Faith

New Bible Translation Replaces ‘Christ,‘ ’Angel’ & ‘Apostle’

There’s a new Bible translation in town. ”The Voice,” an apparently easier-to-digest format that is aimed at reaching those individuals who may own a Bible, but who rarely or never read it, is taking some interesting avenues to help ensure that people better comprehend the Good Book.

Here’s the controversial part: The words “angel,“ ”apostle” and — “Christ” have been removed from the translation. It‘s not that these themes aren’t present in the newfound Biblical interpretation. Instead, the translators have chosen alternatives. For instance, Jesus Christ is now “Jesus the Anointed One.” The meaning is still there, but the traditional semantics have been altered.

Here’s a video that further explains the project:

CNN’s Belief Blog provides more about this new, purportedly easier-to-comprehend Biblical version:

Professor David Capes says the Bible “is probably the most owned and least read book out there. That’s because, for many, it’s too difficult to understand.”

The “own it but haven’t read it” demographic is his target market, says Capes, who teaches the New Testament at Houston Baptist University and was part of a team that compiled “The Voice,” a new translation of the King James Bible. Capes told CNN that the motivation behind the translation, seven years in the making, was to emphasize the meaning behind the words.

“‘The Voice’ considers the narrative links that help us to understand the drama and passion of story that is present in the original languages,” according to the website for the book. “The tone of the writing, the format of the page, and the directness of the dialog allows the tradition of passing down the biblical narrative to come through in ‘The Voice.’”

Rather than re-writing the Bible, those scholars and individuals behind the seven-year project apparently wanted to help readers, as The Christian Post reports, “hear God speaking.”

Despite these intentions and a major publisher — Thomas Nelson — backing the project, some critics have been railing against the translation. The Post has more about those who see the project as a disaster of Biblical proportions (pun intended):

On the website “Life More Abundant,“ poster ”Coralie” commented that the format of The Voice, which includes commentary in the body of the text, was a concern.

“The … effect of the inclusion of midstream commentary is the blurring of the line between inspired word and human opinion,” wrote Coralie.

“My fear in our postmodern world is not that a new reader would take the commentary as the very word of God, but that he would read the words of God with the casual ease of another form of commentary.”

The blog “Extreme Theology,” an apologetics website, declared that The Voice was a “distorted version of the Bible.”

Below, watch a CNN interview that further describes the process of putting “The Voice” together:

(H/T: CNN Belief Blog)

Carousel image courtesy Shutterstock.com

Comments (371)

1 2 3 ... 7
  • proliance
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:45am

    And you wonder why the Catholic Church didn’t want unqualified people making their own Bible translations?

    Report Post » proliance  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:13am

      And that is the VERY problem with the Catholic church! What, exactly, is qualified? Do you really think God makes some humans more…what…infailable? above others? Don’t you realize we are ALL sinners? Including your parish priest and your pope!

      If any Christian group that has ever existed has DISTORTED the Word of God it is the Catholic church. Of course you do not want to hear that, but a quick look at the history of the church leaves no doubts about this. Take indulgences just for starters.

      But I point no fingers. We all try to twist Scripture to fit in with our beliefs or traditions. Even people with the best intentions will make mistakes with their exegesis, that is just the way we are.

      What do I personally think about this translation? I do not have enough information to process that. Certainly the KJV can be hard to understand. I do not think attempts to make Scripture easier to understand are bad, and look at it this way. If this Bible leads someone to Christ then the Holy Spirit should drive that person to dig deeper into Scripture using other translations. And the fact is most reputable translations are not far apart. 99 times out of 100 it is more a question of the interpretation of the reader rather than the words used in the Bible.

      A serious disciple will use multiple translations anyway, along with the original language and a concordance. Modern software makes this a cinch.

      Report Post »  
    • iampraying4u
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:20am

      The catholics have added to the bible more than any

      Report Post »  
    • IndyBarber
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:30am

      @TrollTrainer — Where did the Bible come from? Did it just fall from the sky? No, it came through the Catholic Church. The Church was given the authority by Christ. If you read 1 Tim 3:15 the authority of the Church is clear.

      The “Chruch” as a body of christ where we can all develop our own doctrine based on scripture is not what Christ intended. He did not say “Churches”

      It wasn’t until Luther had his little temper tantrum was this questioned, afte that is when we started having thousands if not hundreds of thousands of churches pop up leading the confusion we have theologically today. Pro abortion, anti abortion, contraception is wrong, unless you join this church. Salvation from faith…no grace….no, everyone is saved. Too much confusion coming from independant thought these days.

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:35am

      Changing Christ to Jesus the annointed One.. is okay..but to leave out the words angel and apostle is not..They also did change scripture like John 1:1 which changes its meaning by leaving out Father God entirely. It makes it seem as if He is Father God.. John 1:1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” in The Voice it reads Before time itself was measured, the Voice was speaking. The Voice was and is God.” Frank Couch, the executive editor and publisher of “The Voice,” said that translation better captures what logos means. The words angel have been replaced with messenger and apostle has been replaced with immisary..which means messenger..This Bible I suspect is written with an agenda..just like some other religions we know of..The New King James study bible is as easy to read as it gets..it is written in current language.. Stay away from The Voice..

      Report Post »  
    • maplestmom
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:39am

      “Rather than re-writing the Bible, those scholars and individuals behind the seven-year project apparently wanted to help readers, as The Christian Post reports, “hear God speaking.”
      Isn’t this supposed to be the work of the Holy Spirit? We should be doing what we are supposed to do; Love God with all our heart soul and mind, Love our neighbor as ourselves (this one includes the Great Commission to preach the gospel), and not do God’s work by changing his words to make them “more understandable”

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:57am

      @INDY BARBER..You must be referring to the scriptureMat 16:18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. So..I understand that Catholics think that Jesus/Yeshua was inferring that Peter was the foundation of the church..Right? So that is where they get the opinion that the Catholic Church was the beginning and will be the all to end all..She may be the one to end all.. but do you seriously think that Peter was the foundation of the church?? Pah..leez…Jesus/Yeshua is the foundation of the church…and as far as Martin Luther goes..had it not been for him..the Catholic church would be even recognizing Jesus/Yeshua.. Martin Luther was the game changer.. Other people left the “Cattholic Church” because they refuse to have graven images that they kneel to and pray..“idolatry” and praying to saints.. (YWVH) God does not permit His own to speak to the dead.. and no priest has the power to forgive sins..and Mary is not to be worshipped..Also the “ vatican” had her go at creating the religion of Islam through Mohammed and his wife who had been a rich widow friend of the pope’s for the purpose of taking Jerusalem for the Vatican City. That little thing led to the Crusades in which millions of protestant Christians were murdered and millions of Bibles burned to keep the truth from the Roman Catholics and the Muslims. http://www.remnantofgod.org/books/docs/How-the-Vatican-Created-Islam.pdf

      Report Post »  
    • lukerw
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 10:19am

      Really the Catholic Church only came to exist in 800 ad… under Pope Leo III… and since Europe was Illiterate… the Chruch served the Emperor Charlemagne as Clerks… since only the Clergy were actually Educated. Given this… why would anyone want the Illiterate to interpret the Bible? So, it was a reasonable position to take… at the time!

      Report Post » lukerw  
    • NeoFan
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 10:24am

      Doesn’t seem much different than the NIV which is a translation crafted to support specific doctrines.

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 10:26am

      @ I meant to say that Martin Luther is the one who brought Jesus/Yeshua to the forefront as He should have been.. Jesus was as I understand not held in such high esteem before Luther “threw his little tantrum.”

      Report Post »  
    • LemonyFresh
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 10:35am

      If the KJV is “hard” to understand society is the problem not the Bible. Let us see: thee=you, thou=you, thy=your; that is easy. The rest can be found with a dictionary or find a church whose Pastor went to a Bible collage. Folks we are killing the word of God for the sake of laziness. We are told to study the Word. The missing words from KJV to NIV are equal to all of the minor profit’s books in KJV. Over 65,000 words omitted. Get a KJV and read it, ask someone if you need help, don’t settle for a watered down half Bible. PLEASE. Do it for yourself, and your family.

      Report Post » LemonyFresh  
    • hereandnow
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 10:35am

      Is not “Christ” according to Christians the SON of GOD, sent to earth in the body of Jesus? Christ is pure whereas humans are not. It appears that to replace “Jesus Christ” with “Jesus the anointed one” leaving out “GOD’s” anointed one, whom is “Christ”.., is to allow the possibility for a lower classification of “Jesus Christ”.

      http://www.gotquestions.org/anointed.html
      Christ was anointed rather than Jesus. Another meaning for the word anointed is “chosen one.” The Bible says that Jesus Christ was anointed by God with the Holy Spirit to spread the Good News and free those who have been held captive by sin (Luke 4:18-19; Acts 10:38). After Christ left the earth, He left us the gift of the Holy Spirit (John 14:16). Now all Christians are anointed, chosen for a specific purpose in furthering God’s Kingdom (1 John 2:20). “Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and has anointed us is God, who also has sealed us and given us the Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee” (2 Corinthians 1:21-22).

      Report Post »  
    • ashestoashes
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 10:39am

      Coeection..2nd attempt.. Martin Luthers little tantrum included this. He strongly disputed the claim that freedom from God’s punishment for sin could be purchased with money. Luther taught that salvation is not earned by good deeds but received only as a free gift of God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ as redeemer from sin. His theology challenged the authority of the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church by teaching that the Bible is the only source of divinely revealed knowledge[2] and opposed sacerdotalism by considering all baptized Christians to be a holy priesthood.. So Martin Luther’s “little tantrum” was to reveal truth.

