Life Bible-Presbyterian Church and Far Eastern Bible College will cancel one another!
Number of full time student in Far Eastern Bible College will reduce 30%
Numbers of student in ERBL Lecture in Life Bible-Presbyterian Church will reduce another 30%
The rest of the 40% will go to Singapore Bible College...........
Both ERBL and Far Eastern Bible College are losers..........
At last, Bible-Presbyterian Church in Singapore will learn a lesson,
HUMBLENESS.......
And at last they are on the track to become "Evangelical Christian"
17.1.17
When you come to Giltead Road, Singapore
When you meet some one in Life Bible-Presbyterian Church in Gilstead Road, Singapore, you better ask him or her, "To whom you are following, Jeffrey Khoo or Charles Seet?"
Some will say, "I follow Jeffrey Khoo." Some will say, “I follow Charles Seet." Some will say, "I follow Timothy Tow." Some will say, "I am for Verbal Plenary Preservation." Some will say, "I am against Verbal Plenary Preservation." Some will say, "I follow Christ." Some will say, "I am neutral." Some will say, "No comment."
Divisions!There are divisions in one small piece of land, Gilstead Road, Singapore!
Listen, what Paul wrote in his first letter to the Corinthians.
1Co 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
1Co 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
1Co 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
1Co 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
1Co 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
1Co 3:4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
For when one saith (hotan gar legēi tis). Indefinite temporal clause with the present subjunctive of repetition (Robertson, Grammar, p. 972). Each instance is a case in point and proof abundant of the strife.
Of Paul (Paulou). Predicate genitive, belong to Paul, on Paul’s side.
Of Apollos (Apollō). Same genitive, but the form is the so-called Attic second declension. See the nominative Apollōs in 1Co_3:5.
Men (anthrōpoi). Just mere human creatures (anthrōpoi, generic term for mankind), in the flesh (sarkinoi), acting like the flesh (sarkikoi), not pneumatikoi, as if still psuchikoi. It was a home-thrust. Paul would not even defend his own partisans.
To me, honestly speaking, Far Eastern Bible College and Life Bible-Presbyterian Church in Singapore are carnal Christians, they are not spiritual, they are babe in Christ. They are acting in flesh, mere man.
But sad to say, both Far Eastern Bible College and Life Bible-Presbyterian Church are thinking the other way, they think they are very spiritual.......!!!!
Some will say, "I follow Jeffrey Khoo." Some will say, “I follow Charles Seet." Some will say, "I follow Timothy Tow." Some will say, "I am for Verbal Plenary Preservation." Some will say, "I am against Verbal Plenary Preservation." Some will say, "I follow Christ." Some will say, "I am neutral." Some will say, "No comment."
Divisions!There are divisions in one small piece of land, Gilstead Road, Singapore!
Listen, what Paul wrote in his first letter to the Corinthians.
1Co 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
1Co 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
1Co 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
1Co 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
1Co 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
1Co 3:4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
Commentary of 1 Corinthians 3:4
For when one saith (hotan gar legēi tis). Indefinite temporal clause with the present subjunctive of repetition (Robertson, Grammar, p. 972). Each instance is a case in point and proof abundant of the strife.
Of Paul (Paulou). Predicate genitive, belong to Paul, on Paul’s side.
Of Apollos (Apollō). Same genitive, but the form is the so-called Attic second declension. See the nominative Apollōs in 1Co_3:5.
Men (anthrōpoi). Just mere human creatures (anthrōpoi, generic term for mankind), in the flesh (sarkinoi), acting like the flesh (sarkikoi), not pneumatikoi, as if still psuchikoi. It was a home-thrust. Paul would not even defend his own partisans.
To me, honestly speaking, Far Eastern Bible College and Life Bible-Presbyterian Church in Singapore are carnal Christians, they are not spiritual, they are babe in Christ. They are acting in flesh, mere man.
But sad to say, both Far Eastern Bible College and Life Bible-Presbyterian Church are thinking the other way, they think they are very spiritual.......!!!!
FEBC and Life BPC are Church of Sardis
Revelation 3 “To the angel of the church in Sardis write:
These are the words of him who holds the seven spirits of God and the seven stars. I know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead. 2 Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have found your deeds unfinished in the sight of my God. 3 Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; hold it fast, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you.
