Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,494 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,758,183
Pageviews Today: 2,326,811Threads Today: 520Posts Today: 10,558
05:14 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD

 
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
Offer Upgrade

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 11:31 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
I. Why So Many Versions?
"Breaking up is hard to do," as the song goes. Ma Bell did it--creating a glut of long distance companies almost as numerous as brands of deodorant.

The Bible did it, too. Before the year 1881 you could read any version you wanted--as long as it was the King James Version. But since 1881, scores of new translations have been printed.

How did the King James get dethroned? Which translation is best today? Are any of the modern translations really faithful to the original? These are some of the questions we'll be looking at in this essay. But initially, we'd just like to get a bird?s eye view. We simply want an answer to the question, "Why are there so many versions of the Bible?"

There are three basic influences which have given birth to a multitude of translations.

First, in 1881 two British scholars published a Greek New Testament which was based on the most ancient manuscripts then available. This text, by Brook Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort, made several notable departures from the Greek text which King James translators used. For the most part, the Westcott-Hort text was a shorter New Testament. That's because the older manuscripts (MSS) which they used did not contain passages such as the longer ending of Mark's gospel or the story of the women caught in adultery. The Greek MSS which the King James translators followed included these and many other passages.

At the same time the Westcott-Hort text made its debut, the English Revised Version of the New Testament appeared. A new era was born in which translations of the New Testament now used the few ancient Greek MSS rather than the many later ones.

Second, since 1895 many archeological and manuscript discoveries have been made which have which have pronounced judgment on some of the renderings found in the King James. The single most important discovery was that of the Egyptian papyri. In 1895, Adolf Deissmann published a volume, given the unassuming title, Bible Studies (Bibelstudien), which revolutionized NT scholarship. Deissmann discovered that ancient papyrus scraps, buried in Egyptian garbage dumps some 2,000 years ago, contained Greek which was quite similar to the Greek of the NT. He concluded that the Greek of the NT was written in the common language of the day. It was not the dialect which only the most elite could understand. Since Deissmann's discovery, translators have endeavored to put the NT into language the average person could comprehend--just as it was originally intended. Not only that but the papyri have helped us to understand many words--words which were only guessed at by King James translators.

Finally, there have been philosophical influences. That is, the theory of translation is being revamped today. Missionaries have made a significant contribution toward this end--because they are eager to see a particular tribe read the Bible in its own language.

These three differences--textual, informational, philosophical--have been the parents of a new generation of Bible translations. But are these translations any good? Are they any better than the King James?

For the rest of the essay, we will examine each of these influences and then, finally, try to see which translation is best.

II. The Text of Modern Translations
Where have all the verses gone? The modern translations seem to have cut out many of the most precious lines of Scripture. They end Mark's gospel at the 8th verse of chapter 16; they omit the reference of the angel of the Lord stirring the waters at the pool of Bethesda (verse 4 of John 5); and, most notably, they excise the story of the woman caught in adultery in John 8.

Besides omissions, these modern versions make significant changes in the text. For example, in I Timothy 3:16, the King James reads, "God was manifest in the flesh," but most modern translations read, "He was manifest in the flesh." In Revelation 22:19 the King James speaks of the "book of life" while virtually all modern versions speak of the "tree of life." Altogether, there are hundreds of textual changes between the King James and modern translations.

In this brief essay we cannot determine who is right. But we can make a few observations.

First, the textual changes in the modern translations affect no major doctrine. The deity of Christ, virgin birth, salvation by grace alone--and all the rest--are still intact. Though certain passages are omitted or changed, the doctrines are not. There are evangelicals who prefer the King James and there are some evangelicals who prefer the modern translations.

Second, the textual changes in these modern translations are based on the most ancient MSS of the Greek NT. These MSS date from early in the second century A.D. But the Greek texts behind the King James belong to a group of MSS--called the Byzantine text--which are much more recent. On the other hand, although these MSS are more recent, they comprise at least 80% of the 5000+ MSS of the NT that we presently have. It is theoretically possible that, at times, these MSS point to an early tradition as well.

Third, the King James NT did not always follow the majority of MSS. Actually, the Greek text behind the King James was based on only about half a dozen MSS. Now it just so happened that these MSS belonged to the Byzantine text. But on a few occasions there were gaps. And the compiler (a man named Erasmus) had to fill in those gaps by translating the Latin NT back into Greek. There are, therefore, some readings in the King James--such as 'book of life' in Rev 22:19 or the wording of I John 5:7-8, which are not found either in the majority of MSS or the most ancient MSS. No serious student of the Bible would call them original (though many popular Bible teachers do).

