- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi Everyone,
Why are the traditions of men accepted as God's word?
FALSELY believing that one version is as good as the next?God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgFor example…
The Bible calls itself “The Word” of God. (Psalm 68:11)
Jesus said (in essence) “The word” is spirit. (John 6:63)But what does the tradition of men say?
…there is more then one “The Word”. …surely this is pure foolishness.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Ed J @ Aug. 13 2012,16:10) For example… The Bible calls itself “The Word” of God. (Psalm 68:11)
Jesus said (in essence) “The word” is spirit. (John 6:63)But what does the tradition of men say?
…there is more then one “The Word”. …surely this is pure foolishness.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
“We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us;
he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we
the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.” (1 John 4:6)Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 13 2012,16:14) Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 13 2012,16:10) For example… The Bible calls itself “The Word” of God. (Psalm 68:11)
Jesus said (in essence) “The word” is spirit. (John 6:63)But what does the tradition of men say?
…there is more then one “The Word”. …surely this is pure foolishness.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
“We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us;
he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we
the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.” (1 John 4:6)
EdJ.Do you really believe that the bible is the word of God?
wakeup.
Hi Wakeup, (Link to thread)
I have written a free e-book (Holy City Bible Code) that documents the “Proof of God”.
Part of that proof – is that – proof of God's existence was encoded into the “AKJV Bible”.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Ed J @ Aug. 14 2012,10:10) Hi Wakeup, (Link to thread) I have written a free e-book (Holy City Bible Code) that documents the “Proof of God”.
Part of that proof – is that – proof of God's existence was encoded into the “AKJV Bible”.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
EDJ.What about putting numbers on the other translations,like greek,french,indian,chinese,japanese,arabic,korean,african,
dutch,german,swahili,pakistany.
have they got a chance in knowing the numbers,in their own language?wakeup.
1 John 5:7
7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
Footnote from the NIV of this verse:
Late manuscripts of the Vulgate: ……testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And there are three that testify on earth: the……. (These words are not found in any Greek manuscript before the fourteenth century.)Ed, why is this doctored KJV version of 1 John 5:7 accepted as God's truth when these extra words aren't found in any Greek ms before the 14th century?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2012,12:09) 1 John 5:7
7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
Footnote from the NIV of this verse:
Late manuscripts of the Vulgate: ……testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And there are three that testify on earth: the……. (These words are not found in any Greek manuscript before the fourteenth century.)Ed, why is this doctored KJV version of 1 John 5:7 accepted as God's truth when these extra words aren't found in any Greek ms before the 14th century?
Hi Mike, (learn the “facts”)In 1550 Robert Stephanus scribed the “Textus Receptus”.
He made a master Greek copy of all the sacred texts being passed around.
The “Textus Receptus” is also called the “Majority Text” for that very reason.The Johannine Comma was in the majority of the texts that Robert Stephanus had.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgJohannine Comma
The Johannine comma, as it is called, is a sequence of extra words in 1 John 5:7-8 which appear in some early printed Greek texts (notably those of Erasmus), later versions of the Latin Vulgate, and in the King James Version of the Bible. See these words below in italics in the KJV and the same verse from the newer ESV.
“For there are three that bear record (witness) in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” -1 John 5:7-8, KJV
“For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.” -1 John 5:7-8, ESV
Pre-16th century Greek manuscripts and translations
“These extra words are generally absent from the Greek manuscripts. In fact, they only appear in the text of four late medieval manuscripts. They seem to have originated as a marginal note added to certain Latin manuscripts during the middle ages, which was eventually incorporated into the text of most of the later Vulgate manuscripts.” ^1
“The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate. Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript.” ^2
(Link)
Every person to date I have met who believes that the KJV is the only true translation (or is the exclusive Word), is unbalanced in some way.
This has been my experience to date. e.g., a person who tried to convince me the KJV was the only true translation ran this cult in the South Island of New Zealand. He is in prison today for sexual misconduct. I have met others with this belief and some came from groups that believed they were the only true Church or true disciples. Ed you believe the KJV thing and numbers seem more important to you than the meaning of verses.
While we should be careful about what we write and teach, you seem to spend endless hours trying to make your text look like a shape or some kind of matrix code. I don't think anyone is impressed by this. It is as if you are trying to give the impression that the Spirit dictates to you the truth which contains English gematria as a result. I mean who is really going to fall for that.
Why not spend the time you use to simple make shapes and adding up numbers by instead searching out the meaning of scriptures and mining for pearls of wisdom. Would that not be a much more wiser and rewarding thing to do? You could even bless others if you had that attitude. And others might read more of your posts too. A win win, surely.
And the KJV is in truth a not so reliable text. It comes not from the oldest texts and today we have much older texts to translate from, multiple texts to make comparisons, and the Dead Sea Scrolls too. In addition, today's English is not 100% compatible with King James English. Many of these old words are not used today, have changed meanings today, and in some cases even say the opposite as to how we understand. In short not the sharpest translation on the block.
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 14 2012,23:15) the KJV is in truth a not so reliable text.
Hi T8,The “AKJV Bible” is the most accurate “English Version” of the bible that we have – do you believe differently?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgDo you really have to ask if he “believes differently”, Ed? Did you actually read his post?
As for the translation information you posted, it seems to agree that these words were marginal notes made by some scribe, and were not a part of any original text. Therefore, those extra words were not written by John, and are not part of the scriptures.
I understand why the KJV has them – it is because the KJV was translated from late mss, some of which apparently had those marginal notes. (Remember that info I posted before that said the KJV “back-translated” what was missing in their mss from the Latin Vulgate? Well, the info you just posted says the later Vulgate translations have these added words as well.)
