU has been the pastor of our church since 1985. We have
never been a KJV only
Church since Ive been a member . As a matter of fact, our pastor transitioned our church out of our KJV text to NASB and
also encouraged people to use NIV, NKJV also at that time. My Pastor graduated from BJU .
I've been blessed by that and knew BJ used the KJV but rejected Ruckmanism
on that issue. We are
Calvanistic in our theology. We have kept the traditional Baptist Church polity
five pastors under our senior pastor. I have
always wondered about other issues. I
have read that prior to the late 19th century, Christians drank beer, wine, and more. Then from the temperance movement Fundamentalist churches adopted total abstence ( not from bible).
Most IFBA churches
have rules for members to abstain. If a member enjoyed a glass of wine with dinner, they could be subjected to church discipline????? That's just one example. I remember when wire rim glasses were condemned even wearing blue jeans was looked down on. Women in slacks also.
Do you have the courage to share an opinion on these issues. Note I know a
dear Christian Saint from the deep south who sucked on a little
snuff. What about these issues. I know some Christians who bragged about not having a TV and not
reading a newspaper or listening to news.
I look forward to your response .
David, you’ve brought up some touchy subjects on which I definitely have opinions. I’ve shared my opinions on some of them in various places; I do have that courage. =) But it strikes me that these are questions most properly directed toward your pastor. Based on what you say, I’ll bet he’s got thoughtful responses to each one. In general, I’ll observe what I once observed to an older pastor in my BJU circles, someone I like and respect. I told him, “Your generation is more concerned about the effects of drunkenness than about the dangers of going beyond the Bible to forbid all alcohol consumption; my generation is more concerned about going beyond the Bible to forbid what God allows than we are about the effects of drunkenness.” That is an oversimplified summary of a huge topic-and fwiw, I don’t drink alcohol. But I cannot in honesty say that the Bible forbids all alcohol consumption, just drunkenness. And I’m concerned, yes, that some of my church leaders during my formative years were too willing to insist that their valid *personal* applications of Scripture be normative for everyone else. And yet I’m concerned, too, that a lot of folks in my generation swung the pendulum too far the other way, to the point where they watch rated-R movies without question and use their liberties as a cloak for the flesh. =(
Should I keep the KJV issue quiet since i wouldn't want to cause any unnecessary issues with people, though there is one person i know who reads the NKJV and isn't King James Only
Stay humble. Speak only to leadership. Ask questions (like, "Do you have a TR-based translation into contemporary English to recommend?") rather than making accusations. Appeal to Scripture, especially 1 Cor 14. Don't cause division. Keep watching my videos. ;) Keep reading the Bible in your own English.
@@markwardonwords Thank you very much, appreciate the reply. Another thing I was wondering is if you have seen stigma in churches when it comes to mental illness. That topic hits me because I have severe mental health issues and maybe the Lord will want to use that to help others in the body of Christ who suffer from mental health problems. God Bless You!
You know how many bible kjv and acrocrypha kjv kind of names are so different made me confused. I never forgot what happened to me when Lord explained me what means about Jesus died on the cross for my sin after I don’t know how to say or pray about it so Lord explained alike interpreter to tell me that he can replace myself for me . I don’t know how to tell you that he worked with my heart.Do you believe God the father and his son Jesus? How did you say about god the father don’t have in word? HUH? I don’t know how to explain.😢I don’t understand how you believe kjv between another version alike niv,esv, nkjv and more. I believe in true KJV Bible.
Are you IFB Mark?
Right now I’m between churches; the independent church-which was Baptist and had fundamentalist roots-where I was an assistant pastor has recently closed. I posted the story on my blog: byfaithweunderstand.com/2021/11/11/why-my-church-has-closed/
In high school I was definitely in an IFB church. It was KJV-Only. Fairhaven Baptist College orbit at the time, now more like Crown, I gather? Then I went to BJU, which was then on the right side of the IFB. In my judgment, the IFB had a crack-up over the KJV and other issues, and the label “the IFB” seems to mean “independent, militant, credo-Baptist KJV-Onlyists.”
Ah. IFB = Independent Fundamental Baptist.
Mark, sometimes it's okay to name names.
Sometimes, yes. It depends on what you seek to accomplish. I think Mark does a great job discerning properly. He has named names and recently.