Fourth, the charge that the more ancient MSS or the men who embrace them are unorthodox is a faulty charge. It is true that in certain places the ancient MSS do not explicitly affirm the deity of Christ--such as in I Tim 3:16. But neither do they deny it! Besides this, in some passages these ancient MSS make Christ's deity explicit where the King James does not! In John 1:18, the modern versions read "the unique one, God" while the King James has "the only begotten Son." Futhermore, the majority of evangelical scholars embrace this critical text. Even the men who edited the New Scofield Reference Bible of the King James Version personally favor the critical text!

Fifth, at the same time, there are some scholars today who are strong advocates of the Byzantine text--most notably, Zane Hodges and Arthur Farstad. Together they edited The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text and Dr. Farstad was also the senior editor of the New King James Bible. Thus, it is possible to be intelligent and still embrace the Byzantine text, just as it is possible to be evangelical and embrace the modern critical text. (I happen to disagree with the resultant text that Firsthad and Hodges have produced,1 but I respect their scholarship.)

Finally, we ought to quit labeling one another as heretics or idiots in the ongoing discussion. There needs to be charity on both sides. One of my college professors frequently said, "The Christian army is the only army in the world that shoots its wounded!" Unfortunately, this is especially true when it comes to translations of the Bible.

III. Deissmann and the Papyri
In1895 a German pastor by the name of Adolf Deissmann published a rather innocent-sounding volume: Bible Studies. Yet, this single volume started a revolution in NT scholarship--a revolution in which the common man was the winner.

In the 1800s Deissmann began reading ancient Greek MSS. But not the great classical authors. He was reading private letters, business transactions, receipts, marriage contracts. What were these documents? Merely scraps of papyrus (the ancient forerunner to paper) found in 2,000-year-old Egyptian garbage dumps. In these seemingly insignificant papyri, Deissmann discovered a key to uncover the NT! For these papyri contained the common Greek language of the first century A.D. They were written in the vocabulary of the NT.

What's so revolutionary about that? you ask. It is revolutionary because up until 1895, biblical scholars had no real parallels to the language of the NT. They often viewed its Greek as invented by the Holy Spirit. They called it "Holy Ghost Greek." Now it is true that the ideas--even the words--were inspired by the Holy Spirit. But it's another thing to say that the language of the NT was unusual--that its grammar and vocabulary were, in a word, unique. If this were true, only the spiritual elite could even hope to understand the NT.

Deismann's discovery burst the bubble on this view: the Greek of the NT was written in the language of the common man.

There are two implications of what Deissmann did for the Bible translations:

*******read the rest here - to be in compliance with GLPs 50% postin/copyright rule
[link to bible.org (secure)] charlie

Last Edited by Phennommennonn on 03/18/2012 01:54 PM
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1106916
United States
03/18/2012 11:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
How many threads are you going to start in one day?
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 11:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
NO offends to anyone--- just doing healthy conversation here
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 11:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
How many threads are you going to start in one day?
 Quoting: Lisa*Lisa


just some healthy discussion--- i just have question just finding some answer my friend----
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10563046
United States
03/18/2012 11:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
Then when He comes ya'll deny Him AGAIN, Sayin He's got demons
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 11:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
which version of bible is GODS book--- since man made many changes and IF U read MATHEEW jesus is just prophet----but if u read gospel of JOHN then jesus is elevated to status of GOD---- WHO IS RIGHT? AS KING JAMES MADE 100 THOUSAND CHANGES IS BIBLE STILL REMAIN GODS BOOKS?----- DEAD SEA SCROLL IS TRUE BIBLE WHY CHRISTIANS NOT DEMANDING THAT BOOK ?
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 11:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
Then when He comes ya'll deny Him AGAIN, Sayin He's got demons
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10563046


GOOD ONE
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 11:54 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
why did king james who was known pagan "illuminati" made so many changes---where is original bible? if its gods book then why first bible was written 150yrs after jesus died?
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 12:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
did "satan" currupt bible--- no two version of bible are same in whole world--- is mordern day christinity is IDOL WORSHIPING? AND WHAT IF WHEN WORLD FINDS THAT MORDERN DAY STATUE OF JESUS AND MARY IN CHURCHES ARE NOT OF TRUE JESUS BUT "ILLUMINATI PAGAN GOD"
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 12:13 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
IS Idol1MODERN DAY VATICAN WORSHIPING JESUS PUBLICLY AND IN PRIVATELY WORSHIPING "LUCIFER" ?
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 12:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
DOES "DEAD SEA SCROLLS" HAVE ALL ANSWERS----SO GOVT IS LETTING PEOPLE READ THOSE ONE----
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 12:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
ONLY GOD OF JESUS IS WORSHIPABLE---NO ONE ELSE COMES CLOSE TO HIM
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
Sandi_T

