Does having imperfect translations attack God's character and preservation?

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Scott J:
Prove it.

Prove it with your denial.

Askjo, What language was this spoken in by Jesus? (hint: It wasn't 17th century English therefore the words He was given were not in English)

You missed the point on the Scripture that I gave you. Study hard!

There is no evidence that the TR existed before Erasmus collated it in the early 1500's and also no evidence that this term was used before a became a marketing ploy for a printer in 1624.

This is your only argument on the term, "TR" all the time!

BTW, where does this scripture say anything about the TR? ...or you filling in the blanks in God's Word for Him?

Without the text, these writers cannot write down the words. Without the words then the texts would be blank. John 17:8 talked about these believers' responsibility and Chris's responsibility.

Look at Erasmus who didn't leave us with a public testimony that he ever believed in salvation by grace alone. He appears to have died trusting in RCC doctrine and rites to save him.

Erasmus used the pen and wrote down these words where he found from the sources such as 1 John 5:7. When he died, the protestant took care of his body and buried him.

Originally posted by gb93433
Context is everything! Try reading Romans one again. Read your Bible and in it tells who a fool is. It is quite clear in Ps. 53:1 and 14:1, "The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God ," They are corrupt, and have committed abominable injustice; There is no one who does good."

Nida? Metzger? and others? Do you defend them? If so, why did you ignore 2 Cor. 6:14?

Seems like I read that somewhere before on the board before but the poster was unable to give any documentation to support that point.

A poster does not have to answer the evidence because of the denials that many persons who defend him, made.

Not everyone agrees with everything about the way Genesis was written. But that does not make them an unbeliever.

John 5:46-47 are right because this passages show the fact what you avoid.

Henry Morris

Morris defends the KJV; Metzger defends the MVs. What is the difference between Morris and Metzger reflecting the subject on the Book of Genesis?

Originally posted by tinytim
Nope, "them" refers to people.

because you know you are a W/H man.

why would all the preservation scriptures not apply to my NIV.

Because of 6,500 adulterated words in the NIV.

Originally posted by robycop3
I don't see the words "King James Version" or the acronym "KJV" anywhere in this verse. And I doubt if Jesus gave His disciples His Father's words in English. As usual, Askjo, your "evidence" for the KJVO myth is zero.

John 17:8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me. Did this verse say the KJV?

What VERSION of the TR?

ALL Antiochian texrs of TR
ALL Traditional texts of TR
ALL Byzantine texts of TR
ALL Textus Receptus of TR.

Originally posted by Dina
How do you explain someone "struggling" to understand a KJB, picking up another version, and understanding it?

The KJV is understandable as likewise as these MVs.

Genesis

KJV 5.10
ASV 5.13
NKJV 5.52
NIV 5.76
NASB 5.93

See the above - lowest grade level.

Originally posted by michelle
There is a wonderful book called "Touch not the unclean thing" by David H. Sorenson. Textus Receptus is a latin term for the Recieved Text, which down through the centuries it was the text that was recieved or accepted by most all groups.

I recommend this book for everyone.

The KJV is this recieved text in the english language.

Originally posted by Dina
Did a search on the book you suggested. This is the first thing that popped up http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/review_touch_not_the_unclean_thing_pr.htmhttp://www.kjvonly.org/doug/review_touch_not_the_unclean_thing_pr.htm[/b]

Dina, please remember that Doug is a W/H man.

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

--------------------------------------------------
TC quoted:

Erasmus didn't compile the Greek text for use by the churches. He wanted a Greek text so that he could correct the errors he found in the Vulgate. That way the RCC would have corrected translation of the Vulgate to use. He edited the Greek manuscript several times and so did others after him. The term Textus Receptus (TR) was attached as a marketing ploy - a printer's attempt to sell more copies and make more money. It was not that it was really the "text received by all".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TC,

Where did you recieve this information? This is not the truth.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[Charles Meadows]

The issues surrounding Erasmus and his motives are interesting. Desiderius Erasmus was a highly educated man, a scholar in language, history and philosophy. He was a catholic priest but far from a "devout" one. He had many misgivings about the church hierarchy and its dealings in European politics.

Erasmus wanted to publish a Greek NT and he wanted to do it before the pope could! One of the things that got him in the most hot water was his recension of the Vulgate Latin. This was felt by church leadership to be most presumptious! The textus receptus name was not affixed until several revisions later - I think it was the edition published in 1533 by the Elzivir brothers. Perhaps the biggest criticism against this text is that it used the Vulgate for some of Revelation. That is Erasmus didn't have a complete Greek manuscript so he had to translate the Latin into his own Greek for some of the book. Keep in mind he wanted to beat the pope so he didn't want to wait too long!

