@starbox21 The bible is a mistake. it`s immoral.Witches, kill them. Homosexuals, kill them.fortunetellers, kill them. those who don`t listen to priests, kill them. those hitting their dad, kill them. those who curse their parents, kill them, adulterers, kill them. fornicators, kill them. people who believe in other religions, kill them. non-believers,kill them. fals prohets ,kill them. blasphemers, kill them. those who work on the Sabbath, kill them. This is the word of god !
I have admire John Macarthur, I know he is "against" the teachings of Rick Warren, and if you must know, the NIV not only changed the bible in a cultural way, but also omits Fasting and makes it more appealing for he ecumenical point of view. I noticed that the publisher of the NIV and Rick Warren's book is ZONDERVAN, which also owns HARPER COLLINS, which is the publisher for the satanic bible,
today it was a sad day for me because I learned that John Macarthur's publisher is also ZONDERVAN
I still have yet to see anyone of these MacArthur haters being up scripture for calling his a heretic. All I see is inaccurate quotes on his theology. I am a member of his church and never once heard him preach or teach what you are claiming of his theology. Could it be that the truth hurts. If your Catholic or Mormon or JW or part of an emergent or charismatic church then I could see why you would hate him so much because you are suppressing the truth in unrighteousness and you have exchanged
Read the bible with the authors intent in mind and with Gods intent for the whole bible is mind.
1. Authors intent is usually discernable once you know the reason that he wrote it and the reason is usually related to the particular problem or need in the church.
2. God's overall intent is that we learn to love God and each other. Remember that knowledge puffs up but love builds up.
Wow! lots of hate for Dr. MacArthur here. The amount of ad hominem arguments is staggering. 1 Peter 3:15 tells us to give our answers with meekness and fear. Dr. MacArthur's argument is that the TNIV is being modified to placate to modern culture's political correctness and he sees this as wrong. If you disagree, please use facts and logic to explain why his argument is wrong and try to maintain civility while doing it. Blessings you guys.
JM wouldnt twist scripture to fit HIS OWN stogdy, religious culture would he? There surely wouldnt be anything short of the glory of God in the typical evangelical, reform saturated, Calvin-based, "gee, I am not sure it is Godly to raise my hands" church would there? NAAAAAAAAHHHH.
Ah its denoinwa again... The apostate lover of gnostic doctrines and blasphemers... As if anything you have to say carries any weight with Bible believing Christians.
Why would Mr. John MacArthur put down the tniv bible?? He still uses the corrupt ESV...which is a a crap version!! Where is 1st John 5:7 Mr. MacArthur?? And don't give me any of that "not in the original greek" crap either!! Show me an original autograph Mr. MacArthur....they don't exist today!!
To be fair, I agree with much of what MacArthur has to say in this video, but it is hard for me to resist criticizing him because he has made himself one of the foremost anti-Catholic individuals in the world.
So MacArthur is saying that there are different levels of sin! Homosexuality is worse the gluttony. But I heard him criticize the Catholic Church in a separate video for teaching that there are mortal sins and venial sins. Which is it MacArthur, c'mon?
@Jamesglory1......what is wrong with NKJV?? It is the same with the exception of the words thee, thou, shewn, etc. People who claim KJ is the only truth are dabbling in legalism
Damn, I had to go throught all of this man' s bullshit to make a comment. Most post have comments not admitted. Duuu, Wonder why? Could it be that this man is an Idiot and jealous of those with more common sense when it comes to religion? Hell, I am a non believer of organized religion. But, I can tell a hater. this asshole is one. Remember the KJV was man written. We can make up fairy tales to tell the kiddies. I am sure you get my point.
The Bible is a combination of myth, legends, and folklore, written by Hebrew men. It is NOT the word of god. Anyone who believes men can live in the belly of a fish for days, or that a snake can talk to people, or that a woman can spring from a man's rib, has a serious mental problem. You all need to get in touch with reality and stop trying to con people out of their money using religious dogma and fear. The Faith Industry is a FRAUD.
@filoIII There are, as in many other places, corrupt versions a plenty. but, thank God, many true bible believers use, preach from and promote the KJV..
@0Venus0, no difference, except for the fact that today, people do not castrate them. Thank God, apart from the transexuals that choose it. Now read Isaiah 56. In the NT Christ tells you that are some are born like it.
@academysounds Eunuchs are those males without their sexual member. It is a gross misrepresentation to equate those who were/are eunuchs with being homosexual. According to Christ in Matthew 19:12, some were born that way, most were made that way (gelded) in order that kings and rulers could trust them as servants to their women. Homosexuality is a perversion of God's plan for humanity and an abomination before Him. However, Christ can and will save homosexuals & deliver them from a life of sin.
@salmagnum, did you read Isaiah 56? Christ predicted that I would be ashamed of this generation when I came. Did he not teach you to love everyone equally? Christ taught his followers to save themselves. The Queen of the South is here to judge this generation and he told you all that you would be judged by your words. WISDOM WILL BE PROVEN RIGHT BY HER ACTIONS exactly as he predicted. TESHUVAH Christians.
@academysounds I have love for you and all homosexuals, but I hate sin, including ALL sexual perversion (not just sodomy), even as God so clearly hates that which subverts His perfect plan for us. I do not understand how you manage to come up with what you do from reading Scripture. I encourage you to keep searching for more sound Biblical teaching. John MacArthur is definitely a good source for the same. No man can save himself. Only through faith in Christ, by his mercy and grace are we saved.
@salmagnum, did Christ teach you to hate? No. John MacArthur like the rest of them will be brought down just the prophecies predict. The LORD God does not hate anyone or anything. He knows what man's hate does to their own consciousness and what it does to your flesh. Do you know the true meaning of the word hate in Greek? Check it out. I am the Messiah of Joseph that was promised to Moses. Now Christian TESHUVAH because your time is up.
The mass of biblical scholars that worked on the NIV, went back to the original languages and texts, they also cross referenced with the dead sea scrolls as well.
In the NT Christ himself tells you to accept homesexuals if you can. He taught AGAPE, unconditional love. However, he stood up to dogma and those like the Churches that try to oppress others into their way. The books were sealed until the end. The end as come.
For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”Matthew 9:12 “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end. Dan 12:9
@academysounds, What Bible are you using or do you have a typo as the the Book & verse? I've checked several translations of Matthew 9:12 & all are similar, this is what it says in the NKJV: "When Jesus heard that, He said to them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick."
@academysounds Thanks for the correction. :-) Do you understand that there is a great difference between a eunuch & a homosexual? A eunuch is a castrated man.
You can't build your faith in God's word if you use a defective Bible. The 1611 KJV may appear old fashioned and politically incorrect but no other version treats essential Christian doctrine the same way. Besides, I find it's easier to read than the new versions. With a good commentary (I personally recommend the KJV STUDY BIBLE AND KJV PARALLEL COMMENTARY, both by Thomas Nelson, Inc.) and prayer to God for understanding the Lord will teach us His word by the power of the Holy Spirit.
From what I understand the 2011 revised NIV is supposed to be no better than the prior revision or even the TNIV. How can u correct what is completely full of theological errors and appears to have so many irreconcilable contradictions which prevent a clear understanding even from carefully examining the text in context? You can't build a good house on a bad foundation.
By listening to this i take it that TNIV is a bigger peice of rubbish than the original.
I was hoping that they would correct the sins of the past and put back into the new one what they left out of the old one. Does anyone know where i can find a bible with the correct names in them? Since there was no J, or W in the original language the lords name would be Yeshua, and Father would be Yahoveh. John would be Yohan, and Joesph would be Yahsuf, and so on
John also displays a lack of knowledge concerning the translation process. completely ignoring translation issues like idioms and metaphors in Hebrew and Greek for which there are no equivalents in English. If you would translate these words literally, the meaning is often completely lost. so then the translation has failed. eg Joshua10:6 "do not relax your hand from your servants" ESV. Well what does "relax your hand" mean? It is not an English idiom, but a hebrew one....
@brendos444 In Hebrew to "relax your hand" means to abandon. This would have been readily understood by readers of ancient Hebrew. But not by English readers for no such idiom exists in English. so other versions render its meaning rather than to literally translate the idiom, which renders the text meaningless in English. Its the same with the use of "men" in Greek. This word is used to mean "mankind" including females and males. There is another specific greek word that is gender specific...
When this word is used the NIV communicates the gender specific nature. But when the greek word anthropos is used, the NIV translates this as a "person" because the greek word is not about gender but about mankind. The greek word arsen refers to male, it is not used in verses such as Romans 3:28, which looks at justification of not only males but all people. In this verse anthropos is used and therefore the accurate translation of this is "a person is justified by faith..."
So to say that a translators job is merely to find the closest word to the hebrew and greek is simply misleading. No one would translate the English idiom "I'll be a monkey's uncle" literally into another language. The meaning would absolutely be lost. It's the same with hebrew and greek idioms. In fact even the ESV has to make such interpretations of biblical idioms at times - read Fee and Strauss chapt 4.
So I admire John's commitment to the gospel and bringing sanctification to the fore in a time of lawlessness. But he is not free from error himself. He mischaracterizes the TNIV as being beholden to the feminist movement, which it is not. He completely misunderstands the fact that Bible translation must be meaningful in the receptor language. But the Bible says that we must bear with those whose understanding on non core issues is flawed.
John is misrepresenting the translation process of the NIV and TNIV. See athe book called How to Choose a Translation for all its worth. Unfortunately John's preferred translation, the ESV, distorts Romans 16 so as to exclude Junia, a woman, from apostleship. All other translations, including "conservative translations like the KJV, NASB, RSV, include Junia as an apostle. So it is his fav Bible that distorts scripture. The ESV is otherwise a great translation
The tniv is the book the PC police wants us to accept so the gays won't feel unchristianly. Don't worry they've rewrote the constitution as well. So now we all are to accept all life styles. Time to have a party, a TEA PARTY!
