Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The word Jesus is in the original Greek (Ἰησοῦς Gr 2424), so I don't know why the KJV (and it's derivatives) has omitted the word. Virtually every other translation includes the word Jesus.
There are two different vines. Two different vines of manuscripts. The Textus Receptus (where the KJV comes from), and the Majority Text. Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton J. A. Hort, created their New Testament in the Greek, that has later become to be known as the Critical Text. They dismissed the Textus Receptus as inferior and that it was a text full of errors; Westcott and Hort compiled a new Greek text (i.e. the Critical Text based upon the Majority Text). Note: It also must be pointed out that Westcott and Hort's beliefs were also heretical. Please see this CF thread here.
While I used Modern Translations to help update the 1600's English, I do not make Modern Translations my final Word of authority. The KJV (1769) is my final word of authority. The problem is that there are many attacks against the KJV from Modern Translations that water down key doctrines like the divinity of Christ, God's grace, the blood atonement, holiness (or righteous living), the Trinity, etc. The devil's name is also placed in the Bible for God or things that are of God's Kingdom, as well. In fact, whole passages and verses have been changed and removed and not for the better, but for the worse. New Age Bible Versions is a book by Gail Riplinger that was known to me when I first got saved back in 1992. From that point in time, I have found even tons of more reasons (biblically) beyond that book that have proven that the KJV (Textus Receptus line of manuscripts) is the line of manuscripts God has chosen to perfectly preserve His Word for us today. Meaning, I believe I can show evidences to a person that the original Hebrew, and Greek manuscripts and the 1769 KJV is divine in origin.
I have provided some evidences for this in my Blogger article here (if you are interested).
While I used Modern Translations to help update the 1600's English, I do not make Modern Translations my final Word of authority. The KJV (1769) is my final word of authority. The problem is that there are many attacks against the KJV from Modern Translations that water down key doctrines like the divinity of Christ, God's grace, the blood atonement, holiness (or righteous living), the Trinity, etc. The devil's name is also placed in the Bible for God or things that are of God's Kingdom, as well. In fact, whole passages and verses have been changed and removed and not for the better, but for the worse. New Age Bible Versions is a book by Gail Riplinger that was known to me when I first got saved back in 1992. From that point in time, I have found even tons of more reasons (biblically) beyond that book that have proven that the KJV (Textus Receptus line of manuscripts) is the line of manuscripts God has chosen to perfectly preserve His Word for us today. Meaning, I believe I can show evidences to a person that the original Hebrew, and Greek manuscripts and the 1769 KJV is divine in origin.
I do not believe there is a mass conspiracy by all modern translations against the KJV. While there may be a few rogue translations in circulation which alter key doctrines, reputable versions such as the NASB and ESV were compiled by highly respected Greek scholars with no axe to grind using earlier (and hence superior) 4th century manuscripts. If they differ from the best efforts of translators 400 years ago using inferior 12th century manuscripts then so be it. The goal of bible translation is to get as close the originally penned scriptures as possible and that means prioritizing earlier manuscripts where there is less chance of alteration by copyists. In any case the KJV translation of Acts 16:7 is not a problem here because there are plenty of other scriptures (even in the KVJ) which show that the Spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit, which is the accepted view of orthodox Christianity. So there are no fundamental doctrines being violated here (apart from our friends pet theory).
I do not believe there is a mass conspiracy by all modern translations against the KJV. ... ... ... So there are no fundamental doctrines being violated here (apart from our friends pet theory).
I do not believe there is a mass conspiracy by all modern translations against the KJV. While there may be a few rogue translations in circulation which alter key doctrines, reputable versions such as the NASB and ESV were compiled by highly respected Greek scholars with no axe to grind using earlier (and hence superior) 4th century manuscripts. If they differ from the best efforts of translators 400 years ago using inferior 12th century manuscripts then so be it. The goal of bible translation is to get as close the originally penned scriptures as possible and that means prioritizing earlier manuscripts where there is less chance of alteration by copyists. In any case the KJV translation of Acts 16:7 is not a problem here because there are plenty of other scriptures (even in the KVJ) which show that the Spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit, which is the accepted view of orthodox Christianity. So there are no fundamental doctrines being violated here (apart from our friends pet theory).
