Thanks for your response Brian. Sorry about the late response, it's taken me some time to write this, and also I'm sorry because it's extremely long.
Thank you Ellie. It's nice to meet someone from a neighboring state.
As for me being experienced, I have to laugh, because that reminds me I'm experienced in making lots of mistakes. I also grew up with older siblings, so I have always felt young. I'm slowly realizing that when I meet with people, I'm often the older or oldest. It's good for my humility! My son and daughter are in their 20's. I don't know if they have been on this site yet, but I plan to mention it to them. I think I've shared at least one of Chris' article links recently.
Don't worry about typically being the oldest, there are at least a couple here that are older than you. As for me, I am the youngest in the church here
I guess a similar age to your children which is neat, I'm 22.
I have spent some time looking into the Geneva vs King James issue and this has actually been quite an interesting study and I appreciate the suggestion to do so because it’s challenged me and it’s been quite beneficial. You made a good point about calling the Geneva corrupt without knowing much about it. I should have been more careful how I said that, because in my mind I was thinking specifically about the undoubtably corrupt new age versions that I am more familiar with than Geneva but I didn’t think to specify that. Anyway, in my search I wanted to keep my mind open to being changed because I know I have been wrong before and I even used to read new age versions so I know I have been deceived on bible versions in the past. Though I have to admit that I found something that has actually led me to confirm my trust in the King James translation and has made me wary to use the Geneva at best.
I don’t think that the name of the translation is enough evidence that the King James Version is suspect or less trustworthy, or otherwise inferior to the Geneva. Based on the information I found, I agree that if all of that is true about him, then King James was a wicked man and he did many evil things. However, Chris made some points on a call yesterday and he found different information about King James that is contrary to the mainstream “history,” about him being incredibly wicked and murderous and I am unsure what is true. We’ve seen ourselves today how people can twist history and make up lies in order to suit their own agendas, so I can’t say that I fully believe either side at the moment. But either way I do think it would be nice if it were named something else, but the name simply distinguishes it from other translations as the one that King James was involved with. And if he was as terrible as many claim, I do believe God can use wicked men/kings if He so chooses in order to fulfill His will on specific things (in this case I'm referring to the translation of the KJV).
And I’d add that if someone is going to dismiss reading the Word of God entirely and reject Him simply because the specific translation in their language is “named after a politician,” then the problem there would be their own pride and unwillingness to hear a matter before they make up their minds about it. At that point, it seems to me like just an excuse to continue ignoring God’s word, and I wouldn't blame the KJV for that. That's just the pride of heart, and God will reject that anyway.
He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him. - Proverbs 18:13
But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. - James 4:6
What matters more to me when I am determining which translation I am going to trust is about the content rather than what person or what place it is named after. And I obviously haven’t read the entire Geneva or even the entire KJV yet. But I have found something that, to me, makes the Geneva at least somewhat suspect and leads me to continue to prefer the KJV. I was looking into some arguments in support of the Geneva version over the KJV, and in doing so I came across some verse comparisons between the 2 translations. Here’s the first comparison listed by one guy in defense of the Geneva, Matthew 4:17:
From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (King James)
From that time Iesus began to preach, and to say, Amende your liues: for the kingdome of heauen is at hand. (Geneva)
Somewhat ironically, the guy who wrote this said that this was his favorite comparison between them in support of the Geneva, but this verse immediately put me on guard against the Geneva more than anything else that I had read about it up until that point. Because repentance is required for salvation, so the fact that it was phrased differently here caused me to want to look into some other verses about it and compare the two. Here is the one that I have found so far that most clearly demonstrates the issue I have with it, Luke 13:3:
I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. (King James)
I tell you, nay: but except ye amend your liues, ye shall all likewise perish. (Geneva)
I’ll explain my reasoning for why this verse discrepancy alone has me inclined to not trust the Geneva, and to continue using the KJV. So this verse contains a very simple, clear, and direct message, and it is a very important one because it has to do with salvation vs death and hell. Jesus says unless you ______, then you are going to perish. Between these two versions, one of them is saying that you must amend your life otherwise you are going to perish, and the other one is saying that you must repent or you will perish. That isn’t merely a different phrasing of the same concept, these are two completely different things based on the definitions. Repentance is having sorrow over one’s wrongdoing or sin, and amending your life is changing or correcting your actions. We know what the words mean but I’ll include the definitions (from Websters 1828) anyway because I think they’re interesting to compare:
REPENT'ANCE, noun
1. Sorrow for any thing done or said; the pain or grief which a person experiences in consequence of the injury or inconvenience produced by his own conduct.
