Rightly dividing the word of God.

[rick]

I see that  Deu 19 :15 and Mat 18:16  are a scriptural  match but I'm also seeing that I should include  2 Pe 1 :20 along with Deu 19:15 and Mat 18:16 giving me three witnesses for establishing the word of God.

Deu 19:15  One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall a matter be established.

Mat 18:16  But if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may be established.


2Pe 1:20  knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation.


Are there any who would disagree with this ?
   

[lilitalienboi16]

The Concordant and Rotherham have good literal renderings of 2 Peter 1:20

2Pe 1:20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture at all is becoming its own explanation.
2Pe 1:20  Of this, first, taking note—that, no prophecy of scripture, becometh, self-solving;

Replace "explanation" used in CLV with "interpretation" used in the KJV and you have a pretty powerful decleration of truth.

You can also add:

Psalm 119:160 The sum of Thy word [is] truth, And to the age [is] every judgment of Thy righteousness!

This last one ties things in very nicely. It shows that all of God's Word is one.

To your original's there is Paul in Corinthian's repeating the same admonishment:

2 Corinthians 13:1 This third time do I come unto you; on the mouth of two witnesses or three shall every saying be established;

[rick]

Concordant and Rotherham I don't have but I looked up the Rotherham's Emphasized Bible and found it to be very powerful and most helpful with ones understanding. So I'll be getting the Rotherham,

Do you have the hard book copy or are you using an online Rotherham.

Thank you Alex.

[Dave in Tenn]

I'd mainly disagree with your thread title.  "Rightly dividing" (properly, 'cutting') may have something to do with 'witnesses', in that these 'witnesses' are drawn from various true statements of scripture.  But it specifically refers to putting one truth in conjunction with another truth to arrive at a combined truth.  Ray used Peter's sermon at Pentecost as an example of this 'rightly cutting'.  Hopefully somebody can help me locate this section.

But even with this, we don't have a 'short-cut' or 'secret code' to understanding scripture.  Beyond the fact that these portions must be 'reasonably translated' (ie, maintain the sound language of inspired scripture), the 'matches' must be 'spiritual'...that is, the words may be different, but the spirit of the statements are the same.  And they must not contradict--neither each other nor other properly understood portions of scripture.

I'll give one glaring example. 

Pro 26:4  Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou be made like him.
Pro 26:5  Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he imagine himself to be wise.

If you read these as two 'commandments', they contradict.  Should I answer a fool according to his folly, or NOT?  Oh LORD...what am I to do?  If you read them as truths, they do not contradict.  Indeed, put them together, and an even deeper truth emerges.  I might could show you, but I'll refrain from preaching. 


The Twelve truths paper is the source for these and other 'must do's' if bible study is to be serious.

One last warning:  There is no shortcut.  Two or three witnesses establish a truth.  But if the 'truth' you think you've 'established' is contradicted, then you may not have established a 'truth' at all.  If you're 'witnesses' are poorly or even erroneously translated, it's unlikely you are going to get things together.  There is no shortcut.  We're commanded to study and this entails struggle...not to google the bible as a database of unrelated factoids.   

[John from Kentucky]

Rick,

I would disagree that 3 witnesses are required.  The Scriptures state we must have at least two to establish a Scriptural Truth.  It says two or 3.  The more the merrier, so you can have 3 or more Scriptures.  But two is the absolute minimum.

And as Dave mentions, the matches must be spiritual to spiritual, and they must not contradict any other Scriptures.

Which is why all Scriptural truth can only come from the Spirit of God directing ones studies.

There are and have been many intelligent scholars with detailed knowledge of the Scriptures, but understanding only comes from God.

Below I have copied Truths 6 and 7 from Ray's 12 Truths paper, which is an absolute gem of correct Scriptural analysis.

Notice in Truth number 7, that there are only two Scriptures that establish the truth contained in Rev 20:13-15 and 1Cor 3:13-15.  There is no third Scripture to establish that very important truth because 3 or more Scriptures are not needed, only two---The Two Witnesses.



TRUTH NUMBER 6

    [A] "...that in the mouth of TWO OR THREE WITNESSES every word may be established" (Matt. 18:16).

    "...In the mouth of TWO OR THREE WITNESSES shall every word be established" (II Cor. 13:1).

    [C] "And I will give power unto my TWO WITNESSES..." (Rev. 11:3).

This particular law of Scripture is constantly violated. We are to have at least a second witness to establish a Scriptural truth or doctrine.

Unfortunately, the Church does not follow this truth of God in establishing doctrine. Truth be known, orthodoxy has not even one witness to support any of their doctrines! Example: The Scriptures tell us that man is "mortal," not "immortal." They teach that man's soul is immortal. Where do they have a Scripture to support this claim? No Scripture—no witness. Where is their second witness to this claim? No second witness. They will not be encumbered with Scriptures to support their damnable heresies and lies.

God told Adam if he ate of the forbidden fruit he would die: "And the Lord God commanded...you shall surely die." (Gen. 2:17). Theologians teach that, "once we are born, we shall NEVER surely die." Say, doesn't that sound like the very same thing the lying serpent told Eve? Check it out:

    "And the serpent said unto the woman, 'Ye shall NOT surely die"

Can we all agree that the phrase: "shall NOT SURELY die" is a contradiction of the phrase "SHALL SURELY die"?

Does the Church teach what God said or what the serpent said? Why would you prefer to believe what the serpent said rather than what God said? Am I going to fast for anyone?

So do souls actually die, or are they immortal? A "soul" in Hebrew is a "nephesh." Does the Church have "two witnesses" that souls do not die? They don't have even one. Well then, do we have two witnesses that tell us plainly souls do die?

Yes we do:

    "...the soul [Heb: 'nephesh'] that sins, it [the soul, the 'nephesh'] shall die. (Say, isn't that exactly what God taught us back in Gen. 2:17? Of course). (Ezek. 18:4). Doesn't this then contradict both the lie of Satan and the Church?

    "The soul that sins, IT SHALL DIE" (Ezek. 18:20).

Jesus tells us in parable of two great witnesses:

    "Then said He unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which brings forth out of his treasure, NEW AND OLD" (Matt. 13:52).

What "new and old" treasures do "scribes" preserve for us regarding the "kingdom of heaven?" Why the NEW Covenant Scriptures and the OLD Covenant Scriptures, of course. And both the Old (Deut. 17:6 & 19:15), and the New (II Cor. 13:1 & Matt. 18:16) command that we must have two witnesses to establish every Word of God.

I will keep this truth short, as it overlaps with the next spiritual truth # 7 which requires that we compare and match spiritual with spiritual.

The next time your pastor mentions "immortal souls," "Christians going to heaven," "Jesus being in hell for three days," "not all men will be saved," "Christian tithing," "consciousness in death," "resurrection of the body," "parables make the teaching clear," "man's will being free and independent of God," and dozens of other such nonsense, ask him to give you two Scriptures to support each of his unscriptural heresies.

TRUTH NUMBER 7

    [A] "Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches; COMPARING [or 'matching'] SPIRITUAL THINGS WITH SPIRITUAL" (I Cor. 2:13).

    "And to this AGREE the words of the prophets; as it is written..." (Acts 15:15).

    [C] "These [Bereans]... searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were SO [Gk: 'in this way,' 'like'] (Acts 17:11).

    [D] "AS You have sent Me into the world, EVEN SO have I sent them into the world" (John 17:18, and many, many other such comparisons).

The purpose for comparing spiritual with spiritual is to find a spiritual match. There is a spiritual match for every symbol in the book of Revelation. This is a powerful truth that will open the whole Bible to us.

In the previous truth we learned the need for two witnesses. In this truth we will learn the need for those two witnesses to be a "spiritual match." Let's now "spiritually match" two witnesses and see the marvelous eye-opening result.

After being introduced to the Great White Throne in Rev. 20:11, we read of the judgment of every man's work in fire:

    And I saw the dead small and great stand before God, and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

    And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them, and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Notice the specifics of these verses:

    "Every man's work is to be judged by fire."

    EVERY MAN

    Every man's WORK

    Every man's work is to be JUDGED

    Every man's work is to be judged IN FIRE

But we learned that no witness can stand alone. We must have at least TWO WITNESSES to establish the truth of any doctrine. For the simple fact that orthodoxy absolutely refuses to give you a "spiritual match" to these Scriptures, it has enabled them to attach all kinds of unscriptural, extra-scriptural, anti-scriptural heresies to the above Scripture. Why won't they give you a "second witness," and a "spiritual match" to the above Scripture? Because the only second witness which is a spiritual match to the above Scripture, destroys their whole pagan teaching regarding it, that's why.

Now then, is there a second witness to: Every man's work is to be judged by fire? Yes, there is a SECOND witness to this Scripture. But we are looking for more than just a second witness. We have just learned that we are also to "compare [or match] spiritual with spiritual." We are looking for a second witness which is a SPIRITUAL MATCH to these statements that Every man's work is to be judged in fire."

Would you believe that there is ONE and ONLY ONE such spiritual match to this Scripture in the entirety of the Bible? After I give it to you, you will clearly see why orthodoxy will not even concede that this Scripture IS a second witness and a spiritual match. Here it is:

    "Every man's work shall be made manifest for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try [test, examine, judge] every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide that he has built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss, BUT HE HIMSELF SHALL BE SAVED; yet so as by fire" (I Cor. 3:13-15).

There it is: a perfect spiritual match and a second witness to Rev. 20:13-15):

    EVERY MAN

    Every man's WORK

    Every man's work TRIED, TESTED OR JUDGED

    Every man's work tried, tested or judged IN FIRE

Why do Christians and theologians hate what I have just shown you? Because when we put these two spiritually matched Scriptures together, we also are given the added knowledge that there is SALVATION in and through this fire which judges us, and the Church doesn't want all mankind to be saved. Yes, the most evil people who have ever lived, will also be saved one day, but contrary to what all of my detractors constantly lie about my writings, is that they will not be saved before they are purged in "God's CONSUMING FIRE" of every last vestige of evil and carnality.

But many Christians have written me insisting that these two Scriptures are not spiritual matches, and in fact insist that they are never even a second witness to one another. Be it known to all, that God's CONSUMING SPIRITUAL FIRE will purge every vestige of these carnal and evil deceptions of THE GREAT WHORE CHURCH OF BABYLON.

They (like we) will first be "ground to POWDER" (Luke 20:18), and then (like we) subjected to "refiners FIRE and fuller's SOAP" (Malachi 3:2) of Almighty God. The process for them will be the same process as with us, albeit at a later date, and in many cases with greater intensity, and remember that "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the LIVING GOD" (Heb. 10:31). But it is not a never-ending fear in eternal torture.

Question: As the world of Christendom predominantly believes that the Bible is to be taken literally, how pray tell is it even within the realm of possibility for them to compare ANYTHING "spiritual with spiritual" from the Scriptures?

[rick]

I got this from the forum index & info part of this website.

Spurious

Mark 14:72
the second time*

  twice*

Mark 14:72  And straightway the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word, how that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.

Words omitted ( the second time and twice )

Mark 14: 72 And straightway the cock crew and Peter called to mind the word how that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.

I understand that ( the second time and twice ) are not in the original transcripts but I don't see how these added words alter the meaning of this scripture however I always did believe the cock crow twice and see that's not so.

I don't understand what these copyist were trying to achieve or deceive by adding to the word of God ? Its not like they rendered the verse with a total different meaning but then again, I'm not all that bright either.       

All I have to study with is E Sword but am now looking at buying a Rotherham bible.

My question is what books or online bibles should I be using ? The reason I ask this is because of all the bible translations I have on E sword not one have omitted ( the second time or twice )

I need a good and honest rending of the Hebrew and Greek translation, its obvious to me now. 


Thank you Dave and John from K.

God bless

[lilitalienboi16]

Concordant and Rotherham I don't have but I looked up the Rotherham's Emphasized Bible and found it to be very powerful and most helpful with ones understanding. So I'll be getting the Rotherham,

Do you have the hard book copy or are you using an online Rotherham.

Thank you Alex.

Hi Rick,

John and Dave have both contributed significantly to this thread and I believe there is great wisdom in both their responces.

As for hard copy bibles, the only trully unique ones I posses are the 1950 and 1961 World Translations of the New testatement (1950) and Hebrew scriptures (1961). I purchased these for certain reasons. For the new testament they maintain more readily the aoristic tense of the greek allowing for a more accurate understanding of certain writtings. For example:

Eph. 5:2  "go on walking in love"
Eph. 5:10, "Keep on making sure of what is acceptable to the Lord;"
Eph. 5:17, "but go on perceiving what the will of Jehovah is;"

The King James fails to get across this active process that is to continually occur within or with the believer. So I purchased it because ray too often talked about how in the greek many verbs and passages should not be translated in the past tense as if they happened done deal but rather as active processes that are still on going. He also talked about how salvation is a process and not a done deal. It is by no means a perfect translation though as is the case with all translations. For example, it fails to translate God's love for the world as on going and present but rather puts it in the past like the King James does  (John 3:16). Personally I also am more in favor of how the King James uses "grace" as opposed to this versions translation of "underserved kindness" but that's why I check many translations when I do study.

As for Rotherham's, I use the Esword module of it and I believe it is the Emphasized edition as you have yourself. I think its good to have all the literals including the Diaglot, Youngs, Concordant literal. I mean.. there are many. I know ray would check several and mentions in the audio's which ones those are. I have those as well.

I will stress though that all this means absolutely nothing if God does not reveal the truth of a matter to you.

To your original thread, here are more on the witnesses and the necessesity of God's spirit:

Zech 4: 12-14
12 And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?
13 And he answered me and said, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.
14 Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth.

Rev 11:3-5
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.
5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.

Zechariah 4:6 Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of hosts.

1 Samuel 2:9 He will keep the feet of his saints, and the wicked shall be silent in darkness; for by strength shall no man prevail.

God bless,
Alex

[rick]

Concordant and Rotherham I don't have but I looked up the Rotherham's Emphasized Bible and found it to be very powerful and most helpful with ones understanding. So I'll be getting the Rotherham,

Do you have the hard book copy or are you using an online Rotherham.

Thank you Alex.

Hi Rick,

John and Dave have both contributed significantly to this thread and I believe there is great wisdom in both their responces.

I agree Alex

Dave and John gave some great insight, also Dave"s example was very helpful.

Pro 26:4  Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou be made like him.
Pro 26:5  Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he imagine himself to be wise.

[Dave in Tenn]

Mark 14:72 is not the only account of this incident.  And Mark 14:72 is the 'culmination' of what Jesus said earlier in the chapter.  Are those words 'spurious'?  edit:  apparently, they are. 

Here's another warning.  The list of Spurious passages should not be taken as some kind of 'proof' that the omitted words are not true!  I've found more than one example where the 'spurious passage' is a repeat of another passage elsewhere.  Use it, but don't automatically assume that that it changes something else.  Study.

I have several translations on esword which (at least as far as I can tell) use the Sinaitic Manuscript as their basis. The Darby translation puts the pieces not in the Sianatic in italics, as best as I've been able to tell. Read the note at the bottom of the list that explains the asterisks. 

   

[John from Kentucky]

Rick,

Dave is absolutely right.

That list of "spurious Scripture Passages" is not absolute truth.  It is not Scriptural proof.  It is largely based on the studies of a nineteenth century German professor.

The reason we do not know what Scripture passages are spurious or not is because we do not have the original writings of the books of the Bible.

I repeat, the original writings of the Scriptures do not exist.  What we have are copies of copies.  Some scribal errors have been inserted in the manuscripts either intentionally or by accident.

For example, the earliest manuscripts of the New Testament were copied some three hundred years after the time of Jesus.  Three hundred years!  To put that time period in context, the current government of the United States has not been in existence for three hundred years.

The list of spurious scriptures is based largely on two of the oldest manuscripts.  Are those two early manuscripts free from any error?  Maybe.  Maybe not.  If they were copied with absolute accuracy from the original writings of the Scriptures, then they are correct.  However, if they were copied from inaccurate copies, then they are in error.

Without the original writings in existence, then only God knows the original words.

Where does that leave us?  Well, there are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts.  By putting them all together, biblical scholars have produced amazingly accurate versions of the New Testament.

We have more manuscripts of the Greek New Testament than any other original ancient writing.

Where there are differences among the manuscripts, they are minor.  Like one manuscript may say, "Jesus said".  Another manuscript may read, "He said".

The differences among the manuscripts do not affect any major doctrine.

Some minor differences exist.  Some early manuscripts do not have the story of the woman caught in adultery in the Gospel of John.  The vast majority of the manuscripts do include that story.  What is the truth?  I believe that the story is true and should be included in the New Testament.  My explanation would be too lengthy to discuss here.

However, some of the early manuscripts do not have that story and call it a " spurious scripture", which I do not believe.

The history and understanding of how we have the Bible we have is a vast body of knowledge and has been accumulated over centuries.  One reason for the necessity of study.

However, the basic truth is that God knows what His true Word is.  And He sees that it is is made known to those who are His, by the power of His Spirit.

[Joel]

Hi Rick,
If we add Numbers 35:30-31 to Deuteronomy 19:15, and Matthew 18:16, we have three separate scriptures that give instructions telling us we must have two or more PEOPLE as witnesses before bringing charges against anyone.
Numbers 35:30-Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.
31-Moreover ye shall take not satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death.

There is more clarity to what Peter is saying in 2nd Peter 1:20, if verses 20, and 21 are read together.

20-Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21-For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Joel

[rick]

Hi Rick,
If we add Numbers 35:30-31 to Deuteronomy 19:15, and Matthew 18:16, we have three separate scriptures that give instructions telling us we must have two or more PEOPLE as witnesses before bringing charges against anyone.
Numbers 35:30-Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.
31-Moreover ye shall take not satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death.

There is more clarity to what Peter is saying in 2nd Peter 1:20, if verses 20, and 21 are read together.

20-Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21-For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Joel

Hi Joel,

Don't quote me as I'm still learning but what I see and understand is that one can read a scripture and read a nice story but never gets its meaning but I was or am seeing something about these scriptures that are not so much talking about having two or three witnesses if making and accusation in the physical but is making a spiritual reference to establish the word of God.

I'm still learning Joel, I'm not saying I'm right or wrong but I'm putting it out there to see what others say back to me so as to make sure I'm not being deceived.

Thank you Joel and God bless.