A SERIOUS OMISSION IN THE NEW BIBLES

[DougE]

[John 6:47 KJV] "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life."
[John 6:47 NIV] "Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life." *********** Believes WHAT? The New Bibles omit "on me". This removes Jesus as being the one we believe on for eternal life.

 

[Christ4Ever]

[John 6:47 KJV] "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life."
[John 6:47 NIV] "Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life." *********** Believes WHAT? The New Bibles omit "on me". This removes Jesus as being the one we believe on for eternal life.

[Jhn 6:35-36 KJV] 35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. 36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
[Jhn 6:35 NIV] 35 Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.

There are more verses, but it's pertinent to see and read the entirety of Chapter 6 of the Gospel of John to have a better understanding. Again, I remind you that one verse does not a doctrine make, and that context of the entirety of scripture provides greater understanding through the Spirit of God.

It's always comes down to the manuscripts that are used to determine a specific wording used here or there, but as long as the context is understood, since in the case of John chapter 6 is Jesus speaking about Himself, it is not loss that He is pointing to believing in Him. For even if one were to ask themselves the question that you posed "Believes WHAT?" reading the rest of this chapter in context, and/or other books as well, one sees that the answer to your question is belief in Jesus. Yes, even reading the NIV.

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

 

[DougE]

[Jhn 6:35-36 KJV] 35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. 36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
[Jhn 6:35 NIV] 35 Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.

There are more verses, but it's pertinent to see and read the entirety of Chapter 6 of the Gospel of John to have a better understanding. Again, I remind you that one verse does not a doctrine make, and that context of the entirety of scripture provides greater understanding through the Spirit of God.

It's always comes down to the manuscripts that are used to determine a specific wording used here or there, but as long as the context is understood, since in the case of John chapter 6 is Jesus speaking about Himself, it is not loss that He is pointing to believing in Him. For even if one were to ask themselves the question that you posed "Believes WHAT?" reading the rest of this chapter in context, and/or other books as well, one sees that the answer to your question is belief in Jesus. Yes, even reading the NIV.

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

Context and other verses do not change the fact that John 6:47 aren't the same in all the Bibles.

 

[DougE]

[Jhn 6:35-36 KJV] 35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. 36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
[Jhn 6:35 NIV] 35 Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.

There are more verses, but it's pertinent to see and read the entirety of Chapter 6 of the Gospel of John to have a better understanding. Again, I remind you that one verse does not a doctrine make, and that context of the entirety of scripture provides greater understanding through the Spirit of God.

It's always comes down to the manuscripts that are used to determine a specific wording used here or there, but as long as the context is understood, since in the case of John chapter 6 is Jesus speaking about Himself, it is not loss that He is pointing to believing in Him. For even if one were to ask themselves the question that you posed "Believes WHAT?" reading the rest of this chapter in context, and/or other books as well, one sees that the answer to your question is belief in Jesus. Yes, even reading the NIV.

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

Here is the problem of different readings of scriptures

[Galatians 2:7 KJV] "But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter;"
[Galatians 2:7 NIV] "On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised."

So I am teaching that there are two gospels in scripture to someone, and they pull out their Bible and say there is one gospel given to each group. Their Bible changes OF to TO. Having Bibles that say two different things is what causes divisions and disputes

 

[DougE]

There are more verses, but it's pertinent to see and read the entirety of Chapter 6 of the Gospel of John to have a better understanding

Yes. but when a verse is changed so it doesnt reflect the same thing any more, that weakens and puts into question the validity of all the verses

 

[Christ4Ever]

Yes. but when a verse is changed so it doesnt reflect the same thing any more, that weakens and puts into question the validity of all the verses

Dear DougE,
Maybe, to you and to those who are not thoughtful to consider the entirety of scripture it might, but to state validity when you consider an out of context verse? No.

To those who don't need much of an excuse to do as you say, you are probably right, but then again, they may say that KJV is old English, and doesn't mean the same any more and is not a straight translation of the Greek!! People who don't want to believe, don't need much reason to do so, but they are not normally the ones who go in depth into scripture to do so. Only those who are motivated by the devil, and hate God and anything of His, will take the time to do so.

I have asked a number of times on your other thread, but you have not answered. Are the other manuscripts used by different translators to put together biblical translations the Word of God or not?

So I am teaching that there are two gospels in scripture to someone, and they pull out their Bible and say there is one gospel given to each group. Their Bible changes OF to TO. Having Bibles that say two different things is what causes divisions and disputes

Your problem will also be there. Reconcile yourself to that fact. You quibble about one word, when if you were to look at the Greek Manuscripts it might not even be there! That is why context is important. Without which you might have these problems and division/disputes, but apparently you fail to understand that. That becomes more the scribe mentality of Jesus' day who were more concerned with the letter of the law, then the Spirit of it.

Context and other verses do not change the fact that John 6:47 aren't the same in all the Bibles.

Which tells me you are as I mentioned above more about the mentality of the scribes in Jesus' day then one who seeks truth.

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

 

[DougE]

Only those who are motivated by the devil, and hate God and anything of His, will take the time to do so.

What are you saying here?
Who are the those?
Take the time to do what?

 

[DougE]

I have asked a number of times on your other thread, but you have not answered. Are the other manuscripts used by different translators to put together biblical translations the Word of God or not?

You have to determine that for yourself

 

[DougE]

Which tells me you are as I mentioned above more about the mentality of the scribes in Jesus' day then one who seeks truth

Jesus said the scribes were righteous ********** [Matthew 5:20 KJV] "For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven." ********* maybe it was out of context however

 

[Christ4Ever]

Only those who are motivated by the devil, and hate God and anything of His, will take the time to do so.

What are you saying here?
Who are the those?
Take the time to do what?

Dear DougE,
What is the context of what I wrote that you are quoting only in part above?

I have asked a number of times on your other thread, but you have not answered. Are the other manuscripts used by different translators to put together biblical translations the Word of God or not?

You have to determine that for yourself

No, not at all! This goes to the crux of what you are posting about. Which one is correct? The KJV or NIV. Can they both be correct?

You have to go back and consider many things. Apparently, you are not willing to consider them. You can have your opinion about this, but that is all it is. Especially since you are unwilling to provide any information that would afford one who is searching for truth, any answers that make sense.

Your conclusion is that one is not right. You are unwilling to consider that they both can be correct, because as you've shown, context is not very important to you. When it should be.

Which tells me you are as I mentioned above more about the mentality of the scribes in Jesus' day then one who seeks truth

Jesus said the scribes were righteous ********** [Matthew 5:20 KJV] "For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven." ********* maybe it was out of context however

True, but that is not the verses I was considering. You can start reading at Matthew 23:13 and it might open your eyes to what I was talking about.

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

 

[DougE]

Dear DougE,
What is the context of what I wrote that you are quoting only in part above?

To those who don't need much of an excuse to do as you say, you are probably right, but then again, they may say that KJV is old English, and doesn't mean the same any more and is not a straight translation of the Greek!! People who don't want to believe, don't need much reason to do so, but they are not normally the ones who go in depth into scripture to do so. Only those who are motivated by the devil, and hate God and anything of His, will take the time to do so.

What does this mean?

 

[DougE]

No, not at all! This goes to the crux of what you are posting about. Which one is correct? The KJV or NIV. Can they both be correct

I am showing verses that may have gone unnoticed that differ and how they affect doctrine etc

 

[DougE]

You can have your opinion about this, but that is all it is.

a missing word or verse isnt an opinion, its not my opinion they are missing

 

[DougE]

Your conclusion is that one is not right. You are unwilling to consider that they both can be correct, because as you've shown, context is not very important to you. When it should be.