      Report Post »  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:06am

      The NT books were Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation. The NT books were restored by his followers in the 17th century, but they let his cuts to the OT stand.
      Luther was a very troubled soul.
      So no iampraying4u the Catholic Church did not add, Luther subtracted

      James I reigned as king of England from 1603 to 1625. He was the son of Mary Queen of Scots, and he had been king of Scotland before succeeding to the English throne at the death of Queen Elizabeth I. He was prompted to produce an English Bible because of the poor and tendentious copies being circulated in England. He feared these could be used by seditious religious and political factions.

      His authority was one usurped from the Catholic Church, beginning with his predecessor King Henry VIII. Henry had broken with the Catholic Church and made himself the head of the Church in England, which soon enough became the Church of England. You could say James had no more authority in biblical matters than any head of state, basically none. What authority would a “George Bush Bible” have? The true authority and safeguard over Scripture was and has to be the Catholic Church, to which Christ gave his authority. No secular authority has any rightful authority over the Bible.The common claim that the King James is based on the only perfect set of manuscripts we have (a false claim; there is no perfect set of manuscripts; and the ones used for the KJV were compiled by a Catholic, Erasmus)

      Report Post » by faith  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:07am

      The complete KJV was published in 1611. Over the last three centuries, numerous minor changes (for example, of spelling and grammar) have been made in the King James, with the result that most versions of the KJV currently on the market are significantly different from the original. This has led one publisher to recently re-issue the 1611 King James Version Bible.
      That’s your source of eternal never changing truth?

      Ashestoashes, you are so wrong about so many things

      Report Post » by faith  
    • FormerLib
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:12am

      “Did it just fall from the sky? No, it came through the Catholic Church.”

      It came through the “catholic”-(little c) not “Catholic” (big C) church. The word catholic means common. Until Protestantism, there was no church called the Catholic Church. It was called the Holy Roman church or the orthodox church. Protestantism didn‘t just fall out of the sky or arise out of Luther’s ‘temper tantrum.” There were real abuses and real corruption in the church,many of them unspeakable. Every church movement eventually moves away from God and scripture and replaces them with dead religion, ritual and doctrines of men that have nothing to do with a relationship with God and everything to do with membership in the organization. Catholics have done it, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans- all have twisted scripture and adopted polices to curry favor with men. This new “translation” (it isn’t- it’s a paraphrase) is the latest example.

      That is not to say all Catholics are bad, any more than all anything is. Some of the strongest Christians I know are Catholics. I’m saying that any religion that puts the tradition of the church, filtered and interpreted through one man (pope,prophet, whatever) ahead of the sole authority of scripture is going to be subject to error and produce a laity that “will hold to an outward form of godliness but deny its power.” (2 Tim. 3-5)

      Report Post »  
    • Amos37
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:12am

      How about all the churches are messed up, ever think of that? they all claim to be the true church but Christ taught us that He is bringing the true church to earth when He comes back. all these new translations are just a new way to lukewarm God’s Word so much that people reject it because of all the differences between even the words used. Although they may be good to compare, they need to be compared as previously stated, by the KJV (or NKJV).

      Report Post »  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:30am

      The word Catholic, where did it come from?
      St. Ignatius of Antioch
      The second Bishop of Antioch, Syria, this disciple of the beloved Disciple John was consecrated Bishop around the year 69 by the Apostle Peter, the first Pope. A holy man who was deeply loved by the Christian faithful, he always made it his special care to defend “orthodoxy” (right teaching) and “orthopraxy” (right practice) among the early Christians.
      In 107, during the reign of the brutal Emperor Trajan, this holy Bishop was wrongfully sentenced to death because he refused to renounce the Christian faith. He was taken under guard to Rome where he was to be brutally devoured by wild beasts in a public spectacle. It was Bishop Ignatius who first used the term “catholic” to describe the whole Church. His letters connect us to the early Church and the unbroken, clear teaching of the Apostles which was given to them directly by Jesus Christ
      first known use of the Greek word katholikos (καθολικός), meaning “universal”, “complete” and “whole” to describe the church, writing:

      It is from the word katholikos (“according to the whole”) that the word catholic comes. When Ignatius wrote the Letter to the Smyrnaeans in about the year 107 and used the word catholic, he used it as if it were a word already in use to describe the Church. This has led many scholars to conclude that the appellation Catholic Church with its ecclesial connotation may have been in use as early as the last qua

      Report Post » by faith  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:40am

      Myths about Indulgences
      Indulgences. The very word stirs up more misconceptions than perhaps any other teaching in Catholic theology. Those who attack the Church for its use of indulgences rely upon—and take advantage of—the ignorance of both Catholics and non-Catholics.
      Myth 1: A person can buy his way out of hell with indulgences.
      This charge is without foundation. Since indulgences remit only temporal penalties, they cannot remit the eternal penalty of hell. Once a person is in hell, no amount of indulgences will ever change that fact. The only way to avoid hell is by appealing to God’s eternal mercy while still alive. After death, one’s eternal fate is set (Heb. 9:27).
      Myth 2: A person can buy indulgences for sins not yet committed.
      The Church has always taught that indulgences do not apply to sins not yet committed. The Catholic Encyclopedia notes, “[An indulgence] is not a permission to commit sin, nor a pardon of future sin; neither could be granted by any power.”
      Myth 3: A person can “buy forgiveness” with indulgences.
      The definition of indulgences presupposes that forgiveness has already taken place: “An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven” (Indulgentarium Doctrina 1, . Indulgences in no way forgive sins. They deal only with punishments left after sins have been forgiven.

      Report Post » by faith  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:41am

      Myth 4: Indulgences were invented as a means for the Church to raise money.
      Indulgences developed from reflection on the sacrament of reconciliation. They are a way of shortening the penance of sacramental discipline and were in use centuries before money-related problems appeared.
      Myth 5: An indulgence will shorten your time in purgatory by a fixed number of days.
      The number of days which used to be attached to indulgences was references to the period of penance one might undergo during life on earth. The Catholic Church does not claim to know anything about how long or short purgatory is in general, much less in a specific person’s case.
      Myth 6: A person can buy indulgences.
      The Council of Trent instituted severe reforms in the practice of granting indulgences, and, because of prior abuses, “in 1567 Pope Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions” (Catholic Encyclopedia). This act proved the Church’s seriousness about removing abuses from indulgences.
      Myth 7: A person used to be able to buy indulgences.
      One never could “buy” indulgences. The financial scandal surrounding indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his heterodoxy, involved alms—indulgences in which the giving of alms to some charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences.

      Report Post » by faith  
    • Xyskalla
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:47am

      Why is this controversial? “Christ” isn’t a translation. “Christ” is just a transliteration of the Greek word “Christos”. (A transliteration isn’t a translation. Instead, you just substitute the English letters in place of the Greek, so you know how to pronounce it, but the actual meaning of the word doesn’t come through.) Christos is actually a translation of the Hebrew word for Messiah (another English transliteration), but when it’s actually translated, it means “anointed one”. The original audience would have read it as “Jesus the anointed one,” because that’s what “Christ” means.

      Same thing with “angel”. Angel is another transliteration, but when it’s actually translated, it merely means “messenger”. The same word is used for both heavenly spiritual beings and for human messengers. It‘s only by context that the translators decide if it’s referring to spirits or humans. If they think it’s referring to spirits, they transliterate it “angel”, and if they think it’s referring to a human, they translate it “messenger”. Personally I prefer they just translate it the same way every time so I could decide for myself if it’s referring to spirits or humans (see Revelation 2-3 where most translations use the word “angel” but it’s probably referring to humans).

      I don’t have enough characters remaining to go into “apostle” (another transliteration), but you get the idea. It’s nice to be able to read it in a way closer to the way that the or

      Report Post »  
    • k1607
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:52am

      Changing words around, taking words out, and changing words to what people think they mean (rather than what they actually mean) changes the context completely. The scholars that originally translated the Bible spent years studying manuscripts (and what some would consider historical artifacts, in fact in some cases things may have been written on things other than paper, such as cloth and in some cases other materials available). The scholars knew Greek and Hebrew-something that if these men and women who are preaching would learn would help them better translate the KJV (which is not hard to read, if some of the people I know can understand it, anyone can, it‘s just that people don’t want to take the time to understand it and they don’t take time to really meditate on the word of God to really understand it. Too often, only passages are studied without studying and understanding the entire content). I have compared numerous Bibles, some are somewhat similar, but many do loose meaning and change meaning because of the words. The Catholic Bible is different from other Bibles, and this new Bible is just ridiculous, how many translations do people need in order to understand the word of God. How hard is it to understand that charity means love and by reading the book in context one can understand the thee‘s and the thou’s-I actually attribute it to laziness and the fact that people just want something that conforms to them.

      Report Post »  
    • Xyskalla
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:54am

      Another way to look at it would be if John 1:1 was traditionally translated “In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God.” And then complaining when someone decided to actually translate Logos instead of transliterating it, so that it read “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

      Report Post »  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:55am

      There are not even 100 people in this country who hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they think the Catholic Church to be.

      Report Post » by faith  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 12:03pm

      Byfaith,

      Unfortunately, it is you who is wrong about a great many things here. But it is not worth my time to argue obvious things with either you or Indybarber. Hopefully, if you both are Spirit led, you will eventually discover the truth.

      About your attempted spin on indulgences, study up on Johan Tetzel. This little jingle might spark your memory:

      “Another penny in the coffer rings, another soul to Heaven springs.”

      BTW, I am not a Protestant. Luther did not go far enough. My faith can be traced back to the Radical Reformers who wanted to get back to the pure, inerrant Word of God without ANY corrupt tradition. I am a Baptist by chance, but I am a Christian and a part of the Body of Christ by faith in the grace of Christ. Just as the first church from the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit started His work here.

      If you guys want to try and hijack the word for universal to make some kind of appeal to authority then I will simply state Baptists are actually the first church as John the Baptist baptized Christ and everyone else followed. Baptist is in the Bible far more times than catholic.

      Of course that is nonsense, but so are your claims. You stand on tradition…You should be reading your Bibles and worshiping God.

