Mark 16: 9-20 inspiration, God or man?

[WIbaptist]

To everyone else who believes in the Holy Bible::

Psalms 12: KJV
6 "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. {7} Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

You heard it here folks. To be a believer you must adhere to and only to the the KJV that was based on newer, further from the original, less accurate transcripts and filled with multiple translation errors. The KJV is the path to heaven, not Jesus.

 

[oldhermit]

I believe it to be added by a scribe and not inspired by God and certainly not written by Mark. Thoughts?

I have another question for you. It may seem off topic but it isn't. Do you believe 1 John 5:7-8 to be inspired by God or added by man?

 

[John146]

You heard it here folks. To be a believer you must adhere to and only to the the KJV that was based on newer, further from the original, less accurate transcripts and filled with multiple translation errors. The KJV is the path to heaven, not Jesus.

I don't see where Adstar said what you claimed he said. Older does not mean better. Older simply means those manuscripts were not accepted as valid and were not used, thus they survived longer (albeit in the Vatican). New received text were used and wore out, like our bibles should be. Yet, you cannot find one error in the KJV that has not been correctly refuted.

 

[BenFTW]

You heard it here folks. To be a believer you must adhere to and only to the the KJV that was based on newer, further from the original, less accurate transcripts and filled with multiple translation errors. The KJV is the path to heaven, not Jesus.

How many people throughout history have come to Christ, through people's understanding of the Gospel by reading the KJV? How many preachers and evangelists used it, and were so inspired to share the truth of God's word, that through their preaching the Lord did convict the world?

What I'm saying is, for a book you deem as "less accurate" and to be filled with translation errors, it doesn't seem to be a hindrance in leading people to the truth.

 

[WIbaptist]

I don't see where Adstar said what you claimed he said. Older does not mean better. Older simply means those manuscripts were not accepted as valid and were not used, thus they survived longer (albeit in the Vatican). New received text were used and wore out, like our bibles should be. Yet, you cannot find one error in the KJV that has not been correctly refuted.

https://bible.org/article/why-i-do-not-think-king-james-bible-best-translation-available-today

 

[WIbaptist]

How many people throughout history have come to Christ, through people's understanding of the Gospel by reading the KJV? How many preachers and evangelists used it, and were so inspired to share the truth of God's word, that through their preaching the Lord did convict the world?

What I'm saying is, for a book you deem as "less accurate" and to be filled with translation errors, it doesn't seem to be a hindrance in leading people to the truth.

I never stated that God couldn’t work through it and inspire people to faith in Christ.

 

[John146]

https://bible.org/article/why-i-do-not-think-king-james-bible-best-translation-available-today

You get your theology from Bible.org? No thank you. Have you actually done a serious study on it yourself? When reading through the KJV, have you found the errors you speak of yourself?

 

[WIbaptist]

I have another question for you. It may seem off topic but it isn't. Do you believe 1 John 5:7-8 to be inspired by God or added by man?

I do not believe that it is original and was added later by men.

 

[WIbaptist]

You get your theology from Bible.org? No thank you. Have you actually done a serious study on it yourself? When reading through the KJV, have you found the errors you speak of yourself?

I have several translations of the Bible in print. And a multitude more on the Bible app.

 

[WIbaptist]

You get your theology from Bible.org? No thank you. Have you actually done a serious study on it yourself? When reading through the KJV, have you found the errors you speak of yourself?

What in that article is incorrect? Everyone is so quick to discount anything found on the internet. It needs to be with caution and checked against other sources but it’s no less valid than reading something in a book.

 

[oldhermit]

I do not believe that it is original and was added later by men.

Considering that possibility, do you believe that what it teaches is in contradiction with what we learn from other places in scriptures?

 

[BenFTW]

I never stated that God couldn’t work through it and inspire people to faith in Christ.

No, you didn't. Yet, what are the implications of invalidating certain books of the Bible? What is seen to be as 100% truth is now found questionable. If one book is found to be in error, then how much is truly, well, true? The slippery slope begins. What ploy has been set in motion to discredit books of the Bible? Is the devil at work having put false information in God's word, or is the devil at work by making people question God's word? Either way, the end is all the same.

