Which Bible should I believe?

[Wakeup]

J42.

Dont you know that they have been changing and changing
from the beginning?
You know the excuse for that?
Oh; we are learning as we go.
The fact is,beside all this righteous appearance,
they go around preaching another gospel and another Jesus.

If confronted with the question; who created Micha'el.
They will shy away from it,or make all sorts of silly arguments.

John 1. WITHOUT HIM/THE WORD; **WAS NOT ANYTHING MADE THAT WAS MADE**. MICHA'EL WAS MADE BY THE WORD.
HOW CAN HE BE THE WORD?

You see; they are preaching another Jesus.
This is not a light thing what they are doing.

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, ***let him be accursed***.

Galatians 1:9 *As we said before*, *so say I now again*, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, ***let him be accursed***.

wakeup.

[tigger2]

Quote

Journey42 wrote: Does the word Jehovah appear in the Greek text of the New Testatment? According to my research it says this; The NWT [the Watchtower-translated Bible] translates the Greek word “kyrios” as “Jehovah” more than 25 times in the New Testament (Mt 3:3, Lk 2:9, Jn 1:23, Acts 21:14, Rom 12:19, Col 1:10, 1Thess 5:2, 1Pet 1:25, Rev 4:8, etc.). Why is the word “Jehovah” translated when it does not appear in the Greek text? Why is the NWT not consistent in translating kyrios (kurion) as “Jehovah” in Rom 10:9, 1Cor 12:3, Phil 2:11, 2Thess 2:1, and Rev 22:21 (see Gr-Engl Interlinear)?  [Cut-and-paste from one of the many “we hate JWs sites”] Is this a false statement?

…………………………………

From a list of fallacious arguments (emphasis added):

“Needling:
simply attempting to make the other person angry, without trying to address the argument at hand. Sometimes this is a delaying tactic.
Needling is also Ad Hominem if you insult your opponent. You may instead insult something the other person believes in.”

“Changing The Subject (Digression, Red Herring, Misdirection, False Emphasis):
this is sometimes used to avoid having to defend a claim, or to avoid making good on a promise. In general, there is something you are not supposed to notice.”

“Failure To State:
if you make enough attacks, and ask enough questions, you may never have to actually define your own position on the topic.”
………………………………

Good Grief, Journey, stop the flapdoodle and apoplanesis and

Just answer the question: How can the KJV make the clear, definite statement that JEHOVAH [YHWH in Hebrew text] is the only personal name of God (Ps. 83:18), and yet misuse that same name around 6000 times in the rest of the OT?

[tigger2]

wakeup,

The same post above by me apparently applies to you as well. Why can't you confine your personal and organizational attacks to a new discussion instead of purposely distracting from this one?

[journey42]

tigger2,Nov. wrote:

[/quote]
…………………………………

Quote

From a list of fallacious arguments (emphasis added): “Needling: simply attempting to make the other person angry, without trying to address the argument at hand. Sometimes this is a delaying tactic. Needling is also Ad Hominem if you insult your opponent. You may instead insult something the other person believes in.” “Changing The Subject (Digression, Red Herring, Misdirection, False Emphasis): this is sometimes used to avoid having to defend a claim, or to avoid making good on a promise. In general, there is something you are not supposed to notice.” “Failure To State: if you make enough attacks, and ask enough questions, you may never have to actually define your own position on the topic.” ……………………………… Good Grief, Journey, stop the flapdoodle and apoplanesis and Just answer the question: How can the KJV make the clear, definite statement that JEHOVAH [YHWH in Hebrew text] is the only personal name of God (Ps. 83:18), and yet misuse that same name around 6000 times in the rest of the OT?

This is not an answer.  You are giving me dictionary meanings, putting me into a category.

Tigger2

I cannot answer that question you asked me, “Why did the KJV  change the name of God Jehovah 6000 times”, and substituted it with the word God, and give you a solid answer,  because so far by testing the actual scriptures themselves, I can only see a perversion of scriptures, and I am supposed to trust your source?

Do JW's have the original manuscripts in their possession?  Or do they hold on to a counterfeit?

If your source has mistranslated other scriptures in the bible, especially concerning Jesus Christ, and replaced his name with Jehovah, then it is clearly evident that you are preaching another gospel different to the one we received, changing the whole basis of doctrine to a man made doctrine.