      Report Post »  
    • Xyskalla
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 12:03pm

      I just noticed that the end of my first post was cut off, even though it said that I had 7 characters remaining. This isn’t the first time this has happened. Sorry about that–I forgot that The Blaze had this problem.

      Anyway, the last sentence in my first post should have read “It’s nice to be able to read it in a way closer to the way that the original audience would have understood it.”

      Report Post »  
    • Bearfoot
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 12:15pm

      trolltrainer,

      I appreciated your comment “A serious disciple will use multiple translations anyway, along with the original language and a concordance. Modern software makes this a cinch.”

      I use many translations of the Holy Scriptures to get the fullest sense of the message being studied. I would say though that any translation that does not include or hides God’s Name, YHWH, Yahweh, or Jehovah is not accurate enough for me to spend money on. See Psalms 83:18 for example in the KJV

      Report Post » Bearfoot  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 12:39pm

      Troll
      you are good with accusations, but short on proof.
      Your desire to look into history to substantiate the truth of his faith is commendable. However, you probably not read a single primary historical source to substantiate this claim of “Baptist successionism.” Instead, you probably gotten a hold of the booklet Trail of Blood by J.M. Carroll, which puts forth the ideas passed on to you.
      Let’s examine his claims about the sects that he mentions. He claims descent from the Anabaptists, Montanists, and Novations, but was their theology of a Baptist slant?
      The Anabaptists baptized babies, and so can in no way be considered the spiritual ancestors to the present-day Baptists. Novations taught that those who had fallen from the faith should never be allowed to repent and return to the fold, since God cannot forgive their sin. The same council that defined the divinity of Christ (Nicea in A.D. 325) condemned the Novations. Montanists were a movement centering around the false prophet Montanus, who taught that the heavenly Jerusalem would soon descend upon his home town, the Phrygian village of Pepuza, and that, to prepare for the imminent coming of Christ, one must practice severe asceticism.
      Carrol latter recanted and wrote “Baptists arose in the 17th century in Holland and England. They are Protestants, heirs of the reformers”

      Report Post » by faith  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 12:53pm

      Standing on tradition. Interesting how you bring that up. Was the Bible written by Jesus? Did anyone record what he said? In other words did Jesus say “Write this down?
      No. Actually the writtings of the books of the NT were written AD51-125. There were hundreds of “scripture” writings. AD 140 Marcion, a businessman in Rome, taught that there were two Gods: Yahweh, the cruel God of the Old Testament, and Abba, the kind father of the New Testament. Marcion eliminated the Old Testament as scriptures and, since he was anti-Semitic, kept from the New Testament only 10 letters of Paul and 2/3 of Luke’s gospel (he deleted references to Jesus’s Jewishness). Marcion’s “New Testament”, the first to be compiled, forced the mainstream Church to decide on a core canon: the four Gospels and Letters of Paul. AD 367 The earliest extant list of the books of the NT, in exactly the number and order in which we presently have them, is written by Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria. AD 382 Council of Rome (whereby Pope Damasus started the ball rolling for the defining of a universal canon for all city-churches). Listed the New Testament books in their present (Catholic) number and order. Books were removed are altered 1200 years later.
      Back to the original point – tradition. No Bible existed for 300+ years after Jesus. No one even began writing until 20 years after his reserrection. The Bible is written tradition.

      Report Post » by faith  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 12:59pm

      By Faith,

      This:

      “The Anabaptists baptized babies”

      is as far as I got in your posts. This shows your total lack of church history. No more need be said.

      Report Post »  
    • Thomas
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 1:16pm

      Actually the word (Greek word angelos and Hebrew word Malak) for angel is often being translated many times plainly as ‘messenger’ in every bible. This is from also the “New Testament” and “Old Testament”.

      Report Post » Thomas  
    • JRook
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 1:19pm

      Hey who is anyone to distort and edit the bible. That was the Nicaea Councils role.

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 1:27pm

      actually, By Faith, I do have a comment for you. This has bothered me enough the last few minutes to prompt me to say this to you. You wrote this:

      “However, you probably not read a single primary historical source to substantiate this claim of “Baptist successionism.” Instead, you probably gotten a hold of the booklet Trail of Blood by J.M. Carroll, which puts forth the ideas passed on to you.”

      This comment proves you did not even read my post, you skimmed it and jumped to a conclusion. I suggest you go back and FULLY read my post for comprehension. You will clearly see I made no claim to “Baptist successionism.” Instead, I pointed out how ridiculous such claims are. This shows a total lack of reading comprehension on your part which your version of church histopry bears out. You do, in fact, have many things right as far as names and dates, but the conclusions you draw are illogical, unsupported, and mostly irrelevant. It is like you want to go to war with Protestants but only use the weapons you choose.

      I won’t play. I do not give a flip about any of your arguments, they are moot. I stand on Scripture, no matter where you believe it came from, and Scripture alone. Maybe you belong to what was the first church. You do not, but for the sake of argument say you do. So what? It is meaningless today. I worship the Triune God and I use His Word to do that. His Word clearly says that is all that matters.

      Report Post »  
    • C.A. Christopher
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 1:41pm

      the tag trolltrainer says it all. fool.

      Report Post »  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 1:49pm

      Troll
      I hope you read the Bible better than you read my words.
      You accuse me of not reading your post, then openly admit you did not read all of mine.
      Did I go on a website abd openly lie about your faith, no. I followed your lie with a defense of my faith.
      I am truly sorry if facts disagree with your version of truth.
      For someone who doesn’t care what I have to say, you sure type alot.
      Believe in faith alone, that’s on you. Burn people who disagree with you like Calvin or have poo fights with the devil like Luther…just stop lieing about my faith.
      I’ll put it simple for you, all religions have some truth. the Catholic Church has a fullness of faith and the Gates of hell will not prevail against it (as Jesus promissed)
      A banquet has been prepared and paid for. You can eat yours at McDonalds if you want too, I’ll eat mine at Ruth Chris. Both will give you sustanance for survival, one just has more to offer.

      Report Post » by faith  
    • Rohawk
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 1:55pm

      If Catholics were concerned about qualifications of translaters they would have corrected the mistranslation of pentence for repentence that changes asking for forgiveness to paying your way out of sin. The Catholics of that day didn’t want to answer for their false interpetations of scripture so they wanted to keep the tools of exposing the truth out of reformers hands.

      Even the King James translators used the greek work “baptize” instead of the translation “emerse” to not offend as the church practice was sprinkling.

      Report Post »  
    • gena t
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 3:23pm

      Since both the word Christ and the word Messiah translate to literally “the anointed one” from original greek and hebrew, that part doesn’t bother me too much. I’m not so sure about the rest.
      As to all the fighting and name calling going on on here between Catholics and Protestants, I will only remark that I have realized over the years that it serves Satan well that Christians of different denominations fight each other more than Satan. It helps keep their focus off the Evil One whom we should all unite to war against in a common goal of serving our common God.

      Report Post »  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 4:26pm

      Rohawk
      Yes it makes perfect since that the Catholic Church mistranslated the Bible so the reformers could not expose the truth.. (Sarcasm)

      Report Post » by faith  
    • amdntstr
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 5:43pm

      The Catholic Church did not want translations that laymen could read because it is forbidden for everyone bit the priess to decipher it. This is in complete disagreement with Paul ORDERING everyone to search the Scriptures for themselves to prove what even HE taught.

      The Church as used in the NT is talking about ALL Christians not the Catholic Church.

      Scripture comes from GOD NOT the Catholic Church.

      Praying to the dead is paganism and is again forbidden may times over in Scripture.

      Control is NOT the Church.

      Jesus also said to look at the fruit of those claiming to be His. Sinning and making mistakes is one thing, living a life of sin and Idol worship os another beast altogether.

      Islam believes that Jesus was annointed but NOT Christ the Son of God.
      They also do not believe in angels per say. Nor do they believe in the aposles. Seems to me thos is more PC than anything.

      Report Post »  
    • PettroFox
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 7:45pm

      Christ the Anointed is not the full meaning of Messiah from which the word originally comes. To the Jews it always embodied everything that was contained in the Old Testament concerning this Person. He would not be just an Anointed Man – which is what Christ the Anointed means to millions of acknowledged believers today, particularly those who follow Word of Faith from Kenyon, Hagin and Copeland. John elucidates it with “But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God” (20:31).

      Report Post »  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 10:26pm

      Praying to the dead is pagan.
      except for macabees and revelaitons
      and lets not forget Jesus appearing with the dead at the transfiguration

      Report Post » by faith  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 10:29pm

      The Catholic Church not only gave the Bible to the world, they also were the first to print it into local languages. Of course they had to wait for a population that was more than 2% literate and a thing called the printing press

      Report Post » by faith  
    • mauijonny
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 1:27am

      Ah. OK. Got it…So, now we will celebrate “TheAnointedOneMas.” It’ll be fun. We can all sit around a live tree, living free in the forest, while we barter for things like water and gloves, while we witness the miracle of the ocean receeding, and give thanks to dog for our food (tough).

      Report Post » mauijonny  
    • christos
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 2:32am

      To BY FAITH–You said the Bible came about by Tradition,,,No it was Divinely imputed into the Holy Prophets by +JESUS+GOD+ also just because you know the word of +JESUS+GOD+ does not mean +JESUS+GOD+ knows you,,,you sound Cold,,,TA

      Report Post » christos  
    • christos
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 2:43am

      To BY FAITH—+JESUS+GOD+ looks at a persons Heart not their knowledge,,,you seem to cross your T‘s and Dot your Eyes but you respond very cold to anyone who doesn’t agree with you,,,which gives insight into your Heart—-Ice Berg—No Global Warming going on their,,,No Worries—Peace Out..You can become Spiritually Perfect,,,Try Practicing the Beatitudes,,,all of your Theology Education isn’t going to save you,,,if you don’t have +JESUS+GOD+ in your Heart,,,Education of +JESUS CHRIST+ is not the same as Bearing +JESUS CHRIST+ picture yourself standing next to +JESUS+ would you talk Nasty to people would you,,,well you sound nasty,,,Hope this post helps you,,,Amen.