In this verse only one can be right. ********** [Luke 4:44 KJV] "And he preached in the synagogues of Galilee."
[Luke 4:44 NIV] "And he kept on preaching in the synagogues of Judea.********* it cant be both as they are two entirely locations

 

[DougE]

True, but that is not the verses I was considering. You can start reading at Matthew 23:13 and it might open your eyes to what I was talking about.

I better not, I may not get the "CONTEXT" right

 

[DougE]

You have to go back and consider many things. Apparently, you are not willing to consider them.

This is very presumptuous to think what you know about what I have already considered

By the way, Context is important as well as verses from other books of the Bible to support an interpretation
That doesnt mean you can dismiss a single verse by always saying you dont have the right context

A missing word isnt dependent on context to be called missing

 

[Christ4Ever]

To those who don't need much of an excuse to do as you say, you are probably right, but then again, they may say that KJV is old English, and doesn't mean the same any more and is not a straight translation of the Greek!! People who don't want to believe, don't need much reason to do so, but they are not normally the ones who go in depth into scripture to do so. Only those who are motivated by the devil, and hate God and anything of His, will take the time to do so.

What does this mean?

What part of it did you not understand? Or do you not realize that we are at war and that the adversary will do, and use whatever means they can to bring down Believers/Followers of Jesus Christ?

No, not at all! This goes to the crux of what you are posting about. Which one is correct? The KJV or NIV. Can they both be correct

I am showing verses that may have gone unnoticed that differ and how they affect doctrine etc

To what end?
I have told you that this is not a subject unknown to Talk Jesus, or for just about any Christian site.
I have also told you that an individual verse does not doctrine make! You can take just about any verse, out of context, and use it to mean just about anything you want it to mean. Do you not understand that?

You can have your opinion about this, but that is all it is.

a missing word or verse isnt an opinion, its not my opinion they are missing

Yes it is your opinion, when I have told you time and again, that the translators used manuscripts that do not include a word, while other translators used other manuscripts that did! What makes one right and the other wrong if the overall context of what is written doesn’t alter the word of God or what He wants us to understand?

Your conclusion is that one is not right. You are unwilling to consider that they both can be correct, because as you've shown, context is not very important to you. When it should be.

In this verse only one can be right. ********** [Luke 4:44 KJV] "And he preached in the synagogues of Galilee."
[Luke 4:44 NIV] "And he kept on preaching in the synagogues of Judea.********* it cant be both as they are two entirely locations

Again, depends on the manuscript you are using, doesn't it?
This was a summary verse of what Jesus was doing and not setting a geographical boundary/layout of the country.

True, but that is not the verses I was considering. You can start reading at Matthew 23:13 and it might open your eyes to what I was talking about.

I better not, I may not get the "CONTEXT" right

lol - don't worry I or another here would willingly help you. They are not contrary as you might think...especially me!

You have to go back and consider many things. Apparently, you are not willing to consider them.

This is very presumptuous to think what you know about what I have already considered

By the way, Context is important as well as verses from other books of the Bible to support an interpretation
That doesnt mean you can dismiss a single verse by always saying you dont have the right context

A missing word isnt dependent on context to be called missing

What I’m saying is, if you ignore the rest of what’s written in the chapter, book, or testament about a verse, and declare one Bible right and another wrong just because of different wording—while refusing to address whether using a different manuscript is of God, which is the root of those differences—then, frankly, you’re missing the forest for the trees.

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

 

[DougE]

Yes it is your opinion, when I have told you time and again, that the translators used manuscripts that do not include a word,

If a verse is missing a word it is missing a word

 

[DougE]

I have also told you that an individual verse does not doctrine make!

How come people just quote John 3:16???????

 

[DougE]

This was a summary verse of what Jesus was doing and not setting a geographical boundary/layout of the country.

It states a specific location not a summary
Its the same verse not several verses to make it a summary
Its either one or the other and one is wrong