|
Viewing 1 - 7 out of 7 Blogs.
The Apostle Paul in Romans 10:9 explicitly States one must Acknowledge and confess the fact of "The Lord Jesus" as part of biblical salvation (confession-Belief-obedience; 10:9, 10,16). In the Geeek text you will find here the title of "Kyrios", The Lord, because it is with the definite article its hebrew would read "Ha Adhohn" or "The True Lord" as in the case of Exodus 23:17, 34:23, Isaiah 1:24, 3:1, 10:16,33, 19:4, Micah 4:13, Malachi 3:1 et.al. Limits its applicationof this titleexclusively to Jehovah God. The Apostle Paul in another place also proclaims another vital issue, in 1 Corinthians 12:3 "No man can say Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost" here again it is the same case of the definite article. In some editions of the Hebrew Text for the NT, such as Reichardt 1846,render the translation as the sacred name of God, YahWeh/Jehovah/YHWH, so Jesus is YahWeh, Jesus is Jehovah (many editions edited the rendering to avoid the use of the sacred name to conform to orthodoxy, yet understand its meaning as YHWH, Ha Adhohn) So why is it the trinitarians among others cannot confess Jesus Christ is the Lord, He is Jehovah/Yahweh, the one true and living God? The apostle Paul states in Romans 14:10,11 we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ for it is written (as) I live, saith the Lord every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God also in Philipians 2:10,11 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ (is) Lord, to the glory of God the father. Here again the same syntax of words, Let us look at the Verses the Apostle is Quoting, just to clarify;"...there is no God else beside me:a just God and a savior; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am god and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth...that unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. surely, shall one say, in the Lord have I righteousness..." In these verses from the Prophet Isaiah (45:21-25) Lord=Jehovah, the sacred name of God, Yahweh, the one true God, and the apostle quotes and attributes these to Jesus Christ as the Lord, of our appearing and confession; Jesus is Jehovah, he is God! The scriptures also declare in Isaiah 44:6: "thus saith the Lord (Jehovah/Yahweh) the king of israel, and his redeemer the Lord (Jehovah/Yahweh) of hosts; I am the first and I am the Last; and beside me there is no God Who is "the First and Last" in Revelation 1:8&11?Who does John look upon in 1:12-18? Who was dead and is alive in Revelation 2:8? Who is coming in Revelation 22:12&13? According to John he is the Lord Jesus (22:20)! The scriptures plainly show forth one true God; Jehovah/YahWeh, it is to be our witness "Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord (YahWeh), and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am He, before me there was no God formed neither shall there be after me, I even I, am the Lord (YahWeh) and beside me there is no savior" (Isa.43:10,11, 45:5) Jesus himself puts the greatest priority on this truth of one true God alone by giving the shema of Israel (Deut. 6:4,5) as the greatest commandment, of one God alone (Mark 12:28-32). The truth of monotheism; the belief that there is but one God! The early Christians were just this, monotheist, as 1 Tim. 1:17 shows us "the only wise God", that Jesus was this one true God is evident in John 1:1 "In the begining was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" John calls the father and the Word one God (as he confirms in 1 John 5:7), that the Word became a man, in the flesh (John 1:14), as Paul states in 1 Timothy 3:16. Thomas was also a monotheist who believed Deut. 6:4, says to Jesus "My Lord and my God"; Jesus certainly did not rebuke him in anywise (John 20:28)! Jesus is God! I echo Thomas By saying with all my being, Jesus Christ of Nazareth is my Lord and my God come in the flesh! So naturally it arises amongest all of this; Why is he called the son of God if he is god? As John says he wrote that we may believe Jesus is the Christ, the son of God, and that believing we may have life in his name (John 20:31). Well, How did the jewish monotheist who rejected Jesus understand the title "son of God" ? They knew that when He called himself by this title He was claiming to be God, therefore they said he was a blasphemer for taking this title upon himself, punishable by death (Leviticus 24:16), by claiming to be the son of God He was claiming equality with him- by claiming the same nature as God; a son is equal in nature to his father, this is clear in Mark 14:61-64 and John 19:7, and even more plain at John 5:17,18 " 'My father worketh hitherto, and I work', therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because He not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his father, making himself EQUAL with God" So "the son of God" expresses the claim of equality. In verses such as John 14:28 Jesus says greater NOT better, the Father is greater Positionally because the son is in a voluntary state of humility (Philipians 2:5) ; He did nothing apart from the father (John 8:28) and he claimed equal honor with God (John 5:23). According to Colossians 1:15 Jesus is the image of the invisible God! Jesus is called the first-born which means Pre-eminent one, as Gen 49:3,4 with Reuben, though he was the first born/created, he lost his birthright/preeminince among Jacobs sons (Gen 35:22 / 1 Chron 5:1 ) As also