Bammel Church of Christ in Houston, Tx

B
B

May 2nd, 2005, 3:00 am #31

Since you keep calling the KJV "God's word" while pointing out the flaws in the NIV, you shouldn't get terribly insulted when someone does the exact same thing to you.

I did point out a flaw: the use in the KJV of the phraze "God forbid" in several locations (including Romans 6:2) where the words meaning "God" or "forbid" do not appear in the Greek. There are others, but there's not much point in creating a list for someone who will only continue to refer to the KJV as "God's word" as if the NAS, NIV, ASV, RSV, etc. are not.
Quote
Share

Joined: April 15th, 2005, 1:48 pm

May 5th, 2005, 3:18 pm #32

Change agents have hit Bammel Church of Christ in Houston, TxThis has been going on for the past 20 + years. I use to attend there but no longer because of this. They have a praise team and the men are having some kind of Power Breakfasts and they hold a mens prayer time in "a COMMUNITY room". They have their "connection groups" meeting in homes on sunday night and throughout the week. They have once a year have a dedication for the new babies in the congregation. They have a woman as a minister to the women. I know there is more. They are starting a bible class teaching from the book "Experiencing God". Only 10 to this class. I was attending there for along time and didn't realize what was going on. They also have a class where they do majority of the time is singing of contemporary songs, and then they have a little time for a very short devotional. This is happening also to Spring Woodlands Church of Christ in the Woodlands, Tx where we use to attend as well. They are fixing to build a 10 million + dollar building up north somewhere. They have their praise teams standing in front of the audience singing their solos and clapping their hands. This freightens me. It is nothing but the devils work. They have had 2 splits that I know of. This is more powering than Jim Jones and his cult. I can't believe how people can be so blind and deaf about what is going on in these churches. They are so wrapped up in being entertained.
IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT YOU HAVE POINTED OUT. You have not "proved it" sir! YOU NEED TO RE-READ THE ABOVE MESSAGES FROM DAVID AND MYSELF CAREFULLY.


Re: B
Re: Big Mike Lewis May 1 2005, 10:00 PM


Since you keep calling the KJV "God's word" while pointing out the flaws in the NIV, you shouldn't get terribly insulted when someone does the exact same thing to you.

I did point out a flaw: the use in the KJV of the phraze "God forbid" in several locations (including Romans 6:2) where the words meaning "God" or "forbid" do not appear in the Greek. There are others, but there's not much point in creating a list for someone who will only continue to refer to the KJV as "God's word" as if the NAS, NIV, ASV, RSV, etc. are not.



Quote
Like
Share

B
B

May 6th, 2005, 12:02 am #33

If you are unwilling to admit that there are some verses that are more accurate in the NIV than the KJV just as I AM WILLING to admit that there are some verses that are more accurate in the KJV than the NIV, then there is no point in continuing this discussion.
Quote
Share

Joined: April 15th, 2005, 1:48 pm

May 6th, 2005, 3:47 pm #34

Change agents have hit Bammel Church of Christ in Houston, TxThis has been going on for the past 20 + years. I use to attend there but no longer because of this. They have a praise team and the men are having some kind of Power Breakfasts and they hold a mens prayer time in "a COMMUNITY room". They have their "connection groups" meeting in homes on sunday night and throughout the week. They have once a year have a dedication for the new babies in the congregation. They have a woman as a minister to the women. I know there is more. They are starting a bible class teaching from the book "Experiencing God". Only 10 to this class. I was attending there for along time and didn't realize what was going on. They also have a class where they do majority of the time is singing of contemporary songs, and then they have a little time for a very short devotional. This is happening also to Spring Woodlands Church of Christ in the Woodlands, Tx where we use to attend as well. They are fixing to build a 10 million + dollar building up north somewhere. They have their praise teams standing in front of the audience singing their solos and clapping their hands. This freightens me. It is nothing but the devils work. They have had 2 splits that I know of. This is more powering than Jim Jones and his cult. I can't believe how people can be so blind and deaf about what is going on in these churches. They are so wrapped up in being entertained.
(This one goes out to "B" and everyone else out there who think that they can make bold statments about the Word Of God and not have to "prove" those statements;)

1Th:5:21: Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.


<FONT SIZE=3>I can play basketball better than Michael Jordan and I can dance better than Michael Jackson!</FONT>

Really I can!

Would you like me to "prove it!

I do not have to "prove" any; I said it and that should be good enough for you.


(This is how you come across when others who are lovers of the truth read your messages on this site. I have just as much belief in the majority of the things you are writing as I have in the statement that I just wrote above.)
Quote
Like
Share

B
B

May 6th, 2005, 7:20 pm #35

First of all, I hesitate to continue in a debate with someone who, given current events, would have the lack of sense to compare himself (even in jest) to Michael Jackson.

Second, I have already mentioned the use of "God Forbid" in several places in the KJV (specifically Romans 6:2). In the Greek, it reads "ma genoito". Neither of those words is "God" or "forbid". You chose to ingore that example.

Here's another one for you. <Proof ahead - don't ignore this> In I John 5:7, "the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost" was not found in ANY manuscripts until the 16th century. FOR 1500 YEARS THAT WAS NOT IN THE BIBLE. The KJV and NKJV are the only versions to IGNORE the overwhelming evidence that those words are NOT PART OF THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD. It came from the Latin Vulgate and was added to pacify those trying to add more weight to the concept of the trinity. You should be as offended by that as you are by problems in the NIV. Luckily, they weren't able to sneak anything in about the pope, or you would be blindly defending that as well.

And don't assume you know me, by referring to anyone who is on the opposite side of this argument as a "lover of truth" as if I am not. I would not have taken the time to study these things, if I were not searching out truth.

As for your test above:

Romans 8:3 - I actually think the KJV is better than the NIV on this verse. I haven't checked other versions yet. I'm not a big fan of the term "sinful nature" that the NIV uses, although it is frequently an accurate thought.

1 Timothy 3:16 - I'm not sure why the NIV uses "body" instead of "flesh". It doesn't seem to affect the meaning either way. I'm not sure if you have an issue with the "taken up" versus "received up". I'm guessing you do by the underscore. The root word is "lambano" which can mean either take or receive. The "ane" prefix (from ana) adds "up" to the meaning.

I Peter 3:18 - You don't have this underlined, but the KJV uses the word "suffered" while the KJV uses the word "died". Although we all know that Christ did suffer, the Greek apethanev (from apothnasko) is usually translated he died. Funny that one wasn't underlined, don't you think? Flesh/body - already covered in 1 Timothy 3:16.

1 Peter 4:1 - Flesh/body - Do you find such a different meaning in these two that is has caused your walk with God to suffer? Body is simply a more modern term for flesh.

I John 4:2 - The true translation of elaluthota is "having come". It is a perfect participle. Since that doesn't make for sound English (and neither the KJV nor the NIV uses a participle), has come is actually closer to the meaning than is come.

I John 4:3 - The word flesh (sarkos) is not in the Greek! Neither is the "in the" that precedes it in the KJV. Research this before you assume the guy who wrote this is right. The NIV is dead on in this verse. It's ironic that versions that don't "pass the test" cannot be considered as the word of God according to this verse, when the KJV adds words that aren't even there.

II John 2:7 - The word for come, erchomenon, is a participle and is properly translated in the NIV.


You're right. Proof is a great idea. I would imagine you could make a similar list for the NIV (although you failed miserably this time). That's why I don't blindly assume that one version is perfect, and the others are all garbage.


2 observations to take special note of:

1. The major versions don't mess up on the verses that have to do with the plan of salvation (hearing, believing, repentance, confession and baptism) or the basic things God expects from a Christian.

2. You should not make too many assumptions about any of the major versions without at least a basic knowledge of Biblical languages or manuscript history. ALL of them are exact at times and ALL of them take liberties at times that they should not. The fact that someone else uses a version that is different than yours does not make them wrong, from Satan or anything of the kind.

