Is "unicorns" better than "unicorn" at Deut. 33:17?

[Yeshua1]

Majority rules, eh? How many times was the majority right in scripture? There is a lesson to be learned here.

Do you think that the Majority text could have copied in mistakes over the hundreds of years since the Alexandrian text was already used?

 

[Yeshua1]

m

No. I am a seeker of truth, not a seeker of error. That is why I study the KJV. I am fully convinced by my many years of reading and studying it and by the witness of the Spirit of Christ who lives in me that it is the word of God.

Most people who post on these forums are not stating a personal conviction concerning the scriptures that has developed over time as they study and pray but it is because of their associations. This would be true even of some KJV only people. It does not take long to distinguish between the two.

My purpose here is to defend what is true against relentless attack, not to spend my time searching out error. I have always heard that bankers are taught the best way to spot counterfeit currency is to learn the characteristics of the genuine. The counterfeit will then manifest itself by it’s differences. I spend very little time comparing translations.

The Kjv is the word of the Lord to us in English, but is NOT the only word to us!

 

[Yeshua1]

The scriptures instructs me to go and preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. Tell the people who will listen of the glorious good news that God will save all those who will believe the promises God makes to them. Who is this God who makes such promises and is he able to do what he promises to do? He is the God of the bible. No one alive today has seen him. No one has had a vision of him. They have not dreamed dreams of him. He has not shown himself in the heavens. Whatever one can say for sure about this God must come from the written testimony that he has left us. It is the only thing that sinners have to prove him.

Sinners don't generally just pick up a bible and read about him and then believe it. Among the testimony of God in his book in Acts 8, a sinner was reading Isaiah 53 and God sent him a preacher who asked him if he understood what he was reading. His answer is instructive. He said how can I except some man guide me? Therefore, it takes faith and confidence in the written testimony of God to lead a sinner to salvation in Jesus Christ and it takes faith in the testimony of the preacher and God for the sinner to be saved.

Phillip, in Acts 8 began, God and Luke said, in the same scripture, Isaiah 53, to preach unto him Jesus, although the name Jesus does not show up in Isaiah 53. The description of the arm of the Lord, the sheep that was led to the slaughter, the Lamb who was dumb before his shearers, the one who made his grave among the wicked, the one who God confessed had satisfied his justice in that chapter matched the person who God said fulfilled all that for the sinners of the world and that person's name was Jesus the Christ of God..

Who told Phillip that? How could he be so confident? How could he preach that to others with such courage and conviction that it caused them to believe it too? It is because he had the Holy Ghost from God, the Spirit of Christ that was preaching that truth through him as he yielded to him and the Spirt who was in him knew it was Jesus in Isa 53.

How important is the true word of God for the faithful evangelist and bible teacher? It is as important to him as it is to the spirit who is guiding him into all truth. Jesus said in John 5, "sanctify them through thy truth, thy word is truth." This is in the context of a prayer of the prophet Jesus Christ to his Father in heaven. This makes the word of God, from which we get the confirmation of our faith and upon which it is founded, a very important part of the gospel of Jesus Christ. He is the personification of the word of God and is presented in the OT and the NT as the word of the LORD, Adonay Jehovah, the Lord GOD. In the beginning of this age John said he is the WORD. He was with God and he is God.

1 Corinthians 1:30
But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: (the sanctifying truth personified)

God desires sinners to believe his words. He claims he will save everyone who will. I believe that. Now, you come along and claim you have a ministry of God to convince people that God has given the simple man no sure way of knowing what he said and are casting doubt upon it. You are quoting your scholars and telling us they are better teachers than the Spirit of God and a comparison of scores of English translation, all with different words, is better to know the mind of God than a single volume that claims to be his very words. You are teaching that it is a heresy for the simple man to believe he has the words of God.

You started this thread and as far as I can tell you have not quoted a single verse from any version of the bible. For someone who is interested in what God has to say, that is a tremendous oddity. You almost never quote God saying anything. You always quote others and sometimes they might have a God quote, or what you believe is a God quote. You did not even quote Duet 33:17, the subject of this thread. We are now registering about 80 comments and still no quotes from you.

Psalm 119:140
Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it

Thy word [was] very pure; therefore thy servant loveth it.

Which of the above do you like the best?

