Post Info TOPIC: Changing the Bible and Spiritualism
Is there any relevant connection between textual criticism and spiritualism?
Yes
No
I don't know



zafer

Date:
Changing the Bible and Spiritualism
Permalink   


I saw the rapping delusion. Satan has power to bring the appearance of forms before us purporting to be our relatives and friends that now sleep in Jesus. It will be made to appear as if they were present, the words they uttered while here, which we were familiar with, will be spoken, and the same tone of voice which they had while living will fall upon the ear. All this is to deceive the world, and ensnare them into the belief of this delusion.  {1SG 173.1}

This  rapping delusion  is the beginning of modern spiritualism, which started in 1848 in the house of a Methodist farmer (F.D. Fox). While studying the Bible versions issue I found out that Westcott and Hort were among the founders of a society (Ghostlie Guild) which was established with the said purpose of studying this phenomena. Their defenders claim that the two Anglicans were not involved in necromancy or something of that kind. They are basically trying to make us believe that there is no connection between the spiritualism and the change of the Bible worked out by them (they would call that revision). But, going further through the 30-th chapter of 1858GC, this connection (between spiritualism and the change of the Bible) is made very clear:

He who is the father of lies, blinds and deceives the world by sending his angels forth to speak for the apostles, and make it appear that they contradict what they wrote when on earth, which was dictated by the Holy Ghost. These lying angels make the apostles to corrupt their own teachings and declare them to be adulterated. By so doing he can throw professed Christians, who have a name to live and are dead, and all the world, into uncertainty about the word of God; for that cuts directly across his track, and is likely to thwart his plans. Therefore he gets them to doubt the divine origin of the Bible, and then sets up the infidel Thomas Paine, as though he was ushered into heaven when he died, and with the holy apostles whom he hated on earth, is united, and appears to be teaching the world.  {1SG 176.1} 

I don't know if you are aware of the ''recension theory''. Hort came out with it, declaring basically that the received text (Textus Receptus) is unreliable because it was adulterated. What is the result of such a theory? Nothing better than to  throw professed Christians, who have a name to live and are dead, and all the world, into uncertainty about the word of God.

Let's have a look on one more quote from the same chapter of 1858GC!

Satan is [...] is, through his power and lying wonders, tearing away the foundation of the christians' hope, and putting out their sun that is to lighten them in the narrow way to heaven. He is making the world believe that the Bible is no better than a story-book, uninspired, while he holds out something to take its place; namely, Spiritual Manifestations!  {1SG 177.1} 

Is not the higher criticism just a step further from textual critics? For them the Bible is no better than a story-book, uninspired, trying through ''those myths it contains" to pass out some teachings. And, of course, who else but a kabalist (spiritualist) is able to decode the ''esoteric meaning of the Bible''? 



__________________
nb

Date:
Permalink   

great quote Zafer



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

5 years prior to the time when these words were written, Westcott and Hort already agreed upon a plan to revise the Greek text of the New Testament. They kept that plan a secret for a good while but, all this time they, were involved in the so-called investigation of paranormal. Were they involved in necromancy and other spiritualistic activities? What was the source for Hort's idea that the original Scriptures were lost, and the closest text to the "originals" was the one to be found in the manuscripts of the "local text" (the Alexandrian manuscripts)? In other words: What was the source for Hort's "Recension" Theory ("The Lucian Recension")?



__________________
webmaster

Date:
Permalink   

I love that quote about * dictated by the Holy Ghost*.

I:ve found that almost zero of our SDA so-called *scholars* believe that, but around 60% or so of the laity do.  However, I:ve also noticed that when a *scholar* states their position that only the ideas are from God, and that the writers wrote those ideas down the best they could, a majority of those 60% will go over to the scholar:s viewpoint.  In other words, many of the laity instictively know that the words in the Bible are from God, yet, when confronted with an authority figure, will give up their belief in this.

I:ve never heard of the *recension theory* until now.  Yes, I had read before where Westcott and Hort were into spiritualism.

Today, nearly all New Testament translations are based on the Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament, which is itself based on corrupt manuscripts.  From Wikipedia+

*According to Hort, "Knowledge of Documents should precede Final Judgments upon Readings". The two editors favoured two manuscripts: Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.*  It:s no coincidence that both of these manuscripts are late-date forgeries, favored by the Vatican.

Personally, I believe the Analytical Literal Translation of the New Testament is the absolute most correct in the English language.  It is based on the Majority Manuscripts, and is translated by a man who believes the words are from God.  If interested, you can find it on Amazon or on the net.

May we Adventists get back to believing the words are from God, and following them, as our witness will be laughed at in the end times if we tell the judges that we keep the 7th day Sabbath, contrary to their law, yet don:t believe the words are from God! no



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

webmaster wrote:

I love that quote about * dictated by the Holy Ghost*.

