Subtraction of some verses from the Bible, why and who is to be blamed

[Alex Summers]

Congratulations, that is one of the greatest straw men I have ever seen put into words.

[Qnts2]

Lets suppose we were living in a time when there were no English translations of the Bible.  I had it in my heart to create one.  What do I have to work with?  I have the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts in circulation that is accepted by the church as the Bible.  I take those manuscripts and construct an English translation.  Those manuscripts have no title, but later on, are called the Textus Receptus.  How do I know they are what was used by the early church?  Simply because it is what they had.  The manuscripts the new translators are using today were later discoveries of something found in caves.  The paper is older, but the text is not.  They happen to leave out verses that were in the manuscripts used by the church world that understood Greek and Hebrew.  To me, that shows they were incomplete, and when the translators claim they are more reliable, they have no basis for that comment.  Not one person here has been able to defend that comment.  I know nobody wants to take that on, but when you defend translations that make that claim, you need to defend what right they had to remove part of God's Word, and explain how they were justified in doing so. 

 

The Bible was established as being God's Word, and 66 books became the canon.  That means every word and every verse of those 66 books are considered the Word of God.  It doesn't mean that just the book is the Word of God if you gut it.  I am going to play devil's advocate for a moment and try to look at things through the eyes of the defenders of these modern English translations.  There is no English translation that is perfect.  They all have mistakes.  The canon only applies to a book, and not all the contents.  You can remove part of the contents, and the canon still stands.  You only need to fear judgment from God if you remove text from Revelation, not Mark.  The manuscripts being used by the church that were used to create the KJV Bible, and the Geneva Bible for that matter, can't be shown to be fully accurate.  They could have had additions made by scribes, or had mistakes when they were copied.  It has been proven there are mistakes in the KJV Bible.  Look at the word Easter.  We know eagle should really be vulture. 

 

Congratulations.  You have so torn down and discredited the Bible, I can't believe any of it.  I have no idea where the mistakes are.  I have no idea what a scribe may have added.  I have no idea if something was removed.  I have no way to know if the words were the best ones to use.  Heck, I don't even know if the canon itself is legitimate?  A bunch of people got together and claimed 66 books are God's Word.  How do they know?  How do we know the Apocryphal books don't belong in the canon, or perhaps some of them anyway?  How do we know the epistles of Paul are scripture?  Who gave anyone the right to say so?  Does the Bible say the epistles of Paul are God's Word?  How about the other books?  How do I know they were written by who they say they are?  The thing with me is, the day I accept your view that all translations have mistakes, and the TR is no better than the Egyptian and Alexandrian manuscripts, and some of the text may have been added by scribes, is the day I throw my Bible in the trash.  It is worthless.  I can't fully trust it, so I don't even know if something like John 1:1 is correct, as one person is questioning.  How do I know Jesus is really God?  Just a few changes in the wording changes whether or not the Bible teaches he is deity.  I honestly don't know why anyone who believe like you do (the defenders of modern English translations that leave out portions of the text) expects anyone to live by a book full of errors we can't fully believe in?   I don't accept the answer some like to give that most of the text is the same.  Big deal!  I don't have any way to know if any of it was revised.  How do I know the real Bible isn't what was left out?  There are many books floating around that didn't make the canon. 

 

You keep on with these arguments to defend these modern translations, but you are destroying faith in God's Word.  Perhaps you don't care, so long as you win a debate, and the goal posts remain where they began?  I don't know, but I will continue to hold to my KJV Bible as being 100 percent accurate and the Word of God. 

 

I'll just give my view.

 

I believed and still do, that the OT is the words of God. The first time I was going to read a NT, in English, I did not believe the NT was the words of God. I compared some verses in the OT, in the translation done by Gentiles, to see if the translation was somewhat accurate. The verses I chose, matched the way I would have translated from Hebrew to English. I also compared them to some Rabbinical translations from Hebrew to English. They were accurate, so I decided that the Gentiles managed to do a decent translation. I still did not think the NT was the words of God. That came later, and I attribute that to a revelation of Jesus by God for me.