You did not honestly answer me if the name Jehovah was in the greek texts of the NT.

And if it was then why did Jesus teach us how to pray,
Our Father?  

Luke 11:2   And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.

What you are saying is in complete opposite of what Christ is teaching.  Who do you think I will believe? And why should I trust your source?
The truth is MANIFEST in the scriptures, and must harmonise with all other scriptures.

You have been feeding on strange flesh, therefore your whole doctrine will be in error, because the source did not come from God himself, but from Satan.  Doctrines of devils.
And if you are sincere, and worshiping in truth you will question these things yourself, and ask why was the Jehovah Witness association started by a Freemason?  Charles Russell, and what was his agenda?
I'll tell you what is was, THE NEW WORLD ORDER which we will see take power over the earth, with our very own eyes in a year or so.

[journey42]

New World Translation
Luke 11:2   So he said to them: “Whenever you pray, say: ‘Father, let your name be sanctified.*

It's even in your own bible, and contradicts your argument. But it even missed out “Father, who art in heaven.”
So the Father here does not state his habitation, and there is only one Father that abides in heaven, which makes him unique from all the other fathers.

Only the truth from God can expose lies, not the internet, or scholars, but the truth in the Word, contained in the holy scriptures.

[GeneBalthrop]

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 11 2013,16:43)

Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 11 2013,11:25) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 11 2013,11:13) T, Quote this is clear that Jesus was an angel ,and came down from heaven to die for our sins ;BUT AGAIN YOU DENY CHRIST BUT THIS IS YOUR BIG MISTAKE ;REJECTING THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD ,THAT GOD JEHOVAH AS SEND FROM HEAVEN TO SAVE AS ALL, You are trying to interpret one passage to contradict another passage.  You should look for harmony in Scripture. The question is “who is man”  and it is “man” that is put that God put everything under his feet.  The man that was made a little lower that the gods is Jesus.  There is not one word about him being an angel in that passage and you still have the situation that the world to come is not subjected to angels while it is subjected to Jesus. K PLEASE BE PRECISE SHOW SCRIPTURES IN WHICH I AM WRONG OR CONTRADICT, OR INTERPRETING WITH MY PERSONAL VIEW   T, I was but I forget you are not a native English speaker. The passage I quoted literally stated the world to come is not subject to angels. Hebrews 2:5 New International Version (NIV) 5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. Jesus cannot be an angel if Hebrews 2:5 is true.  Nothing you quoted changes that fact. Hebrews 2:6-8 New International Version (NIV) 6 But there is a place where someone has testified: “What is mankind that you are mindful of them,    a son of man that you care for him? 7 You made them a little[a] lower than the angels;    you crowned them with glory and honor 8     and put everything under their feet.”[c] In putting everything under them,[d] God left nothing that is not subject to them.[e] Yet at present we do not see everything subject to them.[f] As you can see the whole passage is speaking of mankind. Hebrews 2:9 New International Version (NIV) 9 But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. Jesus is made a little lower than the angels because he is one of the human and not one of the angels. Being crowned with glory and honor does not change him from being one of the humans and make one of the angels.  If it did he would be disqualified from having the world to come subjected to him for it is not subject to angels. I hope this more modern version is easier to understand.

Kerwin……. I tried to tell them that over and over, I must have written those scripture over ten times here, they seem unable to understand it, talk about being blind as a bat. I, like you, once thought it was Pierre language disadvantage causing the problem, but I no longer believe that, it is simply this, they truly do not love truth , and God has sent into them a deluding spirit, just as 2 Ths 2, shows. IMO

They can not see, making Jesus into a GOD, is creating a False “IMAGE” of Him , this false IMAGE turns Jesus a MAN into a GOD. Creating a “MAN of SIN”, this is, The great LIE spoken of 2Ths 2.

ANYONE who truly loves the truth will be given the ability to read it and. Understand it also. this whole thing about Jesus-being a God of any kind is “FALSE” Christianity     IMO

peace and love to you and yours …………………………….gene

[tigger2]

If the KJV is true at Ps. 83:18, then it is misusing the personal name of God about 6000 times in the rest of the OT.