And by the way, insulting and belittling the versions others use and their religious practices will not convince anyone to change anything.
Quote
Share

Joined: April 15th, 2005, 1:48 pm

May 8th, 2005, 7:05 pm #36

Change agents have hit Bammel Church of Christ in Houston, TxThis has been going on for the past 20 + years. I use to attend there but no longer because of this. They have a praise team and the men are having some kind of Power Breakfasts and they hold a mens prayer time in "a COMMUNITY room". They have their "connection groups" meeting in homes on sunday night and throughout the week. They have once a year have a dedication for the new babies in the congregation. They have a woman as a minister to the women. I know there is more. They are starting a bible class teaching from the book "Experiencing God". Only 10 to this class. I was attending there for along time and didn't realize what was going on. They also have a class where they do majority of the time is singing of contemporary songs, and then they have a little time for a very short devotional. This is happening also to Spring Woodlands Church of Christ in the Woodlands, Tx where we use to attend as well. They are fixing to build a 10 million + dollar building up north somewhere. They have their praise teams standing in front of the audience singing their solos and clapping their hands. This freightens me. It is nothing but the devils work. They have had 2 splits that I know of. This is more powering than Jim Jones and his cult. I can't believe how people can be so blind and deaf about what is going on in these churches. They are so wrapped up in being entertained.
Re: ”B”

You should be more concerned about 110 plus corrupted versions of God’s word than the current happenings in the life of Michael Jackson. MJ can only harm so many (if the claims are true – I am not the judge or the jury in his case), but these corrupted modern versions are jeopardizing the eternal lives of people by the multi-millions. But it does not seem as if you care about that.

You are continually defending all of these corrupted versions at all costs, and do not seem to care if there are changes and additions in these books that are clearly forbidden by God.

Are you defending God or the right to use any corrupted Bible version?

I wonder what Jesus would do in your situation. Would he defend and encourage the use of a corrupted version of God’s word?

Would Jesus defend and encourage the use of the NIV that you are so viciously defending even though the NIV calls Jesus and Satan by the same name?

http://jesus-is-lord.com/nivsatan.htm


NIV Calls Lucifer, "Jesus"

Lucifer, Satan, NIV
________________________________________
(1) Just about everybody knows the word "Lucifer" as another name for Satan. The word "Lucifer" is found one time in the King James Bible.
Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

(2) But what about the NIV? The word "Lucifer" is clean, bald-headed gone and now this creature is identified as the "morning star". Lucifer is the "morning star" in the NIV.
How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

(3) So we know that in the NIV the "morning star" is a negative, evil figure. Right? He was fallen from heaven. He was cast down to the earth. Can we find the "morning star" anywhere else in the NIV? Yes! The following passages in the NIV show the "morning star" as Jesus Christ! But the NIV just called the fallen creature of Isaiah 14:12 "morning star". Lucifer AND Jesus are ONE in the NIV! Lord have mercy, Jesus! Help me, Lord.
NIV: Revelation 22:16,
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you [1] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."
NIV: 2 Peter 1:19,
And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
NIV: Revelation 2:28--
I will also give him the morning star.
________________________________________
NIV Reader, can you say to the "lord" OUT LOUD,
"Oh, lord, Thank you for giving me the NIV.
It is proper to call Jesus a fallen creature.
Jesus and Lucifer are the same.
Thank you, father."
If you can, the lord and father
you are praying to is--SATAN.
If you cannot say this, you need to
UTTERLY DESTROY
your perverted "bible". Don't even use it to "help" you.
Get a King James Bible so you can have the true word of God.
This is very serious.
________________________________________

This is from a person who wrote the preface to the NASV. Let’s see what he has to say!



NASV Committee Member
NASV, New American Standard Version, NASV

"I must under God denounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord...We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the New American Standard, those are my words...it's wrong, it's terribly wrong; it's frightfully wrong...I'm in trouble;...I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and I can't refute them. The deletions are absolutely frightening...there are so many. The finest leaders that we have today haven't gone into it [new versions of Hort and Wescott's corrupted Greek text] just as I hadn't gone into it...that's how easily one can be deceived...Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?"
--Dr. Frank Logsdon, Committee Member
New American Standard Version


Now let us talk about faith.


Heb:11:1: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Heb:11:6: But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

I have a question for you.

Am I supposed to have faith in you and believe you when you are saying that ALL translations of God’s Word are corrupted; or should I have faith in God and the things that God says about his Word?

Let us see what God says about his Word.

(The following passages were taken from “Spiritual deception in the highest” pt. 2 of 2. I wish that I could post the entire document here but it is much too large. This document is full of useful information on the history of Bible translations. I strongly encourage everyone who is a “lover of the truth” to read it. There is a link to it on this site. I have also provided a link to it here. It has a wealth of information on the subject of God's Word and I strongly encourage anyone who is studying the history of God's Word to visit this site.)

http://www.concernedmembers.com/spiritu ... on2.htm#20)


24:2 W H A T G O D S A I D A B O U T H I S W O R D
"FOREVER, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven." (Psalm 119:89)
" ... thou hast magnified thy word above ALL thy name." (Psalm 138:2)
"The words of the Lord [are] pure words: [as] silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt KEEP THEM, O Lord, thou shalt PRESERVE them from this generation for ever." (Psalm 12:6-7)
"Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words SHALL NOT pass away." (Luke 21:33)
"The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God SHALL STAND FOR EVER." (Isaiah 40:8)
" ... the scripture CANNOT be broken;" (John 10:35)
And, lest any of us think that God cannot accomplish His promises; God has already anticipated our doubts. He says:
"Behold, I [am] the LORD, the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?" (Jeremiah 32:27).


I think I will take God’s Word over your word, nothing personal, But God is wiser than you!

Satan recognizes that bibles are needed to control the masses. The DEVELOPMENT of New Age Bibles is among his top priorities.



23:3 F I N A N C I A L C O P Y R I G H T S
'Modern' versions are financially copyrighted. Why is this?
"God has only one Bible. All the other versions ... are not Bibles, but books of men" .
'Modern versions' are copyrighted because they are the product of men's efforts, not God's.
Contrast this to the text of the King James Bible. The KJV text can be copied, reproduced, quoted etc. etc. without any intervention by man.
Peter Ruckman points out:
"The AV has no financial copyright. It has the Crown Copyright, which only applies to Bible publishers in the United Kingdom, and this copyright DOES NOT demand money from anyone who wishes to quote, cite, reproduce, or print any passage from it".
Barry Burton says the: "Thomas Nelson Co. has a copyright notice in the front of ... King James Bibles that they print. It makes it APPEAR that they have the copyright to the King James Bible. HOWEVER ... if you call the Thomas Nelson Company, they will tell you that they do not have a copyright on the King James text (the Bible itself). What they have copyrighted are the notes and the layout" .



Now we will address the issue of Greek. As you may or may not know, there are actually more than one form of biblical text writings in the Greek language. So when you say something is "not in Greek", your statement is too vague to be accurate. You conveniently left out the name of the Greek text that you are referencing when you pointed out the alleged problem with “GOD FORBID” missing.

Nevertheless I will share this with you and all who are seeking the truth.