I've found that almost zero of our SDA so-called *scholars* believe that, but around 60% or so of the laity do. 


You surprise me, webmaster, when you are telling of 60% of laity believing in Holy Spirit dictation. I just wish that to be so. From my experience, most SDA's stick to the SM quote on inspiration and disregard tens of other SoP quotes and all what the Bible says about the subject.

Yes, from my research, it looks like both The Recension Theory and Evolution Theory are coming from the bottomless pit of spiritualism. And here I'm not just talking about a far connection, like Darwin or Westcott and Hort being deceived by the spirits, without them realizing what is influencing their minds. Their deceptions stands rather in the fact that they thought that their information was from departed spirits, while those spirits were, in fact, devils pretending to be departed spirits. Probably, in the case of Westcott and Hort, they believed to receive information from dead apostles, who appear to them and contradicted what they wrote while on earth, which was dictated by the Holy Ghost.

What I find most amazing is that we, as SDA's, believe to be immune to the deception of spiritualism and don't realize how blind we are. We might look to horror on necromancy and other practices of spiritualists, but how many are awake to the corruptions of the Bible which came through spiritualism?  



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

webmaster wrote:

*According to Hort, "Knowledge of Documents should precede Final Judgments upon Readings". The two editors favored two manuscripts: Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.*  It:s no coincidence that both of these manuscripts are late-date forgeries, favored by the Vatican.


 Yes, this is interesting, because spiritualists are not only favorable to textual criticism, but to the esoteric religion of Vatican as well. They believe that the original Christianity, which was esoteric as all other religions, was lost and an institutionalized church came up with their own cannon an recension of the text. Bellow is a quote from Blavatsky:

As Higgins truly said, in the Christologia of St. Paul and Justin Martyr, we have the esoteric religion of the Vatican, a refined Gnosticism for the cardinals, a more gross one for the people. (http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-sio/sio-eso1.htm) 



__________________
Vigilantius

Date:
Permalink   

I'm not a champion of Westcott and Hort, and yet this kind of discussion gives me pause.

It seems like one big issue is how much we trust the Lord to preserve the Scriptures for us.

An example may be helpful.  Richard Thomson was on the KJV translation committee, and his subgroup worked on Genesis through 2 Kings.  He had the reputation of seldom going to bed sober.

Suppose that I'm reading along in Genesis in the KJV, and I come to a passage that I don't agree with, and I say to myself, "Well, Richard Thomson must have translated this while drunk".  This kind of approach doesn't seem very fruitful to me.

Another example.  Suppose that I'm a big KJV proponent, and consider it far superior to the alternatives.  It's my prerogative to think this way if I wish, but doing so leaves unanswered the question of what the roughly 4/5 of the world who don't understand English should use for their Bible reading.  Are these people simply out of luck?

A further example of actual translation variations may be useful.  Luke 4:4 in the KJV and NASB read like this:

And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

And Jesus answered him, "It is written, ' MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE.'"

The KJV has a trailing phrase "but by every word of God" not found in the NASB, and the difference is attributable to the underlying Greek texts.

I don't know which of these is right, and I don't think it's possible to come up with a definitive answer.  KJV advocates will sometimes say that the modern translations "leave out" phrases, but they are assuming that the KJV is right in order to prove that it's right, which is a shaky tactic.

Thus far I've not seen any explanation of how these minor differences in translations affect our understanding of God.  Even if we could prove malicious intent in the NASB leaving out the phrase, it still seems like the net result of doing so is quite trivial.  The Bible contains approximately 31,000 verses, and important subjects are covered over and over.



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

Thank you, Vigilantius, for your intervention! I try to understand your point, so when I try to address what you wrote, I hope I don't miss something. The object of this discussion is by no means to cast doubt into the Jesus's assurance that His words will not pass away. On the contrary, the textual critics (Westcott and Hort are about the most prominent of all) are the ones who, using this premise that the originals are lost, are doing this work of comparing corrupt manuscripts which don't agree one with another in order to come up with some text which, as they will say, is closer to the original. Funny thing is that spiritualists as Blavatsky and Manly P. Hall are in perfect agreement with this kind of approach, because they say that the original Christianity was an esoteric one, like all other religions, and, after losing its esoteric character, a recension of the sacred text took place. I can show quote after quote where Blavatsky is praising what the two guys (W&H) did, and where both Blavatsky and Manly P. Hall are expressing their contempt for the KJV.
Regarding KJV, personally I don't believe that every comma of it is God-breathed. But it used a totally different paradigm than that used by the modern translators who are using the critical text. While these guys believe in the so-called dynamic concept of inspiration (that the words were not inspired) to produce "dynamic equivalence" type of translations (or you can call it "paraphrase" by its right name) from an never-sure, ever-changing text produced out of corrupt manuscripts, KJV is based on the belief in the sure, never-changing, perfectly-preserved Word of God. Moreover, the translators believed that the words of the Holy Writ were "dictated by the Holy Ghost" as it is clearly stated in the 1611 introduction.  
So yes, God's Word has been perfectly preserved in the Masoretic Text (for the OT) and Textus Receptus (for the NT). But this promise doesn't rule out the possibility of counterfeits coming up. Apostle Paul even left clear warnings about that.


