Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth

[JimmyB]

1 hour ago, ChristB4us said:

At this link which is to give a report as if to shame KJVO people, is the preface to the King James by the translators.

THE EMBARRASSING PREFACE TO THE KING JAMES VERSION

At that second link at that web page entitled " “The Translators to the Reader.”  you can read the excerpts as referenced for that article for yourself.

I agree with the KJV translators that the KJV is not a perfect bible, but the majority of the source documents of the KJV is from Antioch where the disciples studied for a year for why they were first called Christians; hence what made up the majority of the Textus Receptus.,

Acts 11:26And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

The majority of manuscripts for modern bibles are the source documents from Alexandria where poetic licensing & Gnosticism has been known to exist.

When the Gnostics take opportunity to delve into Christians, Judaism and pagans circles, you can expect their teachings to be infiltrating those circles.

THE SCHOOL OF ALEXANDRIA AND THE GNOSTICS

"Gnosticism is a modern term, not attested to in antiquity. Even the term gnostic (Gr., gnostikos "knower"), as found in patristic writings, was never used to indicate a general spiritual movement but rather applied only to a single, particular sect.

Gnosticism designates a complex religious and philosophical movement that started probably before Christianity and flourished from about 100 to 700 A.D. There were many Christian, Jewish and pagan Gnostic sects that stressed salvation through a secret "knowledge" or "Gnosis." The term "Gnostics" was first applied by second and third century patristic writers to a large number of teachers, such as Valentinus, Basilides and many others; all of whom were regarded by the Church Fathers as Christian heretics. Although Marcion and his community stand somewhat apart, certain features are common to the movement as a whole.

Today gnosticism is defined as a religion in its own right, whose myths state that the Unknown God is not the creator (Demiurge, YHVH); that the world is an error, the consequence of a fall and split within the deity; and that man, spiritual man, is alien to the natural world and related to the deity, and he becomes conscious of his deepest self when he hears the word of revelation. Unconsciousness, not sin or guilt, is the cause of evil."

I disagree with the first bold statement in the quote as I believe it was a spiritual movement by how they apply tongues that comes with no interpretation for private use aka secret knowledge.  it is no wonder why the Alexandria manuscripts are the oldest manuscripts because they were not using them in wearing them out but fasting and praying in tongues for their "self edification".

Paul even had to deal with these Gnostics coming into the Christian circles back then by encouraging believers to study the scripture rather than going off by way of the Gnostics to use tongues for private use as if they are means for "self edification", & revelation by secret knowledge.

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

The author and historians may not see it but obviously it was a spiritual movement when you take into consideration how they get these revelations when he is conscious of his deepest self as if gained by meditation, fasting, & speaking in tongues.

Was it not the apostate movement at the Toronto's Blessings that once said "We do not need the Word of God any more.  All we need is the Spirit!" ?

Anyway, I can see how they can rewrite certain key verses in the scripture that they can pull out of context in using for their spiritual movement.

I prefer to rely on the documents from Antioch.

Of course you will rely on the documents from Antioch, since they back up your opinion.  However, by doing so, you eliminate all the documents that have been discovered since then, the progress made in understanding the ancient languages, and the evolution of the destination languages.

Beyond that, you will continue to use the KJV because you (and others) can re-interpret the Englyshe to make it mean what you want it to mean.  I trust the products of modern translators who have more and better source documents, improved translation methodology, and are not beholden to a monarch who believes that his personal (self-justifying) Protestantism has a one-to-one correspondence with the true King in Heaven.

The King James translation is a political document.  Modern translations are created using better sources, better translation techniques, and are reviewed by committees to insure both correct understanding and freedom from sectarian bias.

Your use of 2 Timothy 2:15-16 is a prime example! "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness."  The first word -- "study" is olde Englyshe that does not mean "the devotion of time and attention to acquiring knowledge on an academic subject, especially by means of books".  Rather it means "do your best" or "be diligent" or "make every effort".  

Why not use a Bible that is translated into your own normal language?  That might help clear up your misunderstandings.

[ChristB4us]

48 minutes ago, Arial said:

NT Textual Criticism

Currently we possess over 5700 manuscripts of  the NT in Greek,

Plus thousands more manuscripts in other languages, over 10,ooo in Latin, and thousands more in Coptic, Syriac, Gothic, Ethiopic, Armenian, and other languages.

We also have countless number of citations of the NT preserved in the writings of the ECF--enough to reconstruct the entire NT text just from these.

Some of the manuscripts are from as early  as the second century.