A good overview of all of this can be found in Bruce Metzger's books on the canon of the NT.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by michelle:
Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Dina,

There is a wonderful book called "Touch not the unclean thing" by David H. Sorenson. Textus Receptus is a latin term for the Recieved Text, which down through the centuries it was the text that was recieved or accepted by most all groups.

The KJV is this recieved text in the english language.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

Do you know why it was called the received text and what surrounded it?

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Charles,

I highly recommend the book "Touch not the unclean thing" by David H. Sorenson. David Cloud has an excellent book about this also called "Myths About the Modern Versions" who also writes about the history of Erasmus.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

gb,

I stated what the Recieved text meant in one of my posts. It is speculation at best to say in a proof positive way, that this was called this because of a marketing ploy. I would like to see the evidence for such a statement.

What does the word "recieved" mean to you?

Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by michelle:
Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

gb,

I stated what the Recieved text meant in one of my posts. It is speculation at best to say in a proof positive way, that this was called this because of a marketing ploy. I would like to see the evidence for such a statement.

What does the word "recieved" mean to you?

Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

You might want to study what surrounded that time. There was more than one text at the time though and it was political.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by michelle:
Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Charles,

I highly recommend the book "Touch not the unclean thing" by David H. Sorenson. David Cloud has an excellent book about this also called "Myths About the Modern Versions" who also writes about the history of Erasmus.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

Is there anyone this false teacher doesn’t slam? Notice how he even slams The Navigators with junk I have never heard of. I was involved with them for seven years and never once ever heard anything he writes about ever mentioned. Of course I know his type from seminary. Those kind would write the trustees and tell them how all of their professors were heretics only to lie about particular information. One professor threatened to slap a lawsuit on one and his dishonesty stopped. mazing how a threat of a lawsuit stopped him. His lies were easily stopped. But if the man truly felt his professors were heretics why did he continue on in class and back down when threatened with a suit. My Bible says the righteous are as bold as a lion. I guess the lion turned out to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Look at all the expertise by David Cloud! Is there anyone left? I might have missed the name but I didn’t see Bruce Metzger’s name listed.

From his website:

Bible Answer Man and Rome - by Wilson Ewin 6/17/97
Bill Gothard - Biblical Discernment Ministries
Billy Graham - Ally of Rome - Ian Paisley
Billy Graham's Disobedience to the Word of God - by David Cloud
Bill Bright/Campus Crusade And Rome - by David Cloud
Bill Hybels - by David Cloud
Campus Crusade for Christ - Biblical Discernment Ministries (3 articles here) Charismatic Movement - Biblical Discernment Ministries
Clark Pinnock’s Heretical Statements Concerning God And Salvation
Chuck Colson - Catholic Appointed Chairman - David Cloud
Christian Research Institute - Biblical Discernment Ministries
Compromising Fundamentalists - Apostasy On-Line Database - David Cloud
Correspondence Between Bill Gothard and Calvary Contender - FBIS
CRI Guilty of PsychoHeresy? - PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter
C.S. Lewis - Biblical Discernment Ministries (2 articles here)
C.S. Lewis and Evangelicals Today - by David Cloud
David Hocking - Biblical Discernment Ministries (2 articles here)
David Jeremiah - Biblical Discernment Ministries
Falwell Open to Charismatics - by David Cloud
Falwell With Word-Faith Pentecostals and Catholics - David Cloud
F.F. Bruce - by David Cloud FBIS 6/17/97
Gary Ezzo - Biblical Discernment Ministries (5 articles here)
Graham and Rome - Part 1 - by David Cloud
Graham and Rome - Part 2 - by David Cloud
Graham and Rome - Part 3 - by David Cloud
Graham and Rome - Part 4 - by David Cloud
Hal Lindsay - Biblical Discernment Ministries
Hinn Says TBN Will Bring Dead Back To Life - FEA Press
Hybells, Bill - Have We Shamed the Face of Jesus? - Tom White
Hybells, Bill - Biblical Discernment Ministries (2 articles here)
Jack Hayford - Biblical Discernment Ministries
Jack Hayford and Rome - by David Cloud FBIS
James Dobson - Biblical Discernment Ministries (4 articles here)
James Dobson and Romanism - by David Cloud
James Dobson Revisited - by David Cloud FBIS
James Rylerophetic Dreams - by David Cloud FBIS
James Rylerophetic Dreams Revisited - by David Cloud FBIS
John MacArthur and the Blood of Christ - by David Cloud FBIS
John MacArthur - Biblical Discernment Ministries (12 articles here)
John Wimber & the Vineyard - Biblical Discernment Ministries (3 articles here)
Kenneth Hagin - Biblical Discernment Ministries
Larry Crabb's Gospel - Psychoheresy Awareness Ministries
Max Lucado - Biblical Discernment Ministries
Norman Vincent Peale:Apostle of Self-Esteem - by David Cloud FBIS
Oral Roberts: False Prophecies - Media Spotlight
Oral Roberts: Life and Ministry - Edwin Harrell
Paul Crouch and Rome - by David Cloud FBIS
Paul Yongi Cho and Rome - by David Cloud FBIS
Paul Yongi Cho: Occult Healing Builds World's Largest Church - Dr. Peter Masters
Pope John Paul II - numerous articles here
Pope John Paul II - Way of Life Online Database
Pope Says Mary Cooperates In Salvation - FEA Press
Psychoheresy and Individuals - Psychoheresy Awareness Ministries
The Purpose Driven Life - Review of Scripture Misuse
R.C. Sproul - Biblical Discernment Ministries (2 articles here)
Schuller and Rome - by David Cloud
Stanley, Charles - Biblical Discernment Ministries (5 articles here)
Teaching of Dr. James Dobson - Fundamental Baptist News Service
The Liberal Heroes - by David Cloud FBIS
The Navigators: Psychoheresy & Ecumenism-Biblical Discernment Ministries
Tony Campolo - Biblical Discernment Ministries
Warren, Rick - Biblical Discernment Ministries (5 articles here)
William Branham: Prophet of God? - Way of Life Literature Online Books
Women's Aglow and Rome - by David Cloud FBIS
World Vision and Rome - by David Cloud
Youth With A Mission (YWAM) Experiments With New, Unscriptural Missions Strategy