Maybe JMc should sit down with the translators prior to vilifying them, I like most of JMc views but disagree with him on this one. Another point JMc is not a Greek Hebrew SCHOLAR, he is a bible teacher, this should put his comments into context.
@zoltanapril42 I would suggest you ponder why you disagree. Perhaps its coming from a carnal means. I would also suggest looking up the facts on the TNIV and the "New International Version" also. These versions are missing Critical verses and has been edited. Some sections taken out completely! 100's of verses and chapters aren't even in there. MacArthur has forgotten more than you'll ever know about these things. MacArthur stands at 100% correct on this matter, and obviously you don't know.
@jataylor7 if you bothered to actually research this issue maybe you could make an informed opinion.
Textual critisism is highly complicated science, and great scholars such as Bruce Metzger have clearly shown that the there a variations in the old texts which remain and what the new testament is based on.
Gordon Fee is on the editorial commitee a fine evangeligal man. An JMc shold take it up with him.
As far as Chapters missing please quote the chapters whichh are missing from the TNIV.
@zoltanapril42 ..I am a missionary/Bible prophecy teacher. And it is clear that you do not know what you are talking about. There are over 64,000 words, (not letters, but words) "missing" if you compare the NIV with the KJV (or Textus Receptus) All other books in the English language that call themselves a Bilbe, (except for the KJV) are based on "corrupt" Alexandrian "Greek" Manuscripts. The O.T. being the "Septuaginta" that contains 70% of the "Aquilla" of 120 A.D., and about 30% of the...
..."Theodotan" of 170 A.D., and was "first published" in the six collumn work known as the "Hexapla" in 250 A.D.
(It never existed before that, the Lies of modern theology to the contrary not withstanding) As for Bruce Metzger and Gordon Fee, I have no Respect for these debauched charlatans. They know that they are violating God's command in Deut.4:2, 12:32, Prov.30:6, and Rev.22:18-19, in which not to ADD TO, or TAKE AWAY FROM, God, ETERNAL WORD, that is "FOREVER SETTLED IN HEAVEN" ...
...These scoundrels are going to burn in Hell for their attrocities. Their 'scolarship' is questionable, and their so called Christianity, is Non-existant. Maybe you need to "educate" yourself, before you make such absurd remarks . How about getting yourself a copy of "New Age Bible versions" or "Which Bible", by Dr. Gail Riplinger, and examine some of the proof that she presents. In the meantime, go to 2 .Sam.21:19 in your NIV, and see who killed Goliath (we know David did, but not in NIV
@sorens70601 These are the facts a) We dont have the original manuscripts that the apostle wrote and b) The remaining copies we have dont agree with one another. Think about it? This is why we need textual critics to attempt to establish what the originals contained.
Its very simple KJV onlyism is a position held by people who want to remain ignorant. The issue of corrupted egyptian texts is a myth created by religious traditionalists not wanting to accept facts a) and b) above.
@zoltanapril42...The only "fact " that you have stated, is the obvious one, that none of teh "original manuscripts" are currently available. Your point "b", is NOT True ! There are 5366 manuscripts of the New Testament extant today. Only a "corrupt few" give a view, much like a "shifting kaleidoscope". Evidence for the New Testament is composed of "papyrus", "fragments and manuscripts", "uncial and miniscule manuscripts"(modified capitals and cursives) and "lectionaries",(books used in ...
...churches) Each of the 5366 manuscripts, including 2209 lectionaries extant today are given a name, an abreviation and /or a number. "Papyri 1-88",(e.g., P66,P46,P75) "Uncials 01-0274",( e.g. Aleph, B,C,D.)
"Miniscule 1-2795", (e.g. 1-2795) "Lectionaries 1-2209", (e.g. 1-2209) In addition to the above, numerous other language versions of the "common" Greek text were made in the second century , (long before Eusebius's mid-fourth century forgery in classical Greek) Those include...
...the old Latin,the Syriac, the Coptic,the Ethiopian, and scores of others. These provide witnesses to the "correct readings" of the New Testament. Furthermore,scores of second, third and fourth century personalities, such as John Chrysostom, Iranaeus,Tertulain, and Justin Martyr, to name but a few, have left writings containing citations of scripture verses, witnessing to the "original" readings of teh New Testament. Also, Dean Burgon, has extrapolated more than 87,000 of these. Currently..
...the manuscripts are being collated by the " Institut fur nuetestamentiche Tereforschung" by Kurt Aland, in Munster, Germany. Microfilms of many are housed in the archives of the Ancient Biblical Manuscript Center, in Claremont,California. Should you wish to persue your own investigation, I can provide you with a list of resources. By the way, it is in the over 87,000 extrapolated writings by Dean Burgon, that we know that the 9 verse ommission in the NIV of Acts 8, was part of the original
@sorens70601 ok you dont want to believe Metzger or Fee, how about Daniel B Wallace proffessor of new testament studies at Dallas, where he states "thee are 6 to 10 variation per chapterfor the closest byzantine texts we have" type in Wallace and White into youtube where he debates Gipp. Also read KJV only controversy which J Mc himself endorses hisself, is JMc going to hell because he reads the NASB? Stop this brainwashing of young christians. Over and out
@zoltanapril42 .. First of all, you are the "brainwashed one", as you hold to the modern fraud of higher textual criricism. And dont even mention these " spiritual morons" with their phoney degrees from "crakerbox" spiritual cemetaries, called seminaries, which schools have been fined by the texas state for issuing "un-earned degrees. James white is a pathetic liar, and I have told him, and his pastor so. Yes Mac Arthur will not enter the kingdom because of his Masonic Calvinist theology...
...2.John.9 declares; "He that abideth Not in the doctrine of Christ, HATH NOT GOD"! Reformed theology is antichristly to its core, and can be proven as such. Jn.3:16 and Rev.22:17, (whosoever will) demolishes the "L" in TULIP. Rom.3:24-25, does away with the "I am saved from my past , present and future sins" Idea, as it declares that we are only saved from our past sins. Future sins can not be covered until they are repented from. Mac Arthur is Not saved, and you did not read all my post
@zoltanapril42 Also.....You have the freedom to believe that this version complies completely with the original scriptures. But that simply is not true. Ignorance is bliss, i suppose. i guess there's always that guy denying the obvious. I guess what i'm trying to say is don't try to shoot down FACTS with your opinion....it's just not a very bright way to go about such things.
Just so everyone knows, its not just tniv that altered the Word but ALL modern translations! even johns esv. Do your research, the kjv is the only word of God for english. Gods Word never changes.
Darn right! Do not change/diminish/embellish the word of God!! When it says to kill unruly children, then YOU KILL THEM! When it says to kill adulterers and homosexuals, YOU KILL THEM! We're not going to let the culture define our scripture, right John? Get your handful or rocks ready. Let's go fulfill some of God's justice.
God doesn't change, but language does. Unless you want to read the original languages--Greek and Hebrew--there will be new translations. That's not a bad thing.
John MacArthur is brilliant. However, he seems to display a very hard heart consistently. He's the moral and Bible police - plays the role of the Pharisees. He is a bible scholar, but one thing he probably never paid attention to is the Primary Hermeneutic for Bible translation - Matthew 22:37-40. All the Law and Prophets should be interpreted though Loving God and Loving People. He clearly doesn't do this. It will be to his demise. A great mind who lacks love is nothing!
John MacArthur is brilliant. However, he seems to display a very hard heart - consistently. He's the moral and Bible police - plays the role of the Pharisees. He is a bible scholar, but one thing he probably never paid attention to is the Primary Hermeneutic for Bible translation - Matthew 22:37-40. All the Law and Prophets should be interpreted though Loving God and Loving People. He clearly doesn't do this. It will be to his demise. A great mind who lacks love is nothing!
@notmadpastor What??? see his teaching on the Law of Herms. Love is not blind love covers/ atonement- a lot of sin. He surely isn't Pharisectical. He is a Practical Preacher. He teaches the simpicities of the Gospel in a straight forwad way. Does He have all things right no! And he makes no claim to. see his teachings on Calvin vs Armenianism. But in the fundementals of the faith he is sound as a bell..The Law is not interpretted through Loving God. You've just created a nother science of
@notmadpastor exergtes. Love is the fullfilment of the Law. Hear o Isreal thy GOD Is One God, and thou shalt lov the Lord thy God with allthe soul might and strength, and thy neighbor as thy self on nthis hangs the aZLaw and the Prophet,said Christ. where you diagree with a brother who does not see all things clear eat the fish/flesh throw away the bone. Point him to proper application of truth and you save and win a brother
We cannot be hardliners in this way. I am sure the TNIV translates certain sentences better than the NASB (my personal favorite).
If we want to be hardliners we should only read the Greek and Hebrew. Sure, certain translations are VERY much more accurate, and I am not going to defend the TNIV, but no translation is perfect nor ever will be.
For instance the King James Version has the angelic beasts saying they are thanking God they have been forgiven.
I like John McArthur. I like what he stands for. I own a copy of the TNIV and I don't mind it. One of the examples that he is talking about is where the word Man has been replaced with "persons". But the greek word anthorpos can be translated as both man and persons example: "God created man/people in his image.". But I do appreciate what John is saying, and I agree with his stand against many of the libreal wing of the Emergant church.
