1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Why isn't the word "sodomite" in the NIV?

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by Kurt The Baptist, Jun 29, 2001.

  1. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Unfortunately their "sound text critical principles" were not all that sound. If you would like I would be glad to discuss Hort's "pillars" with you and examine the evidence against all 5 of them. Now that would be an interesting discussion.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    It would be profitable to lay out the arguments and the different views on them.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Just the facts. No ad hominem, name calling, bombastic arguments, just the facts. It might even catch on here on the BB! [​IMG]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    You are pushing it with this one. [​IMG]

    [ August 11, 2001: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]
     
  2. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bob walker:
    The occultic duo westcott and hort laid the basis for the NIV a tree is known by its fruits...and why do the homosexual churchs use the NIV as their primary Bible? also there are a couple of negative references to homosexuality in the NIV, but rest assured they too will be deleted like the word sodomy. every new edition of the NIV deletes more words.the traditional jewish text says sodomite and the eastern text the peshitta so quit blowing smoke. it is a corrupt text.
    it is from the same tree as the watchtower jehovah witness Bible. i will pass. I am glad I did not go to Bible school to learn to defend occultists, and their Bible.
    I will stick with the KJV. ;)
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Was this supposed to be a response to anything posted here or just an attempt to spew your own ideas. No one here is defending occultists. We are talking about the Word of God in its various translations specifically on the issue of homosexuality. Feel free to stick with the issue at hand.

    Clear evidence has been presented that the NIV is not soft on homosexuality. You have not addressed that. Since that is the topic of this thread, either address or lay off. Skip the occult stuff.

    BTW, I notice you have mentioned G.A (God and) Riplinger a few times. Take a look at this link: New Age Bible Versions: Review Article. It will save you from a lot of embarrasment in defending her.
     
  3. Rockfort

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    659
    Likes Received:
    0
    &lt; are any of the KJV translators in Hell? I can almost hear Jesus saying to them
    "enter thou faithful servent, into the joy of the LORD". &gt;

    If that is true, Boob, are you a member of their church? Do you practice infant christening and believe in purgatory, as they did? There is preponderant evidence they believed in transsubstantiaion of the elements of communion, and failing to take them was a damnable offense.

    If you are of their thinking, you will join them no matter where they are. Thankfully, I don't where they are. But it is plain scripturally that the vast majority of people anywhere of any time are damned, no matter who likes that word (which is likely to get these last 2 posts erased) or not.

    Nevertheless, you idea of Jesus saying to them "enter thou faithful servent, into the joy..." is a pile of crud. They were just the type of snobs who dressed in fine clothing and wanted the 'important' seats that James warned about (James 2:1-6).

    [ August 11, 2001: Message edited by: Rockfort ]
     
  4. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bob walker:
    Dr. Bob I would like to answer that last question? are any of the KJV translators in Hell? I can almost hear Jesus saying to them
    "enter thou faithful servent, into the joy of the LORD". I will not waste any of my time looking for westcott and hort. I will look for G.Riplinger and a few others.

    :D :D :D
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Riplinger claimed to have gotten some direct inspiration for her book. This book has several known "untruths" in it. It also attacks godly people...perhaps the voice you can "almost hear" comes from Riplinger's source.

    I would also ask you to consider that Archbishops Bancroft and Andrewes (who led the KJV translators) persecuted people who believed as we do, calling them heretics. They also held theology which was closer to the Roman Catholics than to Baptists.

    If corrupt theology necessarily leads to corrupt scholarship then you have some problems. Erasmus was a Catholic, who sought approval for his work from the pope, and corrected his work based on the criticisms of the RCC. In fact, the "Christian" world was dominated by the RCC and Gr. Orth. churches while most of the Byzantine type mss. were being copied. So, I suppose you would want a Bible which favors textual evidence from prior to the catholic domination and translated into English by evangelical scholars... Fortunately, one is a available, the NASB.

    Back to the topic at hand: where is your response to my earlier post? Where is your proof that homosexual churches use the NIV? How do you explain away the fact that some homosexual churches use the KJV? The one I know of uses the KJV. They aren't just compromised on homosexuality like so many churches of our day. They are avowed, out-of-the-closet, in your face homosexuals. Go figure. Maybe they are King James fans for their own reasons...maybe they believe the KJV is easier to distort on the issue.

