Forum rules
This forum is for discussion of aberrant doctrine and not for attempts to rehabilitate the various views considered to be apostate, cultic, heretical, or heterodox.
SupermanFan
Sustaining Member
SupermanFan
Sustaining Member
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 8:33 pm

January 12th, 2018, 5:54 pm #11

brandplucked wrote: Hi Larry. And yet you do not have a copy of any Bible in any language that you can show us that you honestly believe is the complete and 100% true words of God. You don't really believe that such a thing exists, right?  Why not just admit it?

And by the way, the KJB is right about the word "science" as well.

1 Timothy 6:20 - Is the word “science” wrong in the King James Bible?

http://brandplucked.webs.com/1tim620science.htm

God bless.
We know the apostles themselves recorded down inspired by the Holy Spirit Himself the very word of God unto us, as found in the original letter to Romans, original Gospel to Luke etc. Correct?
David Chase
Pastoral Prayer team
Utica StoneyCreek Baptist Church
Like
Share

Ask Mr. Religion
Site Founder
Joined: July 28th, 2008, 9:13 am

January 12th, 2018, 7:29 pm #12

SupermanFan wrote: My understanding would be that regardless if one holds tot he MT/TR/CT, or the KJV or a modern version, this would still be true.
Scripture are to be distinguished. The words of any translation are not inspired words, but the sense that these words conveyed, when accurately translated—faithfully expressing the divine truth of the sources—is inspired.
Maybe. Maybe not, David.

If one ties God's providence to the church in preserving manuscripts, and does not believe that God's providence works outside those boundaries, then the TR/MT will likely be your choice.
 
If you believe God's providence can work in preserving manuscripts outside the church as well as inside, then the CT will probably be your choice.
 
As to individual variants, if you believe that the majority rules, then you will probably hold to the MT.
 
If you believe that geographical distribution and the age of the manuscript is more important, then the CT will probably be your choice.
 
It is extremely difficult to choose among these criteria, and there are strong arguments for both positions. Both positions should be treated with respect in any discussion.

As relates to the transmission of God's word, and His affirmation He will preserve it, I think strongly that this preservation is given to the church, not to secular endeavors, especially when these endeavors start with incorrect presuppositions. I do not believe we can, nor should, attempt to divorce ourselves from all our presuppositions during the interpretative encounter with Scripture. There are some presuppositions we bring to the process that are vitally necessary. Awareness of them is one thing all should endeavor to discover in themselves, but I believe that a view that presuppositions are to be eschewed to the best of one’s ability is a view that ultimately leads to rejection of too much truth contained in Scripture.

We must begin with the divine revelation that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. This is the rock upon which the Lord Jesus Christ builds His church and preserves it from the gates of hell. Those who confess Christ Jesus the Lord are the true successors of St. Peter, speaking by the Holy Spirit. Conversely, those who do not begin with this confession, undertake the work of translation with a veil over the eyes of their understandings. They might understand well enough the literal sense of the letters and syllables, but they will constantly corrupt the spiritual message, because they will not see the heavenly reality to which the earthly language points. The Gospel of John provides numerous examples of this earthly-minded folly.

Whatever one thinks of the text, its wholesale acceptance demonstrates that the reformed church believed in the preservation of the Word without requiring the type of inductive, evidential methodology which is the trademark of modern textual criticism.

In the world of modern textual criticism things have gone amiss. I am not opposed to textual criticism. I embrace it when done aright. Reverent and presuppositional textual criticism involves recognizing that the Bible is not a book like any other, whose preservation and extant copies must be viewed in the light of what the Bible says about itself and its preservation. We know that the original autographs were without error because the Bible tells us so, not because we can prove it empirically; and that proper type of textual criticism involves the believing interpretation of God's providence regarding the preservation of the MSS.

The TR is real; the CT is an idea. The TR is fixed; the CT is fluid. The TR is preserved; the CT is reconstructed, or in the case of eclectic criticism, deconstructed. The TR is "received;" the CT is "examined." With the TR I may humbly sit at the feet of the Word and learn; with the CT I am required to stand over the Word and exercise judgment upon it.
AMR (a.k.a. Patrick)
Do You Confess?
Faculty PRBS
My Randomata Blog
Like
Share

SupermanFan
Sustaining Member
SupermanFan
Sustaining Member
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 8:33 pm

January 12th, 2018, 10:25 pm #13

The truth on this though is that the scriptures are here preserved for and to us in the various manuscripts and others sources available to use, and regardless of the Methodology held to and used, the resultant Greek texts and English versions would all be the word of God unto us for today. The most important criteria to me would not be the Greek texts used to translate, but whether one hold to a formal or DE translation style.
David Chase
Pastoral Prayer team
Utica StoneyCreek Baptist Church
Like
Share

larry joseph pearson
Invested Member
Joined: October 12th, 2011, 8:44 pm

January 13th, 2018, 6:26 am #14

brandplucked wrote: Hi Larry. And yet you do not have a copy of any Bible in any language that you can show us that you honestly believe is the complete and 100% true words of God. You don't really believe that such a thing exists, right?  Why not just admit it?

And by the way, the KJB is right about the word "science" as well.