 

Of course, there were Jewish people who did their best to try to convince me of my error in believing in Jesus. A couple had studied the NT to find the errors. Some of the mistakes they pointed out had to do with OT verses, they claimed were mistranslated. These were not verses which I originally used to verify the Gentile English translation. There were definite differences. So I went back to see the differences and resolve them or verify the the Gentile English translation was wrong.  

 

In Judaism, the Temple had a master copy of the OT, and any copy made was compared to the authorized Torah in the Temple. When the Temple was destroyed, the master copy was carried away and lost. Over the years, those who copied sometimes made the 'tail' of a letter too short, so that it looked like another letter, or too long, looking like another letter. Sometimes, while copying a word or words were accidently repeated. Sometimes added notes in the margin became included in the text. With no master copy, some of these copies were not perfect. And sometimes these imperfect copies were used to make copies. A group of scholars called the Masoretes were concerned, so they procured what was considered a very accurate copy, and compared it to other copies. Their goal was to clean up the OT, have the most perfect authorized version, and to make sure these errors never again entered into the text. They looked at differences and searched available ancient copies to try to determine how the changes worked their way into the text. They even kept track of any variations for historical purposes, noting corrections vs. variations. The Masoretes were highly knowledgable, very dedicated to the accuracy, and meticulous in their research.

 

The NT also went for many years being copied, and we both agree, some insertions or deletions did occur.

 

Well, going back to the Masoretes, I looked at the differences. One difference between the Christian English translation and the Masoretic text involved one of those letters which when shortened, became a different letter. That letter change caused the word to be different. The Christian translation thought the correct letter was the other one which the Masoretes did not choose. The Christian translation also looked at other translations which were very old, and because the other translations, translated the word indicated what those translators read. Both, given the situation, were very reasonable translations, based on the most scrupulous investigation.

 

Another involved the addition or absence of a group of words. And maybe a missing 'tail' for one word. Looking carefully, these are both possible scribal errors. Which is the error. Well, the issue was, the Masoretic text had an incomplete sentence. Or a sentence which was not making a whole lot of sense. The Christian translation had an irregular spelling but which might have been ok, and a complete sentence which made sense. It appeared that the Masoretic text was missing a word, but the Christian version still had an irregular spelling of a word. Since the Masoretic text was not a complete sentence. I believe the Christian version has to be the right one. Not that the Masoretes were anything other then the most careful, and dedicated to the goal of eliminating any possible error from copies. The Masoretes did set up a system so that scribal error would be eliminated.

 

Yes, I did go back and explain my conclusions to those who challenged me. It was a heated discussion. In the end, one person did concede that the incomplete sentence was an issue, but that person did not accept Jesus.

 

Scribal errors do happen. People are not perfect. That does not mean the God did not protect His words to us. While one person agreed with one of my conclusions, they still did not accept Jesus. That takes a revelation of the Holy Spirit, Who is said to lead us into truth.           

[another_poster]

 

You keep on with these arguments to defend these modern translations, but you are destroying faith in God's Word.  Perhaps you don't care, so long as you win a debate, and the goal posts remain where they began?  I don't know, but I will continue to hold to my KJV Bible as being 100 percent accurate and the Word of God. 

Nobody has said you can not have the view you have. The biggest issue I have with you is where you call the rest of us demon possessed because we are happy to use other translations. That is why you come across as arrogant. Stop telling us we are doing satans work. Simple as that. As long as you insist on claiming we are demon possessed we will argue. Do you not realise the seriousness of the accusation you are making against us? I'm guessing you have not really thought about it that much as I'm sure if you did you would not choose to write those words.

 

 

You keep bringing up this person who questions John 1:1. I'm betting they are a JW since you also keep mentioning the bible that cult came up with. Christians do not accept JW's as a christian denomination. You should not argue as if they are when that is not a reflection of reality.