This can be seen in any OT interlinear.  It can be seen in Strong’s Concordance which examines the KJV and its Hebrew OT source (the Masoretic Text).  Notice how many times this noted Concordance has found the personal name of God (YHWH or YHVH in modern Hebrew) in the text used by the KJV translators:

http://biblesuite.com/hebrew/3068.htm " class="bbcode-link"> http://biblesuite.com/hebrew/3068.htm

For a more honest English translation of the Hebrew text which uses the personal name of God as found at Ps. 83:18 in the KJV try:

http://www.dnkjb.net/ " class="bbcode-link"> http://www.dnkjb.net/

Or

http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword….okorder " class="bbcode-link"> http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword….okorder

Notice the different Trinitarian-translated Bibles quoted in the following link.  Also the different Trinitarian scholars quoted in the latter part of the link.

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2010….od.html " class="bbcode-link"> http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2010….od.html

[kerwin]

Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 11 2013,21:53)

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 11 2013,16:16) Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 11 2013,11:09) Quote I THOUGHT I WAS WRITING BAD ENGLISH  BUT YOUR “KJV” IS OUT OF ITS TIME ,IF YOU WOULD SEND A LETTER TYPED IN THAT SORT OF ENGLISH TODAY , I BET YOU WOULD NEVER RECEIVE AN ANSWER     Pierre Just like if someone started talking words in Hebrew and Greek, you would get the same reaction! I do agree that the version Kerwin is using is confusing, not because of the english, but the wording. Journey42, I am using a older version than you are.  If yours is from Bible Gateway it is the 1987 printing according to Bible Gateway.  Even then it is probably an early 19th Century version and almost certainly not the one approved by King James I. I looked it up on Bible Gateway and Wikipedia. Kerwin Thanks for that.   Sorry I must of been reading Pierre's version.  I checked out my scriptures and they are the same wording as yours.

Journey,

I meant the AKJV I use is probably an early 19th Century version.

[kerwin]

Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 11 2013,21:58)

K Heb 2:16 For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. why did not Paul here in this verse says ADAM DESCENDANTS

T,

The letter is written to Hebrews.

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 12 2013,05:08)

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 10 2013,19:00) Jesus cannot be an angel as they do rule the world to come. The Greek says “MESSENGERS” do not rule the world to come.  Is Jesus a “MESSENGER”, Kerwin?

Mike,

You are playing a lawyer.

* Paul quotes the OT and changes the Hebrew word gods to messengers.  

* He already stated Jesus, a man, was made lower that these messengers and then lifted up above them.  

* He is not stating the world to come is not subject to anyone who is God's messenger as then Jesus not any other messenger of God would qualified to rule.  

* You should me able to figure out that it is speaking of these messenger gods man was created a little lower than.

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 12 2013,05:12)

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 10 2013,23:13) The man that was made a little lower than the gods is Jesus. All men were made a little lower than the gods, Kerwin.  When Jesus emptied himself and was made in the likeness of a human being, he too, for a while, was a little lower than the gods. But since then, he as been given back the glory he had alongside his God before the world began.  He has been exalted to an even higher position than the one he left, and has been given the name above all names. He is no longer “a little lower than the gods”.  In fact, he rules over those gods now.  They bow to him now because he is the one to whom God gave all authority in heaven and earth.

Mike,

It does not make that point in that passage of Hebrews, except for the part about being given authority over all things.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 12 2013,18:09)

Mike, You are playing a lawyer.

Just telling it like it is, Kerwin.

[mikeboll64]

Wakeup and journey,

I'm seeing a lot of dodging and misdirection concerning tigger's very simple and straightforward question.

journey, is your “official” answer, “I don't KNOW why the KJV altered the name of God all those times” ?

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 13 2013,06:13)

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 12 2013,18:09) Mike, You are playing a lawyer. Just telling it like it is, Kerwin.

Mike,

You are not. You are changing the meaning of a word even though you know the meaning you are choosing does not apply as it denies the world to come will be subject to Jesus. Lawyers and politicians do that kind of stuff.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (tigger2 @ Nov. 09 2013,13:35)

Thank you, Mike. I truly believe that my study proves that “a god” was intended by John at 1:1c.   I know that it is very rare that anyone carefully reads it, so I am looking forward to your take on it. T2

Hi T2,

Haven't forgot. Just been busy.

