Bible verses and principles

1. God’s Word Is Not Limited to One Language

1 Corinthians 14:9 (NIV): "Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air."

Acts 2:6–11 — On Pentecost, the Spirit allowed people to hear the Word of God in their own languages. This shows God values accessibility in many tongues.

Revelation 7:9–10 — A great multitude from “every nation, tribe, people, and language” worship before the throne. The gospel is meant for all languages.

1 Timothy 2:3-4 (NIV): "This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth."

2. Scripture Emphasizes Inspiration, Not Translation

2 Timothy 3:16–17 — “All Scripture is God-breathed…” (referring originally to the Hebrew and Greek writings, not specifically the KJV). The authority comes from God’s Word itself, not one English rendering.

2 Peter 1:20–21 — Prophecy came as men were moved by the Holy Spirit, again pointing to the originals rather than a single translation.

3. Translations Have Always Existed

Nehemiah 8:8 — Ezra and the Levites read from the Book of the Law of God, making it clear and giving the meaning so that the people could understand. That’s essentially translation and explanation.

Luke 4:18–19 (quoting Isaiah 61) — Jesus quoted the Septuagint (a Greek translation of Hebrew Scripture) rather than the Hebrew text word-for-word.

4. Avoid Division Over Non-Essentials

1 Corinthians 1:10–13 — Paul warns against dividing over leaders or human preferences. Similarly, dividing the church over which English Bible translation is “purest” causes unnecessary strife.

Romans 14:1–4 — Reminds us not to quarrel over disputable matters but to honor one another’s conscience before God.

5. The Goal of Scripture Is Understanding and Obedience

Psalm 119:105 — “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.” The purpose of Scripture is to guide us, not to be locked into one form.

John 17:17 — “Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth.” The truth of God’s Word is what sanctifies — not the English style of one translation.

Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV): "Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."

Practical Advice:

God never restricted His Word to one translation or one language.

The earliest Christians used different versions (Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic).

What matters most is understanding and obeying God’s Word, not defending one English rendering.

Galatians 6:1 (ESV): "Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness."

Confessing Christ and the Danger of Division

Confessing Christ and the Danger of Division

To confess Christ is to love Him, to love His Word, and to love His people. True confession always walks hand in hand with humility and unity. But it is possible to speak boldly of Christ while at the same time denying Him in practice—by sowing unnecessary division in His body, the church.

Some insist that to be faithful to Christ one must hold to a very narrow view of Scripture—such as KJV-Onlyism, or the claim that God’s Word is only perfectly preserved in the Textus Receptus in a single, flawless form. While the love for Scripture behind such convictions is sincere, this position is not what Christ or His apostles require of us. Scripture itself never teaches that God’s Word is bound to one translation, one edition, or one text family. Instead, we are told: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16).

The mark of true discipleship is not clinging to one edition of the Bible, but loving Christ and His people. Jesus said, “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another” (John 13:35). If our defense of the Bible turns into a weapon that cuts the body of Christ, we have misunderstood both the Bible and the Savior it reveals.

To divide Christ’s church over a translation or a particular printed edition of Greek or Hebrew is to act contrary to the very Christ we claim to confess. To love Him is to build up His body, not fracture it. To confess Him is to proclaim His saving work, not add man-made requirements to His Word.

So let us hold fast to the inspired Scriptures with reverence, but let us also hold fast to one another in love. Christ is not honored by schisms dressed up as zeal. He is honored when His people confess Him with lips and lives marked by both truth and love.

Sermon

The preaching

that this world needs most

is sermons in shoes

that are walking with Jesus Christ.

- D.L. Moody

Against Lying By St. Augustine

Section 16. For there were even in the Apostles' times some who preached the truth not

16. For there were even in the Apostles' times some who preached the truth not in truth, that is, not with truthful mind: of whom the Apostle saith that they preached Christ not chastely, but of envy and strife. And on this account even at that time some were tolerated while preaching truth not with a chaste mind: yet not any have been praised as preaching falsehood with a chaste mind. Lastly, he saith of those, "Whether in pretence or in truth Christ be preached:" but in no wise would he say, In order that Christ may after be preached, let Him be first denied.

