KJV or NIV?

[eclipsenow]

Having more documents isn't the issue; I'm not arguing in favor of the Textus Receptus and the text underlying the World English Bible is quite different from the Textus Receptus.

Also, being old doesn't mean being better, which is the argument the WEB FAQ tries to make.

Why do most scholars ignore the WEB FAQ if it is so self-evident? The peer-reviewed theological guys I know disagree with that summary.

 

[FreedByte]

Why do most scholars ignore the WEB FAQ if it is so self-evident? The peer-reviewed theological guys I know disagree with that summary.

Um, I was merely pointing out an alternative viewpoint and that it isn't consensus that the Alexandrian texts are superior just because they're older.

 

[SG9]

Hi all,
the KJV may not be what it's cracked up to be, and inserts words that are not actually in the text!

Why do you use the NIV, rather than the KJV, for the Bible references in all of your commentaries? Isn't the NIV negligent in showing whom Jesus really was?

IMO, we have found discrepancies in everything, and nothing is excluded. This is a sign of our time, and it's because the Truth has been diluted and scattered just as God scattered His children. Do you believe that if there was a scattering and a driving away from God, that God would leave them with a book that would cause Him to remain with those He scattered?

IMO, all of the world's current books will be placed in the side compartment of the Ark when Christ brings it down from Heaven as He brings Himself as the New Revelation of our end time age. A New Revealing comes with every appearing. This should bring comfort rather than confusion. Thanks

 

[sinning machine]

IMO, we have found discrepancies in everything, and nothing is excluded. This is a sign of our time, and it's because the Truth has been diluted and scattered just as God scattered His children. Do you believe that if there was a scattering and a driving away from God, that God would leave them with a book that would cause Him to remain with those He scattered?

IMO, all of the world's current books will be placed in the side compartment of the Ark when Christ brings it down from Heaven as He brings Himself as the New Revelation of our end time age. A New Revealing comes with every appearing. This should bring comfort rather than confusion. Thanks

Which Ark are you referring to ?

 

[SG9]

Which Ark are you referring to ?

In my POV, I see it as a reflection of the past events, and more than one in parallel, and the Ark, in the image of Noah's Ark, and also the Ark of the Covenant. They are parallel along with much more. x141 knows what I mean on this idea. He seems to be the only one who sees exactly as I do but he sees through another eye that sees feasts and I see the present day. Thanks

 

[eclipsenow]

Um, I was merely pointing out an alternative viewpoint and that it isn't consensus that the Alexandrian texts are superior just because they're older.

Before making the next comment I want to point out that I'm grateful for the KJV's role in the Protestant Reformation and the world-shaking, ground-breaking role it had in Christianity. Even if it was based on inferior quality 12th century documents! It was the first time in millennia that people had the bible in their own language. I celebrate the power of God's word to change lives across time.

But now that we have earlier, better manuscripts we may as well use them.

 

[sinning machine]

In my POV, I see it as a reflection of the past events, and more than one in parallel, and the Ark, in the image of Noah's Ark, and also the Ark of the Covenant. They are parallel along with much more. x141 knows what I mean on this idea. He seems to be the only one who sees exactly as I do but he sees through another eye that sees feasts and I see the present day. Thanks

I see truth as it is given to me, Noah's Ark and The Ark of the covenant have many parallel truths , however one lies rotten above ground and one in all its glory stands below ground.

 

[SG9]

I see truth as it is given to me, Noah's Ark and The Ark of the covenant have many parallel truths , however one lies rotten above ground and one in all its glory stands below ground.

You have a gift, my friend. You are seeing the world as it is right now in oppression. The one that lies rotten above ground represents the laws that man has made out of the authentic, and it's dead while in exalted flesh, which is seen on the surface of earth where Heaven on earth should be, and the Ark under the ground will be resurrected, and this Ark represents the human mind. All things will reverse in translation. Thanks

 

[sinning machine]

You have a gift, my friend. You are seeing the world as it is right now in oppression. The one that lies rotten above ground represents the laws that man has made out of the authentic, and it's dead while in exalted flesh, which is seen on the surface of earth where Heaven on earth should be, and the Ark under the ground will be resurrected, and this Ark represents the human mind. All things will reverse in translation. Thanks

Here is what I believe God is telling me.

