Satan's stragegy to discredit the Bible.

I agree with you, Russ. Keep in mind that the two-pronged approach that Satan used with Eve was

"Did God REALLY say...."

and

"Think for yourself...."

A dangerous combination when one is encouraged to 'think for oneself' as opposed to the Word of God.

Essentially, that is calling God a liar, inept at communicating, unknowledgeable, or something equally heretical.

 

I agree, satan will use every trick he has to casue doubt in God's word, or misunderstanding of it. Anyhting to draw people away from God's wor d, or away from following it. Many today are fooled by satan, thats obvious when you look at some of the stuff going on in christianity today.

 

Probably the biggest and most recent statement I hear these days,"Only the Originals in Hebrew and Greek are inspired. Since we don't have them to reference, then we cannot say any version is inspired."

This statement can only lead to fully doubting whether we have the Word of God or not. Therefore, it is the voice of satan, because this very same intent was laid upon Eve in the Garden of Eden; Genesis 3:1.

Are we still wonder why we have so many "versions" being placed before the eyes of the church and the world.


Thank God for the King James Bible!

Brother Ricky

 

Quote from ITNAC,robably the biggest and most recent statement I hear these days,"Only the Originals in Hebrew and Greek are inspired. Since we don't have them to reference, then we cannot say any version is inspired."

Didn't the King James translators say that too?

Sorry, wrong Forum.

 

It is hardly a recent statement. Just exactly which part of the King James Bible was it Satan's intent to make Eve doubt? I am not interested in getting into the debate, I was just curious. I use the KJV now and have all my life and I will continue to do so. I don't speak Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic. I have a lifelong emotional attachment to the KJV but, I have no problem trying to discover what God actually said in the original languages as best I can. When I am convinced that this is actually what God said, I will take that over the KJV or anything else every time. With discernment made possible by the Holy Spirit and a genuine interest in knowing the truth, I will continue to use study aids, concordances, preachers, authors, and any tool at my disposal to discover what God said. I don't trust the vast majority of modern versions to even be trying to tell me what God actually said and I don't trust you so, that leaves me with trusting the Holy Spirit with what the truth is and I am well satisfied with the results.

 

I think just about all the statements about the bible, bad version, best version, only one real version, you gotta have this, or that, or you can't count that,are all from satan . Because they cast doubt o the bible, can any bible possible be real(?), or believeable(?), are any of them from God? It causes confussion and dissention, and only satan can want thiis for the body of Christ, this is not from God.
Choose your personal favorite version, and get over it.

 

Quote from Artimaeus

Since I've never asked you to trust me, don't. If this is a "cut" then so-what? Haven't you EVER read Genesis 3:1? "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?"

Here's something to consider concerning your statements:

2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

I'm sorry, but I find your remarks haven't taken in consideration the preceeding passage.

In Christ,
Brother Ricky

 

The "you" that I don't trust is the generic "you". It not only means you personally but, every other person in the entire world. I wouldn't trust anyone to guide me into the truth. Jesus said he would give us the Holy Spirit for that purpose and HE is who I will trust.

The reason I didn't take 2 Peter 1:20 into consideration is because it has nothing to do with what I was saying. It is a very true statement, just not germane to the subject.

I do not doubt what God said.
I do not doubt what God told men to write down that He said.
I do not doubt what those men actually wrote down.
I had better be wise enough to doubt what somebody else says about those writings.

Satan's intent was not to get Eve to doubt the KJV, his intent was to get her to doubt God. I believe that, because, that is what God said happened. You seem to be wanting me to think that God = KJV. I do not believe that KJV = God because YOU (generic again) say so. I do not believe anything because someone tells me. I believe God and when He tells me to put my full trust in a specific version I will and nowhere in His Word does He say to do so.

 

The "you" that I don't trust is the generic "you". It not only means you personally but, every other person in the entire world. I wouldn't trust anyone to guide me into the truth. Jesus said he would give us the Holy Spirit for that purpose and HE is who I will trust.

The reason I didn't take 2 Peter 1:20 into consideration is because it has nothing to do with what I was saying. It is a very true statement, just not germane to the subject.

