Forums118
Topics9,224
Posts196,102
Members1,325
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
5 registered members (dedication, Karen Y, 3 invisible),
2,179
guests, and 8
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Why the King James Version is Superior...
#137576
11/18/11 10:12 PM
11/18/11 10:12 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,222
Florida, USA
|
|
…to the American Standard Version (ASV), the New International Version (NIV), the New World Translation (NWT), RSV and many other newer versions as they are based on suspect and corrupted manuscripts. If you check them versus the King James, you will see not just a change for clarity as they claim but a complete change of meaning or outright deletion or insertion to support false doctrine.
Many Christians and others have noticed the missing verses and the changes of the text in the NIV and other newer versions... "...During a Sunday morning service I was asked to read the verses... I did not like what I read from my NASB in 1Corinthians 11:24. It said: "This is my body, which is for you." A key word was missing, the word "broken". It should have read "This is my body, which is broken for you (KJV)." It's the most important part of the verse. It gives the application, and purpose. That put some questions in my mind and spirit concerning this translation. I have read other verses that were not perfect in the NASB, as there are in the KJV. However, this is a verse of critical importance to me. I began studying and with some research I have come up with numerous mistranslations in the NASB and NIV; all in key areas of importance. These areas have to do with the virgin birth, the deity of Christ, salvation by faith, the blood of Jesus, His second coming, and judgment of the saints. All are in areas having to do with our faith, salvation and hope..." "...I knew something was wrong in the NASB; because key verses were either changed, or had missing words. In simple language, the NASB and most modern versions are translated from what are known as the 'minority' texts.....I also found out where these minority texts came from, and that they had been corrupted. They are held by the Catholic Church, who is and has long been behind the effort to destroy the Word of God that we have. Don't forget all the men who endangered their lives and suffered and some being martyred by the Catholic Church for trying to give the common man the Word of God in their own language, to give them worship music in their own language, and teach them that they could and should read the Bible for themselves without having a Catholic priest to interpret it for them. These corrupted texts contain numerous other books, such as the Apocrypha, and the Gospel of Barnabas, etc. The corrupted texts came out of Alexandria, Egypt; being accomplished at the hands of Origen, who was promoted by the Catholic Church as a great early church father, but was in reality a heretic...." The problem is that it is not a 'different translation', it basically is editing to take out many core beliefs, and whatever they disagree with or doesnt fit with their doctrine or traditions. Some have taken out whole chapters out or like the Mormons have done away and written their own... and many theologians have noticed 'You cannot prove the Trinity in the NIV...' So its not just a 'different translation'....
|
|
|
Re: Why the King James Version is Superior...
[Re: Rick H]
#137577
11/18/11 10:13 PM
11/18/11 10:13 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,222
Florida, USA
|
|
If you look at the following verses you see the important beliefs they destroy with these newwer versions: 1 John 5:7 Removal of the Trinity KJV-For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:and these three are one. NIV----For there are three that testify the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost RSV---( missing ) Romans 1:3 Systematic removal of the divinity of Jesus Christ KJV-Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; NIV---- concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, RSV---regarding his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, Acts 22:16 Systematic removal of the divinity of Jesus Christ KJV-wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord NIV----and wash away thy sins, calling on his name. RSV---wash your sins away, calling on his name. In the new RSV/ NIV the following is missing so its message or meaning it gave has just been wiped out: Matt 17:21 Matt 18:11 Matt 23:14 Mark 7:16 Mark 9:44 Mark 9:46 Mark 11:26 Mark 15:28 Luke 17:36 Luke 23:17 John 5:4 Acts 8:37 Acts 15:34 Acts 28:29 Romans 16:24 Also, look at Rev 1:11, which I have always memorized as: "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end." That phrase is also missing from the NRSV.
|
|
|
Re: Why the King James Version is Superior...