User ID: 1301649
United States
03/18/2012 01:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
How many threads are you going to start in one day?
 Quoting: Lisa*Lisa


Probably less than you. chuckle


Thanks for the interesting post, OP. It further substantiates some of my own personal research that has been a real sticking point for me. It seemed that I was the only one in the world who noticed that there were added sections in later documents. It's nice to see peer scholars stating it and makes me feel less like I was seeing things that weren't there.
No more requests in the "Strangest things" thread please. :hf:

Past Lives requests thread: Thread: That Which Once Was: Past Lives
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 01:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
How many threads are you going to start in one day?
 Quoting: Lisa*Lisa


Probably less than you. chuckle


Thanks for the interesting post, OP. It further substantiates some of my own personal research that has been a real sticking point for me. It seemed that I was the only one in the world who noticed that there were added sections in later documents. It's nice to see peer scholars stating it and makes me feel less like I was seeing things that weren't there.
 Quoting: Sandi_T


YEP WE NEED TO CONCENTRATE IN THIS FIELD---- MINISTERIES, CHURCHES AND CHARITY MAKING BILLIONS IN THE NAME OF JESUS ----- AND CHIRSTIAN LEADERS HAVE THERE OWN PRIVATE JETS AND AFFAIRS
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
MrCash

User ID: 8694315
United States
03/18/2012 01:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
Unfortunately, the 100000 changes to the original mss are because we, as a whole, are too uneducated/lazy/preoccupied to do our own translations of the original texts.

Old Testament in Hebrew with literal translation and King James version:
[link to www.scripture4all.org]

New Testament in Greek with literal translation and King James version:
[link to www.scripture4all.org]
"...and we dance to the music that plays in our teeth..."

:GLPbook:
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 02:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
Unfortunately, the 100000 changes to the original mss are because we, as a whole, are too uneducated/lazy/preoccupied to do our own translations of the original texts.

Old Testament in Hebrew with literal translation and King James version:
[link to www.scripture4all.org]

New Testament in Greek with literal translation and King James version:
[link to www.scripture4all.org]
 Quoting: MrCash


CHRISTIaNITY judaism and some group of islam have have influence of peganism--- both christinity and judiasm have hijacked by zionist and secret system both want to built 3rd temple of lucifer at jeruselem . "satan is master in deception" and he has sucessfully elevated JESUS TO GOD STATUS ---- 3RD TEMPLE AT JERUSELEM HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDAISM,CHRISTIANITY OR ISLAM BUT ITS HAS EVERY THING TO DO WITH "ILLUMINATI,SECRET SOCIETY .FREEMASSON . ZIONISM QABALLAH "
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 07:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
How many threads are you going to start in one day?
 Quoting: Lisa*Lisa


Probably less than you. chuckle


Thanks for the interesting post, OP. It further substantiates some of my own personal research that has been a real sticking point for me. It seemed that I was the only one in the world who noticed that there were added sections in later documents. It's nice to see peer scholars stating it and makes me feel less like I was seeing things that weren't there.
 Quoting: Sandi_T


and jesus was brown unlike what church and vetican circulation the photos
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1419030
United States
03/18/2012 07:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
Muslim Why do you worship a god who boasts of being the "Greatest of Decievers"?
Satan is the Father of Lies.
Why do you love Satan and piss on the only one who can save your sorry ass and call him only human?
Sorry muslim, only God can save your sorry ass and you rather follow a satanic murdering child molester.
To hell with you.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12741789
United Kingdom
03/18/2012 07:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
How many threads are you going to start in one day?
 Quoting: Lisa*Lisa


shill
Fidokrab

User ID: 1400367
United States
03/18/2012 07:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD


watch and learn
The false gospel: If you don't continually perform, you're out.

The true Gospel: Believe.
Sandi_T

User ID: 1301649
United States
03/18/2012 07:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
How many threads are you going to start in one day?
 Quoting: Lisa*Lisa


Probably less than you. chuckle


Thanks for the interesting post, OP. It further substantiates some of my own personal research that has been a real sticking point for me. It seemed that I was the only one in the world who noticed that there were added sections in later documents. It's nice to see peer scholars stating it and makes me feel less like I was seeing things that weren't there.
 Quoting: Sandi_T


and jesus was brown unlike what church and vetican circulation the photos
 Quoting: EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN


He would have to have existed before he could be any color.