John MacArthur may be wrong about a lot of things, but let's give him credit for attempting to wake people up and get people to study God's Word for themselves. Let's face it folks, biblical illiteracy is on the rise. People want to argue about theology and half of them don't even study God's Word! I don't agree with everything that John MacArthur says because I believe in testing the spirits. I am proud of those here on YouTube that are doing the same!
@MsRld123 hes not wrong about alot of things, Benny Hin is wrong about a lot of things , Rob Bell is wrong about a lot of things.But this is Dr Macthur we are talking about here, one of the greatest bible expositors in the past decade.Hes NOT wrong most of the time
@MsRld123, most Christians haven't seen a real Spirit in their lives. Let alone, be trained in how to test them. Christians are so innocent, the bible warned you that the LORD would make fools of you all.
Which "alot of things" would that be that John MacArthur is incorrect on exactly? Most theologians may have 1 or 2 slightly different viewpoints on peripheral topics....but not essentials. So, when you say a lot of things....what do you believe then? It must be way off the mark....
I wonder if MacArthur knows anything about other languages and consequently about how translation actually works.
languages change, like it or not. "sat at meat" is meaningless to the average modern person, and it did not even exist in idiomatic greek. But it is KJV for having a meal. To change the idiom to make the word comprehensible to other than linguistics scholars is good if done carefjully.
do we kow that MacArthur is careful, or just a hide bound traditionalist?
people like John McArthur are annoying, narrow-minded people, who like to see themselves as bigger in the Kingdom, church, scholarship, etc, than they actually are. They speak in an ex cathedra fashion about things, which they do not understand, yet out of their own bias, heritage and presuppositions they judge yet their reasoning is so stupid. I am so ashamed of them.
secondly, one does not translate the original by translating every word, word by word, but first they need to understand the syntax of the sentence, the discourse, rhetoric, larger context, the usage of the word in the author's vocabulary, the usage in this immediate context, then check it against what the word means in various other context, etc. you don't translate words, you translate meanings - if possible and meaningful, you translate word for word, more often than not this is impossible
John McArthur doesn't know what he's saying, full of unscholarly stupidity and lack of understanding of the linguistic and exegetical decision by the TNIV gender-inclusive language. it never uses gender inclusive language when the word in the original does not imply both gender.
The TNIV and the NIV are both altered Bibles! The NIV is owned by the same company that owns the Satanic Bible. The NIV doesn't use the words SODOMITE nor EFFEMENITE. It also takes out 1 John 5:7 as most other new translations do. I ONLY USE KJV. Can't go wrong with it.
@tugboat2030 1 Corinthians 6:9 KJV ..Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.
@rokwing But of course these things mean different things at different times. Does that mean that God's laws are dependent on what society has established? Are there any other of God's laws that are dependent on human thoughts and ideas?
Why wouldn't one twist the words of the holy Bible? What is it that tells us we are not to do so? In order to come to this conclusion we must embark upon a philosophy and tradition outside of the holy Bible from which we derive our common sense and decency.
It is unfortunate, that our dear MacAurthur attempts to use commonsense arguments as twisted as his logic is all-the-while condemning those gifts to Mankind, philosophy and tradition.
We have enough manuscripts of the Bible to have faith in the trustworthiness of the texts we base our translations on. That's all we need. Tradition can just as well twist words of scripture. I understand that you may believe that that's the solution to this "problem", but I think the Bible speaks for itself. The fact that we can judge wether a scripture is being twisted points to the existence of a clear knowledge of what the scripture really is. Therefore we don't need tradition
Our little minds twist words. We see it all the time. This is called the concupiscence as sin. This does not mean that the Bible has been twisted, not traditions of men twisted. Let us consider that words comes from God. Traditions of men also come from God, as God is both full-man and full-divine in hypostatic union of divine substance and human flesh. "Faith is the realization of things hoped for." My dear Thomas, trust in the Spirit? Come stick your hand in His wounds.
Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason, I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other, my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen. Martin Luther
Let us suppose someone has a malformed conscience. What happens then? Should one go against the malformed conscience or not? What if one only thinks they are captive to the Word of God? What then? You see the problem here is this. The Divine cannot be compartamentalized into our tiny little heads. Sure we may a problem with Pope and Councils. Firsly, let understand Luther. He publically declared himself infallible (i.e. Pope) and all Christians must follow him or risk hell.
@slappy1234567 Every time I read these sorts of statements I am spurred on towards boldness for the truth of what God has revealed in His Word. Praise God for giving Luther that courage.
@kyleniac John wants them to turn away from their sin and follow christ. John Macarthur does not want homosexuals to be damned for their sin and he wants to protect the truth that homosexuality is wrong, which the bible clearly states.
John MacArthur is right! The TNIV is HERESY and FALSE!! I support the KJV, NKJV, NASB, NLT, ESV, NCV, NIV, and the Geneva Bible (GB). The TNIV is a False translation.
On one extreme you have wild-eyed King James Onlyist and on the other you have those that think anything goes. The TNIV translators obviously cared more about cultural whims than truth. Stick with good translations like the NASB, the original NIV, the NKJV, and the HCSB...
Without going into the resource information surrounding the various translations (which can be researched by anyone serious about understanding what all the controversy is about). Will point out the issue of the NKJV by itself. In most of the prefaces of this translation (i.e., Nelson edition), they state that it is translated from the same set of manuscripts (the Textus Receptus) as the KJV. This is clearly not seen by the deleted and altered passages found in the NKJV.
@IDH77 These are but a few verses which do more than show translation differences.
The use of modern language is not the issue. By careful editing there is a subtle attack at key doctrinal points. A further reminder of the ever pervasive attack of those whom Spurgeon referred to in The Down-Grade Controversy of the 19th century.
@IDH77 It would be, by the way, inaccurate, to assume that I am a KJO proponent. Even within some areas of KJV translations there are questions that have for the most gone unanswered. Pro 18:24-the Hebrew for which doesn't even come close to what is found in the first part of the KJV-is but one example. What interests me is the integrity of the Bible-be it in modern English, KJV, which Greek or Hebrew texts are reliable, etc. I have no doubt this is the case for anyone devoted to God's word.
Let's not be naive brothers and sisters. It would be naive of us to think that the devil would attack us at every corner but at the foundation itself-the Bible. Was it not the very first way he attacked us with our mother, "Hath God said?" We MUST be on guard against the attack of the devil! We must "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints."
What is apparent when one does the research is that the NKJV uses the same set of questionable manuscripts collectively called the Alexandrian texts as introduced by disreputable characters as Westcott & Hort.
If modern translators actually used the same manuscripts, (which have proven most reliable), as that used in translating the KJV, then it would give cause to warrant the same honor given to the KJV. Until then...
Ignorant and Arrogant? Hey, at least I care that I have the inspired and infallible Word of God and am not acceptable to others that are not. You probably have like tens of different versions in your home, and don't even care which one is the Word of God.
@bibleword Yes, ignorant and arrogant. First of all, I do not have "tens of different" versions in my home. I have two. KJV and ESV. I have an ESV study bible and the KJV and ESV on my computer as well. Do you have a problem with that? I'm not saying that all versions are equally good. But more importantly, I'm not saying that the KJV is the only good one. It's also a false claim to say that any translation is perfect. The KJV does have translation errors.
Are you doubting that GOD cannot perfectly inspire a translation? It sounds a lot like it by saying, "It's also a false claim to say that any translation is perfect." Do you believe that the Bible was merely written by man and not inspired by God? Or do you believe that only some words are inspired and others aren't? God only wrote one Bible, and there is only one Bible today.
Then, His inspired words must be in one Bible; not multiple. My next question is, which Bible is it? It's not a matter of what is better preferably; but a matter of what is right biblically. You said, "I believe that the bible was written by man and inspired by God." WHICH ONE? It cannot be two. Just like Shakespeare only wrote ONE Hamlet play, God only wrote ONE Bible.
@bibleword The Hebrew and greek. We would do well to to learn hebrew/greek and the culture of the people of that time to understand and to interpret it
Why is it that people like you think that God can only speak in Greek and Hebrew? That's ludicrous. God does not make us have to learn Greek and Hebrew just so we can learn God's Word.
@bibleword I am not saying that God only speeks greek and Hebrew. Wht i will say is that relying on other peoples interpretaions becuasase of our own lack of knowledge to language isnot a good thing. relying on them to inerpret it we are relying on what they tell us to be tru and fact is that people will decieve
"God only wrote one Bible, and there is only one Bible today."
When you say Bible do you really mean Bible or do you mean "translation/copy" of said Bible? The KJV is just another translation in a long list of translations. Obviously the original copies don't exist anymore and what we have n ow are copies of copies of copies, etc.
Through preservation, we have God's inspired Words, the Word of God today and that is found through copies as well. Paul said, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God..." Let me ask you, what Scripture? When Paul said that, did he mean the original writings or copies of them? Did Paul have THE original OT or a copy of it? And also, do we have the originals today? No, we do not. If you are going to tell me that only the originals are inspired, then God is a liar.
Actually, Jesus would. And even Paul was against anyone corrupting God's Word.
"For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ." -2 Corinthians 2:17
There were people corrupting God's Word then, just as there are today.
2 Cor 10:5 says : "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ".
Fully agree with you.
It is our duty to put things wright in alignment with God's Word.
The NIV is printed by Zondervan which is owned by Harper Collins in San Francisco. Harper Collins is owned by Rupert Murdoch who is a billionaire pornographer. Every time someone purchases an NIV, Murdoch gets $1.
This is a very interesting subject. I'll like to know what bible verses in the NIV take out the divinity of Jesus. I wouldn't be surprised that they are making the Bible look "politically correct"..Please, tell me what verses here are causing this controversy both in the NIV and the TNIV.
