Bible Problem

[Carbon]

Yes, and the KJV and others using the same manuscript source (Majority Text) are the only translations that retain the entire Word of God (Mat 4:4). Many will never know that much of these modern translations were produced by Gnostics, with the intent to discredit the Deity of Christ, and disrupt growth through disunity of Scripture. They had to have the right mixture of truth and error, like rat poison which has only 10% arsenic and the rest cornmeal.

Two things. One is I’m not of the KJV only cult.
Two. If you want to discuss the KJO bring it to the proper forum. Thanks

 

[Carbon]

I wouldn't call the RC a Christian church, though they claim to be. They have many anti-Christian doctrines that are well hid and misunderstood, like their doctrine concerning Immaculate Conception: "the conception of the Virgin Mary in which as decreed in Roman Catholic dogma her soul was preserved free from original sin by divine grace." -Merriam Webster. Of course this can only apply to the Lord Jesus! Thanks for your replies!

At one time the only Christian church was the Catholic Church. I thought you being a Chaplin, would have known the history.

 

[David1701]

I found a version like the NASB slightly better when it comes to the fact that the Lord Jesus is God.

Now that's interesting! Can you supply any evidence? If you do, I think you'll be in for a surprise...

 

[David1701]

At one time the only Christian church was the Catholic Church. I thought you being a Chaplin, would have known the history.

Ah, now that's not true, brother. It's what Romanism would have us believe, but there have always been true believers outside of RCism.

 

[Fred]

Just to let you know that this version has all the omissions as the other modern translations; and the error that "Elhanan killed Goliath" in 2Sam 21:19.

This doesn't detract at all from what I have previously asserted.

 

[Fred]

Now that's interesting! Can you supply any evidence? If you do, I think you'll be in for a surprise...

Here's one (among quite a few).

John 14:14
If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.

This demonstrates the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of prayer.
Since only God is to be prayed to proves the Lord Jesus is God.

The 'Me' does not appear in the KJV.

 

[TB2]

At one time the only Christian church was the Catholic Church. I thought you being a Chaplin, would have known the history.

Although your comment was directed to someone else, for what's it's worth as one following the thread, I was pretty sure what you meant when you said that on the previous page (seemed clear to me), but I can see how there might be confusion.

And while I know this isn't what you were talking about, on a related note, perhaps we (commenters here) should distinguish between the RCC (Roman Catholic Church) & the Universal ("Catholic") Church. Not sure the best way to do that. But seems important to distinguish somehow, given that references to the "catholic church" in the second century were not references to the RCC, which didn't exist yet, but references to the "catholic" (universal) church that local churches collectively comprised.

Also, let's not forget the Eastern Orthodox

 

[TB2]

Going back to the original question "which translation do you use?" (which implicitly is asking "which translation is the 'best'/'most accurate'), I don't think it would be off base to state that no translation holds the trophy. The same translation can be the best for one passage, and the worst for another. But the great thing about today's resources is that we don't have to be limited to a single translation.

Personally, for what it's worth, I start with the Greek/Hebrew interlinear (*then check the manuscript textual notes), and then compare multiple, different translations.

 

[NetChaplain]

At one time the only Christian church was the Catholic Church. I thought you being a Chaplin, would have known the history.

As another has mentioned, there were churches that were genuinely Christian well prior to the RCC; and it's unkind to address the title of another in a defamatory manner.

 

[David1701]

Here's one (among quite a few).

John 14:14
If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.

This demonstrates the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of prayer.
Since only God is to be prayed to proves the Lord Jesus is God.

The 'Me' does not appear in the KJV.

Actually, that reading (the inclusion of "Me", in John 14:14) is an error, precisely because we are told to pray to the Father, not to Jesus. Of course, the Lord is not going to scold us for praying to Jesus, still it is a slight error and contradicts Jesus' own instructions on the principles according to which we are to pray.

Matt. 6:6 (WPNT) But you, whenever you pray, go into your room, and having shut the door pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will repay you openly.