with Ephraim (Gen 41:51-52, Jer. 31:9, Gen. 48:17-20) as in the promise to david in Psalms 89:27; preemince NOT first CREATED. So why is Jesus Chief? Because he created all things as Colossians 1:16 and 17 declares BY HIM ALL THINGS WERE CREATED AND FOR HIM AND IN HIM ALL THINGS CONSIST. As John 1:3 declares All things were made by him. In the Psalms (102:24-27) Jehovah is the creator and in Hebrews (1:10-12) Jehovah the creator IS Jesus the creator! We are commanded to worship the Lord God ALONE : Deuteronomy 6:13, as Jesus declares in Matthew 4:10. Angels and Men refuse such worship in the scriptures, such as at Revelation 19:10 and Acts 10:25,26..Yet Jesus himself is worshipped as in Matthew 28:9 and Luke 24:50-53 (likewise Matthew 14:33, 15:25, and John 9:38 ) BECAUSE HE IS GOD! We not only worship him but pray TO him, as in Acts 2:21, as He himself directed in John 14:13&14, andas the Martyr Stephen did in Acts 7:59,60 ; because HE IS GOD.."Lord Jesus" THE Lord/Jehovah Jesus "Receive my spirit" (see Ecclesiastes 12:7). Jesus Christ is the Lord God! We must have this confession as Romans 10:9 and 1 Corinthians 12:3 declare! unless we do not have the Holy Ghost, since it declares we can only say Jesus is Lord, Jesus is YHWH, Jehovah Jesus; ONLY by the Holy Ghost! "If so be that the spirit of God dwell in you"(Romans 8:9) "He will worship God and report that God is in you of a truth" (1 Corinthians 14:25) "The Lord is that spirit" (2 Corinthians 3:17) "Know ye not that Jesus Christ is in you, EXCEPT YE BE REPROBATES?" (2 Corinthians 13:5) "Now if any man have not the spirit of Christ, He is none of his" (Romans 8:9) "Examine yourselves whether ye be in the faith" (2 Corinthians 13:5). The Prophet Jeremiah declared "The great, the mighty God, Jehovah of hosts is His name" The prophet Isaiah declared "Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and...His name shall be called the mighty God,The everlasting father, the prince of peace" (9:6) Jesus Christ was that Child, he is the Father Come in the Flesh!Every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (Php. 2:11) and that is what the word of God declares; NOT this second person of three, not A Lord of Lords, but the One true God, He is the Father, He is the Spirit: ONE! (1 John 5:7) One throne and He alone is upon it! (Revelation 4:2)
I want first to deal with one of the most common objections to the sole deity of the messiah Jesus as God alone, and that is the use of the hebrew word Elohim ; due to its plural tense some misguided trinitarians see some proof of their imagined plurality in the Godhead. Elohim is the most common word in the hebrew scriptures which is translated as "God" in our english translations. It is also used to refer to false gods (Judges 8:33) spirit beings (1 Samuel 28:13) and judges (Psalm 82). In the hebrew language plurals are used to express greatness or majesty, multiple attributes ,etc. Elohim is used in situations that definitly portray only one person or personality: God to Jacob (Genesis 32:30), the golden calf (Exodus 32:1,4,8,23,31) which was one calf (Exodus 32:4,5,8,19-20,24,35) it is used for singular pagan gods also (Judges 8:33, 16:23, 2 Kings 1:2,3, 19:37). The trinitarians do not even stop to ask themselves: why the jews, knowing Elohim was plural, cling so tenaciously to the oneness of God? The Elohim arguments are one of those pitiful "strawmen"! John Calvin ,who championed trinitarianist theology; who also burned Servetus of Villanova, for opposing the trinity, at the stake in 1553; not once resorted to such a fanciful discussion even he knew the truth of the matter of grammer in the hebrew tongue. Allow me to let the trinitarians speak for themselves on this matter of Elohim:John Miley (1893) "Only an overstrained definition, however could give it the sense of a trinal distinction of persons in the Godhead...Elohim is placed in apposition with Jehovah (Deut.4:35/1Kng 18:21) and in such instances a plural sense of the former would be inconsistant with the latter, therefore Elohim has no fixed plural sense which can give the personal distinctions of the trinity"-Systematic TheologyWilliam Smith "The plural form of Elohim has given rise to much discussion. The fanciful idea, that it reffered to the trinity of persons in the Godhead, hardly finds now a supporter among scholars.It is what grammarians call the plurality of majisty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength, the sum of powers displayed by God"-Bible Dictionary Modern scholarship is now reaching for straws or are seriously misguided to propose this stumbling block to the oneness of God! Now let us look at the scriptural texts concerning Elohim as Jehovah in relation to the Lord Jesus Christ for a moment. Jehovah/Yahweh proclaimed himself Elohim in Exodus 16:12 "I am Yahweh your Elohim" and again in 20:2 as well as other places such as found in Leviticus 23:22, 24:22, Numbers 10:10 and 15:41 to name a few. When Moses and the elders of Israel saw the Elohim of Israel, they saw HIS feet NOT THEIRS (Exodus 24:9,10)! The Prophets thereafter proclaimed Yahweh/Jehovah himself is the only true Elohim; "Thus saith Yahweh...beside me is no Elohim"(Isaiah 44:6)"Yahweh is the true Elohim"(Jeremiah 10:10) throughout Ezekiel God proclaimed the very oneness of his nature using "I" the singular pronoun hundreds of times but never "we"; "For Yahweh, he is Elohim and there is no other beside him"(Deuteronomy 4:35).
