Who gave them the authority to OMIT ?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Bro. Tim L. Bynum, Feb 10, 2004.

  1. Bro. Tim L. Bynum

    Bro. Tim L. Bynum
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    0
    What is purpose of totally removing verses
    that are clearly in the original T.R., and who gave the authority to Westcott & Hort to do it ?
    And where did the authority come from for
    Zondervon to print it under the illusion that it is the complete Word of God ? [​IMG]
     
  2. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    If a verse appears in the TR, but not in the LXX, does the LXX "omit" it. or did the TR "add" it? The question could just as readily be asked "who gave them the authority to add?"
     
  3. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Real question is "Who gave the AV Anglican paedobaptizing priests permission to ADD to the Word of God?"

    Oldest and best manuscripts do not contain a number of added verses (we've discussed many such additions that came in later and were copied into the huge pile of Eastern Orthodox documents) added to help defend against certain errors or questions that arose hundreds of years later.

    You are looking at it myopically - saying the AV is the "standard" (truth) and the others changed or omitted from the truth.

    You CANNOT say that. Simply indefensible from logic or history. You CAN believe it by faith (that the AV is the only truth) but that is a personal decision you make.

    It is NOT scriptural. No where in God's Word (any Greek text) does it say the AV is the right or only translation.

    Sorry.
     
  4. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    What amazes me about one side of this ongoing argument is that they keep popping on here acting like they have some great new question that will stun all their opponents into silence!
    Most of us had heard it all before and thought it through to arrive at our positions.

    Either that or we are just so far gone that we are beyond sorting out ;) .
     
  5. Bro. Tim L. Bynum

    Bro. Tim L. Bynum
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr. Bob...that still doesn`t give anybody the authority to omit whole verses...and you know I`m telling the truth, Rev.22:18
    You Hee Hawed and skirted the issue, who gave Wescott & Hort the authority and Zondervon the
    authority to print it as the complete cannon of God`s Word . :mad: :mad: :mad:
     
  6. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yep! That's what we believe, and who can really say we are wrong to believe it? :confused: My ascertion would be; nobody in their right mind.

    Dr. Bob, your ascertion "best" is debatable. I believe best is more accurate in defending against the wiles of the devil, including apostacy. But Hey!, Isn't that what F A I T H is all about? (There's my answer again Larry) ;)


    My position exactly! To defend against ERROR!

    Ere, since we get our Bible right from these MSS containing what many refer to "additions", uh, wouldn't that make our Bible more correct in withstanding "truely" anti-christ doctrines? Yes! I do believe so!

    Hey! Anybody ever questioned me on my doctrine?

    I know BrianT and Scott Emerson Clark have tried, but they don't understand even the doctrine they proclaim, uh, well enough.

    (Here comes ol'Cranston to start that junk again/"hobby-crippled-horse" rides again!

    BTW, and just "nit-picking", nits, that is; "myopically" is correctly spelled myoptically

    Visually preferred. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My Lincoln is prettier than your Corvette, but if you want to race, I'll go get my Cobra GT. My wife is prettier than yours, at least she thinks I had better think so, and I do! ;) Ain't that right, orvie?
     
  7. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorted? Yes. Sordid? Well that's being discuused in another thread, but somehow keeps popping up in this section.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Bro. Tim L. Bynum

    Bro. Tim L. Bynum
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    0
    For sale...Vines Expository Dictionary, Strongs
    Concordance, Merriam-Websters Dictionary and
    Encyclopedias...Don`t need them any more,Liberals
    on the Baptist Board know everything !


    Boy Howdy...that`s a good joke ! [​IMG]
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  9. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Yes! I am finally called a liberal!!

    Guess I can go ahead and dance then - [​IMG]

    Hey, if I'm that far gone I'd might as well go all the way!!
     
  10. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Welcome to the club! I got called a liberal once for saying that we should invite the unchurched to church. Imagine that!! :eek:
     
  11. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Say, what's a liberal ? [​IMG]
     
  12. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    To a hyperfundamentalist or hyperconservative, a liberal is anyone who doesn't agree with them [​IMG] .
     
  13. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    I just figured I'd better figure that out since I am one now.

    And to think, I only use the KJV in my preaching [​IMG]

    Do you think Bro Tim would ask his pastor to let me come to his church on my next furlough?
     
  14. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    To have a more accurate text. The TR was not sent down from heaven by God. It was edited by Erasmus, who compared differing texts and then put in the TR what he thought should be there.

    God, by virtue of the manuscripts that He (God) preserved for us. Unlike you, we do not believe that we should reject the gift of God in his word.

     
  15. Pastor KevinR

    Pastor KevinR
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2001
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    0
    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder ;) .I can't speak for Orvie, but I gotta nice Chocolate Princess from the Caribbean. [​IMG]
     
  16. TC

    TC
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    10
    Who gave Roman Catholic scholar Erasmus authority to compile and print his own greek text? How is it that it is ok for him to change the Word of God to suit what he thought it should say and that it is ok for the KJV translators to follow Erasmus's lead and do the same thing with the already existing English Bibles, but it is horrible when anybody else does the same thing?
     
  17. Orvie

    Orvie
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who gave Roman Catholic scholar Erasmus authority to compile and print his own greek text? How is it that it is ok for him to change the Word of God to suit what he thought it should say and that it is ok for the KJV translators to follow Erasmus's lead and do the same thing with the already existing English Bibles, but it is horrible when anybody else does the same thing? </font>[/QUOTE]Does double standard ring a bell? :eek:
     
  18. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    You are not telling the truth because you are misinformed about the manuscript evidence. Unless you know something I don't.

    When is the earliest manuscript containing 1 John 5:7,8? If my studies are right the earliest manuscript containing those verses is the sixteenth century. Doesn't that seem odd that none have been found with an earler dating?

    BTW, cannon is different than canon.
     
  19. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    You had better not use the Greek or Hebrew text. That might be too much. They might not know what to do because it isn't the KJV. If you asked them any questions they might not speak because they would condemn themselves.

    I find it interesting that he has called me a liberal and others call me a fundamentalist too.
     
  20. Anti-Alexandrian

    Anti-Alexandrian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    0
    Same place Jehudi got it from..


    It happened in Gen 3 with Satan & Eve,Baalam did it in Numbers 22:12-13,Jehudi did it in Jeremiah 36,and Satan did it in Luke 4:10;now bear in mind,they all OMMITED from God's word,to think that ommision is not a factor is insanity,bordering on lunacy........
     

Share This Page

Loading...