CEV VS KJV / Apostasy VS Faith

[Hark]

Discerning Matthew 5:33-37

When He has caused the increase in His words to you regarding the reproofs about making vows, promises, & commitments that should be left to faith in Jesus Christ to perform; let us compare the Contemporary English Version aka the CEV version on the warning Jesus gave about making those kinds of vows.

Matthew 5:33 You know that our ancestors were told, “Don’t use the Lord’s name to make a promise unless you are going to keep it.” 34 But I tell you not to swear by anything when you make a promise! Heaven is God’s throne, so don’t swear by heaven. 35 The earth is God’s footstool, so don’t swear by the earth. Jerusalem is the city of the great king, so don’t swear by it. 36 Don’t swear by your own head. You cannot make one hair white or black. 37 When you make a promise, say only “Yes” or “No.” Anything else comes from the devil. CEV

This is the complete opposite of His message in the KJV, because the CEV makes it okay to make promises but fails to see the warning about not making an oath & to not even swear by that oath when the New Covenant to us is sufficient for following Him..

Matthew 5:33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil. KJV

It gets worse in the CEV as the irony of the hypocrisy is missed below..

Galatians 5:1Christ has set us free! This means we are really free. Now hold on to your freedom and don’t ever become slaves of the Law again. 2 I, Paul, promise you that Christ won’t do you any good if you get circumcised. 3 If you do, you must obey the whole Law. 4 And if you try to please God by obeying the Law, you have cut yourself off from Christ and his wonderful kindness. 5 But the Spirit makes us sure that God will accept us because of our faith in Christ. CEV

Compare with the KJV below; note how Paul was not making any promise to the readers.

Galatians 5:1Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. KJV

Since circumcision is the smallest letter of the law in that if you do that, then you have to do the whole law, what do you consider making a vow or promise to God to be? The biggest letter of the law.

Next post; The apostate movement called Promise Keepers in how the CEV supported that apostasy.

 

[Hark]

At one Promise Keepers' Convention, they supplied the CEV for attendants that supported that apostate movement of men..

The Irony is how the spin off of that movement for the women was called "Faith Keepers".

The 7 promises of Promise Keepers to be good husbands & good fathers & good Christian leaders are His workmanship, not theirs.

The PK movement also gave a false teaching that God will give grace for them to keep trying to keep their promises when they break them. Scripture speaks against that.

Galatians 2: 15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, 16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. 17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. 18 For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. 19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. 20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. 21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. ~ KJV

So discern with Him what it means to finish His work that He began in us by the deeds of the law of keeping those 7 promises of the PK program.

Galatians 3:1O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? 2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? 4 Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain. ~ KJV

God will not give grace for Promise Keepers to live in sin as being Promise Breakers in trying to "perform" let alone finish what God can only do.

Again any one that has gone astray can ask Jesus for forgiveness, to be set free from that yoke of bondage & rest in Him & His New Covenant to us that He will help us to follow Him by faith in Him as our Good Shepherd.

Romans 8:32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? KJV

Keeping the faith is the good fight; not keeping promises to God & failing to do so.

But.. if we do not discern how modern Bible versions are supporting false teachings & apostasy, how can anyone correct them if they insist on following the CEV?

By His grace & by His help, although other Bible versions besides the KJV can expose that errant lying Bible version of the CEV in supporting that apostasy, it does go to point that believers need His help to make sure there are no changed messages in their modern Bible version that opposes the truth in scripture of that same modern bible. All it needs is to sow doubts in His words in the modern bible to wonder if God really meant that.

Thanks to Jesus Christ as my Good Shepherd, I find I can rely on the KJV for the meat of His words to discern good & evil by in modern Bibles.

If you agree that the CEV does support that apostate movement, then I pray the Lord is helping you to see that when you have trouble correcting false teachings or exposing pagan's tongues or discerning false spirits in whatever modern bible you are using, by His grace & by Hs help, you should compare whatever modern Bible version you are using with the KJV.

 

[Hark]

Does it appear how not all Bible versions are saying the same thing whereas in this case of the CEV is saying the opposite of what Jesus & Paul says and that the CEV supports apostasy?

The same can be said for changed messages in modern Bibles that supports false teachings, but I have found the KJV does not.

That is why I rely on the KJV for the meat of His words to discern good & evil by His words whereas modern Bibles do not.

 

[Logos1560]

The same can be said for changed messages in modern Bibles that supports false teachings, but I have found the KJV does not.

That is your biased, one-sided opinion. The Scriptures do not teach your opinion that the KJV should be blindly accepted as the standard for evaluating other English Bible translations.