I named the name of R.B. Ouellette in my most recent video before this one, and I can't say I enjoyed all the resulting attention. It wasn't fun. =( I did it for reasons I may explain in a video or UA-cam post-mainly because he is a leader in KJV-Onlyism.
Brother note I'm not a drinker, I just used that as an example. I could have used women wearing slacks and a few other issues like belief in pathetic conspiracy theories.
Gotcha!
I believe civil debates (even non-civil) are important, because as Brother Berg stated, "Others are listening!" Amen! Not only are they listening but they are watching how we behave in debate! How we react when we're proven wrong and how we react when we are the victors. Remember, the only real winner in a debate is the loser because he's the only one that has learned something. Some people have never heard the other side or their own position contested. Debates allow people to hear both.
I like this!
Mark, the IFB are not confessional. Kevin DeYoung removed University Reformed Church from the RCA to the PCA. The function of confessions is to unite and establish boundaries. In both the CRC ( since the early 60s when they would not discipline pastors/teachers for denying Dort) and the RCA ( in the estimation of the CRC, since the mid-19th century) the confessions no longer serve those functions. Kevin DeYoung's church in Lansing, MI. had to pay a large check to the RCA for the privilege of moving to the PCA.
I feel confessional; I'm close to confessional… At my ordination I confessed a version of the 1689 LBC, which is in turn (as you likely know) a credo-Baptist workover of the Westminster Confession. I am in general in favor of having and using and enforcing confessions. It's a valuable tradition. But I see values in independency as well, especially if it's not permitted to become isolationism. Confessionalism, in my experience, can become Confessionalism with a capital-C; and it hasn't kept the PCA from having significant doctrinal controversy. The IFB in my experience was actually pretty good at insisting on doctrinal fidelity on many, many points. It just tended to add a few points (read: KJV-Onlyism) and fudge or forget a few.
@@markwardonwords I am not a Baptist, Mark. That " independence" stuff is not enticing. Did you know the current PCA doctrinal controversy with Revoice has been stopped by the PCA ruling elders ( laymen) showing up in great numbers at the General Assembly ? The PCA teaching elders ( ministers) have persistently voted down providing financial help to allow the ruling elders to attend. There is now a fund set up to help ruling elders. The PCA controversy has nothing to do with Confessionalism with a capital "C."
@@carmensiekierke3579, please understand that I'm not being critical of you! And I fully support your membership in a confessional denomination! I agree, too, wholeheartedly that the PCA GA has done good in just the way you mention (though I'm not super familiar with specifics).
I'm saying only that no human document, no human leader, no human organization or institution is immune to the effects of the fall. Hence I see value in multiple approaches to church organization-wherever the Bible does not give me definite direction. Does that make sense?
@@markwardonwords For the record: I am Orthodox Presbyterian ( which is the most conservative). I didn't take your comment as a personal criticism. You do know the Presbyterian and Reformed ( NAPARC) do not consider their 6 forms of unity to be above Scripture, correct? The American Presbyterians have a different WCF than the original.....precisely because they believed it to be in error. The United States is not a theocracy. When people criticize the very existence of denominations as being unbiblical it is because they do not acknowledge that there can be disagreements on church government. Thanks for your reply, Mark.
@@carmensiekierke3579, I'm with you! I'm not against denominations; sometimes I really want one. I may even be joining one at some point in the next few months, because my own church closed last Sunday (long story-but a good story of God's goodness to us!) and we are looking for a new place to worship and serve.
The repetitive term, "That's a great question," gets grating in it's overuse.
Is anyone familiar with Jeffrey Riddle?
Yes. ;) ua-cam.com/video/pqCv5HdxB-c/v-deo.html
Good to see that you both refrain from wearing wire-rim glasses. I too refrain from wearing them. Brother, thank you for your graciousness. You do what you do with kindness. However I do not believe you should defend Nathan's intentional disrespect of another church/pulpit. That was more than just a classless move by an otherwise first class individual. That was a stumblingblock. I give him the benefit of the doubt that if he had prayed about it for any amount of time he would have not treated the matter so casually.
I listened to the debate too. Many times. My heart is grieved. I am KJVO but my position was not represented.
The counsel you received was wise. I too want to debate, but it is my flesh that desires it. And in my flesh dwelleth no good thing. But I would like to talk about it with you.
Who do you think are the best representatives of your viewpoint on the KJV?