I do not doubt what God said.
I do not doubt what God told men to write down that He said.
I do not doubt what those men actually wrote down.
I had better be wise enough to doubt what somebody else says about those writings.

Satan's intent was not to get Eve to doubt the KJV, his intent was to get her to doubt God. I believe that, because, that is what God said happened. You seem to be wanting me to think that God = KJV. I do not believe that KJV = God because YOU (generic again) say so. I do not believe anything because someone tells me. I believe God and when He tells me to put my full trust in a specific version I will and nowhere in His Word does He say to do so.

 

As we carefully study the seven churches, we note that Satan has tried bringing great persecutions in the past; these did not destroy the church.
Satan has tried using less persecutions and more false doctrine mixed with the truth; this worked more effectively.
Satan is using prosperity, selfishness, false doctrine, and lukewarm preaching mixed with the truth; this has almost destroyed the church. This is the Laodicean church.
It needs to be repeated that there is not one good thing mentioned about the Laodicean church from the words of Jesus.

About Eve:

NOW THE SERPENT (which is also called Satan, the devil, and Lucifer) WAS MORE SUBTILE (or crafty) THAN ANY BEAST (or wild animal) OF THE FIELD WHICH THE LORD GOD HAD MADE. AND HE SAID UNTO THE WOMAN, YEA, HATH GOD SAID (or did God really say), YE SHALL NOT EAT OF EVERY TREE OF THE GARDEN?-Gen 3:1. The serpent, which is also called Satan, now begins a process of causing Eve to be confused, deceived, to doubt what God had said, and to ultimately cause her to disobey God’s command. We hear that same voice today in our thoughts. Also note that the serpent did not use God’s Words in this case, but rather used an evasive and deceptive approach, by saying, "HATH GOD SAID?" Then he used the words, "YE SHALL NOT EAT OF EVERY TREE OF THE GARDEN?" As the serpent spoke, he did not call God, Lord God (or Jehovah God), but addressed Him only as God, perhaps, trying to belittle Jehovah God in her thinking. From the first three words, "HATH GOD SAID," it can be seen that the serpent is an enemy of God. He is attempting to bring doubt toward the Word of God. He is challenging God’s Word. He begins with a question to open the conversation. It is as if he wants you to know something, but it is really the beginning of a deception. It was intended to cause doubt in the woman’s mind. God is not the author of confusion, but Satan is-ref l Cor 14:33. Thus, we have the beginning of the serpent’s attack, causing the woman to doubt, to be confused, and to be deceived. Eve did not understand the deceptive and crafty ways of the devil. She did not perceive him as a threat. It is the same with most people today. The woman should have turned away, but she did not. She chose to enter into a dialogue with the serpent. That dialogue proved to be a great mistake. She did not realize that the devil was her enemy. The serpent also seems to be implying that God is too demanding and overbearing, and that He does not really love the woman, because she could eat of every tree, except one. Surely, if God really loved her, He would give her everything she wanted.
AND THE WOMAN SAID UNTO THE SERPENT, WE MAY EAT OF THE FRUIT OF THE TREES OF THE GARDEN: BUT OF THE FRUIT OF THE TREE WHICH IS IN THE MIDST OF THE GARDEN, GOD HATH SAID, YE SHALL NOT EAT OF IT, NEITHER SHALL YE TOUCH IT, LEST YE DIE-Gen 3:2,3. Note confusion as to what God said seems to be setting in. In her thoughts, she must have begun to question God’s Word. Eve stated certain words, which are not recorded that God said, such as, NEITHER SHALL YE TOUCH IT. Her response to the serpent was a general impression of what she believed God had said, rather than God’s exact words. It may also be noted that she said, "YE SHALL NOT EAT OF IT...LEST YE DIE." God had said, "THOU SHALT SURELY DIE." Her reply, "Lest ye die," does not seem to carry the force that God’s Word had conveyed. Her way of replying may indicate that her belief and trust in God and His Word was like a wave; however, she did fear God’s judgment. Thus, if Satan was to be successful in causing her to disobey God, he needed to eliminate the fear of God’s judgment, which is death. Satan had won the first round.

The serpent accomplished the fall of mankind with approximately 46 words, as given in the KJV Bible.