The Church of England's KJV could be said to support the false teaching of the Church of England's doctrine of apostolic succession, their teaching that the Church of England is the one fold, and other incorrect Church of England views.

Ross Purdy suggested that two other “examples of the [KJV] translators’ bias will be seen in the postscripts to two of Paul’s epistles” (I Will Have One Doctrine, p. 63). At the end of 2 Timothy in the 1611 edition of the KJV, the postscript referred to Timothy as “ordained the first Bishop of the Church of the Ephesians.” At the end of Titus in the 1611 KJV, the postscript referred to Titus as “ordained the first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians.”

Bishop Thomas Bilson in his book defending Episcopal church government and apostolic succession maintained that Timothy and Titus were bishops (Perpetual Government, pp. 302-303, 341, 388). Bilson wrote: “If succession of Episcopal power came from the apostles to them [Timothy and Titus], and so to their successors, we shall soon conclude that bishops came from the apostles” (p. 302). Bilson asserted: “We infer this power must be perpetual in bishops, for they succeed Timothy in the church” (p. 391). Bilson contended: “St. Paul committed that power and care to Timothy and his successors” (p. 406). Bishop Overall’s Convocation Book claimed that “it is very apparent and cannot be denied, that in many Greek copies of the New Testament, Timothy and Titus are termed bishops in the directions or subscriptions of two epistles which St. Paul did write unto them (pp. 145-146). In this same book, KJV translator John Overall referred to Timothy and Titus as “two apostolical bishops newly designed unto their Episcopal functions” (p. 140). James Lillie maintained that the Church of England uses these postscripts “to prove her order of bishops” (Bishops, p. 3). Stephen Marshall, Edmund Calamy, Thomas Young, Matthew Newcomen, and William Spurstowe maintained that “our Episcopal men of late in newer impressions enlarged their phylacteries, in putting those postscripts in the same full character with that of the text, that the simple might believe they are canonical Scripture” (Smectymnuus, p. 45). Concerning these postscripts, Ross Purdy asserted: “The bias of the King James Version ’translators’ towards prelates (i.e., a hierarchy of ruling prelates/bishops is quite obvious” (I Will Have, p. 64). John Davenport asserted that the postscript to 2 Timothy and to Titus “are apocryphal” (Power, p. 80). William Perkins (1558-1602) noted that “most of the postscripts are uncertain, if not false, as of that after the second epistle to Timothy, in which Timothy is called an ‘elect bishop of Ephesus’” (Works of William Perkins, Vol. 4, p. 21). John Brown maintained: “These postscripts are of no weight; are of no divine authority; but were added, at least in their present form, ages after their [referring to Timothy and Titus] death, by some imposter” (Letters, p. 42). Thomas Powell observed: “The subscriptions at the end of the Epistles are of no authority; but only mere human tradition” (Essay on Apostolical Succession, p. 54). While the 1560 Geneva Bible also included a postscript to 2 Timothy, its rendering does not assert the same degree of Episcopal bias. The Geneva Bible postscript referred to “Timotheus the first bishop elected, of the Church of Ephesus.” Haak’s 1657 English translation of the 1637 Dutch Annotations had this note after the postscript at the end of 2 Timothy: “These subscriptions even as it is uncertain who set them down, so their truth is also uncertain.” At the end of 2 Timothy, Theodore Haak noted or translated: “(The Epistle) to Titus, the first elected overseer [Gr. EPISCOPON; that Titus was an evangelist, sent to and fro by the apostles to spread abroad the gospel, is indeed collected out of the Scriptures; but not that he was anywhere a Bishop, as they are at this day called amongst the Papists].” These misleading postscripts used to advocate Episcopal church government remain in some [perhaps all] KJV editions printed at Cambridge and Oxford in Great Britain, but they are not found in a number of KJV editions printed in America.

Do KJV-only advocates believe those words of the postscripts as the KJV translators did and do they assert that these postscripts should be printed in the KJV editions that they recommend? Some KJV-only advocates recommend as the perfect standard Cambridge KJV editions that may include these Episcopal postscripts.

 

[Logos1560]

Evidence of the Episcopal doctrinal views of the KJV translators can also be seen in the chapter heading to the tenth chapter of 1 Corinthians. Those headings are said to have been the work of Bishop Thomas Bilson, who was one of the last co-editors who could make changes to the 1611. In the 1611 edition of the KJV, this heading stated: “The Sacraments of the Jews are types of ours.” Is this another example of an Episcopal ecclesiastical term in the 1611 edition and in many later KJV editions until at least the late 1800’s that included the same chapter/contents headings? In his book, Bilson claimed that “the delivering or withholding the sacraments is in the pastor’s power and charge” (Perpetual Government, p. 161). Bilson asserted that “the key of power referred to the sacraments” (p. 281).