      Report Post » christos  
    • christos
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 2:49am

      To BY FAITH—You spelled (Revelations) wrong you wrote (except for macabees and revelaitons,and the M and R should be Capitol,,,knowing you like everything correct,,,

      Report Post » christos  
    • christos
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 2:52am

      To BY FAITH— +JESUS+GOD+ gave the Bible to the world not the Catholic Church,,

      Report Post » christos  
    • Xyskalla
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 4:47am

      @PettroFox
      Messiah is a transliteration of the Hebrew word “mashiach”. Mashiach was a very ordinary word. It was not used exclusively for the promised deliverer of Israel. It was used to refer to Levitical priests, King Saul was referred to as Yahweh’s Messiah, and King David was, too. Look it up in Strongs, it’s #4899, and you‘ll see how frequently it’s used. The word is used 39 times in the Old Testament, and the only two times that the NASB (the version I use) transliterates it as “Messiah” are in Daniel 9:25-26, where it is obviously referring Jesus. In the other 37 occurrences, the word is correctly translated “anointed” or “anointed one”.

      If God wanted to come up with a unique word that applied only to Jesus, He could have. But He didn’t. He used a common word (“mashiach” in Hebrew and “christos” in Greek), and most versions of the Bible aren’t even translating it when it refers to Jesus. They just transliterate it as if it were a name. But it’s not a name. It’s an ordinary word with an actual meaning, and that meaning gets obscured when it’s not translated. When they translate it one way 37 times, but they don’t translate it twice, those two times end up losing the significance of why God chose to use that specific word.

      Report Post »  
    • Thomas
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 6:44am

      The problem many have is that they cannot understand timelessness and Oneness. Jesus (the living word from Eterntity) has been here since the beginning but the word was only made flesh 2000 years ago. There for every “anointed one” before Jesus was made flesh was simply a symbol or representation of Jesus. Through Jesus (the living word from Eternity) Enoch was able to walk with God in the 7th Generation from Adam and then was taken. There are many who have not died like Enoch, not even a physical death. Those who dealt with God the Father did so through Jesus (the living word from Eternity).

      Report Post » Thomas  
    • Quiata
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 7:41am

      @TROLLTRAINER So whom DO you trust to play around with and alter Biblical semantics? These clowns?

      Maybe the problem isn’t with the book! MAYBE it’s with a lackadaisical, uninterested-verging-on-atheism society with an already weak grasp of language. Maybe people would rather do “worldly” things like watch sports and go shopping and keep up with the Kardashians.

      By the way, your original comment to PROLIANCE about the relativity of sin was you barking up the wrong tree (we all know no one is without sin). It’s about maintaining continuity. The Catholic Church has done a pretty good job of that for a couple of millennia. They’ll be around for awhile, and judging from the current state of affairs, probably a lot longer than our beloved USA will…

      Report Post »  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 8:44am

      Greek Christ
      Once again your reading skills had let you down.
      Having a conversation with you is like trying to stack water, so I will not bother.
      I give you facts. Jesus gave us His church. The Catholic church is his bride. The authority He gave His church gave the world the Bible, 14 centuries later King James (by whow authority) gave you your Bible. That book was rewritten 15+ times since. This new Biblle does the same thing,

      Your judgement on the condition of my heart, matters not. YOU ARE NOT MY JUDGE.
      Crawl back into the hole you slithered out of.

      Report Post » by faith  
    • old white guy
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 9:08am

      it seems that man always wants to make things more complex than they really are. i have read my KJV several times and also a new american standard. there is nothing complex about Jesus all you have to do is believe and repent and grace is yours. theological arguments distort the truth that Jesus gave us. faith is the necessary thing not what you think of the Bible.

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 9:31am

      Quiata
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 7:41am

      @TROLLTRAINER So whom DO you trust to play around with and alter Biblical semantics? These clowns?
      ———————————————————————————
      Let me reverse the question, who do YOU trust? If all man is corrupt then any of his works will also be corrupt.

      The answer is the Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit. It is the ONLY thing we can positively trust. I am not saying that other sources cannot contain truth, but the Bible IS the Word of God. THAT is what I trust.

      So how do I know which translation is best, how do I reconcile the thousands of doctrinal arguments that arise from faulty interpretation? I trust in the Holy Spirit to lead me to the truth. How do I know MY theology is the correct one? I do not! :-) I am just as subject to misinterpretation as your priest and pope. Does it matter? The Bible tells me what I must do to receive eternal life and live a Christian life.

      I was not trying to bash Catholics here, I wish you would go way up and read my first post again with clearer understanding.

      Report Post »  
    • jcldwl
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 9:51am

      Okay let me get this right. According to what I read removing Christ, Angel, and Apostle from the bible makes it easier to understand. What a load of bunk. I also noticed the man responsible is a professor at a Baptist University. Hmmm…It wasn’t that long ago that the Southern Baptists were considering changing their name under the guise that Southern Baptist has too many negative connotations. Well I was raised Southern Baptist so I will say now that I believe the Baptist denomination has been heavily infiltrated by progressives. If you seek to change the principles of the faith you have been teaching for hundreds of years then something is wrong. People I started stocking KJV and NKJV bibles about a year ago because I saw this sort of thing coming. Please do the same thing and read and study them. Never take your ministers unchecked word. Take your bible to church with you and verify what your minister is teaching. Any trustworthy minister will tell you that themselves. There is also a group trying to rewrite the bible to take out any gender specific words and phrases. Kinda hard to remove His, He, Him etc. without changing the context completely. The same can be said for what these people are doing here.
      Father in heaven above please protect us from these evil people. Amen

      Report Post » jcldwl  
    • Mojoron
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 9:54am

      I love it, every time a new Bible translation is printed, everyone becomes a Bible theorist. For one thing, this translation is of the “King James Bible.” It is not the Catholic BIble, if you don’t know the difference then you are not a Bible scholar. I hate to tell all you Catholic haters here that the original Bible canon was decided back in the 300′s. The Catholic church was the one who did it, not King James or Henry the VIII. I suspect that if this printing of the bible is indeed easier to understand and does not change the meaning of the original that it may bring others to read the Bible. After all we don’t read the Greek or Latin translation which imparts a different meaning than does the english. I think that God understands our motives.

      Report Post » Mojoron  
    • Unix
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 10:07am

      And God said not to mess with his Words didn’t he? He said not to change the Bible, right? It is stated in the Bible, I just cannot remember where? I will find it.

      Report Post » Unix  
    • snooop1e
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 10:23am

      TROLLTRAINER – You are an enigma wrapped in a contradiction. You start your post by declaring that we are all sinners and that God did not select sinful men to do his work or give sinful men any authority which is totally unbiblical and then you (a sinner) go on to infallibly declare what is certain truth. You killed your horse before it even left the gate.

      Report Post » snooop1e  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 11:32am

      Quiata asked you a question.
      ———————————————————————————
      your response: Let me reverse the question, who do YOU trust? If all man is corrupt then any of his works will also be corrupt.

      Answer a question with a question, Troll Trainer indeed

      Report Post » by faith  
    • Silversmith
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 12:43pm

      DUUUDE!!! TRAIN!!!!

      Silversmith

      Report Post » Silversmith  
    • Pieretti
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 12:49pm

      Christ gave the authority to interpret scripture to the First Pope Peter, and to the first Bishops (the other Apostles).He instructed them to hand this teaching on to their successors, the future Bishops. Protestants, other heretical and schismatic sects have NO AUTHORITY to interpret or translate sacred scripture because in doing so they usurp the authority given by Christ only to his ONE Apostolic Church. As a result of this these heretics become their own ‘popes’ – we have some 30,000 of them -all the erroneous protestant and assorted sects/cults which pervert scripture and lead many astray. Here is an excellent explanation of this:
      “This is the goal too of the crafty Bible Societies which renew the old skill of the heretics and ceaselessly force on people of all kinds, even the uneducated, gifts of the Bible. They issue these in large numbers and at great cost, in vernacular translations, which infringe the holy rules of the Church. The commentaries which are included often contain perverse explanations; so, having rejected divine tradition, the doctrine of the Fathers and the authority of the Catholic Church, they all interpret the words of the Lord by their own private judgment, thereby perverting their meaning. As a result, they fall into the greatest errors.” Blessed Pope Pius IX
      http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9quiplu.htm

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 1:56pm

      Hmmm,

      Let me first repost the continuation of this mornings response that I made but failed to hit the reply button so it posted to page 5:

      What I am against is people like By Faith who intentionally mislead. I mean, look at this statement he made:

      The Catholic Church not only gave the Bible to the world, they also were the first to print it into local languages. Of course they had to wait for a population that was more than 2% literate and a thing called the printing press.

      This is 180 degrees from the truth. The Catholic church KILLED people who tried to get the Word of God into the hands of lay people. There is no point in even trying to argue with someone who will not recognize truth. Church history speaks for itself, it is all there for anyone who wishes to study it.

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 2:08pm

      Now then, at sn000pie,

      An enigma?

      You write:

      “You start your post by declaring that we are all sinners”

      I did. I stand by that, the Bible says it is so.

      “and that God did not select sinful men to do his work or give sinful men any authority which is totally unbiblical”

      lol, no I never said this. You said this to find an argument against me. Certainly God uses us, sinful man, for His purposes. Certainly He gives us authority to act in His name. But He does not make one man more worthy than any other. Paul was just a man. Peter was just a man. Both sinners, both made mistakes.

      Then you write:

      “and then you (a sinner) go on to infallibly declare what is certain truth.”

      Really? Can I ask where? In fact, I made these statements:

      “But I point no fingers. We all try to twist Scripture to fit in with our beliefs or traditions. Even people with the best intentions will make mistakes with their exegesis, that is just the way we are.”