This is a very interesting subject. I'll like to know what bible verses in the NIV take out the divinity of Jesus. I wouldn't be surprised that they are making the Bible look "politically correct"..Please, tell me what verses here are causing this controversy both in the NIV and the TNIV.
It doesn't suprise me that the TNIV is so pro gay. The NIV was worked on by homosexuals as well which is why you don't have words like SODOMITE and EFFEMINATE in it. The NIV actually takes whole passages out that show the divinity of Jesus. So to me the NIV is the precursor to the TNIV. Both are blasphemous. NIV is just stage one of the plan. Notice they don't have a TKJV because the KJV doesn't flex on those things. It's sound too! If you love Jesus, get rid of those NIV's and TNIV's.
I have just started reading the tniv and i do find it better to understand?
How true is it that this pastor is really understanding about change and translation. To me a bible is still a Bible and i guess that as seasons and as years go by i believe that writing in urban movement is to help other generations understand what GOD has install for all of us!
Just because the author from a "emergent" church categorized a homosexual with overweight and chocolate eating people, doesn't mean He's trying to make homosexuality okay, it just means they welcome all sinner's. Doesn't the bible say a sin is a sin? Why do make other peoples risks in their walk with the Lord our concern to the point that we "Pass Judgement" on them, knowing that God said we are not to judge our neighbors. Yes we need to be careful of translations but God is in control. RIGHT?
How about the spiritual attacks that come from Pharisees, Big Business Christians, Religious Right polticians, hate-mongering god hates fags preachers? Those have done more harm to the Church than any gay, lesbian, feminist, abortionists can. There is no amazing grace among pharisees.
??? Interesting you put "Big Business" and "Religious Right politicians" (I assume the evangelicals) into the same categories as clear sins - homosexuality and abortion.
Jesus spoke out more against those who love money and religious self righteousness than about gays and abortion. Wait, did Jesus even mention gays and abortion? Paul did, but Jesus didn't. I am not saying those are not sins, but why do you feel those are greater clear sins?
Where in the bible do you find the term "clear sins"?
@lucasboden yeah... except that Jesus had already spoken his word about homosexuality... along with every other sin... in the Old Testament. let's not be like the heretic Marcion... who held that the God of the OT was mean and wrathful but Jesus - God of the NT was nice and a pushover.
I don't see homosexuality as a more condemnable sin than lying or murder (aka abortion). And I would NEVER defend the love of money rather than God or self-righteous religion.
whoa whoa whoa!!! I think we have a miscommunication here. All sins do lead to death and hell- yes. I will admit - by man's standards they are not.
I would never say that cheating on a test is equal to raping a child. It is still breaking God's moral law. So is fornication. Rationalizing it by saying it's not as bad though is not the answer.
I have shown the light of God's law in my life... and it BREAKS me! It does its job- it makes me run to the cross for forgiveness.
follow-up comment. I really am not trying to be self-righteous. I dont' know you... or know if you are gay or straight or a murderer or anything like that. But I will bet that I am a FAR bigger sinner than you.
I have no righteousness in myself... it is only in Christ that I have any righteousness. if I have seemed to come across as pious or ... or that I'm better than any homosexuals... that is not the case. I'm probably worse in my sin. But the cross of Christ offers forgiveness.
@jesusfreakrkg you've made the point! Praise the Lord. :-D
people forget that Jesus IS the Lord (IHWH- I AM)- the One who gave the Law to Moses. Actually if one does not believe that Jesus is Lord (kurios) can not be a true christian.
Jesus is the Lord and He is the Judge of all- dead and alive.
Praise God! Preach brother, preach! Take up the good fight for the faith. God be with you!
Postor MacArthur, the message was ment to a prophesor who claim that ´The Bible is a mistake. Sorry!
starbox21 1 month ago
@starbox21 The bible is a mistake. it`s immoral.Witches, kill them. Homosexuals, kill them.fortunetellers, kill them. those who don`t listen to priests, kill them. those hitting their dad, kill them. those who curse their parents, kill them, adulterers, kill them. fornicators, kill them. people who believe in other religions, kill them. non-believers,kill them. fals prohets ,kill them. blasphemers, kill them. those who work on the Sabbath, kill them. This is the word of god !
ndzoko 1 month ago
@ndzoko
No it isn't. That's your spin on what is within the pages of the Bible without any consideration for context whatsoever.
Keruaran 1 month ago
Prophesor, although your education that you have will bring all the glory´on this earth, where will you spent enternity after you die?
starbox21 1 month ago
Mr Macarthur is Satan's mouthpiece! Joel Olsteen needs to lay hands on him and drive the religious demons out of John! Amen and Amen!
aristotled1 1 month ago
I have admire John Macarthur, I know he is "against" the teachings of Rick Warren, and if you must know, the NIV not only changed the bible in a cultural way, but also omits Fasting and makes it more appealing for he ecumenical point of view. I noticed that the publisher of the NIV and Rick Warren's book is ZONDERVAN, which also owns HARPER COLLINS, which is the publisher for the satanic bible,
today it was a sad day for me because I learned that John Macarthur's publisher is also ZONDERVAN
yesoqueesbrother 2 months ago
@yesoqueesbrother
Zondervan does not own HarperCollins, it became a division of HarperCollins when HarperCollins bought Zondervan in 1988.
Keruaran 1 month ago
I still have yet to see anyone of these MacArthur haters being up scripture for calling his a heretic. All I see is inaccurate quotes on his theology. I am a member of his church and never once heard him preach or teach what you are claiming of his theology. Could it be that the truth hurts. If your Catholic or Mormon or JW or part of an emergent or charismatic church then I could see why you would hate him so much because you are suppressing the truth in unrighteousness and you have exchanged
igniteJC 2 months ago
@igniteJC
Amen!
Keruaran 1 month ago
Read the bible with the authors intent in mind and with Gods intent for the whole bible is mind.
1. Authors intent is usually discernable once you know the reason that he wrote it and the reason is usually related to the particular problem or need in the church.
2. God's overall intent is that we learn to love God and each other. Remember that knowledge puffs up but love builds up.
j919or 2 months ago
Since when did we become "smarter" than the men of the reformation? Mr. Mac (((denies))) that the blood saves a sinner from hell!!!
mrmark262 2 months ago
@mrmark262
Not only have you misrepresented John MacArthur, but I'm also willing to bet that your own theology is far from Reformed.
Keruaran 1 month ago
John MacArthur is a mini mac and not a valid true Bible teacher!!
mrmark262 2 months ago
Wow! lots of hate for Dr. MacArthur here. The amount of ad hominem arguments is staggering. 1 Peter 3:15 tells us to give our answers with meekness and fear. Dr. MacArthur's argument is that the TNIV is being modified to placate to modern culture's political correctness and he sees this as wrong. If you disagree, please use facts and logic to explain why his argument is wrong and try to maintain civility while doing it. Blessings you guys.
SavedNations 3 months ago 6
JM wouldnt twist scripture to fit HIS OWN stogdy, religious culture would he? There surely wouldnt be anything short of the glory of God in the typical evangelical, reform saturated, Calvin-based, "gee, I am not sure it is Godly to raise my hands" church would there? NAAAAAAAAHHHH.
denoinwa 3 months ago
@denoinwa
Ah its denoinwa again... The apostate lover of gnostic doctrines and blasphemers... As if anything you have to say carries any weight with Bible believing Christians.
Keruaran 1 month ago
Why would Mr. John MacArthur put down the tniv bible?? He still uses the corrupt ESV...which is a a crap version!! Where is 1st John 5:7 Mr. MacArthur?? And don't give me any of that "not in the original greek" crap either!! Show me an original autograph Mr. MacArthur....they don't exist today!!
mrmark262 3 months ago
@mrmark262 Huh? 1 John 5:7 is in the ESV. Perhaps some study on the nature of the Comma Johanneum in in order, yes?
SkiesVibrant 2 months ago
@mrmark262
KJVO spam.
Keruaran 1 month ago
To be fair, I agree with much of what MacArthur has to say in this video, but it is hard for me to resist criticizing him because he has made himself one of the foremost anti-Catholic individuals in the world.
adam95y 4 months ago
So MacArthur is saying that there are different levels of sin! Homosexuality is worse the gluttony. But I heard him criticize the Catholic Church in a separate video for teaching that there are mortal sins and venial sins. Which is it MacArthur, c'mon?
adam95y 4 months ago
If the KJV was good enough for St. Paul, it is good enough for me!
adam95y 4 months ago
The only true version I meant :)
chad7206 4 months ago
@Jamesglory1......what is wrong with NKJV?? It is the same with the exception of the words thee, thou, shewn, etc. People who claim KJ is the only truth are dabbling in legalism
chad7206 4 months ago
@chad7206 They are more than dabbling in legalism.
adam95y 4 months ago
Damn, I had to go throught all of this man' s bullshit to make a comment. Most post have comments not admitted. Duuu, Wonder why? Could it be that this man is an Idiot and jealous of those with more common sense when it comes to religion? Hell, I am a non believer of organized religion. But, I can tell a hater. this asshole is one. Remember the KJV was man written. We can make up fairy tales to tell the kiddies. I am sure you get my point.
starr522 4 months ago
How rich is this?! He uses the corrupt E.S.V!!!! hypocrite!!
jamesglory1 5 months ago
The Bible is a combination of myth, legends, and folklore, written by Hebrew men. It is NOT the word of god. Anyone who believes men can live in the belly of a fish for days, or that a snake can talk to people, or that a woman can spring from a man's rib, has a serious mental problem. You all need to get in touch with reality and stop trying to con people out of their money using religious dogma and fear. The Faith Industry is a FRAUD.
Religion and Superstition SUCK. Science ROCKS !