@@markwardonwords I know I'm not Gonzo from the Muppets so I'll consider it and get back to you. My humor is terrible. I just realized that in my YT pic I have on wire-rims😏
@@markwardonwords I don't suppose I can answer. If I say the wrong name you can dismiss everything I say without listening to a single thing. If there is a specific thing you need to know you can ask, but here is my primary stance.
I am the kid on the playground that likes the old slide. Yes, it is higher and steeper than the newer slides and it doesn't have modern safety rails. But how can this slide be replaced? There's dozens of newer slides: plastic, wood with nylon, metal, some have humps, some are spiral. But they don't make them like they used to. All the other kids say the newer slides are more like the original slide from the first playground ever, but none of us have ever seen that playground and we don't know anybody who knows anybody who has seen the original slide. All we know is that every playground needs a slide. There is a group of kids who only ride the old slide and some of them are nasty about it. They won't ride any other slide and they yell at anyone who does. They are opposed by a large group of kids who say all slides are good (most do have a favorite, but the favorite varies by the kid) and all kids should ride all slides. The only problem is they never stop talking bad about the big slide. So the big slide kids talk bad about the new slides, and all kids talk bad about other kids even though they claim its more about the slide they prefer. It is just a matter of time before the big-slide-only kids try to ban me because I refuse to hate other kids. I am already hated by all-slides kids because I only ride the big slide an am therefore a hatemonger, but shouldn't that be a matter of good conscience before God? Can christian liberty be extended to both groups of kids? It should be, but neither side wants to affirm the other's position. If Nathan is correct about it not being a scriptural issue, then he should lay off and let God be the judge. The fact that he participated in the debate lends legitimacy to the idea that it is a scriptural/doctrinal issue. The people who are KJVO for the right reasons do not need anything Mitch said to be true in order for them to read/study/believe the King James Bible and have patience and grace with those who do not.
To the big-slide kids: If someone is indwelt by the Spirit of God, then allow that person to be led by the Spirit into all truth and stop pretending you know what that should look like. To the all-slides kids: if someone is indwelt by the Spirit of God, then allow that person to be led by the Spirit into all truth and stop pretending you know what that should look like. If the two groups cannot see eye-to-eye, then go find likeminded believers with whom they can fellowship and fulfill the great commission by reaching people with the gospel of Christ that the other group could never reach.
I am not a scolar or textual critic. I approach this issue from an end user's viewpoint. After experiencing many small group bible studies where there 5 or 6 different versions represented I can confidently say that it would have been more edifying for the body of Christ if only one version had been used. You are correct when you say that edification required intelligibility. There is nothing intelligible about a bible study where the participants are too distracted by the different versions to study anything. And that is not even strictly a KJVO argument. That is objectively true. I give you credit for being more objective than most people who oppose KJVO.
I feel like some of my statements need qualifiers but I've typed enough. I don't read long posts often, so I hope you made it through this one.🙏🏻
Nathan stated: "They do not believe the original languages and original words have been preserved by God."
1. I have no idea what you mean by preserving "original languages," so, I'll pass on that portion of your statement.
2. Preserved "original words"?
* Without an extant autograph, how do we prove the preservation of the original wording? Conjecture? Faith? You say we have copies. Ok, how do we prove that they are copies of the autograph? Textual criticism doesn't seem to prove the wording of the autograph as it is filled with conjecture, i.e. the most likely wording.
Quote: "Do you mean 'exist somewhere in the universe' even though without a miracle they cannot be confidently reconstructed so that 50% of experts might agree on the text (original wording) of any chapter in the Bible?"
*In my limited foray into textual criticism I've noticed that genuine scholars usually preface their conjectures with "most likely reading." Do you mean conjectural preservation?
* I've read genuine scholars that have stated that every extant (preserved) Hebrew manuscript is wrong in places and "the original" reading can only be found in a Greek translation (LXX)! Are they "Ruckmanites"? I trow not. I've also read genuine textual scholars that have written: "We may never know the original reading."
* What are the original words of the 10 Commandments? The wording in Exodus? The wording in Deuteronomy? The wording of Jesus in the Gospels? The wording of the Apostles in the New Testament?
* Isn't there zealous debate among genuine scholars over "the original wording"? What practical good is there in a preservation doctrine without certainty?
What is the original wording of John 3:13? Can we say, The Lord said, " even the Son of man which is in heaven," "the Son of Man who is in Heaven" or must our doctrine of preservation force us to say, The Lord may have not said that?
