Bible Versions Questions and discussion about the Bible version issue.

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-09-2008, 10:55 AM
Posts: n/a

Sorry if you believe loving the truth and hating evil (and speaking against it - whether it be wrong conduct or false doctrine) is hateful.

Psalms 119:104 Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way.

Psalms 119:128 Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way.
The King James Bible Page SwordSearcher Bible Software
Old 03-11-2008, 12:27 AM
Biblestudent's Avatar
Biblestudent Biblestudent is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 662

Sorry to say this, but I had many Pentecostal friends. I observed that most of them are "open-minded" ONLY when I agree with them. When I disagree with them, they would tell me I am "narrow-minded". Am I? Well, I still consider them friends, knowing that they just can't endure "sound doctrine" (2 Tim. 4:1-4). I am only wondering until now who of us are open-minded or narrow-minded.
Old 03-20-2008, 03:43 PM
avdefender avdefender is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2
Default All Bible perverters the same

I just joined the forum today (3/20/08) so I'm probably a day late and a dollar short in this conversation but I just can't resist commenting.

This Fooley guy claims that no translation can be inspired. By this statement he is discounting most of the New Testament and a good portion of the Old Testament as being inspired. Every time that the Apostle Paul, Peter, John and other New Testament inspired writers quote a passage out of the Old Testament, they are quoting these passages from either Hebrew, or the other languages that the Old Testament was written in by the inspired authors. He either has to say that Paul's Old Testament references are not inspired or that Paul is not quoting these many passages from the inspired Old Testament. Any way that you put it the reasonable conclusion is that a translation can be inspired.

His ridiculous claim that the only perfect Scripture is in the originals is just as Fooleyish (yuk, yuk) as his translation belief. There has never been an original that seems to have outlived its authors in the Old Testament. The original "ten commandments" that were given Moses never made it to the base of Mt. Sinai. He came down the mountain, heard the people partying to Led Zepplin and destroyed the "originals" on the rocks of Sinai. (Ex. 32:19)
Thus we see the very first instance of "original manuscripts" destroyed 40 days after God gives them to man. By the way, the Bible says that God wrote on these stone tabels with His own finger! What an archeological relic that would have been! Leave it to untempered man to destroy that which God wants to give to man.
Moses is then commanded by God to go back to Sinai and is given a copy of the originals with some more added to give to the nation of Israel. This set of copied originals was placed in the Ark of the Covenant which as we know does not exist today. Oops! There goes another set of originals.
There are several instances in the Old Testament where an original manuscript is destroyed almost immediately after its transmission to man.
There is no such thing as an original manuscript in existance. We thus must rely and we do rely on copies, which by definition of the doctrine of the inspiration of the Word of God, must be inspired.

Finally, it is no wonder that Fooley has lifted himself up as the final authority of the scriptures. He is making his own book and will try to market it as a Bible. All Bible perverters do this, elevating their spirituality beyond their capacity to obey the Bible and attempting to impress others with his so called education. It doesn't work, I'm not impressed.
Old 03-20-2008, 03:56 PM
Paladin54's Avatar
Paladin54 Paladin54 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: San Diego, California, the most vile state in the Union
Posts: 169

To reinforce your point even more, avdefender, the Ten Commandments as recorded in Exodus 20 aren't the written copy:God spoke this to Israel from the top of Mt. Sinai.
Then the first copy (if you will), is written with God's hand, then the copy of that copy because Moses destroyed the first "copy". This is why there are three accounts of the Ten Commandments in the Torah, or first 5 books of the OT.

In support of your argument, people are using bad logic when they say "older is better", because just the opposite is true.

Allow me to explain: The reliable ones were transferred to different churches so they could be copied. They would continue copying and using the original manuscript (or autograph) until it was impossible to use. Thus, it would be burned ceremonially, much like to do to our flags that can no longer be used.

So of course, you wouldn't use the heretical codexes of Sinaiticus, Alexandrius, and Vaticanus, and therefore, they would never see any "wear and tear" BECAUSE THEY WERE NEVER USED!
These three were produced by the Alexandrian Egypt.

These codexes have no value over the 5,000+ Greek aupographs we have that are in full agreement with each other, as opposed to Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, which disagree with each other over 3000 times in the gospels alone!

Last edited by Paladin54; 03-20-2008 at 03:59 PM. Reason: I can't even write in proper English, why would I brutalize Greek and Hebrew by ruining them? lol

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

The King James Bible Page SwordSearcher Bible Software

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:42 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®, Copyright vBulletin Solutions Inc.

Website © AV1611.Com.
Posts represent only the opinions of users of this forum and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the webmaster.

Software for Believing Bible Study

Contact Us AV1611.Com