A BLATANT ERROR IN THE NEW BIBLES

[DougE]

[Mark 1:2 KJV] "As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee."

[Mark 1:2 NIV] "as it is written in Isaiah the prophet: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way"--"

The new Bibles not only remove words and verses they are in error.

In the KJV Mark 1:2 reads "as it is written in the PROPHETS", prophets Plural!
In the NIV it reads "as it is written in ISAIAH"
This is a blatant error!
Mark 1:2 is from Malachi NOT Isaiah ********* [Malachi 3:1 KJV] "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts."

[Mark 1:3 KJV] "The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." ********** Mark 1:3 is from Isaiah *********[Isaiah 40:3 KJV] "The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God."

The KJV is correct in saying "as it is written in the prophets" because Mark 1:2 is taken from Malachi and Mark 1:3 from Isaiah.

 

[Christ4Ever]

[Mark 1:2 KJV] "As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee."

[Mark 1:2 NIV] "as it is written in Isaiah the prophet: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way"--"

The new Bibles not only remove words and verses they are in error.

In the KJV Mark 1:2 reads "as it is written in the PROPHETS", prophets Plural!
In the NIV it reads "as it is written in ISAIAH"
This is a blatant error!
Mark 1:2 is from Malachi NOT Isaiah ********* [Malachi 3:1 KJV] "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts."

[Mark 1:3 KJV] "The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." ********** Mark 1:3 is from Isaiah *********[Isaiah 40:3 KJV] "The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God."

The KJV is correct in saying "as it is written in the prophets" because Mark 1:2 is taken from Malachi and Mark 1:3 from Isaiah.

I have one question for you right now, and is posed in the assumption that you hold the belief of being a KJV-only individual.

If someone comes to Christ by reading one translation instead of another, does that make them any less saved, or even not saved at all, just because their belief might be shaped by the wording of that specific translation, making it somehow invalid to the saving grace of God?

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/

 

[DougE]

I have one question for you right now, and is posed in the assumption that you hold the belief of being a KJV-only individual.

If someone comes to Christ by reading one translation instead of another, does that make them any less saved, or even not saved at all, just because their belief might be shaped by the wording of that specific translation, making it somehow invalid to the saving grace of God?

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/

A person can be saved by the other versions
That is assuming the verse contains our gospel which is faith in Christ's blood. That the person believes Christ died for their sins and rose for their justification

 

[Christ4Ever]

A person can be saved by the other versions
That is assuming the verse contains our gospel which is faith in Christ's blood. That the person believes Christ died for their sins and rose for their justification

Good! Just keep in mind that the Bibles you are talking about are not to be put all in one bunch. Like KJV on this side, and every other Bible on the other. Many to be considered are not actual translations. They are considered "Word for Word" like the KJV, and NASB, or "Thought for Thought" like the NIV, REB, and even "Paraphrase" which is the newly popular and I would never suggest to anyone The Living Bible, The Message.

One must also consider, an additional category, which is: Protestant, Catholic, or even Eastern Orthodox even and what is used by them!

Now you state in the last line of your reply to me that the assumption that it contains "our gospel" which is faith in Christ's blood; dying for our sins, rising again for our justification in order to be saved by "other versions". Knowing that it is not the versions of Scripture that save, but through Christ Jesus and His atoning sacrifice.

So, I gather your complaint is to the depth of information provided by one against another, that would allow for accurate study of the manuscripts originally used, for as 2 Timothy 3:16-17, All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Is this a correct view of your concerns?

Do, not lose site of the primary purpose of scripture and not the purpose assigned to it by man. I do believe that God knew what He was doing when He did not allow for the original autographs of scripture but only copies to be in existence. Humanity would wind up worshipping the "article" instead of the "Source" which is God.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/

 

[DougE]

Good! Just keep in mind that the Bibles you are talking about are not to be put all in one bunch. Like KJV on this side, and every other Bible on the other. Many to be considered are not actual translations. They are considered "Word for Word" like the KJV, and NASB, or "Thought for Thought" like the NIV, REB, and even "Paraphrase" which is the newly popular and I would never suggest to anyone The Living Bible, The Message.

One must also consider, an additional category, which is: Protestant, Catholic, or even Eastern Orthodox even and what is used by them!

Now you state in the last line of your reply to me that the assumption that it contains "our gospel" which is faith in Christ's blood; dying for our sins, rising again for our justification in order to be saved by "other versions". Knowing that it is not the versions of Scripture that save, but through Christ Jesus and His atoning sacrifice.

So, I gather your complaint is to the depth of information provided by one against another, that would allow for accurate study of the manuscripts originally used, for as 2 Timothy 3:16-17, All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Is this a correct view of your concerns?

Do, not lose site of the primary purpose of scripture and not the purpose assigned to it by man. I do believe that God knew what He was doing when He did not allow for the original autographs of scripture but only copies to be in existence. Humanity would wind up worshipping the "article" instead of the "Source" which is God.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/

I am pointing out that the new Bibles have differences that can impact doctrine

 

[DougE]

Good! Just keep in mind that the Bibles you are talking about are not to be put all in one bunch. Like KJV on this side, and every other Bible on the other. Many to be considered are not actual translations. They are considered "Word for Word" like the KJV, and NASB, or "Thought for Thought" like the NIV, REB, and even "Paraphrase" which is the newly popular and I would never suggest to anyone The Living Bible, The Message.

I have my own opinion as to whether I will deem the new Bibles as accurate and reliable and being the Word of God or just containing it. You can have yours

 

[DougE]

One must also consider, an additional category, which is: Protestant, Catholic, or even Eastern Orthodox even and what is used by them!

Consider what?

 

[DougE]

Now you state in the last line of your reply to me that the assumption that it contains "our gospel" which is faith in Christ's blood; dying for our sins, rising again for our justification in order to be saved by "other versions". Knowing that it is not the versions of Scripture that save, but through Christ Jesus and His atoning sacrifice.

Yes our salvation is by the faith of Christ, but faith comes by hearing the Word of God. You cant have faith if the Word of God is omitted

 

[DougE]

So, I gather your complaint is to the depth of information provided by one against another, that would allow for accurate study of the manuscripts originally used,

Sorry I have no idea what you mean

 

[DougE]

2 Timothy 3:16-17, All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

You have to all scripture, every word

 

[DougE]

Do, not lose site of the primary purpose of scripture and not the purpose assigned to it by man

What does this mean?