[Re: Rick H]
#137578
11/18/11 10:19 PM
11/18/11 10:19 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,222
Florida, USA
|
|
The King James version is based on the Textus Receptus (the vast majority of copies from original,) and has been attacked with changes, amendments, deletions, and to diminish Gods truth but yet it still stands. I will go into who made corrupted manuscripts and then who put the changed and edited manuscripts into the modern versions we see today.
But first lets go back into history to understand how we got the King James Version (KJV) and then go into whats going on with a few of the modern translations in use today. Let us first consider certain Greek texts from which all New Testament translations are derived. Foremost amongst these is the Traditional Received Text (Textus Receptus), also called the Byzantine Text or the Majority Text because it is based on the vast majority of manuscripts still in existence. These extant manuscripts (MSS) were brought together by various editors such as Lucian (AD 250-312), Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza and the Elzevir brothers to form the text known as Textus Receptus, the name given to the Majority Text in the 17th century. The most notable editor of all was Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536) one of the greatest scholars the world has ever known. When the early Protestant Reformers of the 16th and 17th centuries decided to translate the scriptures directly from Greek into the languages of Europe, they selected Textus Receptus as their foundation Greek document. It is vitally important to understand why they did so.
Wilkinson writes in his book Truth Triumphant: Quote: "The Protestant denominations are built upon that manuscript of the Greek New Testament sometimes called Textus Receptus, or the Received Text. It is that Greek New Testament from which the writings of the apostles in Greek have been translated into English, German, Dutch and other languages. During the dark ages the Received Text was practically unknown outside the Greek Church. It was restored to Christendom by the labours of that great scholar Erasmus.
|
|
|
Re: Why the King James Version is Superior...
[Re: Rick H]
#137579
11/18/11 10:21 PM
11/18/11 10:21 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,222
Florida, USA
|
|
In his Which Bible? David Otis Fuller says this about Textus Receptus, Quote: "First of all, the Textus Receptus was the Bible of early Eastern Christianity. Later it was adopted as the official text of the Greek Catholic Church. There were local reasons which contributed to this result. But, probably, far greater reasons will be found in the fact that the Received Text had authority enough to become, either in itself or by its translation, the Bible of the great Syrian Church; of the Waldensian Church of northern Italy; of the Gallic Church in southern France; and of the Celtic Church in Scotland and Ireland; as well as the official Bible of the Greek Catholic Church. All these churches, some earlier, some later, were in opposition to the Church of Rome and at a time when the Received Text and these Bibles of the Constantine type were rivals. They, as represented in their descendants, are rivals to this day. The Church of Rome built on the Eusebio-Origen type of Bible; these others built on the Received Text. Therefore, because they themselves believed that the Received Text was the true apostolic Bible, and further, because the Church of Rome arrogated to itself the power to choose a Bible which bore the marks of systematic depravation, we have the testimony of these five churches to the authenticity and the apostolicity of the Received Text."
|
|
|
Re: Why the King James Version is Superior...
[Re: Rick H]
#137580
11/18/11 10:22 PM
11/18/11 10:22 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,222
Florida, USA
|
|
Why did the early churches of the 2 nd and 3rd centuries and all the Protestant Reformers of the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries choose Textus Receptus in preference to the Minority Text?
The answer is because: · Textus Receptus is based on the vast majority (90%) of the 5000+ Greek manuscripts in existence. That is why it is also called the Majority Text. · Textus Receptus is not mutilated with deletions, additions and amendments, as is the Minority Text. · Textus Receptus agrees with the earliest versions of the Bible: Peshitta (AD150) Old Latin Vulgate (AD157), the Italic Bible (AD157) etc. These Bibles were produced some 200 years before the minority Egyptian codices favoured by the Roman Church. Remember this vital point. · Textus Receptus agrees wih the vast majority of the 86,000+ citations from scripture by the early church fathers. · Textus Receptus is untainted with Egyptian philosophy and unbelief. · Textus Receptus strongly upholds the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith: the creation account in Genesis, the divinity of Jesus Christ, the virgin birth, the Saviour's miracles, his bodily resurrection, his literal return and the cleansing power of his blood! · Textus Receptus was - and still is - the enemy of the Roman Church
|
|
|
Re: Why the King James Version is Superior...
