Mainly the KJV but there are those who have taken to these new versions based on Hort and Westcotts changes, and we gently try to point out the issues with those versions, and once they see it, they have been getting back to the KJV. But the shaking is full on us as my wife went to her island, and she says half the island SDA churches are rocking away and doing their own thing, while the other half is following Godly principles. Our brand new church was taken over and I never knew their where such followers of the ideas of Willow Creek till I saw the results as they forced their ideas and everyone 'came as they are' and showed off their 'true selves' and our elders were thrown out and the 'rock and roll' brought in overnight. The shaking of the 'wheat and tares' is happening and the church is asleep....Hi reddogs,
I enjoy Walter Veith and his classroom style lectures very much.
Actually that's why I made a visit to this Fourm.
Does the SDA still hold the King James as their Bible of choice?
So many today have gone on to other text ,and your intense work on the historical sources for not using the Alexandria text is rare to see.
Thank You.
Mainly the KJV but there are those who have taken to these new versions based on Hort and Westcotts changes, and we gently try to point out the issues with those versions, and once they see it, they have been getting back to the KJV. But the shaking is full on us as my wife went to her island, and she says half the island SDA churches are rocking away and doing their own thing, while the other half is following Godly principles. Our brand new church was taken over and I never knew their where such followers of the ideas of Willow Creek till I saw the results as they forced their ideas and everyone 'came as they are' and showed off their 'true selves' and our elders were thrown out and the 'rock and roll' brought in overnight. The shaking of the 'wheat and tares' is happening and the church is asleep....
I have found that most of the Alexandrian type text stream are missing certain verses especially those dealing with the divinity of Christ and a key verse they omit is Acts 8:37...Only two? Really?
What about the Peshita/Syriac (in Aramaic) which was separated from the Greek text long before the separation of those 2 families; and has remained untouched by the western (catholic) church? George Lamsa made a very good English translation from the Peshita - oldest versions he could find (just as old as the most ancient Greek manuscripts) and as a native Aramaic speaker, was able to explain the idioms and word plays that are lost in the Greek texts.
So then the question becomes: Did those verses get deleted, or did they get added?I have found that most of the Alexandrian type text stream are missing certain verses especially those dealing with the divinity of Christ
I really think the question that needs to be looked at is why the Alexandrian texts affect or take out the verses relating to the divinity of Christ. That is the telling mark of Gnosticism from Alexandrian spreading like a cancer, and we are still fighting it today....So then the question becomes: Did those verses get deleted, or did they get added?
The catholic church had a bad habit of adding things from their traditions and beliefs, and writing them into scripture. The most egregious examples are references to Christ and "world without end" added to the end of several of the Psalms.
So then the question becomes: Did those verses get deleted, or did they get added?
The catholic church had a bad habit of adding things from their traditions and beliefs, and writing them into scripture. The most egregious examples are references to Christ and "world without end" added to the end of several of the Psalms.
The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 (gcide)
End End ([e^]nd), n. [OE. & AS. ende; akin to OS. endi, D.
einde, eind, OHG. enti, G. ende, Icel. endir, endi, Sw.
[aum]nde, Dan. ende, Goth. andeis, Skr. anta. [root]208. Cf.
Ante-, Anti-, Answer.]
1. The extreme or last point or part of any material thing
considered lengthwise (the extremity of breadth being
side); hence, extremity, in general; the concluding part;
termination; close; limit; as, the end of a field, line,
pole, road; the end of a year, of a discourse; put an end
to pain; -- opposed to beginning, when used of anything
having a first part.
[1913 Webster]
Better is the end of a thing than the beginning
thereof. --Eccl. vii.
8.
[1913 Webster]
2. Point beyond which no procession can be made; conclusion;
issue; result, whether successful or otherwise; conclusive
event; consequence.
[1913 Webster]
My guilt be on my head, and there an end. --Shak.
[1913 Webster]
O that a man might know
The end of this day's business ere it come! --Shak.
[1913 Webster]
3. Termination of being; death; destruction; extermination;
also, cause of death or destruction.
[1913 Webster]
Unblamed through life, lamented in thy end. --Pope.
[1913 Webster]
Confound your hidden falsehood, and award
Either of you to be the other's end. --Shak.
[1913 Webster]
I shall see an end of him. --Shak.
[1913 Webster]
4. The object aimed at in any effort considered as the close
and effect of exertion; purpose; intention; aim; as, to
labor for private or public ends.
[1913 Webster]
Losing her, the end of living lose. --Dryden.
[1913 Webster]
When every man is his own end, all things will come
to a bad end. --Coleridge.
[1913 Webster]
We will just have to agree to disagree my brother, except for the part of Jerome, he was a true and faithful believer. Unfortunately, the leaders of the church in Rome hated it and finally drove him out..I havent read all replies...however, i did not see the second of two of the earliest actual written bibles that we have...Jerome's Latin Vulgate (written in same century as Sinaiticus...probably within 40 years of it). The interesting thing about the Vulgate is that Jerome noted he used manuscripts dating back to the first Century A.D in authoring this translation (remembering Jesus and the Apostles were first century A.D). That is very clearly as close to the originals as we can get.
I also disagree with the premise in this post that the alternatives to the Textus Receptus are unreliable. That is complete nonsense and not scholarly in any way. Codex Sinaiticus and the Vulgate both clearly prove that is not the case. The inclusion of the apocrypha into the Vulgate or any translation for that matter is not evidence for the unreliability of that translation. This also is complete nonsense. The fact Jerome kept it separated in this way is evidence he made every effort to ensure transparency. He spent at least 15 years defending his use of the original Hebrew scriptures in his translation of the Vulgate believing these were the least corrupted and most reliable originals from which he could translate. "Against the traditional view at the time, he maintained that the Hebrew, not the Septuagint, was the inspired text of the Old Testament."
It has been absolutely irrefutable that the differences in the Bible over the centuries account for less than a few percent of its writings and these have absolutely no effect or even influence on its doctrines!
There is at least one authored version that is not to be trusted...the NWT. That version was translated after doctrine was already decided and with this influence. An abominable way of messing with true writings and meaning.
Having said the above, and in answer to the question directly, one should not rely an any single bible for all truth. Decent scholars and particularly church pastors who are genuine in their search for truth, always use a variety of texts.
I was a fan of KJV and believed whole heartedly the Textus Receptus was uncorrupted and therefore the only source of absolute truth in writings. However, my research during the last year of COVID has proven that premise was wrong. There are passages of scripture in the Textus Receptus that are authored/added as a result of biased influence. Whilst at least one of these 1 John 5:7 is clearly out of context and should not be where it is (This chapter is not about the trinity adding trinity doctrine here is a confusion of the context of the chapter), these passages do not in my opinion however, make any difference to underlying doctrines or Biblical themes.
We will just have to agree to disagree my brother, except for the part of Jerome, he was a true and faithful believer. Unfortunately, the leaders of the church in Rome hated it and finally drove him out..
As I said, this is not the debate/open forum, please respect that.Which of the above do you not agree with? Many SDA church ministers share the exact same views as me (I come from an SDA family, my dad was an SDA minister for over 35 years)