The promises in the Bible to be inspired and perfect apply to the originals, no translations, and the Gospel is found in kjv, Nas, esv, Nkjv etc all!

 

[Logos1560]

Psalm 119:140
Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it

Thy word [was] very pure; therefore thy servant loveth it.

Which of the above do you like the best?

Since the statues or words of the LORD are right (Ps. 19:8, Ps. 33:4) since the words of the LORD are pure (Ps. 12:6, Ps. 119:140), and since the words of God are true (Ps. 19:9, John 17:17, Ps. 119:160, Dan. 10:21), it can be soundly and scripturally concluded that any wrong words or errors introduced by imperfect men would not be the absolutely pure words of God. According to scriptural truths, it can be also properly concluded that any errors introduced by men in copying, in printing, or in translating are not words spoken or given by God. Any error introduced by a copier, printer, or whomever in copies and in Bible translations can be and should be corrected.

It could also be soundly concluded that any words perverted, diminished, or mistranslated by men are not actual words spoken by God (Jer. 23:36, Deut. 4:2, Jer. 23:28, Deut. 12:32, 2 Cor. 2:17, Jer. 23:16, Jer. 26:2).

Maintaining that errors introduced by men or words added by men are not the pure inspired words of God would be soundly distinguishing between what is holy and pure and what is not, and it is not accusing the word of God given by inspiration of corruption, of impurity, or of error. Maintaining that any errors introduced by men are not pure words of God is in agreement with scriptural truth.

A logical and sound deduction or necessary consequence from the instructions in several verses of Scripture (Deut. 4:2, Deut. 12:32, Prov. 30:6, Rev. 22:18-19) would indicate and affirm that copies would need to be carefully examined, searched, tried, or evaluated to make sure that no additions were made, that nothing was omitted, that no words were changed, and that the meaning of words according to their context was not diminished. The truth stated in these verses could be properly understood to indicate that whatever adds to, takes away, or diminishes (whether intentional or unintentional) would not be the word of God. These scriptural instructions and truths provide sound guidance concerning how to know the words which the LORD has or has not spoken (Deut. 18:21-22, Jer. 23:16, Jer. 23:35, Ezek. 22:28, Isa. 8:20, 1 John 4:1). Would words that go beyond those words that God actually gave to the prophets and apostles be considered the actual pure words of God (Num. 22:18)? According to the Scriptures, there is such a thing as the possible adding of words in copies or in Bible translations just as there is the possible omitting of words in copies or in Bible translations. It can be properly and legitimately concluded from the Scriptures that God has not directly spoken words added by men and that any words omitted by copiers should be restored (Deut. 4:2, Deut. 12:32, Prov. 30:6, Rev. 22:18). According to clear scriptural truth, words added by men cannot soundly be considered as being words given by inspiration of God.

[All my scripture references are to verses as translated in the KJV.]

 

[Yeshua1]

Since the statues or words of the LORD are right (Ps. 19:8, Ps. 33:4) since the words of the LORD are pure (Ps. 12:6, Ps. 119:140), and since the words of God are true (Ps. 19:9, John 17:17, Ps. 119:160, Dan. 10:21), it can be soundly and scripturally concluded that any wrong words or errors introduced by imperfect men would not be the absolutely pure words of God. According to scriptural truths, it can be also properly concluded that any errors introduced by men in copying, in printing, or in translating are not words spoken or given by God. Any error introduced by a copier, printer, or whomever in copies and in Bible translations can be and should be corrected.

It could also be soundly concluded that any words perverted, diminished, or mistranslated by men are not actual words spoken by God (Jer. 23:36, Deut. 4:2, Jer. 23:28, Deut. 12:32, 2 Cor. 2:17, Jer. 23:16, Jer. 26:2).

Maintaining that errors introduced by men or words added by men are not the pure inspired words of God would be soundly distinguishing between what is holy and pure and what is not, and it is not accusing the word of God given by inspiration of corruption, of impurity, or of error. Maintaining that any errors introduced by men are not pure words of God is in agreement with scriptural truth.