{ this has nothing to do with having a day of lazing about be it Saturday or Sunday }



We know from Gods fourth commandment Exodus 20:8 & 11 we are to keep the Sabbath holy, because the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.



We also know that Genesis 2:3 God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it:



We also know from Genesis 1:26-28 that God created a man and a woman in His likeness and in His image He created male and female and that HE BLESSED THEM.



I believe that in verse 28 when GOD BLESSED THEM, He entered Adam & Eve into a COVENANT OF MARIAGE

I believe from what the messenger said, which was that the tablets of stone {ten commandments } would come out when man changed the fourth commandment, { which I believe which is to keep the seven days of GODS creation Holy which also ties in with x141 three feasts

To date man has defiled all things made/ created by GOD and therefore Holy, even now changing the law so a man can marry a man.

Mathew 24:38 For in the last days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark.

and in the very next verse it says ....; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

 

[SG9]

Here is what I believe God is telling me.

{ this has nothing to do with having a day of lazing about be it Saturday or Sunday }



We know from Gods fourth commandment Exodus 20:8 & 11 we are to keep the Sabbath holy, because the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.



We also know that Genesis 2:3 God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it:



We also know from Genesis 1:26-28 that God created a man and a woman in His likeness and in His image He created male and female and that HE BLESSED THEM.



I believe that in verse 28 when GOD BLESSED THEM, He entered Adam & Eve into a COVENANT OF MARIAGE

I believe from what the messenger said, which was that the tablets of stone {ten commandments } would come out when man changed the fourth commandment, { which I believe which is to keep the seven days of GODS creation Holy which also ties in with x141 three feasts

To date man has defiled all things made/ created by GOD and therefore Holy, even now changing the law so a man can marry a man.

Mathew 24:38 For in the last days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark.

and in the very next verse it says ....; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Not bad et al, but there are some misconceptions about the m/f and man and woman, vs the "image" and the "likeness". Genesis first tells of their plans to "create" a man. This man will be in "our"-their image, and after "our"-their likeness; "Our" is as "One" so to be eternal and spiritual. Then later, during the "Rest" on the seventh-day (Sabbath) God dwelled with the one "man" He had created as m/f gender so that they would be the first born seed of the lineage. In any single seed are both genders, and it's "One" seed but may become either upon sprouting.

The "image" is the Spirit and the "likeness" is the rendering of the Father and Son in One man as both genders. x141 will tell you that Christ is the feminine figure of the two, and Father is masculine. They then formed a covenant between the Father and Sons to be related. This is the covenant that must last the span of eternity, less time.

The woman was not "made" from what was created until after the man created on day 6, although thy were two without covenant. and seen as one. Notice the numbers as we go along, this is 6 to identify man, but he was without covenant and was 6 as in 666. The male and female were gendered but not glorified yet. They were as good as dead. But read and see when the commandment was given to man, it was on the same day that the first man was created, day 6, but without covenant until later.

Then the Son made the woman from Adam's side, (x141 explained this too) and then they were identified as man and woman in separate flesh. When ever a parting occurs there must be a covenant, and when there is a joining a covenant must be made.

The covenant created eternity for the two, it's a promise to sustain the Seed for that eternity, and it removed the curse of "time" that would bring them age. Time had to exist on the 6th day before the covenant was made, this is a separation from God without covenant.

Genesis 1:26-28
King James Version (KJV)
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Now, you are likely correct about the blessing, in fact, I wouldn't doubt if it means they bore a child, as the blessing. The marriage between the man and woman was not needed as we practice today, our ways are our ways, and not God's. The covenant was made between God, the man, and the woman.

Christ is the head of the man, and the man is the head of the woman. We cannot serve two masters, nor can we have both male and female equated in flesh or else it voids the covenant that was made for both flesh and spirit. We have separated the two and have sided entirely with the flesh. Look around the world today, it's all about the flesh.

I do not believe that man and woman were wedded as we practice today. The Most High is Most High, and neither male nor female, but man may be joint heirs of the Kingdom with the covenant of the seventh-day. Yes, a day of observation is partiality towards God, but the day is used as a day of assembly to hear the Lord as He preached on the Sabbath days.