Let us go on further into the matter; look at Isaiah 35:4-6 "Say to them that are of a fearful heart, be strong, fear not: Behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompense: He will come and save you. Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as a hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing" Now according to the scriptures in Luke 7:22, Who came? Look at Isaiah 40:3 "The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God" And according to Matthew 3:3, Whose way was prepared for? According to the prophet Zechariah it would be Elohim sold for thirty pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:4,12,13) Who was sold out according to Matthew 27:9,10? It would be Elohim who would be pierced (Zechariah 12:10) at calvary (John 19:37) It would be Elohim coming back as King (Zechariah 14:5) and we know who is coming back do we not- Jude 14, Revelation 19:5,11, 13, 14-16, and 1 Thessalonians 4:14-18! The Apostle Paul in Ephesians 4:7-10 applies some very interesting scriptures to the Lord Jesus Christ, for he is quoting from the Psalms, 68:17-20, looking at these texts it becomes very, very clear the matter of who is God alone. The psalmist calls him Elohim in 17,18, El (the singular of elohim) in 19,20, Adonai (v. 17,19,20) Yahweh (v. 20) and Yah, the abbriviated form of Yahweh in 18. These verses identify the plural Elohim and Adonai with the singular nouns El, Yah, and Yahweh. Now according to Paul to the Ephesians Jesus himself is Elohim, Yahweh, Adonai, El, and Yah! No one suggests their is a plurality of persons in Jesus do they? Jesus alone is our Elohim, He is Yahweh/Jehovah! As the scripture saith "God was in christ, reconciling the world unto himself" (2 Corinthians 5:19) "In Him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily"(Colossians 2:9) "God was manifested in the flesh"(1 Timothy 3:16) and we find Stephen calling upon God saying Lord Jesus receive my spirit-Acts 7:59!
The foundation tenant of the Holy Scriptures, the Tanakh, or the "Old Testament ", the very bible of the Jews, Gods people, the very scriptures Jesus and the Apostles held onto as the word of God to man, was that their is but one God alone in the universe and him alone do we serve.DEUTERONOMY 6:4,5-"Hear O Israel:The lord our God is One Lord:and Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might" Hearing is to take heed and acting on what is heard.To hear is in this sense to obey(Deut.29:2-4). The belief and worship of the one true God far precedes Moses or the Israelites,the time of Jacob(Gen.35:2-4) or Abraham (Gen.14:22), as is evident by Melchizedek(Gen.14:18) long before Noah(Gen.6:8,13) to the days of Enoch(Gen.5:21-24), even to the days of Enos(Gen.4:26), and of course I would say to beginning with Adam's own family(Gen.2-4); even secular history documents and confirms the worship of one true God alone, such as in the oldest civilization in the world ;China, with the pre-Confucius days of the worship of Shang-Ti. According to the shema of Deut.6:4,5, God is alone one over all! God took Israel and revealed himself in all his mighty attributes(Deut.4:34) to shew forth his oneness(Deut.4:35) and uniqueness as the one true God(Deut.4:39) and commanded sole worship of him alone(Deut.5:7). He has extolled his unique oneness very plainly, even I, am he and there is no god with me:I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal:neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand"(Deut.32:39) King David knew well the sole oneness of God "O Lord God; there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears" (2Samuel7:22) "Thou art God alone" (Ps.86:10) To depart from the worship of him alone was to incite his jealous wrath as was spoken by Jeremiah long ago"they are not the Lords"[Jer.2:5,11, 5:7,10] The prophet Isaiah, speaking to the flippant Israel,confirms the oneness of the Lord God alone"Thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth: thou hast made Heaven and Earth"(37:16)"Before me there was no God formed neither shall there be after me"(43:10)"there is none beside me, I am the Lord, and there is none else"(45:6)"I am the first and the last; and beside me there is no God"(44:6)"Is there a God beside me? Yea there is no God: I know not any"(44:8)"I am the Lord that maketh all things;that stretcheth forth the heavens alone;that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself"(44:24)"there is no God else beside me:A just God and a savior; there is none beside me" (45:21) "I am God and there is none else" (45:22,45:18) "Remember the former things of old:for I am God, and there is none else;I am God and their is none like me"(46:9)"I will not give my glory to another"(48:11) In