A logical and sound deduction or necessary consequence from the instructions in several verses of Scripture (Deut. 4:2, Deut. 12:32, Prov. 30:6, Rev. 22:18-19) would indicate and affirm that copies would need to be carefully examined, searched, tried, or evaluated to make sure that no additions were made, that nothing was omitted, that no words were changed, and that the meaning of words according to their context was not diminished. The truth stated in these verses could be properly understood to indicate that whatever adds to, takes away, or diminishes (whether intentional or unintentional) would not be the word of God. These scriptural instructions and truths provide sound guidance concerning how to know the words which the LORD has or has not spoken (Deut. 18:21-22, Jer. 23:16, Jer. 23:35, Ezek. 22:28, Isa. 8:20, 1 John 4:1). Would words that go beyond those words that God actually gave to the prophets and apostles be considered the actual pure words of God (Num. 22:18)? According to the Scriptures, there is such a thing as the possible adding of words in copies or in Bible translations just as there is the possible omitting of words in copies or in Bible translations. It can be properly and legitimately concluded from the Scriptures that God has not directly spoken words added by men and that any words omitted by copiers should be restored (Deut. 4:2, Deut. 12:32, Prov. 30:6, Rev. 22:18). According to clear scriptural truth, words added by men cannot soundly be considered as being words given by inspiration of God.

All my scripture references are to verses as translated in the KJV.

Inspiration applied only to the original revelation not to any translation afterward!

 

[Logos1560]

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost (2 Peter 1:21)

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16)

It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God (Matthew 4:4b)

For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope (Romans 15:4)

That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour (2 Peter 3:2)

As it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit (Eph. 3:5b)

The Scriptures are the specific revealed, written words of God given by the miracle of inspiration to the prophets and apostles. According to the Scriptures, God revealed His Word to the prophets and apostles by the Holy Spirit (Eph. 3:5, 2 Pet. 1:21, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Rom. 15:4, 1 Cor. 2:10-13, Rom. 16:25-26, Heb. 1:1-2, Acts 1:2, Eph. 2:20, Acts 3:21, John 16:13, John 17:8, 14, John 3:34, 2 Sam. 23:2, Luke 24:25, 27, 44). The word of the LORD came to the prophets and apostles (1 Sam. 15:10, 2 Kings 20:4, Isa. 38:4, Jer. 1:4, Jer. 29:30, Ezek. 6:1, Dan. 9:2, Jonah 1:1, Zech. 7:8, Acts 3:21). A true prophet spoke from the mouth of the LORD (2 Chron. 36:12, Luke 1:70, Jer. 1:9, Acts 3:21, 2 Sam. 23:2, Deut. 18:22). The actual specific words that proceeded out of the mouth of God or that God breathed out are those original language words given by inspiration to the prophets and apostles (Matt. 4:4, Deut. 8:3, Luke 4:4, Isa. 55:11). God’s Word is “the Scriptures of the prophets” (Rom. 16:26, Matt. 26:56). God gave His words or spoke by the mouth of the prophets (Luke 1:70, Jer. 1:9, Acts 1:16, Acts 3:21, Ps. 68:11, 2 Chron. 36:12). All Scripture was given by inspiration of God to those prophets and apostles (2 Tim. 3:16, 2 Pet. 1:21, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Eph. 3:5, Eph. 2:20, Jude 1:3). While 2 Timothy 3:16 may not directly mention the prophets and apostles, the parallel verse concerning inspiration (2 Pet. 1:21) clearly connected the miracle of inspiration to them when considered with other related verses in the whole of Scripture. Comparing scripture with scripture, the holy men of God moved or borne along by the Holy Spirit in the miracle of inspiration were clearly the prophets and apostles (2 Pet. 1:21, Eph. 3:5, Eph. 2:20, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Rom. 16:26, Luke 1:70, Matt. 26:56). The exact same words that the psalmist wrote in Psalm 95 the Holy Spirit spoke or said (compare Ps. 95:7 with Hebrews 3:7). What Moses said to Pharaoh as the LORD told him (Exod. 9:13), the Scripture said (Rom. 9:17, Exod. 9:16). The whole counsel of God or the overall teaching of the Scriptures would indicate that there can be no new inspired works without living apostles or prophets (2 Peter 1:21, Eph. 3:3-5, Heb. 1:1-2, Luke 1:70, 24:27, 44-45, Acts 1:16, 3:21, 26:27, Matt. 2:5, Rom. 1:2, Rom. 16:25-26, Jer. 29:19, 2 Chron. 36:12, Dan. 9:10, Amos 3:7).

