The Godly Heresy of Sinless Perfectionism

[Bible Highlighter]

I’ve already stated I didn’t believe the Alexandrian texts are superior to the Byzantine.

Sorry. I generally don’t hang on the words of other people (Especially when they are people I disagree about the important matters of the faith). It’s rare when I even quote another person that is not the words of God in a theological discussion. A person really has to say something profound for me to remember it. My life’s mission is to primarily focus on God’s words and not the words of men.

You are really one to talk about lengthy posts. If you don’t want to read posts by other people don’t expect them to read yours.

I don’t have a problem with reading lengthy posts if they are making a case based on something that is logical and good. Textual Criticism is unbelief. Whatever is not of faith is sin. You cannot make a biblical case for Textual Criticism.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I’ve already stated I didn’t believe the Alexandrian texts are superior to the Byzantine. You are really one to talk about lengthy posts. If you don’t want to read posts by other people don’t expect them to read yours. It’s interesting you bring up 1John 5:7. Your previous posts claim that modern Bible versions are part of a Catholic conspiracy but they all remove 1John 5:7, a verse that Unitarians and others claim was added to the KJV because of pressure from the Catholic Church. Johannine Comma - Wikipedia and here is the best article I have read on the subject. The Johannine Comma of 1 John 5:7-8: Added or Removed? - Berean Patriot The article supports the Comma as being authentic, The question is why would the Catholic Church want to remove a verse that supports the doctrine of the Trinity?

You don’t seem to believe Modern Bible versions were supervised by the Vatican. This to me is like a person burying their head in the sand that the Earth is round and not flat. Again, I provided picture proof that this is so. If you don’t believe me, get yourself a Nestle and Aland 27th edition. Also, by the words of Westcott and Hort, they professed to believe in Catholic practices. One of their manuscripts they based their NT Greek text on came from the Vatican.

Modern Translations at one point in time based the NT Greek text on Westcott and Hort Text (Critical Text). Alexandrian manuscripts were their favored base.

Modern Translations now use Nestle and Aland NT Greek text.

The Nestle and Aland NT Greek text used Westcott and Hort’s work and they used other Alexandrian manuscripts. The Vatican supervised the work with Protestants.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I’ve already stated I didn’t believe the Alexandrian texts are superior to the Byzantine. You are really one to talk about lengthy posts. If you don’t want to read posts by other people don’t expect them to read yours. It’s interesting you bring up 1John 5:7. Your previous posts claim that modern Bible versions are part of a Catholic conspiracy but they all remove 1John 5:7, a verse that Unitarians and others claim was added to the KJV because of pressure from the Catholic Church. Johannine Comma - Wikipedia and here is the best article I have read on the subject. The Johannine Comma of 1 John 5:7-8: Added or Removed? - Berean Patriot The article supports the Comma as being authentic, The question is why would the Catholic Church want to remove a verse that supports the doctrine of the Trinity?

As I said before in this thread, the Catholics don’t have a problem with the Trinity. The problem is they want you to believe the Trinity not based on what the Bible says but based on what the scholar (or priest) says. This is their new tactic in taking the authority of God’s Word out of people’s hands without them killing anyone this time. So if you fell for Textual Criticism, and look to the scholars (priests) to get the meaning, then Rome has won.

Also, after Erasmus, the Catholic Church has always sided with the Alexandrian texts and they are not really big fans of the TR.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

@RLT63

Please briefly summarize your position on your approach to the Bible.

If you want me to summarize anything, I will be happy to help.

 

[RLT63]

Sorry. I generally don’t hang on the words of other people (Especially when they are people I disagree about the important matters of the faith). It’s rare when I even quote another person that is not the words of God in a theological discussion. A person really has to say something profound for me to remember it. My life’s mission is to primarily focus on God’s words and not the words of men.



I don’t have a problem with reading lengthy posts if they are making a case based on something that is logical and good. Textual Criticism is unbelief. Whatever is not of faith is sin. You cannot make a biblical case for Textual Criticism.

The post I asked if you read is not about textual criticism and you had no problem quoting things I said previously that weren’t even addressing you

 

[RLT63]

@RLT63

Please briefly summarize your position on your approach to the Bible.

If you want me to summarize anything, I will be happy to help.

My approach to the Bible is that the NKJV is my base and I use the NET Bible for the notes

 

[RLT63]

As I said before in this thread, the Catholics don’t have a problem with the Trinity. The problem is they want you to believe the Trinity not based on what the Bible says but based on what the scholar (or priest) says. This is their new tactic in taking the authority of God’s Word out of people’s hands without them killing anyone this time. So if you fell for Textual Criticism, and look to the scholars (priests) to get the meaning, then Rome has won.

Also, after Erasmus, the Catholic Church has always sided with the Alexandrian texts and they are not really big fans of the TR.

Why did they leave this verse in modern translations then

Mat 28:19 - Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Why did they leave this verse in modern translations then

Mat 28:19 - Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ?

I am not sure you understand me here. First, the Catholics are only going by the Alexandrian manuscripts. The United Bible Societies (Protestant) and the Vatican worked on the Nestle and Aland Text. Most of all your Modern bibles are based off the Nestle and Aland NT Greek text.

Second, do you know that Catholics used to keep the Word of God out of the hands of the layperson or regular Catholic? It was not until 1943 that they allowed Bible reading with their own people. A long time back in history, the Catholics used to kill their own people if they possessed the Scriptures or they were heavily fined. So instead of the Catholic killing people for having the Word of God so as to know it, they changed tactics to take God’s Word out of their hands in a different way. This would be getting them to trust the scholar (priest) to get the understanding vs. just reading the Bible and believing it for themselves.

Matthew 28:19 hints at the Trinity but it is not explicitly teaching the Trinity directly. It’s not saying the same thing as 1 John 5:7. Again, the Catholics don’t have a problem with the Trinity. They Believe in the Trinity. The issue again is that they want you to trust the priest or the scholar for that belief and not the Bible always. They are not for the Bible Alone position.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The post I asked if you read is not about textual criticism and you had no problem quoting things I said previously that weren’t even addressing you

You lost me. I have no idea what your talking about. You have to be more specific by quoting my actual words from a certain post #, and then go from there.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

My approach to the Bible is that the NKJV is my base and I use the NET Bible for the notes

 

[RLT63]

You don’t seem to believe Modern Bible versions were supervised by the Vatican. This to me is like a person burying their head in the sand that the Earth is round and not flat. Again, I provided picture proof that this is so. If you don’t believe me, get yourself a Nestle and Aland 27th edition. Also, by the words of Westcott and Hort, they professed to believe in Catholic practices. One of their manuscripts they based their NT Greek text on came from the Vatican.

Modern Translations at one point in time based the NT Greek text on Westcott and Hort Text (Critical Text). Alexandrian manuscripts were their favored base.

Modern Translations now use Nestle and Aland NT Greek text.

The Nestle and Aland NT Greek text used Westcott and Hort’s work and they used other Alexandrian manuscripts. The Vatican supervised the work with Protestants.

Again, you should have read my post, it explains how W&H’s text replaced the TR

 

[RLT63]

You lost me. I have no idea what you’re talking about. You have to be more specific by quoting my actual words from a certain post #, and then go from there.

You brought up that I quoted Isaiah that our works are as filthy rags in another thread and that I liked MailmanDan’s posts on another forum

 

[RLT63]

King James Only movement - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The King James Only Controversy

 

[RLT63]

What's the Best Bible Translation? And More Importantly, Why? - Berean Patriot

This article won't be a quick read because it's an in-depth treatment of the topic, not a gloss. Deciding on the best Bible translation is...

www.bereanpatriot.com

 

[RLT63]

I am not sure you understand me here. First, the Catholics are only going by the Alexandrian manuscripts. The United Bible Societies (Protestant) and the Vatican worked on the Nestle and Aland Text. Most of all your Modern bibles are based off the Nestle and Aland NT Greek text.

Second, do you know that Catholics used to keep the Word of God out of the hands of the layperson or regular Catholic? It was not until 1943 that they allowed Bible reading with their own people. A long time back in history, the Catholics used to kill their own people if they possessed the Scriptures or they were heavily fined. So instead of the Catholic killing people for having the Word of God so as to know it, they changed tactics to take God’s Word out of their hands in a different way. This would be getting them to trust the scholar (priest) to get the understanding vs. just reading the Bible and believing it for themselves.

Matthew 28:19 hints at the Trinity but it is not explicitly teaching the Trinity directly. It’s not saying the same thing as 1 John 5:7. Again, the Catholics don’t have a problem with the Trinity. They Believe in the Trinity. The issue again is that they want you to trust the priest or the scholar for that belief and not the Bible always. They are not for the Bible Alone position.

The Catholic Church has done many terrible things throughout history but it makes no sense for them to take 1John 5:7 out of the Bible, Unitarians argue that the CC was responsible for having this verse put in the KJV

 

[RLT63]

Differences Between Bible Versions: Zeolla, Gary F.: 9780759625013: Amazon.com: Books

Differences Between Bible Versions [Zeolla, Gary F.] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Differences Between Bible Versions

www.amazon.com

 

[HIM]

You lost me. I have no idea what your talking about. You have to be more specific by quoting my actual words from a certain post #, and then go from there.

If you would have read what he wanted you to read you would have seen that he agrees with a lot of what you believe in regards to the Byzantine text. That is what he was showing you.

Sadly we are back to the letter as in the days of Moses. For most Christ had and is availing nothing but a form of godliness with a denying of the power thereof, His Spirit.

Funny we bash the Catholic Church as if; yet they through God through Christ are ultimately responsible for preserving the writings used for all that we have. Praise God for that because the Body of Christ, the Temple of God; His Church apostatized hard within the first century. Only a remanent remained and still is.

I love the KJV. It is my primary Bible. It as other translations have brought many to God through Christ, but it as any other are not perfect translations or a correction of the Masoretic Text or Textus Receptus which is similar to the Byzantine text. Nor is it a perfect translation or a correction of the parts used of the Latin Vulgate, Septuagint in it's compilation. It is a translation and I praise God for it and that He has increased our knowledge so that even a layman like you, I and others can utilize the Greek and Hebrew lexicons to dig deeper in His Word and get a broader understanding of all that He would have us get from the Greek and Hebrew text in which He used to preserve His Word due to hardness of our hearts not receiving His Spirit through Christ. We were from the beginning to Moses until now always to be of His Spirit, not of the letter, the Bible. But our faith is not what it can and should be.

 

[RLT63]

This is a link to a book I enjoyed that is more in line with your beliefs. Editing God: Textual Criticism and Modern Bibles Analyzed: Fortner, Michael D.: 9781734399011: Amazon.com: Books

 

[HIM]

Trust me if Christianity had fallen, there would still be revelation. Christianity wasn't the only one to make use of Divinely Inspired Scripture, the Egyptians had it, The Zoroastrians had it, the Hindus had it, and the Buddhists had it and they were all working together to build One Faith, not through Persecution but through assimilation of One Divine Principle. I'm pretty sure the Babylonians were on board to but their civilization got wiped out...

There is revelation to this day or we are not His people.

1John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.



Paul speaking to the Athenians said, " God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead."

"

 

[RLT63]

What is the KJV Only movement? Is the King James Version the only Bible we should use? | GotQuestions.org

What is the KJV Only movement? Is the King James Version the only Bible we should use? Are all the newer English translations preversions of the Word of God?

www.gotquestions.org