I appreciate some of the information you've given, but I don't believe that there is sufficient evidence to claim that jesus was ever a real person.
No more requests in the "Strangest things" thread please. :hf:

Past Lives requests thread: Thread: That Which Once Was: Past Lives
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 07:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
Muslim Why do you worship a god who boasts of being the "Greatest of Decievers"?
Satan is the Father of Lies.
Why do you love Satan and piss on the only one who can save your sorry ass and call him only human?
Sorry muslim, only God can save your sorry ass and you rather follow a satanic murdering child molester.
To hell with you.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1419030


muslims only worships GOD of jesus,adam,moses,abraham,mohammad,david,solomon as far as i know --- if u have problem with that then i m sorry for your lord "lucifer"
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1419030
United States
03/18/2012 07:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
Muslim Why do you worship a god who boasts of being the "Greatest of Decievers"?
Satan is the Father of Lies.
Why do you love Satan and piss on the only one who can save your sorry ass and call him only human?
Sorry muslim, only God can save your sorry ass and you rather follow a satanic murdering child molester.
To hell with you.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1419030


muslims only worships GOD of jesus,adam,moses,abraham,mohammad,david,solomon as far as i know --- if u have problem with that then i m sorry for your lord "lucifer"
 Quoting: EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN

cruise One thing I admire about you muslims is your unflinching faith. Sorry, this won't get you to heaven though. Here is the god you love. Debunk this. Don't give me the "other translation" bullshit. Here are the accepted translations.
...........................................

The Quran describes Allah as the best deceiver there is, a liar who is not above using the same evil and wicked schemes of his opponents.

For example, the Quran calls Allah a makr, in fact the best makr there is:

But they (the jewish people) were deceptive, and Allah was deceptive, for Allah is the best of deceivers (Wamakaroo wamakara Allahu waAllahu khayru al-makireena)! S. 3:54; cf. 8:30

Other texts that identify Allah as a makr include:

Are they then secure from Allah's deception (makra Allahi)? None deemeth himself secure from Allah's deception (makra Allahi) save folk that perish. S. 7:99

So they schemed a scheme: and We schemed a scheme (Wamakaroo makran wamakarna makran), while they perceived not. S. 27:50

The word for deception/deceiver/scheme is makr. The lexical sources define the term as:

Miim-Kaf-Ra = To practice deceit or guile or circumvention, practice evasion or elusion, to plot, to exercise art or craft or cunning, act with policy, practice stratagem.
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 07:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
Muslim Why do you worship a god who boasts of being the "Greatest of Decievers"?
Satan is the Father of Lies.
Why do you love Satan and piss on the only one who can save your sorry ass and call him only human?
Sorry muslim, only God can save your sorry ass and you rather follow a satanic murdering child molester.
To hell with you.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1419030


muslims only worships GOD of jesus,adam,moses,abraham,mohammad,david,solomon as far as i know --- if u have problem with that then i m sorry for your lord "lucifer"
 Quoting: EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN

cruise One thing I admire about you muslims is your unflinching faith. Sorry, this won't get you to heaven though. Here is the god you love. Debunk this. Don't give me the "other translation" bullshit. Here are the accepted translations.
...........................................

The Quran describes Allah as the best deceiver there is, a liar who is not above using the same evil and wicked schemes of his opponents.

For example, the Quran calls Allah a makr, in fact the best makr there is:

But they (the jewish people) were deceptive, and Allah was deceptive, for Allah is the best of deceivers (Wamakaroo wamakara Allahu waAllahu khayru al-makireena)! S. 3:54; cf. 8:30

Other texts that identify Allah as a makr include:

Are they then secure from Allah's deception (makra Allahi)? None deemeth himself secure from Allah's deception (makra Allahi) save folk that perish. S. 7:99

So they schemed a scheme: and We schemed a scheme (Wamakaroo makran wamakarna makran), while they perceived not. S. 27:50

The word for deception/deceiver/scheme is makr. The lexical sources define the term as:

Miim-Kaf-Ra = To practice deceit or guile or circumvention, practice evasion or elusion, to plot, to exercise art or craft or cunning, act with policy, practice stratagem.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1419030


TRUE TRANSLATION OF QURAN 3:54 -- "THEY (THE OPONENT OF JESUS) DEVISED A PLAN, AND GOD DEVISED A PLAN, AND GOD IS BEST PLANNER" YOU GOOGLE IT OR YOU SEE ONLINE THIS IS REAL TRANSLATION----- BUT I KNOW YOUR PAGAN GOD TELL YOU TO SPREAD LIE--- IT NOT YOUR FAULT
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 07:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
Muslim Why do you worship a god who boasts of being the "Greatest of Decievers"?
Satan is the Father of Lies.
Why do you love Satan and piss on the only one who can save your sorry ass and call him only human?
Sorry muslim, only God can save your sorry ass and you rather follow a satanic murdering child molester.
To hell with you.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1419030


muslims only worships GOD of jesus,adam,moses,abraham,mohammad,david,solomon as far as i know --- if u have problem with that then i m sorry for your lord "lucifer"
 Quoting: EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN

cruise One thing I admire about you muslims is your unflinching faith. Sorry, this won't get you to heaven though. Here is the god you love. Debunk this. Don't give me the "other translation" bullshit. Here are the accepted translations.
...........................................