__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

Well, my friends, we have been warned ...  Unfortunately, such testimonies have been suppressed for a long time:

Now what does Satan propose to do? He proposes that he is capable of changing this Bible. These parties that fell understand all about heaven, and that they can bring in the different sentiments from the Bible, and they are going to have a revision of it. You will see they will make revisions of the Bible, but every one of us needs to stand intelligently on the Word. We cannot afford to be careless, but we must have that simplicity of godliness that is a virtue to us. We must have it. {Ms80-1910 (April 7, 1910) par. 10}

 

 



__________________
webmaster

Date:
Permalink   

I had never seen that quote before about the prophecy of making revisions to the Bible, zafer.  Thank you for that.

Why shouldn't we expect that the same thing will be done to books with Ellen White's name on the cover?

Sadly, many of us SDAs don't believe the words are from God, so aren't concerned when the words are changed around.  I've been taken to task many times, even called a "Commandment breaker" by fellow Conservative SDAs for telling them that in some places, books with Ellen White's name on the cover have been changed.  It is easy to demonstrate, as the evidence is available to anyone who has access to the books themselves, but usually these people will say something like "She approved it all".  That is just another way to say "We don't care, because we don't believe the words are from God anyway, so we can pick and choose what we want to believe and not believe".



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

webmaster wrote:

I had never seen that quote before about the prophecy of making revisions to the Bible, zafer.  Thank you for that.

Why shouldn't we expect that the same thing will be done to books with Ellen White's name on the cover?

Sadly, many of us SDAs don't believe the words are from God, so aren't concerned when the words are changed around.  I've been taken to task many times, even called a "Commandment breaker" by fellow Conservative SDAs for telling them that in some places, books with Ellen White's name on the cover have been changed.  It is easy to demonstrate, as the evidence is available to anyone who has access to the books themselves, but usually these people will say something like "She approved it all".  That is just another way to say "We don't care, because we don't believe the words are from God anyway, so we can pick and choose what we want to believe and not believe".


The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw. (Rev. 1:1-2)

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw. (v. 9)

And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness [the testimony] of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (Rev. 20:4)

In the book of Revelation the testimony (which is the SoP, according to Rev. 19:10) is closely connected with the Word of God. And if we use the Bible as its own dictionary, we are going to realize that the the words (the sayings) given to the prophets by God are the Spirit of prophecy, or testimony of Jesus.

And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See [thou do it] not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. (Rev. 19:10)

And I John saw these things, and heard [them]. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things. Then saith he unto me, See [thou do it] not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God. (Rev. 22:8-9)

See, in one place John's brethren are those who have the testimony, and in the other place are the other prophets and those who keep the sayings (that is "the words"). Today there are many SDA's who disregard God's words (they say that they are not inspired and thus they can be "revised") and pretend that they have the testimony because they are loyal to the Spirit of Prophecy. Such are under the strong delusion of Satan, defending his forgeries and accusing those who are showing them the deception they are in.

Our problem is that we don't accept the testimony of the Faithful Witness. Not only that we don't realize that we are blind, but don't want to accept what He tells us either. Why are the ten virgins sleeping? Why are we blind and naked?

Stay yourselves, and wonder; cry ye out, and cry: they are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink. For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered. (Is. 29:9-10)

Noah became naked because of strong drink. Laodiceans are naked because the eyes of the prophet ("the seer") had been closed. But, more than that, we do not know that we are blind. And that is because we take the spurious as genuine. Now, look what the genuine but suppressed testimony is warning us:

Satan will try to make men believe that the messages from God's throne are forgeries. At the same time, he will endeavor to lead them to accept as truth the lies that he has forged(Ms23-1891)



They come to me, those that are copying my writings, and say, Now here is the better revised words, and I think I will put that in. Don't you change one word, not a word. The revised edition we do not need at all. We have got the word that Christ has spoken Himself and given us. And dont you in my writings change a word for any revised edition. There will be revised editions, plenty of them, just before the close of this earths history, and I want all my workers to understand, and I have got quite a number of them. I want them to understand that they are never to take the revised word, and put it in the place of the plain, simple words just as they are. They think they are improving them, but how do they know but that they may switch off on an idea, and give it less importance than Christ means them to have. {Ms188-1907} 

 

 

 



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

webmaster wrote:

I've been taken to task many times, even called a "Commandment breaker" by fellow Conservative SDAs for telling them that in some places, books with Ellen White's name on the cover have been changed.  