Please don't take this post as antagonism. These are sincere concerns. My viewpoint on preservation is this:
The autographs changed over time and are no longer extant and thus not preserved in its original form. Preservation has never been about preserving jots and tittles, word counts, etc. Scriptural preservation should never be compared to grandpa's coin collection "preserved" down in the vaults at 1st National Bank & Trust Jerusalem where every "generation" can come and take a peek at the exact same mint condition coins. No, that type of preservation doesn't fit the Scriptures or history! Scriptural preservation is more like grandma's pickles where the nutritional value is preserved even though the form (jots, tittles, word counts, etc.) changes. In the form that God wants each generation and language to have.
Brother Mark. I am a member of an IFB church but my Pastor who graduated from the college you came from took a position back in 2000 against KJV onlyism.
But let me tell where I was attacked and became dismayed occurred and started in 2015. The issue was ,is my open support for President Donald Trump in Primaries to be the 2016 GOP nominee fr President. It got bitter. I refused to give ground and never wavered on his fitness to be President. I believe I have been vindicated so to speak for my choice then and now. The opposition became intense. But I have been vindicated. I'm not afraid to discuss the experience. It really opened my eyes
to the point that it has caused me to re-evaluate IFB people and their discernment
with reality.
David, I'd probably have to be closer to this situation to give you worthwhile counsel. In general, I do encourage you to speak to church leaders, show charity as much as you can, and to realize that you are seeing some of the same points of division that are roiling-it seems-the entire American church.
I think that what your discussing is not king james only but king james only mixed with other things like hyper dispensationalism and possibly other things. Because I study this subject a lot from both sides and the middle. Some like me believe that the word of God exists without error and are led to believe it is the king james Bible in the English language and would be considered king james only but don't believe a number of the dispensationalist legalism. I believe that God's word can be in any language without error. And I believe that other versions could give the gospel to save. I'm not commenting trying to convince you to believe the way I do but to express my thoughts that all would be king james only clumped believers are put in without qualifying.
I agree that the KJV is a separate issue from things like legalism-but the KJV has become a symbol for groups shot through with other problems.
That's what my point is. Because a good amount of discussions on this topic is addressing a more legalistic group and not king james supporters that come at this subject from a preservation, God controlled event we all are considered radical, legalistic, not educated, I can go on. Lol
I don't have the answer and maybe no one cares that much and won't draw interest. I love studying and appreciate hearing others views and understanding. But I appreciate hearing all of them for the most part.
Well, let's see who is Nathan Cravatt:
1. Positive about the Asbury Revival.
2. Positive about the movie "JESUS REVOLUTION"
3. Pro tattoos.
4. States: "Racism is a mark of Ruckman and his adherents."
5. Nov 1, 2022 "Thank you, @AndyStanley for boldly proclaiming the gospel."
Ya, I will pass...... plenty of other Mark Ward videos to watch.
Love your videos, Mark. Just really sad that you like Calvinism.
It'd be nice if you could define for those who don't know all the acronyms just exactly what RFP (RFB?), and IFB stand for. It would help with understanding things.
Aside from that, can't we all just agree that Dr. Ruckman had it all figured out and we should just leave it at that. (Yes, that was an attempt at humourous trolling. Nevertheless, he's (probably) mostly right. 😮. 🙏✝️👑✝️🙏
What does preaching from the ESV in a T-shirt and skinny jeans have to do with anything. That you even said that tells me that what you wore was a means of saying "screw you" to those who are more conservative, not just the KJV only crowd. Shame on you for using the pulpit to make a cultural statement.
I'll speak up in defense of my brother Nathan here: I think he actually is using the pulpit to make a *theological* statement, namely that the cultural forms of the America of the 1950s are not all abiding moral norms for the church. The IFB is big into suits and ties on men; I still feel more comfortable dressing that way while preaching, in particular. But I have had to make a self-conscious decision to dress down a bit here in the Pacific Northwest where the cultural expectations are just very different from those of Greenville, SC. I do think there's a ditch on the other side: dressing down so much that you show disrespect. But Nathan is trying to pull people out of the other ditch, the right ditch.
That doesn't mean he should pull them from one ditch to another. What you described is more reasonable. What he was saying implicitly was, "Come over to my side where you can totally chill at church and from the pulpit. Oh, and I use the ESV, not your stuffy old KJV. Nice to defend your friends but come on, Mark. No need to stick it to the opponent.@@markwardonwords