Now, the three rested on that day, this is when something more occurred, IMO, and I suspect that's when they were translated into a Glorified being. The "Rest" is a spiritual amalgamation of all three in one.

The marriage of the man and woman as we practice is without God because there is no seventh day covenant made between them at marriage. It actually divorces the two from the three. God had made this covenant in the beginning for eternity but we have changed it all and now man and woman marry the flesh, and our marriage laws do not include any covenant made with God, they only use God to glorify what was de-glorified by man.

Our wedding is to the Lord, not between man and woman. Male and female figures are a different entity than that of man and woman. The virgins go into the Wedding feast to wed our Lord, not each other. Our world are professional compro-misers that pick and choose what we have made from our creation.

The world will discover some day that we are actually using our minds to control the earth and we don't know it. Satan has deceived us terribly and we cannot exercise our free will while in captivity to this beast. We will then be able and perhaps, blessed to exercise our free will. Now, I'm likely wrong to attribute the blessing to a child, and I only offered that as an option until I came to this idea that the blessing was the gift of Liberty and Free will once the couple rested and the covenant was made.

Before the covenant, the couple were in hell and gendered, and the hell was a captivity as if the two were inside of a real seed. All things seen natural have a spiritual parallel. Compare to a real seed and follow the scriptures and nature as how the seed performs in life.

Keep in mind, we are in hell as long as "time" exists. this is positive proof that we need a savior to resurrect us and bring us out of hell, and to the surface of earth in intellectual minds that are in the Image and the likeness of both the Father and Son. We are flesh Like the Son, and missing the Spirit of the Father until we see Christ again. Thus, we have only had the promise of the Seed. He comes, again! Thanks

PS, just so that you don't be confused over this, it all starts with two in one, then two break out of one, and then become one. There are many changes and events that occur through this process and it can get tricky to follow; there are more parallel's of this than I can count, perhaps it will be infinite once in eternity?

I have one correction to make, when ever a change occurs, I said that a covenant must be made; well, not always, actually it must be there, and already made. I really meant to say that no change may occur without a covenant in place, and it required a covenant to put asunder what God established, and that was from the serpent.

 

[eclipsenow]

Here is what I believe God is telling me.

{ this has nothing to do with having a day of lazing about be it Saturday or Sunday }



We know from Gods fourth commandment Exodus 20:8 & 11 we are to keep the Sabbath holy, because the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.



We also know that Genesis 2:3 God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it:



We also know from Genesis 1:26-28 that God created a man and a woman in His likeness and in His image He created male and female and that HE BLESSED THEM.



I believe that in verse 28 when GOD BLESSED THEM, He entered Adam & Eve into a COVENANT OF MARIAGE

I believe from what the messenger said, which was that the tablets of stone {ten commandments } would come out when man changed the fourth commandment, { which I believe which is to keep the seven days of GODS creation Holy which also ties in with x141 three feasts

To date man has defiled all things made/ created by GOD and therefore Holy, even now changing the law so a man can marry a man.

Mathew 24:38 For in the last days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark.

and in the very next verse it says ....; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Please, take it to the eschatology forum. Thanks.

 

[sinning machine]

Not bad et al, but there are some misconceptions about the m/f and man and woman, vs the "image" and the "likeness". Genesis first tells of their plans to "create" a man. This man will be in "our"-their image, and after "our"-their likeness; "Our" is as "One" so to be eternal and spiritual. Then later, during the "Rest" on the seventh-day (Sabbath) God dwelled with the one "man" He had created as m/f gender so that they would be the first born seed of the lineage. In any single seed are both genders, and it's "One" seed but may become either upon sprouting.

The "image" is the Spirit and the "likeness" is the rendering of the Father and Son in One man as both genders. x141 will tell you that Christ is the feminine figure of the two, and Father is masculine. They then formed a covenant between the Father and Sons to be related. This is the covenant that must last the span of eternity, less time.

The woman was not "made" from what was created until after the man created on day 6, although thy were two without covenant. and seen as one. Notice the numbers as we go along, this is 6 to identify man, but he was without covenant and was 6 as in 666. The male and female were gendered but not glorified yet. They were as good as dead. But read and see when the commandment was given to man, it was on the same day that the first man was created, day 6, but without covenant until later.