The Quran describes Allah as the best deceiver there is, a liar who is not above using the same evil and wicked schemes of his opponents.

For example, the Quran calls Allah a makr, in fact the best makr there is:

But they (the jewish people) were deceptive, and Allah was deceptive, for Allah is the best of deceivers (Wamakaroo wamakara Allahu waAllahu khayru al-makireena)! S. 3:54; cf. 8:30

Other texts that identify Allah as a makr include:

Are they then secure from Allah's deception (makra Allahi)? None deemeth himself secure from Allah's deception (makra Allahi) save folk that perish. S. 7:99

So they schemed a scheme: and We schemed a scheme (Wamakaroo makran wamakarna makran), while they perceived not. S. 27:50

The word for deception/deceiver/scheme is makr. The lexical sources define the term as:

Miim-Kaf-Ra = To practice deceit or guile or circumvention, practice evasion or elusion, to plot, to exercise art or craft or cunning, act with policy, practice stratagem.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1419030


if u have iphone or andriod- download quran explorer its free but dont spread lie ---- i believe satan will reward you for your lie here but GOD OF JESUS will kick your but hearafter banana2
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
Axx
User ID: 2580226
United States
03/18/2012 08:48 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
New Bibles are rejected. The KJV has zero contradictions - name one?


[link to bibles4free.com]
[link to carm.org]

KJB Answer Book
[link to www.chick.com]


KJV History

[link to www.youtube.com]
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/18/2012 08:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
New Bibles are rejected. The KJV has zero contradictions - name one?


[link to bibles4free.com]
[link to carm.org]

KJB Answer Book
[link to www.chick.com]


KJV History

[link to www.youtube.com]
 Quoting: Axx 2580226


GOOD ONE
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1731028
United States
03/18/2012 09:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
IS Idol1MODERN DAY VATICAN WORSHIPING JESUS PUBLICLY AND IN PRIVATELY WORSHIPING "LUCIFER" ?
 Quoting: EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN

NOW THATS AN EASY ANSWER,YES.
KlLLUMINATI

User ID: 11546392
United States
03/18/2012 10:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
I. Why So Many Versions?
"Breaking up is hard to do," as the song goes. Ma Bell did it--creating a glut of long distance companies almost as numerous as brands of deodorant.

The Bible did it, too. Before the year 1881 you could read any version you wanted--as long as it was the King James Version. But since 1881, scores of new translations have been printed.

How did the King James get dethroned? Which translation is best today? Are any of the modern translations really faithful to the original? These are some of the questions we'll be looking at in this essay. But initially, we'd just like to get a bird?s eye view. We simply want an answer to the question, "Why are there so many versions of the Bible?"

There are three basic influences which have given birth to a multitude of translations.

First, in 1881 two British scholars published a Greek New Testament which was based on the most ancient manuscripts then available. This text, by Brook Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort, made several notable departures from the Greek text which King James translators used. For the most part, the Westcott-Hort text was a shorter New Testament. That's because the older manuscripts (MSS) which they used did not contain passages such as the longer ending of Mark's gospel or the story of the women caught in adultery. The Greek MSS which the King James translators followed included these and many other passages.

At the same time the Westcott-Hort text made its debut, the English Revised Version of the New Testament appeared. A new era was born in which translations of the New Testament now used the few ancient Greek MSS rather than the many later ones.

Second, since 1895 many archeological and manuscript discoveries have been made which have which have pronounced judgment on some of the renderings found in the King James. The single most important discovery was that of the Egyptian papyri. In 1895, Adolf Deissmann published a volume, given the unassuming title, Bible Studies (Bibelstudien), which revolutionized NT scholarship. Deissmann discovered that ancient papyrus scraps, buried in Egyptian garbage dumps some 2,000 years ago, contained Greek which was quite similar to the Greek of the NT. He concluded that the Greek of the NT was written in the common language of the day. It was not the dialect which only the most elite could understand. Since Deissmann's discovery, translators have endeavored to put the NT into language the average person could comprehend--just as it was originally intended. Not only that but the papyri have helped us to understand many words--words which were only guessed at by King James translators.