    BTW, the KJV was the official Bible of the JW's. They then went to the ASV. Being satisfied with NEITHER, they created their own which can rightly be called a perversion.
     
  5. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Ad hominem attacks try to infer that the truth or untruth of a publication rests upon the character of the individual.

    Rather than attack the issues we substitute the individual.

    I have no idea if ANY of the AV1611 translators are in heaven. They were all baby-baptizing, Anglicans whose doctrine and erroneous views of grace we loudly condemn in our Baptist pulpits. I am a skeptic about heaven for folks like that. I try to WIN people to the Lord who believe like they did!

    I have no idea if Wescott or Hort or Ruckman or Riplinger were demon possessed to come up with some of the garbage they have come up with. Whether Mariolatry or KJVolatry, it is still idol worship.

    OK. We cannot know. We cannot judge. But we can look at the empirical evidence of the versions, texts, books, etc and we can debate the issues at hand. [​IMG]
     
  6. Chet

    Chet New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2001
    Messages:
    496
    Likes Received:
    0
    bob walker,

    Pastor Larry pointed out in one of his post the following:

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Did you know ...

    ... that the NIV uses the term "Homosexual" more than the KJV does? (1 to 0). The NIV even says that these homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God.

    ... that the term "sodomite" in contemporary usage does not mean homosexual activity per se. There is much homosexual activity that does not fall under the definition of "sodomite"? I would quote it here but it might be inappropriate considering the forum.

    ... that churches that adamantly condemn homosexuality as sinful before God use the NIV?

    ... that the NIV has the following verses:

    Leviticus 18:22 "'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.
    Leviticus 20:13 "'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. Romans 1:26-27 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.1 Cor 6:9-10 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Now I have been watching this thread, and others, you have not answered to this. You did say: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>there are a couple of negative references to homosexuality in the NIV, but rest assured they too will be deleted like the word sodomy. every new edition of the NIV deletes more words.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Is this the response? This is no answer. And are you giving us prophecy that the NIV will delete these in the future?

    Thanks,

    Chet
     
  7. Jude

    Jude <img src=/scott3.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2001
    Messages:
    2,680
    Likes Received:
    0
    I find the accusations that the NIV is of the devil to be quite ridiculous. Millions are in bondage to the devil. Thousands upon thousands die every die without salvation and hope. Thousands upon thousands are in bitter poverty and suffer deeply. I wonder what the Lord would say to those who spend so much energy degrading a Bible version translated by Godly folk, all-the-while the world is going to hell. The Devil isn't behind the NIV. But he sure as heck is behind much of this passionate talk. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
     
  8. Jude

    Jude <img src=/scott3.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2001
    Messages:
    2,680
    Likes Received:
    0
    That should be "die every DAY". Sorry. One more thing. A recent Gallup Poll stated that there was little lifestyle difference between evangelical Christians and the secular people of America. Perhaps we would see a glorious wave of revival in this country if those in the CHURCH would spend more time and energy seeking the Lord's grace to become HOLY PEOPLE and sharing HIS GOSPEL and less time degrading the NIV/NLT/NRSV etc.,etc. :eek:
     
  9. BarbiSaved

    BarbiSaved Guest

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Terry Burnett:


    This is where you KJVO guys just don't get it. :rolleyes:

    NO words have been "removed" from the "Old Testament", and no words have been "changed". That is nothing but deceptive propaganda.

    First of all, the modern versions are NOT alternate versions of the King James! They are scholarly translations of Hebrew & Greek manuscripts into the English language -- just like the KJV was when it was first translated. With the possible exception of the NKJV, KJ21 and a few others, the KJV never was an integral part of their translation process. :eek:

    Secondly, the translators of the KJV never intended for their work to be a standard by which all later versions are to be compared. The phrase "Authorized Version" merely means that King James authorized its publication for the people of England. Period.

    To say that words have been changed or removed from the KJV is utter nonsense, and it only reveals ignorance on the part of he people who intentionally broadcast such myths. :rolleyes:

    I'm no defender of the NIV, but to suggest that all modern versions are corruptions of the King James "Bible" is a lie that needs to stop.