Then the Son made the woman from Adam's side, (x141 explained this too) and then they were identified as man and woman in separate flesh. When ever a parting occurs there must be a covenant, and when there is a joining a covenant must be made.

The covenant created eternity for the two, it's a promise to sustain the Seed for that eternity, and it removed the curse of "time" that would bring them age. Time had to exist on the 6th day before the covenant was made, this is a separation from God without covenant.

Genesis 1:26-28
King James Version (KJV)
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Now, you are likely correct about the blessing, in fact, I wouldn't doubt if it means they bore a child, as the blessing. The marriage between the man and woman was not needed as we practice today, our ways are our ways, and not God's. The covenant was made between God, the man, and the woman.

Christ is the head of the man, and the man is the head of the woman. We cannot serve two masters, nor can we have both male and female equated in flesh or else it voids the covenant that was made for both flesh and spirit. We have separated the two and have sided entirely with the flesh. Look around the world today, it's all about the flesh.

I do not believe that man and woman were wedded as we practice today. The Most High is Most High, and neither male nor female, but man may be joint heirs of the Kingdom with the covenant of the seventh-day. Yes, a day of observation is partiality towards God, but the day is used as a day of assembly to hear the Lord as He preached on the Sabbath days.

Now, the three rested on that day, this is when something more occurred, IMO, and I suspect that's when they were translated into a Glorified being. The "Rest" is a spiritual amalgamation of all three in one.

The marriage of the man and woman as we practice is without God because there is no seventh day covenant made between them at marriage. It actually divorces the two from the three. God had made this covenant in the beginning for eternity but we have changed it all and now man and woman marry the flesh, and our marriage laws do not include any covenant made with God, they only use God to glorify what was de-glorified by man.

Our wedding is to the Lord, not between man and woman. Male and female figures are a different entity than that of man and woman. The virgins go into the Wedding feast to wed our Lord, not each other. Our world are professional compro-misers that pick and choose what we have made from our creation.

The world will discover some day that we are actually using our minds to control the earth and we don't know it. Satan has deceived us terribly and we cannot exercise our free will while in captivity to this beast. We will then be able and perhaps, blessed to exercise our free will. Now, I'm likely wrong to attribute the blessing to a child, and I only offered that as an option until I came to this idea that the blessing was the gift of Liberty and Free will once the couple rested and the covenant was made.

Before the covenant, the couple were in hell and gendered, and the hell was a captivity as if the two were inside of a real seed. All things seen natural have a spiritual parallel. Compare to a real seed and follow the scriptures and nature as how the seed performs in life.

Keep in mind, we are in hell as long as "time" exists. this is positive proof that we need a savior to resurrect us and bring us out of hell, and to the surface of earth in intellectual minds that are in the Image and the likeness of both the Father and Son. We are flesh Like the Son, and missing the Spirit of the Father until we see Christ again. Thus, we have only had the promise of the Seed. He comes, again! Thanks

PS, just so that you don't be confused over this, it all starts with two in one, then two break out of one, and then become one. There are many changes and events that occur through this process and it can get tricky to follow; there are more parallel's of this than I can count, perhaps it will be infinite once in eternity?

I have one correction to make, when ever a change occurs, I said that a covenant must be made; well, not always, actually it must be there, and already made. I really meant to say that no change may occur without a covenant in place, and it required a covenant to put asunder what God established, and that was from the serpent.

Many thanx, you have helped make clear many things, my [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] steak of a mind got stuck {on what I wrote} and needed this expanded to move me on , I love the way GOD works, I find { if patient } when I need to understand a truth, HE gives me a whole bunch more to understand , so when I learn the truth I sought after to start with it enables me to understand the truths that followed, being that they are part of this same truth { if that makes any sense } and when I learn a new truth questions then spring fourth which need testing and then the need for an answer is then needed.

 

[sinning machine]

Please, take it to the eschatology forum. Thanks.

Sorry, I seized upon an opportunity, hope you will like this

WHICH BIBLE TRANSLATION IS BEST?



Many people believe that understanding the Scriptures has to do with having a "perfect translation" of the Scriptures. I try to tell them that there is no such thing as a "perfect" translation. And even if you read Hebrew and Greek fluently, it is still no guarantee that you will understand what you are reading.

