Are Doctrines affected by Modern Versions

[DNB]

i dont think so but she is placing limits on redemption and atonement i john 1:9 ALL unrighteousness

ok, thanks, ...it's getting a bit bizarre either way?

 

[ReChoired]

yes, and 2 Peter 1:9

Truth. (John 17:17)

 

[CharismaticLady]

Sorry CL, you didn't say anything, .....I said that the stipulation '...and walk by the spirit..' was not in the earliest manuscripts, therefore was excluded by the modern translators that reference the W&H, N/A & UBS. Point is, it doesn't change doctrine, as that, just because it's omitted, it doesn't mean that it's not implied, like you are trying to say. The spirit is at enmity with the flesh, is a principle that is understood by all Christians, ...I don't care who says otherwise.
So your allegations about doctrine being changed due to exclusion, does not hold water by any standard, it's just silly actually?
For, what about all the other verses that state one must be in Christ, that don't make the same stipulation, are they deficient or misleading also, obviously not!

I don't think doctrines that cause people to go to hell as silly.

 

[DNB]

Ok, this serves as a good case in point for what I was asking ReChoired in Post #319. I can see adding a phrase as giving further clarification on the text, but to deliberately subtract it would (as you suggest) imply there was a deliberate move to insert heresy into church doctrine. But here's the question: Why then would they retain the same phrase in Romans 8:4? Seems like if this were the motivation they would have eliminated it from both verses, yes? The same goes 1 John 4:3 and 1 John 4:2. If the scribes were wishing to corrupt church teaching by subtracting key phrases, why didn't they eliminate it from the passage altogether?

Of course, that's exactly the point. Conspiracy theory has no grounds, it's an unfounded and absurd conclusion. One can claim incompetence, impetuousness, bad eyesight, dittography, haplograhy etc.. But not a concerted effort to corrupt doctrine. ...at best, one could accuse the copyists of attempting to make our scriptures appear unreliable, ...that would be the only viable accusation under the evidence.

 

[DNB]

I don't think doctrines that cause people to go to hell as silly.

There you go changing the subject again. You inability to follow the point, indicts your rationale!

 

[CharismaticLady]

so there is a list of sins that jesus only covers ? if so would you provide then i want thesin into death i only know of one blaspheme which is total rejection of Christ dying in your sins. no repentance Jesus is our advocate to those saved FOR every sin . your using limited atonement

To find out what a sin unto death is, all you have to do is look at the old testament and see which sins were not covered by a sacrifice where they instead stoned them to death. That would include the breaking of any of the Ten Commandments. They are sins of lawlessness against God's laws, so are against God, Himself.

The total rejection of Christ does not apply to a brother, so you are not describing the sin unto death of 1 John 5:16-17, and will have to rethink that one through a little better. It is not your fault, except for not questioning the teachers that teach what you quoted.

 

[ReChoired]

I could see the motivation behind why scribes would add to the texts to provide more clarity, but what do you think was the logical reason why they were subtracting from them?

Why did God give this warning, several times:

Deu_4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.'

Deu_12:32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.​

Even Balaam knew better:

Num_22:18 And Balaam answered and said unto the servants of Balak, If Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold, I cannot go beyond the word of the LORD my God, to do less or more.​

Do not add:

Pro_30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.​

Do not take away, subtract or diminish:

Jer_26:2 Thus saith the LORD; Stand in the court of the LORD'S house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the LORD'S house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word:​

Other indications:

Psa_119:57 CHETH. Thou art my portion, O LORD: I have said that I would keep thy words.​

False epistles in circulation:

2Th_2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.​

Additional warnings:

Psa_56:5 Every day they wrest my words: all their thoughts are against me for evil.

2Pe_3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.​

 

[Ezra]

ok, thanks, ...it's getting a bit bizarre either way?

left fieldish i can see not forgiving but i am of the opinion a child of God would forgive it might take some work God dealing with our heart .but if we say we are not chastised then we are illegitimate child not saved

 

[Ezra]

To find out what a sin unto death is, all you have to do is look at the old testament and see which sins were not covered by a sacrifice where they instead stoned them to death. That would include the breaking of any of the Ten Commandments. They are sins of lawlessness against God's laws, so are against God, Himself.

The total rejection of Christ does not apply to a brother, so you are not describing the sin unto death of 1 John 5:16-17, and will have to rethink that one through a little better. It is not your fault, except for not questioning the teachers that teach what you quoted.

the law was our school master note was.. law only points to sin can not fix sin Grace says we can be forgiven .i will write a check any day on grace compared to law insufficient funds

 

[Ezra]

I don't think doctrines that cause people to go to hell as silly.

what if i started a teaching doctrine that said just be polite and you will go to heaven .. what would that lead to .its sure aint eternal life

 

[CharismaticLady]

Ok, this serves as a good case in point for what I was asking ReChoired in Post #319. I can see adding a phrase as giving further clarification on the text, but to deliberately subtract it would (as you suggest) imply there was a deliberate move to insert heresy into church doctrine. But here's the question: Why then would they retain the same phrase in Romans 8:4? Seems like if this were the motivation they would have eliminated it from both verses, yes? The same goes for 1 John 4:3 and 1 John 4:2. If the scribes were wishing to corrupt church teaching by subtracting key phrases, why didn't they eliminate it from the passage altogether?

I see nothing wrong in reiterating the condition in Romans 8:1, but many use the shortened version of Romans 8:1 with a period after Jesus and never study past it, to where it is repeated. This is one reason we have to study in context.

As far as just applying 1 John 4:1 to every denomination you don't agree with is ludicrous. John was speaking of the Nicolaitans who were a sect of Gnostics, but you don't know that unless you read 1-3 in context, as you probably already know to point that out.

My biggest beef is with Westcott and Hort, not even the Alexandrians. There were so many discrepancies among those codices, who knows what is original. But to leave it in the hands of two men that don't even believe the words they are translating, I doubt that the Spirit was anywhere near them. By other beef is with the scholars who give their opinions of things being added, that were actually quoted - what? out of thin air??? They were deleted for some reason known only to those who were responsible. But all I have to do is see if what they say was added contradicts or confirms scripture to know which is correct.

 

[Ezra]

im going to bed MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL and to all a good night HE is the reason AMEN

 

[CharismaticLady]

the law was our school master note was.. law only points to sin can not fix sin Grace says we can be forgiven .i will write a check any day on grace compared to law insufficient funds

That depends on what you know about what is true grace. Is it a get out of jail free card?

 

[CharismaticLady]

what if i started a teaching doctrine that said just be polite and you will go to heaven .. what would that lead to .its sure aint eternal life

 

[Hidden In Him]

Why did God give this warning, several times:

Deu_4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.'

Deu_12:32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

I don't think you're actually interacting with me here, ReChoired. You're restating your position but not answering my question. These verses all further beg the question of why they would logically do so. What was your answer?

 

[Hidden In Him]

Of course, that's exactly the point. Conspiracy theory has no grounds, it's an unfounded and absurd conclusion. One can claim incompetence, impetuousness, bad eyesight, dittography, haplograhy etc.. But not a concerted effort to corrupt doctrine. ...at best, one could accuse the copyists of attempting to make our scriptures appear unreliable, ...that would be the only viable accusation under the evidence.

I certainly would never buy either dittography or haplography. It seems too deliberate and recurrent to have been accidental either way. My personal take is that they were reinforcing particularly key phrases deliberately at the price of redundancy. This habit was clearly displayed in the epistles, as they often repeated basic Christian teachings over and over and over again, setting forth "a pattern of teaching" to all the churches. Jude likewise made reference to repeating certain teachings his readers were already well aware of (Jude 1:5). But to subtract repetitions from the text would be to instead go directly against this principle and the expressed intentions of the apostles, and it once again leaves you asking why they elected to do so.

 

[ReChoired]

I don't think you're actually interacting with me here, ReChoired. You're restating your position but not answering my question. These verses all further beg the question of why they would logically do so. What was your answer?

I don't think you're actually reading the texts provided, nor the question asked in response to your question, which answers your question by the method Christ Jesus used.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I see nothing wrong in reiterating the condition in Romans 8:1, but many use the shortened version of Romans 8:1 with a period after Jesus and never study past it, to where it is repeated. This is one reason we have to study in context.

As far as just applying 1 John 4:1 to every denomination you don't agree with is ludicrous. John was speaking of the Nicolaitans who were a sect of Gnostics, but you don't know that unless you read 1-3 in context, as you probably already know to point that out.

My biggest beef is with Westcott and Hort, not even the Alexandrians. There were so many discrepancies among those codices, who knows what is original. But to leave it in the hands of two men that don't even believe the words they are translating, I doubt that the Spirit was anywhere near them. By other beef is with the scholars who give their opinions of things being added, that were actually quoted - what? out of thin air??? They were deleted for some reason known only to those who were responsible. But all I have to do is see if what they say was added contradicts or confirms scripture to know which is correct.

If the discrepancies only showed up consistently in Westcott and Hort, I think I would view them with suspicion as well. But often their readings coincide perfectly with Vaticanus and Alexandrinus, which I hold to be the two most authoritative texts. (Not that I have any feelings about Westcott and Hort either way. I pay them no mind actually).

Granted, it's my opinion, but Vaticanus and Alexandrinus continue to witness to me to this day, and on an issue like this I have to go with what the Spirit of God within me witnesses to, as we all do.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I don't think you're actually reading the texts provided, nor the question asked in response to your question, which answers your question by the method Christ Jesus used.

: ) It's not a debate contest, ReChoired. It's an exchange. And in an honest and open exchange, when someone asks you a question you answer it. You don't avoid it by asking another one of your own, LoL.

But no big deal. I was just responding to your initial post.

Hope you have a blessed Christmas!

 

[ReChoired]

Hmmm, natural to spiritual:

Luk_19:47 And he taught daily in the temple. But the chief priests and the scribes and the chief of the people sought to destroy him,

Luk_9:22 Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.
​

Fancy that, the scribes, which were in trouble with Jesus, sought to 'destroy' the Word of God - Jesus, by rejecting Him publicly, and then removing Him from the living, just as they do to the word of God (written), by removing portions that rebuke themselves, and to kill the word, by taking it away, and so bury it.

Isa 28:15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:

Job_24:2 Some remove the landmarks; they violently take away flocks, and feed thereof.

Isa_5:23 Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!​