 I saw the state of some who professed to stand on present truth, but disregarded the visionsthe way God had chosen to teach, in some cases, those who erred from Bible truth. I saw that in striking against the visions, they did not strike against the worm,the feeble instrument that God spoke through, but against the Holy Ghost. I saw it was a small thing to speak against the instrument, but it was dangerous to slight the words of God. I saw if they were in error and God chose to show them their errors through visions, and they disregarded the teachings of God through visions, they would be left to take their own way, and run in the way of error, and think they were right until they would find it out too late. Then in the time of trouble I heard them cry to God in agonywhy didst Thou not show us our wrong, that we might have gotten right, and ready for this time. Then an angel pointed to them, and saidmy Father taught but you would not be instructed. He spoke through visions but you disregarded His voice, and He gave you up to your own ways to be filled with your own doings. {Ms2-1849}

People who pretend that they keep EGW in high regard and, in the same breath, they slight the words of God, are under a strong delusion. 



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

We are to maintain the inspiration of the Scriptures religiously and zealously, in a period of the worlds [history] when men who claim to be religious are not religious as far as the sacred Scriptures are concerned. They are a pretense. They would change the Scriptures into an unreliable production and bring in forgery as the Word of the Lord. {Ms88-1910}

Looks like we can easily fall into Satan's trap if we don't understand how the inspiration of the Scriptures works. We can easily be deceived into taking a forgery as the Word of God. This forgery is the work of textual critics - those who look upon the authentic text of the Scriptures (Textus Receptus and The Masoretic Text) as upon an unreliable production.



__________________
webmaster

Date:
Permalink   

But we Seventh-day Adventists were originally known as *People of the Book*.  Actually, we are still proud of that as a denomination, showing other denominations that they don:t follow God:s words that he wrote with his finger in stone.

How did we get to this unenviable position of denying that the words are from God?

And how in the world will we stand before judges and rulers in the end time, and be able to give any kind of testimony that gives glory to Jesus when those peope ask us why we keep the 7th day Sabbath, we tell them it:s because the Bible says so, and then they point out that we don:t even profess to believe those words in the Bible are from God?!



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

webmaster wrote:

But we Seventh-day Adventists were originally known as *People of the Book*.  Actually, we are still proud of that as a denomination, showing other denominations that they don:t follow God:s words that he wrote with his finger in stone.

How did we get to this unenviable position of denying that the words are from God?

And how in the world will we stand before judges and rulers in the end time, and be able to give any kind of testimony that gives glory to Jesus when those peope ask us why we keep the 7th day Sabbath, we tell them it:s because the Bible says so, and then they point out that we don:t even profess to believe those words in the Bible are from God?!


It is quite a long history, little known to us as SDA's, but clearly outlined in the Scriptures. When I realized how God foresaw all that in His Word, I was really amazed. If someone is interested, we can go through the parable of the 10 virgins, and see all our history there. But, for now, let me point to how God describes the church of Philadelphia:

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

Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. (v. 10)

Did Philadelphia keep God's word? Oh yes, look just at the first two words of Miller's 14 rules of interpretation:

"1. Every word must have its proper bearing on the subject presented in the Bible."

"Every word" comes up two times more in the same 14 rules:

"4. To understand doctrine, bring all the Scriptures together on the subject you wish to know; then let every word have its proper influence, and if you can form your theory without a contradiction, you cannot be in an error."

"13. To know whether we have the true historical event for the fulfillment of a prophecy: If you find every word of the prophecy (after the figures are understood) is literally fulfilled, then you may know that your history is the true event. But if one word lacks a fulfillment, then you must look for another event, or wait its future development. For God takes care that history and prophecy doth agree, so that the true, believing children of God may never be ashamed." 

How are we going to apply the 13th rule (let's say) in a modern translation, where you're not even sure if that word God has given is going to be there or not? 

Now, let's go further, to the 2nd AM, proclaimed by Charles Fitch, still under the Philadelphia period. In his sermon, Come Out of Her, My People, he said: 

"God as it is, and needs no alterations and emendations from men, as though they could tell what God means, better than He has been able to express it in his own language."

If you look in context, you will see that Fitch told that the Bible was given in God's own language? This is what he believed, and this is what Philadelphia believed. What does Laodiceea believe now?



__________________
Vigilantius

Date:
Permalink   

Whether the Bible was written in "God's own language" or not might depend on how we wish to say it.