3. Real penitence; sorrow or deep contrition for sin, as an offense and dishonor to God, a violation of his holy law, and the basest ingratitude towards a Being of infinite benevolence. This is called evangelical repentance and is accompanied and followed by amendment of life.
AMEND'MENT, noun
1. An alteration or change for the better; correction of a fault or faults; reformation of life, by quitting vices.I found these interesting because with repentance it states that it is sorrow and contrition for sin “…
accompanied and followed by amendment of life.” With true repentance (godly sorrow), God gives the desire to amend one’s life by the Holy Spirit, but sorrow of sin is not the same thing as amendment of one’s life. And also, if someone on their death bed comes to sorrow of sin and faith in Christ, but has no chance to begin to amend their life, then Christ will still save him. Someone can amend their life, or change it for the better, and be completely devoid of any godly sorrow or faith at all.
I do want to note though, that another point was made by Chris on this yesterday was that it’s possible that someone can argue that the meaning of “amend” here could be referring to something else besides doing works. I can’t quite remember the way he explained it, but it could mean an amendment in the sense of Christ’s amendment of someone’s soul or something along those lines, something that is more spiritual and not the works you do. And maybe that is possible, but I personally question it because it is a command to a person to amend their life, I don’t quite see how that doesn’t involve works at least to some degree (though I am open to the possibility). And I’ve seen how important the doctrine of repentance is especially now when people are even changing the meaning of it to claim it is “turning from sin” or “changing one’s mind.” And even if it’s a small possibility that this could be used to support a false gospel of works doctrine, I am personally wary of it and would not recommend it to someone or quote scripture with it. I'd rather go with the KJV.
All that to say, nobody is going to tell you that you must use only the KJV and not Geneva in order to be part of this church. That's your own personal choice, and that's okay if you like the Geneva more. The KJV is just what we use and prefer and I'd agree that being on the same page is a good thing as a group. This was just my own reasoning based on the most significant thing I've seen so far that can have an impact on doctrine. But several of us in the church do appreciate how you have chosen to quote the KJV to us out of consideration for us since that's what we use, that's a charitable thing to do despite your preferences.
By the way, since I notice you're a moderator, I wonder if you can please show me how to mark someone's post as encouraging. I saw some mention of it, but now I can't find it.
Hope I answered your questions. I look forward to learning more about people in this group. So are you originally from Alabama? How long have you been in the group? What is your favorite part of the group calls?
I believe you're referring to edification points. Once you reach a certain amount of posts (and I am actually unsure of how many it is, Chris may know), next to each person's posts on the left, you should get the option to "Edify" or "Rebuke" which will give them an Edification point or take one away.
To answer your questions about me, I'm actually from California originally. I lived there all my life (aside from a couple college semesters in Oregon) up until January 2021 when I moved to Alabama and got married. I met my husband Tim after joining the forum and we ended up speaking personally after I joined the church and got on the calls. Not long after that we hung out in person at a church meetup at Chris and Lorraine's house, and about a month later I moved to Tim's state and we got married.
I have been on the forum since September 2020 and I joined the church shortly after that--so I've been here almost 2 years. And I will have been saved for three years this December. If you want to read my testimony/introduction post it's
here. Though it is another long one just to warn you.
I'd say that my favorite part of the group calls is simply that it's composed of other believers who are likeminded in the way that scripture talks about. The calls are the main way that God has provided for our group to be able to function as a body of believers despite the physical distance between all of us. This is the only place I personally have found (along with most of the others here) with other Christians who believe and preach sound doctrine. And it's pretty interesting because we have a handful of different countries and backgrounds that are represented here, so the internet and the calls gives us the opportunity to meet with other Christians regularly who we likely would have never met otherwise (during this lifetime at least). I am generally more quiet and I don't speak up as much as many of the others do (aside from the ladies group), but even so, I truly appreciate and enjoy the company of other believers and learning from them.
If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. - Philippians 2:1-2