the largest defense of Gods one sole uniqueness at the mouth of his Prophet Isaiah(ch.44-46) he says"I have not spoken in secret"and "I the lord speak righteousness, I declare things that are right"(45:19)He not once declared his tri-personality! Even unto the last volume of those Holy scriptures it is exclaimed plainly"hast not one God created us ?"andthe days shall come among all the nations of worship of him alone(Malachi 2:10,1:11) He is proclaimed as "thou Holy one of Israel"(Ps.71:22) and spoken of as "the Holy one of Israel" (Ps.78:41). Isaiah proclaimed him "They have forsaken the Lord, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward"(Isa.1:4)"Let the councel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come that we may know it!"(Isa.5:19) "Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble , and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the lord of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel"(Isa.5:24) And what of you? Have you cast away his commandments? Have you despised the word of the Lord; that he is alone one, He is the Holy One not Holy Trinity: Of his own word? The Lord himself proclaimed Deut.6:4,5 as the greatest of the commandments:Mark 12:28-34"...'The first of all commandments is, Hear,O Israel:The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment'...and the scribe said unto him,'Well master, thou hast said the truth:for there is one God; and there is none other but he'..." The rest of the New Testament echoes our Lord in there being solely one God: "Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the gentiles? Yes, of the gentiles also: seeing it is one God"(Rom.3:29,30) Yet the trinitarian would have us believe the Jews worship him as one while the gentile church as three? Paul said "That there is none other God but one" (1cor.8:4) "one God and father of all"(Eph.4:6)"God is one"(Gal.3:20) Paul never proclaimed a three person oneness as the trinitarians would have us believe, If so where anywhere is this Holy Trinity proclaimed in the book of Acts? Did any of his Jewish brethren persecute the Christians for preaching this "revelation" of a divine trinity? O foolish trinitarian even the devils know more than you "Thou believest that there is one God: thou doest well: the devils also believe and tremble"(James 2:19)! The apostle John looked upon heavens scenes and proclaimed "Behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne" (Rev.4:2) Not some threesome of power and glory rather one "...Holy,Holy, Holy Lord God Almighty, which was and is, and is to come. And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever, the four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying, Thou art worthy O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power; for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created" (Rev.4:8-11) To the New Testament Christians there was only one "King eternal, immortal, invisable, the only wise God"(1 Tim.1:17, see also Jer.23:5) the Holy one. "Ye have an unction from the holy one"(1 Jhn.2:20) No speaking or even mentioning of the holy trinity; only ONE! As the prophets have said "The Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord and his name one"(Zech.14:9) The Apostles all acknowledge Jesus to be that Holy One of Israel, the one true God; John said "The Word was God"(Jhn 1:1)"we know the son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, even in his son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life"(1Jhn.5:20) Thomas said "My Lord and my God"(Jhn.20:28) Paul said "as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever,Amen"(Rom.9:5)"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our savior Jesus Christ"(Titus 2:13)Peter said Our God and Savior Jesus Christ (2 Pet.2:1) Even the Pre-Trnitarian church acknowledged Jesus to be God:Justin Martyr,AD 110-165 "For Christ is King and Priest, and God andLord" -Dial.w/Trypho 34, Irenaeus,AD 120-202 "To Christ Jesus, Our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King" -Against Heresies, Ignatius,AD 30-107 "Our God Jesus Christ...Our Lord and God Jesus Christ" -to the Ephesians 15&18 Is there a God beside Yahweh/Jehovah?(Isa.44:6) Did not Jesus himself claim to be God as found in John 14:6-11; Jesus saith unto him I am the Way the Truth, and the Life: No man cometh unto the father, but by me. If ye had known me, Ye should have known my father also: and from henceforth ye know him , and have seen him. Philip saith unto him, Lord shew us the father and it sufficeth us. Jesus said unto him,Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me Philip? He that hath seen me Hath seen the father; and how sayest thou then, shew us the father?...