I'll look at part B as soon as I can. I hope to get back to you and perhaps even discuss the subject at length. We agree that “a god” is the correct translation of 1:1c, and I think it might be good for us to discuss it and compare notes about our research.

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 13 2013,06:15)

Wakeup and journey, I'm seeing a lot of dodging and misdirection concerning tigger's very simple and straightforward question. journey, is your “official” answer, “I don't KNOW why the KJV altered the name of God all those times” ?

Mike,

I have a good idea but I see know reason to bring of history to point up why. They can do their own research.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 12 2013,18:16)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 13 2013,06:13) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 12 2013,18:09) Mike, You are playing a lawyer. Just telling it like it is, Kerwin. Mike, You are not.  You are changing the meaning of a word even though you know the meaning you are choosing does not apply as it denies the world to come will be subject to Jesus.  Lawyers and politicians do that kind of stuff.

What I'm doing is telling you that the Greek word “aggelos”, and it's Hebrew equivalent “mal'ak” both mean “messenger”.

So if Jesus can be a “messenger” who is not included in the teaching of Hebrews 2:5, then Jesus can likewise be an “angel” who is not included in that teaching.

You won't convince any of us that Jesus is the only flesh being in the spirit realm of heaven by using Hebrews 2:5, Kerwin. Nor will you convince us that Jesus is not a “spirit messenger of God”, and therefore an “angel of God”.

[kerwin]

Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 11 2013,12:26)

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 11 2013,11:50) T, Quote Heb 2:16 For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. Heb 2:17 For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Heb 2:18 Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted. Is Jesus made angels who he does not help or like humanity who he does help. We already know Jesus was made like humanity and not like the angels.  We also know that the world to come is not subject to angels but it is subject to Jesus. K What was Jesus before he was made like his to be brothers

T,

What was Adam before he was made?

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 13 2013,06:24)

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 12 2013,18:16) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 13 2013,06:13) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 12 2013,18:09) Mike, You are playing a lawyer. Just telling it like it is, Kerwin. Mike, You are not.  You are changing the meaning of a word even though you know the meaning you are choosing does not apply as it denies the world to come will be subject to Jesus.  Lawyers and politicians do that kind of stuff. What I'm doing is telling you that the Greek word “aggelos”, and it's Hebrew equivalent “mal'ak” both mean “messenger”. So if Jesus can be a “messenger” who is not included in the teaching of Hebrews 2:5, then Jesus can likewise be an “angel” who is not included in that teaching. You won't convince any of us that Jesus is the only flesh being in the spirit realm of heaven by using Hebrews 2:5, Kerwin.  Nor will you convince us that Jesus is not a “spirit messenger of God”, and therefore an “angel of God”.

Mike,

I am not the one claiming Jesus is one of the gods humanity was made a little lower than, you are. Are you now claiming he is not one of them because they are the angels the world to come is not subject to.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 12 2013,18:22)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 13 2013,06:15) Wakeup and journey, I'm seeing a lot of dodging and misdirection concerning tigger's very simple and straightforward question. journey, is your “official” answer, “I don't KNOW why the KJV altered the name of God all those times” ? Mike, I have a good idea but I see know reason to bring of history to point up why.  They can do their own research.

This whole thing started because journey and Wakeup believe God created evil itself. I suspect that this thought goes against even their common sense, but they are hopelessly linked to one single English translation of the scriptures – as if that translation was inspired of God Himself or something. And because of this “marriage”, they must accept without question the many flaws and inaccuracies their “bride” puts forth.

I've pointed out to them that even the KJV translates the Hebrew word “ra” as “adversity” four different times, and so there's no logical or scriptural reason they couldn't have also translated it as “adversity” in Isaiah 45:7.

I've received no direct response to this valid point.

Nor has tigger received a direct response to his simple question.

I don't want to alienate journey and Wakeup, or try to make them look “bad” or anything. But what recourse is left us if we keep showing them the PROOF of the KJV flaws, and they still accept it as God's own truth?

They don't know it yet, but they are more in love with one translation than they are with the actual truth of the scriptures.

Anyway, do what you want. If you have an easy way to help them out of their dilemma, you should do so, IMO. We all end up doing research for others here on occasion, and there's no good reason to keep your research to yourself, if you ask me.

[Author]

Posts