The Bible and SOP indicate pretty clearly that God's modes of thought are not the same as ours, and thus His communication with us represents a condescension on His part.  Here are two examples of inspired statements:

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. (Isaiah 55:8)

The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented. Men will often say such an expression is not like God. But God has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. {Ms24-1886, par. 9}

We should not assume that God thinks or speaks in Hebrew and Greek, and we should not assume that God's thought patterns are the same as those found in the Bible.  Rather, the language and modes of thought of the Bible are chosen by God to communicate with fallen human beings.

Another more general example of this principle is the one where Moses asked God to show him His glory, and God condescended to show him His back parts (Exodus 33:18-23).

 



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

 While it is true that God's thoughts are way beyond our understanding, it is as well true that He reveals Himself to His intelligent creatures through His words. 

Regarding Ms24-1886, if you compare it with the straight testimonies of the Holy Spirit, it very well might be that you don't find there God's language. In many places is rather a philosophical, weird language. And especially if you go to the last to paragraphs, God's language is surely not there, because about every phrase of them is so ... unbiblical!!! But nevertheless, Arthur White needed it for his "carefully" selected messages. 

And yes, the way God communicates it is in a plain and simple language, so that everybody can understand. For this reason we don't need to assume anything, but rather be sure that God knows and speaks Hebrew, Greek, English, and every other language in the world. He was the One who made Adam with the ability to speak and to understand His words, and He was the One who, at the tower of Babel, confounded people's language. And still He was the One who, through His Holy Spirit, spoke in as many languages as were needed.  



__________________
webmaster

Date:
Permalink   

Putting this problem of messing with the words of God, in connection with the message to the Philadelphians, is very new and interesting for me, zafer.

I agree totally.

William Miller:s 13th rule of interpretation is what really confirmed me in my belief that many things in Revelation are yet to have final fulfillment.

* If you find every word of the prophecy *

It is obvious that Miller had to have everything in the Bible basically finished by 1843.  We can:t, and shouldn:t fault him for that, as God led him.

But then years later, Uriah Smith pretty much set it all in concrete that everything has been completed except for the Sunday Law, Time of Trouble, and of course 2nd Coming.  Now many of us SDAs will take Uriah Smith:s words over the words of the Bible.

However, according to Miller:s rule #13 (which I believe, but understand it may not be inspired), it is not possible that any of the 7Trumpets for example, have even started yet (in a final fulfillment setting).

God thinks in Hebrew, Greek, English, and every other language ever known, and every other language that humans have no idea of either.  I:ve heard several fellow SDAs say that the words in the Bible cannot be from God, because then it would all sound the same!  And these are leading evangelists saying such nonsense!  God does condescend to speak to us in languages that we can understand, and in gratefulness, we....... say those words are not from God. doh.gif

Will the Laodiceans be among those who come to bow at the feet of the Philadelphians at the end time?



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

Men act as thou they had been given special liberty to cancel the decisions of God. The higher criticize put themselves in the place of God, and review the Word of God, revising or endorsing it. In this way all nations are induced to drink the wine of the fornication of Babylon. These higher critics have fixed things to suit the popular heresies of these last days. If they cannot subvert and misapply the Word of God, if they cannot bond it to human practices, they break it. {Lt48-1897} 

But no man who is a partaker of the divine nature will judge the Word of God, for he realizes that it is that Word that judges him. We cannot bring our religion to the Bible, and re-shape and misplace the Scriptures to prove our religion true. We must obtain our religion from the Word, just as it reads. Those who have felt at liberty to reject any portion of Gods Word at pleasure, trampling upon it because it does not suit the worlds measure, or accommodate their own practices in business deal, will find that they are handling a sword which cuts both ways. {Lt48-1897}



__________________
webmaster

Date:
Permalink   

*A sword which cuts both ways*

Solemn words.



__________________
nb

Date:
Permalink   

the Words of God....  they are spirit, they are life...  and the great testimony of Jesus

and the great standard for our lives...



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

That was tough what you said about Laodiceans, Webmaster!

Now, since we have seen that the True Witness confirms that Philadelphia had the Word, how do the things stand in regard with Laodicea? First, notice that to each of the seven churches the True Witness introduces Himself under a different name, relevant to the specific experience of the church He is addressing. What is the name which He is using when speaking to the Laodiceans?

And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;  (Rev.  3:14)

One of the names is the beginning of the creation of God. What does that mean? 

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (Gen 1:1)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)

Christ is the beginning of the creation of God, which means that He is God and the Word of God. Considering this truth, how is Laodicea in relation with the Word of God?

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock ... (Rev. 3:20)

There are several places in the Bible showing that Christ lives in the life of the believer through His words (see, for instance, John 15:7 or Rom. 10:6-8). In the case of Laodiceans Christ is outside, because His words are not accepted.

 



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with [his] word, and healed all that were sick (Matt. 8:16).

