Who gave them the authority to OMIT ?

[Bro. Tim L. Bynum]

What is purpose of totally removing verses
that are clearly in the original T.R., and who gave the authority to Westcott & Hort to do it ?
And where did the authority come from for
Zondervon to print it under the illusion that it is the complete Word of God ?

 

[Johnv]

If a verse appears in the TR, but not in the LXX, does the LXX "omit" it. or did the TR "add" it? The question could just as readily be asked "who gave them the authority to add?"

 

[Dr. Bob]

Real question is "Who gave the AV Anglican paedobaptizing priests permission to ADD to the Word of God?"

Oldest and best manuscripts do not contain a number of added verses (we've discussed many such additions that came in later and were copied into the huge pile of Eastern Orthodox documents) added to help defend against certain errors or questions that arose hundreds of years later.

You are looking at it myopically - saying the AV is the "standard" (truth) and the others changed or omitted from the truth.

You CANNOT say that. Simply indefensible from logic or history. You CAN believe it by faith (that the AV is the only truth) but that is a personal decision you make.

It is NOT scriptural. No where in God's Word (any Greek text) does it say the AV is the right or only translation.

Sorry.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

What amazes me about one side of this ongoing argument is that they keep popping on here acting like they have some great new question that will stun all their opponents into silence!
Most of us had heard it all before and thought it through to arrive at our positions.

Either that or we are just so far gone that we are beyond sorting out .

 

[Bro. Tim L. Bynum]

Dr. Bob...that still doesn`t give anybody the authority to omit whole verses...and you know I`m telling the truth, Rev.22:18
You Hee Hawed and skirted the issue, who gave Wescott & Hort the authority and Zondervon the
authority to print it as the complete cannon of God`s Word .

 

[Precepts]

Oldest and best manuscripts do not contain a number of added verses (we've discussed many such additions that came in later and were copied into the huge pile of Eastern Orthodox documents) added to help defend against certain errors or questions that arose hundreds of years later.

Yep! That's what we believe, and who can really say we are wrong to believe it? My ascertion would be; nobody in their right mind.

Dr. Bob, your ascertion "best" is debatable. I believe best is more accurate in defending against the wiles of the devil, including apostacy. But Hey!, Isn't that what F A I T H is all about? (There's my answer again Larry)


My position exactly! To defend against ERROR!

Ere, since we get our Bible right from these MSS containing what many refer to "additions", uh, wouldn't that make our Bible more correct in withstanding "truely" anti-christ doctrines? Yes! I do believe so!

Hey! Anybody ever questioned me on my doctrine?

I know BrianT and Scott Emerson Clark have tried, but they don't understand even the doctrine they proclaim, uh, well enough.

(Here comes ol'Cranston to start that junk again/"hobby-crippled-horse" rides again!

BTW, and just "nit-picking", nits, that is; "myopically" is correctly spelled myoptically

Visually preferred. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My Lincoln is prettier than your Corvette, but if you want to race, I'll go get my Cobra GT. My wife is prettier than yours, at least she thinks I had better think so, and I do! Ain't that right, orvie?

 

[Precepts]

Either that or we are just so far gone that we are beyond sorting out

Sorted? Yes. Sordid? Well that's being discuused in another thread, but somehow keeps popping up in this section.

 

[Bro. Tim L. Bynum]

For sale...Vines Expository Dictionary, Strongs
Concordance, Merriam-Websters Dictionary and
Encyclopedias...Don`t need them any more,Liberals
on the Baptist Board know everything !


Boy Howdy...that`s a good joke !

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Yes! I am finally called a liberal!!

Guess I can go ahead and dance then -

Hey, if I'm that far gone I'd might as well go all the way!!

 

[Johnv]

Welcome to the club! I got called a liberal once for saying that we should invite the unchurched to church. Imagine that!!

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Say, what's a liberal ?

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Christ4Kildare:
Say, what's a liberal ?

To a hyperfundamentalist or hyperconservative, a liberal is anyone who doesn't agree with them

.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

I just figured I'd better figure that out since I am one now.