According to the Scriptures themselves, it could be soundly concluded that inspiration would be a term for the way, method, means, or process by which God directly gave the Scriptures to the prophets and apostles or for the way that the words proceeded from the mouth of God to the prophets and apostles (2 Tim 3:16, 2 Pet. 1:21, Matt. 4:4, Eph. 3:5, Deut. 8:3).

 

[Logos1560]

the bible translators are the arbiters of truth.

KJV-only teaching in effect makes the KJV translators the arbiters and determiners of truth.

KJV-only reasoning/teaching would make the Church of England priests/critics who made the KJV into an exclusive priesthood who are trusted blindly and exclusively as the only acceptable translators/interpreters and determiners of the word of God in English.

 

[Logos1560]

In his 1848 Bible (KJV) and Commentary, Adam Clarke wrote: "Reem is in the singular number, and because the horns of a unicorn, a one-horned animal, would have appeared absurd, our [KJV] translators, with an unfaithfulness not common to them, put the word in the plural number" (I, p. 834).

John Kitto maintained: “The name is singular, not plural, although our translators make it here ‘unicorns,‘ because it would have been absurd to say ‘the horns of the unicorn,‘--that is, the horns of the one-horned beast” (Daily Bible, p. 221). Concerning Deuteronomy 33:17, Robert Brown claimed that “our [KJV] translators render the singular by the plural” (Unicorn, p. 8). Michael Bright asserted: “The Hebrew word is in fact singular, yet in the verse from Deuteronomy--’horns of unicorns’--the [KJV] translators have opted for the plural” (Beasts, p. 5). Bright affirmed that the Hebrew indicates “that the reem had more than one horn” (Ibid.). William Houghton declared: “Our translators, seeing the contradiction involved in the expression ‘horns of the Unicorn,‘ have rendered the Hebrew singular noun as if it were a plural form in the text” (Annals and Magazine of Natural History, X, p. 365).

 

[JD731]

KJV-only teaching in effect makes the KJV translators the arbiters and determiners of truth.

KJV-only reasoning/teaching would make the Church of England priests/critics who made the KJV into an exclusive priesthood who are trusted blindly and exclusively as the only acceptable translators/interpreters and determiners of the word of God in English.

Your opinion! And it would be unquestioned if not for the promises from heaven and if the Holy Spirit of Christ was not a real person who actually does live in the believer. Nowhere has God ever said his inspiration was limited to the original languages or that his words would not be just as true in a translation if he were the one inspiring the translation. If you are acting as a prophet and saying he has not or can not inspire a translation and you can prove your commission, then I am set to believe you.

You should read and believe 2 Corinthians 11 about now because there are other heavenly entities at work and they have great power to deceive. This entity has a track record already and we are not ignorant of his devices. His specialty is centered around the word of God.

God allows heresies to test our fidelity to him. Beware lest you serve the wrong lord.

1 Corinthians 11:19
For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

 

[JD731]

The promises in the Bible to be inspired and perfect apply to the originals, no translations, and the Gospel is found in kjv, Nas, esv, Nkjv etc all!

The gospel of Jesus Christ requires no written Bible and sinners can get saved without ever even seeing one. But, one cannot have sound doctrine without one. He cannot be assured of the deep things of God without one. He can never have the great mysteries of the faith revealed to him without one.

I know the last sentence to be true because I have read many things some of you have written on the subject of the mysteries.

Meanwhile, you are speaking as a prophet when you make the claim that inspiration applies only to the originals, because God did not say it to previous prophets and you are quoting none of them. That voice you are hearing that is whispering this to you may not be God's.

 

[37818]

The gospel of Jesus Christ requires no written Bible . . .

Without the written New Testament there is no gospel.

 

[Conan]

Conan of course you are wrong. A cursory search at Bible Gateway finds plural forms of the animal employed in Biblica's French La Bible du Semeur and in the United Bibles Societies' Spanish Traducción en Lenguaje Actual.

Thank you! So no real independent English Bible translations then. Neither pre-KJV nor post-KJV.

 

[JD731]

Without the written New Testament there is no gospel.