Back to the relation between spiritualism and God's Word! ... We see that Christ was casting out the spirits with His Word. Is there any chance that someone who was into the communion with the evil spirits will give us the true Word of God? If Westcott and Hort were into spiritualism, should we expect them to give us the unadulterated words of Christ?

And, because we are speaking about Laodicea, let us put some things into perspective: for decades there was someone who stood as the head of publishing work, while the testimonies were given. We can rightly say that, for a long time, he was the one who stood between the light of God given through the testimonies and the people to whom they were addressed. But God revealed something very dark about this man:

I had no rest in spirit in the house of Brother Uriah. I have left the house saying to myself, It is a godless house. I have seen no less than four evil angels controlling members of the family. {Lt3-1869} 

Considering that Christ was casting out the evil spirits with His Word, how interested were the evil angels controlling Uriah Smith to communicate the unadulterated words dictated by the Holy Spirit?



__________________
Anonymous

Date:
Permalink   

zafer wrote:

When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with [his] word, and healed all that were sick (Matt. 8:16).

Back to the relation between spiritualism and God's Word! ... We see that Christ was casting out the spirits with His Word. Is there any chance that someone who was into the communion with the evil spirits will give us the true Word of God? If Westcott and Hort were into spiritualism, should we expect them to give us the unadulterated words of Christ?

And, because we are speaking about Laodicea, let us put some things into perspective: for decades there was someone who stood as the head of publishing work, while the testimonies were given. We can rightly say that, for a long time, he was the one who stood between the light of God given through the testimonies and the people to whom they were addressed. But God revealed something very dark about this man:

I had no rest in spirit in the house of Brother Uriah. I have left the house saying to myself, It is a godless house. I have seen no less than four evil angels controlling members of the family. {Lt3-1869} 

Considering that Christ was casting out the evil spirits with His Word, how interested were the evil angels controlling Uriah Smith to communicate the unadulterated words dictated by the Holy Spirit?


 YIKES!!    



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

Is the Bible versions issue a new controversy?

Here is Gail Riplinger quoting from Foxe's book on marthyrs:

In 1557 Richard Woodman, an iron-maker from Chishester, was questioned before a tribunal and finally burned at the stake with ten others in Lewes. The devils charge was - A better translation would be. Woodman died defending the Bibles method of expounding words, saying, ...[O]ne scripture must be understood by another. The age-old battle for the Bible is summarized here by Foxe:

Inquisitor: ...[I]t is wrong translated, as it is in a thousand places more...

Woodman: If that place be wrong translated, and so many places of the Bible as you say, then I may say with Christ, It cannot be avoided, but offences must be given; but woe unto them by whom they come. I may say, Woe unto false translators: for cursed are they that add or take away. But take you heed that you belie not the translators. I believe they had the fear of God more before their eyes than you report of them...

Inquisitor: O, my lord, what a heretic...! Send him to prison...Me thinks he is not afraid of the prison...

Woodman: No, I praise the living God.

Inquisitor: This is a heretic indeed! He hath the right terms of all heretics; the living God:

Woodman: Be you angry with me, because I speak the words which are written in the Bible?

Inquisitor: Bible-babble, bible-babble! What speakest thou of the Bible?...My lord, I will tell you how you shall know a heretic by his words...[T]hey will say, the Lord, and we praise God and the living God: by these words you shall know a heretic.

Woodman: All these words are written for our learning...I marvel why you should reprove me there-for, seeing they be the words of God...I believe in the living God... And the greatest cause that I was compelled to read the Scriptures, was, because the preachers and teachers were so changeable...I believe, he that would burn a Testament willingly, would burn God himself, if he were here, if he could: for he and his word are all one...

Inquisitor: Who shall be judge betwixt us in this matter?

Woodman: The twelfth of John declareth who shall be judge in the last day.

Inquisitor: You mean the word shall judge the word. How can that be?

Woodman: Peter saith, The scripture hath no private interpretation: but one scripture must be understood by another.

Foxe ends saying, And thus have you the examinations of this blessed Woodman, or rather Goodman [and]...the gross ignorance and barbarous cruelty of his adversaries, especially Dr. White... (Foxe, vol. 8, pp. 340-374).



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

zafer wrote:

Is the Bible versions issue a new controversy?

Here is Gail Riplinger quoting from Foxe's book on marthyrs:

In 1557 Richard Woodman, an iron-maker from Chishester, was questioned before a tribunal and finally burned at the stake with ten others in Lewes. The devils charge was - A better translation would be. Woodman died defending the Bibles method of expounding words, saying, ...[O]ne scripture must be understood by another. The age-old battle for the Bible is summarized here by Foxe:

Inquisitor: ...[I]t is wrong translated, as it is in a thousand places more...