S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T S :
T H E S I N A I T I C U S A N D V A T I C A N U S T E X T S
( Corrupted Minority Texts In Greek )
"In our day there are reputed to be about 110 so-called translations of the Bible or New Testament in the English language alone ... Of those 110 versions only the King James Version (Authorized) is translated from the Received Text (Textus Receptus). All the others, even though no two of them agree with each other, were translated from another source. That other source is the Misters Westcott and Hort Text".
Jasper James Ray 'echoes' the same report. He says all modern Bibles since 1611 are: "... for the most part, in agreement with the Greek Text of Westcott and Hort" .
So, where did the Greek Text of Westcott and Hort come from?
"The Greek text of Westcott and Hort is ... from a very limited and select number of manuscripts" . "The Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament was primarily based on the Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus (Aleph) manuscripts of the fourth century, both of which originated from the Alexandrian School" .
In this chapter we discuss the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts.
The reader should note that 'Vaticanus' is sometimes called 'Codex Vaticanus'. The word 'Codex' means the manuscript is in 'book' form, verses a scroll. Vaticanus is also called 'B'.
Sinaiticus is also referred to as 'Codex Sinaiticus'. Again the word Codex meaning this manuscript is also in 'book' form, verses scroll. Sometimes Sinaiticus is also called 'Aleph'.
In summary: "The text of Westcott and Hort is practically the text of Aleph and B" . i.e. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
20:4 S I N A I T I C U S A N D V A T I C A N U S
Since the Vaticanus originated between 325 A.D. and 350 A.D; and since the Sinaiticus originated about 340 A.D. :
"Several textural authorities believe that the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts are two extant copies of the 50 Greek manuscripts copied for Constantine by Eusebius in 331 A.D." .
One of those authorities is Dr. Herman C. Hoskier. He says:
"My thesis is then that B (Vaticanus) and Aleph (Sinaiticus) ... are Egyptian revisions current between A.D. 200-400 and abandoned between 500 and 1881, merely revived in our day ..." .
Do you remember in an earlier chapter we talked about Constantine? We said that, on the surface, he put on the 'robe' of Christianity. But, behind the scenes, he had Eusebius prepare 50 corrupt Bibles from the heretical teachings of Origin.
It's possible that we have 2 copies of Satan's corrupted minority Greek texts resurfacing again from the year 331 A.D. Westcott and Hort then use these 2 corrupt texts to produce their own corrupt Greek text.


28:2 C O M E, L E T U S R E A S O N T O G E T H E R
Would Jesus Christ leave the world, for the last 2,000 years, WITHOUT leaving us his true New Testament Word? Would He NEGLECT everyone for the last 2,000 years?
The simple truth is this: When Jesus Christ left the earth, he left MANY witnesses. Those witnesses wrote down what Jesus said and did. In fact, Jesus left so many witnesses that there are still more than 5,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts which EXIST TODAY. The early church had those witnesses. We have them, too.
From those 5,000 New Testament witnesses we can take ANY Bible and test it for accuracy.
The King James Bible has been found to AGREE with those 5,000 witnesses in 90-95% of the cases. That agreement level is why the King James is called: 'The Majority Text'.
So, we do have God's Word, and we have it, today.
If, on the other hand, we take the Westcott and Hort New Testament text (which underpins 'modern' versions) and if we compare it to the 5,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts; we find that it DISAGREES with 90-95% of the witnesses. That is why it is called the 'Minority Text'.
The bottom line is this: Jesus said you will know a tree by its fruit.
As a Christian, you need to compare the 'fruit' of these Bibles and decide whether you believe the King James Bible (The Majority Text) contains the Word of God, or whether the Word of God is in these 'modern' versions (the Minority Text).
Remember that the Bible is not just any book; it is the Word of God, and is, therefore, subject to spiritual attack.
In fact it is due to SPIRITUAL ATTACK, that there EVEN EXISTS a MINORITY of the 5,000 Greek New Testament texts which ARE CORRUPTED. Without that spiritual attack, the King James Bible would have agreed with 100% of the 5,000 Greek New Testament witnesses.
Remember also: Jesus has the name above all names (Philip. 2:9). And the Bible goes on to say that: God has MAGNIFIED HIS WORD ABOVE ALL HIS NAME (Psalms 138:2).
Wow! That is getting up there!
Thus, when we are talking about the Word of God, we are discussing a VERY, VERY, important topic.
This report was written for the Glory of God and to point everyone toward His True Word.
- THY WORD have I hid in my heart that I might not sin against thee. ( Ps 119:11 )
- I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget THY WORD. ( Ps 119:16 )
- For ever, O Lord, THY WORD is settled in heaven. (Ps 119:89)
- I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep THY WORD. ( Ps 119:101 )
- THY WORD [is] a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. ( Ps 119:105 )
- Thou [art] my hiding place and my shield: I hope in THY WORD. ( Ps 119:114 )
- THY WORD [is] true [from] the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments [endureth] for ever. ( Ps 119:160 )


G O D ' S P R E S E R V E D W O R D
The foreword to the NASB Bible says that ONLY the originals were inspired. It says: "The New American Standard Bible has been produced with the conviction that the words of scripture AS ORIGINALLY PENNED in the Hebrew and Greek were inspired by God" .



Today it is taught that: "... God wrote the originals perfectly, but that there is NO perfect translation. Yet, there is NO scripture that teaches any such thing!.
We are told that God CAN NOT use Holy men to translate His Word (from the Traditional Majority Text) into the various world languages.
Yet, if God used Holy men to write His originals, why can't He use Holy men to translate his Word?
Something is wrong, here. The logic, in what we're being told, does not make sense.
So, in this chapter, let's examine what God said about His Word.

24:3 I N S P I R E D A N D P R E S E R V E D
Contrary to what we're being told, God says that his word is WITH us and is PRESERVED forever.
Reverend Gipp agrees and points out:
" ... the Bible is a spiritual book which God exerted supernatural force to conceive, and it is reasonable to assume that He could exert the same supernatural force to PRESERVE it" .
Edward Hills comments:
"... why would God infallibly inspire these original manuscripts if He did not intend to PRESERVE their texts by His special providence down through the ages?" .
"... if the providential PRESERVATION of the Scriptures is not important, why is the infallible INSPIRATION of the original Scriptures important? .
"Every argument for inerrant, infallible INSPIRATION applies also for inerrant, infallible PRESERVATION. It is the same God!" .
"If the doctrine of the Divine inspiration of the Old and New Testament scriptures is true doctrine, the doctrine of the providential preservation of the scriptures MUST also be a true doctrine. It must be that down through the centuries God has exercised a special providential control over the copying of the scriptures ... so that trustworthy representatives of the original text have been available to God's people in every age" [S6P192-3].
"There exists NO reason for supposing that the divine agent who ... gave to mankind the scriptures ... straightway abdicated his office, took no further care of his work, [and] abandoned these precious writings to their fate" .
Or put another way:
"Are we to simply believe that, for a millenium and a half, the New Testament languished textually until it was providentially rescued in the last century by two random discoveries: in a Vatican archive and in a Mount Sinai wastebasket ...? .
" ... if God has not preserved His words ... then he has done something which He has never done before. He has wasted His time!" .
No dear reader, God has not wasted His time. He has, in fact, preserved his Words. For instance:
"A.W. Pink ... wrote that the indestructibility of the Bible is proof that the Author is Divine... A very small percentage of books survive more than twenty years, a yet smaller percent last a hundred years, and only an INSIGNIFICANT fraction ... have lived a thousand years" ."As Dean Burgon (1883) pointed out, the history of the New Testament text is the history of a conflict between God and Satan. Soon after the New Testament books were written Satan corrupted their texts by means of heretics and misguided critics whom he had raised up. These assaults, however, on the integrity of the Word were repulsed by the providence of God, who guided true believers to reject these false teachings and to preserve the True Text in the majority of the Greek New Testament manuscripts .

So, we know God HAS preserved His Word.


It's possible that we have 2 copies of Satan's corrupted minority Greek texts resurfacing again from the year 331 A.D. Westcott and Hort then use these 2 corrupt texts to produce their own corrupt Greek text.

