Where has this gotten you?

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

russell55,

I appreciate the efforts you took to post your findings of definitions in your dictionary, but I disagree with your conclusion. The definition that I gave came from a common Webster's dictionary, not an Oxford English Dictionary. It would be beneficial to those who have the modern versions to have an oxford dictionary in order to understand that the word deceive has that meaning. However, does this not defeat the whole purpose and reasoning of the modern versions, that one would be able to read and understand God's word more easily? Gee, if all I had to rely upon, was my webster's dictionary, being the common folk here, and thinking my version of the Bible was to be so easy to read and understand, I would think that that passage was saying that God can be deceived. If I didn't think that and looked it up in my webster's dictionary, I would not be able to come away with a different understanding, unlike the one who might happen to have and Oxford dictionary and then take the 3 or 4 definition of it.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Well, where better to look for definitions of the King's English than an English dictionary!

But if you are honest, you will see that there are several definitions given for each word in Webster's too, and you must choose your definition by what fits in the word's context. And actually, there is NO definition of "flatter" in my Webster's that fits:

1. to praise excessively .... (Noop)
2. BEGUILE (Uh-oh! Doesn't beguile mean to deceive?)
3. to encourage or gratify....(doesn't work)
4. to portray too favorably...(can't be that one either)
5. to display to advantage...(not really what the verse is driving at)

So, which definition from Websters are you using?

Why not just admit you need to drop this argument? This one doesn't help your case in support of the KJV, because it only works if you hold to a double standard--a different criteria for judging the NAS than you use for the KJV.

 

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

russell55,

I am just a common person here, and happened to have a Webster's New World Dictionary Third College Edition. I quoted all the definitions of those two words that were available to me in this dictionary. It is the only dictionary I have, and quite frankly, the only one I need. I will quote to you something precepts stated that states the 100% absolute truth concerning this and specifically to this discusstion:


Precepts Quote:

Why do we have to dig so profusely to understand the difference between "flatter" (which is all they did, and that w/o any accomplishment) or "deceive" (which runs with an automatic understanding that one is fooled, duped, snowed over, snookered, etc., I think you should get the picture) ?

The words are not at first glance taken as equivelent in "suitability", that is what we are trying, futilally at that it seems, to show yall, but I have to echo Sister Michelle's sentiment here, as she also echoes mine, yall are going to extreme lengths to defend something so obviously contrary to the Truth of God's Word. If anything, in this case in point, the NasV complicates, rather than simplifies, that which is already pretty simple to understand, and that w/o a dictionary, to the common man.
--------------------------------------------------

Take notice ecspecially of the last 7 lines of this quote.

Thanks again Precepts!

Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

You have not spoken the truth. You have continued to speak falsehood. I pointed out the falsity of your statements and you ignored them.

I have never said I consider you evil. I said the false teaching you keep posting is evil.

Yes. Proverbs 26:5.

That is another untruth.

I am not right all the time. This is the second time you have posted this falsehood in violation of Exodus 20:16.

The inspired word is "pathah" and is translated by the KJV as entice 10 times, deceive 8 times, persuade 4 times, flatter twice, allure once, enlarge once, silly one once, and silly once.

Then the King James Version of the Bible is wrong, according to you, for the King James Version of the Bible translates "pathah" deceive 8 times.

Yes.

No, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

No, to correct your horrible error. To lift you out of the mire of false doctrine. To elevate you in the grace of God. To edify you in your understanding so that you can be delivered from the terrible cult you have been caught up in.

 

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Skanw,

Skanw quote:
I have never said I consider you evil. I said the false teaching you keep posting is evil.
--------------------------------------------------

What false teaching do I keep posting?


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Okay, simpleton's terms: If you add "tried to" to the KJV, then you need to add "tried to" to the NASV. Otherwise, are judging the NASV by a different standard than the KMV.

Divers weights, [and] divers measures, both of them [are] alike abomination to the LORD.

Out with arguments based on a double standard!

"Did flatter" IS the past tense of flatter. "Flattered" in modern English is the exact equivalent to "did flatter" in 1611 English.