[Re: Rick H]
#137590
11/19/11 03:38 PM
11/19/11 03:38 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,222
Florida, USA
|
|
The Majority Text has been known throughout history by several names. It has been known as the Byzantine text, the Imperial Text, the Traditional Text and the Reformation Text as well as the Majority Text. This text culminates in the TEXTUS RECEPTUS or Received Text which is the basis for the King James Bible, which we know also as the Authorized Version. The Majority text, upon which the King James Version is based, has in reality the strongest claim possible to be regarded as an authentic representation of the original text.
So were did these corrupted versions come about. Well right as the Millerite movement and Adventist church was coming to be, curriously, two previously unknown or unrecognized manuscripts appeared. These were called Vaticanus & Sinaiticus since they were somehow 'found' in the Vatican Library & a monastery in the Sinai respectively. Neither was in the original Greek language, but in a Coptic translation, an early Egyptian language. Coptic placed the origin of these two texts in the region of Alexandria, Egypt the center of the gnosticism heresy. Hence they became known collectively as the Alexandrian Codices.
The Gnostic heresy was a Greek line of thought which came to be known as Gnosticism. We find it specially in the background of the Pastoral Epistles, the Letter to the Colossians and the Fourth Gospel. This Gnostic line of thought had certain characteristics which appear all through the Pastoral Epistles as the characteristics of those whose heresies were threatening the Church and the purity of the faith. It had serious moral and ethical consequences. Its basic belief was that matter was essentially evil and spirit alone was good. That issued in two opposite results.
If matter is evil, the body is evil; and the body must be despised and held down. Therefore Gnosticism could and did issue in a rigid asceticism. The Gnostic looked on creation as an evil thing, the work of an evil god; the Christian looks on creation as a noble thing, the gift of a good God. The Christian lives in a world where all things are pure; the Gnostic lived in a world where all things were defiled.(Titus 1:15)
But Gnosticism could issue in precisely the opposite ethical belief. If the body is evil, it does not matter what a man does with it. Therefore, let him sate his appetites. These things are of no importance, therefore a man can use his body in the most licentious way and it makes no difference. So the Pastorals speak of those who lead away weak women until they are laden with sin and the victims of all kinds of lusts.(2 Timothy 3:6) Such men profess to know God, but they deny him by their deeds.(Titus 1:16) They used their religious beliefs as an excuse for immorality.
|
|
|
Re: Why the King James Version is Superior...
[Re: Rick H]
#137591
11/19/11 03:42 PM
11/19/11 03:42 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,222
Florida, USA
|
|
Westcott & Hort undertook the translation of these Coptic copies back into their original Greek language and differences began to suddenly appear. Gone was the resurrection story in the book of Mark (the last twelve verses of the KJV). Gone was Acts 8:37 where the Ethiopian eunuch confesses Jesus as the Son of God along with many other passages. All the modern translations which were written during this time are based on the Westcott & Hort Coptic Greek text including the American Standard Version (ASV), the New International Version (NIV), the New World Translation (NWT) & even the New KJV (NKJV) But since the Alexandrian Codices were considered older than any document in the Textus Receptus, it was believed that these verses did not exist in the original manuscripts that the apostles wrote & were added by eager scribes & priests sometime between the 3rd century & the 5th. This was the prevailing theory for many years.