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

gb,

And your problem is? Do you have a problem with ministries warning the flock of those who are not in accord with Biblical doctrine? This man is doing what God expects us all to do. Look out for one another, and help keep them from those who would deceive them and lead them astray. He has been a great blessing to me, although there are some things I also disagree with.

You called him a false teacher, and I would like to know on what basis you claim he is a false teacher?

Thank you for showing his website, and what he offers, so others might check it out and come out from those who are leading many astray in these last days.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[Phillip]

Originally posted by gb93433:
Look at all the expertise by David Cloud! Is there anyone left? I might have missed the name but I didn’t see Bruce Metzger’s name listed.

From his website:

Bible Answer Man and Rome - by Wilson Ewin 6/17/97
Bill Gothard - Biblical Discernment Ministries

I edited the list, but it looks like every person that preaches is a conspiracy theory with Rome.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by michelle:
Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

gb,

And your problem is? Do you have a problem with ministries warning the flock of those who are not in accord with Biblical doctrine? This man is doing what God expects us all to do. Look out for one another, and help keep them from those who would deceive them and lead them astray. He has been a great blessing to me, although there are some things I also disagree with.

You called him a false teacher, and I would like to know on what basis you claim he is a false teacher?

Thank you for showing his website, and what he offers, so others might check it out and come out from those who are leading many astray in these last days.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

My Bible says in Gal. 6:1, “Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, so that you too will not be tempted.”

Give me evidence of his spirituality. Those who lie and slant the truth are not spiritual but are destroyers. The thief comes to stea,l kill, and destroy.


I know for a fact that some of his material is an outright lie. It is a little of the truth with his commentary that is an exaggeration. Exaggeration is the truth tainted with a lie. For example he is a liar when he names the Nav press as being equivalent with The Navigators. He does not even mention that several years ago they became separate. He is just like so many of his type. He writes loads of commentary and no documentation. I have no use for evil like that. I gave you one example. Check it out for yourself.

The Bible says that we are to check the fruit first. Does David Cloud have any fruit other than causing division and strife? Division and strife are right from hell.

Hebrews 13:7, "Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith."

David Cloud is described in Jude 17-19, “But you, beloved, ought to remember the words that were spoken beforehand by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, that they were saying to you, "In the last time there will be mockers, following after their own ungodly lusts." These are the ones who cause divisions, worldly-minded, devoid of the Spirit.”

How are those who cause divisions are grouped with. It is one thing to disagree with another. But quite another to quote a little truth and then add loads of commentary with no documentation for the purpose of causing division.

I have seen men get sucked into listening to those men. We had one where I live. Fortunately that man is gone. People after about 15 years finally began to realize who the leader really was. I had one of the main leaders in a Bible study I led and the doctrine he had was so far off it was unbelievable how far someone could go. They thought they had the truth and everyone else was wrong. They would even tell me I was wrong and they were right. Now they are telling me exactly the opposite. Fortunately the man who was in my Bible study got turned around. They would call people heretics. But their fruit proved itself. I saw one of those who self proclaimed truth tellers eventually shack up with some young ladies in his church. God eventually gives them the fruit of their ways.