If you believe the former, what else is false then that you have assumed to be true? Doubts arise. Cracks in the foundation. If you believe the latter, you understand that God has preserved His word for His saints, for His children, and the Spirit leads them in all truth. If the Bible is the means by which God delivers the truth to us, then it must be pure. The standard of objectivity. The enemy may wish to make people question that Word, but it is still nonetheless His word.

 

[John146]

I have several translations of the Bible in print. And a multitude more on the Bible app.

Doesn't it seem just a little unscholarly and hypocritical for the NASB, NIV, ESV to include these 12 verses in their "bibles", and yet to omit the other THOUSANDS of words from the New Testament based primarily on these same two manuscripts from Egypt and Rome?

If they really believe they are NOT inspired Scripture, then let them take a solid stand on their mistaken convictions, and simply OMIT them. But don't keep sitting on the fence and sowing doubt as to the true words of God. Oh...wait....THAT'S what they DO anyway, isn't it!

What's keeping them back? Could it be that they don't want to get too far from the KJV where they would certainly be exposed for what they are?

 

[WIbaptist]

Considering that possibility, do you believe that what it teaches is in contradiction with what we learn from other places in scriptures?

No, and neither is Mark 16: 9-20. But they are additions to the original. The main reason I posted this is because it is the most quoted scripture from fraudulent “healers”, Pentecostals and Charismatics that claim to control the power of the Holy Spirt, and from those in Apostolic churches. It has lead many astray.

 

[John146]

What in that article is incorrect? Everyone is so quick to discount anything found on the internet. It needs to be with caution and checked against other sources but it’s no less valid than reading something in a book.

So you didn't find the errors yourself? Have you been educated out of your child like faith that the God who gave us His original word and commanded us to live by it, did not preserve it perfectly for us today?

 

[WIbaptist]

No, you didn't. Yet, what are the implications of invalidating certain books of the Bible? What is seen to be as 100% truth is now found questionable. If one book is found to be in error, then how much is truly, well, true? The slippery slope begins. What ploy has been set in motion to discredit books of the Bible? Is the devil at work having put false information in God's word, or is the devil at work by making people question God's word? Either way, the end is all the same.

If you believe the former, what else is false then that you have assumed to be true? Doubts arise. Cracks in the foundation. If you believe the latter, you understand that God has preserved His word for His saints, for His children, and the Spirit leads them in all truth. If the Bible is the means by which God delivers the truth to us, then it must be pure. The standard of objectivity. The enemy may wish to make people question that Word, but it is still nonetheless His word.

I never challenged let alone invalidated an entire book of the Bible, only the contested sections within.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I’ve yet to meet a bible believing Christian of any denomination that belives water baptism is anything more than than a public display of faith in Jesus. Those that hold to infant baptism are putting tradition and church doctrine over the Bible and I oppose them.

Hey bro, get out more, look at all the baptism thread in here, they do believe that

 

[oldhermit]

No, and neither is Mark 16: 9-20. But they are additions to the original. The main reason I posted this is because it is the most quoted scripture from fraudulent “healers”, Pentecostals and Charismatics that claim to control the power of the Holy Spirt, and from those in Apostolic churches. It has lead many astray.

Misrepresentation of any text of scripture by a select segment is not justification for calling the legitimacy of that text into question.

 

[WIbaptist]

So you didn't find the errors yourself? Have you been educated out of your child like faith that the God who gave us His original word and commanded us to live by it, did not preserve it perfectly for us today?

I have found many. I don’t keep a written record. I wouldn’t believe what I believe if I didn’t see them for myself. What I have issue with is blind faith in a single translation mainly the KJV.

 

[WIbaptist]

Hey bro, get out more, look at all the baptism thread in here, they do believe that

I know that there are many that believe it to include Lutherans and Presbyterians. I hold that they have strayed from the Bible in that matter and have elevated church doctrine and tradition over the Bible.