Did God Die In 1611?

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by Askjo:
For example, NASB changed:
city to gate
father to sons
flesh to man
suffered to died
brethern to beloved
chains to pits
And more...

And the 1769 KJV changed the 1611 KJV, for example:

"her" to "his" (Gen. 39:16)
"at" to "all" (Josh. 3:15)
"good" to "God" (Psa. 69:32)
"God" to "the LORD" (Isa. 49:13)
"thy people" to "the children of thy people" (Ezek. 3:11)
"came" to "ran" (Mk. 5:6)
"approved" to "appointed" (1 Cor. 4:9)
and more...

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by David J:
I believe he NASB is the inspired, infallible, and inerrant Word of the Most High in that it is a translation

No, it is not. How would you read 4,000+ NON-inspired, not preserved words in the NASB?</font>[/QUOTE] You missed by several thousand words Askjo... There are no inspired "words" in the NASB except for those that are left in their original form such as the names of places and people.

This is also true of the KJV and every other translation into any language. None of the writers of scripture spoke or wrote in English. None of the inspired words are English...zero...nada.

That wasn't my choice or Homebound's or Skan's or Craig's or yours... it was the choice of Almighty God who specifically chose 40 or so very special men to write in languages that God Himself divinely chose.

How would you dare that 4,000+ adulterated words are the Words of God?

They aren't adulterated words... nor are they the words of God. Together, however, they are the written Word of God, His message and revelation of Himself to us.

Your lack of understanding of the difference between words (the individual units of speech) and 'word' (the expressed mind of a communicator) does not constitute a valid indictment of the NASB or any other version.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Askjo:
For example, NASB changed:
city to gate

Where?

father to sons

Where?

flesh to man

Where?

suffered to died

Where?

brethern to beloved

Where?

chains to pits

Where?

And more...

I hope so! That is only 6 and you said there are over 4,000! When do we see the whole list, with verse references? </font>[/QUOTE]4,000+, not 6!!!! I gave you 6 examples of 4,000+.

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by Askjo:
4,000+, not 6!!!! I gave you 6 examples of 4,000+.

So far you haven't given us anything. I asked for the references for just the 6 and so far you haven't be able to provide them. If you can't support the 6 then I have no reason to believe the 4000+.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
The NASB is my favorite translation of the Bible, but it is not perfect.

Your choice! It is better than the NIV or CEV.

because I frequently recommend it to others,

I wish you don't. Your choice is to do it.

Please list the verses one at a time and indicate for each one the specific errors.

Daniel 3:25

KJV - He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

NASB - He said, "Look! I see four men loosed and walking about in the midst of the fire without harm, and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods!"

Notice NASB saying, "a son of gods.

Is Jesus a son of gods?

Mark 1:2-3

KJV - As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

NASB - As it is written in Isaiah the prophet: "BEHOLD, I SEND MY MESSENGER AHEAD OF YOU, WHO WILL PREPARE YOUR WAY; THE VOICE OF ONE CRYING IN THE WILDERNESS, 'MAKE READY THE WAY OF THE LORD, MAKE HIS PATHS STRAIGHT.'"

According the Scriptures, there is more than one prophet. NASB is incorrect.

Mark 1:2 is from Malachi 3:1.
Mark 1:3 is from Isaiah 40:3.

Luke 23:45

KJV - And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.

NASB - because the sun was obscured; and (39) the veil of the temple was torn in two.

NASB is incorrect because of a scientific error.

The TR reading "eskotisthe" - "was darkened."

John 1:18

KJV- The only begotten Son,...He hath declared Him.

NASB- The only begotten God,...He has explained Him.

NWT (Jehovah's Witness)- The only begotten God ...is the one that has explained Him.

By substituting "God" for "Son," the NASB and NWT change the glorious truth of God into a lie. If Christ is really a "begotten God," then His Deity is invalidated. These translations delight the heart of the Unitarian and the Jehovah's Witness, neither of which believe in the Deity of our Lord Jesus. The NASB stands shoulder to shoulder with the Jehovah's Witness bible at this and many, many other points of alteration.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Dear Askjo,

Thank you for posting the data. If you can find some more, I would very much appreciate it if you would post it. I am very busy right now, and I don’t have time to discuss with you any details of your data, but I would like to share with you one thing that I believe is very important.

The RV, the ASV, and the RSV are all revisions of the KJV, and it is correct, therefore, to speak of the differences in them from the KJV as “changes.” Indeed, that is exactly what they were.

The NASB, however, is NOT a revision of the KJV, but a new translation, and it is NOT correct, therefore, to speak of the differences in it from the KJV as “changes.” Indeed, they are NOT changes, but “different” translations.