Bible texts essential to the Doctrine of Biblical preservation. Isa 30:8 Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever: Isa 40:8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever. Isa 59:21 As for me, this [is] my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that [is] upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever. Mar 13:31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. 1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 1Pe 1:24 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: 1Pe 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you. Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD [are] pure words: [as] silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. Psa 119:10 With my whole heart have I sought thee: O let me not wander from thy commandments. Psa 119:11 Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee. Joh 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. 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. Pro 30:5 Every word of God [is] pure: he [is] a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Pro 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. 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. Mar 8:38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life. Joh 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
Mark 16:9-20 (The last twelve verses of Mark) This passage is referred to as the "Longer Ending" of Mark. Many textual critics doubt its authenticity, believing it was an addition made in the second century. It often appears in modern versions in brackets with footnotes questioning its authenticity. [1] Most textual scholars believe that the text abruptly ends after verse eight. Even the so-called "Shorter Ending" that is added after verse eight is considered to have originated in the second century. The shorter ending reads: But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been bold. And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation. [2] Most scholars believe the original ending to Mark's Gospel has been lost. [3] If this is true, the concept of preserving the words of Scripture is forever annihilated. The words cannot be preserved and lost at the same time. However, textual scholars usually call for its inclusion even if they question its originality. Dr. Bruce Metzger departs from the maxim of modern textual critics, Brevior lectio potior (the shorter reading is preferable), and supports the longer ending even though admittedly he does not regard the passage as genuine. He considers it to be a legitimate part of the New Testament because of its traditional significance to the body of Christendom. [4] The passage is not contained in the Alexandrian texts, minuscule 2386, the Syrian Sinaitic Version, and a few other translations. However, it is in many of the Greek uncials (A, C, D, K, X, D, Q, and P) dating between the fifth and ninth centuries. It is also contained in later dated Greek minuscules (137, 138, 1110, 1210, 1215, 1216, 1217, 1221, and 1582). It is the reading found in the majority of Old Latin texts as well as the Coptic versions and other early translations. Finally, it is cited (at least in part) by many of the early church fathers such as Justin (165 AD), Tertullian (220 AD), Hippolytus (235 AD), Ambrose (397 AD) and Augustine (430 AD). [5] In 177 AD Irenaeus wrote Against Heresies. In it he cites from Mark 16:19, establishing that the longer reading was in existence at this time and was considered canonical, at least by Irenaeus: Also, towards the conclusion of his Gospel, Mark says: "So then, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God; " confirming what had been spoken by the prophet: "The LORD said to my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, until I make Thy foes Thy footstool." Thus God and the Father are truly one and the same; He who was announced by the prophets, and handed down by the true Gospel; whom we Christians worship and love with the whole heart, as the Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things therein. (3:10:5). The difference here is extremely important. If we conclude that this passage is not authentic, then we must question what happened to the original ending of Mark. It is not logical that the Gospel would end at this place so abruptly. Nor is it likely, as some scholars have suggested, that the Gospel was never finished, calling biblical inspiration into question. The conclusion held by most textual scholars, whether liberal or conservative, that the original ending has been lost over the passage of time certainly denies the doctrine of biblical preservation. If we allow that a passage of inspired Scripture has been lost from this section of the Bible, what stops us from making the same application to other passages? It is certainly within the realm of scholastic studies to note any and all textual differences. But once we open the possibility that this or that passage has been lost, we are now trusting in the understanding of men over the biblical promises of God. Certainly it is better to embrace the textual evidence and hold to the promise of preservation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- [1] Kurt and Barbara Aland, The Text Of The New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), 232.