Truth be known, millions who believe that the King James, for example, is a perfect inerrant translation have not a clue as to what is involved in translating from one language to another. It may be possible to translate a few specific words almost perfectly from one language to another. But once we get into whole sentences, paragraphs, pages, and whole books (written by different people over a period of many centuries, in ancient languages), the task is almost daunting. When considering the enormity of the task, I believe most translators of most Versions have done a satisfactory job.

That is not to say there aren't problems with all Versions. But thank God there are many copies of the Greek, and some copies of the Hebrew manuscripts which makes it possible to come pretty close to the mind of God in most areas of the Scriptures.

There are four stern warnings in the Scriptures with regards to adding to or taking away from the Word of God:
1."For I testify unto every man that hears the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall ADD unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book.

And if any man shall take away from the WORDS of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book" (Rev. 22:18-19).

2."You shall not ADD unto the word which I command you, neither shall you DIMINISH ought from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you" (Deut. 4:2).

3."What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: you shall not ADD thereto, nor DIMINISH from it" (Deut. 12:32).

4."Every word of God is PURE: He is a shield unto them that put their trust in Him. ADD YOU NOT unto His words, lest He reprove you, and you be found a liar" (Prov. 30:5-6).

Surely God did not sternly warn against adding to or taking away from His Word, while knowing it would never happen. Of course it has happened. But the immature absolutely refuse to believe it. They argue God is able to preserve His Word without error. And surely He is able, but that does not detract from the fact that men have indeed tampered with the interpretation of and translation of the very words of Scripture. God KNEW that men would add to and take from His Word—hence the warning.

Admittedly, by the translators themselves, a perfect translation is not possible. Surely the teachers are more honest regarding their errors and imperfect knowledge than their students who swear by every word of their imperfections.

Notice these nine remarkable statements from the Translators of The King James Version immediately following the Preface, entitled: THE TRANSLATORS To The Readers (1611 Edition—I will copy it as is, in the archaic English spelling):


"No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be currant, notwithstanding that some IMPERFECTIONS and BLEMISHES may be noted in the setting forth of it"

"For to whom euer was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to goe ouer that which hee had done, as to AMEND IT where saw cause?"

"But the difference that appeareth betweene our Translations, and OUR OFTEN CORRECTING OF THEM, is the thing that wee are specially charged with; let vs see therefore whether they themselves bee without fault this way, (if it be to be counted a fault, TO CORRECT) and whether they bee fit men to throw stones at vs…they that are less sound themselues, ought not to object infirmities to others."

"Some peraduenture would haue no varietie of sences to be set in the margine [as the King James has done from the start; albeit they have in recent times been all removed in many editions] lest the authoritie of the Scriptures for deciding of controuersies by that SHEW OF VNCERTAINTIE [not knowing for sure the proper or best way to translate this or that], should somewhat be shaken."

"Now in such a case, doth not a margine do well to admonish the Reader to seeke further, and NOT TO CONCLUDE OR DOGMATIZE VPON THIS OR THAT PEREMPTORIALY? For as it is a fault of incredulitie, to doubt of these things that are euident: so to determine of such things as the Spirit God hath left (euen in the iudgment of the iudicious) QUESTIONALBLE, can be no lesse then PRESUMPTION."

"Therefore as S.Augustine saith, that VARIETIE [different] of Translations is profitable for the find out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversitie of signification and sense in the margine, where THE TEXT IS NOT SO CLEAR, must needes doe good, yea, is NECESSARY, as we are perswaded."

"An other thing we thinke good to admonish thee of (gentle Reader) that wee haue not tyed our selues to an VNIFORMITIE OF PHRASING [that is just another way of saying they would not be tied to being CONSISTANT in their translating even though, consistency would be more accurate], or to an identitie of words, as some peraduenture would wish that we had done [I FOR ONE], because they obserue, that some learned men some where, haue beene as exact as they could that way [as though being "as EXACT as they could" is not a virtue]."

"Thus to minse the matter, wee thought to sauour more of CURIOSITIE THEN WISEDOME, and that rather it would breed scorne in the Athiest, then bring profit to the godly Reader." (All CAPS are mine).