Translation:

Even back in the Apostles’ time, there were people who preached the message of Christ, but not with honest intentions. The Apostle said that some preached Christ out of jealousy and rivalry, not out of pure motives. Still, even then, such people were allowed to preach the truth, even though their hearts weren’t pure. But no one was ever praised for preaching lies, even if they did it with a good heart. In the end, the Apostle said, “Whether people preach Christ honestly or out of false motives, Christ is still being preached.” But he never said, “Let us deny Christ now so that later on Christ can be preached.”

Confessing Christ ?

The Dilemma

The tension arises because these convictions don’t perfectly overlap in history, theology, or textual transmission.

Confessing Christ vs. KJV-Onlyism

Confessing Christ is the central act of Christian faith (Romans 10:9–10).

KJV-Onlyism risks confusing confessing Christ with confessing a translation, which may add a layer of exclusivity not taught in Scripture.

Is my faith in Christ or in a particular English Bible?

Perfect TR vs. Historical Textual Reality

The TR itself went through multiple printed editions (Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza). They differ slightly. Which one is “perfect”?

Claiming “one perfect TR” doesn’t align neatly with historical evidence.

How do I reconcile belief in one perfect TR with the fact that no single TR edition is identical to the others?

Verbal Plenary Preservation vs. KJV-Onlyism

VPP is broader: God preserved His Word across all faithful manuscripts and copies, not necessarily in one translation.

KJV-Only claims preservation culminates only in the English KJV.

Does God’s promise of preservation mean one translation (KJV) or the faithful transmission of the text in Hebrew/Greek across manuscripts?

English Bible Exclusivity vs. Global Church

If the KJV alone is “perfect,” what about Christians in China, Africa, or South America who rely on translations from other textual traditions?

This raises questions about God’s faithfulness to preserve His Word for all nations and tongues (Revelation 7:9).

Is preservation limited to English-speaking believers?

The Conflicts Summarized

Faith in Christ vs. Elevating a Translation: The danger of confusing gospel confession with translation loyalty.

Perfect TR vs. Historical Editions: No single TR edition is universally agreed upon as “the one.”

Preservation vs. Translation: VPP refers to original-language texts, but KJV-Onlyism transfers that authority to a translation.

Universality vs. Exclusivity: Restricting God’s Word to one English version conflicts with the global, multi-lingual mission of the gospel.

The dilemma is that confessing Christ is about allegiance to the living Word (Christ Himself), while KJV-Onlyism, Perfect TR, and VPP—though motivated by love for Scripture—can create conflicts when they elevate one edition or translation above the broader doctrine of God’s preservation and the sufficiency of the gospel.

Building church together ?

 Whose Church Are We Building?

When we speak about building a church, we must first be clear: it is not our church to build according to our own blueprint. Jesus Christ said plainly, “I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18). Notice carefully—it is His church, and He is the builder. If we attempt to build it by our own preferences, convictions, or traditions, we risk placing ourselves in the position of lord rather than submitting to the true Head of the church.

1. The Danger of Our Own Blueprint

We may be tempted to say:

“Only KJV will be used here.”

“We will uphold verbal plenary preservation.”

“We will base everything on the TR text.”

“We will practice total abstinence from alcohol.”

“We will reject all tongue-speaking.”

While some of these positions may reflect biblical convictions, if we make them the foundation of the church rather than Christ Himself, we are no longer building on the Rock. Paul warns: “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 3:11).

The church is not defined by the version of Scripture we prefer, nor by the policies we set, but by Christ’s finished work and His living presence among His people.

2. Christ Is the Head, Not Us

Paul tells us, “And he is the head of the body, the church” (Colossians 1:18). When we decide the terms of who can join us based on our own chosen distinctives, we risk dethroning Christ and enthroning ourselves. Instead, God’s Word shows the church is made up of all who are born again by the Spirit: “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body” (1 Corinthians 12:13).

The question is not, “Do they fit our exact standard?” but rather, “Are they in Christ?”

3. The Folly of Human Strength

Psalm 127:1 declares: “Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it.” No matter how carefully we design our church rules, no matter how pure we believe our doctrine or practice to be, if Christ is not building it, our labor will end in vanity.

Israel tried to build religion their way, and the Lord said through Isaiah: “This people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me” (Isaiah 29:13). We must beware lest we do the same.