HardClay1 5 months ago
Strange how MacArthur criticizes a fake bible when he uses a perverted one himself.
filoIII 6 months ago
@filoIII Exactly! I posted the same and then saw you had stated that.. blessings.
This is typical of his pick and choose Christianity. unequal yolkings etc...
jamesglory1 5 months ago
@jamesglory1 Yes friend. Beware of MacArthur. What is the most popular Bible across the pond where you are?
filoIII 5 months ago
@filoIII There are, as in many other places, corrupt versions a plenty. but, thank God, many true bible believers use, preach from and promote the KJV..
You over there?
jamesglory1 5 months ago
@jamesglory1 Yep, in the land of the sodomite damned. Blessings.
filoIII 5 months ago
@0Venus0, no difference, except for the fact that today, people do not castrate them. Thank God, apart from the transexuals that choose it. Now read Isaiah 56. In the NT Christ tells you that are some are born like it.
academysounds 7 months ago
@academysounds Eunuchs are those males without their sexual member. It is a gross misrepresentation to equate those who were/are eunuchs with being homosexual. According to Christ in Matthew 19:12, some were born that way, most were made that way (gelded) in order that kings and rulers could trust them as servants to their women. Homosexuality is a perversion of God's plan for humanity and an abomination before Him. However, Christ can and will save homosexuals & deliver them from a life of sin.
salmagnum 6 months ago
@salmagnum, did you read Isaiah 56? Christ predicted that I would be ashamed of this generation when I came. Did he not teach you to love everyone equally? Christ taught his followers to save themselves. The Queen of the South is here to judge this generation and he told you all that you would be judged by your words. WISDOM WILL BE PROVEN RIGHT BY HER ACTIONS exactly as he predicted. TESHUVAH Christians.
academysounds 6 months ago
@academysounds I have love for you and all homosexuals, but I hate sin, including ALL sexual perversion (not just sodomy), even as God so clearly hates that which subverts His perfect plan for us. I do not understand how you manage to come up with what you do from reading Scripture. I encourage you to keep searching for more sound Biblical teaching. John MacArthur is definitely a good source for the same. No man can save himself. Only through faith in Christ, by his mercy and grace are we saved.
salmagnum 6 months ago
@salmagnum, did Christ teach you to hate? No. John MacArthur like the rest of them will be brought down just the prophecies predict. The LORD God does not hate anyone or anything. He knows what man's hate does to their own consciousness and what it does to your flesh. Do you know the true meaning of the word hate in Greek? Check it out. I am the Messiah of Joseph that was promised to Moses. Now Christian TESHUVAH because your time is up.
academysounds 6 months ago
@academysounds By what authority?
salmagnum 6 months ago
@salmagnum. By the authority of the LORD God Almighty.
Now TESHUVAH.
academysounds 6 months ago
@academysounds
"The LORD God does not hate anyone or anything"
Really?
Psalm 5:5, Psalm 11:5, Lev. 20:23, Prov. 6:16-19, Hosea 9:15...
Keruaran 1 month ago 2
The mass of biblical scholars that worked on the NIV, went back to the original languages and texts, they also cross referenced with the dead sea scrolls as well.
In the NT Christ himself tells you to accept homesexuals if you can. He taught AGAPE, unconditional love. However, he stood up to dogma and those like the Churches that try to oppress others into their way. The books were sealed until the end. The end as come.
academysounds 8 months ago
@academysounds are you kidding me? Show me the exact scripture where Christ says that
FuroraCeltica 8 months ago
@FuroraCeltica
For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”Matthew 9:12 “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end. Dan 12:9
academysounds 8 months ago
@academysounds, What Bible are you using or do you have a typo as the the Book & verse? I've checked several translations of Matthew 9:12 & all are similar, this is what it says in the NKJV: "When Jesus heard that, He said to them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick."
0Venus0 7 months ago
@0Venus0, sorry Matthew 19:12, They are also honored by prophet Isaiah in Isa 56
academysounds 7 months ago
@academysounds Thanks for the correction. :-) Do you understand that there is a great difference between a eunuch & a homosexual? A eunuch is a castrated man.
0Venus0 7 months ago
@FuroraCeltica, they also served Queen Ester and were revered in ancient times. So do as Christ did and love your neighbors beyond measure.
academysounds 8 months ago
You can't build your faith in God's word if you use a defective Bible. The 1611 KJV may appear old fashioned and politically incorrect but no other version treats essential Christian doctrine the same way. Besides, I find it's easier to read than the new versions. With a good commentary (I personally recommend the KJV STUDY BIBLE AND KJV PARALLEL COMMENTARY, both by Thomas Nelson, Inc.) and prayer to God for understanding the Lord will teach us His word by the power of the Holy Spirit.
UtubeLeeOh 8 months ago
From what I understand the 2011 revised NIV is supposed to be no better than the prior revision or even the TNIV. How can u correct what is completely full of theological errors and appears to have so many irreconcilable contradictions which prevent a clear understanding even from carefully examining the text in context? You can't build a good house on a bad foundation.
UtubeLeeOh 8 months ago
John MacArthur is a self-righteous, selfish, bullying narcissist. Those who follow him are walking with a hateful charlatan. YUCK!
schlummieleinchen 8 months ago
By listening to this i take it that TNIV is a bigger peice of rubbish than the original.
I was hoping that they would correct the sins of the past and put back into the new one what they left out of the old one. Does anyone know where i can find a bible with the correct names in them? Since there was no J, or W in the original language the lords name would be Yeshua, and Father would be Yahoveh. John would be Yohan, and Joesph would be Yahsuf, and so on
Mrpl778 9 months ago
John also displays a lack of knowledge concerning the translation process. completely ignoring translation issues like idioms and metaphors in Hebrew and Greek for which there are no equivalents in English. If you would translate these words literally, the meaning is often completely lost. so then the translation has failed. eg Joshua10:6 "do not relax your hand from your servants" ESV. Well what does "relax your hand" mean? It is not an English idiom, but a hebrew one....
brendos444 9 months ago
@brendos444 In Hebrew to "relax your hand" means to abandon. This would have been readily understood by readers of ancient Hebrew. But not by English readers for no such idiom exists in English. so other versions render its meaning rather than to literally translate the idiom, which renders the text meaningless in English. Its the same with the use of "men" in Greek. This word is used to mean "mankind" including females and males. There is another specific greek word that is gender specific...
brendos444 9 months ago
Comment removed
brendos444 9 months ago
When this word is used the NIV communicates the gender specific nature. But when the greek word anthropos is used, the NIV translates this as a "person" because the greek word is not about gender but about mankind. The greek word arsen refers to male, it is not used in verses such as Romans 3:28, which looks at justification of not only males but all people. In this verse anthropos is used and therefore the accurate translation of this is "a person is justified by faith..."
brendos444 9 months ago
So to say that a translators job is merely to find the closest word to the hebrew and greek is simply misleading. No one would translate the English idiom "I'll be a monkey's uncle" literally into another language. The meaning would absolutely be lost. It's the same with hebrew and greek idioms. In fact even the ESV has to make such interpretations of biblical idioms at times - read Fee and Strauss chapt 4.
brendos444 9 months ago
So I admire John's commitment to the gospel and bringing sanctification to the fore in a time of lawlessness. But he is not free from error himself. He mischaracterizes the TNIV as being beholden to the feminist movement, which it is not. He completely misunderstands the fact that Bible translation must be meaningful in the receptor language. But the Bible says that we must bear with those whose understanding on non core issues is flawed.
brendos444 9 months ago
John is misrepresenting the translation process of the NIV and TNIV. See athe book called How to Choose a Translation for all its worth. Unfortunately John's preferred translation, the ESV, distorts Romans 16 so as to exclude Junia, a woman, from apostleship. All other translations, including "conservative translations like the KJV, NASB, RSV, include Junia as an apostle. So it is his fav Bible that distorts scripture. The ESV is otherwise a great translation
brendos444 9 months ago
Interesting, I never thought that changing 'brethren' to 'brothers and sisters' was an issue but John Macarthur makes a good point
MrCharrrles 10 months ago
The tniv is the book the PC police wants us to accept so the gays won't feel unchristianly. Don't worry they've rewrote the constitution as well. So now we all are to accept all life styles. Time to have a party, a TEA PARTY!
onemarktwoyou 11 months ago
I would have liked to have had concrete examples to illustrate his point.
jasondeegan 11 months ago
Maybe JMc should sit down with the translators prior to vilifying them, I like most of JMc views but disagree with him on this one. Another point JMc is not a Greek Hebrew SCHOLAR, he is a bible teacher, this should put his comments into context.
zoltanapril42 1 year ago
@zoltanapril42 I would suggest you ponder why you disagree. Perhaps its coming from a carnal means. I would also suggest looking up the facts on the TNIV and the "New International Version" also. These versions are missing Critical verses and has been edited. Some sections taken out completely! 100's of verses and chapters aren't even in there. MacArthur has forgotten more than you'll ever know about these things. MacArthur stands at 100% correct on this matter, and obviously you don't know.
jataylor7 1 year ago
@jataylor7 if you bothered to actually research this issue maybe you could make an informed opinion.
Textual critisism is highly complicated science, and great scholars such as Bruce Metzger have clearly shown that the there a variations in the old texts which remain and what the new testament is based on.
Gordon Fee is on the editorial commitee a fine evangeligal man. An JMc shold take it up with him.