 

I believe that casting doubt on scripture as true and the inspired word of God is, by far, Satan's most effective weapon against us. It can cause a sort of cancer that consumes or corrupts faith. It can be a huge stumbling block to witnessing to others who cannot or will not accept scriptural authority, as well.

 

Approximately is a good word here. Not being a Hebrew scholar, I don't know how many words Moses used in the Hebrew of the relevant passage in Gen 3, and I don't think anyone knows what language Adam and Eve spoke, except that it is highly unlikely to have been Elizabethan English. What we call "word for word" accuracy, even in a fairly literal translation such as the KJV, NKJV or NASB, is still far from exactly word for word. For instance, in Romans 10 the Greek (I am a Greek reader) for "thou shalt be saved" is one word, sothese , pronounced so-thay-say. It comes out "thou shalt be saved," because it is 2nd person singular = thou (the singular "you"), shalt be (future tense, passive), saved (the meaning of the root word).

 

Amen to that!

And thank God for the NKJV, NASB, NIV, and ESV!

Wow, I didn't think this discussion would spill over to here. I guess the Versions forum is not big enough to contain it.

Neal

 

The KJV is just that: a version. A version is an approximation since a translation can never convey the original nuance of all the words since language is imperfect in that there is not a one-to-one word correspondence from the Bible languages of the originals into any other receptor language on earth.

Problems do occur. For instance "God forbid" is attributed to Paul in the KJV in many places where no koine manuscript copy on earth has him saying those exact words.

The KJV is the Word of God by derivation.
It is derived from original manuscripts which were preserved in faithful copies of those manuscripts.

There remains some work to be done to determine which of the "families" of the copies are faithful (and to what degree) to the originals. Until then one must by faith choose which Bible represents most accurately The original Word of God. The total dispute of words in the "families" can be resolved down to about 2%.

as to the proliferation of translations, even the KJV translators had this to say:

Prologue to the 1611 KJV.

Therefore, according to the KJV translators, the KJV, RSV, NIV, NAS, NAB, etc., are all the Word of God.

They also said:

Good advice from 1611AD for 21 century folk to defeat "Satan's stragegy to discredit the Bible".

So according to the wisdom of these men we should purchase as many varieties of translations as we can individually afford for comparison and the "finding out the sense of the Scriptures" whether they be "mean" or not.

HankD

[ June 08, 2003, 08:00 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

Prologue to the 1611 KJV.

Therefore, according to the KJV translators, the KJV, RSV, NIV, NAS, NAB, etc., are all the Word of God.

They also said:

Good advice from 1611AD for 21 century folk to defeat "Satan's stragegy to discredit the Bible".

So according to the wisdom of these men we should purchase as many varieties of translations as we can individually afford for comparison and the "finding out the sense of the Scriptures" whether they be "mean" or not.

HankD </font>[/QUOTE]Hank, I'm sorry, but you really do need to go back and read the quote from the KJB translators, they weren't saying they didn't have the Word of God, but the "theirs' wasn't complete and the KJB translators have the Word of God.

Also, the KJB translators NEVER said the other versions were the Word of God.

 

“Wasn’t complete” Was the KJV complete because it included the Apocrypha?

In any event, I beg to differ ITNAC, it is you my brother who needs to read the KJV prologue quote.

If they believed that the other translations were NOT the Word of God (Geneva, Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishop’s Bible - all of which were know in England as The Word of God) why do they suggest that the advice of St. Augustine concerning these other translations are of value to learn the “sense” of the Scriptures?

Simply saying that they did not mean what they plainly said does not change what they plainly said.

HankD

 

“Wasn’t complete” Was the KJV complete because it included the Apocrypha?

In any event, I beg to differ ITNAC, it is you my brother who needs to read the KJV prologue quote.

If they believed that the other translations were NOT the Word of God (Geneva, Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishop’s Bible - all of which were know in England as The Word of God) why do they suggest that the advice of St. Augustine concerning these other translations are of value to learn the “sense” of the Scriptures?

Simply saying that they did not mean what they plainly said does not change what they plainly said.

HankD </font>[/QUOTE]They plainly said the previous compilations were incomplete and not fully the Word of God.

 

So for 1600 years God left his people without his complete word?? What was added to it in 1611 that finally made it complete?