Are Doctrines affected by Modern Versions

[ReChoired]

...That being said, your interpretation STILL doesn't hold water. We do not need daily anything. We had one final sacrifice.

Again, your reply is simply ignorance (not knowing) of scripture:

We, Christians, are "Kings and Priest" under the Great High Priest, Jesus Christ.

You can read the full study here - http://sdamaranathachurch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/The-Daily-Daily-With-No-Pictures.pdf

[06B] The New Testament continuance ...

The sinner, have a counterfeit daily (see also Daniel 1), a daily toil, and having no rest whatsoever from their sin:

Revelation 14:11 KJB - And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Compare:

Genesis 6:5 KJB - And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Psalms 32:3 KJB - When I kept silence, my bones waxed old through my roaring all the day long.

Psalms 32:4 KJB - For day and night thy hand was heavy upon me: my moisture is turned into the drought of summer. Selah.

Psalms 38:4 KJB - For mine iniquities are gone over mine head: as an heavy burden they are too heavy for me.

Psalms 38:5 KJB - My wounds stink and are corrupt because of my foolishness.

Psalms 38:6 KJB - I am troubled; I am bowed down greatly; I go mourning all the day long.

Psalms 38:12 KJB - They also that seek after my life lay snares for me: and they that seek my hurt speak mischievous things, and imagine deceits all the day long.

Psalms 73:14 KJB - For all the day long have I been plagued, and chastened every morning.

Proverbs 21:26 KJB - He coveteth greedily all the day long: but the righteous giveth and spareth not.​

 

[reformed1689]

Again, your reply is simply ignorance (not knowing) of scripture:

We, Christians, are "Kings and Priest" under the Great High Priest, Jesus Christ.

You can read the full study here - http://sdamaranathachurch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/The-Daily-Daily-With-No-Pictures.pdf

[06B] The New Testament continuance

Jesus was performing the work of the true priest in the courtyard “daily” service in the true Temple:

Matthew 26:55 KJB - In that same hour said Jesus to the multitudes, Are ye come out as against a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me.

Mark 14:49 KJB - I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not: but the scriptures must be fulfilled.

Luke 19:47 KJB - And he taught daily in the temple. But the chief priests and the scribes and the chief of the people sought to destroy him,

Luke 22:53 KJB - When I was daily with you in the temple, ye stretched forth no hands against me: but this is your hour, and the power of darkness.

John 18:20 KJB - Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing.​

Jesus taught His disciples to ask for “the daily” bread of the True Temple:

Matthew 6:11 KJB - Give us this day our daily bread.

Luke 11:3 KJB - Give us day by day our daily bread.​

Jesus taught us to “continual[ly]” come to Him by faith:

Luke 18:5 KJB - Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.​

Jesus taught His disciples to “daily” take up their cross, a “daily” sacrifice, and follow Him:

Luke 9:23 KJB - And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.​

When Jesus, their priest and sacrifice, ascended to Heaven, and even became the Great High Priest, to continue “the daily” ministration of the True Tabernacle, the True Sanctuary of Heaven, as we see in the Revelation, among the Candlesticks, Altar of Incense, and the Table of Shewbread, the disciples on earth, followed Him in this work, and entered into that upper room, being “the daily” experience of the True Holy Place in Heaven above, by “daily” faith therein, in Him, and thus anti-typical “the daily” was in full swing:

Luke 24:53 KJB - And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.

Acts 2:46 KJB - And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,

Acts 2:47 KJB - Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

Acts 5:42 KJB - And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.

Acts 6:1 KJB - And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.

Acts 6:4 KJB - But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.

Acts 16:5 KJB - And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.

Acts 17:11 KJB - These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Acts 17:17 KJB - Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.
​

This isn't even worth rebutting. You are still confusing the offices of priest, high priest, and new testament offices. You are combining things that have nothing to do with each other. This is not me being ignorant of the Scripture, this is eisegesis. You reading into the Scriptures soething that is not there.

 

[ReChoired]

This isn't even worth rebutting. ...

As you will. It was never-the-less given you freely and in charity (1 Cor. 13).

 

[reformed1689]

As you will. It was never-the-less given you freely and in charity (1 Cor. 13).

It was out of context using unrelated verses and trying to relate them simply because they use the words daily or bread, etc. It's proof-texting. It has no basis in actual biblical interpretation. The fact remains there is no doctrinal error in the NKJV in Hebrews 9:12. Only SDA cultists think so apparently.

 

[ReChoired]

I repeat: it is a sad irony that Christians with the highest view of Scripture blissfully prefer the most corrupt text, the one used by the KJV. None of thse naïve Christians care enough about God's Word to read an academically respected book on Text Criticism such as the one written by my former New Testament professor, Bruce Metzger. Text Critics group the manuscripts by families, that is, by region of origin and date. They then compare errors by date and region with the best and most reliable of the ancient manuscripts and check the results with biblical quotations from the earliest church Fathers, who wrote before the biblical manuscripts in question. They then determine when, where, and why each of the 10 million errrors crept in the text, often inevitable copy errors made and supplemented by tired monks over the centuries.

