Ditto here with a book by Peter Ruckman.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Are modern Bible translations gnostic?
- Thread starter Keith M
- Start date
- Status
Ditto here with a book by Peter Ruckman.
Askjo, we're still waiting for you to produce one shred of evidence modern Bible translations are gnostic. Do you have anything to contribute, or are we to assume this is merely another flight of your imagination and it has absolutely no foundation? Your silence speaks volumes about the legitimacy of your undounded accusation.
I even tried to help Askjo with a definition of "gnostic" as it applies to worship.
"How 'boutcha, Askjo, gotcher ears on?"
And a big ten-furr on Riplinger, Marcia! She's in the business of selling boox & hitting the lecture tour, livin' large at the expense of the gullible, the TRUTH be dipped!
Here's a little more about her:
http://www.avpublications.org/
Last edited by a moderator:
Gnosticism is a ”philosophical knowledge” system including heretical teachings. Gnosticism comes from the Greek word "GNOSIS" which means “knowledge." Gnosticism’s headquarters were in Alexandria, Egypt. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Eusebius were leaders of Gnosticism. Their heretical doctrines are found in the Greek manuscripts which came from Alexandria such as the Vatican and the Sinai which the Gnostics corrupted in at many places. Wikipedia encyclopedia and Britannicaencyclopedia said Gnosticism was popular in 2nd -3rd centuries. Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology agreed that the early church called heretics, “Gnostics.” Ancient Gnosticism was earliest heresies that challenged Christianity. Gnosticism is practiced in the United States and in other countries today.
The most dangerous of these perversions was Gnosticism. Basilides was a Gnostic who taught in Alexandria and founded his school of Gnosticism there. Valentinus, a Gnostic who was born in Eygpt, founded 2 schools of Gnosticism in Rome (where the Vaticanus manuscript was kept) and in Alexandria. Gnostic Marcion and his followers mutilated the Scriptures – the New Testament. Gnostics produced corrupt manuscripts in Alexandria.
A few writers of the New Testament condemned the Gnosticism as false and heretical. Also they condemned the Gnostic teachings.
The most dangerous of these perversions was Gnosticism. Basilides was a Gnostic who taught in Alexandria and founded his school of Gnosticism there. Valentinus, a Gnostic who was born in Eygpt, founded 2 schools of Gnosticism in Rome (where the Vaticanus manuscript was kept) and in Alexandria. Gnostic Marcion and his followers mutilated the Scriptures – the New Testament. Gnostics produced corrupt manuscripts in Alexandria.
A few writers of the New Testament condemned the Gnosticism as false and heretical. Also they condemned the Gnostic teachings.
Last edited by a moderator:
Gnostics’ denial of doctrines:
I learned that ancient and modern scholars admitted that the Gnostics heretics tampered the NT text.
- the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ
- His virgin birth
- His miracles
- His bodily resurrection
- Jesus was the Christ
I learned that ancient and modern scholars admitted that the Gnostics heretics tampered the NT text.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Gnostics’ view of Jesus Christ showed that God could not have become incarnate. Gnostics did not believe that Christ really came in the flesh. They taught that Jesus was God, but not human. Look at the Scriptures:
1 Timothy 3:16 (KJV)
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
The Greek text on this verse said:
και ομολογουμενως μεγα εστιν το της ευσεβειας μυστηριον θεος εφανερωθη εν σαρκι εδικαιωθη εν πνευματι ωφθη αγγελοις εκηρυχθη εν εθνεσιν επιστευθη εν κοσμω ανεληφθη εν δοξη
The Greek word, θεος means, “God.”
Modern versions changed from “God” to “He” or “He who” or whatsoever.
1 Timothy 3:16 (New International Version)
Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.
1 Timothy 3:16 (New American Standard Bible)
By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory.