      “So how do I know which translation is best, how do I reconcile the thousands of doctrinal arguments that arise from faulty interpretation? I trust in the Holy Spirit to lead me to the truth. How do I know MY theology is the correct one? I do not! :-) I am just as subject to misinterpretation as your priest and pope. Does it matter? The Bible tells me what I must do to receive eternal life and live a Christian life.”

      So where you get your argument from is beyond me.

      Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 2:19pm

      By Faith,

      I hate to say it but you really are a piece of work. In an exchange above you write:

      “Your judgement on the condition of my heart, matters not. YOU ARE NOT MY JUDGE.
      Crawl back into the hole you slithered out of.”

      Yet in a previous response to me you make the very same judgments on me! BTW, where did I lie?

      So now you write:

      “Quiata asked you a question.
      ———————————————————————————
      your response: Let me reverse the question, who do YOU trust? If all man is corrupt then any of his works will also be corrupt.

      Answer a question with a question, Troll Trainer indeed”

      You once again show a complete lack of reading comprehension. I did, in fact, answer this question. Quite clearly.

      But I am done with you. You are simply bitter and you lash out at anyone who disagrees with you. You feel you are an expert on history or theology, but you are nothing but a fool. Anabaptists baptized babies…Really? Where in the world do you get that? They were killed by the hundreds because they baptized at the time of salvation and did not recognize infant baptism. By baptizing again…ana baptist or again baptizing…they were making the statement that the Catholic church was wrong and that their first baptisms as infants were meaningless.

      Then you state Catholics promoted the distribution of the Bible to the laity. Then again, you also try to dismiss indulgences also…Whatever…

      Report Post »  
    • stormcrow53
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 3:12pm

      The agenda is Global Government. Global Government must have Global Religion else Islam won’t join up. This is an Overton Window shift to reduce the divinity of Jesus step by small step, to make Christianity more palatable to those other folk who do not accept the divinity of Jesus. Whomever those other folk might be. Right, Mecca Rose? Relatively soon the son of a carpenter will be just that. Then there will be one whole religion under a moon god or something. Kumbya.

      Report Post » stormcrow53  
    • Paul
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 4:54pm

      Rev 22

      19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

      Nuff said…

      Report Post » Paul  
    • PATTY HENRY
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 5:01pm

      I hope you are kidding. One of the BEST things about the CATHOLIC Church is the Magisterium – the
      “resource Library” unlike anything else that exists on earth with tons and tons of “proof” through out the ages. IN SIMPLE TERMS: Until a soul turns to GOD the Bible may read like BLAH BLAH BLAH (think Charlie Brown’s Teacher) and then, as a Soul turns to GOD and seeks GOD, the Bible becomes more ‘understandable’…when a SOUL commits to GOD, the Bible becomes the most exciting and RELEVANT book that any of us will ever have in our homes. THIS entire Effort of “making it easier for people” is purely SATANIC. (maybe not knowingly) When GOD is ready for us to understand GOD, trust me, we Understand. Time‘s awastin’ it’s best to get about your one-on-one relationship with GOD…which BTW is the reason I’m a CATHOLIC CONVERT…this was the basis of my faith, this Catholic message… it was true yesterday, is true today and will be tomorrow and I so appreciate that. NO ONE can SIT on the OUTSIDE of the CATHOLIC CHURCH and decide anything about it. When you are in accord with GOD, it all makes sense and you know 1000% that this IS GOD’S Church, I say that even knowing that GOD has to come for the person. His timing; His way and nothing is worse than an INTERLOPER trying to be an INTERCESSOR.

      Report Post » PATTY HENRY  
    • turkey13
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 6:12pm

      Read Revelation Ch. 22, verse 18 &19. Ver. 18 – For I testify to everyonewho hears the wordsof the prophecyof this book:”If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; Ver. 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, “God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. If you don’t have a King James Version get one before it is trash. These Bibles with pictures and modified fall into the above catagory.

      Report Post »  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 7:12pm

      Troll (potty)trainer

      This is what I hear in my head when I read your post: “Whan whan blah blah don’t confuse me with facts I have my on version of the truth. I cannot prove any of my accusations but anyone who calls me on it is mean”.
      You aragantly post half truths and out right lies. I respond with truth. You think that makes me mean I honestly don’t care what you think of me. I can give you texts in Greek or Aramiac. I can give you quotes from the church fathers and their contemperaries but none of this will open your eyes.
      Let’s get one thing straight the Bible Catholics use is the same since it was first cannonized. Your Bible just like the one in the article is a rewrite that is heavy on edits. Deal with it

      Report Post » by faith  
    • mycomet123
      Posted on April 22, 2012 at 8:48am

      The most accurate Bible (I feel) is the one that is the oldest. It’s like gossiping–when someone tells you something & you pass it own the story grows & changes with each interpretation. Like it or not, the earliest Bible orginated from the Catholic Church. Protestant reformation took place when Martin Luther split from the Church & started the Luthern religion & it’s been splitting ever since! Why do so many so-called christians spend all their time on dividing christianity instead of trying to unite on what they do agree upon.

      Report Post »  
    • mamatango
      Posted on April 22, 2012 at 11:30pm

      ASHESTOASHES,

      I agree.

      1Jo 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
      1Jo 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would [no doubt] have continued with us: but [they went out], that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. 1Jo 2:20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. 1Jo 2:21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. 1Jo 2:26 These [things] have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.

      Even in the Geneva Bible, they deduced that 666 was the Pope. Actually, this is just a continuation of the Mother/Son cults that go back before Babylon. Christianity is about God the Father and His Son, “The Word.”

      I feel sorry for the Catholics; they only know what they have been taught for centuries. I do believe there are some Spirit filled Catholics though, because salvation has nothing to do with church membership or rituals, but a personal relationship with the Son of God. Their Bible is the Septuagint, and the Catholic church fought bitterly with King James over not having dominion over it.

      Actually, a new book by Tom Horn is coming out on the 24th, “Petrus Romanus, The Final Pope is Here.” You can even read the chapters online. http://www.raidersnewsup

      Report Post »  
    • mamatango
      Posted on April 22, 2012 at 11:32pm

      Sorry, the link didn’t come out totally.

      http://www.raidersnewsupdate.com/

      Report Post »  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 23, 2012 at 3:14pm

      Potty trainer (in response to your hissy fit)
      While the FIRST Anabaptists were often baptized TWICE, once as INFANTS in the medieval church and again as adults in the early years of the Reformation, the overwhelming majority throughout the early modern era were baptized only once as adults, after first confessing their faith publicly.
      But unlike the majority of other major Christian communities, Anabaptists rejected child baptism in favor of believers’ baptism
      Source:Gale Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World

      Also
      “Extensive study and independent investigation of church history has convinced the author that the view once held so dear has not been and cannot be verified. On the contrary, Baptist arose in the 17th century in Holland and England. They are Protestants heirs of the reformers.” J.M. Carroll

      Report Post » by faith  
    • by faith
      Posted on April 23, 2012 at 5:54pm

      Troll
      From your original post: “If any Christian group that has ever existed has DISTORTED the Word of God it is the Catholic church.” So this is not an attack on the Church, it’s a complement?
      None of my post were directed at you until you call me out by name. I posted that the Bible was canonized in the 300’s (fact). Luther and the reformers edited or removed 11 books from the NT(fact). I also questioned the authority of King James to re-write the Bible. Why can he write a Bible and the guy in this article can’t? I posted the origin of the term Catholic. Then I posted 7 myths about indulgences. This is where you interjected yourself.
      I count 4 others who had issues with your “Christian responses”. But you call me bitter and I lash out.
      So you call me out, but when I respond you play the victim. Well pour pityful you.

      Report Post » by faith  
  • countrysideflair
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:44am

    This is a lot like the Constitution… make minor wording changes and you change the whole story.

    Report Post » countrysideflair  
    • NHwinter
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:02am

      Why dumb down anything let alone the Bible. Elevate the intelligence of people. Have them strive for higher understanding. Sounds just like the Progressives that think people are too stupid to understand the economy and what government is doing to America.

      Report Post » NHwinter  
    • Tigress1
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:41am

      I agree. Things are getting dumbed down too much. They needed a translation for “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” What’s so difficult to understand about that? I don’t have a problem with clarifications at the bottom of the page, but the original words should remain intact. After a while it’s like the game “Grapevine” that we played as kids. The original message gets more and more distorted the further away from source it goes.

      Report Post » Tigress1  
    • lukerw
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:04am

      With the Constitution… you have read, at least… The Declaration of Independence; the Federalist Papers; and the AntiFederalist Paper… to know what they were thinking. And, the same with the Bible… Ancient Egyptian History & Religion… and all the History of the Middle East to the time of Christ. IE: The Eye was a small tunnel in Jerusalem… where Camels had to walk upon their knees to get through.

      I am saying, the Solution is not Easy… and requires alot of study!

      Report Post » lukerw  
    • Pontiac
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:19pm

      @Tigress1
      [They needed a translation for “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” What’s so difficult to understand about that?]
      Apparently a lot is difficult with that seeing as how you couldn’t even read or write it in Hebrew!

      [The original message gets more and more distorted the further away from source it goes.]
      What’s the source? Certainly not that crap King James authorized.

      Report Post » Pontiac  
    • chancetexas
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 12:13pm

      The organized take down of the education system and the removal of God from schooling was instrumental in this process. In essence, dumb down society then usher in Satan’s work. Very simple and effective.

      What are you going to do to keep God the Father Almighty in Christ Jesus in your lives and your home and to protect your family? More TV anyone?

      Try sitting down just five (5) minutes a night with your family, your spouse or just yourself and read some scripture out of the Holy Bible. Turn off the radio in your car and pray out loud (works well and people think you’re on blue tooth) and tell God what’s really on your mind and ask Him for direction and wisdom.

