the Error in the "Error" of saying there is an Error in Gods word
- Thread starter CS1
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
and who said that ? please proivde an example of this here .Believers? Jesus brought a sword and dividing the truth from error is a godly enterprise. Believers don’t whine about the truth being decisive. God has drawn lines before and its a good thing to know and hate what is false, but love and stand firm in the truth.
In Revelation 13, at the time of the rise of the beast with seven heads, ten horns and crowns came up out of the sea we read that John stood on the sand of that sea of mankind without national borders, and winds of opinions blowing minds every which way.
The modern bibles are like that sand, as are all the philosophical works of man.
But Jesus is the rock of our salvation and his words are life and spirit.
Take heed what words you hear and trust.
In Revelation 13, at the time of the rise of the beast with seven heads, ten horns and crowns came up out of the sea we read that John stood on the sand of that sea of mankind without national borders, and winds of opinions blowing minds every which way.
The modern bibles are like that sand, as are all the philosophical works of man.
But Jesus is the rock of our salvation and his words are life and spirit.
Take heed what words you hear and trust.
Last edited:
A
It quotes printed copies of the Bible. It even gives the sources if you would like to buy a copy and compare.
Unfortunately I dont have the money but since I am at church I could go look up various versions and tell you what their footnotes say, but would rather go home and back cookies for our kiaros mission team.
Maybe tomorrow evening.
Unfortunately I dont have the money but since I am at church I could go look up various versions and tell you what their footnotes say, but would rather go home and back cookies for our kiaros mission team.
Maybe tomorrow evening.
Last edited by a moderator:
A
Pulpit commentary
https://www.christianbook.com/pulpi...eiswHFKbphfxhDFhMMgCUrwozHKo3BGhoCrYgQAvD_BwE
I am sure if you want a Bible filled with theological errors, I was told the Scolfield Bible would fit the bill or the one the Jehovah witnesses publish.
https://www.christianbook.com/pulpi...eiswHFKbphfxhDFhMMgCUrwozHKo3BGhoCrYgQAvD_BwE
I am sure if you want a Bible filled with theological errors, I was told the Scolfield Bible would fit the bill or the one the Jehovah witnesses publish.
Numbers 3. the 3 Levite clans are 7500+8600+6200=22,000. This is rounded to the nearest thousand. The total is 22,300. The firstborn sons of Israel are counted to the nearest one (22,273). Because rounding was used for the Levites, the firstborns sons pay a fine. If rounding was not used, the Levites pay a fine. The math error because of the rounding changes the story but is prophetic of the Sadducees and Jesus, the firstborn son of God.
A
I should have been more specific. I meant to reference the NEW Scofield Bible (published in 1967 after the man by that name had already died), not the man himself. You can read a book review for your self and decide:
https://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_39.asp
https://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_39.asp
I have no problem with the Scofield reference bible. The notes are not intended to be inspired and the cross references are quite useful. It is a KJV or a NKJV with is also acceptable. Great for memorization.
Some one has been poisoning your mind with prejudice towards the works of a very devout Christian man and the group of men that labored with him.
This verse always comes to mind when folks talk down about men whom God has blessed and anointed to preach and teach the word of God.
2Ti 3:8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Some one has been poisoning your mind with prejudice towards the works of a very devout Christian man and the group of men that labored with him.
This verse always comes to mind when folks talk down about men whom God has blessed and anointed to preach and teach the word of God.
2Ti 3:8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
This is an excellent scholarly article, from a reliable source, a conservative Christian website. I highly recommend everyone read it, even if you only get to the graph comparison, which show that literally, the Byzantine text did not exist before the 4th century, that early church father’s had their texts “revised” as late as the 9th century to correspond to the Majority Text, that the TR doesn’t even agree with the Majority Text in many places, but more importantly, the textual variants make so little difference to doctrine, that the whole issue is overblown! (Oh, the footnotes in the article are also excellent - worth a read!)
As far as footnotes, the issue is NOT modern footnotes. Those are clearly marked, the bottom of the page is the preferred place, and yes, comments are often made as to the arguments in the particular quotes.
The footnotes that affect the text are in the Byzantine texts, where a scribe makes a comment in the margin. It could be short or long, but it is always extraneous to the text. And, these manuscripts actually exist, where for the first time, something was added to a particular verses, usually in the margin.
Those type of footnotes are common, and it is easy to identify they are not part of the text. The problem arose, because the next generation of scribes would then copy that margin note into the actual text. And so would the next generation, and all the sucessive notes. So, by the 9th century, there were a lot of notes which had been comments on the sides, now part of the actual texts.
A lot of these are to make a text have high Christiology. So Mark, who alwatys referred to Jesus by his name, “Jesus” has many attempts to make it say “The Lord Jesus” or “The Lord Jesus Christ.” The longer ending of Mark is rife with this mistake.
I am not an expert on textual criticism. I have read the intro to Kostenberger’s 2nd year Greek text, “Linguistic Analysis of the Greek New Testament.” Also, FF Bruce’s “The Canon of Scripture” has some information on textual criticism. Mostly, I rely on my commentaries, which are whole books on various books of the Bible. The New International Commentary on the Greek New Testament” is one of the best sources, but the series is not yet finished, so then I got to other commentaries. Textual issues are dealt with in these commentaries.
Really, the people with their KJVOnlyism are quite laughable. They know nothing of the original languages, nothing of textual criticism, have never read a real commentary, and yet, they stoutly maintain that any other Biblical translation is not pure or corrupted. I think if they even read the article Ariel posted, they would shake their heads and wonder how they could believe that the KJV was the only version. Well, I guess the revert to some kind of “only inspired text” nonsense, because from a manuscript evidence point of view, they don’t have a leg to stand on.
As for how bad the Alexandrian texts are, it was the Bishop of Alexandria, Athenasius, who first stood against the Arian heresy, brought it to a council, where it was decided that Jesus was both God and man. So, some good doctrine coming out of Alexandria, at a time when the Byzantine text didn’t even exist.
A
folks can decide for themselves via the Holy Spirit what is true. Historically dispentionalism and futurism were not part of church doctrine. Scofield introduced these doctrines in his study bible. since i consider both to be false, i see Scofield's bible as false teaching and commentary.
just as many would consider any Bible denying the Trinity or the divinity of Jesus would not be a true Bible.
The Most Famous Study Bible of Them All: The Scofield Reference Bible | Community Renewal Society
I know that many people believe Scofield teachings of endtimes as Biblical truth and I don't consider it an issue that essential to the faith (as in it will not cause someone's salvation state to change if you agree or disagree in eschtalogical theology)
the truth is the Scofield Bible still reprints the KJV of the Bible and God can still reach out and work in people's lives.
just as many would consider any Bible denying the Trinity or the divinity of Jesus would not be a true Bible.
The Most Famous Study Bible of Them All: The Scofield Reference Bible | Community Renewal Society
I know that many people believe Scofield teachings of endtimes as Biblical truth and I don't consider it an issue that essential to the faith (as in it will not cause someone's salvation state to change if you agree or disagree in eschtalogical theology)
the truth is the Scofield Bible still reprints the KJV of the Bible and God can still reach out and work in people's lives.
Last edited by a moderator:
I still think commentaries are beside the point. I've never used a Scofield but I had a Thompson Chain Reference Bible years ago. Before I had a Bible dictionary, an interlinear text and a set of Bible encyclopedias it was good. It had a terrific archaeological supplement as well. All the extras were in the back of the Bible. I don't know if Scofield's is the same but there was no mistaking that the supplements were just that. Nothing was inserted into the text. You could read the whole Bible and ignore it. (In fact I did)
