NIV & New Age Movement by Al Lacey

[Marcia]

Read my post, Michelle.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by michelle:
Can one be saved and decieved? YES! Does this mean they are not saved? NO.

Absolutely true! I agree.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Askjo:
The NIV omitted the Christ in the NT 43 times!

In how many of those
43 cases is the term "Christ" in the
same sentence anyway?
In how many of those 43 cases is the term
"Christ" in the verse before or
after the verse where it is missing.

This question will NOT be answered,
for these folk don't have a list
of the 43 cases where Christ
is missing in the NIV relative
to the KJV1769.

 

[DeclareHim]

Don't make a point if you can't back it up it's that simple. If you can't prove the NIV has New Age terminology then stop arguing it does. Your wasting your time cause no one is going to take your word for it or Ruckman's and I'm not going to waste my time trying to prove something that doesn't exist your the one saying we're wrong its your job to prove it. That simple.

 

[michelle]

--------------------------------------------------
Well I hate to disappoint you but the KJV translators were ANGLICAN Westcott and Hort were also ANGLICAN so if Westcott and Hort weren't saved then the KJV translators weren't either because they were from the same church. If you want to read an ANGLICAN Bible in the KJV fine.
--------------------------------------------------

Salvation is NOT DETERMINED by the type of church you belong to. This point is irrelevent to this issue. These translators were translators, and very well educated men versed in many different languages, and translated God's Holy word, to which they all believed were the very words of God and this is how they approached their translation, unlike those of Westcott and Hort who were skeptics at best and heretics at worst. The two differed in not only the era they lived, but also their approach to the translation and the texts they used to translate. One was Godly and faithful (KJV translators), the other was skeptical and heretical/apostate (Westcott and Hort). There were a committee of 47 different men who all took great care and 6-7 years of work to translate to the best word for word accuracy as possible in the English language. Westcott and Hort sought to change what was already there by virtue of using those corrupt greek texts and the methods they used.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Marcia:
I not only have researched New Age authors (I realize the above statement was not addressed to me but am putting in my response to what you are saying anyway) but I lived it for over 15 yrs. I know the New Age inside and out. ...
I had an NIV study Bible as a new believer. I was and still am, extremely sensitive to and aware of New Age language and terms. There is nothing in it that is remotely like the New Age. You have still not given an example from the NIV that shows it is New Age.

By contrast, there is a party
here that has no NIV. There is a party here who
only heard about the New Age Movement
in a couple of sermons. There is a party here
who only read a book by G.A.Riplinger
(who at least looked through a NIV
before misunderstanding it).
This party is NOT qualified to speak on
matters pertaining to the NIV, or the
New Age movement and probably not capable
either.

BTW< Marcia, you and i are invisible
to the said party, for she ignores
all we say.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Marcia:
Read my post, Michelle.

 

[michelle]

Marcia,

I appreciate your post, and would like to discuss this more, however I will have to get back to you at a later time. I have been on here for quite some time, and need to take a breather for today. I just wanted to let you know that I read your post and desire to discuss this more with you if you so desire also. Until then...

May the Peace of our Lord be with you all.

Please feel free to email me anytime with anything you would like to share/discuss with me regarding this, or anything else for that matter.

Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[Orvie]

Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scott J:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by michelle:
How is it you trust every word in all versions, if all these versions are different and then what is your final authority when they differ, and how do you tell?

If two sisters in your church told you how to make the exact same cake but used different wording what would be the final authority? The cake, right? How can you tell? By the result, right? The faithful versions of God's Word all yield the same doctrines, the same truths, and most especially the same faith. </font>[/QUOTE]2 sisters? You mean 2 Gods? There is ONE God! For example, He gave you 5 letters. You read all His 5 letters. His 5 letters differ each other. Let me ask you ONE simple question: Which one of 5 letters is MOST ACCURATE? MVs differ each other; which one of them is MOST accurate? </font>[/QUOTE]Hmmmmmnnnnn...Matthew "disagrees" w/ Mark who "disagrees" w/ Luke, who "disagrees" w/ John. Things that are different aren't the same y'all! (sarcasm intentional)

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Orvie:
Hmmmmmnnnnn...Matthew "disagrees" w/ Mark who "disagrees" w/ Luke, who "disagrees" w/ John. Things that are different aren't the same y'all! (sarcasm intentional)

You misunderstand what I said. I did not talk about the original writings of the OT and the NT, but I talked about Bible translations. How many book(s) did God give us in our mother tongue? If He gave many books, I would ask you the simple questions: which one of many books is MOST accurate? Which one of NIV, NASB, CEV, KJV, NrIV, TNIV, NASB95, New KJV, KJV, and other modern versions is MOST accurate?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Askjo:
How many book(s) did God give us in our mother tongue?

All of the
Bibles in English God gave us.

Originally posted by Askjo:
If He gave many books, I would ask you the simple questions: which one of many books is MOST accurate? Which one of NIV, NASB, CEV, KJV, NrIV, TNIV, NASB95, New KJV, KJV, and other modern versions is MOST accurate?

This is not a good question. This question
is the same type as these questions:

Which one of NIV, NASB, CEV, KJV, NrIV,
TNIV, NASB95, New KJV, KJV, and other
modern versions is MOST inerrant?

Which one of NIV, NASB, CEV, KJV, NrIV,
TNIV, NASB95, New KJV, KJV, and other
modern versions is MOST God preserved
for our day?