      If you don‘t have don’t know Christ as your Savior, say a simple prayer to Him: Acknowledge you are a flawed person who sins and you accept His forgiveness, by Him taking away all your sins at the cross (past and future), and you accept His unconditional love and acceptance by inviting Him into your heart and receiving His Life. Live in grace and peace.

      Bring Him back into your home, your children’s education and your community. Love your neighbor. Let them know who God is in your life.

      Report Post »  
    • Pontiac
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 2:07pm

      [The organized take down of the education system and the removal of God from schooling was instrumental in this process.]
      When was a Government School ever your Church? It was never governments job to advance your religion. If you can’t expand your nutty theistic base without government oppression, tough. That’s what happens when you can only rely on an absurd dogma created millennia ago when people still used sticks and rocks to wipe their posterior.

      Report Post » Pontiac  
    • chancetexas
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 3:05pm

      @ Pontiac [That’s what happens when you can only rely on an absurd dogma created millennia ago when people still used sticks and rocks to wipe their posterior.]

      “The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, their deeds are vile…” Psalm 14:1

      Report Post »  
    • Pontiac
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 3:25pm

      @chancetexas
      Quote all the meaningless scripture you want to protect your fragile ego. You still lost the argument when you tried to make government schools your temples.

      “We in the United States, above all, must remember that lesson, for we were founded as a nation of openness to people of all beliefs. And so we must remain. Our very unity has been strengthened by our pluralism. We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free, and should be free, to speak of and act on their belief.
      At the same time that our Constitution prohibits state establishment of religion, it protects the free exercise of all religions. And walking this fine line requires government to be strictly neutral.”–Ronald Reagan 10-26-1984

      Report Post » Pontiac  
    • chancetexas
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 10:53pm

      @Pontiac:
      “In the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior. The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity”. John Quincy Adams

      “I conceive we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world . . . that the confusions that are and have been among the nations may be overruled by the promoting and speedily bringing in the holy and happy period when the kingdoms of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and the people willingly bow to the scepter of Him who is the Prince of Peace.” Samuel Adams

      “Being a Christian… is a character which I prize far above all this world has or can boast.” Patrick Henry

      “I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.” Thomas Jefferson

      “You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are.” George Washington

      “The moral principles and precepts found in the Scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws.” Noah Webster

      “The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity and humanity.” John Adams

      You’ve been intentionally misinformed: Go with t

      Report Post »  
    • Pontiac
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 11:16pm

      @chancetexas
      Oh boy, a bunch of politicians paying lip service to organized religion. Are you going to to make an actual argument on why any ONE religion or god should be part of public education or are you having a brain aneurysm trying to come up with something valid?

      “I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church. All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.” – Thomas Paine

      Report Post » Pontiac  
    • chancetexas
      Posted on April 22, 2012 at 1:16am

      @Pontiac:

      Thomas Paine was not a signer of the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. You are off track. Are you even an American by the way?

      History is factual, and you have been intentionally misled and lied to. We all have been for that matter. Separation of Church and State was the biggest propaganda lie ever spoon fed to this nation. This country was founded and deeply imbedded in Christianity: Like it or not it is the truth. It still is steeped in its Christian roots, but the world, as a whole, is believing the lies of the Enemy of Your Soul. Please don’t give in. Seek truth and God will reveal Himself to you. I pray that be the case for you. Time is short. Blessings to you.

      “You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand

      Here is a good place to start.

      http://www.wallbuilders.com

      Report Post »  
    • Pontiac
      Posted on April 22, 2012 at 2:11am

      [Thomas Paine was not a signer of the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.]
      Can’t argue your original point, so marginalize something that isn’t even the argument. There wouldn’t have been a revolution without “Common Sense”.

      [Separation of Church and State was the biggest propaganda lie ever spoon fed to this nation]
      Pushing religion is not and never was a legitimate function of our government. Nothing gives government that authority. The constitution gives you, THE INDIVIDUAL, religious liberty. It does NOT give the government or any institution thereof such liberty.

      [This country was founded and deeply imbedded in Christianity]
      Lah-de-dah. No one denies the founders were Christians and Deist. However, that does not give christians the authority to dictate what others should or should not believe. Stop being a belligerent ignoramus and get it through your head, government cannot be anything other than neutral on religion.

      Btw, Ayn Rand was one of my favorite atheist. Funny you would quote her speaking of “reality” when you speak of “mysticism”. I can no more believe in your fairy tales than you can believe in leprechauns and unicorns so give it a rest bible boy.

      Lastly, already seen wallbuilders, already aware of David Barton and his past fabricating quotes…

      http://atheism.about.com/od/tencommandments/a/americanlaw.htm (2 pages)

      Report Post » Pontiac  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:39am

    Let these manipulators and changers of God’s word understand loud and clear; they will be held and brought to task in judgment before the Father. This is just one more abomination of perversion that those who wish to deny the truth of Christ are using.

    Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • SimpleTruths
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:26am

      But they were inspired by God. How is that any different than the other many authors and subsequent translators of the book. ‘God’ didn’t sit down one day and write this out, it was all done by people like you and me. Anybody can make things up.

      Report Post » SimpleTruths  
    • Bill30097
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:33am

      amen

      Report Post »  
    • V-MindMeld
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 10:11am

      You hit the nail on the head,,,,it even states in the last verses of Bible and warns from GOD, for no one to add or take away from these words that are written,,,,,(thats not a quote but is the message essentially) and if you do alter it? well we’ll leave that up to Gods judgement

      Report Post »  
    • Silversmith
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 12:46pm

      So, if you take the word “Christ” out of the mix and replace it with “Anointed One”; doesn’t that make Christians, Annointedoneians??

      Silversmith

      Report Post » Silversmith  
  • BLACKDIAMONDSKIER
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:38am

    The only argument for or against it can only be made from what was written in the past…..

    “And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, a until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” 2 Peter 1:19-21

    “You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.” Deuteronomy 4:2

    “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.” Deuteronomy 12:32

    While they are at it why not remove the words God, creation, Jesus, good, evil, anti-Christ, Satan, sin, homosexuality, drunkeness, adultery, love, compassion, prophet, heaven, hell, liar, thief, deceiver, etc. The truth will stand for eternity…..It cannot be altered by man.

    Report Post »  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:46am

      Of course not, because the “Word” is built into men. Look what happens to people who live by the sword? Look what happens to people who are drunk far too much? Look what happens to adulterers? The “Word” is just right there all the time.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • scuba13
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 4:04pm

      And look what happens to idiots like Timmy who abuse prescription medications.

      Report Post » scuba13  
  • deadend
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:37am

    the great deceiver is hard at work.

    Report Post »  
    • CougarNick78
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:04am

      And plenty have itching ears wanting something soothing OR the so-called harder workers have grown tired and want to coast. Both are human. Both are typical. However, both, if unchecked and acted on far too long, will veer you off the path toward God and deeper understanding of His Truth.

      Report Post » CougarNick78  
  • mdeputy7
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:37am

    I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

    Revelation 22:18-19. Quit trying to “reach” people with gimmicks like this. We need to simply go out and meet people where they are….not bring them to us.

    Report Post »  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:11am

      The “Word” of God is in all men. Therefore nearly all men have added to the words and taken away from Revelation. That’s why people are looking at drones, and thinking to themselves “These are the locusts with venom in their tails”, and many other things added and taken away.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • John 3:16
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:41am

      Yes we must go out into all the world and reach people with CHRIST like attitudes of serventhood. Christ was and is a servant first. Christ washed many nasty feet soles before he washed their nasty spiritual souls. Allowing changes to GOD’S word is a slippery slope, similar to progressivism. It will muddy sparkling waters.

      Report Post » John 3:16  
    • Texas.7
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 12:42pm

      When we paraphrase the Bible, the reader must rely on someone else’s interpretation. I haven’t met anyone who reads every single text the same way I do, and others probably would say the same of me. But good for all of us, we have fairly accurate translations (linked to concordances with original words in ancient tongues). Ancient texts used unique analogies and word symbols, holding even more meaning for us as time progresses.

      Language changes very quickly between one generation and the next. Read something written a hundred years ago. I would guess that if each generation updated the Bible with their own common terms, we would grow further and further from truth, as we loose the underlining meanings buried in the original text. Our most accurate translations often fall short on certain verses. Paraphrases have only one dimension, and can even be wrong.

      Ancient words were originally built around the meaning of the letters themselves, represented by pictographs. Then, when pictographs were replaced by shorter symbols, spelling relied less on the original pictographs as dots and punctuation began to accentuate meaning- and Jesus tells us that these too shall come to pass (jots and tittles).

      We loose too much when we only read someone else’s pre-digested words instead of scripture. paraphrases are fine for Children’s books and commentaries, but if scripture is the litmus of all truth, let’s not change it.

      Report Post »  
    • amdntstr
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 6:15pm

      Itsjusttim. Wrong!

      Jesus is the Word. This is stated many times over. Jesus is NOT in all men. “The heart of man is evil, even in the womb”. Jesus can not abide in an evil heart. The Bible clearly states this when Paul writes thT those who preach a doctrine contrary to what he and the other apostles were teaching lived in darkeness and does NOT have God in them.The Word is only in true Christians.

      I read the KJV and the NAS but prefet Websters with both hos 1849 dictionary as well as Strongs. All three have gone back and used the oldest manuscripts out there when they wrote them. The OT has been around for around a tgousand years before the Catholic Church and is to be used to prove the NT. It is all there if you know where to look and care to put things in context. God again ordered everyone to teach the scriptures to everyone especially family.

      The Pope does not have a direct line to God. Again, read Isaiah. Oh yeah I forgot that is forvidden by the Catholic church. Hummmm.

      Report Post »  
  • izukiddin
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:36am

    My niece has seen this paraphrase and likes it. She is a biblical illiterate, but she is inching her way to God and that’s not a bad thing. But, an easy to read paraphrase is not a substitute for in depth biblical study and understanding.

