| Poster | Thread | KingJimmy
Member
Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC
| | Re: | | Quote:
The things that I mentioned were omitted almost 2,000 years ago by a pagan named Origen in Alexandria, Egypt. Thus: Alexandrian Text.
This is simply false.
_________________
Jimmy H
|
|  2006/3/27 10:43 | Profile | KingJimmy
Member
Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC
| | Re: | | Quote:
Of course, there is still another side to this story. In my opinion, the KJV and NIV debate comes down to a question of sources particularly whether or not a person is willing to accept the Textus Receptus, the Alexandrian and other texts, or both.
Excellent post here chris.
_________________
Jimmy H
|
| | 2006/3/27 10:52 | Profile | Greenquality
Member
Joined: 2006/1/26
Posts: 189
mountains of Pa.
| | Re: | | take the discovery of the rosetta Stone, this stone held the key to unlock 3 ancient languages, which is inscribed,..Greek,and two forms of Egyptain writings,one being the older hieroglyphic. all three languages on this stone,are in one acorde in the mesage inscribed.a key facter in decoding these languages. was the Coptic language which is the oldest form of Aramaci,which is still spoken today. |
| | 2006/3/27 11:06 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Quote:
This is simply false.
Is it false because you say it is? I may have over generalized it, but the statement I made is not false.
Krispy |
| | 2006/3/27 11:13 | | KingJimmy
Member
Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC
| | Re: | | Quote:
Is it false because you say it is? I may have over generalized it, but the statement I made is not false.
Can you please offer any actual proof whatsoever the Oriegen delibereately made additions/omissions to create what is known as the Alexandrian texts?
_________________
Jimmy H
|
| | 2006/3/27 12:32 | Profile | ccchhhrrriiisss
Member
Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779
| | Re: | | Hi MeAgain... Quote:
HA Chris, I thought you were the guy who said he doesn't like to press a point.
Is this a record for you on one thread ?
I thought it was just sort of out of character for you.
How come ? I'm just interested because you said you read the KJV, so why so many posts for the NIV and all of this work on one topic ?
And I ain't bein' a wise guy neither ... just so curious about what drives you on some topics.
It's not that I want to ever force anyone to concede a point. However, I feel that if someone feels the need to create a thread when a position is already decided beforehand, then the motive is to spark some sort of discussion.
On a side note, I have noticed that there are alot of Christians that believe a particular doctrinal persuasion -- yet cannot rightfully validate their beliefs. If a person believes in the "pre-trib Rapture" -- why? What Scriptural evidence does that person base their beliefs upon? The same can be asked about nearly every topic of discussion in the Church. While many of the positions we take on issues are true -- far too often that position is influenced primarily by what we are taught, and not by truths that we sought out.
Likewise, there are believers that take a "final" stand on an issue when they are not (or cannot be) completely convinced about taking such a position with the little or tainted information they obtain. Sadly, it seems that it doesn't take much to convince many believers. The Church truly needs men and women with Berean-like attitudes. I pray that God fill us with an attitude where we "prove everything" that we are taught -- as Paul urged us in I Thessalonians 5:21. If Christianity around the world is truly "missing the mark," then we really need to test everything that we hold so dear. Remember, it is "hard to kick against the pricks" (Acts 26:14).
:-)
_________________
Christopher
|
| | 2006/3/27 12:56 | Profile |
| | Re: | | These are fact about Origen.. this comes from multiple sources, and of course, just like you I have not traveled the world and done archeological digs to unearth this. I have had to rely on the work of others, just like you. I have found this same info from sources on BOTH sides of this issue.
I know you'll counter it with info you have learned in seminary. That neither bothers me or surprises me... but as you do not believe the modern versions are a big conspiracy, I do not believe that there is a big conspiracy to smear the name of Origen. Facts are facts, and they can not be denied.
[i]"Origen of Egypt is considered te be the source of both the Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus. How "godly" was he? He referred to Jesus Christ as the "Ktisma," or the "Created One (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITTANICA). He believed in universal salvation, unbaptized babies going to hell, reincarnation and transmigration of the soul (MANUAL OF CHURCH HISTORY, A. H. Newman). He also believed that the devil will be saved in the end. He took great liberties with the Word of God. From Dr. David O. Fuller's bool WHICH BIBLE, we read the following:
Origen had so surrendered him self to the furore of turning all Bible events into allegories that he himself, says, The Scriptures are of little use to those who understand them as they are written.
In order to estimate Origen rightly we must remember that as a pupil of Clement, he learned the teaching of the Gnostic heresy and, like his master, lightly esteemed the historical basis of the Bible. As Schaff says, "His predilection for Plato (the pagan philosopher) led him into many grand and fascinating errors. He made himself acquainted with the various heresies and studied under the heathen Ammonius Sacca, founder of Neo-Platonism. He taught that the soul existed in eternity before it inhabited the body, and that after death, it migrated to a higher or lower form of life according to the deeds done in the body. Finally all are to return to the state of pure intelligence, only to begin again the same cycles as before. He believed that the devils would be saved, that the stars and planets had souls, and were, like men, on trial to learn perfection" (Dr. David Fuller, WHICH BIBLE, pages 109 and 110).