Finally, there have been philosophical influences. That is, the theory of translation is being revamped today. Missionaries have made a significant contribution toward this end--because they are eager to see a particular tribe read the Bible in its own language.

These three differences--textual, informational, philosophical--have been the parents of a new generation of Bible translations. But are these translations any good? Are they any better than the King James?

For the rest of the essay, we will examine each of these influences and then, finally, try to see which translation is best.

II. The Text of Modern Translations
Where have all the verses gone? The modern translations seem to have cut out many of the most precious lines of Scripture. They end Mark's gospel at the 8th verse of chapter 16; they omit the reference of the angel of the Lord stirring the waters at the pool of Bethesda (verse 4 of John 5); and, most notably, they excise the story of the woman caught in adultery in John 8.

Besides omissions, these modern versions make significant changes in the text. For example, in I Timothy 3:16, the King James reads, "God was manifest in the flesh," but most modern translations read, "He was manifest in the flesh." In Revelation 22:19 the King James speaks of the "book of life" while virtually all modern versions speak of the "tree of life." Altogether, there are hundreds of textual changes between the King James and modern translations.

In this brief essay we cannot determine who is right. But we can make a few observations.

First, the textual changes in the modern translations affect no major doctrine. The deity of Christ, virgin birth, salvation by grace alone--and all the rest--are still intact. Though certain passages are omitted or changed, the doctrines are not. There are evangelicals who prefer the King James and there are some evangelicals who prefer the modern translations.

Second, the textual changes in these modern translations are based on the most ancient MSS of the Greek NT. These MSS date from early in the second century A.D. But the Greek texts behind the King James belong to a group of MSS--called the Byzantine text--which are much more recent. On the other hand, although these MSS are more recent, they comprise at least 80% of the 5000+ MSS of the NT that we presently have. It is theoretically possible that, at times, these MSS point to an early tradition as well.

Third, the King James NT did not always follow the majority of MSS. Actually, the Greek text behind the King James was based on only about half a dozen MSS. Now it just so happened that these MSS belonged to the Byzantine text. But on a few occasions there were gaps. And the compiler (a man named Erasmus) had to fill in those gaps by translating the Latin NT back into Greek. There are, therefore, some readings in the King James--such as 'book of life' in Rev 22:19 or the wording of I John 5:7-8, which are not found either in the majority of MSS or the most ancient MSS. No serious student of the Bible would call them original (though many popular Bible teachers do).

Fourth, the charge that the more ancient MSS or the men who embrace them are unorthodox is a faulty charge. It is true that in certain places the ancient MSS do not explicitly affirm the deity of Christ--such as in I Tim 3:16. But neither do they deny it! Besides this, in some passages these ancient MSS make Christ's deity explicit where the King James does not! In John 1:18, the modern versions read "the unique one, God" while the King James has "the only begotten Son." Futhermore, the majority of evangelical scholars embrace this critical text. Even the men who edited the New Scofield Reference Bible of the King James Version personally favor the critical text!

Fifth, at the same time, there are some scholars today who are strong advocates of the Byzantine text--most notably, Zane Hodges and Arthur Farstad. Together they edited The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text and Dr. Farstad was also the senior editor of the New King James Bible. Thus, it is possible to be intelligent and still embrace the Byzantine text, just as it is possible to be evangelical and embrace the modern critical text. (I happen to disagree with the resultant text that Firsthad and Hodges have produced,1 but I respect their scholarship.)

Finally, we ought to quit labeling one another as heretics or idiots in the ongoing discussion. There needs to be charity on both sides. One of my college professors frequently said, "The Christian army is the only army in the world that shoots its wounded!" Unfortunately, this is especially true when it comes to translations of the Bible.

III. Deissmann and the Papyri
In1895 a German pastor by the name of Adolf Deissmann published a rather innocent-sounding volume: Bible Studies. Yet, this single volume started a revolution in NT scholarship--a revolution in which the common man was the winner.

In the 1800s Deissmann began reading ancient Greek MSS. But not the great classical authors. He was reading private letters, business transactions, receipts, marriage contracts. What were these documents? Merely scraps of papyrus (the ancient forerunner to paper) found in 2,000-year-old Egyptian garbage dumps. In these seemingly insignificant papyri, Deissmann discovered a key to uncover the NT! For these papyri contained the common Greek language of the first century A.D. They were written in the vocabulary of the NT.