As far as Chapters missing please quote the chapters whichh are missing from the TNIV.
zoltanapril42 1 year ago
@zoltanapril42 ..I am a missionary/Bible prophecy teacher. And it is clear that you do not know what you are talking about. There are over 64,000 words, (not letters, but words) "missing" if you compare the NIV with the KJV (or Textus Receptus) All other books in the English language that call themselves a Bilbe, (except for the KJV) are based on "corrupt" Alexandrian "Greek" Manuscripts. The O.T. being the "Septuaginta" that contains 70% of the "Aquilla" of 120 A.D., and about 30% of the...
sorens70601 10 months ago
..."Theodotan" of 170 A.D., and was "first published" in the six collumn work known as the "Hexapla" in 250 A.D.
(It never existed before that, the Lies of modern theology to the contrary not withstanding) As for Bruce Metzger and Gordon Fee, I have no Respect for these debauched charlatans. They know that they are violating God's command in Deut.4:2, 12:32, Prov.30:6, and Rev.22:18-19, in which not to ADD TO, or TAKE AWAY FROM, God, ETERNAL WORD, that is "FOREVER SETTLED IN HEAVEN" ...
sorens70601 10 months ago
...These scoundrels are going to burn in Hell for their attrocities. Their 'scolarship' is questionable, and their so called Christianity, is Non-existant. Maybe you need to "educate" yourself, before you make such absurd remarks . How about getting yourself a copy of "New Age Bible versions" or "Which Bible", by Dr. Gail Riplinger, and examine some of the proof that she presents. In the meantime, go to 2 .Sam.21:19 in your NIV, and see who killed Goliath (we know David did, but not in NIV
sorens70601 10 months ago
@sorens70601 These are the facts a) We dont have the original manuscripts that the apostle wrote and b) The remaining copies we have dont agree with one another. Think about it? This is why we need textual critics to attempt to establish what the originals contained.
Its very simple KJV onlyism is a position held by people who want to remain ignorant. The issue of corrupted egyptian texts is a myth created by religious traditionalists not wanting to accept facts a) and b) above.
zoltanapril42 10 months ago
@zoltanapril42...The only "fact " that you have stated, is the obvious one, that none of teh "original manuscripts" are currently available. Your point "b", is NOT True ! There are 5366 manuscripts of the New Testament extant today. Only a "corrupt few" give a view, much like a "shifting kaleidoscope". Evidence for the New Testament is composed of "papyrus", "fragments and manuscripts", "uncial and miniscule manuscripts"(modified capitals and cursives) and "lectionaries",(books used in ...
sorens70601 10 months ago
...churches) Each of the 5366 manuscripts, including 2209 lectionaries extant today are given a name, an abreviation and /or a number. "Papyri 1-88",(e.g., P66,P46,P75) "Uncials 01-0274",( e.g. Aleph, B,C,D.)
"Miniscule 1-2795", (e.g. 1-2795) "Lectionaries 1-2209", (e.g. 1-2209) In addition to the above, numerous other language versions of the "common" Greek text were made in the second century , (long before Eusebius's mid-fourth century forgery in classical Greek) Those include...
sorens70601 10 months ago
...the old Latin,the Syriac, the Coptic,the Ethiopian, and scores of others. These provide witnesses to the "correct readings" of the New Testament. Furthermore,scores of second, third and fourth century personalities, such as John Chrysostom, Iranaeus,Tertulain, and Justin Martyr, to name but a few, have left writings containing citations of scripture verses, witnessing to the "original" readings of teh New Testament. Also, Dean Burgon, has extrapolated more than 87,000 of these. Currently..
sorens70601 10 months ago
...the manuscripts are being collated by the " Institut fur nuetestamentiche Tereforschung" by Kurt Aland, in Munster, Germany. Microfilms of many are housed in the archives of the Ancient Biblical Manuscript Center, in Claremont,California. Should you wish to persue your own investigation, I can provide you with a list of resources. By the way, it is in the over 87,000 extrapolated writings by Dean Burgon, that we know that the 9 verse ommission in the NIV of Acts 8, was part of the original
sorens70601 10 months ago
@sorens70601 ok you dont want to believe Metzger or Fee, how about Daniel B Wallace proffessor of new testament studies at Dallas, where he states "thee are 6 to 10 variation per chapterfor the closest byzantine texts we have" type in Wallace and White into youtube where he debates Gipp. Also read KJV only controversy which J Mc himself endorses hisself, is JMc going to hell because he reads the NASB? Stop this brainwashing of young christians. Over and out
zoltanapril42 10 months ago
@zoltanapril42 .. First of all, you are the "brainwashed one", as you hold to the modern fraud of higher textual criricism. And dont even mention these " spiritual morons" with their phoney degrees from "crakerbox" spiritual cemetaries, called seminaries, which schools have been fined by the texas state for issuing "un-earned degrees. James white is a pathetic liar, and I have told him, and his pastor so. Yes Mac Arthur will not enter the kingdom because of his Masonic Calvinist theology...
sorens70601 10 months ago
...2.John.9 declares; "He that abideth Not in the doctrine of Christ, HATH NOT GOD"! Reformed theology is antichristly to its core, and can be proven as such. Jn.3:16 and Rev.22:17, (whosoever will) demolishes the "L" in TULIP. Rom.3:24-25, does away with the "I am saved from my past , present and future sins" Idea, as it declares that we are only saved from our past sins. Future sins can not be covered until they are repented from. Mac Arthur is Not saved, and you did not read all my post
sorens70601 10 months ago
@zoltanapril42 Also.....You have the freedom to believe that this version complies completely with the original scriptures. But that simply is not true. Ignorance is bliss, i suppose. i guess there's always that guy denying the obvious. I guess what i'm trying to say is don't try to shoot down FACTS with your opinion....it's just not a very bright way to go about such things.
jataylor7 1 year ago
Well said, thank God for preachers like John M.
gbologa 1 year ago
Just so everyone knows, its not just tniv that altered the Word but ALL modern translations! even johns esv. Do your research, the kjv is the only word of God for english. Gods Word never changes.
TheKJVberean 1 year ago
Darn right! Do not change/diminish/embellish the word of God!! When it says to kill unruly children, then YOU KILL THEM! When it says to kill adulterers and homosexuals, YOU KILL THEM! We're not going to let the culture define our scripture, right John? Get your handful or rocks ready. Let's go fulfill some of God's justice.
drumrnva 1 year ago
Wow I got a bible with that translation just thinking it was just a good pure new translation but now I know the difference thanks to mcarthur !!
95GODisLOVE 1 year ago 2
I Timothy 2:15 "But women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety."
...maybe the bible should be changed.
ndjarnag 1 year ago
God doesn't change, but language does. Unless you want to read the original languages--Greek and Hebrew--there will be new translations. That's not a bad thing.
tddzdm 1 year ago
hes just mad because they beat him to the punch
captbullhorn 1 year ago
John MacArthur is brilliant. However, he seems to display a very hard heart consistently. He's the moral and Bible police - plays the role of the Pharisees. He is a bible scholar, but one thing he probably never paid attention to is the Primary Hermeneutic for Bible translation - Matthew 22:37-40. All the Law and Prophets should be interpreted though Loving God and Loving People. He clearly doesn't do this. It will be to his demise. A great mind who lacks love is nothing!
notmadpastor 1 year ago
John MacArthur is brilliant. However, he seems to display a very hard heart - consistently. He's the moral and Bible police - plays the role of the Pharisees. He is a bible scholar, but one thing he probably never paid attention to is the Primary Hermeneutic for Bible translation - Matthew 22:37-40. All the Law and Prophets should be interpreted though Loving God and Loving People. He clearly doesn't do this. It will be to his demise. A great mind who lacks love is nothing!
notmadpastor 1 year ago
@notmadpastor What??? see his teaching on the Law of Herms. Love is not blind love covers/ atonement- a lot of sin. He surely isn't Pharisectical. He is a Practical Preacher. He teaches the simpicities of the Gospel in a straight forwad way. Does He have all things right no! And he makes no claim to. see his teachings on Calvin vs Armenianism. But in the fundementals of the faith he is sound as a bell..The Law is not interpretted through Loving God. You've just created a nother science of
PastorJS1 1 year ago
@notmadpastor exergtes. Love is the fullfilment of the Law. Hear o Isreal thy GOD Is One God, and thou shalt lov the Lord thy God with allthe soul might and strength, and thy neighbor as thy self on nthis hangs the aZLaw and the Prophet,said Christ. where you diagree with a brother who does not see all things clear eat the fish/flesh throw away the bone. Point him to proper application of truth and you save and win a brother
PastorJS1 1 year ago
@notmadpastor thats very judgemental, you don't know his heart
jmanexpress 9 months ago
We cannot be hardliners in this way. I am sure the TNIV translates certain sentences better than the NASB (my personal favorite).
If we want to be hardliners we should only read the Greek and Hebrew. Sure, certain translations are VERY much more accurate, and I am not going to defend the TNIV, but no translation is perfect nor ever will be.
For instance the King James Version has the angelic beasts saying they are thanking God they have been forgiven.
Icannottolerateit 1 year ago
I like John McArthur. I like what he stands for. I own a copy of the TNIV and I don't mind it. One of the examples that he is talking about is where the word Man has been replaced with "persons". But the greek word anthorpos can be translated as both man and persons example: "God created man/people in his image.". But I do appreciate what John is saying, and I agree with his stand against many of the libreal wing of the Emergant church.
pretoshohmoofc 1 year ago
John MacArthur may be wrong about a lot of things, but let's give him credit for attempting to wake people up and get people to study God's Word for themselves. Let's face it folks, biblical illiteracy is on the rise. People want to argue about theology and half of them don't even study God's Word! I don't agree with everything that John MacArthur says because I believe in testing the spirits. I am proud of those here on YouTube that are doing the same!