 

 

I would also be interested if you could provide a list of the different manuscripts that are available to translate from original language.

[Guest]

I believed the Bible was the Word of God, so I believed it when it spoke of Jesus and who he is.  If I had heard the same story from people telling me the Bible is full of errors, I wouldn't have believed their witness.  You don't know the damage you are doing.  People wonder why so many have abandoned church attendance today.  At one time, all Christians just knew going to church was something they should do.  The church was a special place to meet with God.  That is no longer the case.  After years of telling us how the church is the people and not a building, and how the church building is no more special than a Moose Lodge, it has no meaning.  People don't care how they come to church.   People figure they can stay home and pray and read the Bible and watch the tv preachers, so they don't need the church.  I don't go to church anymore.  I lost confidence in it.  I still have faith in God, but not the modern church.  I have trouble understanding how you and others can't see what is happening, but you don't see. 

 

 

From The Very Beginning

 

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. Psalms 119:160

 

It Always Was Jesus

 

Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. John 15:3-4

[another_poster]

Butero I went back through the thread and read carefully before posting what I did. It is nothing but semantics claiming it is not the same thing. You certainly did claim the translators were demon possessed at least with absolutely no evidence. Tell me what happens if they were doing God's work and spirit inspired. What happens to someone attributing the work of God to the devil? Ever heard of a thing called blaspheming the spirit? One should be very careful before making the accusations you have made.

 

As for faith comments my faith is in God and God alone. If your faith is in the bible then you are not christian. Your faith is not supposed to be in the bible. Having faith that the bible is 100% correct is fine but it should not be the basis for your faith like you have claimed. You make out like it is an impossible thing to handle. If you can't figure out something as simple as that how on earth do you handle the tough questions? None of those things have any negative bearing on my faith. I know God is real so no matter what I am left with no choice but to believe and worship God.

 

I also find it interestingthat you comment that a person did not address any of your comments yet you have refused to address many of mine. How about applying the same standards to others that you apply to yourself please. If you like lets start with why there are different words in the KJV for the exact same passage. After all if your claim is correct then surely the words should be the same.

[saved34]

I am saying you are doing the work of the devil because you are defending his attack on God's Word when portions of the text are removed.

 

Butero, this statement is just as bad and nothing more than slander. You have not presented one ounce of fact, just your personal opinion and why you hold to the KJV. The problem with that is, it doesn't really matter why you personally hold to the KJV, this is a discussion of truth and why you and others feel the need to call perfectly fine translations of God's Holy word, perversions, and then you go so far as to personally say men and women whom Christ has redeemed and died for are doing the work of satan for defending these translations. You have zero scriptural backing for such wild and reckless statements, and have yet to prove why the KJV is the only Bible English speaking people should read. 

 

Your personal testimony is fine, but you are making serious accusations, and personal testimony will not cut it. You must present Bible facts, and show where the modern versions are perverting God's word. What essential truths are missing from them? Where does scripture declare the KJV as the only real Bible? The bible is full of scripture that testifies about itself. Do you know what are the essential truths of the faith? If so, what is missing? I promise you and can go to any good modern translation, and debunk that myth real quick.

[another_poster]

No, it is not semantics Another Poster.  Everything you said was a downright lie!  There is a huge difference between a person being demon possessed, as opposed to doing the work of the devil.  If you can't find an actual place where I stated that the translators were demon possessed, and you refuse to admit you said something that is not true, I am going to report this to the moderators.  What you did is called slander.  Go back and find one quote where I stated that any of the translators were demon possessed or that any person defending them was demon possessed or admit you lied. 

