Bible Problem

[Fred]

Isn't it that Jesus being the Son of God has more relation to our salvation than thinking He is God?

The two cannot be separated.

Jesus being the Son of God is equivalent to Him being God.

 

[ChristB4us]

Which translation of the Bible do you use? Many are unaware that the manuscripts used for the modern translations are highly spurious, because of the numerous differences between them and the Traditional Text (TT).

Probably from Alexandia where poetic licensing and Gnosticism was know to exist as opposed to the Traditional Text which I believe originated from Antioch.

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.

The manuscripts used for the TT (Majority Text, or Textus Receptus, or Received Text) are much latter (5 century and latter) than those used for the modern translations (MT).

Those who loved Him and His words would be wearing them out for why there are no older manuscripts.

The oldest manuscripts are from the Alexandrian area where they would disregard the scriptures and use tongues for private use for self edification; hence secret or hidden knowledge for what Gnosticism thrives on, thus I see them as in praying in tongues and fasting in those monasteries.

The MT manuscripts were not used for copying purposes like those of the TT, because they had too many errors and therefore were rejected and did not wear out. This is what allowed the modern text to gain much ascendancy in popularity, due to their antiquity (3-4th century). As there are many differences between the manuscripts use for the MT, due to omissions, transpositions and interpolations, the early church would not use them (Vaticanus, Sinaticus and Alexandrinus).

I agree although I suspect that the reasons why they were never wearing out is because they were not reading them regularly for why they never wore out.

Makes me wonder if those errors were put in those manuscripts intentionally that by it, they can pull "scripture" hence the errors out of context that promotes their praying in tongues for private use back then in Gnosticism, but I care not to research that to see if that is true or not.

 

[NetChaplain]

The two cannot be separated.

Jesus being the Son of God is equivalent to Him being God.

The Lord Jesus is referred to as "Mighty God" and everlasting Father" (Isa 9:6). This is in reference that He is "the fulness of the Godhead (the Father) bodily" (Col 2:9). He represents the Father, Who is God (Jhn 20:17; 1Co 8:6), as if the Father was with us. The order of authority is Father, Son, Spirit.

 

[Fred]

The Lord Jesus is referred to as "Mighty God" and everlasting Father" (Isa 9:6). This is in reference that He is "the fulness of the Godhead (the Father) bodily" (Col 2:9). He represents the Father, Who is God (Jhn 20:17; 1Co 8:6), as if the Father was with us. The order of authority is Father, Son, Spirit.

Something to which I never denied.

But what I asserted in reference to Jesus being the Son of God and God remains.

 

[David1701]

Because it is the version looked to as superior to a version like the NASB in demonstrating Jesus is God.
I didn't make that original assertion. I am responding to it.



Why do you belittle the other versions. Are you obssessed with doing so?



To fear the Lord involves worshiping the Lord. Thus, Colossians 3:22 is a better proof for the Deity of Christ in the NASB.





"God" applies to Jesus in both passages.
This is much clearer in the NASB.
Titus 2:13
looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus

2 Peter 1:1
Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ



The context makes it easy to see that the "Lord" refers to Jesus (3:17, 24).

You're obviously not bothering to read my posts properly; so, never mind...

 

[Fred]

You're obviously not bothering to read my posts properly; so, never mind...

I wouldn't want to defend your position either.

 

[NetChaplain]

Probably from Alexandia where poetic licensing and Gnosticism was know to exist as opposed to the Traditional Text which I believe originated from Antioch.

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.

Those who loved Him and His words would be wearing them out for why there are no older manuscripts.

The oldest manuscripts are from the Alexandrian area where they would disregard the scriptures and use tongues for private use for self edification; hence secret or hidden knowledge for what Gnosticism thrives on, thus I see them as in praying in tongues and fasting in those monasteries.

I agree although I suspect that the reasons why they were never wearing out is because they were not reading them regularly for why they never wore out.

Makes me wonder if those errors were put in those manuscripts intentionally that by it, they can pull "scripture" hence the errors out of context that promotes their praying in tongues for private use back then in Gnosticism, but I care not to research that to see if that is true or not.

Hi and like your knowledgeable reply! Yes, the copyists for the Majority Text manuscripts would copy then destroy the exemplar when the manuscript was becoming illegible, so it could not be misused, and the transfer of true Word was continued. God bless!

 

[TB2]

So by using this logic of yours, the New Testament isnt sufficient.

God is sufficient, my friend. My statement was that sola Scriptura is not expressly taught in the Bible. I believe the OT & NT are inspired just as much as anybody, but I can't support that by proof texts from the Bible that were written prior to the existence of the Bible. That is the hermeneutical error of anachronism like how some Christians see Jeremiah 10 as a prohibition against Christmas trees before there was such a thing as Christmas trees (or Christmas, for that matter). Almost all (but not quite) the standard proof texts about Scripture refer to the OT. Even the phrase "word of God" in the NT, that people often read as referring to the Bible (before the Bible existed), most of those occurrences actually refer specifically to the gospel message that was preached. That is one of the number one ways that the apostles referred to the gospel as: "the word of God."

More problematic is the fact that even if the standard proof texts were referring to the Bible, the Bible still doesn't come with an inspired Table of Contents to tell us which books constitute Scripture. For that we can only appeal to the canonization process that came later in church history.

 

[NetChaplain]

Makes me wonder if those errors were put in those manuscripts intentionally that by it, they can pull "scripture" hence the errors out of context that promotes their praying in tongues for private use back then in Gnosticism, but I care not to research that to see if that is true or not.

