[Gord]

Just a quick reminder or the topic:

http://www.communitybaptistchurch.co...amentalist.htm

Thanks

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Originally Posted by Gord

the literal claim of missing verses,

For the powerful ending of Mark, the verses are literally missing in their underlying Greek text. The fact is the modern version textcrits deceive you, they contradict themselves, and they instill doubt and confusion about 12 powerful, significant majestic verses. And in hundreds of other cases (e.g. see Brandon's magic marker site) they actually do remove words, phrases and verses from the modern version texts. The only reason they have not done that fully with the resurrection accounts of Mark (beyond changing text, and telling you they are the corruption of man and not scripture) is that the believers would be too aware of the gross tampering. Nonetheless, that is their stated goal.

Originally Posted by Gord

I am going to try and spend more time in study on this topic ..thank everyone for there input, it has opened my eyes to a very real topic for study, thank you all who contributed to causing me to think.

Most welcome. That was the main goal of the discussion .. to encourage you to think for yourself, clearly and hungry for God's pure word. Including the question of whether deal-breaker is a proper concept for seeking the pure word of God . Not to offend you, simply to cause you to examine and think.

Shalom,
Steven

Originally Posted by Gord
a blessing to read NASB, NKJV, ESV along with my KJV for that parallel comparison to help be understand the content

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Which textual content are you trying to understand ? The Greek texts that claim that the ending of Mark, the Pericope Adultera, "God was manifest in the flesh .." and the Acts 8:37 baptism testimony and the Johannine Comma are all man's corruption (which is the Greek text that has gross errors like the swine marathon from Gerasa and Jesus saying he is not going to the feast).

Or do you desire the underlying source text of the King James Bible and the historic Reformation Bibles, that accepts and declare these beautiful verses and sections as God's word, inspired and pure scripture.

One is truth, one is error. On this level, there is no issue of translation whatsoever. There are times where we are called to:

..choose you this day whom ye will serve..Jushua 24:15

In that last ref you quoted, that's very revealing. Whose god are you referring to... God himself, or Bible versions? (Selah)

Remember the Philippians ref I mentioned.

Originally Posted by jerry

Context is always important. Paul is not saying he does not care how God's Word is changed or how someone says something (ie. whether it is true or not) - what he said was that it does not matter what someone's motives were in preaching about Christ, as long as they preached the truth about Christ. And the more mvs are watering down and changing the Word of God, the less truth about Him you are getting.

I agree partially in that the chief error is not so much through error of doctrine but that of motive, but there will always be corruption of God's word. Basically, two streams of Bibles, one corrupt, one not. But God is greater than the corruption; the Holy Ghost is able to lead and teach even through a corrupt text, particularly for someone new to the scriptures. In other words, the corruption of versions are not deep enough to affect the basics of the Gospel. Line upon line, precept upon precept. First clean the inside of the cup and platter, then the outside will be clean, too.

Originally Posted by jerry

1 Corinthians 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

You would be better off comparing things within the Bible itself, precept upon precept - rather than running to other corrupted versions to try to help you understand the KJV (or whatever other version someone prefers).

Doing Bible study out of multiple modern versions is never going to give you a greater understanding of the Bible, but will in fact give you a lowest common denominator approach to the Bible (ie. eventually you will start throwing out specifics and stick with generalities - whatever they all have in common; however, where they differ will be discarded).

Touche, you're correct regarding comparing versions versus internal comparing (I used that to throw him off)

But actually... this verse is commonly understood to mean comparing the spiritual things under the Old Testament with the spiritual things under the New (which is perfectly valid): but this does not appear to be the apostle’s meaning. The word συγκρινοντες, which we translate "comparing," rather signifies conferring, discussing, or explaining; and the word πνευματικοις should be rendered to spiritual men, and not be referred to spiritual things. The passage therefore should be thus translated: Explaining spiritual things to spiritual persons. And this sense the following verse absolutely requires.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by MDOC

In that last ref you quoted, that's very revealing. Whose god are you referring to... God himself, or Bible versions?

Simply that our pure and perfect God has given us His pure and perfect word. And those who grossly refuse to even notice the huge issue of two very different contenders for his pure word should at least notice the issue and not pretend that they can straddle a fence between truth and falsehood. If they actually believed the modern versions are true, the only proper path would be to stop reading the King James Bible. If the Received Text and King James Bible are true, then the only proper path is to stop reading the modern versions based on the alexandrian mss.

In my own life I came to that realization and understood that with the pure Bible I had to come to the point of:

..choose you this day whom ye will serve..Joshua 24:15

At first, when I made that choice, I began to read the New King James Version as my daily Bible. Later I learned more and put that version aside for the pure and perfect King James Bible.

Shalom,
Steven

Originally Posted by Gord

Just a quick reminder or the topic:

http://www.communitybaptistchurch.co...amentalist.htm

Thanks

Bad link, Gord.

[Gord]

I see the problem, but my edit for that post is gone... job for super moderator !

Originally Posted by MDOC

Basically, two streams of Bibles, one corrupt, one not. But God is greater than the corruption; the Holy Ghost is able to lead and teach even through a corrupt text, particularly for someone new to the scriptures. In other words, the corruption of versions are not deep enough to affect the basics of the Gospel.

There is a big difference between having enough of the Bible unchanged to bring someone to salvation, and having enough changed that they will not be able to learn God's will for them each day. There is more at stake than just getting saved - we are also to live daily by the Word of God. If it is corrupted, it will affect my daily walk.

First clean the inside of the cup and platter, then the outside will be clean, too.

I have no idea why you keep quoting this verse in reference to modern Bible versions - unless you are trying to imply that those who take a stand solely on the KJV are hypocrites (which I believe is an unjust accusation - there certainly will be some hypocrites in whatever side someone takes on the issue, but that doesn't make all on one side hypocrites).

Originally Posted by MDOC

The word συγκρινοντες, which we translate "comparing," rather signifies conferring, discussing, or explaining; and the word πνευματικοις should be rendered to spiritual men, and not be referred to spiritual things. The passage therefore should be thus translated: Explaining spiritual things to spiritual persons. And this sense the following verse absolutely requires.

Explaining is different than comparing. I believe two primary applications are:

1) Comparing things within the Bible itself.
2) Comparing what someone says/teaches with the Word of God itself.