Ever thought about comparing what Paul writes in Phil 1:15-18 and what David Cloud writes on his website. What was Paul’s attitude even with those he did not agree with?

Phil 1:15-18, “Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some also from good will; the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel; the former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition rather than from pure motives, thinking to cause me distress in my imprisonment. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice, yes, and I will rejoice.”

Why would I want to spend my time reading a commentary of what someone feels is wrong. Read the Bible. Is not scripture sufficient. If you feel it is not then you do not believe the following verse. Scripture is sufficient.

2 Timothy 3:16,17, “ All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.”

Just look at what it says scripture can do. Why waste my time on a man when the scripture tells me all I need to know.

“Know how to tell a crooked stick? Lay a straight one next to it.”

If you don’t know what the real one looks like how will you recognize the counterfeit. When they train someone to recognize counterfeit money they spend a great deal of time teaching them what the real one looks like.

The Bible says that we are to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

If you keep reading men like David Cloud you will become just like Him and not Jesus.

But if you do decide to read him ask for his sources and read them yourself. I can assure you that most of those people do not have any reputable sources.

As you may have seen I have asked a particular person for some documentation recently. To this I have not seen it posted.

 

[gb93433]

It's sad but i have seen what happens to people who follow people like him. I had one in a Bible study that I was able to turn around. The man was so far off it was unbelieveable. Even new believers in the study saw how far off he was. One new believer even asked me if I agreed with him. I told him, "No." He said, "Good, because I was wondering."

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

gb,

I asked you to show me how David Cloud was a false teacher and all you did was rant and rave and throw out the accusations, but did not provide one thing. I am to believe you, who believes in such men as Metzger? By their fruits you shall know them.

For you to assume, that my understanding of things comes from men and not that from the scriptures and my Lord Jesus Christ, is insulting to me, to say the least. David Cloud is not the only one to inform those things posted on his website. Many a good christian websites and godly men also indicate these very same things. Out of the mouth of two or three witnessess, the thing shall be established. Scripture is the foundation by which we are to prove all things. You quoted alot of scriptures, that you would do well to listen to yourself. You are not the only one that knows the scriptures here. I know them, believe them, and live them to the best of my ability daily, even though I fail many times, but my Lord is faithful and true. He will never leave me, nor forsake me. You seem to have great problems, with those who do not agree with you, or point out truths to you, yet you seem to be ignorant and unwilling to listen to that same counsel that you have quoted to me. Don't forget what Jesus said, Will there be any faith when I return? Are we all to compromise sound biblical truth, for the sake of unity? No, my Bible says we are to separate from those who are not following the scriptures. Jesus said he came not to bring peace, but division. You may not like what he has to say because you disagree with it, but he tells the truth so far as I have seen and read, and his writings glorify the Lord always, and share God's truth, even though it is hard for many to bare, myself included. Truth is love. Sometimes that truth will hurt the receiver, if they are in the wrong. It must hurt, if one is to be healed/cured of their sickness. God's word of truth is sharper than any two-edged sword.

One more thing, the mob mentality has nothing whatsoever to do with God. Many a prophets of God were stoned by the mob, and rejected by their people. Our Lord Jesus Christ was rejected of his own people. Just because the majority of christians say something is so or approves of things, doesn't mean it is the standard by what we are to live by - the scriptures are that standard. I feel very sorry for that poor man that was probably telling you all truth, and you bullied him away, because he didn't see it the way you and the mob did. Remember this also, the Lord uses the weak to confound the strong.

You quoted alot of scripture that you do not seem to listen to regarding trusting the scriptures. You trust the words, theories and beliefs of men such as Metzger who denies the preservation of the scriptures, over that of the scriptures themselves pertaining to this very issue. If you are going to judge others, make sure it is righteous judgement. All I can see from your posts is hypocracy.

Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[gb93433]

[unneccessary quote from above deleted]

It is obvious that you did not read from my earlier post. So try reading this from my earlier post. “I know for a fact that some of his material is an outright lie. It is a little of the truth with his commentary that is an exaggeration. Exaggeration is the truth tainted with a lie. For example he is a liar when he names the Nav press as being equivalent with The Navigators. He does not even mention that several years ago they became separate. He is just like so many of his type. He writes loads of commentary and no documentation. I have no use for evil like that. I gave you one example. Check it out for yourself.”