Really? Are you for real? Did you really not understand my point? And yes, there is the gospel of Christ before the NT was written. None of the 4 gospel accounts were written before the mid 60's of the first century and John's gospel and his other four books were not written until the 90's. Acts was not written before the last recorded historical entry which was in the mid 60's. Romans was written in 58 AD, Galatians in 49 AD, 1st and 2nd Corinthians in 54 and 55 AD, the prison epistles, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon in 60 AD, James in 45 AD, Jude in 69 AD and on and on. Jesus Christ died and rose again in 30 AD. The NT church had it's Jewish beginning in this year. Paul was converted to Christ in AD 37. The gentiles were added to the church in AD 40. The generation of Jesus Christ ended in 70 AD, the year Judah lost it's identity as a nation and the people were dispersed and scattered by the Romans into the nations of the world. All this before the NT scriptures were finalized.

"God hath chosen the foolishness of preaching to save them which believe."

The short version of the gospel of Jesus Christ is given in 1 Cor 15:1-4, where it is identified as the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and is the door by which all men must go through to get into his church and the favor and salvation of God. It did not take a bible, it took a preacher and the Spirit of God and a sinner for anyone to get saved. It did not take the written NT for them to be saved and put into the church.

Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

The them is identified as the church here;

Acts 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

If you have any doubts about when the church began, check this;

Col 1:8 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Speaking to the Jewish apostles and elders in Jerusalem about the inclusion of the gentiles through the door that Peter opened to Cornelius and the gentiles in AD 40, 10 years after the founding of the church in Jerusalem in AD 30, we have him giving this defense;

Acts 11:13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;
14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.
15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

Acts 2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

Acts 14:27 And when they were come (to Antioch), and had gathered the church together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles.

Matt 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Peter opened the door of faith to the Jews first, and then ten years later, to the gentiles. Thus sayeth the scriptures.

So, the conclusion from scripture is that there was the gospel of Christ before the NT was written with multiplied many salvations.

 

[Jerome]

A cursory search at Bible Gateway finds plural forms of the animal employed in Biblica's French La Bible du Semeur and in the United Bibles Societies' Spanish Traducción en Lenguaje Actual.

Thank you! So no real independent English Bible translations then. Neither pre-KJV nor post-KJV.

Oh brother. What you asked for (and blustered about) was: "any other Bible on this earth", "all other editions of God's word", "all of the editions of God's word from the times before Christ up until now".

Remember?

There is. All other editions of God's word I believe goes against the KJV at Deuteronomy 33:17. Not the majority, but all other editions of God's word. I believe it is all of the editions of God's word from the times before Christ up until now. If so it is a clear error in the KJV be it mistranslation or printers error. I could be wrong though. There could be some modern versions which agree with the KJV? If so that could prove me wrong. Do you know of any other Bible on this earth that agrees with the KJV here?

 

[Logos1560]

Nowhere has God ever said his inspiration was limited to the original languages or that his words would not be just as true in a translation if he were the one inspiring the translation.

The whole counsel of God or the overall teaching of the Scriptures would indicate that there can be no new inspired works without living apostles or prophets (2 Peter 1:21, Eph. 3:3-5, Heb. 1:1-2, Luke 1:70, 24:27, 44-45, Acts 1:16, 3:21, 26:27, Matt. 2:5, Rom. 1:2, Rom. 16:25-26, Jer. 29:19, 2 Chron. 36:12, Dan. 9:10, Amos 3:7).

Nowhere has God ever said that a translation after the end of the giving of the New Testament by inspiration to the apostles and NT prophets would be given by the process of direct inspiration of God.

The scripturally-based case that the process of inspiration concerns the original-language words breathed out by God to the prophets and apostles is much stronger than the non-scriptural opinion that God directly inspired the KJV. The actual errors in the 1611 edition of the KJV would also be evidence that it was not given by inspiration of God.

 

[Conan]

Oh brother. What you asked for (and blustered about) was: "any other Bible on this earth", "all other editions of God's word", "all of the editions of God's word from the times before Christ up until now".

Remember?

Yes, I remember. So the facts remain. Almost all editions of God's word does not support the KJV, especially all English Bibles, that is, all other English Bibles Translated from the Hebrew, Greek or Latin. None are found to support the KJV, but two obscure non english foriegn Bibles. So the KJV has no real support, showing a mistake in the KJV, being either a mistranslation or an early printing error that was never corrected. Thank you for not finding any real support for the KJV here at Deuteronomy 33:17.