These are the words of him who holds the seven spirits of God and the seven stars. I know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead. 2 Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have found your deeds unfinished in the sight of my God. 3 Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; hold it fast, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you.
4 Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. 5 The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels. 6 Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches.
The New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), Re 3:1–6.
Wake Up—The Message to the Church in Sardis (3:1–6)
The two most adverse reports are sent to Sardis and to Laodicea. In this letter to Sardis, Jesus passes over any estimate of their “deeds” and their “reputation” to give the bottom line: “You are dead” (Revelation 3:1). Their only hope is to “Wake up!” How do they do this? They must complete the deeds they began at a former time, “Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it, and repent” (Revelation 3:3). What will the consequences be if this is not done? Certainly it will be no less than His warning to the Ephesians, “I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place” (Revelation 2:5). Or to Pergamum, “Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth” (Revelation 2:16). But to Sardis, Jesus simply warns, “I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you” (Revelation 3:3).
“You Are Dead!” (1–3)
The two most adverse reports are sent to Sardis and to Laodicea. In this letter to Sardis, Jesus passes over any estimate of their “deeds” and their “reputation” to give the bottom line: “You are dead” (Revelation 3:1). Their only hope is to “Wake up!” How do they do this? They must complete the deeds they began at a former time, “Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it, and repent” (Revelation 3:3). What will the consequences be if this is not done? Certainly it will be no less than His warning to the Ephesians, “I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place” (Revelation 2:5). Or to Pergamum, “Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth” (Revelation 2:16). But to Sardis, Jesus simply warns, “I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you” (Revelation 3:3).
A Few Still Live (4–6)
Even in a congregation judged as dead, a few individuals have managed to stay alive and refused to be entangled in either the sin of the world or the apathy of a dying congregation. They “have not soiled their clothes.” Jesus promises, “They will walk with me, dressed in white” (Revelation 3:4). He promises the one who overcomes, “I will never blot out his name from the book of life” (Revelation 3:5). By inference, Jesus is saying unless a person remains faithful, his name will be blotted out.
As Jesus introduces himself to this church, He is described as holding the sevenfold Spirit (the Holy Spirit) in one hand and the seven stars (angels or messengers) in the other. This is appropriate to the deepest need of the congregation. They need life, and the Spirit is associated with giving life: “The Spirit of God has made me; the breath of the Almighty gives me life” (Job 33:4).
Lewis Foster, Revelation: Unlocking the Scriptures for You, Standard Bible Studies (Cincinnati, OH: Standard, 1989), 54.
Heresy versus Schism: Which is Worse?
Heresy versus Schism: Which is Worse?
Dear All,
Heresy dies out. Schisms last for centuries. Heresy invites its own reversal by awakening a dynamic orthodoxy. Schism freezes doctrine, interferes with its healthy development. Heretics after all passionately want to improve the church's teaching. Their passion ignites a new passion in the church. Schism only provokes the passion of hatred, and its concomitant, war. In this discussion on the seriousness of heresy vis-a-vis schism, one of our company reminds us that the great schism between East and West is the first great fragmentation of the Church. Another listsib goes back to the Monophysite controversies of the fifth century, and their schisms.
These prove the point I have been arguing: heresy is essentially a short-term phenomenon, schism is long-term. Heresy forces the church to articulate its message more accurately.
For instance, the term homousios ("of one Being" in the Nicene Creed) is an accurate theoretical description of Jesus' relation to God, over against Arius' contention that "there was a time when He (Jesus Christ) was not." There was no schism because of the Arian controversy. even though it was one of the most serious and deadly heresies of all.
This later developed into the Monophysite controversy, as to whether Jesus had one ("mono") nature ("physis") or two, as Chalcedon insisted. After Chalcedon (451) there was a schism over the person of Christ.
One of the consequences of that schism was the disillusionment with Christianity of a young man thirsting for God named Muhammed.
More importantly, think how our divisions have given the lie to the Gospel we all preach.
Heresy dies out. Schisms last for centuries. Heresy invites its own reversal by awakening a dynamic orthodoxy. Schism freezes doctrine, interferes with its healthy development. Heretics after all passionately want to improve the church's teaching. Their passion ignites a new passion in the church. Schism only provokes the passion of hatred, and its concomitant, war.
I reiterate, schism is always worse than heresy. For heresy is about doctrine - credo ut intelligam - while schism is about abandoning the commandment to love one another as Christ has loved us.
These prove the point I have been arguing: heresy is essentially a short-term phenomenon, schism is long-term. Heresy forces the church to articulate its message more accurately.
For instance, the term homousios ("of one Being" in the Nicene Creed) is an accurate theoretical description of Jesus' relation to God, over against Arius' contention that "there was a time when He (Jesus Christ) was not." There was no schism because of the Arian controversy. even though it was one of the most serious and deadly heresies of all.
This later developed into the Monophysite controversy, as to whether Jesus had one ("mono") nature ("physis") or two, as Chalcedon insisted. After Chalcedon (451) there was a schism over the person of Christ.
One of the consequences of that schism was the disillusionment with Christianity of a young man thirsting for God named Muhammed.
More importantly, think how our divisions have given the lie to the Gospel we all preach.
Heresy dies out. Schisms last for centuries. Heresy invites its own reversal by awakening a dynamic orthodoxy. Schism freezes doctrine, interferes with its healthy development. Heretics after all passionately want to improve the church's teaching. Their passion ignites a new passion in the church. Schism only provokes the passion of hatred, and its concomitant, war.
I reiterate, schism is always worse than heresy. For heresy is about doctrine - credo ut intelligam - while schism is about abandoning the commandment to love one another as Christ has loved us.
KJV only?
This past Sunday at church, a young lady in our congregation shared with me about someone she knows who believes that the King James Version(KJV) of the Bible is the only inspired translation. She went on to say that this acquaintance will actually go so far as to say that someone cannot be saved unless the KJV is used! It occurred to me that this young lady is most likely not the only person with a friend, relative, or co-worker who believes that the KJV is the only "inspired" version of the Bible.
Before commenting further, I want to be sure I'm clear on one thing; I like the KJV translation of the Bible. It's eloquence and poetic verse are second to none. Those who enjoy using the translation, whether because they were raised on it or due to the poetic nature of the verses, I believe it to be a good translation and see nothing wrong with it. However, I believe it to be one of the many good translations available today and certainly not the best.
My goal in this post is to 1) provide resources to understand the KJV only debate better 2) to provide questions for you to ask those who hold to "KJV Onlyism." I hope you find it helpful!
Here are some helpful resources:
A Complete History of the KJV Bible
The King James Bible
or check out this audio from Dr. Dan Wallace, New Testament Scholar
Background Information
If you are new to the KJV-only issue by Brian Tegart
If your not new to the KJV-only issue by Brian Tegart
If you are "KJV-only" by Brian Tegart
On the KJV Translators
The KJV Translators said THAT? by Brian Tegart
The Lofty and Worthy Endeavor or Goal of the KJV Translators by Rick Norris
Accuracy of the King James Version
Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible is the Best Translation Available Today by Daniel Wallace
Is Your Modern Translation Corrupt? Answering the Allegations of the KJV Only Advocates by James R. White
Errors in the King James Version? by William W. Combs
Issue Settled
Jesus is NOT KJV-Only! by Brian Tegart
Questions to ask KJV-Only Advocates
Ten Questions for "KJV Only" Supporters
In summary, the KJV is a good translation, but that is all.
read more: http://truthbomb.blogspot.com/search/label/KJV%20Onlyism
B-P Pastors and Leaders Retreat
B-P Pastors and Leaders Retreat, 13-14 July 2015. Theme: "Building and Bonding" at Pulai Springs Resort.
FEBC starts another round of fighting
FEBC starts another round of fighting with Life BP Church, calling Life BP Church as liberal.
See weekly published at FEBC website: http://febc.edu.sg/assets/weekly2015/weekly-volxii-no38.htm
Not Liberal
Neither are we liberal or modernistic. Liberalism or Modernism says you can be a Christian without believing the Bible, without believing in Jesus Christ. Be warned that liberalism has crept into the Presbyterian Church. One clear example is the Presbyterian Church of the United States of America (PCUSA). In 1924, 1293 Presbyterian ministers in the PCUSA denied the five fundamentals of the Christians Faith: (1) Inerrancy of Scripture, (2) Virgin Birth, (3) Miracles of Christ, (4) Substitutionary Atonement, and (5) Resurrection of Christ. Do you believe the Bible is 100% God’s Word without any mistake and Jesus Christ is the only Saviour? If you do not believe in the five fundamentals of the faith, you should not call yourself a Presbyterian, not even Christian. Without the five fundamentals of the faith, there is no Christianity and no salvation. But today in the PCUSA and in the Presbyterian Church here in Singapore, and even in the Bible-Presbyterian Church, there are those who say the Bible is not 100% perfect. They say the Bible was only perfect in the past when it was first written, but no longer perfect today. They deny that God has preserved His inspired words perfectly. But Psalm 12:6-7 says very clearly, “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.” Jesus said, “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (Matt 5:18).
Did the NIV Delete 64,575 Words?
by Christopher D. Hudson
MY LOVE FOR THE KJV
I don’t say that to undermine the Bible at all. God is perfect, and the gospel is perfect. His Word is infallible. One of the benefits of having so many translations is that we can do our best to understand the text as it was originally written thousands of years ago.
ZONDERVAN/HARPERCOLLINS
Zondervan is owned by HarperCollins, and HarperCollins is owned by News Corp. As public corporations (headed by Rupert Murdoch), these companies are not “Christian” companies. However, the leaders of the organizations have wisely realized that they will make more money if they allow Zondervan to fulfill its faith-driven, Jesus-centered mission. They know that Christians trust Zondervan, and they’ve intentionally allowed the company to remain staffed with deeply committed, faith-driven, Jesus-centered people. In fact, the head of Zondervan’s Bible publishing efforts has served as a long-term pastor. He and I spoke this week on the phone about our mutual love for Jesus, Christ's teaching, and the truth about the gospel.
Christians have no grounds for criticizing the NIV based on its publishers. Even though the parent company, News Corp, is a secular corporation looking to turn a profit, it doesn’t interfere with the Christian editors who are preserving God’s Word at Zondervan. I believe that God has blessed Zondervan’s efforts so that they are among the most profitable divisions of HarperCollins.
HAS THE NIV REMOVED 64,575 WORDS FROM THE BIBLE?
So, did the NIV translators remove words that are in the KJV? Yes. Their goal was to translate the original intent of the biblical writers in fewer words. Did they undermine or take away from the biblical meaning in doing so? No. (Translating between languages is always dynamic and never just word for word. The best translator in any setting can communicate the literal meaning with fewer words.)
Some people have criticized the NIV due to the removal of the term “Holy Ghost.” That’s just silly. NIV translators used “Holy Spirit,” which is essentially the same term. Personally, I believe that “Holy Spirit” is probably a better translation and more accurate for a modern-day reader. (Is it better to tell children that God is a Ghost or that God is a Spirit?) Anyone who uses this change in wording as an argument against the NIV shows they are trying to be inflammatory and not being intellectually honest.
DOES THE NIV USE A STRANGE BIBLE TRANSLATION MODEL?
HAS THE NIV REMOVED VERSES FROM THE BIBLE?
The KJV was published in 1611 from a collection of Greek texts, which has become known as the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus is an excellent collection of manuscripts, and reading from them (or a Bible translated from them) can properly teach people about God, Jesus, and the gospel. However, there is no Bible verse that says the Textus Receptus is inspired. I believe the only inspired versions are the original copies written by the original authors.
The problem lies in that for over a thousand years, people hand copied the Bible word by word. And while these outstanding scribes were 99.99 percent accurate, occasionally they made a mistake. To me, what is remarkable is how accurate these scribes remained while playing a gigantic game of “telephone” (each copying a previous person’s work).
As language scholarship and archaeology has improved, we have been able to get back to manuscripts that seem to more likely resemble the original autographs written right after the time of Christ. As we’ve gotten closer to the original, we have found that there were a handful of problems in the Textus Receptus. While none of these problems really violate the gospel, they offer subtle changes.
As an example, it appears there are about 45 verses that the New Testament writers did not actually include in their original work. Well-meaning scribes seemed to have added them in over the centuries to help clarify a verse or passage in order to help readers understand.
BIBLE ACCURACY AND MY FAITH
I rarely get involved in debates on Bible translation. In fact, I don’t weigh in a lot of debates, as I believe my mission is to challenge people to simply read, engage, and apply the Bible.
As long as people are reading God’s Word, I’m not concerned about varying opinions on Bible translations, worship styles, church denominations, etc. I’m happy knowing we share a faith in Christ Jesus first and foremost, and I hope to walk with my brothers and sisters as we take one more step in the journey with Jesus.
However, I feel I must speak up when trust in God’s Word is in danger of becoming weakened due to someone’s attacks on certain translations of the Bible. A person who solely promotes the KJV (King James Version) and believes that any modern translation is evil undermines the faith of people who choose to read and study God’s Word in a translation other than the KJV.
As personal background, my degree is in ancient languages (New Testament Greek). I have a love for many Bible translations, as they have been helpful to many people (myself included) in their walk with Christ. I enjoy reading regularly from the KJV, NIV, ESV, NLT and others.
MY LOVE FOR THE KJV
I absolutely love the King James Version (KJV). In fact, I serve as the editor of a KJV Study Bible. God has used the KJV mightily over the centuries, but it is only a translation of the original Hebrew and Greek Bible.
Ultimately, I firmly believe that God’s Word is infallible. But I don’t want to confuse God’s Word (in the original Greek and Hebrew texts) with human fallible translation efforts. God’s Word is infallible. The NIV is fallible. So is the ESV. So is every translation—even my beloved KJV.
There is nothing in the Bible to indicate that God gave special blessing to Martin Luther’s translation, John Wycliffe’s translation, or to King James’s translation.
I don’t say that to undermine the Bible at all. God is perfect, and the gospel is perfect. His Word is infallible. One of the benefits of having so many translations is that we can do our best to understand the text as it was originally written thousands of years ago.
ZONDERVAN/HARPERCOLLINS
Some who attack the NIV in favor of the KJV openly denounce those who publish and back the NIV. In full disclosure, I am personal friends with the editors at Zondervan who publish the NIV Bible. We e-mail and talk on the phone often. I can assure you they are faith-driven, humble, Jesus-following people. They are actively involved in conservative churches and ministry. I’ve known some of their staff for nearly twenty years; we have challenged each other in our faith and walk with Christ. I have no doubt of their Christian commitment or their passion for preserving God’s Word.
Zondervan is owned by HarperCollins, and HarperCollins is owned by News Corp. As public corporations (headed by Rupert Murdoch), these companies are not “Christian” companies. However, the leaders of the organizations have wisely realized that they will make more money if they allow Zondervan to fulfill its faith-driven, Jesus-centered mission. They know that Christians trust Zondervan, and they’ve intentionally allowed the company to remain staffed with deeply committed, faith-driven, Jesus-centered people. In fact, the head of Zondervan’s Bible publishing efforts has served as a long-term pastor. He and I spoke this week on the phone about our mutual love for Jesus, Christ's teaching, and the truth about the gospel.
Christians have no grounds for criticizing the NIV based on its publishers. Even though the parent company, News Corp, is a secular corporation looking to turn a profit, it doesn’t interfere with the Christian editors who are preserving God’s Word at Zondervan. I believe that God has blessed Zondervan’s efforts so that they are among the most profitable divisions of HarperCollins.
HAS THE NIV REMOVED 64,575 WORDS FROM THE BIBLE?
An accusation has been made that the translators of the NIV removed a remarkably large number of words from the text of the NIV. This may be one of the most ill-informed and unfounded arguments against the NIV I’ve ever heard. I’m guessing the person who made this accusation looked at overall word count of the KJV and the NIV and saw a difference. Or maybe they counted all the “thees” and “thous” that the NIV doesn’t include? Actually, I can’t figure out how they would have come up with that number.
So, did the NIV translators remove words that are in the KJV? Yes. Their goal was to translate the original intent of the biblical writers in fewer words. Did they undermine or take away from the biblical meaning in doing so? No. (Translating between languages is always dynamic and never just word for word. The best translator in any setting can communicate the literal meaning with fewer words.)
Some people have criticized the NIV due to the removal of the term “Holy Ghost.” That’s just silly. NIV translators used “Holy Spirit,” which is essentially the same term. Personally, I believe that “Holy Spirit” is probably a better translation and more accurate for a modern-day reader. (Is it better to tell children that God is a Ghost or that God is a Spirit?) Anyone who uses this change in wording as an argument against the NIV shows they are trying to be inflammatory and not being intellectually honest.
DOES THE NIV USE A STRANGE BIBLE TRANSLATION MODEL?
Not at all. The NIV gets attacked a lot because it is the most popular translation. However, very similar translation philosophies are followed by translators of the ESV and the NLT. If you throw out the NIV, you need to throw out virtually all modern translations that follow similar translation philosophies.