Does the title page of the 1611 edition of the KJV give some additional evidence concerning possible Episcopal bias? The 1611 title page includes on the right side Aaron in his priestly robes. Gordon Campbell maintained that “the purpose of his inclusion is to emphasize the role of the priest in the English Church; whereas puritans insisted on the priesthood of all believers, the Church saw the priest as mediator of the teaching of the Church to the laity, and Aaron is an emblem of that priesthood” (Bible, p. 97). On the seventh page of his anniversary essay in the back of the Quatercentenary Edition of the KJV [reprint of the 1611], Gordon Campbell asserted: “The purpose of giving Aaron such prominence is to emphasize the role of the priest in the English church.” David Norton also indicated that the including of Aaron “may be taken as a statement of the importance of the Anglican priesthood, and so a rejection of Presbyterianism” (KJB: a Short History, p. 117). Margery Corbett and Ronald Lightbown asserted: “It was necessary that the figure of the High Priest should appear in a pictorial statement of Anglicanism” (Comely Frontispiece, p. 111). They noted that in the Church of England “the priest and only the priest could administer the sacrament, the core of its doctrine” and that “in this sense the title-page is an explicit rejection of Presbyterianism” (Ibid.).

 

[Jerome]

Does one use false measures when on one hand one excludes marginal notes when they confute one's sophistries, yet on the other hand employs other extratextual elements as the centerpiece of others?

my statement was referring to what is in the text of the Geneva Bible, and not to any marginal notes.

 

[Logos1560]

Does one use false measures when on one hand one excludes marginal notes when they confute one's sophistries, yet on the other hand employs other extratextual elements as the centerpiece of others?

Your question would seem to be based on misrepresentation and distortion.

You tried to misrepresent or twist an accurate statement that I made concerning the Geneva Bible's text in order to make it supposedly wrong, and I properly and correctly pointed out to what my statement referred. My response had been a correct answer to your misleading effort to discredit an accurate statement.

I did not assert or claim that marginal notes provide no additional information. You fail to prove any use of false measures on my part such as your question tries to infer.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

But.. if we do not discern how modern Bible versions are supporting false teachings & apostasy, how can anyone correct them if they insist on following the CEV?

The CEV is undoubtedly the worst translation I have come across - even worse than The Message!. Judging all modern versions by the CEV is like judging all Romanians by Count Dracula.

 

[Yeshua1]

Discerning Matthew 5:33-37

When He has caused the increase in His words to you regarding the reproofs about making vows, promises, & commitments that should be left to faith in Jesus Christ to perform; let us compare the Contemporary English Version aka the CEV version on the warning Jesus gave about making those kinds of vows.

Matthew 5:33 You know that our ancestors were told, “Don’t use the Lord’s name to make a promise unless you are going to keep it.” 34 But I tell you not to swear by anything when you make a promise! Heaven is God’s throne, so don’t swear by heaven. 35 The earth is God’s footstool, so don’t swear by the earth. Jerusalem is the city of the great king, so don’t swear by it. 36 Don’t swear by your own head. You cannot make one hair white or black. 37 When you make a promise, say only “Yes” or “No.” Anything else comes from the devil. CEV

This is the complete opposite of His message in the KJV, because the CEV makes it okay to make promises but fails to see the warning about not making an oath & to not even swear by that oath when the New Covenant to us is sufficient for following Him..

Matthew 5:33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil. KJV

It gets worse in the CEV as the irony of the hypocrisy is missed below..

Galatians 5:1Christ has set us free! This means we are really free. Now hold on to your freedom and don’t ever become slaves of the Law again. 2 I, Paul, promise you that Christ won’t do you any good if you get circumcised. 3 If you do, you must obey the whole Law. 4 And if you try to please God by obeying the Law, you have cut yourself off from Christ and his wonderful kindness. 5 But the Spirit makes us sure that God will accept us because of our faith in Christ. CEV

Compare with the KJV below; note how Paul was not making any promise to the readers.

Galatians 5:1Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. KJV

Since circumcision is the smallest letter of the law in that if you do that, then you have to do the whole law, what do you consider making a vow or promise to God to be? The biggest letter of the law.

Next post; The apostate movement called Promise Keepers in how the CEV supported that apostasy.

Will you be using the Message and Good News bibles next?

 

[Squire Robertsson]

As the OP is now banned for 6 months this thread is closed.