 

For anyone who may not understand what I was saying or meaning, here goes.  Non believers and Christians alike are sometimes guilty of doing the work of the devil.  It happens when we think we are doing right, but are not.  I have been guilty of doing the devil's work through ignorance.  That does not mean I was demon possessed.  Another thing many don't get is the difference between being possessed and oppressed.  You can be bombarded by demonic activity urging you or influencing you to do something wrong.  That is not being demon possessed.  At the same time, you can have a demonic spirit actually take up residence inside your body, and that is what we call being demon possessed.  There is a huge difference there.  I have encountered people that were demon possessed, so I don't go around lightly accusing someone of being possessed.  I am also very familiar with blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.  That is where the Spirit heals someone, forces a devil to leave someone, or performs some type of miracle, and someone accuses that person of doing it through the work of the devil.  I guarantee God is not the one responsible for removal of part of the text in the new translations of the Bible, at least he is not in favor of it. 

 

I have my faith in God, and I learned of God through the Bible.  I heard about God through the preaching of the Word.  If someone came to me and preached salvation through faith in Jesus, and showed me how I should believe in him based on the Bible, but at the same time, told me the Bible wasn't fully reliable, I have no reason to believe that person is telling me the truth.  If God is unable to preserve his Word, what does that say of God?  The thing is, I believe God did preserve his Word, fully.  I believe it was preserved through the manuscripts in Greek and Hebrew, and now it is still preserved through the King James Bible.  I don't believe it is 95 or 96 percent reliable, but I believe it is 100 percent correct.  I have enough faith in God to believe he is big enough to do that, as opposed to some who think that was too great a task for him.  They think he allowed scribes to add to his Word and mess it up.  I don't.  I just know that Satan is a counterfeiter, and he has come along and created translations that are not complete from manuscripts that were found in caves. 

 

Now, I have been accused by a man who already lied once in saying I said people were guilty of being demon possessed of refusing to answer some of his questions.  In spite of the lack of credibility he has shown by making a false statement twice, I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt that I may have overlooked some questions he asked, so here goes.  Another Poster, if you think I failed to answer any of your questions, and you desire I would do so now, on anything to do with this topic, feel free to ask it along with your apology for your false accusation.  I never, and I mean never, shy away from questions intentionally.  I sometimes miss something, but there isn't one question you could possibly ask me I am not willing to answer, so I suggest you number them in a single post so I can't miss them, and I will be glad to address them one by one.  As a matter of fact Another One, I would be glad to take you on one on one in a Soap Box debate if you desire that.  I am not the least bit intimidated by you, and I have no reason to duck any of your questions, because I have an answer for all of them. 

post #74. Yes you are playing semantics. Claiming people were demonically inspired is same as demon possessed.  You also criticise the claims that that Alexandrian & Egyptian texts are more reliable as a claim with no evidence. Well stop your double standards and produce your evidence that the translators of EVERY SINGLE TRANSLATION that used those texts was demonically inspired. I bet you can't. I know remember why I didn't respond to your earlier posts. You keep low standards for yourself while expecting much higher standards of everyone else. I must look at why I was silly enough to reply to a person who has proven several times they do not listen. In previous discussion on this topic you also did not address several things I raised. Once or twice I could easily understand as a accident but when getting into double digits then it becomes rather difficult to dismiss as an accident.

 

You have several times accused people of not addressing your posts but you continue to refuse to address other peoples posts. You say you do not do so intentionally but yet here you reply to a post where I repeated one of the questions yet you still did not answer it. So are you admitting to only reading half of a post and then replying? If not how did you miss my question? So get on and answer it please. You will note this time I have not included the scripture reference but since you constantly claim to have researched this and studied the scriptures closely you should know what I am talking about. I am only talking about the KJV translation. If they chose the best words possible why do the passages not read identically? Why are the words different?  Especially as you say just because the message is the same does not make it valid.

 

Also justify your claim that you know the mind of God. That is quite a extraordinary claim. You say God is not in favour of those passages being removed but you have not justified the claim. God looks at the heart and I reckon if he looked at the heart of the translators of these other versions then even if wrong he would see they were doing what they felt best. 

[Fez]

This has become again, as usually, KJV vs everything else, and it has become personal.

 

Closed because it is ugly...