THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD

[journeymanisnothing]

Warnings against changing the text are only found in regards to the Law and the Revelation.
You are being loosy goosy with your qualifications for scripture.
If the message is consistent then why worry about the warnings?

I'm not worried about them. I take the whole Bible seriously and wouldn't tinker with any of it.

I never said His Word changes. I say that the warnings not to tamper with Revelation only applies to Revelation.

I don't tamper with how Christ is reveaed to people, no matter where he shows himself in the Bible.

The OT and NT do NOT say the same things.
If they did there would be no need for at least one of them. Which one do you wish to do away with?

Lol...well lets see. Prophecy about Christs' coming vs. his coming? Our Lord and his disciples quoting from OT books, or the books....hmmm? I pick both.

Please use proper understanding with the text or you might find yourself on the wrong end of one of these warnings.

Here's a warning for you and not from me,

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Mt.5:17-18

 

[Paul Timothy]

I'm not worried about them. I take the whole Bible seriously and wouldn't tinker with any of it.

I don't tamper with how Christ is reveaed to people, no matter where he shows himself in the Bible.

Lol...well lets see. Prophecy about Christs' coming vs. his coming? Our Lord and his disciples quoting from OT books, or the books....hmmm? I pick both.

Here's a warning for you and not from me,

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Mt.5:17-18

I fail to see how that verse is a warning of any kind.
That is a joyous promise and in no way a warning.
But the truth remains that the passage in Revelation only applies to Revelation.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

I fail to see how that verse is a warning of any kind.
That is a joyous promise and in no way a warning.

Tell that to the very well educated religious leaders who said,

This man blasphemeth...This man is not of God...We will not have this man to reign over us...Away with him, away with him, crucify him.

But the truth remains that the passage in Revelation only applies to Revelation.

I disagree. Adding to or subtracting from applies to all God says. Muslims replaced Isaac with Ishmael concerning Abrahams' sacrifice, thereby distorting the sacrifice of Christ.

 

[Paul Timothy]

Tell that to the very well educated religious leaders who said,

This man blasphemeth...This man is not of God...We will not have this man to reign over us...Away with him, away with him, crucify him.

I didn't say that... so why bring it up?

I disagree. Adding to or subtracting from applies to all God says. Muslims replaced Isaac with Ishmael concerning Abrahams' sacrifice, thereby distorting the sacrifice of Christ.

So you disagree with the Word.
What is your Sciptural basis for your disagreeal?
We already addressed how Revelation references don't work for your argument. And how the Deut passage works against you as well.

So what new Scripture do you wish to give to back your claim this time?

 

[jeremiah1five]

Actually, it's people who think Abel was accepted without being in Christ that add to what the Bible says.

You said God is NOT a respecter of persons.
I posted Scripture in Genesis 4:4-5 which contradicts your statement.
God IS a respecter of persons according to Genesis 4:4-5.
Just admit you were in error.

 

[jeremiah1five]

The above verses only apply to Revelation and not the entire Bible.


Please don't apply a local restriction to the entire work.

So, it's OK to add or subtract words to and from the Word of God other than Revelation?
It's OK?

 

[Paul Timothy]

So, it's OK to add or subtract words to and from the Word of God other than Revelation?
It's OK?

I am saying that your proof text does not apply.
I am not saying anything about editing Scripture.

If you want to make the case that you shouldn't alter the text... use an appropriate Scripture to back your position.
Revelation 20 does not do that for you.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

I didn't say that... so why bring it up?

Because others did say it. Because when our Lord said, Don't think I'm contrary to what Moses and the prophets said...it was because he knew they would say he was.

So you disagree with the Word.

No, I believe the son of promise was offered, as the Bible says.

What is your Sciptural basis for your disagreeal?

I'm giving it to you. Are you saying unless there's a specific prohibition not to add to or subtract from any book of the Bible, God doesn't mind if people change what his word says?

We already addressed how Revelation references don't work for your argument. And how the Deut passage works against you as well.

No we haven't. Where are you getting the idea that if God didn't state, "Don't add to or subtract from any book of scripture", it's ok to do it?

So what new Scripture do you wish to give to back your claim this time?

they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 1Pet.3:16

 

[jeremiah1five]

I am saying that your proof text does not apply.
I am not saying anything about editing Scripture.

If you want to make the case that you shouldn't alter the text... use an appropriate Scripture to back your position.
Revelation 20 does not do that for you.

I am addressing about adding and subtracting and omitting ALL Scripture, which was what happen when Westcott and Hort created their Revised Version, corrupt Greek texts that are the basis of ALL modern-day new-age translations.

