[tonybones2112]

[QUOTE=Will Kinney;23311]

Originally Posted by Critical Thinking

Are you are forcing literalness and not being the least bit charitable? Do you really KNOW that it was Dr. Combs' intention to decieve? Or could he have been simply mistaken, using hyperbole, or something else? Wouldn't you have to be omniscient to be sure? Can you not just stick to the facts? It'll make your posts much shorter.



Hi CT. I notice you avoided my last question to you about the KJB versus the other versions out there like the NASB, NIV, ESV, etc. Now, you wouldn't be trying fool us into thinking your are actually a Bible believer, would you?

As for your displeasure at calling Mr. Combs a liar, here are some facts about him from his own site. "Dr. William W. Combs has been teaching at Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary since 1983. He is currently Professor of New Testament and Chairman of the New Testament department. Dr. Combs also serves as the seminary's Academic Dean. Previously, he was the seminary's Registrar. He graduated from Tennessee Temple University with his B.A. degree and from Temple Baptist Theological Seminary with his M.Div. and Th.M. degrees. His Th.D. degree is from Grace Theological Seminary in the field of New Testament Text and Interpretation. Before coming to DBTS, Dr. Combs taught at Tennessee Temple University for four years. "

Now for a man like this who touts himself as an expert in the New Testament to come out and say that NO Greek texts read like the KJB and that ALL read "and shall be", then the guy is either a liar or he is an idiot and has no business at all teaching in a nursery sunday school class, much less at some seminary.

HE IS WRONG, and so are you, as I will gladly point out in your other post.

Will K

Loyola bless us! To say Will Kenney has "hate" is the worst form of lying , unlearned exaggeration and hyperbole that would strike the members of FFF dumb. You "critical thinkers" don't know what "hate" is till you've dealt with me, my Jesuit friend.

As usual Will, the Original Manuscript Fraud ignores the real test: internal evidence and the cross-reference method of doctrinal study as found in Hosea 12:10 and Isaiah 28:9-13. The whole purpose in changing the readings and wording of the KJV is to lose the cross references that teach us doctrine.

Re 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
Re 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

John wrote as a prophecy, looking ahead, and said the Beast "was"(once alive prior to this writing), "is not"(dead at the time of this writing, and "shall" acsend and "is"(returns during the Tribulation). Paul gives the first hint as to his identity, Christ praying for the apostles in John 17 nails him down::

2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Joh 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

Thus Paul and Jesus Christ name the Anti-Christ as being Judas Iscariot:

Joh 6:70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

Peter fills us in a little more:

Acts 1:13 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.
14 These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)
16 Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
17 For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry.
18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.
20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.
21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.
23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.

We return to the contested passage for anothe hint:

Re 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

So Judas is identified as being "yet is". His body is dead and his soul is in a "bottomless pit", a pit that is spherical and has no "bottom" because a sphere has no sides, such as the Scriptural location of hell, the center of the Earth.

We return to Paul for some further clues:

II Thes. 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Further clues are found in Ezekiel as to Judas claiming to be "God"

Eze 28:2 Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:
Eze 28:12 Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.

This "prince" of Tyrus clearly has a king, who is Satan:

Eze. 28:14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

We see so far the unholy "trinity" of the spirit of Satan, the soul of Judas Iscariot, and the body of a cardinal or bishop of the Maronite Catholic Church of Lebanon who is half Jewish and half Gentile as Judas was, stepping forward to mediate the eternal and ongoing war in the Middle East. He will be declared to be the reincarnation of Jesus Christ by the Pope(the False Prophet).

Re 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
Re 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

Zechariah tells us the nature of this wound, which is a sword wound:

Zec 11:17 Woe to the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened.

The Anti-Christ is killed by a cut from a sword, his arm is raised to ward off the blow and it almost severs the arm and at the same time puts his eye out. (90 percent of the world is right-handed, he is approached from his left, the left arm would be thrown up and the right eye cut. The only sword that inflicts such a wound is a scimitar with the curved blade. Only the Muslim world uses the scimitar today in public execution/beheadings or for ceremonial/honor guards.

The Koran teaches that it is an abomination to say Allah would have a Son.
The Koran teaches that it is an abomination to say Allah would be "manifest in the flesh".

The conclusion? The Anti-Christ is killed in the Temple by one of his own ceremonial Muslim honor guards, who is an Islamic extremist. The Scripture?

Eze 28:9 Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I am God? but thou shalt be a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee.

So "Critical Thinker", is there anything else you'd like to know? Would you like to know from the Scriptures what the "star" of Bethlehem was(an angel)? Would you like to know how the apostle Paul really died(pneumonia)? Would you like to know what Jesus wrote in the dust in John 8(Deut. 22:22)? Are there any more words in the KJV you'd like to "retranslate"? are you and a hyperfundamentalist pastor in Detroit smart enough to correct the inspired Scriptures in English?

Grace and peace, you're going to need both at the Judgment Seat of Christ.

Tony

Originally Posted by Will Kinney

... I clearly said that IN THE FOOTNOTE you will see that he says the Received Text reads kaiper estin = and yet is. ...

I was mistaken. I can admit I was wrong. I should have been more careful; I felt rushed because it was almost time to go to Sunday evening service (observe the time stamp). I apologize for my error.

It is noteworthy that this footnote is to the printed Greek text (TR), not an ancient manuscript.

