Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 02:18:53 GMT

From: (Nigel B. Mitchell)

Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian

Michael wrote:

…your whole point of my dishonesty stems from me not agreeing with your interpretation of texts. Funny, my dictionary dosen’t support that usage.

Michael

You have misunderstood and misrepresented the point I was making.

I know you do not agree with my interpretation of texts. We all disagree on the interpretation of various texts – that is what makes the discussions here intersting. If there was only one possible interpretation of the scriptures, and we all agreed on it, then we would have nothing to talk about (and life would be very boring).

My use of the word “dishonest” related quite specifically to your quotation of 1 Cor 14:26 from the King James Version.

Having watched and participated in debates here on ARC for the past year or more, you cannot be unaware that the KJV translation of this verse is notably different from both the Greek text and all other modern translations.

The KJV text, taken by itself, seems to explicitly state that all Christians can speak in tongues etc. The Greek text and all other English translations are either ambiguous on this point, or have the sense that “one has a psalm, another has a teaching, another speaks in tongues…”. As you have pointed out, the context is that Paul is giving instructions for worship, so the latter meaning “one has a psalm, another has a teaching…” is the most likely. From the context, there is no suggestion that Paul is making a definitive statement on whether or not all Christians speak in tongues.

We have been over all this many times, in debates in which you have participated. That being the case, I can find no other word but “dishonest” for your quoting the KJV translation of 1 Cor 14:26 as though it settled the ‘all Christians speak in tongues’ argument in your favour. Perhaps “misleading” would be a less value- laden word, but in any case it is clear to me that you quoted the verse from the KJV in full knowledge that if you had quoted any other version it would not have supported your argument. Your statement that “I only have a KJV at the moment” stikes me as just a bit too convenient.

I repeat my offer; if you give me your snail mail address I will send you a copy of the NRSV. Alternatively, I would encourage you to get a simple Bible program (I use Quickverse), or even better, go to your local university or Bible College and learn NT Greek. Then you will never be caught short in this way again.

Cheers

N+

Nigel B. Mitchell

….

Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997

From: (Nigel B. Mitchell)

Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian

(Michael Kennedy) wrote:

TRUST ME !!!!!! I AM TELLING YOU THE TRUTH !!!!!!!! “TRUST” is not an alien concept to Christianity you know.

PLEASE read my post. TRY to understand.

The dishonesty is not in saying that you only had the KJV with you. If that is true, and I have no reason to doubt your word, then I can only suggest that you were ill- equipped to write your post at all, and would have been better off writing nothing, than something you knew was potentially misleading.

The dishonesty is in quoting 1 Cor 14:26 in the KJV version as though that settled the matter. It is usually better to say nothing, than to say something you know is wrong.

Now back to business,

The KJV text, taken by itself, seems to explicitly state that all Christians can speak in tongues etc. The Greek text and all other English translations are either ambiguous on this point, or have the sense that “one has a psalm, another has a teaching, another speaks in tongues…”. As you have pointed out, the context is that Paul is giving instructions for worship, so the latter meaning “one has a psalm, another has a teaching…” is the most likely. From the context, there is no suggestion that Paul is making a definitive statement on whether or not all Christians speak in tongues.

Okay, one Bible version is “for”, others are “ambigous on the point”, in terms of “everyone” or ” each one”, I accept that. And, you tell me, the non KJV Bibles are more accruate in there rendering of the greek as “each one”. I might accept that.

Then we have nothing to argue about. If you decide not to accept it, I would like to know why.

Having accepted that the KJV is not accurate in its rendering of this verse, I am sure that as an honest person you will never again quote it as though it settled the ‘tongues’ argument.

But in context of the surrounding verses, it’s quite obviously part of a definitive section of scripture with Paul showing that all with the Holy Spirit speak in Tongues. eg. (1 Cor 14:23) Therefore if the whole church comes together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those who are uninformed or unbelievers, will they not say that you are out of your mind? “and all speak with tongues” , how much clearer can Paul be ? All must receive this manifestation, or Pauls statement is foolish.

