Sola scriptura

[sculleywr]

No, I didn't miss that, and it doesn't change one thing I said either. I also don't look for perfection, that's you, you claim to have the "true oneness church". You bring it on yourself. I look only for simplicity because its obvious that when denominations add things like icon veneration, canonization, praying to saints and other such things, that only causes division and contention which are not spiritual. THis lacks discernment. Yet you just cant let go of such things. I just cant see the apostle paul promoting such doctrines, because he was a man who promoted liberty from the law, and rebuked glorying in men, and said that idols have no power. He surely wouldn't promote such things if they caused the division and contention that they do, because he preaches love above all things, and unity in the body.

Simplicity is not synonymous with truth. It is simpler to believe that Jesus was just a man. It makes more sense and doesn't create paradox. The Church didn't add things like praying to saints or use of Icons. Those were already present at the time of Christ. The Intercession of the saints actually shows up in the Septuagint, which is the Scripture the Apostles used.

Idols have no power because they are made to REPLACE God. Icons do not replace God and your lie about Icons being idols has been dealt with several times. Now I will tell you to drop that one because it is a lie and I doubt you want to explain to God why you would promote a lie. Doesn't God have an opinion about lying?

The fact is that YOU are the source from which the division comes from the Church. If you choose to divide yourself, it is not the Church forcing you to. Did the Bishops of the Orthodox Church hold a gun to your head and tell you that you must divide yourself? Did they do anything that was directly contrary to the Scriptures? The answer to both is no. Division from the Truth is not caused by those who hold the truth. It is quite common among people who CLAIM to be against division to divide themselves from others. In some cases, a reference to your own self-excommunication from any church might count as ad hominem tu quoque, but in this case, it is directly relevant to the facts of the matter. You talk about how there should be no divisions in the church, and yet you are a division to yourself. You cut yourself off from the Body of Christ of your own will. You can give all the explanations you want for why you won't go to church, but the fact is that God knows the reality and so do you, and so do I, even, for I once considered it. They are all excuses. If you can't find a church that meets up to your standards of being filled with perfect people, which seems to be your standard, then perhaps the problem is not with the churches, but with your standards. Don't tell me that you don't need people, because even Paul, in his final hour, wished for people to be with him, calling for Timothy to come to be with him and bring his coat. Being a Christian is not something we do on our own, because one cannot be a gathering, an Ekklessia, on his own. To be a gathering, there must be multiple people gathered together. Not on the internet. In the real world without screens in between. I'm sorry, but relationships formed on the internet are not real or lasting. It is very rare for relationships to form without physical face to face contact. And that is the way the Apostles did it. They didn't communicate by written letters alone. They went house to house, meeting people where they lived, worshiping together with them, ministering together with them.

No man can expect to grow without the Church. As John said, if any man says he is perfect, he is a liar. And to say that one does not need correction is to say you are perfect. Eating meat does not mean you are perfect. It means you humble yourself to obey the commands of God. God commands us to gather together in community to worship. So while you talk about following Paul, you don't walk it. Your walk is to disobey the direct command of Paul, and in doing so, to disobey Christ Himself. Do not talk about how veneration of Icons, which is not a violation of Scripture, is a problem for the faith while claiming not gathering together in Church, which IS a violation of Scripture, is not. It's a case of whining about a speck you think is in someone's eye whilst there is this giant log in your own. Before you claim there is division caused by others, you must remove all divisions that are rooted in yourself.

 

[Propianotuner]

Denn alles Fleisch ist wie Gras
und alle Herrlichkeit des Menschen
wie des Grases Blumen.
Das Gras ist verdorret
und die Blume abgefallen.

So seid nun geduldig, lieben Brüder,
bis auf die Zukunft des Herrn.
Siehe, ein Ackermann wartet
auf die köstliche Frucht der Erde
und ist geduldig darüber, bis er empfahe
den Morgenregen und Abendregen.

Aber des Herrn Wort bleibet in Ewigkeit.

Die Erlöseten des Herrn werden wieder kommen,
und gen Zion kommen mit Jauchzen;
ewige Freude wird über ihrem Haupte sein;
Freude und Wonne werden sie ergreifen
und Schmerz und Seufzen wird weg müssen

For all flesh is as grass,
and the glory of man
like flowers.
The grass withers
and the flower falls.