What's so revolutionary about that? you ask. It is revolutionary because up until 1895, biblical scholars had no real parallels to the language of the NT. They often viewed its Greek as invented by the Holy Spirit. They called it "Holy Ghost Greek." Now it is true that the ideas--even the words--were inspired by the Holy Spirit. But it's another thing to say that the language of the NT was unusual--that its grammar and vocabulary were, in a word, unique. If this were true, only the spiritual elite could even hope to understand the NT.

Deismann's discovery burst the bubble on this view: the Greek of the NT was written in the language of the common man.

There are two implications of what Deissmann did for the Bible translations:

*******read the rest here - to be in compliance with GLPs 50% postin/copyright rule
[link to bible.org (secure)]
charlie
 Quoting: EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN



We follow the Masoretic bible
She just goes a little mad sometimes. We all go a little mad sometimes. Haven't you?
-Norman Bates

I think that rich people should live like poor people, and poor people should live like rich people, and change every week....
-Tupac Shakur

Somebody help me, tell me where to go from here cause even Thugs cry, but do the Lord care?
-Tupac Shakur

I don't have no fear of death. My only fear is coming back reincarnated.
-Tupac Shakur

I believe in human beings, and that all human beings should be respected as such, regardless of their color.
-Malcolm X

A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything.
-Malcolm X

When there’s no more room in Hell, the dead will walk the Earth.
-Dawn of the Dead

What an excellent day for an exorcism.
-The Exorcist
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN (OP)

User ID: 770867
United States
03/19/2012 11:12 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
I. Why So Many Versions?
"Breaking up is hard to do," as the song goes. Ma Bell did it--creating a glut of long distance companies almost as numerous as brands of deodorant.

The Bible did it, too. Before the year 1881 you could read any version you wanted--as long as it was the King James Version. But since 1881, scores of new translations have been printed.

How did the King James get dethroned? Which translation is best today? Are any of the modern translations really faithful to the original? These are some of the questions we'll be looking at in this essay. But initially, we'd just like to get a bird?s eye view. We simply want an answer to the question, "Why are there so many versions of the Bible?"

There are three basic influences which have given birth to a multitude of translations.

First, in 1881 two British scholars published a Greek New Testament which was based on the most ancient manuscripts then available. This text, by Brook Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort, made several notable departures from the Greek text which King James translators used. For the most part, the Westcott-Hort text was a shorter New Testament. That's because the older manuscripts (MSS) which they used did not contain passages such as the longer ending of Mark's gospel or the story of the women caught in adultery. The Greek MSS which the King James translators followed included these and many other passages.

At the same time the Westcott-Hort text made its debut, the English Revised Version of the New Testament appeared. A new era was born in which translations of the New Testament now used the few ancient Greek MSS rather than the many later ones.

Second, since 1895 many archeological and manuscript discoveries have been made which have which have pronounced judgment on some of the renderings found in the King James. The single most important discovery was that of the Egyptian papyri. In 1895, Adolf Deissmann published a volume, given the unassuming title, Bible Studies (Bibelstudien), which revolutionized NT scholarship. Deissmann discovered that ancient papyrus scraps, buried in Egyptian garbage dumps some 2,000 years ago, contained Greek which was quite similar to the Greek of the NT. He concluded that the Greek of the NT was written in the common language of the day. It was not the dialect which only the most elite could understand. Since Deissmann's discovery, translators have endeavored to put the NT into language the average person could comprehend--just as it was originally intended. Not only that but the papyri have helped us to understand many words--words which were only guessed at by King James translators.

Finally, there have been philosophical influences. That is, the theory of translation is being revamped today. Missionaries have made a significant contribution toward this end--because they are eager to see a particular tribe read the Bible in its own language.

These three differences--textual, informational, philosophical--have been the parents of a new generation of Bible translations. But are these translations any good? Are they any better than the King James?

For the rest of the essay, we will examine each of these influences and then, finally, try to see which translation is best.

II. The Text of Modern Translations
Where have all the verses gone? The modern translations seem to have cut out many of the most precious lines of Scripture. They end Mark's gospel at the 8th verse of chapter 16; they omit the reference of the angel of the Lord stirring the waters at the pool of Bethesda (verse 4 of John 5); and, most notably, they excise the story of the woman caught in adultery in John 8.

Besides omissions, these modern versions make significant changes in the text. For example, in I Timothy 3:16, the King James reads, "God was manifest in the flesh," but most modern translations read, "He was manifest in the flesh." In Revelation 22:19 the King James speaks of the "book of life" while virtually all modern versions speak of the "tree of life." Altogether, there are hundreds of textual changes between the King James and modern translations.

In this brief essay we cannot determine who is right. But we can make a few observations.