And to think, I only use the KJV in my preaching

Do you think Bro Tim would ask his pastor to let me come to his church on my next furlough?

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by Bro. Tim L. Bynum:
What is purpose of totally removing verses
that are clearly in the original T.R.,

To have a more accurate text. The TR was not sent down from heaven by God. It was edited by Erasmus, who compared differing texts and then put in the TR what he thought should be there.

and who gave the authority to Westcott & Hort to do it ?

God, by virtue of the manuscripts that He (God) preserved for us. Unlike you, we do not believe that we should reject the gift of God in his word.

And where did the authority come from for Zondervon to print it under the illusion that it is the complete Word of God ?[/qutoe]It is Zondervan since you are bent on accuracy. And their authority comes from their charter and incorporation as a publishing company.

Most people only clap after something good. It is a sign of the values of hte world when something pathetic draws applause from people.

 

[Pastor KevinR]

Originally posted by QuickeningSpirit:
Visually preferred. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My Lincoln is prettier than your Corvette, but if you want to race, I'll go get my Cobra GT. My wife is prettier than yours, at least she thinks I had better think so, and I do! Ain't that right, orvie?

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder .I can't speak for Orvie, but I gotta nice Chocolate Princess from the Caribbean.

 

[TC]

Originally posted by Bro. Tim L. Bynum:
Dr. Bob...that still doesn`t give anybody the authority to omit whole verses...and you know I`m telling the truth, Rev.22:18
You Hee Hawed and skirted the issue, who gave Wescott & Hort the authority and Zondervon the
authority to print it as the complete cannon of God`s Word .

Who gave Roman Catholic scholar Erasmus authority to compile and print his own greek text? How is it that it is ok for him to change the Word of God to suit what he thought it should say and that it is ok for the KJV translators to follow Erasmus's lead and do the same thing with the already existing English Bibles, but it is horrible when anybody else does the same thing?

 

[Orvie]

Originally posted by TC:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bro. Tim L. Bynum:
Dr. Bob...that still doesn`t give anybody the authority to omit whole verses...and you know I`m telling the truth, Rev.22:18
You Hee Hawed and skirted the issue, who gave Wescott & Hort the authority and Zondervon the
authority to print it as the complete cannon of God`s Word .

Who gave Roman Catholic scholar Erasmus authority to compile and print his own greek text? How is it that it is ok for him to change the Word of God to suit what he thought it should say and that it is ok for the KJV translators to follow Erasmus's lead and do the same thing with the already existing English Bibles, but it is horrible when anybody else does the same thing? </font>[/QUOTE]Does double standard ring a bell?

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Bro. Tim L. Bynum:
Dr. Bob...that still doesn`t give anybody the authority to omit whole verses...and you know I`m telling the truth, Rev.22:18
You Hee Hawed and skirted the issue, who gave Wescott & Hort the authority and Zondervon the
authority to print it as the complete cannon of God`s Word .

You are not telling the truth because you are misinformed about the manuscript evidence. Unless you know something I don't.

When is the earliest manuscript containing 1 John 5:7,8? If my studies are right the earliest manuscript containing those verses is the sixteenth century. Doesn't that seem odd that none have been found with an earler dating?

BTW, cannon is different than canon.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Christ4Kildare:
I just figured I'd better figure that out since I am one now.

And to think, I only use the KJV in my preaching

Do you think Bro Tim would ask his pastor to let me come to his church on my next furlough?

You had better not use the Greek or Hebrew text. That might be too much. They might not know what to do because it isn't the KJV. If you asked them any questions they might not speak because they would condemn themselves.

I find it interesting that he has called me a liberal and others call me a fundamentalist too.

 

[Anti-Alexandrian]

And where did the authority come from for

Same place Jehudi got it from..


It happened in Gen 3 with Satan & Eve,Baalam did it in Numbers 22:12-13,Jehudi did it in Jeremiah 36,and Satan did it in Luke 4:10;now bear in mind,they all OMMITED from God's word,to think that ommision is not a factor is insanity,bordering on lunacy........