John Burgon said of the W&H text:
"... the Greek Text which they have INVENTED proves to be hopelessly depraved ... The underlying Greek is a MANUFACTURED article throughout ... The New Greek Text was FULL OF ERRORS from beginning to end ... " .
John Burgon said to Westcott and Hort:
"It was no part of your instructions to INVENT a new Greek Text, or indeed to MEDDLE with the original Greek at all ... By your OWN confession - you and your colleges knew yourselves to be INCOMPETENT. Shame on [those] most incompetent men who ... occupied themselves ... with FALSIFYING the inspired Greek Text ... Who will venture to predict the amount of MISCHIEF which must follow if the 'New' Greek Text ... should become used" . Immortal words indeed:
"... Who will venture to predict the amount of mischief which must follow if the 'New' Greek Text ... should become used".
The W&H corrupted Greek Text is now in more than 110+ 'modern' versions.
"... all Greek texts produced since 1611, which are in agreement with Westcott and Hort are founded upon the same quicksands ... Since Westcott and Hort's text is corrupt, all in agreement with it are corrupt also" .

And so the foundation for a 'mass deception' had been laid by Satan through his use of Westcott and Hort.
In summary; we can trace 'modern corruptions' back to the 1881 English Revised Version Of Westcott and Hort:


Quotes from: Edwin Palmer
Coordinator Of: 'All The Work On The NIV Bible'
"[T]his [his NIV Bible] shows the GREAT ERROR that is so prevalent today in some orthodox Protestant circles, namely that regeneration depends upon faith ... and that in order to be born again a man must first accept Jesus as his Savior ..." .
"... that Christ loved the whole world equally and gave himself up for the world is WRONG" .
"[There are] few clear and decisive texts that declare Jesus is God" .
"The committee DID NOT FEEL BOUND TO THE HEBREW TEXT ..." .



26:4 B E W A R E O F T H E C O U N T E R F E I T
In effect, the men who write lexicons are saying: "Yea, hath God said?" And these same men then say: "God did not say the English words that are in your King James Bible, what God really meant was ....".
Then the 'counterfeit' is given to the Christian.
Lexicons are subtle and devious in their methodology. G.A. Riplinger believes we should rename them: "Lucifer's Lexicons" .



Lexicons corrupt the word of God.
In this chapter we will see how that happens.

26:2.1 M E T H O D 1
In method 1, the Christian looks up an English word in their King James Bible. If a 'lexicon' is used, it cross references the Bible's original English word to the Bible's original Hebrew/Greek word. Then the Christian is given the lexicon's 'new' English translation of that original Hebrew/Greek Word.
Notice how the Christian makes a 360 degree circle from the Holy Spirit's chosen English word, to the Holy Spirit's chosen Hebrew/Greek word, to "another" English word chosen by MAN!
Since God is perfect, and man is not, this method corrupts God's Word.
Notice also, method #1 approaches the Word of God by 'doubting' him. i.e. by doubting His choice of the original English words.
That is how some people use a lexicon.
Knowingly or unknowingly Christians are being misled from what God wants them to know, to what man and/or Satan puts in place of God's original!
Thus, a Christian may have God's Word (from their King James Bible), but they can get 'derailed' by reading man's words in place of God's Words!

26:2.2 E X A M P L E O F M E T H O D 1
The following is an example of using method 1. Let's see how God's Word gets corrupted.
In the King James Bible, in Isaiah 7:14, it says:
"... Behold, a VIRGIN shall conceive, and bear a son ...".
If I look up the original Hebrew word for 'virgin' in a corrupted (but popular) Strong's lexicon, it says the original Hebrew word is: 'al-maw'.
To that original word 'al-maw', Strong gives his definitions. That's right 'plural' definitions! Strong says al-maw is a "young woman" and could EITHER be A) of marriageable age or B) maid or newly married.
Notice Strong NEVER translates it "virgin"!
Think about it.
The Holy Spirit translated 'al-maw' as "virgin". For a "virgin" to conceive is an obvious MIRACLE.
But Strong says an 'equivalent translation' is "young woman"!
There are two MAJOR problems with Strong's translation:
1) If a "young woman" gave birth to Jesus, this is NOT a miracle. Young women give birth all the time! By Strong's definition, Jesus is just ANY man. If Jesus is just any man, then we are still in our sins. If we are still in our sins, then we are not saved. If we are not saved, then we have a big, big, problem.
2) In Strong's definition 'A' he says "of marriageable age". Strong does not say Mary was married, only that she was of marriageable age. In Strong's definition 'B' he has 2 translations: 1) maid (i.e. a woman who is not married) or 2) newly married. Thus, in most of these definitions, Strong is inferring that Mary is unmarried. Since Mary is pregnant and Strong is inferring that she is unmarried, Strong is calling Mary a whore !
Folks, this is heresy.
Lexicons are apostate and are ANOTHER way to corrupt the Word of God.

Some people 'like' the new version's translation. However, the 'new version' does not give the FULL meaning.
If I use Strong's lexicon and look up the original Greek word I find it is "agape". In the King James Bible, the Holy Spirit translated agape as 'charity' in 1st Corinthians 13:13 BUT the Holy Spirit translated agape as 'love' in Matthew 24:12.
Remember, we said earlier there are two ways to approach God's Word: doubt or faith.
When I first read this, I approached the Word in doubt. I did not understand why the word 'charity' was used in 1Co 13:13. In my position of doubt, I went to the Lord to ask him why He said 'charity'. I received NO insight. I received NOTHING. Total void.
This kept bothering me. Eventually I wearied of getting no response and I finally took the approach of faith. I said:
"Lord I KNOW you chose the word 'charity' for a REASON. I don't know why. Lord, you are not the problem, I am the problem. I just don't understand. As your Word says; please give me wisdom and 'upbraideth me not'".
At that moment of faith; the Lord gave me insight into His Word:


Man made definitions in lexicons are corrupt.


In effect, the men who write lexicons are saying: "Yea, hath God said?" And these same men then say: "God did not say the English words that are in your King James Bible, what God really meant was ....".
Then the 'counterfeit' is given to the Christian.
Lexicons are subtle and devious in their methodology. G.A. Riplinger believes we should rename them: "Lucifer's Lexicons" .


27:4 C O N F U S I O N
The Bible says God IS NOT the author of confusion. (1Co 14:33)
Since 'modern versions' dis-agree among themselves, and since this is causing confusion in the Church; I believe we can conclude that these books ( i.e. new versions ) are NOT from God.
And, if they are not from God, they must be from Satan.

I have little faith that this information will help you because I am now under the impression that you have your own agenda and defending God and his word is not on the list. You seem to want to take the side of those who would deceive. I hope and pray that I am wrong.

I only write these messages to defend God’s word, hoping to help someone along the way who is sincerely seeking to please God only.

In Jesus’ name.



Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

May 10th, 2005, 5:04 am #37

Response to: “Big Mike Lewis”

First of all, it is <B>not my KJV. I didn’t write it; I didn't translate it; and I sure don’t own it. Nobody does.


Mike, if you’re going to make a bold statement like this:</B>



[Oh brother...your KJV is full of error and bias also...]



Then you need to <FONT SIZE=3>PROVE</FONT> that the KJ translation is "full of errors", otherwise your statement (opinion) means absolutely nothing!


1Th:5:21: Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.>>>>>>>


(By the way, are you calling God Word "bias"?...Well, I guess God has a right to be bias, You know, being God and all...)



By your response I take it that your bible translation failed the test.

If it did fail the test; then do you realize that you are using a bible version that is <B>not
inspired by God? You can choose to continue to use a bible version inspired by an Anti-Christ even after you know the truth, God gives us the freedom to make stupid decisions; but know that God also holds us accountable for the stupid decisions that we make.</B>


Jas:4:17: Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.>>>>>>>>>


Please don’t be another one of Satan’s helpers. Believe me, he already has enough help!


In Jesus’ name.






a brief look at the hstory of the King James Bible.