HAS THE NIV REMOVED VERSES FROM THE BIBLE?
Another factor in the debate on Bible translation is the Hebrew and Greek texts these translations came from. I believe that the Greek and Hebrew texts used by modern scholars for recent translations (NIV, NLT, ESV, etc.) are more accurate.
The KJV was published in 1611 from a collection of Greek texts, which has become known as the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus is an excellent collection of manuscripts, and reading from them (or a Bible translated from them) can properly teach people about God, Jesus, and the gospel. However, there is no Bible verse that says the Textus Receptus is inspired. I believe the only inspired versions are the original copies written by the original authors.
The problem lies in that for over a thousand years, people hand copied the Bible word by word. And while these outstanding scribes were 99.99 percent accurate, occasionally they made a mistake. To me, what is remarkable is how accurate these scribes remained while playing a gigantic game of “telephone” (each copying a previous person’s work).
As language scholarship and archaeology has improved, we have been able to get back to manuscripts that seem to more likely resemble the original autographs written right after the time of Christ. As we’ve gotten closer to the original, we have found that there were a handful of problems in the Textus Receptus. While none of these problems really violate the gospel, they offer subtle changes.
As an example, it appears there are about 45 verses that the New Testament writers did not actually include in their original work. Well-meaning scribes seemed to have added them in over the centuries to help clarify a verse or passage in order to help readers understand.
However, none of those 45 verses change any core belief of the gospel. They are almost all clarifications. My faith is solid in God, Jesus, and the atoning work of salvation even if those 45 verses aren’t there (or if they are, it doesn’t change anything). Modern translations (including the NIV) are often criticized for removing the 45 verses. Actually, they have done a better job of maintaining the original Bible text since it looks like the 45 verses were not in the original. (Also, the 45 verses really haven’t been removed from the NIV at all—each of these verses is still present in every copy of the NIV and can be found in the NIV footnotes.)
BIBLE ACCURACY AND MY FAITH
This area of textual criticism is an area I studied extensively. My faith is in God and the God of the Bible. My hope is in Jesus. If I can’t trust the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, I can’t know that my faith is firm. After much, much study, I came to the conclusion that the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts are very accurate. They accurately record Jesus’ words and teaching. As such, my faith is secure.
It’s easy to throw rocks, and I’m afraid those who vehemently oppose and attack the NIV (or any other translation) do so in a way that hurts Christians and their faith. Thankfully, Jesus is bigger than our human attempts to win an argument. I pray he’ll continue to be exalted even while some Christians—perhaps well-meaning ones—continue to tarnish the love and gospel of Christ in their efforts to preserve what they believe is the truth.
B-P Church = Bible-Pharisee Church
"Pharisee" is derived from Ancient Greek Pharisaios (Φαρισαῖος),[7] from Aramaic Pərīšā (פְּרִישָׁא), plural Pərīšayyā (פְּרִישַׁיָּא), meaning "set apart, separated", related to Hebrew pārûš (פָּרוּשׁ), plural pĕrûšîm (פְּרוּשִׁים), the Qal passive participle of the verb pāraš (פָּרַשׁ)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharisees
B-P Church is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharisees
B-P Church is
Bible-Pharisee Church, or
Bible-Press Church....
16.1.17
Should Differences in Biblical Manuscripts Scare Christians?
Should Differences in Biblical Manuscripts Scare Christians?
Image: codex-sinaiticus.net
Many Christians are troubled by differences in wording among various Greek New Testament texts: The Bible has scribal errors in it? Then how can I be sure what I’m reading is God’s word?
I have taught New Testament Introduction to beginning seminary students for many years, and I’ve come to realize that there’s a simple path to clarity and comfort regarding this issue—simpler than diving into excessively complicated details about ancient manuscripts written in languages few Christians have the training or experience to assess reliably.Here are three reasons Christians should not be troubled by textual variants.
1. No theologies or denominations claim a particular text
Yes, there are differences between Bible manuscripts, and from a certain perspective, they can look alarmingly serious. For example, those manuscripts (and resultant Bible translations) which “omit” 1 John 5:7 seem to some readers to undermine the doctrine of the Trinity.But there’s a simple way to demonstrate how trivial the differences between ancient manuscripts really are in terms of their effect on the body of truth that the Bible reveals. We have lots of doctrinal differences within Christianity, right? But there are no Calvinist manuscripts/versions, Arminian manuscripts/versions, Pentecostal, Reformed, Presbyterian, Episcopal, Congregationalist, Egalitarian, Complementarian, Integrationist, Cessationist, or Continuationist manuscripts/versions.