Therefore be patient, dear brothers,
for the coming of the Lord.
Behold, the husbandman waits
for the delicious fruits of the earth
and is patient for it, until he receives
the morning rain and evening rain.

But the word of the Lord endures for eternity.

The redeemed of the Lord will come again,
and come to Zion with a shout;
eternal joy shall be upon her head;
They shall take joy and gladness,
and sorrow and sighing must depart.

24 for
“All flesh is like grass
and all its glory like the flower of grass.
The grass withers,
and the flower falls,
25 but the word of the Lord remains forever.”
1st Peter 1:24-25

1. No Scriptural canon is established by Scripture, so the canon itself is purely tradition.

While your honest sentiments here are appreciated, this statement is hardly representative of the issue, and critically acclaimed minds from your denominational background tend not to make statements this drastic. Why?

Well, the conundrum here is that any appraisal that keeps an appreciable sum of the facts at hand has to, at the very least, admit that the origins of the canon are neither purely scriptural nor purely traditional.

Every knowledgeable Christian should be able to acknowledge that when, for example, Paul described one of his own epistles to Timothy as theopnustos/God-breathed, it became canon/binding right that moment because God spoke. At the same time, even though there are several passages that refer to their own books or other areas of scripture either specifically as theopnustos or generally convey the concept, we're left with a considerable portion of scripture that has no such internal confirmation.

What's more, we're left in the position of having to ask: is the mere claim of something being so stupendous, so sublime and beautiful as theopnustos enough to warrant instant recognition of it as genuinely having that nature? Of course not! Someone between then and now had to recognize the very voice of God and commend it to us future Christians for our edification, pleasure, and salvation. But that someone wasn't God, and his/her statements are hence not all authoritative.

2. There is no verse that says Scripture is comprehensive, meaning the doctrine of Sola scripture is itself not derived from Scripture.

Of course there is no verse saying Scripture is comprehensive! Who is the Author and primary subject of scripture? The Lord God, who is worshiped precisely because He is beyond all comprehension, His glory can never be told, and His love can never be reciprocated in any remotely alike manner. The best that all of the Word can do is present analogical confirmation of truths simply too profound to be explained.

What is Scripture, then? It is sufficient.

2nd Timothy 3:14-16

14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

Notice that I have every intention of being intellectually honest enough to include the crucial context here that Paul recognized Timothy's having learned through association with knowledgeable believers, and he not only acknowledged it but relished in the fact. However, verses 15 and 16 are unambiguous about the value and authority of Scripture.

There is no reasonable scruple requiring that a believer must look at the sum total of any church's traditions and say "that is theopnustos". Our own sin nature precludes us entertaining the thought that a general record of what is and isn't theopnustos can be institutionally maintained. Being creaturely, and having to live with our carnal nature while not yet in a glorified state, when thought of together necessitates the conclusion that a comprehensive set of statements about God's nature is altogether impossible, seeing as we are not only finite but flawed. We aren't just fundamentally incapable because the finite cannot comprehend the infinite, our statements aren't nearly as reliable as we'd like to think because human beings in history have failed and concomitantly have been part of negative developments in the Church.

Where does Scripture authorize its canon? Where does Scripture authorize the doctrine of sola scriptura?

-It doesn't authorize it's canon exhaustively, but any dogged student should be able to find scripture canonizing itself.

-Sola Scriptura is simply too ill defined to say "Scripture authorizes it". Does Scripture authorize the doctrine that it is the ultimate judge in matters of faith, and that as in Peter's epistle it is the litmus test that determines whether or not anything else is of a divine origin? Absolutely.

 

[amariselle]

I am not suggesting that Scripture and oral tradition are separate. I am suggesting that, as Scripture says, not everything that was said is written, as doing so would be requiring more books than existed in the world.

The fact is that there is no part of Apostolic Tradition that contradicts the Scripture, because Scripture is an integral part of Apostolic Tradition. While it may contradict modern interpretations of Scripture, it does not contradict Scripture. And we know for a fact that this Tradition is put at equal levels with the written epistles of the Apostles.

We also know that if you remove the Tradition which is above Scripture, you lose the very Canon of Scripture. The Canon of Scripture is Tradition, and because it defines the content of Scripture, any change to the Canon can change the message. Nobody can point to an alteration of the Canon which did not change the message the Scripture gives. Mohammed changed the Canon when he added the Qur'an. Protestants changed the Canon when they removed what they falsely call the Apocrypha (how can something be a hidden book when everyone knew about it?). Joseph Smith changed that canon by adding 4 new books. Jehovah's witnesses changed that canon to specifically remove references to the deity of Christ.

So it's not judgemental to say that people who claim Sola Scriptura are lying to themselves. They do not hold Scripture as the highest authority. The canon is the highest authority and always will be. Whoever sets the Canon is the authority over the Scripture. Since God did NOT set the Canon, that means that we have either the Canon of the Church, or the canons of other groups who created their own canons.

And it is not convoluted. It establishes a clear hierarchy. Sure, you can make it convoluted, but just as a 5th grader is able to grasp the basics of how the body works in a basic science class, so can the average man grasp the basics of this structure of authority.

God did in fact "set the Canon." Scripture is His divinely inspired word, it is not manmade. God worked through all of the writers and those who formed Scripture, He is the Author and Creator, not people.

And in regards to tradition; yes, Jesus did and said more things that were not written down, but nothing that He did or said would have contradicted what is written down, because God does not contradict Himself. I don't know as much about Orthodox tradition, but there is much in Catholic Tradition that is not Scriptural in any way.

And when it comes to the Apocrypha, the Jews themselves did not accept those books as on the same level of authority as the rest of their Scriptures. The Apocrypha was added much later by the Catholic Church.

And yes, it is judgmental to say the terrible things you have said about Protestants, and to suggest that every single one of them is lying to themselves and that they do not have true and complete faith in God because they do not accept Orthodox or Catholic traction, but instead uphold the word of God above all other teachings.

Many of the people you are so harshly judging have risked or given up their very lives for even a portion of God's word, that's how precious they know it is. You should read some accounts from Voice of the Martyrs sometime (or read some more, if you already have). That might help you put some things into perspective.

Our brothers and sisters in Christ who live in countries where Christianity is a crime punishable by imprisonment, torture or death are giving everything to follow and share the word of God. And all they care about is the Gospel and being used by God to share His word and the Gospel message so that more people can be saved.

It's horrendous that you would sit in judgement over all such Christians and suggest that just because they do not follow certain church traditions, their faith has no heart or true substance.

You have no right to suggest that someone else's faith is not completely adequate or genuine just because they are not Catholic or Orthodox.

 

[mikpat]

Canon— 'it signifies the authoritative list or closed number of writings composed under Divine inspiration, and destined for the well-being of the Church, using the latter word in the wide sense of the theocratic society which began with God's revelation of Himself to the people of Israel, and which finds its ripe development and completion in the Catholic organism. "

Canon of Old Testament,


Canon of The New Testament—

Seems to include all the writings of the New Testament which were evoked by particular occasions , or addressed to particular destinations, example, exchanges between the leading Churches— Antioch, Thessalonica, Alexanadria, Corinth, Rome. All added to the special treasure which were publicly read in its religious assemblies all Apostolic writings which came under its knowledge.
The faithful must have had from the beginning some realization that in the writings of the Apostles and Evangelists, they had acquired a new body of Divine Scriptures, a New written Testament, destined to stand side by side with the Old.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia

 

[sculleywr]

God did in fact "set the Canon." Scripture is His divinely inspired word, it is not manmade. God worked through all of the writers and those who formed Scripture, He is the Author and Creator, not people.

And in regards to tradition; yes, Jesus did and said more things that were not written down, but nothing that He did or said would have contradicted what is written down, because God does not contradict Himself. I don't know as much about Orthodox tradition, but there is much in Catholic Tradition that is not Scriptural in any way.

And when it comes to the Apocrypha, the Jews themselves did not accept those books as on the same level of authority as the rest of their Scriptures. The Apocrypha was added much later by the Catholic Church.

And yes, it is judgmental to say the terrible things you have said about Protestants, and to suggest that every single one of them is lying to themselves and that they do not have true and complete faith in God because they do not accept Orthodox or Catholic traction, but instead uphold the word of God above all other teachings.

Many of the people you are so harshly judging have risked or given up their very lives for even a portion of God's word, that's how precious they know it is. You should read some accounts from Voice of the Martyrs sometime (or read some more, if you already have). That might help you put some things into perspective.

Our brothers and sisters in Christ who live in countries where Christianity is a crime punishable by imprisonment, torture or death are giving everything to follow and share the word of God. And all they care about is the Gospel and being used by God to share His word and the Gospel message so that more people can be saved.

It's horrendous that you would sit in judgement over all such Christians and suggest that just because they do not follow certain church traditions, their faith has no heart or true substance.

You have no right to suggest that someone else's faith is not completely adequate or genuine just because they are not Catholic or Orthodox.

So where exactly did God declare which canon we should use? First Opinions 3:15?

Unless you have chapter and verse for where God listed which books are Scripture and which aren't, then your argument falls completely flat. The Canon was formed by the Church, compiled by St. Athanasius in 367 AD and accepted around 50 years later at the Council of Carthage. And if you're going to say God inspired that, then you should accept the rest of what Athanasius and the Council of Carthage wrote.

 

[Meowzltov]

There are two difficulties here.

1. No Scriptural canon is established by Scripture, so the canon itself is purely tradition.

2. There is no verse that says Scripture is comprehensive, meaning the doctrine of Sola scripture is itself not derived from Scripture.

EVEN MORE than this, Scripture itself commands us NOT to be Sola Scriptura. Deuteronomy 17:8-13 says that if there is a matter of law that is too unclear to be judged just by the Torah, to take it to the Levites and judges/elders (the seventy elders is also known as the Sanhedrin). Go not to the right or to the left. If anyone questions the ruling, KILL THEM, so that all Israel shall be afraid. That's AUTHORITY given by God himself, authority outside of Scripture.

 

[FireDragon76]

I've become a bit jaded about the issue... a week ago, bored, I watched God's Not Dead and I couldn't help but think that what passes as "Bible-based religion" has gone off the rails, replaced with consumerism, polemicism, and a childish worldview based on cheap grace and glib certainties that won't withstand a "dark night of the soul" (is it a wonder that so many atheists grew up with this type of religion?). So, I have a lot more respect now for churches that try to adhere to some kind of catholicity.

 

[amariselle]

So where exactly did God declare which canon we should use? First Opinions 3:15?

Unless you have chapter and verse for where God listed which books are Scripture and which aren't, then your argument falls completely flat. The Canon was formed by the Church, compiled by St. Athanasius in 367 AD and accepted around 50 years later at the Council of Carthage. And if you're going to say God inspired that, then you should accept the rest of what Athanasius and the Council of Carthage wrote.

I have absolutely NO problem believing that God inspired the formation of the Canon without also accepting the rest of Athanasius' and the Council of Carthage's writings as equal authority to Scripture.

God has inspired the entire Bible, it is HIS word, not mankind's.

 

[amariselle]

EVEN MORE than this, Scripture itself commands us NOT to be Sola Scriptura. Deuteronomy 17:8-13 says that if there is a matter of law that is too unclear to be judged just by the Torah, to take it to the Levites and judges/elders (the seventy elders is also known as the Sanhedrin). Go not to the right or to the left. If anyone questions the ruling, KILL THEM, so that all Israel shall be afraid. That's AUTHORITY given by God himself, authority outside of Scripture.

So, are we still under the Old Testament Law, or under the New Covenant?

Are we now able to go directly to God, knowing that Jesus, our High Priest is mediating and interceding for us, or must we continue to rely on the Levitical Priesthood/Sanhedrin to intercede for us and make atonement for our sins?

Was not the sacrifice and atoning death of Jesus on the cross sufficient? Or should we rely on various rituals, practices and traditions to make ourselves right with God?

 

[W2L]

So where exactly did God declare which canon we should use? First Opinions 3:15?

Unless you have chapter and verse for where God listed which books are Scripture and which aren't, then your argument falls completely flat. The Canon was formed by the Church, compiled by St. Athanasius in 367 AD and accepted around 50 years later at the Council of Carthage. And if you're going to say God inspired that, then you should accept the rest of what Athanasius and the Council of Carthage wrote.

I'm happy to follow Christ and not a Church. My soul delights in His words of love, faith, and hope. My soul prospers at home on Sunday morning without any contentious denomination to bring me down. I do not need a denomination that teaches me to go online and argue with other denominations. I am free and happy. Blessed is the man who makes God his dwelling place.

Praise the Lord my soul, praise the lord.

 

[Propianotuner]

The Canon was formed by the Church, compiled by St. Athanasius in 367 AD and accepted around 50 years later at the Council of Carthage.

It is deleterious to your case that you happened to mention Athanasius. In his 39th Festal Letter, where we see the first extensive list by an Orthodox bishop (Marcion the Gnostic had come up with a list long before), he makes it explicitly clear that it was not only his attitude but that of the council that they couldn't form the canon of scripture, they confirmed it.

What they did was recognize authority, not assert it. In fact if you read contemporary accounts of the council and take a look at it's canons, you'll find that the confirmation of the scriptural canon took little deliberation, a last measure if you will to secure the Church against heresy and false literature propagated by Gnostics, Arians and Semi-Arians.

The most common tradition was that they simply asked bishops with sees that dated back to Acts and who could trace their ordination back to the Apostles: what is read in your church? And so the canon was unanimously confirmed.

 

[sculleywr]

I have absolutely NO problem believing that God inspired the formation of the Canon without also accepting the rest of Athanasius' and the Council of Carthage's writings as equal authority to Scripture.

God has inspired the entire Bible, it is HIS word, not mankind's.

Except for one problem, the Scripture never said the canon will be inspired, nor WHICH canon is inspired. You've just run into the same problem as KJV Onlyists, with the only difference being that there are less canons than there are translations. There are several canons out there. There's the Marcionite Canon, which is the earliest known canon. There's the Syriac Canon, as well. Not to mention the modern canons of the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons. There's also different canons of the Old Testament. The one you most likely use is one that was formed by 5th century Jews called the Masoretes. I use the Septuagint Canon.

And without God declaring which Canon is the inspired Canon, you have no basis of authority to declare which Canon is inspired. So you don't have a problem? You do have a problem because you're taking man's word that the Canon you use is the true Canon. Since God didn't say it is inspired, you must rely on a tradition of men.

 

[sculleywr]

I'm happy to follow Christ and not a Church. My soul delights in His words of love, faith, and hope. My soul prospers at home on Sunday morning without any contentious denomination to bring me down. I do not need a denomination that teaches me to go online and argue with other denominations. I am free and happy. Blessed is the man who makes God his dwelling place.

Praise the Lord my soul, praise the lord.

And you live in rejection of God's command to gather together with the brethren. You are not free. Any person who lives in defiance of God's command is already chained down. The most effective kind of slavery is the one where the slave thinks he is free.

 

[sculleywr]

It is deleterious to your case that you happened to mention Athanasius. In his 39th Festal Letter, where we see the first extensive list by an Orthodox bishop (Marcion the Gnostic had come up with a list long before), he makes it explicitly clear that it was not only his attitude but that of the council that they couldn't form the canon of scripture, they confirmed it.

What they did was recognize authority, not assert it. In fact if you read contemporary accounts of the council and take a look at it's canons, you'll find that the confirmation of the scriptural canon took little deliberation, a last measure if you will to secure the Church against heresy and false literature propagated by Gnostics, Arians and Semi-Arians.

The most common tradition was that they simply asked bishops with sees that dated back to Acts and who could trace their ordination back to the Apostles: what is read in your church? And so the canon was unanimously confirmed.

And this makes it Sola Scriptura how?

They didn't assert something that was already assumed by the very existence of the Council. Shoot, even Paul didn't assert his own authority in several of his books. The only time he asserts it is when he directly defends his apostleship. Assertion of the assumed might have been considered redundant.

Besides that, the Old Testament currently used in the majority of the Protestant world was not formed in that way, either. It was formed by the Jews long after Christ.

 

[Meowzltov]

So, are we still under the Old Testament Law, or under the New Covenant?

The new covenant is simply the gospel, that Christ died for our sins, is risen and is coming again.

God still calls us to obey does he not? We are called unto good works, the scripture says. Gentiles are not bound by Jewish Law, but by universal law, sometimes called Natural Law. Natural Law is part of Torah, because of course Jews are human beings too. But Natural Law is much smaller than Torah. Natural is loving your neighbor as yourself. Refraining from sexual immorality. Keeping away from idolatry.

 

[amariselle]

Except for one problem, the Scripture never said the canon will be inspired, nor WHICH canon is inspired. You've just run into the same problem as KJV Onlyists, with the only difference being that there are less canons than there are translations. There are several canons out there. There's the Marcionite Canon, which is the earliest known canon. There's the Syriac Canon, as well. Not to mention the modern canons of the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons. There's also different canons of the Old Testament. The one you most likely use is one that was formed by 5th century Jews called the Masoretes. I use the Septuagint Canon.

And without God declaring which Canon is the inspired Canon, you have no basis of authority to declare which Canon is inspired. So you don't have a problem? You do have a problem because you're taking man's word that the Canon you use is the true Canon. Since God didn't say it is inspired, you must rely on a tradition of men.

I rely on God, above and beyond any human being, including myself.

The Bible is God's inspired word.

No, I don't have the problems you say I do. I trust God, in everything. That is what I am always praying and growing in.

You can believe I have erred and made a faulty judgment if you like, that is your right, that doesn't bother me. My hope and trust are in God and in Jesus Christ, His Son and the Holy Spirit.

Blessings,

~Amariselle

 

[amariselle]

The new covenant is simply the gospel, that Christ died for our sins, is risen and is coming again.

God still calls us to obey does he not? We are called unto good works, the scripture says. Gentiles are not bound by Jewish Law, but by universal law, sometimes called Natural Law. Natural Law is part of Torah, because of course Jews are human beings too. But Natural Law is much smaller than Torah. Natural is loving your neighbor as yourself. Refraining from sexual immorality. Keeping away from idolatry.

Of course we are to obey God, I never said or suggested otherwise.

And while our works and obedience are certainly evidence of our faith, our works and obedience in themselves are not what saves us. We are saved by the blood of Christ and the mercy, Grace and forgiveness He offers us, and by accepting and believing in Him.

 

[sculleywr]

I rely on God, above and beyond any human being, including myself.

The Bible is God's inspired word.

No, I don't have the problems you say I do. I trust God, in everything. That is what I am always praying and growing in.

You can believe I have erred and made a faulty judgment if you like, that is your right, that doesn't bother me. My hope and trust are in God and in Jesus Christ, His Son and the Holy Spirit.

Blessings,

~Amariselle

So God told you that's the right canon? God? And not a human being in a church you grew up in?

Sorry, but you rely on perception. Personal perception. Your Old Testament canon was made by people who outright hated Christ, and you have no problem with that fact. Your problem is there. You can deny it all you want, but in the end, you saying God said it was inspired is, in the end, you saying it was inspired. Without God openly and clearly declaring the Canon of Scripture, you do have that problem. It is based on human perception, and not divine declaration. If it were based on divine declaration, you could point me to where God declared the Canon of Athanasius and of the Masoretes to be inspired. But you can't. It's 100% human declaration.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Of course we are to obey God, I never said or suggested otherwise.

And while our works and obedience are certainly evidence of our faith, our works and obedience in themselves are not what saves us. We are saved by the blood of Christ and the mercy, Grace and forgiveness He offers us, and by accepting and believing in Him.

Your testimony of trust and faith in God Himself has been good to see over this year.

Especially in sharp contrast to those who trust in man opposed to God,
and those who trust in traditions that contradict God and contradict God's Word.

Shalom to All who love the Truth as you do !

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The Greek word is Paradosis. It is verse three. the KJV mistranslates it as ordinances. However, Tradition is more than just a bunch of rules, as is Paradosis. Paradosis is not teachings or ordinances. It is knowledge that is handed down, be it through written or oral form, or even by example, as martial arts are traditions which couldn't be conveyed through speaking or writing, but by demonstration. This is shown in translations of all other contemporary documents in the Greek which use the word. It isn't used to speak only of teachings.

First, I do not see the Greek word "paradosis" in Philippians.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/Lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?strongs=G3862&t=KJV

Second, the KJV does not have the word "ordinances" within the book of Philippians.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/search.cfm?Criteria=ordinances&t=KJV#s=s_primary_0_1

Three, besides, I don't believe the KJV has any errors within it. Many have tried to convince me otherwise, but they have failed miserably. For if the KJV had errors within it, then God would not have preserved His Word perfectly like He said He would. For if you cannot trust one word in your Bible than what makes you trust the rest of it? Or do you get to pick and choose which words are correct or false? Seems to me when someone says the KJV mistranslates words is not saying so because they know it because it is a fact that they witnessed firsthand but because they do not agree with a particular truth in God's Word as a result of a personal belief that they are hanging onto that conflicts with it. In other words, believing in the Bible is an all in one package deal. You either believe every word of it is perfect and true or it is all false. I choose to believe all of the Bible is true because of the many evidences that back it up. Yes, I am talking about the KJV in addition to the other languages God chose to preserve His Word thru out time.

Side Note:

While I do believe in using Modern Translations, I do not make them my authority like the KJV. I use Modern Translations sort of like sifting thru the dirt to get to the gold in the KJV and the original languages.

...