Thread: Romans 1: 28-29, Debate As Expression of the Reprobate Mind
Admin
Romans 1: 28-29, Debate As Expression of the Reprobate Mind
Posted : 31 Jul, 2013 05:57 AM
Romans 1: 28-29, Debate As Expression of A Reprobate Mind
http://studybible.info/Geneva/Romans
Geneva Bible Romans 1: 28-29:
"For as they regarded not to acknowledge God, euen so God deliuered them vp vnto a reprobate minde, to doe those things which are not conuenient, 29 Being full of all vnrighteousnesse, fornication, wickednes, couetousnes, maliciousnes, full of enuie, of murther, of debate, of deceit, taking all things in the euill part, whisperers, "
Tyndale Bible Romans 1: 28-29:
http://alleluya.com/WTNT/romans_1.html
The Tyndale Bible for Romans 1: 28-29 in modern English spelling says:
"And as it seemed not good unto them to be aknown of God, even so God delivered them up unto a leawde mind, that they should do those things which were not comely, being full of all unrighteous doing, of fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, evil conditioned whisperers.."
King James Version for Romans 1: 28-29:
28. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,"
But for Romans 1: 28-29 the New International Version says "Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips.."
The Greek word eris, Strong's number 2054, is translated in the NIV as strife, not as debate. Strong's number 2054 is said to mean "a quarrel, by implicating wrangling - contention, debate, strife, variance." Note that the first definitions of eris are "a quarrel, by implicating wrangling."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate
"Debate is contention in argument; dispute, controversy; discussion.."
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/debating
"Middle English debaten, from Old French debatre : de-, de- + battre, to beat; see batter."
In other places of the New Testament, Paul teaches that believers should not be contentious, supporting the doctrine of the Tyndale, Geneva and King James versions saying that debate is an expression of the reporbate mind. Except that one in Christ may be called to defend the truth against false doctrines, as in Acts 15: 1-2. There Paul and Barnabas made "no small dissension and disputation with them," the Pharisees who had joined the Jerusalem Christian community but taught that Christians must be circumcised and keep the law (ceremonial) of Moses. Luke uses the Greek words stasis and suzetesis, rather than eris.
Paul in I Corinthians 1: 10-11 says "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
11. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you." Contentious is from eris.
I Corinthians 11: 16 says "But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."
II Corinthians 12: 20 says "For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults:"
Here the Greek word eris is translated as debates and eritheia is translated as strifes. Again, a debate can be strife or contention by words.
Paul uses a different Greek word in II Timothy 2: 23, mache, "But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes."
And in I Timothy 6: 3-4 he uses an interesting Greek word, logomachia, "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings."
This is a significant text, because what Paul is saying is that those who get off into doctrines that were not taught by Christ and the Apostles tend to get into logomachia, or strifes of words." Lets see what Strong's says about logomachia.
Logomachia is number 3055 in Strong's and is said to mean "disputations, strife of words." One might translate logomachia as "word fights."
Someone who has the mind of Christ (Philippians 2: 5) would not want to get into prolonged quarrels. Christ preached and taught, but did not get into quarrels though he sometimes used strong language against the Pharisees, calling them serpents (Matthew 23: 33) telling them they are of their father the devil (John 8: 44).
In questioning and disputing the doctrine taught by the Pharisees Paul and Barnabas were upholding the truth revealed to Paul by the risen Christ. In Acts 26; 16 Christ said to Paul after he shook him up thoroughly on the Road to Damascus "But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;" Christ told Paul he would appear to him again to instruct him.
Luke did not use eris or logomachia in Acts 15: 2, which would have carried a meaning closer to contentiousness than suzetesis. Nevertheless, Paul and Barnabas did make strong disputation with the Pharisees who taught that Christians must observe the ceremonial law of Moses to be saved.
While an argument against the absolute truth of scripture is called the dialectic, and is of the reprobate mind as Paul teaches in Romans 1; 29, questioning false doctrine and defending the absolute truth of scripture is not an act of the reprobate mind.
Scripture and Christ's example allows us to strongly state the truth, but not to get into prolonged quarrels with those who argue against scripture.
This is about the Revised Version (or British Revised Version). Its New Testament came out in 1881 and the Old Testament in 1885. On the translation committee for the "revision of the Authorized Version" - the King James Version - were Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort, the guys who created the Westcott-Hort new Greek text mostly from two Greek manuscripts associated with Alexandria, Egypt, the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The Authorized Version, the King James Version of 1611, for the New Testament was from the Erasmus Textus Receptus made from several Byzantine Greek manuscripts.
"But instead of a Revised version of the long accepted English Bible, the Committee brought forth (so far at least as the New Testament was concerned) a New Version. This fact was not disclosed by them. The "Preface to the Edition of A.D. 1885" gives no indication of it; but through the vigilance of certain godly and scholarly men (Dean Burgon in particular) the important fact was discerned and brought to light that the Committee had produced, not a Revised Version (though that was the name given it) but a New Version, which was a translation of a "New Greek Text."
Westcott and Hort, who were the drivers of a wrecking machine, were on the translation committee for the 1881 British Revised Version of the New Testament. This committee, with Westcott and Hort influencing it, changed the verse wordings of the Tyndale, Geneva and King James Version New Testaments. For some verses, that word change also changed or got rid of doctrines taught in these older English versions.