Yes, modern translations correct deadly errors created by the KJV text. Consider, for example, Mark 16:9-20 which gives itself away as a later forgery by its very different Greek style and was added in the 2nd half of the 2nd century by Aristo of Pella. This name of the forger is even added to one ancient manuscript of Mark. In the forged text Jesus offers as "signs" of the true believer the ability to drink poison and pick up poisonous snakes with impunity. This ghastly sign is responsible for many deaths among Appalachian Christians who wrongly equate the KJV with God's Word and put Jesus' claim to the test. I have learned from long experience to ignore modern books that exclusively quote the KJV and preachers who only preach from the KJV.

Me thinks you need to update your information about Mark 16:9-20, and "Aristo of Pella" (who is not Aristion, "Aristion must be distinguished from Aristo of Pella." given in a single 10th Cent. Armenian NT MS (link below)) -

[1] - Free Online Bible Library | Aristion

[2] - https://brandplucked.webs.com/mark16920.htm​

 

[DNB]

I repeat: it is a sad irony that Christians with the highest view of Scripture blissfully prefer the most corrupt text, the one used by the KJV. None of thse naïve Christians care enough about God's Word to read an academically respected book on Text Criticism such as the one written by my former New Testament professor, Bruce Metzger. Text Critics group the manuscripts by families, that is, by region of origin and date. They then compare errors by date and region with the best and most reliable of the ancient manuscripts and check the results with biblical quotations from the earliest church Fathers, who wrote before the biblical manuscripts in question. They then determine when, where, and why each of the 10 million errrors crept in the text, often inevitable copy errors made and supplemented by tired monks over the centuries.

Yes, modern translations correct deadly errors created by the KJV text. Consider, for example, Mark 16:9-20 which gives itself away as a later forgery by its very different Greek style and was added in the 2nd half of the 2nd century by Aristo of Pella. This name of the forger is even added to one ancient manuscript of Mark. In the forged text Jesus offers as "signs" of the true believer the ability to drink poison and pick up poisonous snakes with impunity. This ghastly sign is responsible for many deaths among Appalachian Christians who wrongly equate the KJV with God's Word and put Jesus' claim to the test. I have learned from long experience to ignore modern books that exclusively quote the KJV and preachers who only preach from the KJV.

Agreed Berserk, ...and what amazes me even more than what you stated, is that it doesn't even require such academia to perceive the irrational argumentation that supports KJV onlyism, and that denounces the critical text families? Mostly all translations have gone through a comparable process that the KJV authors followed. Except, that the later translations have had the benefit of having countless more manuscripts at their disposal, and the fortune of having older ones that predate the Textus Receptus sources by a good century. We do not entertain their absurd, inherent Alexandrian corruption theory. The ignorance, bias and credulity is utterly frightening, ...and incriminating?

Meaning, the irony is, that they're claiming such an integrity to their scriptures, by such an incompetent rationale, that, I would say, that even if they had the pure word or original manuscripts before them, they wouldn't have the sense and wisdom to interpret them correctly. In other words, even though I accept the KJV as a valid translation, as any other, a KJV Onlyist is the last person that I would ask of their opinion on a particular text, or doctrinal issue. They've truly indicted themselves on so many levels, that their blindness and impetuousness does not end at their favouritism of the KJV, ...it starts there.

 

[DNB]

Me thinks you need to update your information about Mark 16:9-20, and "Aristo of Pella" (who is not Aristion, "Aristion must be distinguished from Aristo of Pella." given in a single 10th Cent. Armenian NT MS (link below)) -

[1] - Free Online Bible Library | Aristion

[2] - https://brandplucked.webs.com/mark16920.htm​

Me thinks, ReChoired, that you need to stop your petty and unsound proof of what is considered veritable scripture. Why stray from the elementary and fundamental textual critical processes? You choose a somewhat esoteric manuscript, with a disclaimer (marginal note about the interpolation), and deny the majority evidence i.e. doesn't appear till 10th century, and that in an Armenian manuscript, as opposed to the requirement of it being witnessed to in all the hundreds of Greek MSS before that time.

 

[Enoch111]

It is not precisely and exactly the same. Not to mention, it is a deception that there have been no changes.

Again you are bearing false witness since I have given you TANGIBLE EVIDENCE that they are precisely and exactly the same (barring updated spellings, which cannot be used against an older translation).

That's a pretty bold claim. How do you know those texts go all the way back to the autographs?

Because there is such a thing as the doctrine of divine preservation.
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the Word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the Word which by the Gospel is preached unto you. (1 Peter 1:23-25)

That is why the Westminster Confession of Faith says: The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old) and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical, so as in all controversies of religion the Church is finally to appeal unto them. (WCOF, Ch. 1, Sect. 8).