    &lt;end of tirade&gt; [​IMG]

    TLB
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
    The REAL problem today is that NO one wants a Final Authority. The King James Bible is The Final Authority. The Word of God that has changed lives and started sweeping revivals. The King James is the most HATED or LOVED book of all time. Jesus said, Man shall not live by bread alone BUT by EVERY Word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. The NIV leaves out "Every Word". Hmmmm! Wonder why...cause it is NOT the Word of God. &gt;&gt;&gt;Things that are different are NOT the same&lt;&lt;&lt;
     
  10. Wayne Rossi

    Wayne Rossi New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2001
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Jesus said, Man shall not live by bread alone BUT by EVERY Word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. The NIV leaves out "Every Word". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    That is not true, actually. Compare KJV Luke 4:4 to NIV Luke 4:4.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Luke 4:4 KJV:
    And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Luke 4:4 NIV:
    Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone.'" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    You might say that "every word of God" has been taken out, but you would be mistaken. Let us look in Matthew 4:4 now:

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Matthew 4:4 KJV:
    But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Matthew 4:4 NIV:
    Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.'" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Now, the important thing is that the fuller quote of Deuteronomy 8:3 does exist in all of the MVs. If we were to assume a conspiracy to "remove words" from the Bible, then Matthew 4:4 would logically have to lack the second part of what our Lord said as well as Luke 4:4. However, it is there. The more realistic possibility is that in copying, one of the Syncoptic Gospels was "corrected" with another, intentionally or accidentally (picture a scribe who knows these lines by heart, and seeing the first half of the quotation finishes it without really reading). This is believed to be a very real occurrence, and when the diversity of manuscripts don't testify to it, we can chalk it up to a scribal error. (It's funny, but these scribal errors never seem to get anything of importance, or that is not duplicated elsewhere...)

    As to the issue of final authority, my friend, final authority is in the words of God and not in any translation. It's funny...no matter how many different manuscripts you appeal to, the translated product will look 98% the same and will have 100% the same message. God's words are powerful, my friend, and we need not underestimate them by chaining them to one language or set of manuscripts. We must simply do what we do in faith, and God will provide the accuracy and correctness.

    -Wayne
     
  11. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BarbiSaved:

    The REAL problem today is that NO one wants a Final Authority.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


    Really?...I know a group of people, primarily Baptist, who want one so badly that they will go to virtually any lengths to demonstrate that a 400 year old Anglican translation is just that...
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The King James Bible is The Final Authority.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ...and your proof is? History? Scripture? ...or maybe just your feelings?
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The Word of God that has changed lives and started sweeping revivals.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Really...I would actually give credit to the Holy Spirit. In addition, the greatest growth of the church was probably within the first 2 or 3 hundred years following the ascension. And not only was this prior to the KJV, it was probably prior to the first collation of the complete NT. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The King James is the most HATED or LOVED book of all time.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I guess you can cite some objective source for this conclusion?

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Jesus said, Man shall not live by bread alone BUT by EVERY Word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, you have a little problem don't you? The English language did not even exist when God stopped speaking directly to man. The inspired words of God were recorded in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. Therefore, by your own definition you do not have the Word of God...things that are different are not the same and English is certainly different from the biblical languages.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The NIV leaves out "Every Word". Hmmmm! Wonder why...cause it is NOT the Word of God. &gt;&gt;&gt;Things that are different are NOT the same&lt;&lt;&lt;<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Really? I just read Matthew 4:4 in the NIV, NASB, KJ21, NKJV, & NLT and the words are there.

    The basic problem with what you write is that you don't seem to understand the difference between the words of God which were given by inspiration to the writers of scripture and the Word of God which is the substance of what God chose to reveal directly to mankind. I am not a fan of the NIV myself however all versions of the Bible which accurately convey the character and the will of God as recorded in the originals can rightly be called the Word of God.

    [ August 23, 2001: Message edited by: Scott J ]
     
  12. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The King James Bible is The Final Authority. ... &gt;&gt;&gt;Things that are different are NOT the same&lt;&lt;&lt;<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Assuming for the sake of argument that both of these statements are true, which KJV will you choose as the final authority? The original or one of the many revisions that contain clear "different things." The Cambridge or the Oxford? After all, only one can be the Word of God. Which one do you choose?
     
  13. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    &gt;&gt;The King James is the most HATED or LOVED book of all time.&gt;&gt;

    Just to be clear about one issue and dispel a KJVO myth...

    Many Christians who believe that the KJV has some translational flaws, love the Book in spite of what they know to be true.

    just for a test...

    How many Christians here at the BB Forum who use MVs hate the KJV?

    HankD
     
Loading...