Originally Posted by Will Kinney

... I notice you avoided my last question to you about the KJB versus the other versions out there like the NASB, NIV, ESV, etc. Now, you wouldn't be trying fool us into thinking your are actually a Bible believer, would you? ...

I was not avoiding your question. If you observe the time stamps on my posts you will notice I was writing in another thread up until I had to leave for evening church. I obliged you with one answer. I will not reward bully tactics.

Originally Posted by Will Kinney

... Now if you really believe that the KJB IS the inspired and 100% true Bible like YOU SAID, then why are you trying to find fault with it. You wouldn't by any chance also be a liar, would you? Nah, perish the thought.

I am not finding fault with the KJB, I am finding fault with your evidence, argumentation, tone, logic, etc. This is an opportunity for your own personal growth and improvement. I promise to not just pat you on the back for every word you write like most folks here.

Originally Posted by Will Kinney

... It also appears you have some reading comprehension problems. I listed some specific manuscripts that Jack Moorman names. Those are manuscripts.

You did list some manuscripts courtesy of Dr. Moorman. However, you wrote that they merely "essentially" gave the "same sense" as Sinaiticus which sounds like they do not have precisely the same words as the KJB reading. To prove Dr. Combs statement incorrect you must produce at least one Greek manuscript that has the exact words. Do you or do you not have Greek manuscript like that? Make it a clear declaration.

Originally Posted by Will Kinney

... By the way, individual manuscripts are used to make up a Greek text. We have four printed Greek texts that read kaiper estin- Erasmus, Beza, Stephanos and Elziever. We also have the Trinitarian Bible Society Greek text. ...

Yes, you have provided more true facts that do not have bearing on the question at hand (which is: Did Mr. Combs lie about Greek manuscripts?).

Originally Posted by tonybones2112

... I] Are there any more words in the KJV you'd like to "retranslate"? are you and a hyperfundamentalist pastor in Detroit smart enough to correct the inspired Scriptures in English?...

Please show me where I "retranslated" or "correct" the Scriptures.

You guys don't get it. I never said I disagreed with the KJB reading.

[bibleprotector]

Originally Posted by Critical Thinking

Drop the hate. Please stop wasting our time.

Mt 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

If Will Kinney's work contains faults, would it not be better to improve, and to make assertions with better logic, evidence and in more eloquent manner, to produce much more, rather than to be an agent of inquisition?

[Will Kinney]

Originally Posted by Critical Thinking

You did list some manuscripts courtesy of Dr. Moorman. However, you wrote that they merely "essentially" gave the "same sense" as Sinaiticus which sounds like they do not have precisely the same words as the KJB reading. To prove Dr. Combs statement incorrect you must produce at least one Greek manuscript that has the exact words. Do you or do you not have Greek manuscript like that? Make it a clear declaration.
Yes, you have provided more true facts that do not have bearing on the question at hand (which is: Did Mr. Combs lie about Greek manuscripts?).

Yes. Mr. Moorman lists Greek manuscript # 2049 specifically. Plus if you looked at the N.T. translation of the Sinaitic manuscript you would see that they translated it as:"though he is yet present". Now how does this differ in meaning from "and yet is"?

This was in the initial post- "There is a 1918 version called The New Testament Translation from the Sinaitic Manuscript, done by Henry Anderson. It clearly says: “when they see the beast that was, and is not, THOUGH HE IS YET PRESENT.”

You can see this translation online here:http://www.lookhigher.net/englishbib...ion/17.html#v7

In addition to this, Mr. Combs was either lying or flat out did not do his homework as the Chairman of New Testament studies of a Christian Seminary should when he stated that ALL Greek manuscripts read "and shall be". This is a lie.

Hodges and Farstad's "Majority" text, which I have right here in front of me, clearly shows that there are many manuscripts (the 31 mentioned by Moorman) that do not read "and shall be" but "and is" which is the same meaning as that found in the Bible you seem so eager to have us question and doubt.

Will K

[Will Kinney]

Originally Posted by Will Kinney
... I notice you avoided my last question to you about the KJB versus the other versions out there like the NASB, NIV, ESV, etc. Now, you wouldn't be trying fool us into thinking your are actually a Bible believer, would you? ...

Originally Posted by Critical Thinking

I was not avoiding your question. If you observe the time stamps on my posts you will notice I was writing in another thread up until I had to leave for evening church. I obliged you with one answer. I will not reward bully tactics.

Hi Critical. You certainly seem to be an interesting case study in Jesuit gymnastics. I ask you a direct question and you avoid it. Then I ask it again and you come back with "I was not avoiding your question", but what do you do? You avoid it again! Simply amazing. So I will try again one more time.

Originally Posted by Critical Thinking

But let this be sufficient for now: I think the KJV which exists right now is the complete, inspired and 100% true Holy Bible!

Forgive me if I am assuming something that is not true, but as a result of discussions on many other forums and with lots of different Christians, I have often found that people cloak what they really believe by using ambiguous or unclear phrases. If you really think the King James Bible IS the complete, inspired and 100% true Holy Bible, then are you equally prepared to state the only logical alternative in regard to versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, NKJV, Holman Standard, etc? Because these multi-choice versions differ from the 100% true KJB by literally thousand of words omitted (anywhere from 17 to 45 entire verses in the N.T. alone) and often reject the Hebrew texts and have completely different meanings in hundreds of verses, are you then willing to take the stand that these other versions are NOT the complete, inspired and 100% Holy Bible?

This is not a rhetorical question. I really would like for you to give us a straight up and honest answer to it.

Thank you,

Will K