Matt. 6:7-15 (WPNT)
7 “But when you pray do not babble like the heathen; for they think that they will be heard for their many words.
8 So do not be like them, because your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.
9 Therefore, you pray like this: ‘Our Father who is in the heavens, let Your name be reverenced;
10 let Your kingdom come, let Your will be done, on the earth just as in heaven.
11 Give us today our daily bread;
12 and forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.
13 And do not bring us into testing, but rescue us from the evil one; because Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.’
14 For if you forgive people their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
15 But if you do not forgive people their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

 

[Carbon]

Although your comment was directed to someone else, for what's it's worth as one following the thread, I was pretty sure what you meant when you said that on the previous page (seemed clear to me), but I can see how there might be confusion.

And while I know this isn't what you were talking about, on a related note, perhaps we (commenters here) should distinguish between the RCC (Roman Catholic Church) & the Universal ("Catholic") Church. Not sure the best way to do that. But seems important to distinguish somehow, given that references to the "catholic church" in the second century were not references to the RCC, which didn't exist yet, but references to the "catholic" (universal) church that local churches collectively comprised.

Also, let's not forget the Eastern Orthodox

Exactly. As I studied church history, the Christian churches scattered abroad throughout Asia minor were independent and considered free churches. With so many false teaching trying to get into the churches, I believe God united them for the churches protection. It wasn’t until probably a few hundred years later corruption came into the church. And of course much later the reformation. Which wasn’t to break off but to reform back to the Bible.

 

[Carbon]

As another has mentioned, there were churches that were genuinely Christian well prior to the RCC;

There were always those who did not like and trust organized religions many were small (organized) groups. And please do not tell me the Baptist church goes all the way back to John the Baptist.

and it's unkind to address the title of another in a defamatory manner.

My apologies. Your right,

 

[David1701]

There were always those who did not like and trust organized religions many were small (organized) groups. And please do not tell me the Baptist church goes all the way back to John the Baptist.

My apologies. Your right,

It can't go back to J. the B., because his was a different baptism, but it does go back to the apostles (nodding head emoji needed).

 

[Fred]

Actually, that reading (the inclusion of "Me", in John 14:14) is an error, precisely because we are told to pray to the Father, not to Jesus. Of course, the Lord is not going to scold us for praying to Jesus, still it is a slight error and contradicts Jesus' own instructions on the principles according to which we are to pray.

Matt. 6:6 (WPNT) But you, whenever you pray, go into your room, and having shut the door pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will repay you openly.

Matt. 6:7-15 (WPNT)
7 “But when you pray do not babble like the heathen; for they think that they will be heard for their many words.
8 So do not be like them, because your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.
9 Therefore, you pray like this: ‘Our Father who is in the heavens, let Your name be reverenced;
10 let Your kingdom come, let Your will be done, on the earth just as in heaven.
11 Give us today our daily bread;
12 and forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.
13 And do not bring us into testing, but rescue us from the evil one; because Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.’
14 For if you forgive people their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
15 But if you do not forgive people their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

The 'Me' in John 14:14 is not in error.

What is in error is your attempt to use Matthew 6:9 to show Jesus isn't to be prayed to. This is foolish. He is the proper recipient of prayer (Acts 1:24-26; 7:59-60; Romans 10:12-14; 1 Corinthians 1:2; etc.). Furthermore, nowhere in Matthew 6:9 does the word 'only' appear. It doesn't teach we are to pray only to the Father. That is your misunderstanding.

 

[Carbon]

It can't go back to J. the B., because his was a different baptism,

I agree.

but it does go back to the apostles (nodding head emoji needed).

Ya. And eventually united in the Catholic Church.

 

[Carbon]

Exactly. As I studied church history, the Christian churches scattered abroad throughout Asia minor were independent and considered free churches. With so many false teaching trying to get into the churches, I believe God united them for the churches protection. It wasn’t until probably a few hundred years later corruption came into the church. And of course much later the reformation. Which wasn’t to break off but to reform back to the Bible.

@David1701
Do you agree?