Out with arguments based on a misunderstanding of verb tenses!

The KJV translation of this word is acceptable. The NASV translation of this word is acceptable. They tried to flatter God; they tried to deceive Him. Using equal standards, they both pass.

C'mon guys. This is one of the lamest arguments I've seen on here. There is NO ISSUE! And in your attempts to keep on convincing yourselves it's an issue you are making statements that are just plain not true and "beguiling" with sleight of hand--adding "tried to" to the KJV text, but not to the NASV. When you have to resort to false statements and trickery, the game's up.

You've got better arguments than this. Find them. This boat won't float.

[ February 26, 2004, 09:24 PM: Message edited by: russell55 ]

 

I'm just a common person, too. And when I see the word "flatter", what does it mean to me? It means that someone is giving someone a compliment they don't deserve. But I use my noggin when I read the verse, and I know that these guys didn't REALLY flatter God. I understand it in exactly the same way Precepts does--they TRIED TO flatter God.

But if I allow Precepts use his noggin and clarify the meaning of the verse by adding "tried to" to the KJV, then NASV readers ought to be allowed to use their noggins and add "tried to" for clarification to the NASV, too, don't you think?

Whatever standard you use for one, you need to use for the other. That's just common sense, isn't it?

 

The false teaching that the modern versions are "corrupt" and that etymologically and philologically correct words such as "deceit" are wrong and corrupt.

 

Once again you display your ignorance regarding grammar and syntax. The fact that "pathah" is an imperfect simply means the action was incomplete. They tried to deceive God but they failed and did not complete their deception. What is more important, which you seem to have missed, is that the word is a piel stem indicating a deliberate act. They deliberately were continually deceptive in their worship of God.

No, I simply point out what the inspired word of God says, that "flatter him with their mouth" is synonymous with "they lied unto him with their tongues." It is you who keeps denying what God has inspired. And it is you and your sister who keep attacking the word of God, making slanderous accusations, and bearing false witness.

The inspired word of God is not a pretext, but if God can't get you to believe His word I doubt I will be able to unshackle your mind, and free you from the dark dungeon of false teaching which you are in bondage to.

 

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Skanw,

I am sorry to see that you consider standing for the integrity of and purity of God's word as a false teaching. You are making it seem as though those who warn about this, and point these things out as though they are only focusing on small and minor issues (twisting and spinning things again), which in fact is not the truth at all. It is so much more than just the word "deceived" and the word "morning star" and the deletion of many parts of our Lord's prayer that are at the heart of this issue also. It is the OVERALL additions/omittions and changes of words (that is changing the word to alter the meaning and understanding of the true meaning intended)that is evidenced in the modern versions that is the real problem, and the real corruption.

It is also very sad that you find my statement in error that the Holy Spirit inspired men to write God's inspired word, and that those who are indwelt with the Holy Spirit of God will EXHALT THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY and not the opposite of that. I find that what I have said here is in line with what God has said, and I am at peace with God on this. Think what you want about me, I know in my heart and from God's word of truth, that His truth will prevail, and I know that I will be on the prevailing side. I shall not fear men, but God.

I will continue to pray for you Skanw, and pray the Lord continue to bless you.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Amen, Brother HomeBound -- Preach it!

Before I came here I knew the New
International Bible is God's infallible,
inerrant, inspired word of God.

Before i came here i knew that
God has two eternal words:
1. the written word of God - the Holy Bible
2. the living word of God - Messiah Iesus*

* i use the name I find in my King
James Bible.

 

Michelle: "It is also very sad that you find my statement
in error that the Holy Spirit inspired men to write God's
inspired word, and that those who are indwelt with
the Holy Spirit of God will EXHALT THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY
and not the opposite of that."

I did not find this in the posts of Skanwmatos after
you mentioned them at 12:22PM CST on page 7 and before you
said the above at 10:43 CST. I do not have time
to search more than the space between two statements
for his transgressions. Please point them out to me.
Thank you.