Those who write or preach about the “changes” that the NASB made from the KJV are either mistaken or deliberately lying. In either case, their choice of the word “changes” very greatly diminishes the value of their argument and makes them appear to be either very ignorant or very dishonest. I believe, therefore, that it would be helpful to you to use more accurate terminology in arguing for your position.

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by Askjo:
Daniel 3:25

KJV - He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

NASB - He said, "Look! I see four men loosed and walking about in the midst of the fire without harm, and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods!"

Notice NASB saying, "a son of gods.

Is Jesus a son of gods?

Is the passage referring to Jesus or was Nebuchadnezzar referring to one of his pagan gods?

Mark 1:2-3

KJV - As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

NASB - As it is written in Isaiah the prophet: "BEHOLD, I SEND MY MESSENGER AHEAD OF YOU, WHO WILL PREPARE YOUR WAY; THE VOICE OF ONE CRYING IN THE WILDERNESS, 'MAKE READY THE WAY OF THE LORD, MAKE HIS PATHS STRAIGHT.'"

According the Scriptures, there is more than one prophet. NASB is incorrect.

Mark 1:2 is from Malachi 3:1.
Mark 1:3 is from Isaiah 40:3.

If the practice of referring to the minor prophet as being included in the major is wrong, as you claim, does that also mean the KJV is wrong when it says the words were spoken by Jeremy the prophet in Matt 27:9 but the words are quoted from Zec 11:12?

Luke 23:45

KJV - And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.

NASB - because the sun was obscured; and (39) the veil of the temple was torn in two.

NASB is incorrect because of a scientific error.

The TR reading "eskotisthe" - "was darkened."

So, you think when it gets dark outside it is because the sun went out?

John 1:18

KJV- The only begotten Son,...He hath declared Him.

NASB- The only begotten God,...He has explained Him.

NWT (Jehovah's Witness)- The only begotten God ...is the one that has explained Him.

By substituting "God" for "Son," the NASB and NWT change the glorious truth of God into a lie. If Christ is really a "begotten God," then His Deity is invalidated. These translations delight the heart of the Unitarian and the Jehovah's Witness, neither of which believe in the Deity of our Lord Jesus. The NASB stands shoulder to shoulder with the Jehovah's Witness bible at this and many, many other points of alteration.

I gotta give you this one. In my opinion the reading "theos" is a Gnostic interpolation.

So, that is 1 confirmed. Only 3,999 to go!

NEXT!

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
Is the passage referring to Jesus or was Nebuchadnezzar referring to one of his pagan gods?

Was Jesus a son of gods if you said Nebuchadnezzar referring to one of his pagan gods? This verse talks about Jesus.

If the practice of referring to the minor prophet as being included in the major is wrong, as you claim, does that also mean the KJV is wrong when it says the words were spoken by Jeremy the prophet in Matt 27:9 but the words are quoted from Zec 11:12?

Who was first to prophesy? You need to ask NASB committees why the NASB agrees with the KJV on Matthew 27:9.

So, you think when it gets dark outside it is because the sun went out?

God the Omnipotent can do anything He wants to.

 

[robycop3]

Askjo:Originally posted by Askjo:
Daniel 3:25

KJV - He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

NASB - He said, "Look! I see four men loosed and walking about in the midst of the fire without harm, and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods!"

Notice NASB saying, "a son of gods.

Is Jesus a son of gods?

Would you really expect a pagan king who'd heard but very little about God in his lifetime, and who had just thrown three men into the furnace for refusing to worship his god, to know who Jesus was? Heck, not even Daniel knew! Daniel expected the Messiah, but he had no clue as to His identity.

God the Omnipotent can do anything He wants to.

Then why do you deny Him the right to provide His word in the forms He chooses?

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by Askjo:
This verse talks about Jesus.

How do you know that?

You need to ask NASB committees why the NASB agrees with the KJV on Matthew 27:9.

So, then, you are saying both the NASB and the KJV are wrong in Matthew?

God the Omnipotent can do anything He wants to.

I know that but you didn't answer my question. Do you think the sun shut off or do you think it got dark due to the sun being obscured?

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
How do you know that?

How do you know that a son of gods can spoke with 3 men in a furance? How would a stone as a son of gods, speak with 3 men in a furance?

So, then, you are saying both the NASB and the KJV are wrong in Matthew?

Did I say they are wrong? No, it is very obvious to see your accusation against me. You did not answer my question.

Do you think the sun shut off or do you think it got dark due to the sun being obscured?

How was the sun covered?

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by robycop3:
Would you really expect a pagan king who'd heard but very little about God in his lifetime, and who had just thrown three men into the furnace for refusing to worship his god, to know who Jesus was? Heck, not even Daniel knew! Daniel expected the Messiah, but he had no clue as to His identity.