Did you take a look at it for yourself? If you are too lazy to take a look at the information on the website and look up the sources he uses then don’t waste our time posting and asking for a response.

[ April 07, 2004, 08:49 AM: Message edited by: Pastor_Bob ]

 

[Dina]

>>Dina, please remember that Doug is a W/H man. <<

What is that?
I'm fairly new to this debate, so I have no idea what a W/H man is.

 

[Phillip]

Originally posted by Dina:
>>Dina, please remember that Doug is a W/H man. <<

What is that?
I'm fairly new to this debate, so I have no idea what a W/H man is.

It stands for Westcott/Hort. Two scholars in the late 1800's who did their best to compile a document in the original languages from multiple manuscript sources in a scholarly attempt to provide scholars and translators with a copy as close to the originals as they could. Yes, some of the manuscripts they used did come from Alexandria because these manuscripts were some 100 to 200 years "older" than those available in the 1600's. The theory being, if it is closer to the originals in time, there is a good chance it is probably more accurate.

See the KJVo's mention of the telephone game where you pass a message down a line by whispering to the next person. The message comes out garbled at the far end. This can also be applied to manuscripts that have been passed from person to person and re-written as they are worn out. If you can find a document "pre-dating" these by 200 years, then you would assume it is closer and more accurate. However, the KJVo group says Alexandria was an evil city and as such, the documents kept by Christians there must also be tainted. In reality, there are some minor wording differences, but no doctrinal changes whatsoever.

Before the printing press and computers, manuscripts were hand copied. It was easy to leave things out or even add things. Some well-meaning scholars were known to have added a few words here and there to make the case for the Lord stronger. They did not realize, at the time, they were tampering with Holy Scriptures (or if they did, they unashamedly did it anyway). So, theory has it after dilligently comparing documents; the Westcott/Hort versions of the "original manuscripts" were compiled, printed and released for translators to use.

Many KJVo groups like to point their fingers at Westcott and Hort claiming they were either evil or non-Christians on a mission to "water-down" the Word of God. In reality, they were doing very complex scholarly work in an effort to provide the most accurate grouping of manuscripts they could. You will also hear of Nestle versions. Scholars, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Nestle pusblished his before Westcott and Hort came on the scene and W/H relied on Nestle compilations as a basis to start theirs.
So, when you here someone say you are a W/H, it is usually considered an insult because they are accusing you of believing the "non-christian, and evil scholars who spent their time trying to destroy original manuscripts". Good theory to use against MVers, but not accurate. Westcott/Hort were diligent scholars who's sole purpose was to assist translators with a compiled group of manuscripts.

The only real problem with this theory is that God has used people throughout the ages who are not Christians to provide His word to later generations. You have to look at the work itself and many scholars have and have put their stamp of approval on the results. Does anybody ever wonder how many of those Anglican translators in 1611 were real Christians? It works on both sides of the fence.

GB can probably point you to some very qualified books to read regarding the distillation of ancient manuscripts.

 

[LarryN]

W & H were Anglican, just as the majority of the translators of the KJV were.

The difference to most KJVO's though is that early-17th century Anglicans = Good, mid-19th century Anglicans = Bad; as long as that suits your agenda.

 

[gb93433]

Askjo:

Don't think for one moment that I agree with Metzger on his interpretation of Genesis.

I much more agree with Morris.

Morris knows little to nothing about the Hebrew and Greek text. I have heard him speak and it is clear from what he says. All he knows is what he reads that others write. I do have great respect for him being that he stood and is still satnding for the truth of scripture while the rest bow down to their god. He is still standing while so many others are sitting with the truth watching the stars go by each day and never once give a though about the world going to hell.

 

[Phillip]

Originally posted by LarryN:
W & H were Anglican, just as the majority of the translators of the KJV were.

The difference to most KJVO's though is that early-17th century Anglicans = Good, mid-19th century Anglicans = Bad; as long as that suits your agenda.

Thank you, I hope I didn't butcher the history. I was trying to explain who W&H were, but I do not personally know much about them. This is interesting information.

To be honest, (and this is my humble opinion) there is very little difference between the W/H Greek and the TR Greek that I can find. Only minor issues. I can't speak for the Hebrew, I have to take the word of others.

Is it also true that the TR of today is somewhat far removed (in time and possibly in content) from the TR of the 15th century? Is this true and is it not also true that the KJV1611 is the only remaining authority of that original TR?

 

[TC]

Originally posted by michelle:
TC,

Where did you recieve this information? This is not the truth.

http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/Textus_Receptus.htm


There are a couple more if I can remember where. If I find them, I'll post them.