4. God’s Way of Building

The true church is built by:

The preaching of Christ crucified (1 Corinthians 1:23).

The power of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:47).

The Word of God in truth (John 17:17).

Love that flows from Christ (John 13:35).

These are the marks of God’s building, not man’s regulations. If our distinctives are elevated above the gospel, we have ceased to be co-laborers with God and have made ourselves master-builders of our own little kingdom.

Conclusion: Whose Church?

If we insist on building a church where only those who meet our man-made criteria may belong, then it is not God’s church—it is ours. We have become the lord of that assembly. But Christ does not call us to build our church; He calls us to be living stones in His church (1 Peter 2:5).

The great question remains: Are we co-laborers with Christ, submitting to His Word and Spirit, or are we attempting to establish a monument to our own will?

Let us humble ourselves under Christ’s headship, remembering His words: “I will build my church.” And if it is His church, then only His way will stand.

To those who show mercy, mercy will be shown

“To those who show mercy, mercy will be shown”

This echoes Matthew 5:7 and James 2:13:

• “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.”

• “Judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment.”

In other words, how we treat others reveals how much we’ve truly received and understood God’s mercy.

Why the church should show mercy to NIV / ESV readers

• All true translations point to Christ. NIV, ESV, KJV, and others translate the same inspired Scriptures. The goal is not to worship a translation, but to know the Lord.

• Different people need different helps. Some find the KJV’s beauty uplifting; others find the NIV’s clarity or ESV’s precision helpful. Showing mercy means recognizing that God uses various translations to reach different hearts.

• Unity is greater than uniformity. Romans 14:13 reminds us not to put stumbling blocks in front of fellow believers. Mercy toward those who use another translation is part of Christlike love.

Why some who hold to KJV seem merciless toward others

Not all KJV readers are merciless, but in some circles:

• Conviction becomes pride. Some equate the KJV with the only true Bible, so they condemn others as “corrupted.”

• Fear of error. Out of zeal for purity of Scripture, some react strongly against newer translations, but this can lead to harshness.

• Cultural/language loyalty. For some, the KJV represents heritage, identity, and spiritual roots — so rejecting it feels like rejecting their faith itself.

The problem is not the KJV itself, but the spirit of exclusivity that can creep in.

The Better Way: Mercy in Disagreement

• Ephesians 4:2–3: “Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit.”

• Mercy says: “I love you as a brother/sister, even if you read a different translation.”

• The test of true maturity is not which Bible version we defend, but whether our hearts reflect Christ’s compassion.

The church should show mercy to those reading NIV, ESV, or any faithful translation because mercy is the heart of God and the mark of true discipleship. Some KJV-only believers act mercilessly out of fear, pride, or misunderstanding — but Jesus calls all His followers to let mercy triumph over judgment.

Martin Luther

Martin Luther used remarkably vulgar, coarse, and scatological language in his writings and table talks. This was not an occasional slip but a consistent and deliberate part of his rhetorical style, which he used for emphasis, ridicule, and to connect with the common people.

Here are detailed examples categorized by his targets:

1. Against the Papacy and Catholic Clergy

Luther reserved his most graphic language for the Pope, bishops, and priests, whom he labeled as the "Antichrist."

The "Ass-Pope" and "Papal Ass": Luther frequently used the German word Eselskopff (ass's head) and Papstesel (Papal ass). In his 1545 pamphlet "Against the Papacy at Rome, Founded by the Devil," he included vicious woodcut images commissioned by him, depicting the Pope being defecated and vomited out of the mouth of a demonic monster. The text is equally graphic.

Excrement and Latrines: He often compared the doctrines and decrees of the Church to excrement. In his commentary on Galatians, he wrote:

    "The Pope and his vermin… fill the world with their dung, their filth, their stinking ordinances and traditions."

    He famously suggested that the Devil, after tempting him, would eventually "void and empty his belly… a papal decretal of the most exquisite sort would come out."

    Sodomy and Depravity: He frequently accused monks and priests of homosexuality and perversion in graphic terms. In his Table Talks, he stated that monasteries and convents were nothing but "brothels" and that the clergy were "sodomites."