[2] Revised Standard Version, footnote[3] Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament, 105. [4] Bruce Metzger, Christian History (interview with Dr. Metzger downloaded from Christian History Magazine, America Online, 9/17/96).[5] John William Burgon, The Revision Revised (Paradise, PA: Conservative Classics, 1883), 422-423. Burgon also supplies additional names of church fathers who support the reading. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Let me summarize the evidences FOR the last twelve verses of Mark as follows; 1. All other Uncials other than B and Aleph, i.e. ACDEFGHKMSUVXT et al :— also L. 2. All Cursives. 3.Versions- (a) Peshito. Harclean, Jerusalem, and Curetonian Syriac.(b) All Old Latin except k, and Vulgate.(c) Memphitic, and Thebaic.(d) Gothic, /Ethiopic (except two MSS), Georgian, Armenian (except two MSS.), Arabic. ' 4. All Lectionaries 5. Fathers :—Cent. II. Papias, Irenasus. [ustin Martyr, Tertullian. „ III. Hippolytus, Vincentius at 7th Council of Carthage, Acta Pilati. IV. Syriac Table of Canons, Eusebius, Macarius Magnes, Aphraates, Didymus, Syriac Acts of the Apostles. Epiphanius, Leontius, Pseudo-Ephraem, Ambrose, Chrysostom, lerome, Augustine. „ V. Leo, Nestorius, Cyril of Alexandria, Victor of Antioch, Patricius, Marius Mercator. ., VI. and VIII. Hesychius, Gregentius, Prosper, John (Abp. of Thessalonica), Modestus (Bp. of Jerusalem). Let me elaoborate a bit; As To MANUSCRIPTS, there are none older than the fourth century, and the oldest two uncial MSS. (B and a, see Ap. 94. V.) are without those twelve verses. Of all the others (consisting of some eighteen uncials and some six hundred cursive MSS. which contain the Gospel of Mark) there is not one which leaves out these twelve verses. As to the Versions:-- THE SYRIAC. The oldest is the Syriac in its various forms : the "Peshitto" (cent. 2), and the "Curetonian Syriac" (cent. 3). Both are older than any Greek MS. in existence, and both contain these twelve verses. So with the "Philoxenian" (cent. 5) and the "Jerusalem" (cent. 5). See note (*3) on page 136 - Ap 94. THE LATIN VERSIONS. JEROME (A.D. 382), who had access to Greek MSS. older than any now extant, includes these twelve verses; but this Version (known as the Vulgate) was only a revision of the VETUS ITALA, which is believed to belong to cent. 2, and contains these verses. THE GOTHIC VERSION (A.D. 350) contains them. THE EGYPTIAN VERSIONS: the Memphitic (or Lower Egyptian, less properly called "COPTIC"), belonging to cent. 4 or 5, contains them; as does the "THEBAIC" (or Upper Egyptian, less properly called the "SAHIDIC"), belonging to cent. 3. THE ARMENIAN (cent. 5), the ETHIOPIC (cent. 4-7), and the GEORGIAN (cent. 6) also bear witness to the genuineness of these verses. THE FATHERS. Whatever may be their value (or otherwise )as to doctrine and interpretation yet, in determining actual words or their form, or sequence their evidence, even by an allusion, as to whether a verse or verses existed or not in their day, is more valuable than even manuscripts or Versions. There are nearly a hundred ecclesiastical writers older than the oldest of our Greek codices; while between A.D. 300 and A.D. 600 there are about two hundred more, and they all refer to these twelve verses. PAPIAS (about A.D. 100) refers to v. 18 (as stated by Eusebius, Hist. Ecc. iii. 39). JUSTIN MARTYR (A.D. 151) quotes v. 20 (Apol. I. c. 45). IRENAEUS (A.D. 180) quotes and remarks on v. 19 (Adv. Hoer. lib. iii. c. x.). HIPPOLYTUS (A.D. 190-227) quotes vv. 17-19 (Lagarde's ed., 1858, p. 74). VINCENTIUS (A.D. 256) quoted two verses at the seventh Council of Carthage, held under CYPRIAN. The ACTA PILATI (cent. 2) quotes vv. 15, 16, 17, 18 (Tischendorf's ed., 1852, pp. 243, 351). The APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS (cent. 3 or 4) quotes vv. 16, 17, 18. EUSEBIUS (A.D. 325) discusses these verses, as quoted by MARINUS from a lost part of his History. APHRAARTES (A.D. 337), a Syrian bishop, quoted vv. 16-18 in his first Homily (Dr. Wright's ed., 1869, i. p. 21). AMBROSE (A.D. 374-97), Archbishop of Milan, freely quotes vv. 15 (four times), 16, 17, 18 (three times), and v. 20 (once). CHRYSOSTOM (A.D. 400) refers to v. 9; and states that vv. 19, 20 are "the end of the Gospel". JEROME (b. 331, d. 420) includes these twelve verses in his Latin translation, besides quoting vv. 9 and 14 in his other writings. AUGUSTINE (fl. A.D. 395-430) more than quotes them. He discusses them as being the work of the Evangelist MARK, and says that they were publicly read in the churches. NESTORIUS (cent. 5) quotes v. 20 and CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA (A.D. 430) accepts the quotation. VICTOR OF ANTIOCH (A.D. 425) confutes the opinion of Eusebius, by referring to very many MSS. which he had seen, and so had satisfied himself that the last twelve verses were recorded in them.
