NIV Bible Error Lucifer AND Jesus are ONE in the NIV

2010 | bibletruth

[bibletruth]

NIV Bible error - Lucifer AND Jesus are ONE in the NIV. See Isaiah 14:12.

[Cronos]

Check out the list of faiths to avoid. It cracked me up. Judaism is stuck between something called “Apostolic Oneness Pentacostal” and the Seventh Day Adventists!

Yes, the rocky and bullwinkle cult says "avoid everyone!"

[Cronos]

bib: the only pride going on here is men on this page who trust scholars words above God’s Word...

MD: 30 years of study makes you a scholar. So in an effort to avoid pride, I will not trust your words.

Hilarious! Baffled him with logic and truth and grace!

[Cronos]

bibtut: Amen - KJV 1611... if it was good enough for Paul and Peter, it’s good enough for me

Sometimes you just gotta shake you head and laugh your guts out at sheer ignorance!

[Cronos]

You should ask as bib did "Is the NIV biblical?"

Or perhaps it is sola-KJVa?

[John Leland 1789]

"Don’t be surprised if most of the posters on this thread don’t “get” what you’re saying. The Bible versions issue often exposes the spiritual immatur[e]"

That's right. Most reading your post still hold the position that all of the versions and translations basically come from the same source and are in one solid stack from the "originals" to what ever the newest "NEW" version is on the bookstore shelves today in the States. And they're going to go with the "All NEW Chevrolet," you know, as if they're buying shampoo or spaghetti sauce.

And the promises of God to preserve His words to every generation are discounted altogether.

[Cronos]

Matt:23... "call no man Father"

Btw, in Poland we don't call priests Father, we call them "ksiądz" which is quite different from father which is "tatuś" or "ojciec" -- Ksiądz translates as priest.

Just because the English speaking world uses one term, you think it means everything??? Hilarious!

[Cronos]

Matt:23... "call no man Father"

Btw, in Poland we don't call priests Father, we call them "ksiądz" which is quite different from father which is "tatuś" or "ojciec" -- Ksiądz translates as priest.

Just because the English speaking world uses one term, you think it means everything??? Hilarious!

[Cronos]

And you mean Catholic priest are never referred to as “father.”

Yes, in Poland for example they are referred to as Ksiądz (translation to English = priest) as a title (ojciec is father). Do you know any language besides English and maybe a smattering of Spanish?

[Cronos]

iscool: The KJV translators used the 'original language' to translate the KJV...

Was that Quenya or Sindarin ? /sarc

[count-your-change]

“But no, cyc — you should humbly submit to the Tut, the whole Tut and nothing but the tut.”

Then Tut is King?

[markomalley]

lucifer = Latin for light bringer. Classically used as The morning-star, the planet Venus.

quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes

So I never realized that the inspired translators referred back to the Vulgate for their inspiration.

Just amazing.

[big'ol_freeper]

There are folks that I disagree with when it comes to theology and there are morons I disagree with when it comes to theology. The difference is that those I just disagree with can at least show some semblance of intellectual pursuit. These morons have the intellectual rigor of a pile of landscaping rocks.

My favorite statement is still “if [the KJV] was good enough for Paul [et. al.] then it’s good enough for me”

I chuckle every time I think about that statement..LOL

I’d take odds that there is at least one church member named Buford T. Pusser.

[aruanan]

What know-nothings can't get their minds around is that the NIV (which is much more accurate to the ORIGINAL Greek and Aramaic) seems to them similar to the Douay-Rheims.

it's not because the NIV was based on the D-R, but rather that the D-R is correct and the NIV re-invented the wheel and ended up with the same thing -- based on the original Greek/Aramaic/Hebrew texts!

You still didn't demonstrate the original assertion: The NIV is not based on the Translations from original Greek, but the Roman Catholic approved translations.

What you posted from wikipedia doesn't even allude to something like this.

[Mad Dawg]

Sorry. That is a sloppy account of Catholicism. That account of Justification is especially sloppy. It’s a shame when such stuff is passed off as authoritative.

[Mad Dawg]

Watchmen who pass on unexamined falsehoods as true warnings have not discharged their duty.

[aruanan]

Furthermore, if we wanted a translation of the OT that was commonly used up to and including the time of Jesus, we would have a translation from the Septuagint, not from the Masoretic text. When Jesus was quoting the OT, he was quoting the Septuagint. Because new Jewish Christians were so adept at using the Septuagint to proselytize, Jewish leaders abandoned it and adopted the Hebrew OT.

And the older Greek NT texts were much better than the so-called Textus Receptus, which was, in part, invented by translating the Vulgate back into Greek, creating words that did not appear in koine Greek. In fact, the phrase "textus receptus" was an advertising blurb for a Greek NT that was hastily cobbled together out of late miniscule manuscripts, parts of the Vulgate, whatever Erasmus could get his hands on as quickly as he could to beat others to publication. The so-called "textus receptus" did not exist before it was crafted by Erasmus. It went on to underlie many different translations into other languages which is why, for example, the standard Spanish translation, the Reina-Valera, was so close to the KJV in the NT--both came from Erasmus's creation.

[Mad Dawg]

“Dynamic equivalence” gives me a pain! Unfortunately the current translation used in the US Catholic Church (the NAB, but I call it the ‘Yoda Translation’ because of its clunky English) is chock full o’ that stuff.

Twice a week I read the Scriptures at Mass. My biggest challenge is not wincing when I hit the more egregious passages.

[Mad Dawg]

... full of God?s Word as I have devoured it like a mad-man for thirty-years and know what it says.

Another scholar! Fly! Fly for your lives!

[Mad Dawg]

fermented juice is tainted.

Is risen bread dough tainted?

The problem with freshly pressed grape juice is to keep it from fermenting. You don't have to 'pitch' it with yeast (unless, as is wise, you want to make sure that good strains of yeast outnumber the bad.) Wild yeasts will start "working" right away. Unless you pasteurize the cloudy must after filtering, it will ferment, "and that right early."

[mnehring]

He didn’t create 150 gallons of rotten juice to throw a drunken party. Jesus Christ never created anything tainted, and fermented juice is tainted.

Wow, now there is some massive twisting of scripture (actually, I've seen this a bunch). The one I love is when they use the contradiction that the 'juice' wasn't actually wine, but at the same time, they say it was watered down to purify water that couldn't be drunk. You can't have it both ways. Also, their justification regarding wine not being wine contradicts so many biblical passages, it isn't even funny. They should just admit they have a problem with booze instead of twisting the bible to say something it doesn't.