    Report Post »  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:14am

      Right on! My thoughts exactly.

      Report Post »  
    • Texas.7
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 12:58pm

      I also agree as long as the meaning is protected. Paraphrases are great for new Christians and young ones. Translations are sent all around the world in many languages and bring many to Christ. But we should be clear that paraphrases are not full scripture, and we can’t loose touch with the original meanings- which still serve as the test of all truth.

      I once ran across a paraphrase once that used a football analogy instead of the original text- which did get one layer of that truth right. The problem is, the Bible is also a bit of a jigsaw puzzle, so when we read scripture, we can bounce all around, cover to cover to find the patterns, which themselves draw even more vivid pictures than the individual verses. I cherish these larger patterns, the simple hidden nuggets, as well as the surface message and hate to see any little smidgen of it lost or overlooked. Often, a paraphrased version, leaves me feeling unsatisfied, as if it was missing something- because the absolute beauty of scripture is the personal expression of the Holy Spirit, the voice of God showing you more than you expected to find. Pre-digested writings of man don’t do this for me very often. (Though, having said that, I really do like JB Phillips’ New Testiment.)

      Report Post »  
  • ZAP
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:34am

    And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book

    Report Post » ZAP  
  • searching for the Truth
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:33am

    The Interlinear gives a Side by Side Comparison of Both the Masoretic and the King James. Normally, This Version was recommended in theology schools. The Epilogue use to state that many versions of the Bible has had Christ’s Name removed.

    Report Post »  
  • Itsjusttim
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:31am

    Well of course they took out the word “Apostle” because there is a huge difference between Apostles and disciples (not to mention Paul was not an Apostle), but they don’t want you to know there is a difference between Apostles and just regular disciples. Well just as hospitals are trying to make it whereby women get Caesarean Sections, rather than the Father being able to deliver their own children – they want to make sure the Father is no where around.

    Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:35am

      They already separated the ability of Fathers to take their Newborn into his bosom immediately, and now they don’t even want the father in the room.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:40am

      I mean even look at the name of it “Caesar” Section. Duh, just passing by duh! Gee what is that.

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • Itsjusttim
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:53am

      I want Fathers to deliver their own babies. So tell me what seems just and true? To have them deliver their own children, or the liars who want them away from the good water and blood?

      Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • iampraying4u
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:13am

      itsjusttim take your meds

      Report Post »  
    • FormerLib
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:26am

      Paul was not an apostle?

      You are perhaps the only person in the 35 years I‘ve been an active practicing Christian I’ve ever heard make that claim. But I‘m sure you’re privy to information that leading theologians are not. Clearly, guys like Billy Graham, RC Sproul, HR Ironside. John Calvin, St Ignatius of Loyola, John Knox,George Fox, Charles and John Wesley, George Whitfield, Charles Spurgeon, Charles Hodge, Deitrich Boenhoffer, FF Bruce, and a thousand others were all completely wrong.

      Report Post »  
    • vaman
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 1:52pm

      You are certifiable and some kind of lunatic.

      Report Post »  
    • afdbghq
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 4:55pm

      You are correct to say Paul was not an Apostle but was in fact a Disciple. In all his writings he calls himself a disciple not an Apostle. There were only twelve original Apostles. These were the men personally called by Jesus to follow him. After these original twelve (plus the one who replaced Judas after his death) everyone else was and is still referred to as a disciple.

      The original church which Jesus established would be called The Christian Church. All other denominations (Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran, etc.) are based on different interpretations of scripture but are in essence still Christian churches. All denominations are correct in some of their theology and wrong in some of their theology because they are made up of imperfect humans. I go to the church I gp to not because of any specific reason other than it is the one I am most comfortable with. However, if at any time I feel that the teachings of this denomination starts to go against what I feel the scriptures are saying to me, I will be looking for another church home.

      Report Post »  
    • amdntstr
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 6:29pm

      So Paul was a liar when he called himself and Apostle? Or that there are more than just the twelve? Interesting since an Apostle is reaponsible for setting up churches and this is exactly what he did. He himself states that he was called as an Apostle by God and sent to the gentiles where Peter was sent to the Jews.

      Another interesting fact that you would know if you bothered to read the Word is that Paul and Peter argued many times over scripture vs. Traditions held by the Jews. Paul won out most of the time.

      Paul was also used by God to write 65%+ of the NT. Peter was not over Paul nor was Paul over Peter. They were equals in everyway except in scriptural knowledge since Paul was a Jewis priest with an extensive education in scripture.

      Report Post »  
  • JohnJoseph
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:28am

    Many wonder what is it about all these new bibles, is it just money. Let me give you what and who is behind them all:

    Acts 13:10—
    And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?

    The Apostle Paul had these same devils in his day and in churches where he went:

    2 Corinthians 2:17—
    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.

    Here is a warning for all those that would “pervert” the Word of God:

    Galatians 1:6-9—
    I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
    Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
    But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
    As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

    The words “let him be accursed” is speaking about “destruction” OR “dropping into hell fire”.

    I can hear the arguments – you are a King James Only believer. Yes I am. However, I have no problem with someone that wants to use another Bible. All I want is them to be honest and say – the Bible I’m going to use is the Word of God (they all c

    Report Post »  
  • momrules
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:28am

    Jesus Christ is our Lord, our Savior and our King.

    These people have devalued Him and God will not be mocked. I would not allow this tripe into my house.

    Report Post »  
  • EulersDayOff
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:25am

    Much too confusing. Wait. Wot?

    What a shame that the American education system can’t even maintain status quo. We just gettin dumber n’ dummer. kthxbai.

    Report Post » EulersDayOff  
  • SpankDaMonkey
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:22am

    .
    Did they replace ‘Christ,‘ ’Angel’ & ‘Apostle’ with The Black Baby Jesus Obama’s name?……..

    Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
  • Gonzo
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:21am

    I wonder what would happen if somebody published a similar version of the Koran? Pretty sure people would die.

    Report Post » Gonzo  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:29am

      They have Gonzo…There sre many versions of the Koran. It does however keep the same BS lies intact…

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
  • Gonzo
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:18am

    “Jesus the Anointed One.”???? I thought Obama had that title trademarked.

    Report Post » Gonzo  
  • Brandon
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:18am

    Well the headline was misleading…

    Christ does pretty much mean “the anointed one” so I think in most contexts its easier for someone who has never read the Bible to know what “the anointed one” means as opposed to Christ. Christ isn’t a regularly used word any where else.

    on another thought, if the King James Bible was good enough for Jesus it’s good enough for me!….

    Report Post » Brandon  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:33am

      Jesus had a King James Bible? What the hell are you smoking? The Torah is what Jesus taught from and the Bible was not put together for many yars after His death, burilal and ressurection…sorry man but there are many good solid translations out there besides the KJV….

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • 1956
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:52am

      Christ comes from the Greek,Christos, meaning literally, “annointed”. Christ is also interchangeable with Messiah (from the Hebrew mashia, and the Aramaic meshiha, also literally meaning “annointed”).

      Did they remove the word Messiah? I wonder.

      Report Post » 1956  
    • trolltrainer
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:21am

      Brandon
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:18am

      …on another thought, if the King James Bible was good enough for Jesus it’s good enough for me!….
      —————————————————————-
      Heh!

      Whoops…

      Report Post »  
    • tzion
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:28am

      Also, the word Angel comes for the Greek word meaning “messenger”, which was translated from the Hebrew “malach”, also meaning messenger. In fact, the word Angel has seemingly lost its meaning to the point that other similar beings in the Bible, such as the Seraphs, are called Angels when they technically aren’t. If the translated Angel as either messenger or G-d’s messenger it would be an accurate translation (or at least as accurate as a translation can be).

      Report Post »  
    • Brandon
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:28am

      lolz sarcasm, I have actually heard old folks at my church say this with a straight face.

      Report Post » Brandon  
    • Granny58
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:38am

      @baddoggy, I think he is just being funny.

      Report Post »  
    • Dismayed Veteran
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 11:05am

      Don’t want to burst your bubble but the King James Bible was begun in 1604 and completed in 1611 and was revised multiple times. Do you use the 1611 original edition or one of these revisions? BTW, these are just the modern revisions. There multiple revisions following the original 1611 bible.

      KJV20 King James Version—Twentieth Century Edition Jay P. Green

      CKJV Children’s King James Version Jay P. Green 1960

      KJ II King James II Version of the Bible Jay P. Green 1971

      NKJV New King James Version 1982

      KJ21 21st Century King James Version 1991

      MKJV Modern King James Version 1999

      AKJV American King James Version[1] 1999

      KJV2000 King James 2000 Version[2] 2000

      UKJV Updated King James Version[3] 2000

      KJVER King James Version Easy Reading[4] 2001

      HSE Holy Scriptures in English[5] 2001

      CKJV Comfort-able King James Version[6][7 2003

      NCPB New Cambridge Paragraph Bible[8] 2005

      AVU Authorized Version Update[9] 2006

      AV7 AV7 (New Authorized Version) 2006

      Report Post » Dismayed Veteran  
    • Texas.7
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 1:08pm

      And to further confuse things, the Greek Septuagint was the scripture most commonly used in Jesus’ day, with almost all OT quotes in the NT based on that ancient translation. The Septuagint was compiled a couple hundred years BC while the MT was assembled centuries after Christ. Of course they had Hebrew scrolls, I’m just pointing out that there were several versions at that time also. And the average man, including the apostles, used the Greek translation on a daily basis.

      Still, it is good to keep going back to the original sources so that we don’t find ourselves moved too far away from that meaning in our attempts to make it easier to digest in this day and age. I kinda like there being lots of translations, and am OK with paraphrases as long as the maintain original intent (not politically correct versions), and we rely primarily on original sources to establish truth, which never changes.