All are compared to see where there are differences, and those differences determined by the content as to whether any truth is changed. Most are insignificant as they don't change any truth.

To suggest that poetic license and gnosticism tampered with God's word is to speak of what one does not know. That is what non-Christians do to try and disprove the Bible.

And yet Jesus gave us this warning from the Father that there will be those who will not love Him to keep his words nor the sayings of His disciples.

Was that to fill the pages or is it a valid warning when antiKJVers says the KJV is a good Bible but they prefer an easier to read Bible.  And then from there they complain that not all Bibles are saying the same thing and so they charge Bible readers to go learn the Greek & Hebrew.  And while scholars make light of the KJV, they cannot agree with their own translation from the Greek and Hebrew.

And so I see this prophesy as a double prophesy coming to pass.

Amos 8:11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord: 12 And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it. 13 In that day shall the fair virgins and young men faint for thirst.

No changing the truth in His words?  Here is a flagrant one when comparing the KJV with the CEV.

Matthew 5:33-37 & Galatians 5:1-5 KJV VS CEV

CEV makes it look okay to make promises, but just don't swear by them and yet Jesus in the KJV says not to make oaths, not even to swear by them.  Swearing means to show the oath maker sincerity in finishing that oath but Jesus did not want His followers to do that at all, to not even swear by it.  Verse 36 is the why because when you make an oath that is your work as you are to do all that proceeds out of your mouth Numbers 30:2 KJV and you are not allowed to leave it unfinished or undone per Ecclesiastes 5:4-7 KJV les the Lord destroys the work of your hands.

Now if circumcision is the smallest letter of the law and if they do that, they have to do the whole law, where does vows fall under?  The biggest letter of the law!!!

Coincidence that Promise Keepers' Movement used the CEV Bible at their convention in St. Louis where the holy laughter movement manifested there at the same time in that same PK convention?

We are to follow Jesus by faith that He will finish His work in us to His glory as He is our Good Shepherd and He will help us to follow Him daily by helping us to lay aside every weight & sin to walk in the light in fellowship with the Father & the Son.

The law of keeping those promises or commitments is not of faith and those that strive to keep it as if seeking justification by keeping it, shall be judged by it.

Believers that err like I had in placing themselves under that yoke of bondage can ask Jesus to forgive them and set them free so as to rest in Him in being our Good Shepherd & Friend to help us to follow Him to abide in His words by faith alone.

But hey.  If you see nothing wrong with the CEV, and nothing wrong with the Promise Keepers movement, the Lord will have to do a miracle on you to see it.

[ChristB4us]

48 minutes ago, JimmyB said:

Of course you will rely on the documents from Antioch, since they back up your opinion.  However, by doing so, you eliminate all the documents that have been discovered since then, the progress made in understanding the ancient languages, and the evolution of the destination languages.

Beyond that, you will continue to use the KJV because you (and others) can re-interpret the Englyshe to make it mean what you want it to mean.  I trust the products of modern translators who have more and better source documents, improved translation methodology, and are not beholden to a monarch who believes that his personal (self-justifying) Protestantism has a one-to-one correspondence with the true King in Heaven.

The King James translation is a political document.  Modern translations are created using better sources, better translation techniques, and are reviewed by committees to insure both correct understanding and freedom from sectarian bias.

Your use of 2 Timothy 2:15-16 is a prime example! "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness."  The first word -- "study" is olde Englyshe that does not mean "the devotion of time and attention to acquiring knowledge on an academic subject, especially by means of books".  Rather it means "do your best" or "be diligent" or "make every effort".  

Why not use a Bible that is translated into your own normal language?  That might help clear up your misunderstandings.

Actually I had been using the NASB Ryrie Study Bible and the NIV until I got stumped because false teachings were using certain verses that went against other scriptures in that respective modern bible until I checked with the KJV.

That was enough for me for Jesus to finally get me to rely only on the KJV for the meat of His words as keeping the faith is the good fight.

[1to3]

Some facts and explanations concerning the newer bible versions.

https://www.mikeleake.net/2015/07/on-those-missing-verses-in-your-esv-and-niv-bible.html

 

https://becomingchristians.com/2018/06/18/12-unspoken-reasons-why-you-should-never-use-the-new-international-version-niv-bible/

 

Also can be listened to on youtube with the following title:

https://www.mikeleake.net/2015/07/on-those-missing-verses-in-your-esv-and-niv-bible.html

 

 

 

[Retrobyter]

3 hours ago, 1to3 said:

Some facts and explanations concerning the newer bible versions.

https://www.mikeleake.net/2015/07/on-those-missing-verses-in-your-esv-and-niv-bible.html

 

https://becomingchristians.com/2018/06/18/12-unspoken-reasons-why-you-should-never-use-the-new-international-version-niv-bible/

 

Also can be listened to on youtube with the following title:

https://www.mikeleake.net/2015/07/on-those-missing-verses-in-your-esv-and-niv-bible.html

Shalom, 1to3.