However it happened, it is clear that the KJV translators mistakenly added what was a marginal note into the translation as if it was bona fide scripture. That was a mistake they made, Ed. They were only flawed men doing the best they could with what they had to work with at the time.
The bottom line is that the KJV contains flaws just like any other English Bible. It is not some magical, 100% infallible Bible – like you and certain others seem to believe. It is simply one of thousands of English translations, and it has flaws just like those other ones.
peace,
mikeQuote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2012,12:09) 1 John 5:7
7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
Footnote from the NIV of this verse:
Late manuscripts of the Vulgate: ……testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And there are three that testify on earth: the……. (These words are not found in any Greek manuscript before the fourteenth century.)Ed, why is this doctored KJV version of 1 John 5:7 accepted as God's truth when these extra words aren't found in any Greek ms before the 14th century?
Hi MikeFootnotes should not be written in bibles. Men are adding their interpretations here. Should be a big no no.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2012,07:09) 1 John 5:7
7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
Footnote from the NIV of this verse:
Late manuscripts of the Vulgate: ……testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And there are three that testify on earth: the……. (These words are not found in any Greek manuscript before the fourteenth century.)Ed, why is this doctored KJV version of 1 John 5:7 accepted as God's truth when these extra words aren't found in any Greek ms before the 14th century?
Mike,The Vulgate is Latin, not Greek. I believe the Latin was translated to Greek; and then that Greek was translated to English.
It does not care as certain people want to believe King James is a prophet of God; therefore that which is authorized by him is authorized by God; and that which does not is not from God.
According to their reasoning anything that disagrees with the KJV or they think does is flawed.
I do not hold King James, head of the Anglican sect of his time, as a man that was carried along by the Spirit.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 15 2012,10:48) Do you really have to ask if he “believes differently”, Ed? Did you actually read his post? As for the translation information you posted, it seems to agree that these words were marginal notes made by some scribe, and were not a part of any original text. Therefore, those extra words were not written by John, and are not part of the scriptures.
I understand why the KJV has them – it is because the KJV was translated from late mss, some of which apparently had those marginal notes. (Remember that info I posted before that said the KJV “back-translated” what was missing in their mss from the Latin Vulgate? Well, the info you just posted says the later Vulgate translations have these added words as well.)
However it happened, it is clear that the KJV translators mistakenly added what was a marginal note into the translation as if it was bona fide scripture. That was a mistake they made, Ed. They were only flawed men doing the best they could with what they had to work with at the time.
The bottom line is that the KJV contains flaws just like any other English Bible. It is not some magical, 100% infallible Bible – like you and certain others seem to believe. It is simply one of thousands of English translations, and it has flaws just like those other ones.
peace,
mike
Hi Mike,It is obvious that you do not read my posts to make such statements.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (journey42 @ Aug. 14 2012,19:07) Hi Mike Footnotes should not be written in bibles. Men are adding their interpretations here. Should be a big no no.
That's too rich, journey!
I've just explained that it is a FACT that those added words in the KJV are not in ANY mss before the 14th century. I've explained that those added words have been proven to be a MARGINAL NOTE that some 14th century scribe wrote beside the text, and that those words were either purposely or mistakenly written in as part of the actual scripture.
These are proven facts, journey. So I thought is was quite funny that you would scold ME about a footnote explaining these facts about a MARGINAL NOTE that the KJV has added to the scriptures.
If the NIV footnote, which could never be mistaken to be a part of the scriptures, is a “no no”, then surely adding the footnote of a 14th century scribe INTO the verse, as if it WERE a part of the scripture, is also “no no”, don't you think?
Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 15 2012,01:52) Hi Mike, It is obvious that you do not read my posts to make such statements.
Please explain, Ed.Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 14 2012,23:08) Mike, The Vulgate is Latin, not Greek.
Yes Kerwin. This is what I just posted to Ed about 3 posts above yours:(Remember that info I posted before that said the KJV “back-translated” what was missing in their mss from the Latin Vulgate? Well, the info you just posted says the later Vulgate translations have these added words as well.)
Did I mistakenly say “Greek Vulgate” in one of my posts?
Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 14 2012,23:08) …….certain people want to believe King James is a prophet of God; therefore that which is authorized by him is authorized by God; and that which does not is not from God. According to their reasoning anything that disagrees with the KJV or they think does is flawed.
I had never heard that before, but it sure explains alot. Thanks for the info.Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 14 2012,23:08) I do not hold King James, head of the Anglican sect of his time, as a man that was carried along by the Spirit.
I am not in a position to comment on that, but I hold that the KJV is just one of many English translations – all of which have certain flaws when compared to the Greek and Hebrew texts.After all, a “translation” is basically an educated guess as to how certain words and ideas in one language are best conveyed to the people of a different language. And the “guess” depends on whose doing the translating.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 16 2012,11:18) Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 15 2012,01:52) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 15 2012,10:48)
It is not some magical, 100% infallible Bible – like you and certain others seem to believe.
It is simply one of thousands of English translations, and it has flaws just like those other ones.peace,
Hi Mike,It is obvious that you do not read my posts to make such statements.
Please explain, Ed.
Hi Mike,Since I agree with you that 1John 5:7 was added – YOUR statement cannot be accurate.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgEd, you just said to t8: “Hi T8,
The “AKJV Bible” is the most accurate “English Version” of the bible that we have………..”
Did you mean to add, “with the exception of the added words in 1 John 5:7, the 'easter' translation of 'passover', and the 'God' translation of 'who' in 1 Tim – among many others” ?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