However, since Westcott & Hort's version, some reavealing scholarship & textual discoveries have taken place anthere now exist over 24,000 fragments & complete texts of the New Testament, many dating to even earlier than the Alexandrian Codices. There is even fragments of the Gospel of Matthew dating to AD 50 a mere twenty or so years after the crucifixion of Christ. From this assemblage of 24,000 documents, scholars have constructed what is now called The Majority Text, with each book, passage & quote rated with a percentage of how many of the 24,000 agree with each reading. By & large, with 90%+ certainty, the Textus Receptus & therefore the KJV has been vindicated as the more authoritative text.
(You can look for Acts 8:37 in most of these 'Modern' Bibles based on the Westcott & Hort Coptic Greek text & you will see that it skips directly from 8:36 to 8:38 without the proclamation of the deity of Christ by the Ethiopian.)
|
|
|
Re: Why the King James Version is Superior...
[Re: Rick H]
#137592
11/19/11 03:46 PM
11/19/11 03:46 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,222
Florida, USA
|
|
Gnosticism tried to blend the new religion but ultimately was against traditional Christian beliefs and attempted to combine Paganism with Christianity. Some Gnostic groups had beliefs that often contradicted the beliefs of other Gnostic groups. The one thing thay all had in common was that all of these groups departed from the orthodox Christian faith, but the Gnostic mixed their beliefs into the manuscripts they made of the scriptures, putting changes of their particular beliefs or taking out what disagreed with it.
The Alexandrian Codices that Westcott & Hort's version used, the Vaticanis & the Sinaiticus reflect this and are unique in their reading in toto. In fact many, if not all of the passages altered or missing from these codices were in fact quoted by the early church fathers as far back as the late 1st century. For instance, if one reads Irenaeus' Against Heresies 3.10.5-6, he states, "Furthermore, near the end of his Gospel, Mark says:'thus, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God.'" quoting Mark 16:19. Irenaeus wrote this in AD180, some 200 years before the Alexandrian Codices, yet he quotes word for word all the verses from the missing part of Mark which were supposedly not to have been added until the 4th or 5th centuries.
|
|
|
Re: Why the King James Version is Superior...
[Re: Rick H]
#137593
11/19/11 03:47 PM
11/19/11 03:47 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,222
Florida, USA
|
|
With the discovery of a Gnostic Library called the Nag Hammadi, it became clear that the sect known as the "Gnostics" did not believe in the deity of Jesus Christ. Nor did they really believe in His humanity either. They believed He was a "guiding spirit" sent to earth by the "True God" (not the YHWH of the Old Testament, incidently, whom they considered to be a blind, insane angel who created the material world against Sophia's or "Wisdom" i.e. the True God's will). Jesus' mission according to the Gnostics, was to impart special knowledge or "Gnosis" to spirits trapped in this material world seeking release. Thus, Jesus never died on the cross, was never resurrected, was not God, nor was He human. Mysteriously, but rather conveniently, all the altered or missing texts in the Alexandrian Codices always happen to involve one or a combination of these subjects.
|
|
|
Re: Why the King James Version is Superior...
[Re: Rick H]
#137594
11/19/11 03:49 PM
11/19/11 03:49 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,222
Florida, USA
|
|
Now, the pieces fall into place. All these "missing" verses were in the original texts written by the apostles. The older manuscripts & the many quotes from the 1st and 2nd century church fathers more than confirm that as fact. However, since these verses did not agree with the theology being taught by the Gnostics, when they made their own Coptic copies of the Greek originals, they conveniently altered or deleted them to suit their own ideas of what God should say. Westcott & Hort picked up on these corrupted Coptic texts as they were caught up in the veiws prevalant from darwinism & secular humanist questioning of the validity of orthodox Christianity, if just a few verse could be altered or brought into question, it would serve their purpose. These corrupted Coptic texts easily appealed to Westcott & Hort's own sensibilities (as testified to by their surviving correspondence with each other). They in my opinion from the letters they exchanged, knowingly made a Greek translation of what was a changed or heavily edited & thus corrupted Coptic translation of a Greek original.
So check your version and if is not the King James, look and see what you may be missing, and now you know why and how..
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|