I prefer the KJV for three very important reasons.

First, the KJV has been around the longest, and it's the version I grew up with and by which I was introduced to our Lord.

Second, it is public domain. It is not a copyrighted book, and is therefore, open to anyone's need to quote from it. That's not true with other versions. Most of the newer versions are copyrighted, and although most won't mind you quoting their work, there are limitations to what the owners of the copyrights will allow.

Third, and this may seem odd to some people, it's the ONE version that PRESERVES the "thee's" and "thou's" in the text.

The second person pronouns in the KJV contained more information than they do today. They used to provide case and number, and the verbs used with these pronouns reflected the same case and number.

Here's a quick chart:

SECOND PERSON PRONOUNS

SINGULAR:

Subjective: thou
Objective: thee
Possessive adjective: thy
Possessive pronoun: thine

PLURAL:

Subjective: ye
Objective: you
Possessive adjective: your
Possessive pronoun: yours

Today, we are reduced to "you," "your," and "yours" used for both singular and plural, and "you" used for both subjective and objective cases.

Of course, this information was all but lost to the churches in which I grew up. Their meanings were implied, but some actually felt that the "thee's" and "thou's" were HOLY words, for they were used to translate the Ten Commandments into English.

No English version of the Bible is perfect, because translations are HUMAN attempts to make the Scriptures available in a different language. Furthermore, no two languages will match precisely one-to-one. A Greek word might be rendered by several different English words, for example, while several different Greek words might be translated with the same English word.

However, the original manuscripts were inspired by God, and I believe in the plenary verbal inspiration of God's Word. EVERY WORD was so inspired! Such important documents were protected by God's blessings and cursings. And, I believe that God perfectly preserved the important meanings of the text through the translation process. All the same, the translation doesn't have the same force as the original documents.

We no longer have the original manuscripts. All we have today are many COPIES of the original that were copied by scribes who did their best to remain faithful to the text they copied. However, sometimes, a scribe might take liberties with the text to help "explain" a passage better, or to somehow "improve" on how the text was worded. Seldom was the intent to deceive, but any change in the text is informational thermodynamics. That is, they introduced human changes into the God-inspired text, and thereby risked the introduction of error into the text!

This is why I feel it is important to learn the original languages to the best of our abiliies. And, one should not just learn the vocabulary, but also the grammar of the language! By doing so, we are no longer at the mercy of the translators but can read the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts for ourselves. I feel it is our DUTY to do so!

But, that's my opinion. I've no authority to dictate to others how God leads them.

[ChristB4us]

9 hours ago, 1to3 said:

Some facts and explanations concerning the newer bible versions.

https://www.mikeleake.net/2015/07/on-those-missing-verses-in-your-esv-and-niv-bible.html

 

https://becomingchristians.com/2018/06/18/12-unspoken-reasons-why-you-should-never-use-the-new-international-version-niv-bible/

 

Also can be listened to on youtube with the following title:

https://www.mikeleake.net/2015/07/on-those-missing-verses-in-your-esv-and-niv-bible.html

Do consider flipping the view of missing verses, you may find the warning from the Father from Jesus Christ as coming true as the documents from Alexandria were not kept by those who loved Him and His words.  Gnosticism had influence.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

John 15:20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.

So what was Jesus warning about unless it was for that reason from where the source documents originated from?

[ChristB4us]

4 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, 1to3.

I prefer the KJV for three very important reasons.

First, the KJV has been around the longest, and it's the version I grew up with and by which I was introduced to our Lord.

Second, it is public domain. It is not a copyrighted book, and is therefore, open to anyone's need to quote from it. That's not true with other versions. Most of the newer versions are copyrighted, and although most won't mind you quoting their work, there are limitations to what the owners of the copyrights will allow.

Third, and this may seem odd to some people, it's the ONE version that PRESERVES the "thee's" and "thou's" in the text.

The second person pronouns in the KJV contained more information than they do today. They used to provide case and number, and the verbs used with these pronouns reflected the same case and number.

Here's a quick chart:

SECOND PERSON PRONOUNS

SINGULAR:

Subjective: thou
Objective: thee
Possessive adjective: thy
Possessive pronoun: thine

PLURAL:

Subjective: ye
Objective: you
Possessive adjective: your
Possessive pronoun: yours

Today, we are reduced to "you," "your," and "yours" used for both singular and plural, and "you" used for both subjective and objective cases.