2. Against Theological Opponents (e.g., Lord Albrecht of Mainz)

When Lord Albrecht of Mainz continued to sell indulgences, Luther wrote him a letter in 1539 that was filled with shocking insults:

"You should show your contempt for the devil, who has made such an ass of you, and stop protecting your vomit and your shit… those blasphemous, poisonous indulgences of yours."

He then suggested that Albrecht should have a "vomiting spell" to purge himself of his indulgences and his "idolatries."

3. Against the Devil

Luther's scatological battles were not just against human opponents but also against the Devil during his periods of spiritual anguish (Anfechtungen).

The "Fart" Defense: One of the most famous anecdotes comes from his Table Talks. When plagued by the Devil, Luther is reported to have proclaimed:

"I have fought against him with flatulence." (The original German is more vulgar: *"Ich hab ihn mit Furzen abgewehrt").

Defecating on the Devil: In another instance, he is said to have told the Devil: "I shit on you and in your name." This was his way of expressing utter contempt and rejecting the Devil's accusations, believing that the victory of Christ made the Devil a defeated, contemptible foe.

4. General Vulgarities and Earthy Language

Luther's vulgarity extended to his general writing and speech:

In his "On the Jews and Their Lies" (1543), he uses extremely coarse language, recommending that synagogues and Jewish homes be burned, and that Jews be subjected to hard labor or expelled.

He commonly used phrases like:

    Leck mich am Arschn ("Kiss my ass")

    Dreck ("filth" or "shit") to describe worthless ideas.

    Hurenkind ("whore's child" or "son of a whore") as a general insult.

Conclusion

Martin Luther's use of vulgarity was intentional, strategic, and prolific. It was an integral part of his identity as a blunt, passionate reformer who believed he was engaged in a cosmic war. To remove this vulgarity from the historical record is to sanitize and misunderstand his character and the ferocity of the Reformation conflict.

For modern readers, it is jarring and can be offensive. Scholars debate its effectiveness; while it undoubtedly made his writing memorable and powerful to his supporters, it also made reconciliation with his opponents impossible and contributed to the violent and divisive nature of the period. It remains one of the most striking and controversial aspects of his vast literary legacy.

Vulgar Language in Reformation

Martin Luther, the 16th-century reformer, often used harsh, earthy, and sometimes vulgar language in his polemical writings and sermons. His style was deliberately blunt; he wanted to shock, ridicule, and undermine his opponents (both the papacy and other reformers he disagreed with). For Luther, this wasn’t just uncontrolled anger — he saw strong language as a rhetorical weapon in a spiritual battle.

Here are some detailed examples from his works (translated into English from the German or Latin originals):

1. Against the Papacy at Rome, Founded by the Devil (1545)

• Luther calls the Pope:

  “the most hellish father, St. Paul’s stinking bag of maggots”
  “the devil’s whore and sodomite.”

• He also compares the papal court to a brothel and cesspool.

2. Table Talk (Tischreden)

• In casual conversations recorded by his students, Luther often used barnyard or toilet humor.

• He said of the Pope:

  “I resist the devil, and often it is with a fart that I chase him away.”

• He frequently equated false teaching with excrement, e.g., “The papists are like donkeys, full of nothing but dung.”

3. On the Bondage of the Will (1525) – against Erasmus

• Luther tells Erasmus:

  “Your whole book is so useless and full of crap (merda), I think you must have shat it out in a single session.”

• He calls Erasmus’ arguments “stinking scum” and accuses him of being “a mouth and anus equally open.”

4. Against the Roman Papacy, an Institution of the Devil (1545)

• Luther refers to the papal decretals (church laws) as:

  “Devil’s excrement, dung sprinkled with holy water.”

5. Letter to Duke George (1532)

• Luther calls the Duke “a pig, ass, and mad fool” and says:

  “You are a brothel-keeper and the devil’s spawn in hell.”

Why Luther used such vulgarity ?

• Theological conviction: He believed the papacy and certain opponents were agents of Satan, so he chose language meant to unmask and ridicule them.

• Cultural context: Early modern German polemics often employed scatological humor and invective; Luther was especially gifted at it.

• Accessibility: His rough speech resonated with common people who lived in a world of earthy metaphors.