Anything that Adamantius Origenes (Origen) didn't agree with, he changed. Finally, in order to be more "holy," he castrated himself.[/i]
Any wonder why the Catholic Bible is based on the same exact text as the modern bibles?
Krispy
|
| | 2006/3/27 13:28 | |
| | Re: | | Quote:
ccchhhrrriiisss wrote:
Hi MeAgain...Quote:
Quote:
It's not that I want to ever force anyone to concede a point. However, I feel that if someone feels the need to create a thread when a position is already decided beforehand, then the motive is to spark some sort of discussion.
On a side note, I have noticed that there are alot of Christians that believe a particular doctrinal persuasion -- yet cannot rightfully validate their beliefs. If a person believes in the "pre-trib Rapture" -- why? What Scriptural evidence does that person base their beliefs upon? The same can be asked about nearly every topic of discussion in the Church. While many of the positions we take on issues are true -- far too often that position is influenced primarily by what we are taught, and not by truths that we sought out.
Likewise, there are believers that take a "final" stand on an issue when they are not (or cannot be) completely convinced about taking such a position with the little or tainted information they obtain. Sadly, it seems that it doesn't take much to convince many believers. The Church truly needs men and women with Berean-like attitudes. I pray that God fill us with an attitude where we "prove everything" that we are taught -- as Paul urged us in I Thessalonians 5:21. If Christianity around the world is truly "missing the mark," then we really need to test everything that we hold so dear. Remember, it is "hard to kick against the pricks" (Acts 26:14).
:-)
Hia Chris, "Pressing" a point 'is' certainly different than "forcing" a point as you have said.
All the research one can do the better. Gobs of it and yesterday was my 1st ammendment day on here. ha. Two posts on freedom of speech. I love it.
I've given my opinion here enough on the KJV - I can't let another translation or interpretation get into my head for memorizing, or it takes longer to find it in the Strong's etc.
Just to give you more research material so we all stay open minded..[url=http://www.oldpathspublications.org/defended.html]KJV Defended Download[/url]
[url=http://www.trinitarianbiblesociety.org/]Click on Articles on left.[/url]
But you should know better than to ask me, even as just analogically What Scriptures do Pre-Trib folks use ? Ha. I like that question. Why ?
I've been asking the same for 21 years now. Ha.
All joking aside, you also have "final stands" no ?
I wonder just how objective one can be and wonder are you are applying all of the above for yourself also ?
But there are things we have to learn to stay firm on. And not gonna use any fancy terms here ... but besides absolutes ... there is the wisdom to know, that you "don't" question "everything" and that's also important for young folks to know. Because our beliefs are about to be tested rather severely and the no absolutes thing that's come in with the Alpha course and all has hit some young folks hard.
But you ain't a youngin', so maybe you don't need to hear that.
Unfortunately, the folks who raised me were the cards all out on the table type folks. You never had to wonder how they felt about you or anyone else for that matter ... ha.
Crude by some folk's definition of good communicators and definitely "missing the mark", but reckon that's why I prefer to deal with unsaved folks.
They tell ya what they're thinking 'right out' - HA. Some folks who used to post here too did also.
Thanks for your patience in answering me. And for covering for me when you can. Ha, now that takes a large roll of paper towels if anyone would like the job full time.
Ya'll have fun now.
:-? Still my new sig.
Edit: I have no idea why this is long and narrow. ha.
|
| | 2006/3/27 13:46 | |
| | Re: | | Quote:
It's not that I want to ever force anyone to concede a point. However, I feel that if someone feels the need to create a thread when a position is already decided beforehand, then the motive is to spark some sort of discussion.
It's not secret around here where I stand on this, so it shouldnt surprised anyone. Also, I made it abundantly clear why I started this thread right from the get-go. So yea, my motive was to spark some sort of discussion... and it's been a great one, in my opinion.
Why act surprised now? Perhaps one should read the entire thread before acting surprised about my pre-decided stance on this issue.
:-)
Krispy |
| | 2006/3/27 14:54 | |
| | Re: | | Krispy, forgive me, I'm the one that provoked that answer from brother Chris.
The way I worded my post to him was NOT Perfect .. as is the norm ... but it could put anyone on the defensive as to why they are being questioned about why they have posted so much on here.
Chris was trying to explain his reasoning in defense of my not so perfect question. It wasn't at you at all. He wouldn't post on here if he thought you were wrong in starting this thread.
He's not 'surprised' at you, but I may have caused him and possibly others to be surprised with how I worded my post that he was replying to.
You guys are all great and please don't let blabber-mouth ruin a great discussion ... See why -> :-? |
| | 2006/3/27 15:10 | |
|