Take any systematic theology textbook you want, and the set of proof texts offered for particular points is for all practical purposes version-independent—the authors don’t care which translation you use, so they just give references. The difference in doctrinal character among the various manuscripts and translations is very close to zero. The “omission” of 1 John 5:7 (in the judgment of almost all textual scholars, those words were actually added very late in the manuscript tradition, not appearing in Erasmus’ Greek New Testament until its third edition) has not caused a single Christian denomination to descend into Unitarianism—because the New Testament elsewhere still clearly teaches the doctrine of the Trinity. In fact, none of the Greek writings of the early church ever mentions this passage—even in their discussions of the Trinity! If the church fathers recognized and formulated that vital doctrine without referring to this verse, then its presence in the New Testament of their day is highly unlikely, and certainly its absence from a Bible text or translation today constitutes no defect in doctrinal character.
If the differences between Greek texts were doctrinally significant, you would expect theologies and tribal groups to grow out of distinctive readings of those texts—you would expect certain sects to adopt Greek texts as theological banners. But compare the positions of Majority text advocates, Textus Receptus devotees, and eclectic text users on the core doctrines of the historic creeds and you’d be hard pressed to find a doctrinal difference for which they claim support in their favored New Testament text as opposed to others.
Different Christian tribes bring somewhat different lenses to the Bible, but it’s the lenses that differ, not the Bible.
2. Even if we had absolutely perfect copies, the work of interpretation would still have to go on
If we had the originals themselves—the very pieces of papyrus Paul used to compose Romans and Ephesians, for example—or if no copies contained any textual variants at all, unlocking the Bible’s power would still require us to do exactly what we do now: search for Scripture’s wisdom as for hidden treasure, interpreting carefully, comparing Scripture with Scripture, and making relevant personal application. Nothing would change except that we would be able to dismiss from our minds the possibility that the text we’re working with may not preserve God’s exact inspired words with complete perfection. But my own weaknesses as a reader expose me to far more significant misunderstanding than the manuscript differences do, so by far the greatest problems that God must overcome in order to talk to me are within me, not within the transmission process.3. Pristine perfection is a property of the next world, not (generally) of this one
It’s true that the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts we have can’t all preserve the exact wording of the originals (and by definition, a translation cannot do so). The fact that no two manuscripts are identical down to the jots and tittles means that at most only one manuscript of any given Bible book can be “perfect.” All manuscripts of any size (some are less than a page) contain some obvious scribal slips, so it seems clear that God hasn’t given us access to the one “perfect” manuscript of any book of the Bible.The very strong pattern God has ordained is that pristine perfection is a property of the next world, not this one, so I just need to conform my expectations to that reality. The textual imperfections that generate so much angst and controversy are well within an easily tolerable range, and, while of course we must make the wisest choices we can, we can be completely at ease that, with the exception of extreme paraphrases or Bibles translated by cult groups, any Bible we may use is fully trustworthy as God’s Word. We need not fear that some of these Bibles are the devil’s. Where does Scripture warn us to ferret out and avoid the devil’s Bibles? It seems that, in his sovereignty, God has arranged that the very few Bibles possibly worthy of that categorization are obviously so, not subtly so.
Conclusion
If the manuscripts were hopelessly confused across their whole bodies of text about whether Paul’s gospel was justification by faith plus works of the law or justification by faith without works of the law; or if some manuscripts said that the baptism of the Spirit includes speaking with tongues and some said the opposite; or if some promised that Jesus would rapture his church before the Tribulation while others took what we now call a postmillennial view—then identifying the correct text would obviously be a matter of theological importance. Jesus called some matters of the law “weightier” than others (Matt 23:23)—if serious differences existed among those, we’d have a serious difficulty.But the variations we have among manuscripts raise far different questions: does the inspired text say we have redemption through Christ’s blood twice or only once? Does it testify to Jesus’ atoning blood 44 times or only 43? Does John say “his anointing” or “the same anointing” (one letter different in Greek) in 1 John 2:27?