Mark 9:29 And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting. Now the Modern Versions masqueradeing as Transalations remove the “and Fasting” here and render the text “He answered, "There is no way to get rid of this kind of demon except by prayer." The Message, or “Jesus answered, "Only prayer can force out that kind of demon." Contemporary English Version, or “And he said unto them, This kind can come out by nothing, save by prayer.” American Standard..the list goes on..not a few transalations omit this vital part of the Text. Why? One has to ask..and simply put , these modern versions will use two manuscripts to correct everything thing else. The use B and Aleph mss. To correct the mass of other Textual evidence.The KJV controversy goes beyond translation it’s a matter of Text, some have been mislead into the Translation lie and have a bible with over 2000 verses ripped away out of the New Tetament alone.In the above Text Many Bible versions give us a Lying footnote that says “Some manuscripts add and fasting” such as the NIV which says “some manuscripts Prayer and Fasting”…SOME? Now of course not everyone has Access to a Greek Text with Textual Variants listed such as United Bible Society Third Edition to confirm such a thing or some have an abridged listing of Texts such as the preface of UBS4 notes of a “select sampling”. The Reality is this; the only evidences are 2 manuscripts, both B and Aleph…now The Original Aleph doesn’t have AND FASTING, yet the Corrected one does, do ya think maybe the scribe of the original made a mistake, while the second scibe corrected that mistake?, which only Leaves us with the Fourth century Vaticanus Text B. Now of course its not alone, a fourth/fifth century Italian mss doesnt have it either(ITk), but it stands alone against all its predeccesors and followers, alone against every IT text before it and after it and during its Authorship from the Early fourth century till the Thirtenth century, How strange, isn’t it? Another support the removal of AND FASTING has is a Nineth century Georgian Text, but Here Again, the same case its fifth century predessor and tenth century successors INCLUDE it , How odd, don’t you think? And the Last Piece of Evidence we have is the Citation of CLEMENT of Alexandria, I wonder why? Is it Just because MAYBE he quoted only the part of a text that is relevant to his Discussion, PRAYER, that maybe if he was talking about FASTING he would have quoted the whole Text? Because if you Read His STROMATA hes only speaking about Prayer, he no where addresses FASTING, hummm could it be? So here they use Clement, why? Because They Assume his Bible didn’t have AND FASTING? We know TertUllians did Because in his address on Fasting he says “He taught likewise that fasts are to be weapons for battling with more direful demons”, Where did Jesus teach that? Mark 9:29! So when its all looked at we have Only one SOLID piece of Evidence to Remove this “and fasting”, the other 4 are highly questionable, so at least you have 1 text and at best 5 pieces of Evidence to remove it, against over The Rest of every textual mss with the verse from the Third century till the Fourtenth, over 40 Manuscript proofs, also every Lectionary, and every other piece of evidence that could be supplied! Yet what did the NIV say? SOME? Since when is +40 pieces SOME compared to at most 5?This is Just One Example of the Superior Text of The Authorized Version.
The Bible Version Issue covers a wide range of points; Text, Translators, Technique, and Theology..some believe it is as simple as Translation, but the issue goes beyond that. You can’t Translate correctly if the Text is different.A-TEXTWhen looking at Bible Versions you really have only TWO options..a Bible Translated from the Traditional type Text which underlies every Version before the late 1800s and has a steady history behind its translation, represented by 99% of all the Textual Evidence available or a Bible Translated from the Critical Text type which underlies most all versions after 1880 that has no steady history of Translation..corrections to the text are made from a few early manuscripts that where not found in any translation for nearly 1500 years and represented by about 1% of Textual Evidence.B-TRANSLATORSWhen looking at Bible Versions there are a mass of Variants available..we should look at the Qualifications of the Translators and their Personal beliefs. For Example..Gerbers Translation, a great one..yet he was a spiritualist, thus we have oddball Unfounded translations such as "a god" at John 1:1, (the New World Translation has the same unfounded Biased Translation from their own Doctrines) With a little Reaserch One is able to find out Qualifications and background of Translators..Moffatt was a Highly Qualified Translator, and Men such as John Bois who could read the bible in hebrew before age five, william Bedwell who had such knowledge of te cognate Languages He wrote a Persian Dictionary, Francis Dillingham who not only was Knowledgable in the Greek but Could Debate in the Greek, Henry Savillie who translated most of the Early Greek science texts, such as those on geometry, these 4 men were among those who worked on the KJV translation..most all the men who worked on the KJV were Godly ministers beyoond reproach..versions like the NIV have some great scholars, tho not nearly as Qualified as others, yet they had Virgina Maloncott who is a lesbian and believes God is a woman..a little bit of research behind Translators would prove fruitfull for those who want an Good accurate Translation.C-TECHNIQUETheir