I can certainly agree and sympathize with almost everything said by these truthful and candid Translators of the Authorized Version, with one exception. Although they believe that "Variety is the spice of life," I would rather suggest that "Honesty is always the best policy." I certainly prefer a translation that is consistent and meticulously accurate over one that has great variety, and reads smoothly with a poetic and melodious rhythm.

With that said, my personal teaching, preaching, and study Bible is nonetheless, the King James Version. But the primary reason for this is that more people are more familiar with King James than any other Version. Sadly, for many unlearned students of God’s Word, to quote from any Version other than the King James, is to not be quoting Scripture at all. Not to worry, one can learn the Truths of God from ANY translation once God opens one’s mind to the things of the spirit.

ADDING TO GOD’S WORD:

Just as surely as God warned against "adding to or taking from" His word, it has happened. There is overwhelming evidence and historical proof that the following portion of I John 5:7-8 iss not part of the original Greek manuscripts.


"…in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth…"

Also there is a mountain of historical evidence that this portion of the so-called "Great Commission" found in Matt. 28:19 is also not in any Scripture found in the first few centuries of both manuscripts or translations.


"…baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost"

In fact, it is an obvious and blatant contradiction of how the Apostles actually did baptize. They NEVER baptized into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but always in the Name of Jesus ONLY. The Scriptures do not contradict; but some Bibles do.

But these two "additions" to God’s Word pale into little or no significance compared to the ONE GIANT INEXCUSABLE, "adding to" God’s word wherein the Translators turn Greek "aions" (periods of time as short as a few years) into English "eternities." This one gross error has turned into the most devastating botch of translating in the history of the world. Which consequently brought about the most damnable heresy in the history of the world—"Eternal Punishment."

Early translations of the Greek Scriptures into English did not use the words "everlasting," "evermore," "for ever and ever" or "eternal" in their versions. Maybe the very oldest English related tongue was the Ancient Gothic Version by Wulfila, which was a language spoken about 350 AD, closely akin to the Old German and Old English spoken at that time. This version translated from the Greek, as well as later Old English versions between 680 and 995 translated from the Latin, did not use any words that meant "everlasting" or "eternal."

Wiclif’ finished his translation in 1382. A hundred and fifty years later came Tyndale, then Coverdale (1535), Cranmer’s (1539), the Genevan (1557), Rheims (1582), and finally The King James Authorized (1611). It was in these well-known English translations that the words "forever and ever" "everlasting" and "eternal" come before us.

However, not all English Versions perverted and corrupted the words having reference to time into words that now stand for eternity, but have nothing to do with time at all. Here are a few. I use the first three quite regularly, but, I am not recommending you buy any of them.


Rotherham Emphasized Bible, 1959

Concordant Literal New Testament, 1983 2013 ORDER BLANK FOR THE CONCORDANT PUBLISHING CONCERN

The Emphatic Diaglott, 1912 edition (Greek/English Interlinear)

The Holy Bible in Modern English (Fenton), 1903)

The New Covenant, 1884

The New Testament in Modern Speech, 1910

The Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible, 1976

The New Testament of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Anointed, 1958

The New Testament a Translation, 1938

The Companion Bible, 1990 A King James Reference Bible

See my paper "Is EVERLASTING Scriptural," found on our home page.

TAKING FROM GOD’S WORD:


"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God…" (Rom. 8:28).

Oh really? Is this verse from the King James Version even true? How many billions of times has this verse been quoted, and it isn’t even true! Things do NOT "work together for good." That is absurd. "THINGS" can’t do anything by themselves. Just what is it that the King James has left out of this verse which has turned a grand and marvelous Spiritual Truth into a carnal-minded heresy? Why, just "GOD," that’s all. They left GOD out of this verse. And here is how God inspired this verse:


"And we know that GOD works together all things for Good to the (ones) loving God…" (Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, By J P. Green, Sr).


‘Now we are aware that GOD is working all together for the good of those who are loving God…" (Concordant Literal New Testament).


"We know, further, that unto them who love God, GOD causes all things to work together for good…" (Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible).

Putting "God" back into this verse, puts the Truth back into this verse.

One more example: Just what is the "the book of life?" The King James (and others) makes it sound like the "book of life" is a literal book that is in the possession of the Lamb (Jesus Christ). Hence people believe that Jesus carries a literal book that has literal pages in it, on which are written literal names of the saved saints. Here is how the book of life is presented in the King James Bible:


"And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb…" (Rev. 13:8).