 

[TB2]

Exactly. As I studied church history, the Christian churches scattered abroad throughout Asia minor were independent and considered free churches. With so many false teaching trying to get into the churches, I believe God united them for the churches protection. It wasn’t until probably a few hundred years later corruption came into the church. And of course much later the reformation. Which wasn’t to break off but to reform back to the Bible.

Yes, agreed.

I would only add a couple caveats. I'd say there's been corruption from the very beginning. Or, false teaching is probably a better way for me to say it. The church has always had to combat false teaching and corruption (both within and without). In the second century, it was Gnosticism.

The second caveat I'm a little hesitant to add (as it will likely make everyone mad to one degree or another; so my apologies in advance if I step on yours or anyone else's toes). I think we need to be as honest as we can in our appraisals and recognize the good and bad in all (three) major branches of Christianity (Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant), and avoid either vilifying or absolving them. As a Christian of the Protestant tradition, I recognize positives and negatives (as I do about the Roman Catholic & Orthodox as well). I think there are things my Protestant tradition gets right (that the RCC gets wrong). But if I were to be totally honest, I'd have to say that there also things that my Protestant tradition gets wrong (that the RCC gets right).

Personally, I prefer to weed through all those millenia of controversies and councils and layers of tradition and go all the way straight back to the first century (before we even had the Bible) and resolve to know nothing but "Christ crucified." The Cross: that's the hill I fight and die on. Is that too minimalist?

 

[Carbon]

Yes, agreed.

I would only add a couple caveats. I'd say there's been corruption from the very beginning. Or, false teaching is probably a better way for me to say it. The church has always had to combat false teaching and corruption (both within and without). In the second century, it was Gnosticism.

The second caveat I'm a little hesitant to add (as it will likely make everyone mad to one degree or another; so my apologies in advance if I step on yours or anyone else's toes). I think we need to be as honest as we can in our appraisals and recognize the good and bad in all (three) major branches of Christianity (Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant), and avoid either vilifying or absolving them. As a Christian of the Protestant tradition, I recognize positives and negatives (as I do about the Roman Catholic & Orthodox as well). I think there are things my Protestant tradition gets right (that the RCC gets wrong). But if I were to be totally honest, I'd have to say that they’re also things that my Protestant tradition gets wrong (that the RCC gets right).

Curious if you would share a couple points where the RCC is correct and Protestants are wrong?
You got my interest now.
I can think of a couple myself.

One being the scriptures should be in the hands of the church as it is not open to personal interpretations and must be governed by the church. I notice the epistles of Paul to Timothy are written to Timothy, a young pastor. As some of the instruction are for pastors not laymen.

I’ll just mention this one for now.

Personally, I prefer to weed through all those millenia of controversies and councils and layers of tradition and go all the way straight back to the first century (before we even had the Bible) and resolve to know nothing but "Christ crucified." The Cross: that's the hill I fight and die on. Is that too minimalist?

 

[Carbon]

Curious if you would share a couple points where the RCC is correct and Protestants are wrong?
You got my interest now.
I can think of a couple myself.

One being the scriptures should be in the hands of the church as it is not open to personal interpretations and must be governed by the church. I notice the epistles of Paul to Timothy are written to Timothy, a young pastor. As some of the instruction are for pastors not laymen.

I’ll just mention this one for now.

One other thing the RCC got right was. The Bible getting in the hands of all the people as it would be the cause of so many belief systems. And right they were.

 

[TB2]

@Carbon excellent, excellent points. And lovin' the Greek under your screen name ("Jesus is Lord," right?). The example that comes to mind (and the only one I can think of right now off the top of my head) is bound to stir up a hornets nest (with just about everyone). I have yet to communicate it in a way that doesn't get misunderstood, and without people accusing me of heresy, and wanting to burn me at the stake (granted, it's a virtual, cyber-burning so less painful physically, but still not much fun). So, let me think about this, and mull this over for a bit, to see if I want to "go there" and dive into all that. It "only" strikes at one of the major pillars of the Reformation (yikes).