Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sloth
It is erroneous to call such people "Bible-believing."

Try visiting a "happy-clappy" church. They will all be holding their NIV Bibles while being entertained for an hour or so. They will be anti-abortion and will mostly vote Republican, but they won't tolerate traditional worship.

8 posted on 07/08/2005 7:22:35 AM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: PAR35

Hi Par,

You wrote:

"Try visiting a "happy-clappy" church. They will all be holding their NIV Bibles while being entertained for an hour or so. They will be anti-abortion and will mostly vote Republican, but they won't tolerate traditional worship."

Just a few questions:

1) The NIV translation is bad/wrong? Please enlighten me as to the best translation.

2) What exactly is "traditional worship"? Hymns? Liturgy? My church is a Bible-believing church, yet we don't sing hymns. We even have a BAND! Please let me know what's wrong.

Kharis


13 posted on 07/08/2005 7:46:48 AM PDT by Kharis13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: PAR35

AMEN! You mean those "seeker friendly" "purpose driven" charismatics?


15 posted on 07/08/2005 8:09:01 AM PDT by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: PAR35
Try visiting a "happy-clappy" church. They will all be holding their NIV Bibles while being entertained for an hour or so. They will be anti-abortion and will mostly vote Republican, but they won't tolerate traditional worship.

I go to what you would consider a "happy-clappy" church. I'll be holding my King James Version Bible and praising God and studying His word for an hour or two. Yes we sing praise choruses (Shout to the Lord etc) but we also do an old hymn from time to time.

(For the uninformed, the King James, New King James and several other bible versions were translated using formal equivalence, that is, word for word translation. The NIV and several other versions were translated using dynamic equivalence, that is, thought for thought translation. A formally equivalent version will always be closer in meaning to the original manuscripts as the translators' opinions don't get as much chance to enter into the work. I actually use a parrallel KJV/NIV to get the best of both worlds. Greater readability from the NIV but greater accuracy from the KJV. In case of conflict the KJV wins out due to more accurate translation technique)

Now define traditional worship? Is a group of people singing hymns not traditional worship? After all that's what Jesus and His disciples did. Of course they probably didn't sing "Amazing Grace" or "How Great Thou Art" but since Jesus is God He can probably get away with it right? < /heavy sarcasm>

Worship is worship no matter what the music is or the songs being sung. Worship is an attitude of the heart and can be done in church or in a fishing boat or while driving to work etc. Don't get caught up in formulaic definitions of worship (First, second, and last verse of any song from the approved hymnal. But any hymn older than 150 years should be OK)

16 posted on 07/08/2005 8:20:28 AM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson