Walter the KJO Advocate, Part 4 - 02/23/2004

First off, I'm not aware of quoting anything from G.Riplinger' book and no, i did not read it, in one of the links which i include, you can find Riplinger' reply to D. Cloud' criticism, and his answer to that reply, if her work was as bad as they say, than she deserves the criticism, but that does not change the fact that modern bible versions are deadly. Just try to keep in mind how and when it ALL started: Gen 3:1"Yea, hath God saith...?" attempts to corrupt The Word Of God are both, real and sccessful. But according to some, with no original manuscripts there's no final autority, all we have is a bunch of no longer inspired, imperfect, impure copies and translations, and it takes an "educated" Greek and Hebrew "speaking" guru, juggling between several different Bible versions, to arrive at what he thinks is a correct meaning, right? was God sitting with His fingers crossed watching Erasmus "hastly" and "haphazardly" "gathering"(like some would like to have it) those "late" and "obscure" manuscripts, thinking "I really hope he pick's the right ones" (by the way it was not Erasmus but Stephanus and Beza whose work was used for the 1611 KJV) at least thats what we've been arguing about all that time. Any statement denying that Our Lord left us without His Word, comes from the pit of hell...literally, because it makes a liar out of God ! Why? KJV reads:Luk 4:4 "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God" which means that every word He spoke for our profit we must have record of. NIV,NAS,NWT convieniently skip words:"...but by every Word of God" therefore denying themselves the title thereof, plus neutralising message, that we are to constantly "eat" His Word. Consider Ps 12:6-7"The words of Jehovah are pure words;As silver tried in a furnace on earth, Purified seven times.7"Thou wilt keep them, O Jehovah, Thou wilt preserve them from this generation for ever." another promise from Jehovah to protect His Word FOREVER! NIV perverts the Ps12: 7".....protect us from such people forever." those are only two verses i chose now to the "perversions" KJV reads in Mat 9:13"for i am not come to call the rigtheous, but sinners to repentance".NIV, NAS, NWT, omit the word "repentance" making the verse sound a little strange, totally misrepresenting His mission, and hiding one of the basis of salvation. Mat 18:11"for the Son of man is come to save that which was lost" precious Words of The Saviour Himself, which for some were not worthy to be included, NIV and NWT omits the whole verse, NAS sports doubt-casting footnote... Mar11:10"that cometh in the name of the Lord" NIV,NAS,NWT all just say:"coming"Jn 6:69" Christ the son of the living God" now this is our very "Rock" but the NIV,NAS,NWT all say "Holy One of God" ironicly though, if you look at Mar 1:24 and Luk 4:34 you'll see that this very title "Holy One of God" was used by demons just about to be cast out... .Mat25:13" hard it is for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!" NIV,NAS,NWT all skip words"for them that trust in riches" implying that salvation may require some hard work, plus it does not alarm those who do trust in richies. 1 Tim 3:16 "God was manifest in flesh". NIV,NAS,NWT use "He..." Rev21:24"And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it" NIV,NAS,NWT, all skip words:"of them which are saved" making the meaning as oposite as heaven and hell. This is only a tiny fraction of all the verses that are omitted or perverted in modern versions (I urge you to check the links that i included) it would take a willfully ignorant and naive person to insist that there's no doctrine compromised in modern bible versions, your "earliest and best" manuscripts do not contain those verses because they were removed from them, they more often disagree with each other than agree,(and that's actual statement of one of the reaserchers) they are missing and twisting words and verses because they were edited from them several times over, by several different scribes, they were in great condition because nobody used them. Wake up Ben, don't take The Spirit Of God for granted, but pray for it daily, there are many sites quoting from modern bible versions, the reason i wrote to you is your view on John3:36 (obey v.s belive) the only kind of obedience God approves of is the one that comes as a fruit of belief and can never be interchangable. I've got Textus Receptus, Westcott&Hort and KJVSL(corresponding greek word following english word)on cd. rom and though i do not know Greek i know those words visually and asTR so is W&H in John3:36 the word in question "pisteuo" SGD#4100 meaning: "to have faith, belive ..."nothing about obeying, it is also the same word as used in John 3:16 (!!!) i don't know what made you say that i chose the more "obscure" meaning, but i know that reading corrupted bibles cannot be edyfying. As for causing strife... Jesus' teachings were to avoid strife in worldly matters never did He tell us to avoid strife when His Word was in question or disfavor, to the contrary Mat 10:34"think not that i am come to send peace on earth, i come not to send peace but a sword" if we don't defend the integrity of our doctrine, who will? Are you ofended? Heb 4:12"For The Word Of God is quick, and powerfull, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the diving asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart" are we to carefully stash it away as too sharp? and use the late "plastic" ones. All new agers, catholics, gay and feminism advocates, liberal"christians" want to do away with KJV any way they can, do you know why? because there's no armor against it! Consider John 6:66-67"from that time many disciples went back, and walked no more with him; then said Jesus unto the twelve, will ye also go away?" He could've called them: come back i'll explain! but He didn't. was He "unloving"? in fact He turned and challenged His twelve! "will ye also go away? there is no compromise my friend, and unless you don't care if He "spits you out" you better straighten out with Him while today is still called today. walter.


Walter...words escape me. I truly do feel sorry for you. Rather than accept the KJV as one acceptable translation of the Bible, you have set it apart as an idol. That has obscured your ability to see truth from error, fact from fiction. First, let me say that we are not "new agers, catholics, gay or feminism advocates, or liberal Christians." We also don't want to tear down the KJV - we both use it frequently. However, in keeping with what the translators of the KJV rightly said in their address to the readers, we use a variety of translations for the beneficial interpretation of the Scriptures. We don't want to tear the KJV from its role as divine Scripture, but we do want to keep people like you from making an idol out of it as you have done.

You asked, "was God sitting with His fingers crossed watching Erasmus 'hastly' and 'haphazardly' 'gathering'(like some would like to have it) those 'late' and 'obscure' manuscripts, thinking 'I really hope he pick's the right ones'" Are you suggesting that God did that while the later translators did their service to the Lord? And Theodore de Beza's text was based on Robert Stephanus's, which was based on Erasmus's text. They're all virtually identical, but Erasmus's text was the foundation of the rest. You said of the early texts that "they are missing and twisting words and verses because they were edited from them several times over, by several different scribes." You are so certain that this is the case, as opposed to the later texts having added and twisted words and verses, that you must have proof. What proof do you have that the texts that had been copied fewer times were less accurate than those that had been copied for hundreds and hundreds of years more?

Now, we again arrive at an impasse. I have asked repeatedly for you to tell me what key doctrines have been lost from the newer translations. Yet all you have done is give examples of words or verses that are present in the KJV but absent in the NIV/NASB. The issue of additional words and verses in the KJV was never a point of contention, Walter. You still have not told me what key doctrines are missing from the NIV/NASB. At this point in our conversation, I must assume that it's because you know of none, and are simply blindly defending a beautiful translation of the Bible as your idol. Until you can point out the key doctrinal differences to me, then we have nothing further to talk about. I will not stoop to the KJO level of causing needless strife among my fellow Christians.

"Of these things put [them] in remembrance, charging [them] before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, [but] to the subverting of the hearers. But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all [men], apt to teach, patient..." - 2 Timothy 2:14, 23-24

In Christ,

Ben and Jennifer Rast
Contender Ministries