      Report Post »  
    • Watchingtheweasels
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 7:27am

      I have the Geneva Bible and the King James Bible on my shelf. Used the NIV for many years until I noticed a disturbing theme that has run through all modern bible translations to one degree or another: (1) Diminishing of the diety of Jesus Christ, (2) Promotion of feminism, (3) Advancement of homosexuality. If you have to pick a “modern” translation most immune to this trend it’s probaly the New King James.

      “The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.” (John 4:25)

      “He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.” (John 1:41)

      An “anoninted one” can be anything from the captain of a football team to a prophet, but only a messiah can save you.

      Report Post »  
    • Texas.7
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 9:56am

      Watchingtheweasels,
      You are right except that the Hebrew word for Messiah does literally mean “annointed”, except when used in certain context, it took on a title almost like god vs God or saviour vs Saviour. The word became a proper name for the One who carries out the role, so it does seem diminished if He is simply called “anointed” rather than Christ, or Messiah.

      And personally, using the title, rather than the description, which is generic, is more meaningful. That is why we still know the proximity of the Hebrew word, because early translators carried it over from Hebrew as a title they would not eagerly translate.

      \4899\ j”yvim; — mashiyach, maw-shee’-akh; from 4886; anointed; usually a consecrated person (as a king, priest, or saint); specifically, the Messiah: — anointed, Messiah. click to see \4886\

      from: \4886\ jv”m; — mashach, maw-shakh’; a primitive root; to rub with oil, i.e. to anoint; by implication, to consecrate; also to paint: — anoint, paint.

      In Greek, they often used the “proper name” Messiah in a translated form from Hebrew:
      (3323) Messi>av, — mes-see’-as ; of Hebrew origin [ Hebrew \4899\ (mashiyach)]; the Messias (i.e. Mashiach ), or Christ: — Messias.

      As well as the translation for annointed, which took on a proper name for the Messiah, Christ:
      (5547) Cristo>v, — khris-tos’ ; from (5548) (cri>w ); anointed , i.e. the Messiah , an epithet of Jesus: — Christ.

      Report Post »  
    • Texas.7
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 10:09am

      Watchingtheweasels,
      (cont) I agree whole heartedly with you, though I couldn’t put my finger on why until I read your post. Without the cultural reference the Jews had (whether speaking Greek or Hebrew), words simply mean the surface meaning to us. To them, the word was a title. People around the world have continued the use of the title Messiah or Christ.

      John wanted to be sure the translation was understood, though He used both as titles:
      John 1:41 He *found first his own brother Simon and *said to him, “We have found the Messiah”
      (which translated means *Christ).

      John 4:25 The woman *said to Him, “I know that Messiah is coming (He who is called Christ); when that One comes, He will declare all things to us.”

      We do loose something valuable when we remove the title and apply the most generic description. It would be like calling the President our elected leader. While BO is both, the Office Of Elected Leader doesn’t hold the same weight as simply calling him the president. And when foreign news media discusses our politics, they use the English word “president” rather than their own descriptive terms. There is something about recognising the one-of-a-kind title holder rather than diminishing His role as Savior to “one who saves”, or Christ to “one who is anointed”.

      BTW, you might like NASB, which is very accurate and much easier to read. Unfortunately, most sources of the Strongs concordances link to KJV, but for reading, NASB is great!

      Report Post »  
    • Texas.7
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 10:45am

      I like this title for Christ also:

      Is 30:15 For thus says the Lord GOD, the Holy One of Israel: “In returning and rest you shall be saved; In quietness and confidence shall be your strength.” But you would not,

      Jesus is the fulfilment of the Sabbath rest, and we cannot enter into that Sabbath in our own works. But He is our strength, and confidence in Him will be our perseverance.

      Is 12:6 Cry out and shout, O inhabitant of Zion, For great is the Holy One of Israel in your midst!”
      (Immanuel)

      Is 17:7 In that day a man will look to his Maker, And his eyes will have respect for the Holy One of Israel.

      Is 43:15 I am the LORD, your Holy One, The Creator of Israel, your King.”
      (Mocked as “King of the Jews”, He didn’t deny, clarify that His Kingdom is not of this world. Of that Kingdom, we have become Jews, not of the flesh, but of the Spirit.)

      Is 49:7 Thus says the LORD, The Redeemer of Israel, their Holy One, To Him whom man despises, To Him whom the nation abhors, To the Servant of rulers: “Kings shall see and arise, Princes also shall worship, Because of the LORD who is faithful, The Holy One of Israel; And He has chosen You.” (Part of the Godhead, despised of man.)

      Is 55:5 Surely you shall call a nation you do not know, And nations who do not know you shall run to you, Because of the LORD your God, And the Holy One of Israel; For He has glorified you.” 6 Seek the LORD while He may be found, Call upon Him while He is near.

      Report Post »  
  • budzy1911
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:18am

    The fact that CNN has a positive story on it makes you wonder. I’ll stick to the one I have.

    Report Post » budzy1911  
  • Susie
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:17am

    Boy the attacks on Christianity are sure coming from every side, including the ones which are so cleverly subtle they can be so easily missed.

    Report Post »  
  • Tunesmith
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:16am

    Not a big deal, but it shouldn‘t be sold or labeled as a ’translation’.

    Paraphrased bibles are fairly commonplace, the most popular of which is ‘the living bible’.

    So fine for casual reading, not so fine for serious study.

    Report Post »  
    • kaydeebeau
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:34am

      Agreed, I have a version called The Message that I use in conjunction with the traditional KJV as well as more current translations. I find it helpful.

      Report Post » kaydeebeau  
  • Jenny Lind
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:15am

    I’m kind of fond of the one I have-King James-don‘t believe I’ll be rushing out to buy this one. I rather doubt many will.

    Report Post »  
  • s0ck_monkey
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:14am

    The ancient Hebrew word that was translated into “angel” was also misinterpreted. It actually translates to mean “messenger”

    I wonder how different the messages of the bible would be if all the incorrect translations and misinterpretations were corrected?

    Report Post »  
    • tzion
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 9:36am

      Well the Greek root of angel does mean messenger. Obviously that meaning has been lost as even the Seraphs are now seen as Angels.

      Report Post »  
    • lukerw
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 10:11am

      The Latin “Lucifer”… was “Morning Star” in the Hebrew text… so considering Rules for Radicals worships Lucifer… I would say a correct translation would have much impact. Just like Witches were the creation of King James… replacing a list of crimes!

      Report Post » lukerw  
  • searching for the Truth
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:12am

    They can print a thousand Bibles, but none will replace the Word bought by Blood.

    Report Post »  
    • searching for the Truth
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:23am

      ” Line upon Line.”

      Report Post »  
    • MSrebel
      Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:20pm

      What exactly does that mean?

      Report Post »  
    • searching for the Truth
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 9:34am

      The meaning: There are Two or Three Witnesses for Every Thing in the Word. Unless This is changed or removed in the Holy Bible thru revision. Jesus ( God ) said it first , Moses second, and the Apostle Paul, third . This is spoken in the Word – Jesus said, ” Let every Word be approved by two or three witnesses.“ With an in depth study one will find that the ” Word, ” The Holy Bible, is filled with this validation.

      Report Post »  
    • searching for the Truth
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 9:51am

      The Word, Jesus, walked the earth before man, as testified by John and Paul. The Word, Jesus, was crucified on the Cross as testified by Mathew , Mark, Luke and John. And the Blood ( of God ) was bought for a price, paid for by God. For a sacrifice to be valid there has to be a letting of Blood.

      Report Post »  
    • searching for the Truth
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 9:59am

      In short, and since someone is making it virtually difficult to type , we all better be packing when we face Jesus at the end, with two or three witnesses for our existence.

      Report Post »  
    • searching for the Truth
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 10:12am

      If one doesn’t believe Jesus is God; then, Moses said it first, Jesus said it second, and the Apostle Paul said it third – ” two or three witnesses.”

      Report Post »  
    • MSrebel
      Posted on April 21, 2012 at 4:57pm

      You need to show me three scriptures that indicate Jesus is God. I offer these three, that he is not:

      Psalms 83:18- “That people may know that you alone, whose name is Jehovah (Yahweh), are the most High over all the earth.” King David of Israel.

      Micah 4: 5- “For all the peoples, for their part, will walk each one in the name of its god; but we, for our part, shall walk in the name of Jehovah (Yahweh) our God to time indefinite, even forever. -Micah a Jewish prophet

      John 8: 28- “…I do nothing of my own initiative, but just as the Father taught me I speak these things.”- Jesus Christ, Son of God (not God, or he’d be talking to himself.) Read all of the 8th Chapter for clarity.

      Report Post »  
    • searching for the Truth
      Posted on April 22, 2012 at 6:37pm

      Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be on His shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, ” the everlasting Father,” the Prince of Peace. Isaiah 7:14 ……. Immanuel: ” God with us.” Matthew 1:23 Behold a virgin shall be with Child ………. Son, and they shall call His Name Immanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. St. John 1: 1- ” 10. ” Colossians 2:9 In Jesus exist the fullness of the Godhead Bodily. There is much more Scripture on this, but I may get cut off from the blog.

      Report Post »  
    • searching for the Truth
      Posted on April 22, 2012 at 6:45pm

      Furthermore. Jesus was praying to the Spirit that existed in Him. After all , He is the Father, He is the Son, and He is the Spirit ( For only he is Holy ) – all Titles – He is the Great I Am, the Everlasting Father, The Holy Spirit, the King of Kings, the Comforter, the First and the Last.

      Report Post »  
  • mike_trivisonno
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:11am

    The Brick Testament is a better translation. And who doesn’t like Legos!

    http://www.thebricktestament.com/

    Report Post » mike_trivisonno  
  • lukerw
    Posted on April 20, 2012 at 8:08am

    It’s coming: The Bible… according to Universalists & Communists!

    Report Post » lukerw  
1 2 3 ... 7

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love