[Will Kinney]

Originally Posted by magicref

I had an additional thought about the NIV discussions. Since she doesn't trust that the NIV is inspired or inerrent, then how can she put any credence to the "other" verses that DO prove Christ's deity? That is, she is ready to admit that there are some poor translations in the NIV, so how do I know if ANY of the translations in the NIV are any good?

Good point,Doug. Annie speaks out of both sides of her mouth. At times she talks about "other inspired and inerrant Bibles" (never mentioning which ones they might be) and then says that they all have errors and bad translations. Then she says she doesn't believe the Bible even teaches that God said He would preserve His words in a book at all.

What she has in a very real way done is to make up a new definition of the word "inerrant". For Annie and others like her it no longer means "without error" but "ballpark approximation close enuf to be divinely useful" for determining what God probably said.

She talks about her hermeneutics and yet seems totally incapable of seeing some of the plainest teaching of the KJB and how it differs radically from the heresy that is found in the NIV about the deity of Christ in such passages as Micah 5:2 and Acts 13:33.

In the _real_ practical sense, however, we believers are CONSTANTLY coming to issues with all these different translations. How many times do we hear the Preacher saying, "this is better translated as", or as someone here just posted, "what the Bible really says is..."

When God says that ALL Scripture is profitable, and that we see even ONE WORD can be pivotal (seed vs. seeds), I for one don't feel too content thinking the real Bible is just lurking out there in the ether.


I would have to admit that the fruit of the Churches does not seem to support this. I don't see Christ's Church getting stronger and stronger, but rather more and more tepid and mixed up in the World.

Thoughts would be greatly appreciated!

Doug A.

Amen. Very well said.

God bless,

Will K