First, the textual changes in the modern translations affect no major doctrine. The deity of Christ, virgin birth, salvation by grace alone--and all the rest--are still intact. Though certain passages are omitted or changed, the doctrines are not. There are evangelicals who prefer the King James and there are some evangelicals who prefer the modern translations.

Second, the textual changes in these modern translations are based on the most ancient MSS of the Greek NT. These MSS date from early in the second century A.D. But the Greek texts behind the King James belong to a group of MSS--called the Byzantine text--which are much more recent. On the other hand, although these MSS are more recent, they comprise at least 80% of the 5000+ MSS of the NT that we presently have. It is theoretically possible that, at times, these MSS point to an early tradition as well.

Third, the King James NT did not always follow the majority of MSS. Actually, the Greek text behind the King James was based on only about half a dozen MSS. Now it just so happened that these MSS belonged to the Byzantine text. But on a few occasions there were gaps. And the compiler (a man named Erasmus) had to fill in those gaps by translating the Latin NT back into Greek. There are, therefore, some readings in the King James--such as 'book of life' in Rev 22:19 or the wording of I John 5:7-8, which are not found either in the majority of MSS or the most ancient MSS. No serious student of the Bible would call them original (though many popular Bible teachers do).

Fourth, the charge that the more ancient MSS or the men who embrace them are unorthodox is a faulty charge. It is true that in certain places the ancient MSS do not explicitly affirm the deity of Christ--such as in I Tim 3:16. But neither do they deny it! Besides this, in some passages these ancient MSS make Christ's deity explicit where the King James does not! In John 1:18, the modern versions read "the unique one, God" while the King James has "the only begotten Son." Futhermore, the majority of evangelical scholars embrace this critical text. Even the men who edited the New Scofield Reference Bible of the King James Version personally favor the critical text!

Fifth, at the same time, there are some scholars today who are strong advocates of the Byzantine text--most notably, Zane Hodges and Arthur Farstad. Together they edited The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text and Dr. Farstad was also the senior editor of the New King James Bible. Thus, it is possible to be intelligent and still embrace the Byzantine text, just as it is possible to be evangelical and embrace the modern critical text. (I happen to disagree with the resultant text that Firsthad and Hodges have produced,1 but I respect their scholarship.)

Finally, we ought to quit labeling one another as heretics or idiots in the ongoing discussion. There needs to be charity on both sides. One of my college professors frequently said, "The Christian army is the only army in the world that shoots its wounded!" Unfortunately, this is especially true when it comes to translations of the Bible.

III. Deissmann and the Papyri
In1895 a German pastor by the name of Adolf Deissmann published a rather innocent-sounding volume: Bible Studies. Yet, this single volume started a revolution in NT scholarship--a revolution in which the common man was the winner.

In the 1800s Deissmann began reading ancient Greek MSS. But not the great classical authors. He was reading private letters, business transactions, receipts, marriage contracts. What were these documents? Merely scraps of papyrus (the ancient forerunner to paper) found in 2,000-year-old Egyptian garbage dumps. In these seemingly insignificant papyri, Deissmann discovered a key to uncover the NT! For these papyri contained the common Greek language of the first century A.D. They were written in the vocabulary of the NT.

What's so revolutionary about that? you ask. It is revolutionary because up until 1895, biblical scholars had no real parallels to the language of the NT. They often viewed its Greek as invented by the Holy Spirit. They called it "Holy Ghost Greek." Now it is true that the ideas--even the words--were inspired by the Holy Spirit. But it's another thing to say that the language of the NT was unusual--that its grammar and vocabulary were, in a word, unique. If this were true, only the spiritual elite could even hope to understand the NT.

Deismann's discovery burst the bubble on this view: the Greek of the NT was written in the language of the common man.

There are two implications of what Deissmann did for the Bible translations:

*******read the rest here - to be in compliance with GLPs 50% postin/copyright rule
[link to bible.org (secure)]
charlie
 Quoting: EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN



We follow the Masoretic bible
 Quoting: KlLLUMINATI


yes we should spread awarenss that GODS fath of CHRISTIANITY IS hijacked by PAGAN culture
EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN
IagreeWithOriginalPos​ter
User ID: 12614422
United States
03/19/2012 11:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: IS BIBLE GODS BOOK? THEN KING JAMES MADE 100000 CHANGES AND NO TWO BIBLE ARE SAME IN WHOLE WORLD
Mans interpretation will always cause error.
Even the KJV is false in its diction.

If we wanted the original story we'd have to piece together the various dead sea scrolls and even those were written by men and not God himself.
Mans nature is to alter and adapt to better suit his own interests if they be political or sociological.

Who knows what has been added or subtracted over the centuries.

News