Why is this book called "the book of life?" Most would answer: because of the names that are WRITTEN inside who are promised LIFE. Maybe then it should have been called "the book of NAMES." Whether we emphasize "the book of life," or "the book of life," both are wrong. Something is missing? What? The same thing that was missing in Rom. 8:28, only this time it is CHRIST Who is missing. Put back the missing word, and we have a WHOLE NEW SCRIPTURAL TRUTH:

From King James Version:


"…whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb…"

From the Concordant Greek Text (Page 713):


"OF-WHOM NOT HAS-been-WRITTEN THE NAME OF-him IN THE SCROLLet OF-THE LIFE OF-THE LAMBkin"

From the Emphatic Diaglott Interlinear (Page 8843):


"…of which not has been written the name in the scroll of THE life of the Lamb…"

This book is a whole lot more than the "book of life." Rather this book is: "the book of THE LIFE OF THE LAMB!" WOW!

What a Truth we lose when we "take away" the definite article "the" from this verse of God’s Book. Why oh why would God have to write our names "IN A BOOK?" How absurd! Do we think that God has a POOR MEMORY and FORGETS things if He doesn’t WRITE THEM DOWN?

No, our names must be written in "THE LIFE OF THE LAMB" or our lives are not worth anything. Here is how Jesus Christ is our "Book of Life:"


"For the law of the Spirit of LIFE IN CHRIST JESUS has made me free from the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2).

Our lives must be written in "The BOOK of the LIFE of the LAMB." It is "The Book of THE LIFE of THE Lamb." The book is the LAMB’S LIFE. The Lamb IS THE BOOK—JESUS CHRIST IS THE BOOK! When we "take away" from God’s "Book" we take away FROM JESUS CHRIST. We diminish "THE LIFE of the Lamb" down to a mere physical "book"—a book of paper when translators, "take away from the words of the BOOK of this prophecy" (Rev. 22:19).

The solution to better understanding the Scriptures and the will of God is not solely a matter of a better translation or a perfect translation. The early church had NO translations—they had the original Greek signatures, and copies of these signatures in the Greek language, which was universally understood throughout much of the Roman Empire—even Egyptians spoke Greek. And yet, the first century was a time of MASS APOSTASY in the church. Here is Scriptural proof:


"For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them" (Acts 20:29-30).


"HOLD FAST THE FORM OF SOUND WORDS, which you have heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. That good thing, which was committed unto you keep by the Holy Spirit which dwells in us. This you know, that ALL THEY WHICH ARE IN ASIA BE TURNED AWAY FROM ME…" (II Tim. 1:13-15).

So, even a perfect translation would not keep carnal men from turning from the Truth.

Spend more time "praying and obeying" than looking for that perfect translation and you will make faster progress in your Spiritual walk with God.

L.Ray.Smith Exposing those who contradict http://forums.bible-truths.com

 

[SG9]

Many thanx, you have helped make clear many things, my [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] steak of a mind got stuck {on what I wrote} and needed this expanded to move me on , I love the way GOD works, I find { if patient } when I need to understand a truth, HE gives me a whole bunch more to understand , so when I learn the truth I sought after to start with it enables me to understand the truths that followed, being that they are part of this same truth { if that makes any sense } and when I learn a new truth questions then spring fourth which need testing and then the need for an answer is then needed.

I appreciate your heart and zeal for truth. I ask God to bless you. Thanks

BTW, my reply covers a great deal and it also applies well to the "wine skin parable" thread.

 

[Unix]

The Editions of the RSV copyrighted in the '70s, have a lot of tools (older Editions are not the same). There is a Reverse Interlinear New Testament in Logos. There's UBS (Translator's) Handbook -series. A really good textual commentary on Isaiah is based on the RSV: Continental by Wildberger. The 1971 RSV utilized Qumran scrolls. A decent devotional commentary -series is based on the RSV: Interpretation (You can see which volumes of it I have, from the post: Unix's recent purchases, including upgrade DVD & topics), as well as many other different kinds of commentaries are either based on it or reference it frequently.
The book Form Criticism of the Old Testament was authored by Gene M. Tucker who was on the RSV Old Testament translation team.