So how did God preserve His Word from about c 1500 BC to 2020 AD? That's over 3,500 years. God used the Hebrew scribes (sopherim, tannaim, amoraim, and masorethes) and Christian monks in their scriptoriums to carefully and faithfully make copies of copies of copies by hand until printing came into existence.

1. While the apostles were alive, the Scriptures were being copied and circulate to all the churches in the Roman empire. Peter was totally familiar with all the epistles of Paul and regarded them as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15,16). Paul exhorted the churches to pass along his epistles.

2. The Bible continued to be copied and also translated as early as the 2nd century AD (the Peshitta is the Syriac translation). Many other translations came into existence. And the Word of God spread throughout the Roman Empire and beyond.

3. The Greek Orthodox Church created lesson books called *Lectionaries* in which they had portions of Scripture for every Sunday in the year, as well as for feast days. These are further evidence of what was in the autographs. The majority of churches in the Roman Empire were Greek Orthodox, and the Byzantine Empire ensured the spread of Orthodox Christianity.

4. By the 4th century a traditional Greek text, known as the Byzantine text, was in existence, and the majority of manuscripts were based upon this text. Both the enemies of the Received Text as well as its supporters accepted this AS FACT. So this text had come down from the autographs, while the Hebrew Tanakh was already an established text during the time of Christ.

5. By the time of the Renaissance and the Reformation, when printing came into existence, there were printed texts of both the Hebrew Bible and the Greek New Testament. Over a period of about 100 years, several editors worked on the text of Erasmus, which was based on the few best available manuscripts at the time. This became the Received Text (Textus Receptus) and there was not a single Reformer who had any misgivings about this text. It was translated into English and all the European languages. Several English translations came into existence, and the King James Bible became the Authorized Version of the Church of England and the British Empire (which included the American colonies before the War of Independence).

6. By the 19th century, there were over 5,000 Greek manuscripts (from various parts of the world and from different centuries), translations, lectionaries, as well as the quotations of the Early Church Fathers, and scholars involved with Lower Criticism were carefully collating (comparing) these manuscripts (even though only a fraction of them have been collated). All the manuscripts were in general agreement as to the text.

But it was also about this time that Theolgical Liberalism entered into the seminaries, and skeptical and rationalistic scholars began to attack the Bible, and started promoting the corrupted manuscripts. The end result was that Westcott & Hort (W & H) in the 19th century created a new Greek Text from primarily Aleph and B (Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus). But they were also opposed in their efforts to replace the true traditional text with a corrupt *Critical Text* by scholars such as Burgon, Scrivener, Hoskier, et al. Nonetheless, in the end W & H were able to fool everyone, and produced the Revised Version (RV) of 1881. There were thousands of differences between the KJV and the RV, but everyone thought that these were *improvements* to the Bible. Today hardly anyone looks at this version.

7. There were also about 1,500 passages which seriously affected Christian doctrine, but hardly anyone took the time or made the effort to investigate this hoax. Thus the majority of textual scholars bought into the Westcott Hort Theory, which then established itself in almost all the seminaries and Bible schools. But Dr. Edward Hills wrote a scholarly book called The King James Version Defended, and it can be purchased from Amazon even today.

8. Modern translations began to proliferate after this and between 1900 and 2000 dozens of new versions appeared, but all based upon the corrupted critical texts [Kittel's Biblia Hebraica for the Hebrew and Westcott & Hort's for the Greek (now known as the Nestle-Aland or United Bible Societies Text]. If these were really so superior to the KJV, how is it that these same modern bibles (and paraphrases) were revised over and over and over again?

To sum up (1) the KJV has not changed since 1611, (2) the KJV has been THE English language Bible for almost 400 years, and (3) the KJV is available in an even more updated form as the King James 2000 Bible.

 

[ReChoired]

Why stray from the elementary and fundamental textual critical processes?

Because it is unscriptural.

 

[ReChoired]

... The fact remains there is no doctrinal error in the NKJV in Hebrews 9:12. Only SDA cultists think so apparently.

Not at all, as historic translations agree with Hebrews 9:12 KJB, and the Seventh-day Adventist position.

There is not a single extant mss, codici or papyrii, [etc] written in Koine Greek [or in any language] that reads "αγια αγιων" [the Most Holy Place, see Hebrews 9:3 KJB, GNT TR] here in Hebrews 9:12, but plainly reads in all known extant mss, etc in any language, "τα αγια" [the sanctuary, ie first apartment, the holy place].

the Latin [Jerome's Vulgate] reads, "in sancta",

the Wycliffe reads "the holy",

the German Luther Bibel 1545 reads, "das Heilige",

Stephanus 1550 reads, "τα αγια",

Scrivener's 1894 reads, "τα αγια",

and even Westcott's and Hort's 1881 reads, "τα αγια",

the UBS 5th reads, "τὰ ἅγια",

the Novum Testamentum Graece 28th [Eberhard Nestle's / Kurt Aland's, etc] reads, "τὰ ἅγια" without a single footnote in either 'scholars' work indicating any deviation from this reading in any known extant mss, etc.]​

Here are the other texts, read them for yourself and shew thyself approved unto God:

Hebrews 8:2 KJB - A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
Hebrews 8:2 GNT TR - των αγιων λειτουργος και της σκηνης της αληθινης ην επηξεν ο κυριος και ουκ ανθρωπος

Hebrews 9:1 KJB - Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
Hebrews 9:1 GNT TR - ειχεν μεν ουν και η πρωτη δικαιωματα λατρειας το τε αγιον κοσμικον

Hebrews 9:2 KJB - For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
Hebrews 9:2 GNT TR - σκηνη γαρ κατεσκευασθη η πρωτη εν η η τε λυχνια και η τραπεζα και η προθεσις των αρτων ητις λεγεται αγια

Hebrews 9:3 KJB - And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
Hebrews 9:3 GNT TR - μετα δε το δευτερον καταπετασμα σκηνη η λεγομενη αγια αγιων

Hebrews 9:7 KJB - But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
Hebrews 9:7 GNT TR - εις δε την δευτεραν απαξ του ενιαυτου μονος ο αρχιερευς ου χωρις αιματος ο προσφερει υπερ εαυτου και των του λαου αγνοηματων

Hebrews 9:8 KJB - The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
Hebrews 9:8 GNT TR - τουτο δηλουντος του πνευματος του αγιου μηπω πεφανερωσθαι την των αγιων οδον ετι της πρωτης σκηνης εχουσης στασιν

Hebrews 9:24 KJB - For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
Hebrews 9:24 GNT TR - ου γαρ εις χειροποιη τα αγια εισηλθεν ο χριστος αντιτυπα των αληθινων αλλ εις αυτον τον ουρανον νυν εμφανισθηναι τω προσωπω του θεου υπερ ημων

Hebrews 9:25 KJB - Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
Hebrews 9:25 GNT TR - ουδ ινα πολλακις προσφερη εαυτον ωσπερ ο αρχιερευς εισερχεται εις τα αγια κατ ενιαυτον εν αιματι αλλοτριω

Hebrews 10:19 KJB - Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
Hebrews 10:19 GNT TR - εχοντες ουν αδελφοι παρρησιαν εις την εισοδον των αγιων εν τω αιματι ιησου

Hebrews 13:11 KJB - For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.
Hebrews 13:11 GNT TR - ων γαρ εισφερεται ζωων το αιμα περι αμαρτιας εις τα αγια δια του αρχιερεως τουτων τα σωματα κατακαιεται εξω της παρεμβολης

Revelation 15:5 KJB - And after that I looked, and, behold, the temple of the tabernacle of the testimony in heaven was opened:
Revelation 15:5 GNT TR - και μετα ταυτα ειδον και ιδου ηνοιγη ο ναος της σκηνης του μαρτυριου εν τω ουρανω​

"Walter Martin" knew the difference of position and used his own private transaltion in defense of his own errors, so let me show those errors he made about what he stated, on tv, even the John Ankerberg "show", in regards Hebrews 9:12, in the Koine Greek:

[John Ankerberg Show, with Walter Martin and William Johnsson [Review and Herald], time index 00:33:16-00:33:57] -

"... [George E. Canon reading the [Koine] Greek New Testament, Hebrews 9:12, in the presence of Walter Martin and others at a selective closed meeting of (so-called) 'scholars'] that Jesus Christ entered once into the holiest of all with his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption for us. ...", and I [Walter Martin] asked the question, and 'Canon' did too [to the present persons meeting], "Did this [event of Hebrews 9:12] take place, as [O.R.L.] Crosier said, as Mrs. [Ellen G.] White said, as the early Adventists taught? Did it [event of Hebrews 9:12] take place in [AD] 1844, or did it [event of Hebrews 9:12] take place at the ascension of Jesus Christ [AD 31]?" [Walter Martin continues apart from the past quotation and questions asked then] The [Koine] Greek text says, at the ascension of Jesus Christ [AD 31]. Once into the holiest of all - the Most Holy Place! ..."​

Walter Martin [and associates, including John Ankerberg] was/and still are dead wrong, on both counts, and even the (so-called) LXX in Exodus 26:33 disagrees with him [them].

Exodus 26:33 KJB - And thou shalt hang up the vail under the taches, that thou mayest bring in thither within the vail the ark of the testimony: and the vail shall divide unto you between the holy place and the most holy.
Exodus 26:33 (so-called) LXX - καὶ θήσεις τὸ καταπέτασμα ἐπὶ τοὺς στύλους καὶ εἰσοίσεις ἐκεῖ ἐσώτερον τοῦ καταπετάσματος τὴν κιβωτὸν τοῦ μαρτυρίου· καὶ διοριεῖ τὸ καταπέτασμα ὑμῖν ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ ἁγίου καὶ ἀνὰ μέσον τοῦ ἁγίου τῶν ἁγίων.​

The "holy place" [τοῦ ἁγίου] is separate [by a second "vail" [καταπέτασμα]] from and not the same as the "most holy" [τοῦ ἁγίου τῶν ἁγίων].

 

[ReChoired]

... The fact remains there is no doctrinal error in the NKJV in Hebrews 9:12. Only SDA cultists think so apparently.

Not at all, as historic translations agree with Hebrews 9:12 KJB, and the Seventh-day Adventist position.

There is not a single extant mss, codici or papyrii, [etc] written in Koine Greek [or in any language] that reads "αγια αγιων" [the Most Holy Place, see Hebrews 9:3 KJB, GNT TR] here in Hebrews 9:12, but plainly reads in all known extant mss, etc in any language, "τα αγια" [the sanctuary, ie first apartment, the holy place].

Walter Martin also erred about what sister White and Seventh-day Adventists teach in regards Hebrews 9:12.

Seventh-day Adventists, including O.R.L. Crosier [Day Star Extra, February 7th, 1846, you may read in full here - The Sanctuary, Table of Contents -- Ellen G. White Writings ], and especially sister Ellen G. White, do/did not teach, and have never taught, that Heb 9:12 KJB happened in AD 1844.

The event in Heb 9:12 KJB, took place in AD 31, at Christ's Ascension from the Mount of Olives, which parallels Psalms 24:1-10, 133:1-3; Revelation 5:5-6, etc. Seventh-day Adventist do however teach, that the text of Daniel 7:13, and the events therein, took place in AD 1844, based upon the ending of the 2,300 prophecy of Daniel 8:13,14,26, 9:24-27, 11:31-33,40, 12:7-13; Revelation 9:13-15; 10:1-11, etc.

The Great Controversy 1888 & 1911, page 421 -

"... Thither the faith of Christ's disciples followed him as he ascended from their sight. Here their hopes centered, “which hope we have,” said Paul, “as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest forever.” “Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.” [Hebrews 6:19, 20; 9:12]

For eighteen centuries this work of ministration continued in the first apartment of the sanctuary. The blood of Christ, pleaded in behalf of penitent believers, secured their pardon and acceptance with the Father, yet their sins still remained upon the books of record. As in the typical service there was a work of atonement at the close of the year, so before Christ's work for the redemption of men is completed, there is a work of atonement for the removal of sin from the sanctuary. This is the service which began when the 2300 days ended. At that time, as foretold by Daniel the prophet, our High Priest entered the most holy, to perform the last division of his solemn work,—to cleanse the sanctuary. ..." - The Great Controversy, Page 421 -- Ellen G. White Writings​

The Desire of Ages, page 166 -

"... The sacrificial service that had pointed to Christ passed away; but the eyes of men were turned to the true sacrifice for the sins of the world. The earthly priesthood ceased; but we look to Jesus, the minister of the new covenant, and “to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.” “The way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: ... but Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, ... by His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.” Hebrews 12:24; 9:8-12. ..." - The Desire of Ages, Page 166 -- Ellen G. White Writings​

Walter Martin [and assoc., including John Ankerberg] was/and still are dead wrong, on both counts, and even the (so-called) LXX in Exo 26:33 disagrees with him [them].

 

[ReChoired]

... The fact remains there is no doctrinal error in the NKJV in Hebrews 9:12. Only SDA cultists think so apparently.

Not at all, as historic translations agree with Hebrews 9:12 KJB, and the Seventh-day Adventist position.

There is not a single extant mss, codici or papyrii, [etc] written in Koine Greek [or in any language] that reads "αγια αγιων" [the Most Holy Place, see Hebrews 9:3 KJB, GNT TR] here in Hebrews 9:12, but plainly reads in all known extant mss, etc in any language, "τα αγια" [the sanctuary, ie first apartment, the holy place].

Both Daniel; Hebrews and Revelation are clear on this point. It is irrefutable to anyone that takes the time to study carefully and prayerfully the words of the texts.

It is impossible for Jesus to begin the Most Holy Place ministry at His ascension. Pentecost hadn't even happened then, which is needful to anoint Jesus to be High Priest as already demonstrated elsewhere in this debunking.

Spring Feasts:

Passover: Leviticus 23:5 [Jesus dies AD 31, First Month - Abib/Nisan 14th, the 6th Day, 3 PM]

Feast of Unleavened Bread: Leviticus 23:6-8 [Jesus in the Tomb, Abib/Nisan 15th, the 7th Day]

Feast of Firstfruits [Wave Sheaf]: Leviticus 23:10-14 [Jesus resurrected, Abib/Nisan 16th, 1st day]

Pentecost [Feast of Weeks]: Leviticus 23:15-22 [Jesus, in the Holy Place, pouring of the Holy Spirit, Acts 1-3, etc Revelation 5:6; Psalms 133:1-3, etc]​

Long Summer

Fall Feasts:

Feast Of Trumpets: Leviticus 23:24-25 [Jesus, announcing coming Judgment, about to move, the bell is heard, 1833/4, Miller goes forward, Advent movement, Revelation 9:5,6,10; Genesis 7:24, 8:3; Luke 1:24 - “5 months”, etc]

Day Of Atonement: Leviticus 23:27-32 [Jesus in the Most Holy Place, 1843/44, specifically Oct 22 1844, the bell is heard, Jesus and Father moved from Holy to Most Holy in Heavenly Sanctuary; Daniel 7:9-10,13,22, 8:13-14,26; Revelation 9:13-15, 10:1-6, 14:6-7] KJB

Feast of Booths/Tabernacles/Ingathering: Leviticus 23:34-43 [Harvest, and on into Millennium and then into eternity; Revelation 7:9, 14:13-20, 15:2]​

Atonement, and the entering into the Most Holy Place could not have happened in the Spring (Calvary). It had to take place after Pentecost, after (Fall) Trumpets, and before Tabernacles.

Jesus Christ is the God of order [1 Corinthians 14:40 KJB], not of confusion [1 Corinthians 14:33 KJB], but rather of perfect timing [Ecclesiastes 3:17 KJB]. He leads from beginning [alpha/first/author] unto the ending [omega/last/finisher], in that order, never going out of order. Christ Jesus Himself gave the times and seasons of the feasts themselves in Leviticus 23[:4] onward, and elsewhere all connected with the Sanctuary [Psalms 77:13 KJB] and also in types elsewhere, even from the Exodus [Psalms 77:19 KJB] from Egypt to Canaan, and so on.

We need to consider that the anti-typical/reality of the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement and the feast of Tabernacles/Booths/Ingathering cannot have happened in AD 31 at the Crucifixion of Jesus, at the death of Jesus thereon, at the burial of Jesus, at the resurrection of Jesus, at the ascension of Jesus, or even up to the time of AD 34, or AD 70, but could only take place long after those events, in connection with the 2,300, which the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 were simply a small part of, as is the 1,260, 1,290 and 1,335.

See Hebrews 9:2-3:

For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary. Hebrews 9:2

And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; Hebrews 9:3​

Paul is clear about the typology, First comes the First {part of the} Tabernacle, wherein was the Candlestick and the Table, even along with the Altar of Incense:

Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God. Hebrews 9:6​

Where is Jesus standing in Acts 7 {part of the Church of Ephesus} and where is He seen walking in Revelation 2:1?

Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks; Revelation 2:1​

Which of the two compartments of the Tented Sanctuary is that? It is verily the First, not the Second. Hebrews 9:12 {as also vs 24 "agia" and vs 25, "ta agia"} simply reads ta agia, which is the Sanctuary, and not agia agion, the Holy of Holies.

Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; Hebrews 9:25
Paul is very clear about the separation of the two veils. It never says Jesus entered through the Second Veil, and did not then need to at His 2nd Ascension, being from the Mt of Olives. We see Jesus ascending in Psa 24 and compare Rev 4 and 5 {compare to Acts 1-2 and Psa 133; Exo 29:7; Lev 8:12; also needed to be 12, Exo 28:21-22, 29:5, 39:14; then the Holy Spirit was sent - Rev 5:6}. Rev 4 speaks of the First Veil:

After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. Revelation 4:1​

Thus John is taken in the Holy Place, the First 'Tabernacle' of Heaven, revealing the 7 lamps which sat directly across from {before} the Table of Shewbread which was Crowned, and had two stacks, representing the Throne of God in the Holy Place:

And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God. Revelation 4:5​

Revelation 3:8, in the period of the 6th Church, thousand{s} of years {1800+ yrs} later from the First Church of Ephesus, another door/veil is seen opened in Heaven, while the first was closed, and this is also witnessed in Daniel:

And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; Revelation 3:7

I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name. Revelation 3:8

I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. Daniel 7:13​

 

[Davy]

Lets compare one verse, 1 John 4:3:

NIV - but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

RSV - and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of antichrist, of which you heard that it was coming, and now it is in the world already.

ASV and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it cometh; and now it is in the world already.

KJV - And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

We see here in 1 John 4:3 that the NIV takes out the whole point in the text, "NIV leaves out the fact that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh--yet another swipe at the divinity of Christ." https://mundall.com/erik/NIV-KJV.htm

The reason those versions other than the KJV leave out that point is because they originate from Westcott & Hort's New Testament Greek translation from the Alexandrian, Egypt manuscripts.

The Christian school at Alexandria, Egypt of which early Church fathers like Clement and Origen were from, was more liberal, likely from the many Greek Gnostic teachings that were popular in the area. Most modern NT translations are based on the Wescott & Hort 1881 Greek texts. The KJV was based on the Textus Receptus or Received Texts, or Majority Texts, because they make up the majority of Greek NT manuscripts.

 

[reformed1689]

Again you are bearing false witness since I have given you TANGIBLE EVIDENCE that they are precisely and exactly the same (barring updated spellings, which cannot be used against an older translation).

False, you gave one passage. I showed evidence that refutes your position.

So how did God preserve His Word from about c 1500 BC to 2020 AD? That's over 3,500 years. God used the Hebrew scribes (sopherim, tannaim, amoraim, and masorethes) and Christian monks in their scriptoriums to carefully and faithfully make copies of copies of copies by hand until printing came into existence.

Notice the manuscripts do not change doctrine. So yes, the Doctrine of the Bible was carefully preserved.

To sum up (1) the KJV has not changed since 1611, (2) the KJV has been THE English language Bible for almost 400 years, and (3) the KJV is available in an even more updated form as the King James 2000 Bible.

I've already shown this to be absolutely false.

 

[ReChoired]

...I read and have taught NT Greek. I conclude that the NIV is a faithful translation from the Nestle-Aland Greek and Tyndale House Greek NT.

Being an 'accurate' or 'faithful translation' of a corrupt text doesn't make the text itself, correct, does it? It is non-sequitur. The N/A and UBS texts (which constantly changes, N/A is on 28th edition now? (and the changes from 25-28 are tremendous) and UBS 5th now right? - Comparison NA28 - UBS5 :: academic-bible.com )

See the real deception of the NA28th edition - TEXTUAL WARFARE ! : Does NESTLE-ALAND 28th Edition of the Greek New Testament WEIGH the Evidence FAIRLY . . . in 1 JOHN 4:3 ?

Instead of concluding that the NIV has taken out that Jesus had come in the flesh, I'm of the view that the TR and KJV have added to the earliest (Alexandrian) MSS. 'Jesus Christ has come in the flesh' is not in the earliest MSS.

Oz

What 'earliest MSS' are you referring to specifically, and what makes these accurate, and by what standard did you test?

"And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God" is found in the following MSS:

"... K, L, 049, 0142
Cursives: MAJORITY
Vulg-ms
Syr: peshitta, harclean

It is also extant in 0245. ..." - A Closer Look: Early Manuscripts & The AV by Jack Moorman, page 147​

It is also in the letters of the so called "ECF":

For instance, Polycarp (mid. 2nd cent.), cites 1 John 4, as it basically is in the KJB at present:

"... "For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is antichrist;" 1 John 4:3 and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross, is of the devil; and whosoever perverts the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts, and says that there is neither a resurrection nor a judgment, he is the first-born of Satan. ..." - Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians - CHURCH FATHERS: Epistle to the Philippians (Polycarp)​

For instance, Tertullian (mid. 2nd to mid. 3rd cent.), cited 1 John 4, as it basically is in the KJB at present:

"... There are even now another sort of Nicolaitans. Theirs is called the Gaian heresy. But in his epistle he especially designates those as "Antichrists" who "denied that Christ had come in the flesh," 1 John 4:3 ..." - Prescription against Heretics, Tertullian - CHURCH FATHERS: The Prescription Against Heretics (Tertullian)​

For instance, Cyprian of Carthage (mid. 3rd cent.), cites 1 John 4, as it basically is in the KJB at present:

"... Also Paul to the Galatians: But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent His Son, horn of a woman. Also in the Epistle of John: Every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God. But whosoever denies that He has come in the flesh is not of God, but is of the spirit of Antichrist. ..." - Treatise 12, Second Book - CHURCH FATHERS: Treatise 12, Second Book (Cyprian of Carthage)​

For instance, Augustine (mid 4th cent.), cites 1 John 4, at least twice, as it basically is in KJB at present:

"... 12. There remains then the test by which it is to be proved to be the Spirit of God. He has indeed set down a sign, and this, belike, difficult: let us see, however. We are to recur to that charity; it is that which teacheth us, because it is the unction. However, what saith he here? “Prove the spirits, whether they be from God: because many false prophets have gone out into this world.” Now there are all heretics and all schismatics. How then am I to prove the spirit? He goes on: “In this is known2337 the Spirit of God.” Wake up the ears of your heart. We were at a loss; we were saying, Who knows? who discerns? Behold, he is about to tell the sign. “Hereby is known the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is the antichrist, of whom ye have heard that he should come; and even now already is he in this world.” 2338 ..." - Homily 6 on First John, Augustine - Philip Schaff: NPNF1-07. St. Augustine: Homilies on the Gospel of John; Homilies on the First Epistle of John; Soliloquies - Christian Classics Ethereal Library see also: CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 6 on First John (Augustine)

"... Surely he is antichrist who denies that Christ has come in the flesh. 1 John 4:3 ..." - On the Flesh of Christ, Augustine CHURCH FATHERS: On the Flesh of Christ (Tertullian)
​

For instance, Theodoret (mid. 5th cent.), cites 1 John 4, as it basically is in KJB at present:

"... hear the great John in his Catholic Epistle saying "Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God, and this is that spirit of Anti-Christ." ..." - Dialogue 1, Theodoret - CHURCH FATHERS: Dialogue 1 (Theodoret)
​

Adam Clarke, states that it is in, "... in Origen, Cyril, Theodoret, Irenaeus, and others. ..." - Adam Clarke's commentary on 1 John 4:3

 

[reformed1689]

Being an 'accurate' or 'faithful translation' of a corrupt text doesn't make the text itself, correct, does it?

You actually have to prove that it is a corrupt text.

 

[reformed1689]

Being an 'accurate' or 'faithful translation' of a corrupt text doesn't make the text itself, correct, does it? It is non-sequitur. The N/A and UBS texts (which constantly changes, N/A is on 28th edition now? (and the changes from 25-28 are tremendous) and UBS 5th now right? - Comparison NA28 - UBS5 :: academic-bible.com )

See the real deception of the NA28th edition - TEXTUAL WARFARE ! : Does NESTLE-ALAND 28th Edition of the Greek New Testament WEIGH the Evidence FAIRLY . . . in 1 JOHN 4:3 ?

What 'earliest MSS' are you referring to specifically, and what makes these accurate, and by what standard did you test?

"And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God" is found in the following MSS:

"... K, L, 049, 0142
Cursives: MAJORITY
Vulg-ms
Syr: peshitta, harclean

It is also extant in 0245. ..." - A Closer Look: Early Manuscripts & The AV by Jack Moorman, page 147​

It is also in the letters of the so called "ECF":

For instance, Polycarp (mid. 2nd cent.), cites 1 John 4, as it basically is in the KJB at present:

"... "For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is antichrist;" 1 John 4:3 and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross, is of the devil; and whosoever perverts the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts, and says that there is neither a resurrection nor a judgment, he is the first-born of Satan. ..." - Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians - CHURCH FATHERS: Epistle to the Philippians (Polycarp)​

For instance, Tertullian (mid. 2nd to mid. 3rd cent.), cited 1 John 4, as it basically is in the KJB at present:

"... There are even now another sort of Nicolaitans. Theirs is called the Gaian heresy. But in his epistle he especially designates those as "Antichrists" who "denied that Christ had come in the flesh," 1 John 4:3 ..." - Prescription against Heretics, Tertullian - CHURCH FATHERS: The Prescription Against Heretics (Tertullian)​

For instance, Cyprian of Carthage (mid. 3rd cent.), cites 1 John 4, as it basically is in the KJB at present:

"... Also Paul to the Galatians: But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent His Son, horn of a woman. Also in the Epistle of John: Every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God. But whosoever denies that He has come in the flesh is not of God, but is of the spirit of Antichrist. ..." - Treatise 12, Second Book - CHURCH FATHERS: Treatise 12, Second Book (Cyprian of Carthage)​

For instance, Augustine (mid 4th cent.), cites 1 John 4, at least twice, as it basically is in KJB at present:

"... 12. There remains then the test by which it is to be proved to be the Spirit of God. He has indeed set down a sign, and this, belike, difficult: let us see, however. We are to recur to that charity; it is that which teacheth us, because it is the unction. However, what saith he here? “Prove the spirits, whether they be from God: because many false prophets have gone out into this world.” Now there are all heretics and all schismatics. How then am I to prove the spirit? He goes on: “In this is known2337 the Spirit of God.” Wake up the ears of your heart. We were at a loss; we were saying, Who knows? who discerns? Behold, he is about to tell the sign. “Hereby is known the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is the antichrist, of whom ye have heard that he should come; and even now already is he in this world.” 2338 ..." - Homily 6 on First John, Augustine - Philip Schaff: NPNF1-07. St. Augustine: Homilies on the Gospel of John; Homilies on the First Epistle of John; Soliloquies - Christian Classics Ethereal Library see also: CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 6 on First John (Augustine)

"... Surely he is antichrist who denies that Christ has come in the flesh. 1 John 4:3 ..." - On the Flesh of Christ, Augustine CHURCH FATHERS: On the Flesh of Christ (Tertullian)
​

For instance, Theodoret (mid. 5th cent.), cites 1 John 4, as it basically is in KJB at present:

"... hear the great John in his Catholic Epistle saying "Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God, and this is that spirit of Anti-Christ." ..." - Dialogue 1, Theodoret - CHURCH FATHERS: Dialogue 1 (Theodoret)
​

Adam Clarke, states that it is in, "... in Origen, Cyril, Theodoret, Irenaeus, and others. ..." - Adam Clarke's commentary on 1 John 4:3

You can know that he has come in the flesh from verse 2. That doesn't boost the argument from the TR. You don't need flesh in verse 3 because of context.

 

[ReChoired]

You can know that he has come in the flesh from verse 2. That doesn't boost the argument from the TR. You don't need flesh in verse 3 because of context.

What I "need" or "don't need" is irrelevant to what actually "is" "inspired", "preserved" to the present and historically in the text.

 

[ReChoired]

You actually have to prove that it is a corrupt text.

Just did that - Are Doctrines affected by Modern Versions

 

[reformed1689]

What I "need" or "don't need" is irrelevant to what actually "is" "inspired", "preserved" to the present and historically in the text.

And that is precisely the point. You have to prove that the TR is what is inspired and the earlier manuscripts are not.