Woodman: If that place be wrong translated, and so many places of the Bible as you say, then I may say with Christ, It cannot be avoided, but offences must be given; but woe unto them by whom they come. I may say, Woe unto false translators: for cursed are they that add or take away. But take you heed that you belie not the translators. I believe they had the fear of God more before their eyes than you report of them...

Inquisitor: O, my lord, what a heretic...! Send him to prison...Me thinks he is not afraid of the prison...

Woodman: No, I praise the living God.

Inquisitor: This is a heretic indeed! He hath the right terms of all heretics; the living God:

Woodman: Be you angry with me, because I speak the words which are written in the Bible?

Inquisitor: Bible-babble, bible-babble! What speakest thou of the Bible?...My lord, I will tell you how you shall know a heretic by his words...[T]hey will say, the Lord, and we praise God and the living God: by these words you shall know a heretic.

Woodman: All these words are written for our learning...I marvel why you should reprove me there-for, seeing they be the words of God...I believe in the living God... And the greatest cause that I was compelled to read the Scriptures, was, because the preachers and teachers were so changeable...I believe, he that would burn a Testament willingly, would burn God himself, if he were here, if he could: for he and his word are all one...

Inquisitor: Who shall be judge betwixt us in this matter?

Woodman: The twelfth of John declareth who shall be judge in the last day.

Inquisitor: You mean the word shall judge the word. How can that be?

Woodman: Peter saith, The scripture hath no private interpretation: but one scripture must be understood by another.

Foxe ends saying, And thus have you the examinations of this blessed Woodman, or rather Goodman [and]...the gross ignorance and barbarous cruelty of his adversaries, especially Dr. White... (Foxe, vol. 8, pp. 340-374).


Here is what Gail Riplinger writes prior to that (I wan't able to post it toghether, as the commentary was too long): 

Martyrs died for the living God, spoken of in John 6:69 in the Tyndale and KJV Bibles. Their blood cries from the ground and vies for the authenticity of these words, while new version editors are dying to get rid of them. Martyr John Rogers wrote before his death:

Seek first, I say, the living God, and always him adore, And then be sure that he will bless your basket and your store (Matt Whitling, The Grammar of Poetry, Moscow, Idaho, 2000, p. 6).



__________________
nb

Date:
Permalink   

I wonder how many different versions there are now? Just English.



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

nb wrote:

I wonder how many different versions there are now? Just English.


Basically in the Middle Ages was the Eastern Orthodox Church with the Scriptures in Greek (Septuagint and the Greek NT), the Jews with the Hebrew Scriptures and the Catholics with the Latin Vulgate. And the true custodians of the authentic text of both the OT and NT was the Church in the wilderness. Than, through the Reformation, the authentic Scriptures were bought into attention and received a wide distribution.

Now, at the time when the Bible of the Reformers seem to have no rival, Satan came out with something else to overthrow them: the Greek text of the textual critics. Their claim was basically the same as that of the Church of Rome during the Middle Ages: that the original text was lost because the Jewish people corrupted the Hebrew Scriptures and the Eastern Church corrupted the Greek Scriptures. And, while Catholics claimed to have the authority and capacity to reconstruct the text of the Scripture because they are the custodians of the tradition entrusted to them by Christ through Peter down the line of the bishops of Rome, the textual critics claimed to have this capacity through the falsely so-called science of textual criticism. And, if you do some research, it will come out that the church tradition of Vatican is basically the esoteric system of belief of Vatican. Similar to this, the textual criticism is just one of the many pseudo-sciences which emerged during the XIX-th century, having their roots in occultism. More than that, the main textual critics were initiated into the esoteric knowledge of the occult: Westcott and Hort were involved in spiritualism and Nestle was an orientalist.

So, the many modern versions are all based on the ever-changing text text of the textual critics which came out of the bottomless pit of Satan, as the Latin Vulgate did. And, because of the dynamic view of inspiration, the fact that the Bible is always changing is not troubling. But a biblical understanding of this subject makes it clear that God gave us only one Bible and the words of the inspired Scriptures will not pass away and will not change.



__________________
webmaster

Date:
Permalink   

nb, This web page of the American Bible Society tells how difficult it is to answer that question:

http://news.americanbible.org/article/number-of-english-translations-of-the-bible

Here is a short quote from that web site "With all these caveats in mind, the number of printed English translations and paraphrases of the Bible, whether complete or not, is about 900.

The most comprehensive English bibliography of the subject is the one compiled by William J. Chamberlin, and published in 1991, as "Catalogue of English Bible Translations." The section covering the canonical books (including the Deuterocanon) has 806 pages. "

I wish to profusely thank zafer for his/her information on this subject, as it gives me even more confidence in the truthfulness, and necessity of the words of God.  They are not just ideas in human words.  They are God's words, and we mess with or ignore any of those words at our soul's eternal peril.