1611 King James Bible (Authorized Version)
King James I appointed 54 of the best scholars in England to revise the Bishop's Bible. It took them seven years. The authorities authorized this translation which had enormous influence on the minds of people, and on English literature. The New Testament in the King James translation was taken, with few exceptions, from the Catholic Douay Rheims translation, which was completed 29 years previously. Like all translations, the King James translation had errors in it. In the last century, Protestant Scripture scholars met to come up with a better translation because there were several thousand errors in the existing King James translation.
1881-1885 Revised Version
The King James version was revised.
1952 Revised Standard Version
King James translation again revised.
1970 New English Bible
1973 New International Version
1980 New King James Version
1986 New Revised Standard Version

If it is the only correct version of the Bible, why did it have to be revised so many times and who authorized it.

Quote
Share

ed
ed

May 11th, 2005, 2:54 pm #38

Re: ”B”

You should be more concerned about 110 plus corrupted versions of God’s word than the current happenings in the life of Michael Jackson. MJ can only harm so many (if the claims are true – I am not the judge or the jury in his case), but these corrupted modern versions are jeopardizing the eternal lives of people by the multi-millions. But it does not seem as if you care about that.

You are continually defending all of these corrupted versions at all costs, and do not seem to care if there are changes and additions in these books that are clearly forbidden by God.

Are you defending God or the right to use any corrupted Bible version?

I wonder what Jesus would do in your situation. Would he defend and encourage the use of a corrupted version of God’s word?

Would Jesus defend and encourage the use of the NIV that you are so viciously defending even though the NIV calls Jesus and Satan by the same name?

http://jesus-is-lord.com/nivsatan.htm


NIV Calls Lucifer, "Jesus"

Lucifer, Satan, NIV
________________________________________
(1) Just about everybody knows the word "Lucifer" as another name for Satan. The word "Lucifer" is found one time in the King James Bible.
Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

(2) But what about the NIV? The word "Lucifer" is clean, bald-headed gone and now this creature is identified as the "morning star". Lucifer is the "morning star" in the NIV.
How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

(3) So we know that in the NIV the "morning star" is a negative, evil figure. Right? He was fallen from heaven. He was cast down to the earth. Can we find the "morning star" anywhere else in the NIV? Yes! The following passages in the NIV show the "morning star" as Jesus Christ! But the NIV just called the fallen creature of Isaiah 14:12 "morning star". Lucifer AND Jesus are ONE in the NIV! Lord have mercy, Jesus! Help me, Lord.
NIV: Revelation 22:16,
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you [1] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."
NIV: 2 Peter 1:19,
And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
NIV: Revelation 2:28--
I will also give him the morning star.
________________________________________
NIV Reader, can you say to the "lord" OUT LOUD,
"Oh, lord, Thank you for giving me the NIV.
It is proper to call Jesus a fallen creature.
Jesus and Lucifer are the same.
Thank you, father."
If you can, the lord and father
you are praying to is--SATAN.
If you cannot say this, you need to
UTTERLY DESTROY
your perverted "bible". Don't even use it to "help" you.
Get a King James Bible so you can have the true word of God.
This is very serious.
________________________________________

This is from a person who wrote the preface to the NASV. Let’s see what he has to say!



NASV Committee Member
NASV, New American Standard Version, NASV

"I must under God denounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord...We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the New American Standard, those are my words...it's wrong, it's terribly wrong; it's frightfully wrong...I'm in trouble;...I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and I can't refute them. The deletions are absolutely frightening...there are so many. The finest leaders that we have today haven't gone into it [new versions of Hort and Wescott's corrupted Greek text] just as I hadn't gone into it...that's how easily one can be deceived...Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?"
--Dr. Frank Logsdon, Committee Member
New American Standard Version


Now let us talk about faith.


Heb:11:1: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Heb:11:6: But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

I have a question for you.

Am I supposed to have faith in you and believe you when you are saying that ALL translations of God’s Word are corrupted; or should I have faith in God and the things that God says about his Word?

Let us see what God says about his Word.

(The following passages were taken from “Spiritual deception in the highest” pt. 2 of 2. I wish that I could post the entire document here but it is much too large. This document is full of useful information on the history of Bible translations. I strongly encourage everyone who is a “lover of the truth” to read it. There is a link to it on this site. I have also provided a link to it here. It has a wealth of information on the subject of God's Word and I strongly encourage anyone who is studying the history of God's Word to visit this site.)

http://www.concernedmembers.com/spiritu ... on2.htm#20)


24:2 W H A T G O D S A I D A B O U T H I S W O R D
"FOREVER, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven." (Psalm 119:89)
" ... thou hast magnified thy word above ALL thy name." (Psalm 138:2)
"The words of the Lord [are] pure words: [as] silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt KEEP THEM, O Lord, thou shalt PRESERVE them from this generation for ever." (Psalm 12:6-7)
"Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words SHALL NOT pass away." (Luke 21:33)
"The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God SHALL STAND FOR EVER." (Isaiah 40:8)
" ... the scripture CANNOT be broken;" (John 10:35)
And, lest any of us think that God cannot accomplish His promises; God has already anticipated our doubts. He says:
"Behold, I [am] the LORD, the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?" (Jeremiah 32:27).


I think I will take God’s Word over your word, nothing personal, But God is wiser than you!

Satan recognizes that bibles are needed to control the masses. The DEVELOPMENT of New Age Bibles is among his top priorities.



23:3 F I N A N C I A L C O P Y R I G H T S
'Modern' versions are financially copyrighted. Why is this?
"God has only one Bible. All the other versions ... are not Bibles, but books of men" .
'Modern versions' are copyrighted because they are the product of men's efforts, not God's.
Contrast this to the text of the King James Bible. The KJV text can be copied, reproduced, quoted etc. etc. without any intervention by man.
Peter Ruckman points out:
"The AV has no financial copyright. It has the Crown Copyright, which only applies to Bible publishers in the United Kingdom, and this copyright DOES NOT demand money from anyone who wishes to quote, cite, reproduce, or print any passage from it".
Barry Burton says the: "Thomas Nelson Co. has a copyright notice in the front of ... King James Bibles that they print. It makes it APPEAR that they have the copyright to the King James Bible. HOWEVER ... if you call the Thomas Nelson Company, they will tell you that they do not have a copyright on the King James text (the Bible itself). What they have copyrighted are the notes and the layout" .



Now we will address the issue of Greek. As you may or may not know, there are actually more than one form of biblical text writings in the Greek language. So when you say something is "not in Greek", your statement is too vague to be accurate. You conveniently left out the name of the Greek text that you are referencing when you pointed out the alleged problem with “GOD FORBID” missing.

Nevertheless I will share this with you and all who are seeking the truth.


S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T S :
T H E S I N A I T I C U S A N D V A T I C A N U S T E X T S
( Corrupted Minority Texts In Greek )
"In our day there are reputed to be about 110 so-called translations of the Bible or New Testament in the English language alone ... Of those 110 versions only the King James Version (Authorized) is translated from the Received Text (Textus Receptus). All the others, even though no two of them agree with each other, were translated from another source. That other source is the Misters Westcott and Hort Text".
Jasper James Ray 'echoes' the same report. He says all modern Bibles since 1611 are: "... for the most part, in agreement with the Greek Text of Westcott and Hort" .
So, where did the Greek Text of Westcott and Hort come from?
"The Greek text of Westcott and Hort is ... from a very limited and select number of manuscripts" . "The Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament was primarily based on the Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus (Aleph) manuscripts of the fourth century, both of which originated from the Alexandrian School" .
In this chapter we discuss the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts.
The reader should note that 'Vaticanus' is sometimes called 'Codex Vaticanus'. The word 'Codex' means the manuscript is in 'book' form, verses a scroll. Vaticanus is also called 'B'.
Sinaiticus is also referred to as 'Codex Sinaiticus'. Again the word Codex meaning this manuscript is also in 'book' form, verses scroll. Sometimes Sinaiticus is also called 'Aleph'.
In summary: "The text of Westcott and Hort is practically the text of Aleph and B" . i.e. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
20:4 S I N A I T I C U S A N D V A T I C A N U S
Since the Vaticanus originated between 325 A.D. and 350 A.D; and since the Sinaiticus originated about 340 A.D. :
"Several textural authorities believe that the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts are two extant copies of the 50 Greek manuscripts copied for Constantine by Eusebius in 331 A.D." .
One of those authorities is Dr. Herman C. Hoskier. He says:
"My thesis is then that B (Vaticanus) and Aleph (Sinaiticus) ... are Egyptian revisions current between A.D. 200-400 and abandoned between 500 and 1881, merely revived in our day ..." .
Do you remember in an earlier chapter we talked about Constantine? We said that, on the surface, he put on the 'robe' of Christianity. But, behind the scenes, he had Eusebius prepare 50 corrupt Bibles from the heretical teachings of Origin.
It's possible that we have 2 copies of Satan's corrupted minority Greek texts resurfacing again from the year 331 A.D. Westcott and Hort then use these 2 corrupt texts to produce their own corrupt Greek text.