 

[Logos1560]

I put the quote in the comments.

My clear statement does not mean what you misunderstand and misrepresent it to mean. My statement did not at all say that "Bible translators are the arbiters of truth." You jump to wrong conclusions.

What other Bible translators in agreement with the KJV translators acknowledge is that the preserved Scriptures in the original languages are the proper standard and authority for the making and trying of all Bible translations.

My statement clearly acknowledges that it is the preserved original-language words of Scripture that are the standard and authority for determining and evaluating which words should be in Bible translations. My statement acknowledges that Bible translators can be mistaken in their translation decisions which is why those decisions should be tried by the proper standard and authority of the preserved Scriptures in the original languages. Therefore, it is very clear and obvious that my statement did not say what you tried to distort and misrepresent it as supposedly saying.

Human KJV-only reasoning may in effect suggest that one exclusive group of doctrinally-unsound Church of England priests in 1611 are "the arbiters of truth" in English, but that is not what my statement asserted.

 

[Logos1560]

No. I am a seeker of truth, not a seeker of error.

My purpose here is to defend what is true against relentless attack, not to spend my time searching out error.

You fail in your purpose when you try to defend KJV-only assertions that are not true and that are erroneous. You try to defend false KJV-only teaching.

 

[JD731]

The whole counsel of God or the overall teaching of the Scriptures would indicate that there can be no new inspired works without living apostles or prophets (2 Peter 1:21, Eph. 3:3-5, Heb. 1:1-2, Luke 1:70, 24:27, 44-45, Acts 1:16, 3:21, 26:27, Matt. 2:5, Rom. 1:2, Rom. 16:25-26, Jer. 29:19, 2 Chron. 36:12, Dan. 9:10, Amos 3:7).

Nowhere has God ever said that a translation after the end of the giving of the New Testament by inspiration to the apostles and NT prophets would be given by the process of direct inspiration of God.

The scripturally-based case that the process of inspiration concerns the original-language words breathed out by God to the prophets and apostles is much stronger than the non-scriptural opinion that God directly inspired the KJV. The actual errors in the 1611 edition of the KJV would also be evidence that it was not given by inspiration of God.

When the argument is reduced to someone saying, "the whole counsel of God or the overall teaching of the Scriptures would indicate," then you know the train has run off the track and we are getting ready to get subjective reasonings and overblown opinions and guesswork and obfuscations. And when someone follows those unsanctified opinions up with a long list of scriptures references that they know that no one in this world is going to go to the trouble of looking up to try to figure out what is in the context of those scriptures that will confirm the whole counsel of God saying what is claimed then the reader may as well go ahead and stick their leg out because someone is wanting to pull it.

If this is the best you can do I am losing interest in this conversation.

All the quotes in the NT that are taken from the OT are translated into the Greek language when they were written and they are often not word for word. What is the common denominator between them? It is the person of God. When Paul addressed the angry mob of Jews in Acts 22, he spoke in Hebrew but Luke wrote the record of his words in Greek. Translation had to take place. In which language was the words inspired? Who chose the words, Luke or the Holy Ghost? Which were more inspired, the Hebrew or the Greek?

Does anybody really believe that Jesus Christ is on the earth today in the person of the Holy Ghost? Did he lose his power after the NT was written in Greek? What is worse in God's eyes, having one English translation that is Holy Ghost produced or having scores of English translations that he had nothing to do with? Who really has the false teaching here? What philosophy would Satan be better able to infiltrate and corrupt?



The characteristic of this age as it winds toward it's end, according to Jesus Christ, is total and complete corruption, and these new MV and the Satanic philosophy that is associated with it is just one proof that his words are true.

Matt 13:33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

Matt 13:6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?
12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

The leaven was not added by the atheists and sinners, but by the religious teachers. So it is.

 

[Logos1560]

The leaven was not added by the atheists and sinners, but by the religious teachers. So it is.

Are you in effect admitting that KJV-only religious teachers are adding the leaven of human, non-scriptural, extra-biblical KJV-only reasoning with its dependence upon fallacies, its showing of partiality, and its use of unjust divers measures/standards?