MsRld123 1 year ago 14
@MsRld123 hes not wrong about alot of things, Benny Hin is wrong about a lot of things , Rob Bell is wrong about a lot of things.But this is Dr Macthur we are talking about here, one of the greatest bible expositors in the past decade.Hes NOT wrong most of the time
jmanexpress 11 months ago 2
@MsRld123, most Christians haven't seen a real Spirit in their lives. Let alone, be trained in how to test them. Christians are so innocent, the bible warned you that the LORD would make fools of you all.
academysounds 7 months ago
@MsRld123
Which "alot of things" would that be that John MacArthur is incorrect on exactly? Most theologians may have 1 or 2 slightly different viewpoints on peripheral topics....but not essentials. So, when you say a lot of things....what do you believe then? It must be way off the mark....
apathy7170 5 months ago
I wonder if MacArthur knows anything about other languages and consequently about how translation actually works.
languages change, like it or not. "sat at meat" is meaningless to the average modern person, and it did not even exist in idiomatic greek. But it is KJV for having a meal. To change the idiom to make the word comprehensible to other than linguistics scholars is good if done carefjully.
do we kow that MacArthur is careful, or just a hide bound traditionalist?
Strefanash 1 year ago
people like John McArthur are annoying, narrow-minded people, who like to see themselves as bigger in the Kingdom, church, scholarship, etc, than they actually are. They speak in an ex cathedra fashion about things, which they do not understand, yet out of their own bias, heritage and presuppositions they judge yet their reasoning is so stupid. I am so ashamed of them.
bluesyboypete 1 year ago
secondly, one does not translate the original by translating every word, word by word, but first they need to understand the syntax of the sentence, the discourse, rhetoric, larger context, the usage of the word in the author's vocabulary, the usage in this immediate context, then check it against what the word means in various other context, etc. you don't translate words, you translate meanings - if possible and meaningful, you translate word for word, more often than not this is impossible
bluesyboypete 1 year ago
John McArthur doesn't know what he's saying, full of unscholarly stupidity and lack of understanding of the linguistic and exegetical decision by the TNIV gender-inclusive language. it never uses gender inclusive language when the word in the original does not imply both gender.
bluesyboypete 1 year ago
The TNIV and the NIV are both altered Bibles! The NIV is owned by the same company that owns the Satanic Bible. The NIV doesn't use the words SODOMITE nor EFFEMENITE. It also takes out 1 John 5:7 as most other new translations do. I ONLY USE KJV. Can't go wrong with it.
KakkoiGuy1 1 year ago
@KakkoiGuy1 I completely agree. I have a strong dislike for most if not all modern perversions.
9876543212345678912 1 year ago
@KakkoiGuy1 what's wrong with being effeminate?
tugboat2030 1 year ago
@tugboat2030 1 Corinthians 6:9 KJV ..Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.
There you go. Not my words but God's Word.
KakkoiGuy1 1 year ago 3
@tugboat2030 Being effeminate is great, if you are a female. The Bible condemns men dressing and acting like women, like cross dressing and such.
rokwing 1 year ago 2
@rokwing But of course these things mean different things at different times. Does that mean that God's laws are dependent on what society has established? Are there any other of God's laws that are dependent on human thoughts and ideas?
tugboat2030 1 year ago
@tugboat2030 nothing for a woman
Talithapraiz 1 year ago
Why wouldn't one twist the words of the holy Bible? What is it that tells us we are not to do so? In order to come to this conclusion we must embark upon a philosophy and tradition outside of the holy Bible from which we derive our common sense and decency.
It is unfortunate, that our dear MacAurthur attempts to use commonsense arguments as twisted as his logic is all-the-while condemning those gifts to Mankind, philosophy and tradition.
+++
Alms. Fasting. Prayer.
ammazzamoro 1 year ago
@ammazzamoro
We have enough manuscripts of the Bible to have faith in the trustworthiness of the texts we base our translations on. That's all we need. Tradition can just as well twist words of scripture. I understand that you may believe that that's the solution to this "problem", but I think the Bible speaks for itself. The fact that we can judge wether a scripture is being twisted points to the existence of a clear knowledge of what the scripture really is. Therefore we don't need tradition
vincentjdrummer 1 year ago
@vincentjdrummer
Our little minds twist words. We see it all the time. This is called the concupiscence as sin. This does not mean that the Bible has been twisted, not traditions of men twisted. Let us consider that words comes from God. Traditions of men also come from God, as God is both full-man and full-divine in hypostatic union of divine substance and human flesh. "Faith is the realization of things hoped for." My dear Thomas, trust in the Spirit? Come stick your hand in His wounds.
ammazzamoro 1 year ago
slappy1234567 1 year ago
@slappy1234567
Let us suppose someone has a malformed conscience. What happens then? Should one go against the malformed conscience or not? What if one only thinks they are captive to the Word of God? What then? You see the problem here is this. The Divine cannot be compartamentalized into our tiny little heads. Sure we may a problem with Pope and Councils. Firsly, let understand Luther. He publically declared himself infallible (i.e. Pope) and all Christians must follow him or risk hell.
ammazzamoro 1 year ago
@slappy1234567 Every time I read these sorts of statements I am spurred on towards boldness for the truth of what God has revealed in His Word. Praise God for giving Luther that courage.
becauseHeisgood 1 year ago
so what does john macarthur want gay people to do?
kyleniac 1 year ago
repent
slappy1234567 1 year ago
@kyleniac John wants them to turn away from their sin and follow christ. John Macarthur does not want homosexuals to be damned for their sin and he wants to protect the truth that homosexuality is wrong, which the bible clearly states.
evanbaarsel 1 year ago 26
@evanbaarsel what??
jbferrer3 8 months ago
@evanbaarsel, Prophet Isaiah honors them see Isaiah 56.
academysounds 7 months ago
the TNIV NKJV NASV ESV NIV and Gideon and goodnews bibles are all on the same side AGAINST Gods real word of the KJV
frank0067 1 year ago
@frank0067
AMEN!!!
crawforda1611 1 year ago
John MacArthur is right! The TNIV is HERESY and FALSE!! I support the KJV, NKJV, NASB, NLT, ESV, NCV, NIV, and the Geneva Bible (GB). The TNIV is a False translation.
ArmorOfGodMinistries 1 year ago
The Schlachter 2000 (based on Textus Receputs) has also it's problems... See for example Reveleation (book versus tree, etc.)
1videoshow 1 year ago
What? lol
Galdreah 1 year ago
On one extreme you have wild-eyed King James Onlyist and on the other you have those that think anything goes. The TNIV translators obviously cared more about cultural whims than truth. Stick with good translations like the NASB, the original NIV, the NKJV, and the HCSB...
DrStevenz 1 year ago
Without going into the resource information surrounding the various translations (which can be researched by anyone serious about understanding what all the controversy is about). Will point out the issue of the NKJV by itself. In most of the prefaces of this translation (i.e., Nelson edition), they state that it is translated from the same set of manuscripts (the Textus Receptus) as the KJV. This is clearly not seen by the deleted and altered passages found in the NKJV.
HermitintheRain 1 year ago
@HermitintheRain 'm sorry but I use the NKJV and yes it does follow the TR. I've checked this out for myself against Strongs and other translations.
It has all the verses and passages that are omitted from the NU-text.
KJO's criticise it because it uses modern language.
IDH77 1 year ago
@IDH77
KJV vs NKJV sampling differences:
2 Cor 2:17 Corrupt the word of God/peddle the word of God
1 Thes 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil/every form
1 Tim 6:5 ..that gain is godliness/godliness is a means of gain
Rom 1:18 ..men who suppress the truth/hold the truth
Rom 1:25 ..changed the truth of God into a lie/exchanged the truth
HermitintheRain 1 year ago
@HermitintheRain I'm sorry but every single one of those is a matter of translation not a matter of different texts.
The only thing that the NKJV has done is use modern language.
I suggest you download E-sword and you will see what I mean.
IDH77 1 year ago
@IDH77 These are but a few verses which do more than show translation differences.
The use of modern language is not the issue. By careful editing there is a subtle attack at key doctrinal points. A further reminder of the ever pervasive attack of those whom Spurgeon referred to in The Down-Grade Controversy of the 19th century.
HermitintheRain 1 year ago
@IDH77 It would be, by the way, inaccurate, to assume that I am a KJO proponent. Even within some areas of KJV translations there are questions that have for the most gone unanswered. Pro 18:24-the Hebrew for which doesn't even come close to what is found in the first part of the KJV-is but one example. What interests me is the integrity of the Bible-be it in modern English, KJV, which Greek or Hebrew texts are reliable, etc. I have no doubt this is the case for anyone devoted to God's word.
HermitintheRain 1 year ago
Let's not be naive brothers and sisters. It would be naive of us to think that the devil would attack us at every corner but at the foundation itself-the Bible. Was it not the very first way he attacked us with our mother, "Hath God said?" We MUST be on guard against the attack of the devil! We must "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints."
HermitintheRain 1 year ago
@IDH77
I agree and disagree. Although the NKJV uses the TR, it is not 100% faithful to it.
bibleword 1 year ago
@bibleword Ther are different editions to the TR! What do you have in mind.
Could you give examples?
IDH77 1 year ago
What is apparent when one does the research is that the NKJV uses the same set of questionable manuscripts collectively called the Alexandrian texts as introduced by disreputable characters as Westcott & Hort.
If modern translators actually used the same manuscripts, (which have proven most reliable), as that used in translating the KJV, then it would give cause to warrant the same honor given to the KJV. Until then...