28:2 C O M E, L E T U S R E A S O N T O G E T H E R
Would Jesus Christ leave the world, for the last 2,000 years, WITHOUT leaving us his true New Testament Word? Would He NEGLECT everyone for the last 2,000 years?
The simple truth is this: When Jesus Christ left the earth, he left MANY witnesses. Those witnesses wrote down what Jesus said and did. In fact, Jesus left so many witnesses that there are still more than 5,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts which EXIST TODAY. The early church had those witnesses. We have them, too.
From those 5,000 New Testament witnesses we can take ANY Bible and test it for accuracy.
The King James Bible has been found to AGREE with those 5,000 witnesses in 90-95% of the cases. That agreement level is why the King James is called: 'The Majority Text'.
So, we do have God's Word, and we have it, today.
If, on the other hand, we take the Westcott and Hort New Testament text (which underpins 'modern' versions) and if we compare it to the 5,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts; we find that it DISAGREES with 90-95% of the witnesses. That is why it is called the 'Minority Text'.
The bottom line is this: Jesus said you will know a tree by its fruit.
As a Christian, you need to compare the 'fruit' of these Bibles and decide whether you believe the King James Bible (The Majority Text) contains the Word of God, or whether the Word of God is in these 'modern' versions (the Minority Text).
Remember that the Bible is not just any book; it is the Word of God, and is, therefore, subject to spiritual attack.
In fact it is due to SPIRITUAL ATTACK, that there EVEN EXISTS a MINORITY of the 5,000 Greek New Testament texts which ARE CORRUPTED. Without that spiritual attack, the King James Bible would have agreed with 100% of the 5,000 Greek New Testament witnesses.
Remember also: Jesus has the name above all names (Philip. 2:9). And the Bible goes on to say that: God has MAGNIFIED HIS WORD ABOVE ALL HIS NAME (Psalms 138:2).
Wow! That is getting up there!
Thus, when we are talking about the Word of God, we are discussing a VERY, VERY, important topic.
This report was written for the Glory of God and to point everyone toward His True Word.
- THY WORD have I hid in my heart that I might not sin against thee. ( Ps 119:11 )
- I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget THY WORD. ( Ps 119:16 )
- For ever, O Lord, THY WORD is settled in heaven. (Ps 119:89)
- I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep THY WORD. ( Ps 119:101 )
- THY WORD [is] a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. ( Ps 119:105 )
- Thou [art] my hiding place and my shield: I hope in THY WORD. ( Ps 119:114 )
- THY WORD [is] true [from] the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments [endureth] for ever. ( Ps 119:160 )


G O D ' S P R E S E R V E D W O R D
The foreword to the NASB Bible says that ONLY the originals were inspired. It says: "The New American Standard Bible has been produced with the conviction that the words of scripture AS ORIGINALLY PENNED in the Hebrew and Greek were inspired by God" .



Today it is taught that: "... God wrote the originals perfectly, but that there is NO perfect translation. Yet, there is NO scripture that teaches any such thing!.
We are told that God CAN NOT use Holy men to translate His Word (from the Traditional Majority Text) into the various world languages.
Yet, if God used Holy men to write His originals, why can't He use Holy men to translate his Word?
Something is wrong, here. The logic, in what we're being told, does not make sense.
So, in this chapter, let's examine what God said about His Word.

24:3 I N S P I R E D A N D P R E S E R V E D
Contrary to what we're being told, God says that his word is WITH us and is PRESERVED forever.
Reverend Gipp agrees and points out:
" ... the Bible is a spiritual book which God exerted supernatural force to conceive, and it is reasonable to assume that He could exert the same supernatural force to PRESERVE it" .
Edward Hills comments:
"... why would God infallibly inspire these original manuscripts if He did not intend to PRESERVE their texts by His special providence down through the ages?" .
"... if the providential PRESERVATION of the Scriptures is not important, why is the infallible INSPIRATION of the original Scriptures important? .
"Every argument for inerrant, infallible INSPIRATION applies also for inerrant, infallible PRESERVATION. It is the same God!" .
"If the doctrine of the Divine inspiration of the Old and New Testament scriptures is true doctrine, the doctrine of the providential preservation of the scriptures MUST also be a true doctrine. It must be that down through the centuries God has exercised a special providential control over the copying of the scriptures ... so that trustworthy representatives of the original text have been available to God's people in every age" [S6P192-3].
"There exists NO reason for supposing that the divine agent who ... gave to mankind the scriptures ... straightway abdicated his office, took no further care of his work, [and] abandoned these precious writings to their fate" .
Or put another way:
"Are we to simply believe that, for a millenium and a half, the New Testament languished textually until it was providentially rescued in the last century by two random discoveries: in a Vatican archive and in a Mount Sinai wastebasket ...? .
" ... if God has not preserved His words ... then he has done something which He has never done before. He has wasted His time!" .
No dear reader, God has not wasted His time. He has, in fact, preserved his Words. For instance:
"A.W. Pink ... wrote that the indestructibility of the Bible is proof that the Author is Divine... A very small percentage of books survive more than twenty years, a yet smaller percent last a hundred years, and only an INSIGNIFICANT fraction ... have lived a thousand years" ."As Dean Burgon (1883) pointed out, the history of the New Testament text is the history of a conflict between God and Satan. Soon after the New Testament books were written Satan corrupted their texts by means of heretics and misguided critics whom he had raised up. These assaults, however, on the integrity of the Word were repulsed by the providence of God, who guided true believers to reject these false teachings and to preserve the True Text in the majority of the Greek New Testament manuscripts .

So, we know God HAS preserved His Word.


It's possible that we have 2 copies of Satan's corrupted minority Greek texts resurfacing again from the year 331 A.D. Westcott and Hort then use these 2 corrupt texts to produce their own corrupt Greek text.

John Burgon said of the W&H text:
"... the Greek Text which they have INVENTED proves to be hopelessly depraved ... The underlying Greek is a MANUFACTURED article throughout ... The New Greek Text was FULL OF ERRORS from beginning to end ... " .
John Burgon said to Westcott and Hort:
"It was no part of your instructions to INVENT a new Greek Text, or indeed to MEDDLE with the original Greek at all ... By your OWN confession - you and your colleges knew yourselves to be INCOMPETENT. Shame on [those] most incompetent men who ... occupied themselves ... with FALSIFYING the inspired Greek Text ... Who will venture to predict the amount of MISCHIEF which must follow if the 'New' Greek Text ... should become used" . Immortal words indeed:
"... Who will venture to predict the amount of mischief which must follow if the 'New' Greek Text ... should become used".
The W&H corrupted Greek Text is now in more than 110+ 'modern' versions.
"... all Greek texts produced since 1611, which are in agreement with Westcott and Hort are founded upon the same quicksands ... Since Westcott and Hort's text is corrupt, all in agreement with it are corrupt also" .