Romans 1: 29 is one such change in doctrine from the three older English translations to the new Westcott-Hort British Revised Version of 1881. Almost all English translations after this 1881 British Revised Version followed the verse wording changes of the l881 Revised Version. One such change was that almost all English translations - from the Alexandarian Greek texts rather than the Textus Receptus - got rid of the doctrine in Romans 1: 28-29 saying that debate is an expression of the reprobate mind.
This elimination or diminishing of the doctrine that debate is of the reprobate mind came in the late 19th century at a time when several cults had gained influence within American and also British Christianity to some extent, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormons, 7th Day Adventists, Christian Science, British Israelite or Christian Identity theology and the dispensationalism of John Darby, Edward Irving, C.I. Scofield and Lewis S. Chafer.
With the doctrine that debate is of the reprobate mind supposedly gone from the New Testament, those in the false doctrines of the 19th century could get into heated and prolonged quarrels with those defending sound doctrine without the people upholding scripture supposedly having an authority to oppose this type of quarreling and bickering..
Romans 1: 28-29, Debate As Expression of the Reprobate Mind
Posted : 31 Jul, 2013 08:35 AM
I'd say it started with Martin Luther and his stand against the supposed expounders of scripture in his day. Anytime there is reformation, there is debate. God debated with Job, Jesus debated with the Pharisees, Paul debated with the jews and just about every christian church in his day. Is the article against debate, or just angry strife-filled debate? In which case, it's not necessarily debate, but just anger and strife?
"Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household."
Romans 1: 28-29, Debate As Expression of the Reprobate Mind
Posted : 31 Jul, 2013 10:58 AM
Discussion can often be considered debate...discussing differing views is often a factor for growth. It depends on how the participants act/talk/write during the discussion. Once someone degrades themselves to name calling and anger, the discussion is over.
It's important for a Christian to understand both sides of a topic...and why they believe what they believe. Discussion can help the understanding.
Romans 1: 28-29, Debate As Expression of the Reprobate Mind
Posted : 31 Jul, 2013 12:27 PM
Dean Gotcher talks about the differences between the patriarchal paradigm�where the father sets rules -- the matriarchal paradigm, and the heresiarchal paradigm.
With the patriarchal paradigm God's word is absolutely true, with no compromise. The matriarchal paradigm is a transition between the patriarchal and the heresiarchal. In both truth and morality are not absolute but relative. Both revolt against the authority of the father figure.
Westcott and Hort in leading the committee which created the English Revised Version (1881), which used the Alexandarian Greek text they had devised. set out to overthrow the patriarchal authority and move toward the heresiarchal paradigm that Dean Gotcher talks about.
The Tyndale, Geneva and King James English translations of the Textus Receptus translated eris in Romans 1: 28-29 as debate rather than as strife, which is a less specific word than debate. Just about all English translations since 1881 have followed Westcott and Hort and translate eris as strife.
There are subtle differences between the Greek words eris, mache, suzetesis, stasis and logomachia. But after the revolt of the 1881 British Revised Version and its changing of verse
,wordings, some New Testament texts where the King James uses English words other than debate now translate a variety of Greek words as debate.
In acts 9: 29 the King James Has "And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians:" But the NIV has debated.
The New Revised Standard Version for Acts 9: 29 has argued.
The King James for Acts 15: 1-2 says "Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them," But the NIV says "This brought Paul into sharp dispute and debate with them."
The New Revised Standard Version and New American Standard Bible also cannot refrain from putting the word debate in their translations of Acts 15: 2.
Acts 18: 28 in the King James says "For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ" But the NIV says "For he vigorously refuted he Jews in public debate..." The New Revised Standard Version and New American Standard Bible have refuted, a somewhat more contentious word than convinced.
Not only did the 1881 British Revised Version change the doctrine of the three earlier English Bibles from saying debate is an expression of the reprobate mind, but it and its followers, the huge number of English translations after 1881 also inserted debate in verses where the King James had used a more subtle and less contentious English word.
The result is that debate as a contentious dialogue has been made into a doctrine. Remember that the first definition of eris in Strong's is "a quarrel, i.e, by implication wrangling, contention..."
The King James version makes a better distinction between the quarrels and bickerings that followers of false doctrines make against absolute truth of scripture and the strong dissension and disputation against false doctrines, made, for example by Paul and Barnabas. Jude 1; 3 tells us to earnestly contend or the faith once delivered unto the saints.' He does not use eris but uses epagonizomai, "to endeavor to accomplish something, , fervently, strive."
Remember that Paul says in
I Corinthians 11: 16 "But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."
II Corinthians 12: 20 says "For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults:"
You cannot debate that since those in Christ are called to stand up and teach his truth, that therefore those in false doctrines can also get into prolonged quarrels with those who teach the truth.
That is being in the heresiarchal paradigm of Dean Gotcher.
Romans 1: 28-29, Debate As Expression of the Reprobate Mind
Posted : 5 Aug, 2013 05:11 AM
I do think that there is something that needs to be said against people who promote false doctrine, wouldn't that be considered debate, or should we remain silent? Or should we just simply "teach" and not argue?
Acts 6
8 And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and signs among the people. 9 Then there arose some from what is called the Synagogue of the Freedmen (Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and those from Cilicia and Asia), disputing with Stephen. 10 And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spoke.
2 Corinthians 10
4 For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, 5 casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ, 6 and being ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled.
2 Timothy 2
23But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. 24And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 25In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