HermitintheRain 1 year ago
Comment removed
DallPro95 1 year ago
@DrStevenz
LOL, a bunch of books authorized by the devil. I happen to be a King James Onlyist and will be faithful to that book till the Lord takes me home!
bibleword 1 year ago
@bibleword Everyone know's that KJV only advocates are ignorant and arrogant. Well, everyone but KJV people that is.
thepiratelarry 1 year ago
@thepiratelarry
Ignorant and Arrogant? Hey, at least I care that I have the inspired and infallible Word of God and am not acceptable to others that are not. You probably have like tens of different versions in your home, and don't even care which one is the Word of God.
bibleword 1 year ago
@bibleword Yes, ignorant and arrogant. First of all, I do not have "tens of different" versions in my home. I have two. KJV and ESV. I have an ESV study bible and the KJV and ESV on my computer as well. Do you have a problem with that? I'm not saying that all versions are equally good. But more importantly, I'm not saying that the KJV is the only good one. It's also a false claim to say that any translation is perfect. The KJV does have translation errors.
thepiratelarry 1 year ago
@thepiratelarry
Are you doubting that GOD cannot perfectly inspire a translation? It sounds a lot like it by saying, "It's also a false claim to say that any translation is perfect." Do you believe that the Bible was merely written by man and not inspired by God? Or do you believe that only some words are inspired and others aren't? God only wrote one Bible, and there is only one Bible today.
bibleword 1 year ago
@bibleword It's funny how you try and turn it around to make it seem like I'm somehow doubting God. I do not doubt God. I doubt you and your logic.
"Do you believe that the Bible was merely written by man and not inspired by God?"
I believe that the bible was written by man and inspired by God.
"Or do you believe that only some words are inspired and others aren't?"
No, I don't believe that.
thepiratelarry 1 year ago
@thepiratelarry
Then, His inspired words must be in one Bible; not multiple. My next question is, which Bible is it? It's not a matter of what is better preferably; but a matter of what is right biblically. You said, "I believe that the bible was written by man and inspired by God." WHICH ONE? It cannot be two. Just like Shakespeare only wrote ONE Hamlet play, God only wrote ONE Bible.
bibleword 1 year ago
@bibleword The Hebrew and greek. We would do well to to learn hebrew/greek and the culture of the people of that time to understand and to interpret it
Friendoflord 1 year ago 2
@Friendoflord
Why is it that people like you think that God can only speak in Greek and Hebrew? That's ludicrous. God does not make us have to learn Greek and Hebrew just so we can learn God's Word.
bibleword 1 year ago 2
@bibleword I am not saying that God only speeks greek and Hebrew. Wht i will say is that relying on other peoples interpretaions becuasase of our own lack of knowledge to language isnot a good thing. relying on them to inerpret it we are relying on what they tell us to be tru and fact is that people will decieve
Friendoflord 1 year ago
@bibleword
"God only wrote one Bible, and there is only one Bible today."
When you say Bible do you really mean Bible or do you mean "translation/copy" of said Bible? The KJV is just another translation in a long list of translations. Obviously the original copies don't exist anymore and what we have n ow are copies of copies of copies, etc.
thepiratelarry 1 year ago
@thepiratelarry
Through preservation, we have God's inspired Words, the Word of God today and that is found through copies as well. Paul said, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God..." Let me ask you, what Scripture? When Paul said that, did he mean the original writings or copies of them? Did Paul have THE original OT or a copy of it? And also, do we have the originals today? No, we do not. If you are going to tell me that only the originals are inspired, then God is a liar.
bibleword 1 year ago
@bibleword - Why would you guys argue like this. This is not something that Jesus would encourage.
MrBcole1 1 year ago
@MrBcole1
Actually, Jesus would. And even Paul was against anyone corrupting God's Word.
"For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ." -2 Corinthians 2:17
There were people corrupting God's Word then, just as there are today.
bibleword 1 year ago
@bibleword
Oh yes, how unfortunatley true !
2 Cor 10:5 says : "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ".
Fully agree with you.
It is our duty to put things wright in alignment with God's Word.
philippeclement 1 year ago
@MrBcole1 exactly! im tired of seeing idiots fight amongst each other over small things
heribertoc9 1 year ago
@DrStevenz
The NIV is printed by Zondervan which is owned by Harper Collins in San Francisco. Harper Collins is owned by Rupert Murdoch who is a billionaire pornographer. Every time someone purchases an NIV, Murdoch gets $1.
bibleword 1 year ago
Sounds like a lot of hypocrisy coming from someone who uses the NKJV which teaches works salvation.
bibleword 1 year ago
@bibleword Where does it teach that in the NKJV?
zon3d 1 year ago
@zon3d
"Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." -Matthew 7:14, KJV
"Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it." -Matthew 7:14, NKJV
Salvation is not difficult!
"But the fruit of the Spirit is ... faith," -Galatians 5:22, KJV
"But the fruit of the Spirit is ... faithfulness," -Galatians 5:22, NKJV
Faith and faithfulness are completely different things.
bibleword 1 year ago
@bibleword John actually uses the NASB
evanbaarsel 1 year ago
This is a very interesting subject. I'll like to know what bible verses in the NIV take out the divinity of Jesus. I wouldn't be surprised that they are making the Bible look "politically correct"..Please, tell me what verses here are causing this controversy both in the NIV and the TNIV.
lopezmiguelo 1 year ago
This is a very interesting subject. I'll like to know what bible verses in the NIV take out the divinity of Jesus. I wouldn't be surprised that they are making the Bible look "politically correct"..Please, tell me what verses here are causing this controversy both in the NIV and the TNIV.
lopezmiguelo 1 year ago
It doesn't suprise me that the TNIV is so pro gay. The NIV was worked on by homosexuals as well which is why you don't have words like SODOMITE and EFFEMINATE in it. The NIV actually takes whole passages out that show the divinity of Jesus. So to me the NIV is the precursor to the TNIV. Both are blasphemous. NIV is just stage one of the plan. Notice they don't have a TKJV because the KJV doesn't flex on those things. It's sound too! If you love Jesus, get rid of those NIV's and TNIV's.
KakkoiGuy1 1 year ago
I have just started reading the tniv and i do find it better to understand?
How true is it that this pastor is really understanding about change and translation. To me a bible is still a Bible and i guess that as seasons and as years go by i believe that writing in urban movement is to help other generations understand what GOD has install for all of us!
tcbh004 1 year ago
Just because the author from a "emergent" church categorized a homosexual with overweight and chocolate eating people, doesn't mean He's trying to make homosexuality okay, it just means they welcome all sinner's. Doesn't the bible say a sin is a sin? Why do make other peoples risks in their walk with the Lord our concern to the point that we "Pass Judgement" on them, knowing that God said we are not to judge our neighbors. Yes we need to be careful of translations but God is in control. RIGHT?
abien777 1 year ago
How about the spiritual attacks that come from Pharisees, Big Business Christians, Religious Right polticians, hate-mongering god hates fags preachers? Those have done more harm to the Church than any gay, lesbian, feminist, abortionists can. There is no amazing grace among pharisees.
lucasboden 2 years ago
??? Interesting you put "Big Business" and "Religious Right politicians" (I assume the evangelicals) into the same categories as clear sins - homosexuality and abortion.
jesusfreakrkg 1 year ago
Jesus spoke out more against those who love money and religious self righteousness than about gays and abortion. Wait, did Jesus even mention gays and abortion? Paul did, but Jesus didn't. I am not saying those are not sins, but why do you feel those are greater clear sins?
Where in the bible do you find the term "clear sins"?
lucasboden 1 year ago
@lucasboden yeah... except that Jesus had already spoken his word about homosexuality... along with every other sin... in the Old Testament. let's not be like the heretic Marcion... who held that the God of the OT was mean and wrathful but Jesus - God of the NT was nice and a pushover.
I don't see homosexuality as a more condemnable sin than lying or murder (aka abortion). And I would NEVER defend the love of money rather than God or self-righteous religion.
jesusfreakrkg 1 year ago
All sins may lead to death and hell. SIN may be SIN under God, but all sins are not equal according to man.
Two men having consenual sex is not equal to rape and murder.
Cheating on a test is not equal to raping a child.
Try shining the judgement of God's Law on your own life. Once you do, you no longer have the ability to judge others.
Stop using gays as scapegoats to make yourself look more self-righteous.
lucasboden 1 year ago
whoa whoa whoa!!! I think we have a miscommunication here. All sins do lead to death and hell- yes. I will admit - by man's standards they are not.
I would never say that cheating on a test is equal to raping a child. It is still breaking God's moral law. So is fornication. Rationalizing it by saying it's not as bad though is not the answer.
I have shown the light of God's law in my life... and it BREAKS me! It does its job- it makes me run to the cross for forgiveness.
jesusfreakrkg 1 year ago
follow-up comment. I really am not trying to be self-righteous. I dont' know you... or know if you are gay or straight or a murderer or anything like that. But I will bet that I am a FAR bigger sinner than you.
I have no righteousness in myself... it is only in Christ that I have any righteousness. if I have seemed to come across as pious or ... or that I'm better than any homosexuals... that is not the case. I'm probably worse in my sin. But the cross of Christ offers forgiveness.
jesusfreakrkg 1 year ago
@jesusfreakrkg you've made the point! Praise the Lord. :-D
people forget that Jesus IS the Lord (IHWH- I AM)- the One who gave the Law to Moses. Actually if one does not believe that Jesus is Lord (kurios) can not be a true christian.
Jesus is the Lord and He is the Judge of all- dead and alive.
Praise God! Preach brother, preach! Take up the good fight for the faith. God be with you!
Shalom! :-D
gr8deals2do 1 year ago
Does it matter that Jesus didn't mention it? All Scripture is God-breathed, not just the red letters...
Wired4Truth 1 year ago