> General Discussions
Rev 20:5
AK4:
Anyone knows where i can find info on why this verse is spurious.
Thanks,
Anthony
Kat:
Hi Anthony,
Here is a link to the Bible Today website, that gives Professor C. Tischendorf’s list of spurious Scriptures.
http://www.bibletoday.com/htstb/spurious.htm
mercy, peace and love
Kat
AK4:
Thanks Kat
I also found this at http://www.bibletruthkeys.com/bible_translated.htm
Revelation 20:5 -- "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished." These words were added at a time when the church claimed to be fulfilling scriptural promises concerning the thousand-year reign of Christ. The dead were not being raised during this pseudo-millennium, so it was convenient to make the inspired record teach that the resurrection should not be expected until the close of the thousand years.
AK4:
I found this also on another site....
--- Quote ---Resurrection of the Unjust—When?
Both Jesus in John 5 and the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 taught the resurrection of the unjust occurs during the 1,000 year Kingdom of Christ when they will be on trial for eternal life. Yet Revelation 20:4, 5 seems to place it after the thousand years.
4…they [the Church] came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years. Revelation 20:4-6
Verses 4 and 6 clearly teach that the Church reigns with Christ in his 1,000 year Kingdom. Therefore, the Church must be resurrected at the beginning of the 1,000 years and verse 6 plainly states the Church's resurrection is the "first resurrection." Yet verse 5 places the raising of "the rest of the dead" (the "unjust") after the thousand years are completed. It then calls the raising of the unjust "the first resurrection." This is a contradiction to verse 6 which identifies the raising of the Church as "the first resurrection."
Notice in verse 5 we italicized, "the rest of the dead did not come alive until the thousand years were completed." Why? These words do not appear in the earliest manuscripts that contain these verses.1 By eliminating these spurious words, verses 4-6 harmonize. Now verses 4 and 5 agree with verse 6—the first resurrection applies to the Church.
Because of their theology, the translators have been less than objective on 1 John 5:7-8 and Revelation 20:5. Finally the translators have, in the last couple of decades, admitted that parts of 1 John 5:7-8 are spurious. Hopefully they will also concede that the first part of Revelation 20:5 is spurious. Thank the Lord there are reference books that enable us to prove it for ourselves.
--- End quote ---
The other day i couldnt find anything at all. Now its starting to come out the woodwork.
Falgn0n:
OH MY GOSH!
For so many years I was readin the NIV, and in MANY places, it says in a footnote something like: "Not in the original manuscript" - BUT I NEVER REALISED THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT!!!
Was I so blinded to believe that God would certainly preserve His own Word in whatever translation that I could even OVERLOOK WHOLE PASSAGES that were indicated as being "not in the original manuscripts"!?!?
I remember reading that passage in John 8 about the woman caught in adultery - the NIV indicates that whole passage as "not in the original manuscript"!
I have been going through the two links provided by KAT with the lists of words and phrases that are "spurious" and I have been comparing the KJV, the "Wescott-Hort Greek New Testament" and the Concordant at: www.concordant.org
WOW! WOW! WOW!
This will be the focus of my study for a good while I think!!!!
God bring us BACK TO YOUR ORIGINAL WORD (please?)!!! ;D
As I'm going through the list, I remember WHOLE SERMONS based on certain "spurious" phrases or verses - can you imagine that? WHOLE SERMONS based on HUMAN IMAGINATION and not scripture!!!
I honestly wonder if the preachers of these sermons are even aware that they are quoting stuff that IS NOT SCRIPTURE! and I don't mean "clever mistranslations" I mean, NOT EVEN THERE - widely recognised as being ADDED LATER BY MEN!
WOW! WOW! WOW!
Whoever started this thread - THANK YOU!
;)
Falgn0n
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version