 



__________________
zafer

Date:
Permalink   

Back to the Bible version controversy in the context of Adventism:

One argument in favor of the new versions is the so-called EGW use of RV. We have seen some prophetic insight into the life of Uriah Smith who, for about 1/2 of century, was the leading man in the SDA publishing work. The one who followed him was W.W. Prescott. He was not alone in what he was doing. Things were getting more an more centralized in the church under Daniells's administration. God had again something to reveal and warn about this situation through the prophetic gift:

Message after message has come to me from the Lord concerning the dangers surrounding you and Elder Prescott. I have seen that Satan would have been greatly pleased to see Elders Prescott and Daniells undertake the work of a general overhauling of our books that have done a good work in the field for years. But neither of you is called of God to that work. If you were to enter upon such a work, much time would be employed that should be given to the proclamation of the last warning message to an impenitent world.

...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Representations have passed before me which indicate that you and Elder Prescott and others united with you have been inclined to search out things to be criticized or condemned in our printed publications. Were encouragement given you, changes and revisions would be made in accordance with the ideas that you have in mind. But you must never forget that Satan, disguised as an angel of light, is always ready to encourage anything that would lead to a loss of confidence in our denominational literature. He would be pleased to keep many minds employed in picking flaws in publications that God has blessed.

The enemy of all truth well knows that if minds can be kept occupied in searching for and giving wide publicity to imperfections in books that have been printed and widely circulated, great weakness will be brought to our work. Time would pass rapidly, and the great work needed in our cities would remain undone. Besides, there would be created in the minds of many an uncertainty as to the value of our publications that have done a good work, and many minds would become absorbed in a further search for possible errors in our literature.

The result would be the creation of a feeling of uncertainty in the minds of many as to the value of our denominational literature in general. If we should now sow broadcast seeds of doubt as to the correctness of our printed books and tracts, and encourage the thought that there must needs be a general revision of our published books, a work would have begun that the Lord has not appointed us to do.

Even a suggestion as to inaccuracies would, if made public, lead some to vindicate their course of action in spending much time in an effort to search for flaws and to find fault. It is not safe to set some minds running in such channels of thought, as this would lead to a harvest of doubt and unbelief. I know whereof I speak; for the Lord has opened this matter before me.

I am bidden to counsel you to leave the work of book revision and devote the entire energies of your mind to the presentation of Bible truth to souls who have never heard the third angels message. If you and Brother Prescott were to sow broadcast seeds of uncertainty and distrust in the minds of others, God would call you to a stern account for this evil.

In the night season, I have seen men looking over our printed books in search of something to criticize, and the adversary was standing by their side, making suggestions to their minds. The natural result of unwise criticism would be to bring infidelity into our ranks.

The Lord Jesus says to the president of the General Conference, "My grace is sufficient for thee; for My strength is made perfect in weakness." Warn the cities. Time is precious. Repent and be converted. Repent, and redeem the time. Let everything be done that can be done to atone for your past neglect. 

.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 

Satan and all his hosts are on the battlefield. The enemy of our souls has acted the part of a busy agent in presenting the thought that many of our books now in print are in need of general revision. He would be glad to have our brethren receive the impression that many changes must be made. He would delight to insinuate questioning and doubt into the minds of many of our people.

I have been instructed that the Lord is not the author of the proposal to make many changes in books already published. If information regarding this sort of work, even as regards the few instances where revisions are needed, should become widespread, seeds of doubt would spring up in many minds. Satan would be busy at work implanting seeds of distrust and unbelief, and it would require much labor to remedy the evil that would be wrought.

The enemy of truth, through the ministry of fallen angels, would be pleased to introduce uncertainty in the minds of many in regard to doctrines that have been established by the sanction of the Holy Spirit. Disguised as one who has a deep understanding of truth, Satan will seek to point out supposed errors in that which needs no revision, and it will take much time and patient labor to restore confidence in those whose minds are unsettled by unnecessary changes. God forbids His servants to alter that which needs no change. If our people would all act sensibly in regard to these matters, and not give themselves to a work of questioning and disputation, much doubt and consequent confusion would be avoided. {Lt70-1910}

Notice that the proposed changes were to be done in accordance with the ideas that you [Daniells] have in mind. It is always that way, and in applies to the words inspired by the Holy Ghost also: the editor makes the changes according to his own ideas. Thus, man becomes the the judge of the Word, though Jesus told that things work vice-versa.

A very important person in this scheme was W.W. Prescott. Fact is that he was a champion in introducing the modern versions into the church. If someone wants to know more about Prescott legacy the book The Dismantling of Seventh-day Adventism by H.H. Meyers is a good resource. 



__________________
1 2  >  Last»  | Page of 2  sorted by
 
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard