bible-truths.com/forums
=> General Discussions => Topic started by: AK4 on August 28, 2008, 05:27:10 PM
-
Anyone knows where i can find info on why this verse is spurious.
Thanks,
Anthony
-
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
-
Thanks Kat
I also found this at http://www.bibletruthkeys.com/bible_translated.htm (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.
-
I found this also on another site....
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.
The other day i couldnt find anything at all. Now its starting to come out the woodwork.
-
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 (http://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
-
God bring us BACK TO YOUR ORIGINAL WORD (please?)!!!
A BIG Amen to that FalgnOn.
Suzie
-
Whoever started this thread - THANK YOU!
Falgn0n
Your welcome. Im in constant search for the whole Truth. Someone else in another thread sparked my interest on Rev 20:5 and Kat put in there something about the Codex Sinaiticus. When you come to Rev 20:5 in it, its just blank.
It is a big WOW when you think of all the sermons done on spurious passages and some of the religions that come from them (the serpent handlers). Some people cant get past that there are bad translations and/or motives some have had when translating the original manuscript, Gods infallible word. They feel the KJV is perfect.
Thank you for that concordant link. I needed that.
In Jesus,
Anthony
ps I still cant believe how big that list was on spurious verses.
-
Matt 6:13 "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." omitted.
I remember growing up around 8 or 9 in childrens church and at the end of Sunday school we would all get up and sing the Lords prayer in song and Matt 6:13 was at the end.
A couple of years ago when i was reading the Gospels and i came to the Lords prayer in the NIV, i wondered why Matt6:13 was missing. I remember starring at that bible and thinking "why is this missing, why"? The song would come in my head and i would sing it and there was "For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever, Amen."
Why is it missing? I was thinking. The many many times i have sung this song i know its supposed to be there. This was before i knew of bad translations and the like. I thank God for opening my eyes and questioning things. Now i can look at that verse and see what damage that does to the entire Word.
In Jesus,
Anthony
-
So this...
Luke 23:34
Then said Jesus, Father forgive them; for they know not what they do
is not in the original Greek manuscript but is made up by men ?
and also John 5:4 ... this is NOT in the Greek manuscript but made up by men ?
:o
-
Hi Sirach,
this is what it says on the online bible study.
The New American Standard Bible
Luke 23 Read This Chapter
23:34
But F499 Jesus was saying, "Father, R1006 forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing." And R1007 they cast lots, dividing up His garments among themselves.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOOTNOTES:
F499: Some early mss do not contain {But Jesus was saying...doing}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CROSS REFERENCES:
R1006: Matthew 11:25; Luke 22:42
R1007: Psalms 22:18; John 19:24
and
The New American Standard Bible
John 5 Read This Chapter
5:3
In these lay a multitude of those who were sick, blind, lame, and withered, [waiting F63 for the moving of the waters;
5:4
for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from whatever disease with which he was afflicted.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOOTNOTES:
F63: Early mss do not contain the remainder of v 3, nor v 4
-
These footnotes : Some early mss do not contain.. Does this mean it is not in the Greek manuscripts...i dont know what "early mss" means
Im from Holland, and sometime i have some difficulty understanding what is ment.
-
Im from the US and I really dont no what mss means. I think it means manuscript. I think this Codex is said to be one of the earliest respected sources.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Codex Sinaiticus (London, Brit. Libr., Add. 43725; Gregory-Aland nº א (Aleph) or 01, Soden δ 2) is a 4th century uncial manuscript of the Greek Bible, written between 330–350. While it originally contained the whole of both Testaments, only portions of the Greek Old Testament or Septuagint survive, along with a complete New Testament, the Epistle of Barnabas, and portions of The Shepherd of Hermas (suggesting that the latter two may have been considered part of Biblical canon by the editors of the codex[1]). Along with Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most valuable manuscripts for textual criticism of the Greek New Testament, as well as the Septuagint. It is the only uncial manuscript with the complete text of the New Testament, and the only manuscript of the New Testament written in four columns per page.
-
These footnotes : Some early mss do not contain.. Does this mean it is not in the Greek manuscripts...i dont know what "early mss" means
Im from Holland, and sometime i have some difficulty understanding what is ment.
I think in this case MSS is the acronym or abbreviation for Manuscripts.
-
Remember the sovereignty of God. God causes all things. God caused the original scriptures to be written down, and God caused the "spurious" scriptures to be added.
It is the "spirit that quickens".
"The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple." Psalms 119:130
Meditate on the Word day and night.
CIY
-
Remember the sovereignty of God. God causes all things. God caused the original scriptures to be written down, and God caused the "spurious" scriptures to be added.
It is the "spirit that quickens".
"The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple." Psalms 119:130
Meditate on the Word day and night.
CIY
Amen to that CIY!!!
Heidi
-
I have a hard time anymore thinking we are going to have a perfect "Bible." Actually I don't think it can be in the sense that once human eyes see the words and the mind gets a hold of it, then it is all over the place no matter how perfectly written. It has to be the "the words are spirit" because typed or written words just are not going to cut it. I know people who try to balance the two, they rely on the spirit and then back it up with the word etc. But no one yet has convinced me of any book doing the job. I can understand books can be a tool to an end but they often times become a god to many people. I am sure many people with less books and less information have known much more than those who have book shelves loaded with all sorts of informational books etc. I actually now see how many non Christians have less polluted minds on certain subjects than Christians. One thing is for sure, no matter how much you think you know, your still most likely in error in comparison to the real truth. Thankfully I don't have the utmost urgency to be correct or else I'm doomed idea going on anymore. More and more I use love as a guiding post. Just the other day I was thinking how I use to be like a survivalist who was trying to figure out just how to survive. For many it is a set or maybe just one or whatever type arrangements they think must be done to "survive." What I mean is salvation to many is just a type of survival. You got to survive "hell" so you learn the magic sinner's prayer to rescue you from your cosmic torturer god. Whew...good thing I learned the secret pass words and now I don't have to burn for eternity is really what people do. They then try to say it is "love." They love God they say! Really? I just want to operate out of love, and I know I am far from knowing much about this love. But I am sure knowing a prefect translation or knowing the original words of a written book is a lot like just knowing a ten second sinners prayer in the end. I don't even think words can come close to what we are really after.
-
I have been trying to read the sinaiticus but I can't find the english version. I enjoy reading these old texts but i can hardly find them in english I also like to know what the original scripts say. Just how much are we missing in these add ons and man;s embellishments? I for one never knew about these add ons. Now If I really didn't know, someone who's been searching (still am) for the truth, how many more don't have any idea about this. Who like me didn't know about these add ons?
Darren
-
Hi Darren
I came across this translation of Revelation, done directly from the Sinaiticus:
http://www.revelation-today.com/sinaitic.htm (http://www.revelation-today.com/sinaitic.htm)
Falgn0n
-
I have been trying to read the sinaiticus but I can't find the english version. I enjoy reading these old texts but i can hardly find them in english I also like to know what the original scripts say. Just how much are we missing in these add ons and man;s embellishments? I for one never knew about these add ons. Now If I really didn't know, someone who's been searching (still am) for the truth, how many more don't have any idea about this. Who like me didn't know about these add ons?
Darren
Hi all,
try this link Darren http://www.sinaiticus.com/ (http://www.sinaiticus.com/). This is the one i go to. It shocked me when i seen how big that list of add ons and omissions was, AND that was only showing the NT! I wonder how it is for the OT.
Lately ive been trying to understand as much as i can about the resurrection. If there 2 or 1, or are all resurrected but "sorted" out (like the parable of the good fish and bad fish). That verse Rev 20:5 was a big wrench in my understanding. Think how many wrenches to understanding these add ons and omissions are to many people. The main ones that comes to mind is the verses that the catholic church added to make the trinity doctrine.
In Jesus,
Anthony
-
This has got me trying to do a study on the resurrections. Is it one or two? It specifically say "this is the first resurrection", but doesnt really say there is a second. Theres the Great White Throne Judgement, but this mentioned after the devil is loosed for a season. Is he out decieving the elect? I dont think so. So he has to be decieving someone. This has to be those who didnt make it in the first/former/chief/principal resurrection. In this way they will be going through the LOF.
Could this be saying there is only one resurrection? There is the resurrection of the BOTH, the just and unjust.
Ac 24:15 - Show Context
And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.
and you know the one in Daniel--age abiding life, age abiding contempt.
Daniel 12 12:2
`And the multitude of those sleeping in the dust of the ground do awake, some to life age-during, and some to reproaches -- to abhorrence age-during. (YLT)
Look at the parables. Theres a "sorting" of people, good and bad in a resurrection. Am i seeing something or not?
Arent the elect changed and therefore we will have bodies where we will be ruling with Christ, ministering to the people but wont be seen by them, helping to heal the nations?
Im having trouble with this because if there is only one resurrection where the elect are given age abiding life/immortality what are the others given. It aint immortality yet. But if there is two you have the problem i stated at first.
Am i on the right tract? Any insights are more than welcomed
In Jesus,
Anthony
-
Hi, there AK4
If you check the scriptures you will see there have been a number of resurrections. I also believe that you are saying that you are one of the elect - how sad. to think of yourself of being that good is a misconception in itself. There has been ONE good man and there is now and there will be only one good man and that's the ONLY one. God will choose the elect (period). Please read the last of Ray's writings on E. Hell Hades & The Second Death. Each and every one of us in one way or the other will be tried by fire. It's the only way. One cannot possibly know in this lifetime that they are one of the elect. If you know something that I don't or have scriptures to prove me wrong, please submit.
Going out on a limb for Jesus Christ - why? cause that's where the fruit's at
In the Spirit of Christ,
love ya
Dewey & Paula
-
there have been a number of resurrections.
Dewey, please supply scripture references to these?
Falgn0n
-
Hi, there AK4
If you check the scriptures you will see there have been a number of resurrections. I also believe that you are saying that you are one of the elect - how sad. to think of yourself of being that good is a misconception in itself.
Dewey,
I too would like to see the scripture supporting a number of resurrections. I've checked a lot of scripture and it appears that I'm missing something, according to you.
I read over all of AK4 replies and do not see where he even infers he is the elect. I think you owe him an apology. Unless you see something I don't, and I'm not discounting that possibility.
Craig
-
I read over all of AK4 replies and do not see where he even infers he is the elect. I think you owe him an apology. Unless you see something I don't, and I'm not discounting that possibility.
Craig
Thank you Craig.
There are sooooooooooo many things i do in life that would discount me to even be worthy to lace His shoes. I may word things wrong sometimes, but i struggle daily trying please my Lord, trying to make it in that first resurrection.
Thank you again Craig. :) :D ;D ;)
-
If you check the scriptures you will see there have been a number of resurrections.
Hi there Dewey and Paula,
If you are referring to those who came back to life when Jesus gave up His spirit-- the "and the graves were opened" of Matt 27:52 may be spurious in that verse. And was this a resurrection to Life (immortality)? When they may have died again? If so that would be a contradiction to what we believe. Lazarus was raised again, but that wasnt a resurrection to Life. There is only one right now who has been given this Life and thats Jesus.
From what i am gathering so far is both are given age abiding life, one with immortality (deathlessness) and the other not, where they must go through a second death/LOF. Do they physically die again? I dont think so because "it is appointed once for men to die, then after that judment" (Heb 9:7). Thier in judgement and this death will be to the carnal mind. After this are they given immortality? I guess so if God is going to be All in All. I dont know, im still in my studies and praying He give the eyes to see it.
If im off tract please let me know. I just want to know the Truth.
In Jesus,
Anthony
-
Hi, Anthony, Craig, and Falgnon
First of all, right off the top as per Craig's suggestion that an apology is in order. Anthony, we ask you to please accept our most sincere apology. It was not our intention to hurt feelings or insult anyone in any way. The reason that we posted what we did was where we read "Arent the elect changed and therefore WE will have bodies where WE will be ruling with Christ, ministering to the people but wont be seen by them, helping to heal the nations?" The two of us have mistakenly taken your use of "we" and thought you were speaking of yourself as one of the elect. To us, "we" is an inclusive plural personal pronoun. And when I said "how sad", we were truly saddened that after all the teachings that L. Ray Smith has out there someone comes along thinking that they're one of the elect. So sorry.
Here's some of the stuff that we go into when we think of the resurrection:
In the New Testament, it says Jesus raised a number of people. Jesus raised Jairus' daughter shortly after death. Jesus also brought back a young man right in the midst of his own funeral. And check out Lazarus - dead for four days. Before I go any further, I want to point out that immortality and resurrection are two different words. All these people that I'm telling you about came back to life - not immortality (John 11:44 Lazarus lives). The word resurrection is found 40 times in this old bible that I have. Let's take for example (Acts 20:9-10). Paul gave life to Eutychus. (Acts 9:36-40) Peter gave life to Dorcas. And in (Matthew 5:41 Jesus gives life to Talitha and says to the little girl, "get up". Not immortality, but life. You can say that they were given life and that is correct. NOT immortality. But they all were resurrected from death.
Let's see what Jesus has to say about this from his own mouth (Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Handle me and see - for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.)
Read Matthew 22:28, Matthew 27:53, Luke 14:14, 1 Cor. 15:1--------------and read Revelations 20:4-5, 2 Timothy 2:23-24.
Anthony, would you have me believe that all these scriptures are "spurious"? Surely not. And if the answer is yes, then why do we bother reading it? Why not just read some sci-fi book?
We love each and every one of you like a member of our family.
In the Spirit of Jesus
Dewey & Paula
Goin' out on a limb for Jesus - why? 'cause that's where the fruit is
-
Hi Dewey and Paula,
Apology accepted. Like i mentioned before sometimes i may word things wrong. Alot of the times i type faster than what i think.
I will address your last post though. You quote 2 tim 2:23-24
2:23
Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.
2:24
And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.
I wasnt havent an arguement, especially one that would start a quarrel. I posted what i came to in my studies and i asked what did any of you guys think and if im on the wrong track, help me get back on track.
In the New Testament, it says Jesus raised a number of people. Jesus raised Jairus' daughter shortly after death. Jesus also brought back a young man right in the midst of his own funeral. And check out Lazarus - dead for four days. Before I go any further, I want to point out that immortality and resurrection are two different words. All these people that I'm telling you about came back to life - not immortality (John 11:44 Lazarus lives). The word resurrection is found 40 times in this old bible that I have. Let's take for example (Acts 20:9-10). Paul gave life to Eutychus. (Acts 9:36-40) Peter gave life to Dorcas. And in (Matthew 5:41 Jesus gives life to Talitha and says to the little girl, "get up". Not immortality, but life. You can say that they were given life and that is correct. NOT immortality. But they all were resurrected from death
Let's see what Jesus has to say about this from his own mouth (Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Handle me and see - for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.)
Yes, immortality and resurrection are two different words. You quoted scriptures that is proving what i said i was coming up with. And these verse you quoted arent resurrections per se. I wont state again what i put in the post earlier, but if there is only one resurrection and as it is said in Dan 12:2 that both are given age-abiding (the same word is used for both)--one to Life (one of the benefits being immortality) and one to contempt (maybe havent gained immortality yet, but will later). I am not seeing where it is saying there are two different resurrections, but both are raised at the same time.
As for Luke 24:39 what about the rest of the chapter--
51 While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven. 52 Then they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. 53 And they stayed continually at the temple, praising God.
This is backing up what i was saying about those healing the nations with bodies given to the Just, bodies like Jesus.
All i am looking for is the Truth.
Now i've been wondering about the word resurrection when it is used in Revelations. I guess my question to all is, since the book of Revelations is a book of symbols, when resurrection is used in it, could it have an even higher meaning for the just in the resurrection-- something like given immortality, faith, knowledge & understanding about who God and Jesus are, a body like Jesus'---you know all the gifts that come with believing that the unjust and wicked do not have now and will learn and possibly get after going through the LOF. (this is assuming still about the only one resurrection theory) I dont know im just rambling off the top of my head right now.
Tell me what you guys think
All in Jesus ;D
Anthony
-
Funny i raise this thread back from the dead (resurrection), but i still am thinking on this.
Now Ray stated that in Revelations the is, was, and will be. So with this in mind this has been eating at my brain lately that resurrection has a higher meaning than the literal raising of the dead (resurrection).
Could it be that Jesus has been raising the spiritually dead to spiritual life? I think so.
I will go further with this later but right now i cant because im at work
-
To All: Last night, before I went to sleep I was reading John Chapter 7
at the end it said;The earliest manuscripts and many other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8 :11. I was tired and never gave it anymore thought till I read what Rodger was talking about.
I believe that God is all knowing. Yes, I believe he knew this would happen. I believe he allowed this. The church I left that I had gone to all my married life, was reading out of the NIV. However, we had people who would not give up there King James. My mother in-law called one night and said"There was a big argument over missing verses in the Niv. thaat were in the Kings James. She called to ask me what I thought. I did not know at that time what to make of it.
But, now that I am here and believe truth. I am with people searching like I am for truth. Makes your wonder why no minister ever saw this Rodger, like you were talking about. The people who liked the King James left because of the difference in the NIV. I do know of a preacher, saying once that we would have to have the original manusripts to know the truth. All, I know is when I was a child I read scriptures in Timothy and I never saw him anything but the Savior of the World. I use to spend most of my time with a one on one Relationship with Jesus. After, I grew up and sinned I got into going into churches and then got there opinions not Gods. The Bible does say we have to come to him with childlike faith or we won't come to him. Church teaches us to
live the old and new covenant cause they do not know him. The do not have the spirit. I found out I did not know God at all, cause I was listening to man say yes he is love, but he is angry, jealous , has wrath and such. They went way out of line on those. They created fear in us. We have peace with God.
All the different religions were confusing to me. The way we belive is nothing ,but peace for me. God says "I am not author of confusion."
Yes, I kind of wonder about the devil is loosed for a while to tempt those who are in the White Throne Judgement.
I just wanted to say that ,I read exactly what Rodger did. I also believe that God would leave what we need to know, but we must have one on one contact with him. He will show us truth. I begged for it one night and I found Ray's website. All I can say, Ray understands truth by the spirit.Just like we are looking at the scriptures now the same way and wanting to learn more and more. I would just love to see the faces of those who did not know truth and who did not believe when he shows his LOVE to them. All, I can say the night I learned and believed the truth was the most wonderful and only true time I really worshiped him with Love and truth.
In His Love
Marlene