1 Timothy 3:16 (KJV)
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
The Greek text on this verse said:
και ομολογουμενως μεγα εστιν το της ευσεβειας μυστηριον θεος εφανερωθη εν σαρκι εδικαιωθη εν πνευματι ωφθη αγγελοις εκηρυχθη εν εθνεσιν επιστευθη εν κοσμω ανεληφθη εν δοξη
The Greek word, θεος means, “God.”
Modern versions changed from “God” to “He” or “He who” or whatsoever.
1 Timothy 3:16 (New International Version)
Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.
1 Timothy 3:16 (New American Standard Bible)
By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory.
Last edited by a moderator:
Arians and Gnostics worked together and corrupted the doctrinal texts. Arians are similar to JW. According to Ante Nicene Fathers, they said, “Only begotten God” had become common with the Arians. We know that Jesus Christ was God, and that Jesus Christ was "begotten" by means of the incarnation, does NOT equal "begotten God.” God the Son, Jesus Christ, became the "only begotten Son" through the incarnation.
The Second Arian Confession said “And in one Lord Jesus Christ, his son, only-begotten god/deity [John 1:18], by whom are all things, who was begotten before all ages from the father, god from God [deity from the Deity]…” Look at the Scripture:
John 1:18 (KJV)
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
John 1:18 NWT (JW)
No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotton god who is in the bosom (position) with the Father, is the one that has explained him.
John 1:18 (New American Standard Bible)
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
The Greek W/H Text on this verse said:
θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο
The Greek word, θεος means, “God.”W/H were also Gnostics and unbelievers.
The Greek Received Text on this verse said:
θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε ο μονογενης υιος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο
The Greek word, υιος means “Son.”
The Gnostics and Arians favored “begotten God” instead of “begotten Son.” The Arian Creed contained, “only begotten God.” Clement of Alexandria and Origen quoted “begotten Son” and “begotten God.” However they favored ”God” over “Son.” For example, Clement said, “For how shall he not be loved for whose sake the only begotten Son is sent from the Father’s bosom…” And he said, “No one hath seen God at any time. The only-begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him.”
Codex Alexandrinus contained, “begotten son.”
Gnostics denied the Jesus was the Christ. They separated Jesus from the Christ. Look at the Scripture:
John 4:42 KJV
And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.
John 4:42 (New International Version)
They said to the woman, "We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is the Savior of the world."
John 4:42 (New American Standard Bible)
and they were saying to the woman, "It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves and know that this One is indeed the Savior of the world."
John 4:42 (English Standard Version)
They said to the woman, "It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves,) and we know that this is indeed the Saviorof the world."
Acts 20:21 (King James Version)
Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.
Acts 20:21 (New International Version)
I have declared to both Jews and Greeks that they must turn to God in repentance and have faith in our Lord Jesus.
Acts 20:21 (Contemporary English Version)
I told Jews and Gentiles to turn to God and have faith in our Lord Jesus.
Acts 20:21 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
I testified to both Jews and Greeks about repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus.
A few modern versions contained, “Christ” on this verse. They agree with the KJV.
Romans 16:18 (King James Version)
For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
Romans 16:18 (New International Version)
For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.
Romans 16:18 (New American Standard Bible)
For such men are slaves, not of our Lord Christ but of their own appetites; and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting.
Romans 16:18 (English Standard Version)
For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.
More passages in modern versions showed the separation Jesus from the Christ because of the Gnosticism anywhere today.
The Second Arian Confession said “And in one Lord Jesus Christ, his son, only-begotten god/deity [John 1:18], by whom are all things, who was begotten before all ages from the father, god from God [deity from the Deity]…” Look at the Scripture:
John 1:18 (KJV)
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
John 1:18 NWT (JW)
No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotton god who is in the bosom (position) with the Father, is the one that has explained him.
John 1:18 (New American Standard Bible)
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
The Greek W/H Text on this verse said:
θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο
The Greek word, θεος means, “God.”W/H were also Gnostics and unbelievers.
The Greek Received Text on this verse said:
θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε ο μονογενης υιος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο
The Greek word, υιος means “Son.”
The Gnostics and Arians favored “begotten God” instead of “begotten Son.” The Arian Creed contained, “only begotten God.” Clement of Alexandria and Origen quoted “begotten Son” and “begotten God.” However they favored ”God” over “Son.” For example, Clement said, “For how shall he not be loved for whose sake the only begotten Son is sent from the Father’s bosom…” And he said, “No one hath seen God at any time. The only-begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him.”
Codex Alexandrinus contained, “begotten son.”
Gnostics denied the Jesus was the Christ. They separated Jesus from the Christ. Look at the Scripture:
John 4:42 KJV
And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.
John 4:42 (New International Version)
They said to the woman, "We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is the Savior of the world."
John 4:42 (New American Standard Bible)
and they were saying to the woman, "It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves and know that this One is indeed the Savior of the world."
John 4:42 (English Standard Version)
They said to the woman, "It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves,) and we know that this is indeed the Saviorof the world."
Acts 20:21 (King James Version)
Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.
Acts 20:21 (New International Version)
I have declared to both Jews and Greeks that they must turn to God in repentance and have faith in our Lord Jesus.
Acts 20:21 (Contemporary English Version)
I told Jews and Gentiles to turn to God and have faith in our Lord Jesus.
Acts 20:21 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
I testified to both Jews and Greeks about repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus.
A few modern versions contained, “Christ” on this verse. They agree with the KJV.
Romans 16:18 (King James Version)
For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
Romans 16:18 (New International Version)
For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.
Romans 16:18 (New American Standard Bible)
For such men are slaves, not of our Lord Christ but of their own appetites; and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting.
Romans 16:18 (English Standard Version)
For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.
More passages in modern versions showed the separation Jesus from the Christ because of the Gnosticism anywhere today.
Last edited by a moderator:
Where did you learn that? references please!
According to Strong's, the Greek hos is a pronoun, thus the translation "he" is not incorrect. Later Greek texts changed hos to theos which is properly translated as "God." I can't say when, where and why the change came about, but since the older and more reliable texts use the pronoun hos, it seems to say the only change was from "he" to "God" and this change was found in the later texts which underlie the KJVs.
Also, if one reads the entire verse, it's quite obvious who is being discussed, so the argument that "he" is incorrect is inconsequential.
You've done absolutely nothing to support your allegation the modern translations are gnostic, Askjo. Why don't you try something with a little evidence, rather than mere opinion and speculation, Askjo?
Jeepers Askjo. My first grader has learned about pronouns - that they always follow the naming of the subject of the pronoun. Let's see what the passages really read:
NIV: Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that, 15if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth. 16Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great:
He appeared in a body,
was vindicated by the Spirit,
was seen by angels,
was preached among the nations,
was believed on in the world,
was taken up in glory.
NASB: but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.
16By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness:
He who was revealed in the flesh,
Was vindicated in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Proclaimed among the nations,
Believed on in the world,
Taken up in glory.
Who is that speaking of? Peter? Luke? Get real.
There is NO PROOF of "Gnostic corruption of the Scriptures".
(From http://en.literaturabautista.com/node/20)
In Jack Moorman’s book Forever Settled, published by the Dean Burgon Society, the first mention of possible Gnostic textual corruptions were presented as a theory: “This omission seems to be a mutilation of the sacred text at the hands of heretics, probably Gnostics.”(1999 edition, p. 108, emphasis mine).
The blog at -
http://hipandthigh.blogspot.com/2006/03/have-heretics-corrupted-my-bible.html
- has an excellent response to these trumped up charges of "Gnostic corruption". In essence, it has as much "proof" as does the theory of evolution.
If you will do a web search on 'Gnoscics corrupted Greek texts' as I did, you will find literally reams of KJVO writers who quote one another as proof- or should that be "Poof"?- of "Gnostic corruption".
It's not smoke- it's haze. There's nothing to see here folks- just keep moving on.
(From http://en.literaturabautista.com/node/20)
In Jack Moorman’s book Forever Settled, published by the Dean Burgon Society, the first mention of possible Gnostic textual corruptions were presented as a theory: “This omission seems to be a mutilation of the sacred text at the hands of heretics, probably Gnostics.”(1999 edition, p. 108, emphasis mine).
The blog at -
http://hipandthigh.blogspot.com/2006/03/have-heretics-corrupted-my-bible.html
- has an excellent response to these trumped up charges of "Gnostic corruption". In essence, it has as much "proof" as does the theory of evolution.
If you will do a web search on 'Gnoscics corrupted Greek texts' as I did, you will find literally reams of KJVO writers who quote one another as proof- or should that be "Poof"?- of "Gnostic corruption".
It's not smoke- it's haze. There's nothing to see here folks- just keep moving on.
Last edited by a moderator:
You seriously are joking, aren't you? Not one of these verses support any such thing that you are declaring. I hope you say "Lord Jesus Christ" everytime you refer to Him (oh wait - I mean the Lord Jesus Christ, not "Him" since that doesn't work for you), because if you don't, you are denying the Lord Jesus Christ's deity, human-ness and His position.
HUH?
If this is true, they did a really lousy job of corrupting the word of God. All the legitimate modern translations I've read teach the very things gnostics denied:
> the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ is taught in John 1:1 and other passages.
> His virgin birth is taught in Matthew 1:23.
> His miracles are well documented - His raising of the dead girl is found in Matthew 9:18-26; His feeding of 5000 is found in Matthew 14:13-21; His walking on the water is found in Mathew 14:22-33; and His turning the water into wine is found in John 2:1-10.
> His bodily resurrection is taught in all four Gospels.
> Jesus was the Christ is taught throughout the NT.
Wow! Those gnostics sure did a lousy job of corrupting the word of God!
Askjo, where did you learn "ancient and modern scholars admitted that the Gnostics heretics tampered the NT text?" What ancient and modern scholars are you talking about? Obviously, your "research" taught you absolutely nothing. Nice try - but a total flop.
Askjo, now that your cut-and-paste posts have been torn to shreds, would you like to try a legitimate defense of your allegation that modern Bible translations are gnostic? Try somehing with a little meat this time, okay?
BTW, Askjo, have you noticed you're all alone on this? Even your KJVO buddies aren't jumping to your defense.
BTW, Askjo, have you noticed you're all alone on this? Even your KJVO buddies aren't jumping to your defense.
Last edited by a moderator:
You said that. Sorry, history disagrees with you.
Last edited by a moderator:
Marcia
Active Member
Askjo, at least some of the posts look like that website you put a link to. As I said earlier, that website fails to show how any of their accusations support the MVs being Gnostic.
I even posted from 1 John in the NASB, NIV, and ESV the verse that says that anyone who denies Jesus came in the flesh is not of God. Why would Gnostics put that in the Bible?
All the MVs have the verses about Jesus coming in the flesh, so how can they be Gnostic?
Marcia
Active Member
Here is more proof from 1 John 1:1 that the MVs are NOT Gnostic:
NASB
What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life--
NIV
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.
ESV
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life.
This verse is a refutation of Gnostic teaching!! It is telling everyone that Jesus came in the flesh - they could see and hear and touch him. So why is it in the MVs? The other verse from 1 John 4 is in these versions as well. All the passages that were written to show Jesus came in a body are in the MVs. You have no case.
NASB
What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life--
NIV
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.
ESV
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life.
This verse is a refutation of Gnostic teaching!! It is telling everyone that Jesus came in the flesh - they could see and hear and touch him. So why is it in the MVs? The other verse from 1 John 4 is in these versions as well. All the passages that were written to show Jesus came in a body are in the MVs. You have no case.
- Status