And so the foundation for a 'mass deception' had been laid by Satan through his use of Westcott and Hort.
In summary; we can trace 'modern corruptions' back to the 1881 English Revised Version Of Westcott and Hort:


Quotes from: Edwin Palmer
Coordinator Of: 'All The Work On The NIV Bible'
"[T]his [his NIV Bible] shows the GREAT ERROR that is so prevalent today in some orthodox Protestant circles, namely that regeneration depends upon faith ... and that in order to be born again a man must first accept Jesus as his Savior ..." .
"... that Christ loved the whole world equally and gave himself up for the world is WRONG" .
"[There are] few clear and decisive texts that declare Jesus is God" .
"The committee DID NOT FEEL BOUND TO THE HEBREW TEXT ..." .



26:4 B E W A R E O F T H E C O U N T E R F E I T
In effect, the men who write lexicons are saying: "Yea, hath God said?" And these same men then say: "God did not say the English words that are in your King James Bible, what God really meant was ....".
Then the 'counterfeit' is given to the Christian.
Lexicons are subtle and devious in their methodology. G.A. Riplinger believes we should rename them: "Lucifer's Lexicons" .



Lexicons corrupt the word of God.
In this chapter we will see how that happens.

26:2.1 M E T H O D 1
In method 1, the Christian looks up an English word in their King James Bible. If a 'lexicon' is used, it cross references the Bible's original English word to the Bible's original Hebrew/Greek word. Then the Christian is given the lexicon's 'new' English translation of that original Hebrew/Greek Word.
Notice how the Christian makes a 360 degree circle from the Holy Spirit's chosen English word, to the Holy Spirit's chosen Hebrew/Greek word, to "another" English word chosen by MAN!
Since God is perfect, and man is not, this method corrupts God's Word.
Notice also, method #1 approaches the Word of God by 'doubting' him. i.e. by doubting His choice of the original English words.
That is how some people use a lexicon.
Knowingly or unknowingly Christians are being misled from what God wants them to know, to what man and/or Satan puts in place of God's original!
Thus, a Christian may have God's Word (from their King James Bible), but they can get 'derailed' by reading man's words in place of God's Words!

26:2.2 E X A M P L E O F M E T H O D 1
The following is an example of using method 1. Let's see how God's Word gets corrupted.
In the King James Bible, in Isaiah 7:14, it says:
"... Behold, a VIRGIN shall conceive, and bear a son ...".
If I look up the original Hebrew word for 'virgin' in a corrupted (but popular) Strong's lexicon, it says the original Hebrew word is: 'al-maw'.
To that original word 'al-maw', Strong gives his definitions. That's right 'plural' definitions! Strong says al-maw is a "young woman" and could EITHER be A) of marriageable age or B) maid or newly married.
Notice Strong NEVER translates it "virgin"!
Think about it.
The Holy Spirit translated 'al-maw' as "virgin". For a "virgin" to conceive is an obvious MIRACLE.
But Strong says an 'equivalent translation' is "young woman"!
There are two MAJOR problems with Strong's translation:
1) If a "young woman" gave birth to Jesus, this is NOT a miracle. Young women give birth all the time! By Strong's definition, Jesus is just ANY man. If Jesus is just any man, then we are still in our sins. If we are still in our sins, then we are not saved. If we are not saved, then we have a big, big, problem.
2) In Strong's definition 'A' he says "of marriageable age". Strong does not say Mary was married, only that she was of marriageable age. In Strong's definition 'B' he has 2 translations: 1) maid (i.e. a woman who is not married) or 2) newly married. Thus, in most of these definitions, Strong is inferring that Mary is unmarried. Since Mary is pregnant and Strong is inferring that she is unmarried, Strong is calling Mary a whore !
Folks, this is heresy.
Lexicons are apostate and are ANOTHER way to corrupt the Word of God.

Some people 'like' the new version's translation. However, the 'new version' does not give the FULL meaning.
If I use Strong's lexicon and look up the original Greek word I find it is "agape". In the King James Bible, the Holy Spirit translated agape as 'charity' in 1st Corinthians 13:13 BUT the Holy Spirit translated agape as 'love' in Matthew 24:12.
Remember, we said earlier there are two ways to approach God's Word: doubt or faith.
When I first read this, I approached the Word in doubt. I did not understand why the word 'charity' was used in 1Co 13:13. In my position of doubt, I went to the Lord to ask him why He said 'charity'. I received NO insight. I received NOTHING. Total void.
This kept bothering me. Eventually I wearied of getting no response and I finally took the approach of faith. I said:
"Lord I KNOW you chose the word 'charity' for a REASON. I don't know why. Lord, you are not the problem, I am the problem. I just don't understand. As your Word says; please give me wisdom and 'upbraideth me not'".
At that moment of faith; the Lord gave me insight into His Word:


Man made definitions in lexicons are corrupt.


In effect, the men who write lexicons are saying: "Yea, hath God said?" And these same men then say: "God did not say the English words that are in your King James Bible, what God really meant was ....".
Then the 'counterfeit' is given to the Christian.
Lexicons are subtle and devious in their methodology. G.A. Riplinger believes we should rename them: "Lucifer's Lexicons" .


27:4 C O N F U S I O N
The Bible says God IS NOT the author of confusion. (1Co 14:33)
Since 'modern versions' dis-agree among themselves, and since this is causing confusion in the Church; I believe we can conclude that these books ( i.e. new versions ) are NOT from God.
And, if they are not from God, they must be from Satan.

I have little faith that this information will help you because I am now under the impression that you have your own agenda and defending God and his word is not on the list. You seem to want to take the side of those who would deceive. I hope and pray that I am wrong.

I only write these messages to defend God’s word, hoping to help someone along the way who is sincerely seeking to please God only.

In Jesus’ name.


Dearest seekingtopleaseGodonly,

I am so thankful for a person like you who is willing to stand up for what is right. My home church is in the same boat many of these churches are in and I do not know what to do. Our preacher has begun to read from the NIV from the pulpit and also has "The Message" in his office. I am afraid for what we stand for and that it will be corrupted by this FALSE bible. He doesn't seem to listen when I tell him that Paul used the King James Version and therefore if it is good enough for him then it should be for us as well. He tells me the Greek is the only true text, is he correct about this? I need to know, there are many in our congregation that are worried about this "Message" he keeps in his office. What kind of pagan things does this bible have to say. I am so scared for the Lord's Church. So many are falling because the translation they are using is not the KJV, inspired and written by God. How can I defend the false teachers in my church. I hope that you or the saint of a man Ken can give some good answers. I have been reading some of the post on this site and need to know where to look to find all the answers about the KJV. I know it is the only text used in the bible by the disciples, Paul used it, and God wrote it. But what about this Greek stuff? What about the OT, did Jesus have a KJV? IS that he used to quote to the people? Please let me know how I can find the answers to these questions. Our preacher is going to flip when I prove that Paul used the KJV when he preached in ACTS! Thanks for the help and remember to keep up the wonderful work of the Lord

ED
Quote
Share

Ken Sublett
Ken Sublett

May 11th, 2005, 4:34 pm #39

Ken is not a KJVer only. However, it is a fact that the NIV is sadly mistaken in many places. However, the KJV committee would recommend comparing various versions. When people radically introduce the NIV it is most likely that it teaches WHAT THEY already believe.

So, I post lots about the use of 1 Peter 3:21 to try to prove that instead of Baptism being A REQUEST to God, Max would say that baptism is AFTER we have received A holy spirit and is OUR PLEDGE to do our part of the bargain to be GOOD GUYS. When Max and others PLEDGE the meaning is that THEY HAVE SOMETHING to put in PAWN.

In the other 58 times the NIV translates the word to be ASKING rather than TELLING God that you GOT that salvation by just looking up and saying: "Wow!."

The NIV uses the word MUSIC which no scholar would add to the SPEAKING passages which are not related to SINGING as in MUSIC.

