In AWE of Thy Word

In Awe, page 721: "In the recent 1995 NASB UPDATE,
the editors slyly change Matt 4:18 and 12:25, from
their previous corrupt reading 'He' -- to the
correct word 'Jesus.' Since this is
practically the only
improvement in teh NASB 1995 edition, it appears it was done so
that NASB readers would reject, at first glance,
revealing Bible versions comparison charts
(written from 1960-1995) which normally
begin in Matthew, the first book of the New Testament.

Tee, hee. Riplenger finally noticed that she is
influencing the Bible Versions. Either that or she
is paranoid?

Matthew 4:17 :: New American Standard Bible (NASB)
From that time Jesus began to preach and say, "Repent,
for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

This seems deceptive to me. 'Jesus' is mentioned in
the prior verse. 'He' obviously refers to Jesus.

 

In Awe, page 723 "Some pretend that the word 'devil'
(Gk. diabolos) refers only to Satan. ...
New versions refuse to translate the Greek word
'daimonion' into English,
transliterating it instead as 'demon' and bringing with
that Greek translaiteration (not translation)
all of the positive meaning and connotations it
carried in ancient pagan Greek Culture. ...
Devil has its own built-in definition."

Other than the 'cute' Devil, this makes
no sense. Does it really make sense to change
the Greek term 'diamonion' to the Greek term 'diabolos'
and then transliterate that into English as 'devil'?

Anyway, how many people in our Christian culture
know the pagan Greek conotations on 'daimonion' (demon)
compared to the pagan Greek conotations on
'diabolos' (devil)? And what connection does the Pagan
religions of ancient Greece have to do with the
modern New Age movement?

 

In Awe, page 729-730

John 5:3 :: New International Version (NIV)

3Here a great number of disabled people used to lie--the blind, the lame, the paralyzed.[1]

Footnotes:
[1]5:3 Some less important manuscripts paralyzed--and they
waited for the moving of the waters.
4 From time to time an angel of the Lord would
come down and stir up the waters. The first one
into the pool after each such disturbance would be
cured of whatever disease he had.

Here the verse is not found in the text of the
Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (N)
or the United Bible Societies' third edition (U).
This is an omission in the N/U sources
OR an addition in the majority text.

By not having margin notes, the KJV1769 hides
this variation in the sources. The NIV is superior
in truth here showing both sources.

Any Baptists here that have the doctrine of soul copentecy?
Tell us Baptists the truth and we will descide which is best.

Meanwhile, IN AWE ignores those versions that insert
the text, and dis those versions that do not. In fact,
I see nowhere where IN AWE ever notes anything good about
any modern version. This includes all the modern versions
using the received text only (some the KJV1879 only)
for a source for translation. Sorry, that seems deceptive
to me.

 

Netbible.com includes this footnote 9
at the end of John 5:3:

9tc The majority of later mss (C3 Q Y 078 Ë1,13 Ï) add the following to 5:3: “waiting for the moving of the water. 5:4 For an angel of the Lord went down and stirred up the water at certain times. Whoever first stepped in after the stirring of the water was healed from whatever disease which he suffered.” Other mss include only v. 3b (Ac D 33 lat) or v. 4 (A L it). Few textual scholars today would accept the authenticity of any portion of vv. 3b-4, for they are not found in the earliest and best witnesses (Ì66,75 Í B C* T pc co), they include un-Johannine vocabulary and syntax, several of the mss that include the verses mark them as spurious (with an asterisk or obelisk), and because there is a great amount of textual diversity among the witnesses that do include the verses. The present translation follows NA27 in omitting the verse number, a procedure also followed by a number of other modern translations.

Sorry, checking the superscripts on the
document titles does NOT appear here???

 

In Awe, page 9, is a table comparing
parts of Colossians 2:18 appartently
trying to show that the new versions
are totally opposite the KJV.

1. What is with the partial quotes?

KJV - things which he hath NOT seen
NIV, TNIV - what he has [noda] seen
NASB - visions he has [noda] seen


Colossians 2:18 (Netbible.com):
Let no one who delights in humility and the worship
of angels pass judgment on you. That person goes on at
great lengths about what he has supposedly seen,
but he is puffed up with empty notions by his fleshly mind.

Interesting, the presence or absence of 'not' makes
no difference. The rest of the verse gives the meaning
with or without the 'not'.

I.E. Again the author IN AWE practices a deception.

Colossians 2:18 (NIV):
Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship
of angels disqualify you for the prize. Such a person goes into
great detail about what he has seen,
and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions.

Colossians 2: 18 (Amplified Bible)
Let no one defraud you by acting as an umpire and
declaring you unworthy and disqualifying you for the prize,
insisting on self-abasement and worship of angels,
taking his stand on visions [he claims] he has seen,
vainly puffed up by his sensuous notions and inflated by his unspiritual thoughts and fleshly conceit,

Colossians 2:18 (KJV1769)
Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility
and worshipping of angels, intruding into
those things which he hath not seen,
vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

See, they all warn of the same type person
taking away your prize with their
false humility and untrue angel stories.
This should apply to women like Gail Riplinger
as well as male men.

 

Anybody interested in a discussion of
real text from a real book?
Or would folk rather argue opinions
and hunches and skip looking
at the facts?

 

Oh, I don't know. It seems
Dr. Pastor Gail Riplinger has learned how
to edit red letters right into her book.
What depth it gives to her presentations.

Too bad she is a black & whitest.
Nowhere could you find something that might
be useful like:

Match to the Blessed KJB:
nKJV - 92%
ASV - 83%
NIV - 12%

No, it is all Black and white.
The NIV that takes the NU view nearly 100%
is called an evil Modern Version.
The nKJV that hardly ever takes the NU
view is called an evil Modern Version.
Every thing is black and white;
everything but the unknown KJV is
white and all other versions are black.

 

Hey, what i said
was a metaphor and you
done gone and took it LITERAL