Of course, this information was all but lost to the churches in which I grew up. Their meanings were implied, but some actually felt that the "thee's" and "thou's" were HOLY words, for they were used to translate the Ten Commandments into English.

No English version of the Bible is perfect, because translations are HUMAN attempts to make the Scriptures available in a different language. Furthermore, no two languages will match precisely one-to-one. A Greek word might be rendered by several different English words, for example, while several different Greek words might be translated with the same English word.

However, the original manuscripts were inspired by God, and I believe in the plenary verbal inspiration of God's Word. EVERY WORD was so inspired! Such important documents were protected by God's blessings and cursings. And, I believe that God perfectly preserved the important meanings of the text through the translation process. All the same, the translation doesn't have the same force as the original documents.

We no longer have the original manuscripts. All we have today are many COPIES of the original that were copied by scribes who did their best to remain faithful to the text they copied. However, sometimes, a scribe might take liberties with the text to help "explain" a passage better, or to somehow "improve" on how the text was worded. Seldom was the intent to deceive, but any change in the text is informational thermodynamics. That is, they introduced human changes into the God-inspired text, and thereby risked the introduction of error into the text!

This is why I feel it is important to learn the original languages to the best of our abiliies. And, one should not just learn the vocabulary, but also the grammar of the language! By doing so, we are no longer at the mercy of the translators but can read the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts for ourselves. I feel it is our DUTY to do so!

But, that's my opinion. I've no authority to dictate to others how God leads them.

As I was using the NASB Ryrie Study Bible and the NIV, so was I led to rely on the KJV for the meat of His words that those Bibles did not keep for me to discern good and evil in these latter days when faith is hard to find.

So He will have to do the same for every one else.

And that legal stigma for getting a copy right for any new Bible version is more than likely is why all the modern Bibles are not saying the same thing as the messages has been changed because of it ................. for the love of money?

Matthew 6:23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness! 24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

God only knows but Jesus did give this warning from the Father that when it comes to source documents from Alexandria where Gnosticism & poetic licensing has been known to exist, is why the source documents from Antioch should be favored.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

John 15:20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.

Acts 11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

[Arial]

13 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

And yet Jesus gave us this warning from the Father that there will be those who will not love Him to keep his words nor the sayings of His disciples.

Was that to fill the pages or is it a valid warning when antiKJVers says the KJV is a good Bible but they prefer an easier to read Bible. 

That scripture has nothing to do with different translations of the Bible lol. To think it does is to not correctly handle the word of God---or divide it as the KJV says (something according to the definition of divide, should never be done with His word.)

[ChristB4us]

3 minutes ago, Arial said:

That scripture has nothing to do with different translations of the Bible lol. To think it does is to not correctly handle the word of God---or divide it as the KJV says (something according to the definition of divide, should never be done with His word.)

Not sure how you can say that when all Bible versions are not saying the same thing.

That is how false teachings strive on are those changed messages that taken out of context, supports their false teachings whereas with the KJV, in regards to those changed message that supports false teachings in the modern bibles, the KJV does not.

Still think the CEV has not changed the message from most modern Bible versions in Matthew 5:33-37 & Galatians 5:1-5?

Check it out for yourself.

Edited May 4, 2023 by ChristB4us

[Arial]

1 hour ago, ChristB4us said:

Not sure how you can say that when all Bible versions are not saying the same thing.

That is how false teachings strive on are those changed messages that taken out of context, supports their false teachings whereas with the KJV, in regards to those changed message that supports false teachings in the modern bibles, the KJV does not.

Still think the CEV has not changed the message from most modern Bible versions in Matthew 5:33-37 & Galatians 5:1-5?

Check it out for yourself.

³³ Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

³⁴ But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:

³⁵ Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.

³⁶ Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.

³⁷ But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

 

 

³³  You know our ancestors were told, “Don't use the Lord's name to make a promise unless you are going to keep it.” ³⁴  But I tell you not to swear by anything when you make a promise! Heaven is God's throne, so don't swear by heaven. ³⁵  The earth is God's footstool, so don't swear by the earth. Jerusalem is the city of the great king, so don't swear by it. ³⁶ Don't swear by your own head. You cannot make one hair white or black. ³⁷ When you make a promise, say only “Yes” or “No.” Anything else comes from the devil.

How are they saying anything different? I added verse 37 which you left out because it summarizes the message (the meaning) of what Jesus is saying.