I use the KJV otherwise I would be TRYING to disturb people as part of the postmodern need to induce SCHIZOPHRENIA before they can change them into THEIR OWN IMAGE. This is no accident: they plan to drive the old people up the wall and out of THEIR OWN BUILDINGS. They BOAST about it. Most people will accept the KJV as having been TESTED wherease the AGENTS OF CHANGE will preach from ANY trash which fits THEIR twisted minds. It is never POSSIBLE to use the NIV as authority without knowing that you are SOWING DISCORD among a part of the congregation. In postmodernism, SOWING DISCORD is now a tool of "saving more souls."

Secondly, I use the KJV because it is not subject to infringment.

Thirdly, the KJV is more literal than most and where it uses archaic words I trust that ANY disciple will be literate enough to grasp older words which are still in the dictionaries. If a word needs explaining then the CONTEXT rules.

Fourthly, it has had the BLACKSMITHS (Cabiri) beat on it for many years and the typos have been hammered out without altering its language or trustworthyness.

Sometimes I see an error in the NIV or other version, check on the KJV and see that indeed the KJV had the same meaning but the problem was with ME.

As long as the MODERN words are not just taking liberties but fit the meaning of the context and leave the OLD meanings alone, if I have problems at this time I will grow and try to understand the words in terms of the CULTURE in which it was written rather than as Rubel and John do, make the Bible fit OUR CULTURE. If it turns out that the preacer--as usual--is just being faddish to put the focus on HIM then I have lost contact completely with the original.

Ed, do you have your tongue in checque?

Ken
Quote
Share

CBM
CBM

May 11th, 2005, 5:21 pm #40

Well said David,

Thank God that there is someone else here that is a lover of the truth.

*****************************************************
Re: B. [ " Jesus did not walk the earth in 1611 " ]


Do you even think about the things that you are writing? It doesn't even make sense.

Does Jesus Christ have to be "physically" present during the time of a translation in order for it to be accurate???

Was Jesus Christ physically 'walking the earth' at the time that the New Testament was being written??? How about during the writing of the Old Testament???

*****************************************************
Re: B. [And to the other poster, Jesus didn't say anything in the King James Bible. Jesus' words were written down in Greek by the writers of the New Testament. Each translation has its own strengths and weaknesses. Generally, the NASB is closer to the Greek than either the KJV or the NIV. Of course, my only statement about the NIV was that the Hitler comparison is ludicrous. Luckily, you were able to jump to about 17 conclusions based on that.]

*****************************************************

Question: Why are the "NASB" and "NIV" published by the same company that publishes the Satanic bible???

*****************************************************
(from a site on the web)

From their (Zondervan) own web site:

Zondervan was founded in 1931 in Grandville, Michigan, a suburb of Grand Rapids, by brothers P.J. (Pat) and Bernie Zondervan.

Zondervan first published the NIV New Testament in partnership with the International Bible Society in 1973 and the complete NIV Bible in 1978.

In 1988, Zondervan became a division of HarperCollinsPublishers, one of the largest publishers in the world.

ZONDERVAN IS OWNED BY HARPERCOLLINS!


The NIV Bible and the Satanic Bible are printed by the same parent company, Harpercollins!


So are you going to listen to the devil and his little helpers about the NIV?

**************************************************************
**************************************************************

***Let's see how "accurate" your beloved "nasb" version is:
(from another site on the web)



Perversions in the NIV & NASB

Can God Lie?


Mark 1:1-3


NIV


The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
It is written in Isaiah the prophet: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way"
"a voice of one calling in the desert, `Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.'"



NASB


The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
As it is written in Isaiah the prophet: ""BEHOLD, I SEND MY MESSENGER AHEAD OF YOU, WHO WILL PREPARE YOUR WAY;
THE VOICE OF ONE CRYING IN THE WILDERNESS, "MAKE READY THE WAY OF THE LORD, MAKE HIS PATHS STRAIGHT.'''



But wait!
"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me"
is not found in Isaiah! It is found in Malachi 3:1!!


"The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord..." is found in Isaiah 40:3
Even the NIV and NASB footnotes admit this! Click here to see.


But what does the KJV say?


"As it is written in the prophets..." (Mark 1:2)


Isaiah + Malachi does not equal "Isaiah the prophet."


Isaiah + Malachi equals "the prophets."


Apparently the modern scholsrs can't tell the differnece between "Isaiah" and "the prophets."
If they didn't they wouldn't have made this contradiction in their translations.


But, what if the manuscripts they used are in error?
What if they really do say "Isaiah the prophet?"
Can these manuscripts be trusted?


Can God lie?


"Thy word is TRUE" Psalm 119:160 "...God, that CANNOT LIE..." Titus 1:2



Another lie in the NASB:


John 7:6-11


6 So Jesus said to them, " My time is not yet here, but your time is always opportune.
7 " The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me because I testify of it, that its deeds are evil.
8 "Go up to the feast yourselves; I do not go up to this feast because My time has not yet fully come.''
9 Having said these things to them, He stayed in Galilee.
10 But when His brothers had gone up to the feast, then He Himself also went up, not publicly, but as if, in secret.
11 So the Jews were seeking Him at the feast and were saying, "Where is He?''


In verse 8, Jesus is saying that He is not going to the feast, but in verse 10, He went anyway.
This makes it appear that Jesus lied.


The King James says:


6 Then Jesus said unto them, My time is not yet come: But your time is alway ready.
7 The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.
8 Go ye up unto this feast:
I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come.
9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee.
10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.
11 Then the Jews sought him at the feast, and said, Where is he?


It is only a one-word difference, but in the KJV, the Lord Jesus is NOT made a liar.


If debating this minor change seems unimportant to you,
one new Christian almost lost his faith over it.
See http://www.balaams-ass.com/journal/reso ... e-dice.htm


Is Jesus in Danger of Judgment?
Matthew 5:22


"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment..." KJV


"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment..." NIV


"But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court..." NASB


The newer versions omit "without a cause."
Another "minor" change, right?
Read Mark 3:5


He [Jesus] looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts..." NIV
After looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, He said to the man..." NASB


In this verse, Jesus was angry, but he had a reason, "the hardness of their hearts."
In the NIV and NASB, anyone who is angry is in danger of judgment, period.
This would make our Lord Jesus in danger of judgment!!!


Blasphemy in the new Bible versions:


NIV calls Satan "Jesus!!!"


Lucifer is another name for Satan. It is found once in the Bible:
Isaiah 14:12:
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!
how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! KJV


But the NIV and the NASB (and others) leave it out:
How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! NIV


How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn!
You have been cut down to the earth, You who have weakened the nations! NASB


But wait? Who is the "morning star?"
The NIV reveals that the morning star is none other than Jesus Christ:

"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star." Revelation 22:16,
But wait! Didn't the NIV say that the morning star is an evil creature that is fallen from heaven?
Didn't the NIV replace "Lucifer" with "morning star?"
Jesus and Satan are one in the NIV!


But wait, you say. The Isaiah 12:14 "morning star" is not capitalized, but the Revelation 22:16 one is.
They have to be different then, because of this.
Wrong. The NIV also calls Jesus, "morning star" with all lower case letters:



And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 2 Peter 1:19,
I will also give him the morning star. Revelation 2:28--


What about the NASB?
The NASB changes "Lucifer" to "star of the morning" which is means the exact same thing as "morning star." They are gramatical equivalants. The NASB, in effect, makes Satan Jesus. too! This is much more subtle than the NIV, but it is still there.
Another thing about this confusion over the identity of "morning star" the Bible says that God is not the author of confusion (1 Corintians 14:33). If God is not the author of confusion, then who is behind these new "Bible" versions? Who would want us to believe that Jesus and Satan are one?
*********************************************************

Now, do you still think that the "NASB" version is more accurate than the King James translation?



I keep reading on this site that the NIV is Satan's Bible because it is published by Zondervan. That is not a very good argument because Zondervan also publishes a King James Bible.

Also, if the King James is the only correct translation, then why was the apocrapha included the the 1611 version of the King James and later taken out?????
Quote
Share