Wrong. As many others have pointed out to you (do you ever read our posts, I wonder?), 1 Cor 14:23 is a rhetorical form of words. The intent is to say precisely the opposite of what you try to make it. In 1 Cor 14:23 (NBM paraphrase translation, 1997), Paul is saying “If all Christians spoke in tongues, people would think we are a bunch of loonies”. And he is right.

I repeat my offer; if you give me your snail mail address I will send you a copy of the NRSV. Alternatively, I would encourage you to get a simple Bible program (I use Quickverse), or even better, go to your local university or Bible College and learn NT Greek. Then you will never be caught short in this way again.

I already use four different Bible versions at home, if you want to send me a fifth, that’s fine by me.

Why don’t you learn Greek, Michael? I can assure you, from personal experience, that there is no better way of understanding the depth and height and fullness of God’s word.

Cheers

N+

Nigel B. Mitchell

…..

Date: 11 Aug 1997

From: (Michael Hore)

Michael Smith < writes:

This is going in never-ending circles.

Too true… and I’m just emerging from a long e-mail debate with Chris Graus about it, so the last thing I want to do is get involved again…

So the question is: from the Greek text, could one reasonably say that the KJV translation is accurate?

No.

Could one reasonably interpret it to support Michael K’s view that every Christian is able to speak in tongues?

No.

Ignoring (for the moment) opinions of whether Michael K’s interpretation is correct, simply “could the Greek reasonably be read that way?”

No.

Oh well, I suppose I’d better say a bit more… _hekastos_ means “each”. So it’s pretty much like Michael’s example, which IIRC was something like “each child brought an apple, an orange or a banana to school”.

This says basically nothing about which fruit little Johnny brought, or whether he always brought the same type of fruit, or whether he could have brought a different one than the one he brought (if any).

So the verse simply says different people can get up and do different things. You simply can’t read any more into it than that.

Cheers, Mike.

…..

Date: 12 Aug 1997

From: (Michael Hore)

(Michael Kennedy) writes:

(Michael Hore) wrote:

(Michael Kennedy) writes:

(Nigel B. Mitchell) wrote:

(1 Cor 12:4-11 NRSV) Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5 and there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; 6 and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.

Okay, so what has Paul said so far – That there are different gifts, and we all do different things in the church, but we all have the same manifestation when we receive the Holy Spirit. Makes sense to me.

Nononono… these verses can’t possibly be interpreted to mean that there’s only ONE UNIQUE manifestation – verse 7 is explained fully by verse 8-10 which you quote:

Sorry Michael, you are wrong this time. They can be interpreted as “one uniqiue” manifestation, because millions of people do interpret them that way.

Okay, you may not agree, but it is still one possible interpretation.

I’m sorry – I think we have a problem here. I don’t remember you saying you read Greek, still you claim I can’t exegete this passage?

Your claimed interpretation is simply nonsense. There isn’t any other word for it. It makes no sense. It would yank one verse right out of context with the rest of the passage, and make it say something different. Also it isn’t what the Greek says.

“The manifestation of the Spirit” uses a definite article because the word “manifestation” is definite in the context – Paul spells out in the following verses what he’s talking about, as I said. If he had said “a manifestation”, that would have meant the same as “one manifestation” which wouldn’t have been right, since some people have more than one gift. But possibly “a manifestation” might have been a better English translation. But the Greek in no way implies there’s only one manifestation, and as I said this would make nonsense of the context. The whole chapter is talking about the variety of gifts that is given by the one Holy Spirit – as I said, unity in diversity.

Furthermore, if Paul had been talking about ONE manifestation in v. 7, then had gone on to talk about the variety of gifts in verse 8 and following, he would have needed to add some other connecting word like “also” to show that he was making an additional point. But he doesn’t, because he’s continuing with the SAME point – the “manifestation” and the “gifts” are talking about precisely the same thing.

THAT is the gifts of the Spirit, different to the manifestation of the Spirit. Yes, diversity in use of the gifts, and Love uniting all. But, you are twisting Paul’s words to fit your accepted doctrine IMO.

If you learn a little Greek, you will see where the twisting is being done, IMO.

Cheers, Mike.