Even the two major passages that are textually questionable—Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53–8:11—do not affect the doctrinal character of the New Testament. The former largely duplicates material found in the other gospels; the latter illustrates truths we know well from other passages: the scribes and Pharisees are self-righteous and Jesus is forgiving and yet demanding. If such textual variants represent Satan’s best attempt to corrupt the doctrinal character of Scripture, then God is clearly keeping him on a very short leash, indeed. Oh, for a life full to the brim of such problems as these!
The bottom line is that God has arranged things so that I can take any good English Bible translation, based on any textual or translation philosophy, treat it as if its every English word were straight from him, and get everything I need from that Bible to know, love, and live for him in a way that will bring Christ’s “Well done!” when I stand before him. And what more is there to life? Wherever a problem in transmission or in my own reading may tend to lead me astray, there’s a corrective somewhere else in Scripture that, when I interpret the parts in light of the whole, will keep me within bounds.
Randy Leedy, PhD, has taught Greek and New Testament at Bob Jones Seminary since 1994. He is the author of Greek New Testament Sentence Diagrams and Love Not the World.
6.12.09
The end of Volume 1
The theologians who are teaching false teachings are here and there on earth, they hide under the covering of Martin Luther, John Calvin and John Wesley.
They said they are returning to the reformed theology, they said they wanted to lift up Calvinism, but they slandered Lutheranism! These theologians are wasting time, in chasing winds of doctrines!
I had seen, these Calvinists promoting Roman Catholicism among the presbyterians, and I had seen, they betray a man like turning their palm. I had seen, they smoke, they drunk with wine even after prayer to give thank. I had seen leaders of this so called reformed theologians, pushing the back of one another like a politician, tapping your back, and then kill you without a sound!
I had seen politicians who are so cruel, we are suffering until today, that is why I wrote this blog, to expose this murdering into the world, the Lord is my witness! I shouted in pain, "Halleluyah, thank God!"
Politicians are so cruel that inhumanly they killed and swindled our hard earned money, they destroyed my vehicle to turn over me from preaching the Gospel, put God say to me, "Give thank!"
This is the end of the writing of Volume 1, refuting the false teaching of Verbal Plenary Plenary, where I make a simple conclusion, this Verbal Plenary Preservation is a lie, a delusion from the depth, and this is voice calling for repentance, I will continue to write, until the end of that great day come to me, where I meet the Lord face to face!
Elders, humble yourselves, do not call yourselves as a theologian! Rather in humility, we call ourselves faithful raiments, the follower of Christ! Watch your back, keep away from false teachers!
They said they are returning to the reformed theology, they said they wanted to lift up Calvinism, but they slandered Lutheranism! These theologians are wasting time, in chasing winds of doctrines!
I had seen, these Calvinists promoting Roman Catholicism among the presbyterians, and I had seen, they betray a man like turning their palm. I had seen, they smoke, they drunk with wine even after prayer to give thank. I had seen leaders of this so called reformed theologians, pushing the back of one another like a politician, tapping your back, and then kill you without a sound!
I had seen politicians who are so cruel, we are suffering until today, that is why I wrote this blog, to expose this murdering into the world, the Lord is my witness! I shouted in pain, "Halleluyah, thank God!"
Politicians are so cruel that inhumanly they killed and swindled our hard earned money, they destroyed my vehicle to turn over me from preaching the Gospel, put God say to me, "Give thank!"
This is the end of the writing of Volume 1, refuting the false teaching of Verbal Plenary Plenary, where I make a simple conclusion, this Verbal Plenary Preservation is a lie, a delusion from the depth, and this is voice calling for repentance, I will continue to write, until the end of that great day come to me, where I meet the Lord face to face!
Elders, humble yourselves, do not call yourselves as a theologian! Rather in humility, we call ourselves faithful raiments, the follower of Christ! Watch your back, keep away from false teachers!
25.10.09
A Chinese Elder
I know of a Chinese elder in the BP church, he had been attacking the chinese fundamental churches like us, and so may God repay him for his evil onto the servant of the Lord, he is from BP! Surprise, the enemies in the closet, the skeleton in our closet in not out of fundamental churches, but they are in the fundamental churches like us.
So great the war until there is no love in the end of the battles, the brethren is bringing one another to the court room!
So great the war until there is no love in the end of the battles, the brethren is bringing one another to the court room!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)