Well, I am not talking about a conspiracy of men but a spiritual one. The devil hates God's Word. In the garden, he told truth but he also mixed it with a lie. The devil is subtle. If he can make people doubt God's Word that it is not God's Word by pointing to a line of manuscripts that are flawed, he can get people to doubt the Bible as being divine in origin. For if one word is corrupted in the Bible, how can we trust the rest of the words in the Bible? Who gets to decide which words are true and which words are false? I would not want that kind of responsibility or authority to say what is true or false in God's Word.
You have to think like a criminal detective who is investigating a crime scene. If the evidence keeps pointing to a particular conclusion or truth in regards to the crime scene, it is highly likely that such a truth is possibly true. The same is true when comparing the KJV vs. the Modern Translations. Anyone who is not biased to Modern Translations over the KJV is going to objectively seek the truth and compare the two in an objective way. They will see that Modern Translations appear to attack the good things of the faith by way of comparison to the KJV. If there was only one or two coincidences like this, then I would be like.... "Okay, this could be just a coincidence and could mean something else." However, the shear number of evidences in our crime scene points to the conclusion that the Modern Translations are guilty of the crime in trying to ever so subtly corrupt God's pure Word.
Well, I am not talking about a conspiracy of men but a spiritual one. The devil hates God's Word. In the garden, he told truth but he also mixed it with a lie. The devil is subtle. If he can make people doubt God's Word that it is not God's Word by pointing to a line of manuscripts that are flawed, he can get people to doubt the Bible as being divine in origin. For if one word is corrupted in the Bible, how can we trust the rest of the words in the Bible? Who gets to decide which words are true and which words are false? I would not want that kind of responsibility or authority to say what is true or false in God's Word.
You have to think like a criminal detective who is investigating a crime scene. If the evidence keeps pointing to a particular conclusion or truth in regards to the crime scene, it is highly likely that such a truth is possibly true. The same is true when comparing the KJV vs. the Modern Translations. Anyone who is not biased to Modern Translations over the KJV is going to objectively seek the truth and compare the two in an objective way. They will see that Modern Translations appear to attack the good things of the faith by way of comparison to the KJV. If there was only one or two coincidences like this, then I would be like.... "Okay, this could be just a coincidence and could mean something else." However, the shear number of evidences in our crime scene points to the conclusion that the Modern Translations are guilty of the crime in trying to ever so subtly corrupt God's pure Word.
I don't think there is any evidence that the KJV is any way superior to other reputable translations. In fact the evidence points the other way with modern translations using the more reliable manuscripts. But I know there is a significant number of folk who 'love' the King James Version and won't have a bad word said about it.
I do not believe there is a mass conspiracy by all modern translations against the KJV. While there may be a few rogue translations in circulation which alter key doctrines, reputable versions such as the NASB and ESV were compiled by highly respected Greek scholars with no axe to grind using earlier (and hence superior) 4th century manuscripts. If they differ from the best efforts of translators 400 years ago using inferior 12th century manuscripts then so be it. The goal of bible translation is to get as close the originally penned scriptures as possible and that means prioritizing earlier manuscripts where there is less chance of alteration by copyists. In any case the KJV translation of Acts 16:7 is not a problem here because there are plenty of other scriptures (even in the KVJ) which show that the Spirit of Christ is the Holy Spirit, which is the accepted view of orthodox Christianity. So there are no fundamental doctrines being violated here (apart from our friends pet theory).
Three Scriptural Reasons to Trust in A Perfect Word Today.
#1. God's Word claims that it is perfect
God's Word claims that it is perfect (Psalms 12:6) (Psalms 119:140) (Proverbs 30:5) and that it will be preserved for all generations (Psalms 12:7) and it will stand forever (Isaiah 40:8) (1 Peter 1:25). Therefore, seeing Scripture plainly states these facts, it then becomes an issue of a test of your faith in God's Word (See the test the devil gave to Eve in Genesis 3:1); For the Bereans were more noble because they compared the spoken Word of God with the written Word of God (Acts of the Apostles 17:11). In other words, if the Bereans thought the written Word was corrupt in some way they would have no way of really knowing if the spoken Word of God was true or not.
#2. KJV vs. Modern Translations
A simple side by side comparison of the KJV vs Modern Translations shows us that the devil tries to place his name in the Modern Versions. Have no idea what I am talking about?
Well, certain Bible versions say that it is the dragon who is standing on the sea shore in Revelation. This is just evil and wrong.
See Parallel Version for Revelation 13:1 here...
Revelation 13:1 The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name.
See, if you know anything about Bible language, standing on something means that you "own it"; And the devil wants to own you. In the King James, John is standing on the seashore. Yet in many Bible versions the dragon (i.e. the devil) is standing on the seashore.
Why is this a problem?
Let's look at...
Genesis 22:17
"That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the seashore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;"
Did you catch that? God says to Abraham that He will multiply his seed as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is upon the seashore where he will then possess the gate of his enemies (i.e. the devil and his kingdom). The apostle John who wrote Revelation was Jewish and he was the promised seed of Genesis 22 standing on the seashore in Revelation 13. It was not the dragon or the devil standing on the seashore.
For certain Modern Versions eliminate the part of the passage in Revelation 13:1 that says that John is standing on the seashore (When he refers to himself as "I").
Also, the devil tries to take out key points in important discussions within the Bible (Which can affect doctrine). For example: In Romans 7 Paul talks from the Jew's perspective in keeping the Old Testament Law (Which leads to problems), and he gives us the climax or heart of his message as a solution in Romans 8:1. Now, certain modern translations have eliminated "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Eliminating this passage destroys the whole thrust of Paul's argument. Walking in the Spirit is the key to being in Christ Jesus. You eliminate that and you destroy Paul's argument. Also, 1 John 5:7 is the only verse in the Bible that is the clearest and most concise teaching on the Godhead (i.e. the Trinity).
For more on this particular point, click on the following spoiler button:
In fact, this is not the only time the devil has tried to place his name in the Bible in exchange for something that is supposed to be sacred or holy. We see the devil tries to place his name in Modern Translations in Daniel 3.
In Daniel 3, the Babylonian king says there is one like the "Son of God" in the fiery furnace along with Daniel's three friends. This is Jesus! Yet, in the Modern Translations it says the "son of the gods." In many false religions we can see how certain gods had mated with human females and created a hybrid. This is popular even in Greek mythology. So who saved Daniel's friends? Jesus or some hybrid like Hercules?
Nebuchadnezzar thought this was an angel of God (singular and not plural).
"Then Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and have changed the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God." (Daniel 3:28).
This was not the "son of the gods (plural) (little "g")!!!
No way Hosea! I mean, "No way José!"
Nebuchadnezzar clearly was referencing the most high God.
The Bible says (even something similar in your Modern Version),
"Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace, and spake, and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, ye servants of the most high God, come forth, and come hither. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, came forth of the midst of the fire." (Daniel 3:26).
Angels are called the: "sons of God" in Job.
The fourth person in the fire was still Jesus! The son of God. The Scriptures were still correct in their inspiration by God when they say, "and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God." While Nebuchadnezzar did not know it was the second person of the Godhead or the Trinity, the Lord our God who inspired Scripture surely would have glorified the name of the Son of God (Jesus) in this instance. For it was Jesus who was in the fire with Daniel's three friends!
Also, please check out this thread here, as well. It will help to explain this situation a little better, too.
Jesus is the Messenger of the Lord in the Old Testament.
(Please take note: I do not believe Jesus is an angelic being; I believe Jesus is the second person of the Godhead or the Trinity and that He is fully 100% God who took on the flesh of man).
In Isaiah 14:12, the devil's name "Lucifer" is replaced with "Day Star" or the "Morning Star."
Yes, I am aware that "morning stars" are angels in the book of Job.
But Modern Translations also say this is the Shining Star or the Son of the Dawn. Why?
Jesus says,
"I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." (Revelation 22:16).
So Jesus is the BRIGHT and MORNING star!
Yet, the individual in Isaiah 14:12 in Modern Translations is called the shining (bright) and morning star or the Day Star, etc.
So the devil is trying to be like the most high here. He is taking a similar sounding title of Jesus in Isaiah 14:12.
For where is the bright and morning star up in the sky?
It is the sun.
That is why He is called the bright and morning star because the sun is bright and rises in the morning.
Also, Lucifer means "light bearer."
Scripture tells us this is what it means.
"And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." (2 Corinthians 11:14).
The word "angel" also means "messenger." So 2 Corinthians 11:14 is saying that Satan is a light messenger or light bearer. In fact, when Satan is described with having all kinds of jewelry on him, it was symbolic of who he was. Certain gemstones refract light. They are not light themselves, but they merely reflect whatever light is in existence. Gemstones are like little light bearers. So how fitting the name "Lucifer" is for the devil. Yet, Modern Translations seek to give the devil a name that is similar to Jesus. This is wrong (of course).
#3. Biblical Numerics
Bible Numbers that glorify God and His Word. (Note: These are not equidistant letter sequences or numbers that attempt to get one to have a special dream, or to divine the future in some way - Striving to foretell the future is forbidden in the Bible). Numbers are something that we deal with in our everyday life and all things glorify God. So obviously the numbers in God's Word would naturally glorify Him in some way. What am I talking about? Check out this video on Numbers & the Greek New Testament.
Sevens in the Bible - Chuck Missler:
Note: Please keep in mind that I do not agree with everything Chuck says or believes; Especially his view of Soteriology (i.e. Eternal Security).
Also, here is a video series by Mike Hoggard that talks about the number 7 in the King James.
King James Code - Number 7 - Mike Hoggard (Part 1):
King James Code - Number 7 - Mike Hoggard (Part 2):
Now, while I may not agree with Mike on everything he teaches in the Bible nor on the way he teaches Bible numbers in every example, I have found that he has made some startling discoveries. Discoveries that do not appear in the modern translations but only in the King James.
I believe the 1769 KJV is the Word of God for our world language (English) today.
In 1611, the printing process was not perfected yet and there was no set standard in spelling yet, either.
From my experience, I have discovered that there are two wrong extremes on this topic. One wrong extreme says the KJV is evil and to even use it is to be a part of a cult (That teaches that one must worship a book - Which is simply not true). The other wrong extreme says the same thing. For I have found that many KJV-Onlyists believe that you should only read the King James. Many other KJV-Onlyists will also say that the King James is not all that hard to understand, too. However, I disagree with both of these conclusions, though.
Anyways, while I believe the KJV is the divinely inspired Word of God, I do not think one should stick to just reading it alone. For I have found Modern Translations to be very helpful in updating the language (From Old English); However, I do not put my entire trust in Modern Translations because the devil has placed his name all over them and key doctrines have been watered down and important messages within God's Word have been neutered.
In other words, I read Modern Translations as if I am panning for gold. I have to sift thru the dirt or the garbage in order to get to the gold of the passage that lines up with the King James (and the original Hebrew and Greek).
This gold that is found within the dirt of the translations can be very useful because it reflects what is in the King James. This is the gold that people hear and are saved when they hear the gospel message. For someone can be saved just by hearing a few Bible verses about the gospel message of Jesus Christ. This gold shines thru and penetrates their heart.
Like the Parable of the Sower. Believers receive the Word of God into their heart from those passages that are talking about salvation. Words that line up with the King James. These words are sown in their heart. And if they let this Word take root in their heart by continually reading the Word of God, then they will have hidden His Word in their heart so they will not sin against Him. It will have taken root and they will not fall away due to persecution or the trials of this life.
For it only takes a few Bible verses to get someone saved. However, washing yourself with the water of the Word is going to be a lot more effective if you use the pure Word of God.
Also, the KJV is not isolated to the English language, either. The King James is available in a few other languages, as well.
Even in this thread we have identified errors in the KJV. Eg Rom 10:14 in the KJV uses the noun 'preacher', whereas in the Greek, including the Textus Receptus, it is the verb 'preaching' (κηρύσσοντος) that is used. So I certainly do not believe the KJV translation is "divinely inspired".
Even in this thread we have identified errors in the KJV. Eg Rom 10:14 in the KJV uses the noun 'preacher', whereas in the Greek, including the Textus Receptus, it is the verb 'preaching' (κηρύσσοντος) that is used. So I certainly do not believe the KJV translation is "divinely inspired".
You did not grow up in Bible times so as to actually know Biblical Greek. Scholars are not inspired by God and they are making educated guesses on a dead language. They did not grow up in Bible times any more than you did. You cannot claim to know a dead language. You can only make educated guesses at best. God’s hand was simply upon the preservation of His Word for our day. There are no errors in His Word. For everything God does is perfect.
This is clearly a spiritual matter. There are two different spirits at work between the two vines. I have seen the viscous attack against me on this particular topic before. For faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God. But which Word? They are not all exactly the same. Each Bible can produce a different kind of faith.
Scholars are not inspired by God and they are making educated guesses on a dead language. They did not grow up in Bible times any more than you did. You cannot claim to know a dead language. You can only make educated guesses at best.
And that would include the scholars who translated the KJV. They were not infallible. The translators of 400 years ago are certainly no more qualified than the respected Greek scholars of today. I do not accept the claim that respected modern translations are the work of the devil.
Here is an interesting article by a scholar I have a lot of respect for. Daniel B. Wallace is professor at
Dallas Theological Seminary and his book 'Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics' is the standard textbook on Koine Greek in seminaries worldwide.
And that would include the scholars who translated the KJV. They were not infallible. The translators of 400 years ago are certainly no more qualified than the respected Greek scholars of today. I do not accept the claim that respected modern translations are the work of the devil.
Here is an interesting article by a scholar I have a lot of respect for. Daniel B. Wallace is professor at
Dallas Theological Seminary and his book 'Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics' is the standard textbook on Koine Greek in seminaries worldwide.
No other translation was peer reviewed like the KJV. God was able to use imperfect men to preserve His Word. Those who see errors in the KJV do not believe there is a perfect Word of God in our world language today. All supposed contradictions and errors made against the KJV over the many years, I was able to explain. So they don’t know what they are talking about.
No other translation was peer reviewed like the KJV. God was able to use imperfect men to preserve His Word. Those who see errors in the KJV do not believe there is a perfect Word of God in our world language today. All supposed contradictions and errors made against the KJV over the many years, I was able to explain. So they don’t know what they are talking about.
Well that is your opinion brother, but not one that I share. Neither of us are Greek scholars, so I am rather more inclined to listen to the experts in this matter.
Even in this thread we have identified errors in the KJV. Eg Rom 10:14 in the KJV uses the noun 'preacher', whereas in the Greek, including the Textus Receptus, it is the verb 'preaching' (κηρύσσοντος) that is used. So I certainly do not believe the KJV translation is "divinely inspired".
The word preacher is right the word “κηρύσσοντος” is not in the text it is “κηρύσσω”
And even if the word was preaching or preacher. My point in that chapter was that God is the divine preacher or the one preaching in the hearts of all men by Christ and the word of Christ. Paul ask the question how shall they hear without an preacher? It is the natural question some might ask since Paul said earlier,
Romans 10:12, 13 KJV “For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”
Paul is basically saying here (as led by the Spirit to write) that no matter who they are Jew or Gentile and wherever they are at any time they can call upon the name of the Lord (read Acts 17:26,27 KJV to see that Paul speaks of this in other places as well and Romans 2:14,25 etc Peter also speaks of this in Acts 10:34,35 KJV).
This would make some ask “how can this be?” Or, as we have it asked in the text
Romans 10:14 KJV “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?”
Paul has already been speaking of this in the previous verses as he spoke of Deuteronomy 30 and showed that the word of faith is close to all “nigh”. Then he reinforces it by answering the many questions he ask in the chapter, and quotes Psalm 19 here,
Romans 10:18 KJV “But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.”
Well that is your opinion brother, but not one that I share. Neither of us are Greek scholars, so I am rather more inclined to listen to the experts in this matter.
1 John 2:26,27 “These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. 27. But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.”
1 Corinthians 2 - 1. And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.”
And even if the word was preaching or preacher. My point in that chapter was that God is the divine preacher or the one preaching in the hearts of all men by Christ and the word of Christ. Paul ask the question how shall they hear without an preacher? It is the natural question some might ask since Paul said earlier,
Romans 10:12, 13 KJV “For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”
Pail is basically saying here (as led by the Spirit to write) that no matter who they are Jew or Gentile and wherever they are at any time they can call upon the name of the Lord (read Acts 17:26,27 KJV to see that Paul speaks of this in other places as well and Tomans 2:14,25 etc Peter also speaks of this in Acts 10:34,35 KJV).
This would make some ask “how can this be?” Or as we have in the text
Romans 10:14 KJV “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?”
Paul has already been speaking of this in the previous verses as he spoke of Deuteronomy 30 and showed that the word of faith is close to all “nigh”. Then he reinforces it by answering the many questions he ask in the chapter, and quotes Psalm 19 here,
Romans 10:18 KJV “But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.”
And I asked you to provide a single commentary that agrees with you. You wriggled out of that one by providing commentary on a completely different passage. So I'll ask the question again. Is there a single commentary that agrees with you that God is doing the preaching in Rom 10:4?
Of course you won't find one, because it is obvious that humans do the preaching. Let's carry on quoting where you left off....
Rom 10:14-15
How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
I know you seem to have Tritheistic tendencies but would Paul really write "And how shall they preach" if he was referring to God preaching?
And I asked you to provide a single commentary that agrees with you. You wriggled out of that one by providing commentary on a completely different passage. So I'll ask the question again. Is there a single commentary that agrees with you that God is doing the preaching in Rom 10:4?
Of course you won't find one, because it is obvious that humans do the preaching. Let's carry on quoting where you left off....
Rom 10:14-15
How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
I know you seem to have Tritheistic tendencies but would Paul really write "And how shall they preach" if he was referring to God preaching?
Your wrong again, the preachers preached by the spirit, the word of God came to the preachers and God spoke through the prophets. So again it was a God doing the work and preaching in creation and in the hearts of man and in the preachers.
And I did provide quotes from authors who some of them did speak of Romans 10 in similar thinking as I have, go read them again. This was known way back in those days and after that as well. The quotes I gave do mention Romans 10 and connected to Moses in Deut 30!and they tie this in with the verses about the Light that lighteth every man and the seed as shown in the sower parable as I have done also.
If you read my words carefully you will see that I spoke of this word in the heart , Christ, the true Light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world and the seed sown as a common theme. Many of the quotes I gave do this also. I don’t say that God preached in the heart by Romans 10 only. But I speak of many of His means in doing this using many scriptures.
Also, you seem to think that if some of the men you read don’t see something then it must not be right. Imagine how the early reformers might have felt if they started to see things about faith and doctrine that the Catholic Church had not seen for a long time. They must have heard similar arguments that you give and of other men who may have accused them of not being orthodox or in the understanding of thousands of priest. But the hundreds of thousands of priest or more were wrong in thier understsnding of certain basic doctrines. As the reformers spoke of.
The word used in the KJV is “preacher” the word used in Greek is “κηρύσσω“ G2784 is used. “of uncertain affinity; to herald (as a public crier), especially divine truth (the gospel):--preacher(-er), proclaim, publih“
other versions use the word “preacher” also not all but some do
Romans 10:14 Revised Standard Version (RSV)
14 But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher“
Romans 10:14 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
14 ..,And how will they hear without a preacher”
Etc
It seems your fighting against your own translators.
"And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!" (Romans 10:15).
The gospel is 1 Corinthians 15:1-4.
The gospel came by Jesus Christ and was fully preached by Paul that has been immortalized into Scripture. We now hear of the gospel on a physical level by hearing actual words from the Bible. I believe this works by Prevenient Grace (John 1:9, John 1:29, John 3:16, John 12:32, John 16:8-11, Romans 2:4, Titus 2:11, 1 Timothy 2:3-4, 2 Peter 3:9, 1 John 2:2, Hebrews 2:9, Hebrews 13:15, Matthew 23:37, Acts of the Apostles 16:14, Acts of the Apostles 17:27, Deuteronomy 30:19). To learn more about Prevenient Grace, check out these articles here, and here. God can open our hearts at the right time in our life so as to understand the gospel message so as to be able to accept it or reject it of our own free will. Without this drawing by God to understand the gospel message, a person cannot understand it. This is not the Calvinistic version called: "Unconditional Election" whereby God regenerates a person to forever be a saved believer for all time before they hear the gospel message. This is Prevenient Grace, whereby God simply opens their heart and mind to understand that gospel at the right time in their life. Without this enlightenment by God, they cannot understand the gospel. For in the Parable of the Sower, we learn that the first seed was unable to understand the gospel message.
"When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side." (Matthew 13:19).
Meaning: This was a time in a person's life whereby God chose not to reveal the truth of the gospel to them yet. But John 1:9 says that Christ gives light to every man that comes into the world. When this happens in a person's life is up to the Lord.
Our faith rests upon the Bible, and the understanding is given by God.
Our acting in accordance with God's Word in being humble, genuine, and seeking God (on His terms) and not sin is what will help us to understand God's Word (the Scriptures) by the Spirit.
1 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
2 For by it the elders obtained a good report.
3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." (Hebrews 11:1-3).
A person can find God if they are truly seeking Him.
"And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart." (Jeremiah 29:13).
Unfortunately, others choose another spirit that is not God or they choose a religion over God.
Some more interesting verses. Notice that word of the Lord here is not refering directly to scripture written down yet. And we read of the word of the Lord speaking
Genesis 15 - 1. After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.”
Ezekiel 36 - 16. Moreover the wordoftheLORD came unto me, saying,...”
And I asked you to provide a single commentary that agrees with you. You wriggled out of that one by providing commentary on a completely different passage. So I'll ask the question again. Is there a single commentary that agrees with you that God is doing the preaching in Rom 10:4?
Of course you won't find one, because it is obvious that humans do the preaching. Let's carry on quoting where you left off....
Rom 10:14-15
How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
I know you seem to have Tritheistic tendencies but would Paul really write "And how shall they preach" if he was referring to God preaching?