Which one of NIV, NASB, CEV, KJV, NrIV,
TNIV, NASB95, New KJV, KJV, and other
modern versions is MOST perfect?

Which one of NIV, NASB, CEV, KJV, NrIV,
TNIV, NASB95, New KJV, KJV, and other
modern versions is MOST Holy?

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Wow - great discussion last night folks - its morning here and we still haven't got the ONE example of a connexion between the NIV and the New Age movement.

 

[rsr]

They both have "new" in the name?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Iesus is my Lord and Sauiour!

LarryN: "You can't even give me one
example of a verse in the NIV where you claim
"the Christ" is somehow used in a new-age context."

BTW a quick search in crosswalk.com shows "the Christ" shows up
in the KJV1769 New Testament 19 times.
I don't have a NIV search engine. The Holman Christian
Standard Bible (HCSB) of 2003 doesn't have the
phrase "the Christ" in it's new Testament.

BTW, I tend to use the phrase "Jesus, the Christ" myself.
"Jesus Christ" has become a curse word. "Jesus H. Christ"
is the most predominate of the name of Jesus being
used as a name, like His name is "Christ". Sorry, "Christ"
is a title. It isn't even the best title, as "Christ" is
a big turn off to every Jew one witnesses to. And just
the mention of "Christ" will turn a Jew off to the Lord.
Better to use the title "Messiah". "Christ" is the English
version of a Greek title meaning "Anointed one of God".
"Messiah" is the English version of a Hebrew word
and it means "Anointed one of God". Much better to use a
title that is NOT offensive, when one exists.

Now the proper order for a title/name is:
Title, given name, surname. When the New Testament was
written both the title/name order and the name/title order
were usesd. So in a word-for-word translation you
will see "Christ Jesus" and "Jesus Christ". But now
we say "General So&so", "President George Bush", title
first then the name.

So it is easy to see why some think that our Lord and Savior
is named "Jesus Christ" for they are familiar with
the given name/surname method of names NOT with the 1st century
names. BTW, the Emperors of the Roman Empire would have
a name like Emperor Neron Caeser Caeser in the order title, given
name, pedigree. By the early 300s the pedigree would make
a Roman Emperor's name longer than de Santa Anna from whom we
won our independance in 1835.

BTW, when i say "Jesus, the Christ" it has nothing to
do with Satanism, Paganism, New Age movemen, paranoia,
nor support of any known conspiracy theory.

Iesus is my Lord and Sauiour!

 

[Ransom]

Askjo said:

The NIV omitted the Christ in the NT 43 times!

Ah, so it isn't all that "new age" then.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Why don't we get to spend our time checking
Bibles for which we have a search engine
at http://www.crosswalk.com/ ?
The NIV just isn't there. Know of a quick
place on-line to do the NIV search?

Iesus is my Lord and Sauiour!

 

[rsr]

biblegateway.com

 

[michelle]

--------------------------------------------------
These have been the the word of God, as he has provided for the english speaking people for hundreds of years, and in all the true churches from the time of our Lord Jesus Christ until now. I do not doubt this one bit. Do you?

Yep! There's no proof that only this one set of mss was used in every genuine church all this time.
--------------------------------------------------

The proof is church history! This text has been preserved in the churches, and by the churches from God throughout the centuries and up unto this very day . Open up a KJB or a Geneva Bible, etc. and it is right there in your face. There is the proof that you continue to deny, or blind yourself to.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[Marcia]

Here is part of what I posted on p. 8:

I had an NIV study Bible as a new believer. I was and still am, extremely sensitive to and aware of New Age language and terms. There is nothing in it that is remotely like the New Age. You have still not given an example from the NIV that shows it is New Age.

In fact, New Agers reject the NIV and all Bibles because even the NIV clearly makes the claims New Agers reject such as: man is sinful (rejected by New Agers), that man needs a Savior from sin (rejected by New Agers), that Jesus is the unique Son of God (rejected by New Agers), that there is a hell (very rejected by New Agers), that Jesus had a bodily resurrection (rejected by most New Agers), that Jesus is the only way to God (absolutely rejected by New Agers). All of these teachings are in the NIV and all are rejected by New Agers.

If the NIV had New Age sympathies, New Agers would find it out and be trumpeting it to the skies, believe you me.

In fact, when I wrote for astrological and New Age publications, I used to quote from the Bible (New Agers do use the Bible out of context - but they don't care which version it is; all versions work for them in this) and I quoted from my King James bible, because that was the only one I had. I wish you could see my 3 part article I wrote as an unbeliever on Jesus as the Avatar of the Age of the Pisces where I quoted quite a bit about Jesus from the King James to make my points.

There is no evidence in an NIV that reveals it to be New Age or to be endorsing New Age beliefs.

 

[Orvie]

Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Orvie:
Hmmmmmnnnnn...Matthew "disagrees" w/ Mark who "disagrees" w/ Luke, who "disagrees" w/ John. Things that are different aren't the same y'all! (sarcasm intentional)

You misunderstand what I said. I did not talk about the original writings of the OT and the NT, but I talked about Bible translations. How many book(s) did God give us in our mother tongue? If He gave many books, I would ask you the simple questions: which one of many books is MOST accurate? Which one of NIV, NASB, CEV, KJV, NrIV, TNIV, NASB95, New KJV, KJV, and other modern versions is MOST accurate? </font>[/QUOTE]ESV