In the Old Testament there was one God. In the New Testament there was one God. In the beginning God created the Earth and Heavens. Who was God? Was He not Jesus Himself?

John 1:1-3, 10.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

Col. 1:16
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

The Creator chatted with 3 men in a furnace. Was the Creator not Jesus Himself?

Jesus was yesterday, today and tomorrow.

Then why do you deny Him the right to provide His word in the forms He chooses?

No! God did not choose to provide His word in the modern versions. Men did. The modern versions are a perversion of God's word.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Askjo:
No! God did not choose to provide His word in the modern versions. Men did. The modern versions are a perversion of God's word.

God did not choose the KJV either. He only chose the inspired original version.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by Askjo:
No! God did not choose to provide His word in the modern versions. Men did. The modern versions are a perversion of God's word.

Where did God say that?... You, are not Him so please stop presuming to speak for Him.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Scott J:
Where did God say that?... You, are not Him so please stop presuming to speak for Him.

2 Cor. 2:17 (KJV) - For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

This verse answered your question, "Where did God say that?"

 

[robycop3]

Originally posted by robycop3:
Would you really expect a pagan king who'd heard but very little about God in his lifetime, and who had just thrown three men into the furnace for refusing to worship his god, to know who Jesus was? Heck, not even Daniel knew! Daniel expected the Messiah, but he had no clue as to His identity.

Askjo:In the Old Testament there was one God. In the New Testament there was one God. In the beginning God created the Earth and Heavens. Who was God? Was He not Jesus Himself?

You didn't answer my question. With hindsight, WE know the 4th person in the furnace was Jesus, but why should we expect NEBUCHADNEZZAR to have known who He was?

quote:
Then why do you deny Him the right to provide His word in the forms He chooses?

[/i]No! God did not choose to provide His word in the modern versions. Men did. The modern versions are a #%$@&*@^ of God's word.[/i]

Pure guesswork and opinion, in this case both incorrect, as well as a rules violation.

 

[robycop3]

2 Cor. 2:17 (KJV) - For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

This verse answered your question, "Where did God say that?"

First, the MOST CORRECT rendering is "PEDDLE", not "corrupt".

Second, this verse doesn't say jack about what GOD said. It's about the attitude & actions of Peter and his companions.

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by Askjo:
How do you know that a son of gods can spoke with 3 men in a furance? How would a stone as a son of gods, speak with 3 men in a furance?

You seem to have missed the point. I believe the 4th person in the furnace was a Christopheny, but there is no reason to believe Nebuchadnezzar thought so, or even know what one was. The wording of the Hebrew leads me to believe he did not. It reads "a son of the gods."

Did I say they are wrong? No, it is very obvious to see your accusation against me. You did not answer my question.

If it is an error in Mark why isn't it an error in Matthew? And why do you consider a question to be an accusation? Are you paranoid?

How was the sun covered?

However God wanted to obscure it.

 

[David J]

By substituting "God" for "Son," the NASB and NWT change the glorious truth of God into a lie. If Christ is really a "begotten God," then His Deity is invalidated. These translations delight the heart of the Unitarian and the Jehovah's Witness, neither of which believe in the Deity of our Lord Jesus. The NASB stands shoulder to shoulder with the Jehovah's Witness bible at this and many, many other points of alteration.

Lets say that you are right on this one Askjo(by the way Jesus is God therefore I don’t see the problem with this verse as found in the NASB but that is another debate all together). If this is your method using the NWT to plead guilt by association then you might have a point. Now let’s consider that your method proves that the NASB is in league with the NWT and changing God’s truths into a lie. You might want to take a very hard look at the KJV.

For example:

When a JW tells you that the Trinity is false and that Jesus is not God in that He is part of and the Trinity, they always love to us the KJV.

Titus 2:13,”Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; “KJV

And

2 Peter 1:1,”Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:” KJV

Humm, looks like Askjo has a little problem now. The KJV agrees with the JW’s! Does this mean the KJV is making God’s truths out to be a lie? According to Askjo’s standards it does. So what bible do you trust Askjoe? I have just proven by your standards that the KJV is in league with the Watchtower!

So if the NASB can error in using “God” instead of “Son” and the KJV can error saying “God and OUR Savior” instead of “God and Savior” then I guess that both bibles are bad. Yet again a KJVO double standard shines bright for all to see!

http://www.bible-researcher.com/new-world.html

By the way, I'm not claiming that the NASB is 100% perfect. The NASB like the KJV has gone through revisions.

You are grasping at straws Askjo!

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by robycop3:
First, the MOST CORRECT rendering is "PEDDLE", not "corrupt".

Interestingly, you disagreed with old-time scholars. They said this verse refers to the word, "corrupt," not peddle. Today scholars said, "peddle." Why change? Why did TODAY scholars disagree with the OLD-TIME scholars concerning this verse?