Martin Luther repeatedly used vulgar, scatological, and insulting language in his writings and speeches. Examples include calling papal decrees “devil’s excrement,” mocking opponents with references to farting and dung, and describing his adversaries as donkeys, pigs, or brothel-keepers. His aim was to ridicule, expose, and discredit those he saw as enemies of the gospel.

Sarcastic

The apostle Paul used sarcasm in his letters. While the Bible is a sacred text, it contains a variety of human literary styles, including irony, satire, and sharp, sarcastic rebuke.

Paul's use of sarcasm is almost always a rhetorical device to make a powerful point, usually to correct serious errors in thinking or behavior within the early churches. He uses it to shock his readers into seeing the absurdity of a position they are considering.

The Clearest Example: Sarcasm in Galatians

The most famous and undeniable example of Paul's sarcasm is found in his letter to the Galatians. The church was being influenced by "Judaizers"—people who insisted that Gentile (non-Jewish) converts must be circumcised and follow the Jewish Law (the Torah) in order to be truly saved.

Paul argues vehemently that salvation is by grace through faith in Christ alone, not by works of the Law. His frustration peaks, and he unleashes some of the most biting sarcasm in the New Testament.

Example 1: Galatians 5:12

"As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!" (NIV)

The Context: The Judaizers were insisting that Gentile believers be circumcised (a minor surgical procedure) to be saved.

The Sarcasm: Paul takes their argument to its shocking, logical extreme. He says, in effect, "If you think cutting a little flesh for circumcision makes you so holy and righteous, why stop there? If physical mutilation is the path to God, then go all the way and castrate yourselves!" This was a brutal and humorous put-down. He wasn't literally wishing them harm; he was using extreme hyperbole to show that their entire premise—that physical acts save you—was flawed and dangerous.

Example 2: The "Foolish" Galatians

Earlier in the letter, Paul uses a sarcastic tone to express his utter amazement at their foolishness.

"You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?" (Galatians 3:1, NIV)

The word "foolish" here (anoētoi in Greek) doesn't just mean silly; it means "mindless" or "lacking understanding." "Bewitched" implies they've been put under a magical spell. This is sarcastic hyperbole—they haven't literally been hexed, but Paul is so baffled by their irrational behavior that he describes it as if they are under a dark magic that has made them lose their minds.

Other Examples of Paul's Sarcasm and Irony

1. 2 Corinthians 11-12: The "Fool's Speech"

Paul is forced to defend his apostolic authority against "super-apostles" who were boasting about their credentials, visions, and miracles to win over the Corinthian church. Paul responds with heavy irony by engaging in the same kind of boasting, but in a way that subverts it.

"I repeat: Let no one take me for a fool. But if you do, then tolerate me just as you would a fool, so that I may do a little boasting. In this self-confident boasting I am not talking as the Lord would, but as a fool... I am out of my mind to talk like this." (2 Corinthians 11:16-17, 23a)

He then lists his real credentials: beatings, shipwrecks, hunger, and suffering for Christ—the opposite of the glamorous boasts of his opponents. He sarcastically calls it "boasting of his weaknesses" (2 Cor 12:9), turning the world's concept of power and status upside down.

2. 1 Corinthians 4:8: Mocking Complacency

The Corinthian church was prideful and arrogant, believing they were already spiritually rich and kings who had arrived.

"Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! You have begun to reign—and that without us! How I wish that you really had begun to reign so that we also might reign with you!" (NIV)

Paul is holding up a mirror to their arrogance. He is saying, "Oh, so you're already full, rich, and ruling like kings? That's amazing! How wonderful for you! I wish that were true..." His tone is clearly mocking, pointing out the vast gap between their self-perception and the spiritual immaturity they were actually displaying.

Why Did Paul Use Sarcasm?

It's important to understand that Paul wasn't just being mean. His sarcasm served several purposes:

To Shock and Awaken: It was a wake-up call for people who were drifting into dangerous theological error.

To Highlight Absurdity: It's an effective tool to show how ridiculous a false idea is by taking it to its logical conclusion.

Rhetorical Force: In the ancient Greco-Roman world, skilled debaters and orators often used irony and sarcasm to persuade an audience and dismantle an opponent's argument.

Paul did write sarcastically in the Bible. His most famous and sharpest examples are found in Galatians, where he uses it as a powerful weapon to defend the core truth of the gospel of grace.