The modern translations are the most significant deception of Satan. Hardly nobody sees this very serious problem. The Gnostics, by way of modern translations wanted to disrupt and confuse the Church by disunity of Scripture.

With the omissions, interpolations (entering foreign words from the original) and transpositions (changing the order of words) they present translations that have a significant absence of the Word, and often give different thoughts when compared to the inspired texts.

 

[NetChaplain]

Something to which I never denied.

But what I asserted in reference to Jesus being the Son of God and God remains.

The Three in the Trinity are equal in essence and power; but they have an order of authority: The Father is the greatest because Jesus said He is "greater than I" - Jhn 14:28, meaning in authority. God is Jesus' Father (Jhn 5:18; Jhn 20:17).

 

[ChristB4us]

The modern translations are the most significant deception of Satan. Hardly nobody sees this very serious problem. The Gnostics, by way of modern translations wanted to disrupt and confuse the Church by disunity of Scripture.

With the omissions, interpolations (entering foreign words from the original) and transpositions (changing the order of words) they present translations that have a significant absence of the Word, and often give different thoughts when compared to the inspired texts.

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.

I would say that the Father's prophetic warning & Jesus's words has come to pass where it is hard for anyone to hear the word of God in these latter days.

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.

 

[Fred]

The Three in the Trinity are equal in essence and power; but they have an order of authority: The Father is the greatest because Jesus said He is "greater than I" - Jhn 14:28, meaning in authority. God is Jesus' Father (Jhn 5:18; Jhn 20:17).

Again, something to which I never denied.

 

[Fred]

Many will never know that much of these modern translations were produced by Gnostics, with the intent to discredit the Deity of Christ

The NASB does a better job in presenting the Deity of Christ than the KJV.

 

[TB2]

The modern translations are the most significant deception of Satan

Agree to disagree

 

[NetChaplain]

The NASB does a better job in presenting the Deity of Christ than the KJV.

The KJV has more Scripture than all the modern translations, because the Gnostics that had their hands in the Minority Text manuscripts omitted some of the passages that manifests the Lord Jesus' Deity:

A couple examples are Jhn 3:13, they omitted the words "even the Son of Man which is in heaven." This part shows that Jesus is in heaven while He is on earth (doctrine of His omnipresence)!

Eph 3:9, they omitted the words, "by Jesus Christ," which shows the Lord Jesus' creating power. It's a reiteration of many passages that show His power, but this is one reiteration they neglected to present.

 

[Fred]

The KJV has more Scripture than all the modern translations, because the Gnostics that had their hands in the Minority Text manuscripts omitted some of the passages that manifests the Lord Jesus' Deity:

A couple examples are Jhn 3:13, they omitted the words "even the Son of Man which is in heaven." This part shows that Jesus is in heaven while He is on earth (doctrine of His omnipresence)!

Eph 3:9, they omitted the words, "by Jesus Christ," which shows the Lord Jesus' creating power. It's a reiteration of many passages that show His power, but this is one reiteration they neglected to present.

You quoted Ephesians 3:9, but have you also seen Ephesians 3:6?
Ephesians 3:6
NASB: to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
KJV: That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel.


The NASB does a much better job in demonstrating the fact that the Lord Jesus is God in:
Colossians 3:22 - "Lord" refers to Jesus
Titus 2:13 - Jesus is the great God and Saviour
2 Peter 1:1 - our God and Savior, Jesus Christ

 

[NetChaplain]

Agree to disagree

One can't deny the omitting of Scripture in the modern translations. They have hundreds of them, making a translation with much less of the Word of God. They were suppose to translate from the source that contain the most manuscripts, which is the Majority Test. This text has over 3000 manuscript copies. They primarily only translate from three sources of manuscripts: Vaticanus Codex; Sinaiticus Codex; Alexandrinus Codex.

It's just because they are the oldest recently discovered (mid 1880's) manuscripts; and they owe their antiquity to the fact that the early scribes would not use them from being too corrupt. They remained unused for 1500 years until someone found them.

When a scribe encountered a manuscript that was close to illegibility He would copy it, then destroy the exemplar so it couldn't be misused. This answers to why there are no extant original manuscripts today, they are all copies of copies.

 

[NetChaplain]

You quoted Ephesians 3:9, but have you also seen Ephesians 3:6?
Ephesians 3:6
NASB: to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
KJV: That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel.

I see no difference in these passages.

The NASB does a much better job in demonstrating the fact that the Lord Jesus is God in:
Colossians 3:22 - "Lord" refers to Jesus
Titus 2:13 - Jesus is the great God and Saviour
2 Peter 1:1 - our God and Savior, Jesus Christ

I'm not sure I understand you here, because the KJV says the same things. But thanks for the replies and God bless!

 

[Fred]

I'm not sure I understand you here, because the KJV says the same things.

Not in the way the NASB does in Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1.

 

[TB2]

One can't deny the omitting of Scripture in the modern translations. They have hundreds of them, making a translation with much less of the Word of God. They were suppose to translate from the source that contain the most manuscripts, which is the Majority Test. This text has over 3000 manuscript copies. They primarily only translate from three sources of manuscripts: Vaticanus Codex; Sinaiticus Codex; Alexandrinus Codex.

It's just because they are the oldest recently discovered (mid 1880's) manuscripts; and they owe their antiquity to the fact that the early scribes would not use them from being too corrupt. They remained unused for 1500 years until someone found them.

When a scribe encountered a manuscript that was close to illegibility He would copy it, then destroy the exemplar so it couldn't be misused. This answers to why there are no extant original manuscripts today, they are all copies of copies.

I acknowledge there is genuine disagreement among believers on this issue. But what you call "omission," another believer calls "corruptions/additions" that don't belong