1 Timothy 6:20 - Is the word “science” wrong in the King James Bible?

http://brandplucked.webs.com/1tim620science.htm

God bless.
Brother you assume to patently believe what I do not affirm. I believe that we have the Word of God in Scripture that is sufficient to us and for our salvation.If I did not  believe that with all my being ,one may as well as grab a copy of Moby *&%# and use it for spiritual guidance.Without the Christ as presented in Holy Scripture we are as Paul said persons to be pitied and of all the most miserable. I had rather set my faith in the Christ of Scripture than in the liberal fairy tales of this world system. The things we see shall perish but the Word of God will abide forever.Consider the warning of John. He said: " I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book" Revelation 22:18-19. Christians and the Bible are being assaulted and belittled in this world's arena, without Christians infighting and accusing some of being willfully ignorant. Our enemy is not the Word of God but the  attacks by fallen human nature spearheaded by the Evil one. In many countries just possessing a Bible in the vernacular may result in imprisonment or death. If those that attack believers hold to the premise that what they call the Bible is conjecture, why such atrocities against them? No the workers of evil know the Word of God is powerful. They know deep down the Spirit of God uses this Word to convict persons and changes them. The same was true in the Apostolic Church and in early Church history where men and women were killed for their testimony and the Word of God. I can not speak for no one but myself. I stand in full affirmation that what we possess, preach and teach from is God's word. I do not mind being called any name or label for better men than I laid their lives down, were beat and suffered imprisonment for it. God help me-Amen!
Like
Share

SupermanFan
Sustaining Member
SupermanFan
Sustaining Member
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 8:33 pm

January 13th, 2018, 3:31 pm #15

God has indeed faithfully preserved for us through all of the various manuscripts available to us the word of God, and the English translations like the Kjv/Nas/Esv are all that for us today.
David Chase
Pastoral Prayer team
Utica StoneyCreek Baptist Church
Like
Share

brandplucked
Sustaining Member
brandplucked
Sustaining Member
Joined: March 15th, 2011, 12:47 am

January 13th, 2018, 7:32 pm #16

"Is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?" Zechariah 3:2
Like
Share

SupermanFan
Sustaining Member
SupermanFan
Sustaining Member
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 8:33 pm

January 13th, 2018, 8:08 pm #17

brandplucked wrote: Bible Babble Buffet Part 1

http://brandplucked.webs.com/biblebabel1.htm
You re advocating for the KJVO position, correct?
David Chase
Pastoral Prayer team
Utica StoneyCreek Baptist Church
Like
Share

Gord
RTI Guru
Gord
RTI Guru
Joined: June 13th, 2009, 2:24 pm

January 13th, 2018, 9:33 pm #18

larry joseph pearson wrote:
brandplucked wrote: Hi Larry. And yet you do not have a copy of any Bible in any language that you can show us that you honestly believe is the complete and 100% true words of God. You don't really believe that such a thing exists, right?  Why not just admit it?

And by the way, the KJB is right about the word "science" as well.

1 Timothy 6:20 - Is the word “science” wrong in the King James Bible?

http://brandplucked.webs.com/1tim620science.htm

God bless.
Brother you assume to patently believe what I do not affirm. I believe that we have the Word of God in Scripture that is sufficient to us and for our salvation.If I did not  believe that with all my being ,one may as well as grab a copy of Moby *&%# and use it for spiritual guidance.Without the Christ as presented in Holy Scripture we are as Paul said persons to be pitied and of all the most miserable. I had rather set my faith in the Christ of Scripture than in the liberal fairy tales of this world system. The things we see shall perish but the Word of God will abide forever.Consider the warning of John. He said: " I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book" Revelation 22:18-19. Christians and the Bible are being assaulted and belittled in this world's arena, without Christians infighting and accusing some of being willfully ignorant. Our enemy is not the Word of God but the  attacks by fallen human nature spearheaded by the Evil one. In many countries just possessing a Bible in the vernacular may result in imprisonment or death. If those that attack believers hold to the premise that what they call the Bible is conjecture, why such atrocities against them? No the workers of evil know the Word of God is powerful. They know deep down the Spirit of God uses this Word to convict persons and changes them. The same was true in the Apostolic Church and in early Church history where men and women were killed for their testimony and the Word of God. I can not speak for no one but myself. I stand in full affirmation that what we possess, preach and teach from is God's word. I do not mind being called any name or label for better men than I laid their lives down, were beat and suffered imprisonment for it. God help me-Amen!
I have followed and read every article and listened to and have personally challenged Will and his debates many over the years, and have concluded that he has about as much evidence for the KJVO stand as does Darwin trying to prove evolution.  There just is no scientific evidence or proof to substantiate the KJVO stand.  Don't get me wrong, he has written a vast collection of well written articles to attempt to prove his stance, but they all lack any form of definitive proof, and like Darwin are just a collection of his and other like minded theories without conclusion.  Any common sense person who has taken the time to study how and why King James put forth his translation, will know it was just that.. a very good translation.  He and his fellow KJVO crowd always use that bully tackling of infallible etc. ...but he nor any one else as PROVEN BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT any proof of their claims, but only offer well crafted man made arguments and theories.  I just want to see where 'God Said' 1700 or so years after the original autographs were penned that this was the only translation that everyone should use.  There is NONE.  His time would be better spent trying to share the gospel and not the translation.
Like
Share

David1689
Inactive Account
David1689
Inactive Account
Joined: January 12th, 2018, 9:49 pm

January 13th, 2018, 10:23 pm #19

I know churches whose declaration of faith says something like "We believe that the scriptures as originally given are the word of God,"  But their preachers regularly say after the reading "So reads the Word of God."  Is there a discrency here?
Like
Share

brandplucked
Sustaining Member
brandplucked
Sustaining Member
Joined: March 15th, 2011, 12:47 am

January 13th, 2018, 11:26 pm #20

David1689 wrote: I know churches whose declaration of faith says something like "We believe that the scriptures as originally given are the word of God,"  But their preachers regularly say after the reading "So reads the Word of God."  Is there a discrency here?
Hi brother David. You are correct. There is a huge discrepancy.  Most Christians profess a faith in a Phantom bible - the originals - that they have never seen, never read, most couldn't read if they had them, and that they know does not exist.
"Is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?" Zechariah 3:2
Like
Share