Pennsylvania pushes for day of the Bible

quote:

---

quote:

---

The Word of God helped make a difference in the founding of our nation, and Mastriano adds it's a living Word to us individually.

---

I wonder what would happen if a similar group were to do the same in DC every year to exercise some demonic spirits out of that place. I recommend the KJV for authenticity, language, authority, and effect.

---

Let me see if I can make a difference here affecting a positive learning moment.

Jude 1:22 KJV

quote:

---

And of some have compassion, making a difference:

---

“Making a difference” here is not the same terminology we would use. The KJV scribe is not talking about making a positive effect on someone. It’s about making a distinction. The NKJV sort of fixes it changing “difference” to “distinction” so the modern English speaker wouldn’t misinterpret what it meant in its original context. For hundreds of years, English speakers thought this line meant one should show mercy or compassion only to some, distinguishing those who deserved it or needed it or didn’t.

The KJV was translated - sort of - mostly from what was called the Textus Receptus (the received text) which was kind of a cobbled together Greek New Testament manuscript by Erasmus. It also used the Masoretic Text for the Old Testament. I say “sort of” because it wasn’t a true translation of the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. The KJV was commissioned to be a revision of the Bishop’s Bible, which was an earlier English Bible, itself a revision of earlier bibles. The KJV scribes were supposed to check the original languages and fix it or update the English where appropriate, but soon after its release people complained the KJV used archaic vocabulary and grammar which wasn’t used anymore in regular speech.

So fast forward hundreds of years later, after many thousands of additional manuscripts have been discovered of the Greek NT and of ancient Hebrew and Aramaic scrolls in caves along the shores of the Dead Sea and we can now make much better translations that are more accurate and true to the “originals”. We have to be careful when we say “originals” because we don’t know what those really looked like - we only know about what the earliest versions we know about said.

And so we can see that what was in the Textus Receptus of Jude 1:22 wasn’t original. And so just about every translation now looks like this:

quote:

---

And you must show mercy to those whose faith is wavering.

---

quote:

---

And have mercy on those who doubt

---

quote:

---

And have mercy on some, who are doubting

---

This reading makes much more sense in context because the surrounding verses are talking about having faith and those who doubt their faith. So the KJV language and effect are sub-par compared to modern translations.

Next, let’s consider the KJV’s authenticity. Let’s check this chapter in 1 John 5…

quote:

---

7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

---

Then let’s look at a modern translation - more authentic and true to the original Greek manuscripts:

quote:

---

7For there are three that testify:
8the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.

---

So that part I bolded from the KJV - that was a scribal insertion. It could have been a marginal notation that another scribe copying that manuscript copied into the body of the text intentionally or unintentionally, or a scribe could have just simply ginned it up and added it to support trinitarian theology which the Bible completely lacks and even rebukes. At any rate, we know that part of the verse about the three in heaven being one wasn’t original, and therefore wasn’t authentic. So the KJV is just simply less authentic.

Don’t get me wrong - the KJV was a masterpiece in its day and is the most widely known translation, but it is at the bottom of the barrel of authenticity and language and effect compared to modern translations.

We need more calls to prayer, calls to read the Bible, and support for the proclamation of the Gospel in this nation.

quote:

---

"I can't think of anything more important than to put and restore the Bible back before (America's) 250th anniversary," State Rep. Borowicz told us.

---

i can think of a lot of things more important

Absolutely! There is demonic influence in most, if not all, of our public institutions. Prayer is essential.

quote:

---

My informal census of pastors I know favors the ESV.

---

I love the ESV.

Thanks again!

quote:

---

We need more calls to prayer, calls to read the Bible, and support for the proclamation of the Gospel in this nation.

---

better idea, let's just pray the rosary! that'd be ok wouldn't it?

The Bible that Republicans claim to love, but not follow. More propaganda.

quote:

---

better idea, let's just pray the rosary! that'd be ok wouldn't it?

---

If you want to do that, go ahead. I was referring to a call to prayer to God alone, though, and heartfelt calls to God for our nation, our leaders, our people, our laws to be changed for God’s glory, and the salvation of the nation, not a superstitious recitation that includes prayer to the “Queen of Heaven”. Sorry for the confusion.

quote:

---

The Bible lacks and rebukes any indications of one God in the three persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?

---

Correct. That there is one single essence or substance of God, and the father and son and Holy Spirit share this substance but are three individuals, and all three are co-equal and co-eternal - that is a very late 4th century philosophical innovation that was produced during the first council of Constantinople. During that council they took the Nicene creed and edited and appended to it giving us the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381CE.

In the Bible, Jesus was a created being by God, in fact he was the firstborn of all creation. The father (the God) is greater than Jesus. Jesus doesn’t do his own will, but the will of his Father. Jesus didn’t try to become equal to God, but made himself low taking the form of a slave (human). In the beginning was the Logos (the Word - aka Jesus), and he was with the God, and we was divine (but not the God capital G). Jesus was one with the Father, and he expected all his followers to become one with him just as he is one with the father.

Do some research on the sentences in the previous paragraph as they are all in the NT. Also - because there were no trinitarian references in scripture, several were added after the fact. Let me give you a couple of examples.

1 John 5:7 is a later scribal addition. It’s in the KJV but it’s not in other modern translations, because modern scholarship (even that of dogmatic Christian scholars) has acknowledged that the verse of the father, son, and spirit being one wasn’t original and is therefore inauthentic.

In Matthew 28:19, Jesus says to go and baptize people in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. So that is what pretty much all translations say for that verse. Our earliest manuscripts for Matthew date back to the 4th century - at the same time the Trinity was being rationalized and developed. How do we know that verse is not original then, if our earliest manuscripts render it this way? It’s because early church fathers, like Tertullian, wrote about people baptizing Christians in the name of Jesus (and only Jesus), and he was kind of mad about because he thought they should be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It’s because Acts chapters 2 and 10 preserve this - baptizing in the name of Jesus only. And we actually have copies of letters, of church fathers like Eusebius, where they directly quoted Matthew 28:19 as baptizing in the name of Jesus (and only Jesus).

So no, there is not (or wasn’t originally) anything pertaining to the modern concept of the Trinity - a 4th century philosophical framework - in the New Testament - a collection of stories and letters 250-350 years older than the Trinity. If it really would have been biblical, it wouldn’t have taken 300 years for them to figure it out (with harsh arguments, rounds of voting, and threats of excommunication and violence).