are really only two schools of Translation Tecnniques..one is called Dynamic Equivalence, that is words are translated by Thoughts, instead of translating a Noun for a Noun, they would use maybe a Pronoun or adverb to retain the Thought of the Text..this Technique sometimes goes beyond words, it is how Paraphrases such as The Living Bible come forth..the Technique is adopted by most all modern versions in their Translational work..the other school is Verbal Equivalence, That is they translate the words , word for word as close as they can from one language to the Next..noun to noun..verb to verb and so forth. Its a matter of which you think is more vital and important..the Words or the Thoughts.D-THEOLOGYAny good able bodied student of the Bible knows you cannot base a doctrine on one text alone. The above 3 points affect this last one a great deal..some versions change words, add words, and remove words that thus will either remove or change Doctrines or at best Weaken a doctrine. the NWT has "a god" at John 1:1, the NIV adds "His name" to Rev 14:1..the list could go on and on..some argue that at times Teachings are still found in their Bibles but not as much or at same places..its like a stool..is it more stable with legs three or two..some Texts are Doctrinally important and to change them means a weaker foundation. which if you rest upon will only lead to a fall.Now in My OpinionTEXT- The KJV is the Best representaion of the Traditional Text and follows it more solid than any other..those who favour the Critical Text have a toss up between the NIV, and the NASB, since they pick and choose when they will follow this or that text.TRANSLATORS- I believe the KJV has the superiour Translators.TECHNIQUE- if you favour Dynamic Equivalence totally then the LIVING BIBLE is your best one, and if you like the Idea but still want the WORDS, then the NIV or NASB is your choice, now if you prefer VERBAL Equivalence..then the KJV is the best of the Traditional Text and the NWT is the best of the Critical text.THEOLOGY- Looking at the mass of diffrences between the TEXTS the KJV has the more superiour Theology.Some points to consider; For Now the Defenders of these modern Versions are content with brushing aside the changes in the Text with stuff like "well its out here, but they leave it over here" when they excuse away removeing from the Words, or their "well basically it still says the same thing" when they excuse away Changing the words, and their "well the best manuscripts have it" when excuseing away adding to the Words..the whole while Each new edition brings a new copyright and new changes, and every several years a newer revised text is released for them…Its just like chopping a tree down; one whack at a time eventually the tree will fall..and folks are just like frogs the whole time, why? Because if you were to heat a Pan up red hot and sit a frog on it, why he will jump right back off that thing! But you put a frog on the pan first and then Heat it up, well he will sit their and Cook away dead, he will take the tempature change as Natural and adjust! For now they are content holding their modern Treasure able to say well its still here, just in a different place and thought..slowly cooking till the Next edition and the next and the next….B and Aleph, the Modern Versions Textual Champions , those "oldest and best MSS" as they are commonly called, DO NOT CONTAIN THE BOOK OF REVELATION AT ALL. Aleph instead ends with two other books..The Shepherd of Hermas and The Epistle of Barnabas…40 years ago if someone wanted to remove the book of Revelation NO ONE would even Dream of such an act, but who knows now, with that chop by chop, little by little turning up the fires..what about 50 or so years from now? 100 years from now? Why Revelation Just might be tossed aside as an old relic just like the KJV, huh? 2 Cor 8:7 as an example of these Modern textual critics methods.NIV Ignores P46 and B, follows Aleph and MajorityNASB Ignores Aleph and Majority,follows P46 and BGal 1:3 Ignores P46 and B, follows Aleph Gal 4:25 Ignores P46 and Aleph, follows B Gal 4:28 Ignores Aleph and Majority, follows P46 and BGal 6:13Ignores P46 and B, follows AlephDo folks Really believe this is How the Texts of our Bibles should be handled? Yet That is Exactly the Methods of these Modern Versions! While we who are AV adherents are ridiculed and plumited with comments like "the oldest Manucripts" or "the Best Manuscripts" or whatever other footnote those who use and love these modern versions want to toss at us, Those scribes play shell and pea with a method that must have been the motivator for the slogan "Have it your way today". Why this shell and pea game? Well Hort-Westcott the founders of the modern Textual Methods taught that the Textual critic should use his "intuitive powers" to determine if a verse had a "ring of genuineness and its Leaders such as J.B. Philips tout the same horn as he says the reader should "try to make his own translation" Of course this is the very same thing the New Agers and their channeled spirits would guide us to also; "It is Likely that a new Kind of Religon will develop in which each man will discover and work out his own sermons for himself" Looks like this New Religon already has New Bibles Reccomended Reading Which Bible?True or False?Counterfeit or GenuineAll above edited by David Otis Fuller and are collections of Articles and essays by not a few Biblical scholars. If you are sincere in your search in understanding the Bible Version issues, these books would be a great place to start.
|