 

[Paul Timothy]

Because others did say it. Because when our Lord said, Don't think I'm contrary to what Moses and the prophets said...it was because he knew they would say he was.

No, I believe the son of promise was offered, as the Bible says.

I'm giving it to you. Are you saying unless there's a specific prohibition not to add to or subtract from any book of the Bible, God doesn't mind if people change what his word says?

No. I didn't say that... only that the text you use to prove your point foes not apply to your point.

No we haven't. Where are you getting the idea that if God didn't state, "Don't add to or subtract from any book of scripture", it's ok to do it?

That is not my idea at all. You are putting words in my mouth.

they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 1Pet.3:16

 

[Paul Timothy]

I am addressing about adding and subtracting and omitting ALL Scripture, which was what happen when Westcott and Hort created their Revised Version, corrupt Greek texts that are the basis of ALL modern-day new-age translations.

Oh... you are one of those.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Oh... you are one of those.

Maybe you should look into the matter.
I don't know if you're saved but having a good/best translation affects your 'walk' in Christ.
The Spirit of Truth doesn't use error and corruption to grow one of God's kids.
He must be one of those, too.

 

[Paul Timothy]

Maybe you should look into the matter.
I don't know if you're saved but having a good/best translation affects your 'walk' in Christ.
The Spirit of Truth doesn't use error and corruption to grow one of God's kids.
He must be one of those, too.

What major theological difference can you point to between which versions of the Bible?

Name the two versions, the chapter and verse in question and the theological conflict.

 

[jeremiah1five]

What major theological difference can you point to between which versions of the Bible?

Name the two versions, the chapter and verse in question and the theological conflict.

There's a reason why it's called the "Received Text."
The Church was using these texts for hundreds of years.
Then here comes Westcott and Hort and their group of scholars and they decide to use Greek texts that the Church was not using. Those texts were found at the Vatican library and in a wastebasket at a Catholic monastery at the base of Mt. Sinai. In 1881 they complete their translation and since then confusion had entered the Church to a new level.
As I said, look into it.

 

[Paul Timothy]

There's a reason why it's called the "Received Text."
The Church was using these texts for hundreds of years.
Then here comes Westcott and Hort and their group of scholars and they decide to use Greek texts that the Church was not using. Those texts were found at the Vatican library and in a wastebasket at a Catholic monastery at the base of Mt. Sinai. In 1881 they complete their translation and since then confusion had entered the Church to a new level.
As I said, look into it.

So you can not point to any theological differences between different versions of the Bible, or won't?

If you stand behind your theory you should be able to reference at least one difference that makes an impact on theology.

So again... Name 2 Bible translations, then point out a chapter and verse reference difference, then show the impact on how that changes basic theology.

If you can not do that simple thing I would say you are just spreading discord among the brethren.
But if you can point out a difference that makes a difference then you will possibly have won many over to your point of view. And this could make a huge difference in peoples view of Christ and Christianity.

 

[jeremiah1five]

So you can not point to any theological differences between different versions of the Bible, or won't?

If you stand behind your theory you should be able to reference at least one difference that makes an impact on theology.

So again... Name 2 Bible translations, then point out a chapter and verse reference difference, then show the impact on how that changes basic theology.

If you can not do that simple thing I would say you are just spreading discord among the brethren.
But if you can point out a difference that makes a difference then you will possibly have won many over to your point of view. And this could make a huge difference in peoples view of Christ and Christianity.

There are thousands of changes and additions and subtractions and omissions between the KJV and the Revision of 1881.
As I said look it up.
Or are you scared?

 

[Paul Timothy]

There are thousands of changes and additions and subtractions and omissions between the KJV and the Revision of 1881.
As I said look it up.
Or are you scared?

You are the one making the claims so therefore it is your responsibility to defend your point.
I am not the one making any claims... so the burden of proof is on you.

 

[jeremiah1five]

You are the one making the claims so therefore it is your responsibility to defend your point.
I am not the one making any claims... so the burden of proof is on you.

Not gunna do it.

 

[Paul Timothy]

Not gunna do it.

So you are backing away from your position.
Really?
Just one difference that makes a difference.
Surely you have at least one example that you base your bias on.

Just one.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

You said God is NOT a respecter of persons.
I posted Scripture in Genesis 4:4-5 which contradicts your statement.
God IS a respecter of persons according to Genesis 4:4-5.
Just admit you were in error.

The only error is when people think Abel (or any other sinner) is accepted apart from
the sacrifice he acknowledged.