Inspiration Only or Inspiration and Preservation?

Lifeway’s New Bible: Holman Christian Study Bible (HCSB)

“The complete Holman Christian Standard Bible® is now available! More than twenty years in the making, crafted by the shared expertise of nearly a hundred conservative scholars and English stylists, the Holman CSB® sets the standard in painstaking biblical accuracy and pure literary form. Accurate, yet highly readable, it’s a translation committed to leaving both the grace and gravity of the original languages intact while carefully creating a smooth flow of wording for the reader.” Quote from the Lifeway website.

Here are a few excerpts from this 'so-called' fine work of accurate biblical scholarship.

Psalms 8:3-6 HCSB
When I observe Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars, which You set in place, what is man that You remember him, the son of man that You look after him? You made him little less than Godand crowned him with glory and honor. You made him lord over the works of Your hands; You put everything under his feet: Footnotes found in the HCSB for this verse are [7] LXX reads angels [8] Or gods, or a god, or heavenly beings; Hb Elohim

Now that’s interesting. According the HCSB translation, Jesus was made a little less than God. This 'scholarly work' chose to make it read 'God' in light of the Septuagint's angel translation and the otherwise understood usage of the word angels in Hebrew! So I ask again, why did these 'scholars' change the Word of God? Clearly the Word of God teaches us that Jesus the 'Son of Man' is God, not less than God. Jesus was 100% man and 100% God. This same scholarship is evident in many of the other modern versions. Now, let’s look at the verses in Hebrews 2 that quote Psalms 8.

Hebrews 2:6-8 HCSB
But one has somewhere testified: What is man, that You remember him, or the son of man, that You care for him? You made him lower than the angels for a short time; You crowned him with glory and honor and subjected everything under his feet.

Did you notice they didn’t have the heart to make the New Testament quote read the same as the Psalms passage? Hebrews gets it right and Psalms is wrong. This is a clear error in doctrine and a contradiction between the Testaments. Similar problems exist in the New American Standard and the many other modern versions. The HCSB refers the reader in Psalms to a footnote that the passage is translated from the LXX (Septuagint – simply put, a Greek translation of the Hebrew with many revisions to that underlying Hebrew text) versus the Bible that Jesus studied and quoted – the Hebrew Massoretic text. The Massoretic text clearly reads the son of man was made a little lower than the angels in English as opposed to 'a little less than God'.

Here’s another interesting example in the HCSB:

Luke 2:33 His father and mother (Footnote: Other mss read But Joseph and His mother as contained in the King James Version)were amazed at what was being said about Him.

Which text is correct?

Joseph and his mother or his father and his mother?

Let me ask it another way, which text did the Holy Spirit author? Which text magnifies the Lord Jesus Christ and affirms the critical doctrine of the virgin birth? Which version builds faith and which one destroys faith because it whispers in your ear and tells you that you can’t really be sure what God says – because the oldest and so-called more reliable manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sianaticus) say ‘his father’ while a more modern text (Textus Receptus) reads Joseph?

The battle lines have been drawn. We are being asked to believe in the doctrine of inspiration. However, the Scriptures not only teach the inspiration of God’s Holy Word, they also proclaim its preservation! Psalms 12:6-7 “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.”

Jesus also said in Matthew 5:18, “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”

I am reminded of another verse with a stern warning from the LORD regarding His Word. Mark 8:38 “Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.”

Beloved, we are living in an age when the norm is to be ashamed of God’s Word. I believe the apostasy swirling around us today fosters this. The numerous modern Bible versions calling themselves ‘Holy Bible’ are fraught with error, conflicting passages, and even heretical teachings. The doctrine of preservation forces us to either believe what God says: He will protect and preserve His Word, or sadly we turn our back on that truth and reject what He proclaimed. If we do believe God in the matter of preservation, then we must contend for the faith and in so doing we must understand that there is no confusion with the LORD. Therefore, if one so-called Bible contains a passage that leaves out the blood of Jesus, omits Hell, casts doubt on the virgin birth, states that Jesus is a little lower than God, then we must decide for ourselves: Which version is God’s Word?

I realize this topic is about as popular as a snake in high grass (yea hath God said?). But in the days ahead, we will all be faced with tests that stretch us and if we doubt the veracity of God’s Word, we may just be persuaded to follow the 'yea hath God said?' crowd and not the LORD. I’m sure you can guess it if you haven’t done so by now after reading this, but I recommend the King James Version for the follower of Jesus. Granted some of the language is archaic, but scholarship has shown it to be accurate to the underlying texts and believe it or not, easier to memorize due to the nature of its prose. Truly the LORD does magnify His Word above His Name (Psalms 138:2).

In Him,

Eye

Badds Too Good at Verizon Heritage

Excerpts from the Associated Press - April 16, 2006

HILTON HEAD ISLAND, S.C. -- Aaron Baddeley won the Verizon Heritage for his first PGA Tour title, rallying with two late birdies and finishing off Jim Furyk with a scrambling par on Harbour Town's lighthouse closing hole.

Baddeley was tied with Furyk entering the round, had a two-shot lead by the fifth hole, then was down by that many to Furyk after No. 11.

Aaron Baddeley became the second straight Aussie to win the Heritage (Peter Lonard).But the 25-year-old Australian proved unflappable, birdieing two of the hardest holes on the PGA Tour -- the 14th was statistically the hardest par 3 on tour last year and the 15th was the hardest par 5 -- to move in front for good.

Baddeley shot a 1-under 70 to finish at 15 under, a stroke ahead of Furyk (71) and two ahead of Vaughn Taylor (66) and Billy Mayfair (69).

Golf fans might best know Baddeley as the young hotshot in the golf commercial, driving a convertible with young female fans yelling his nickname, "Badds." It's an image the first-time winner says he's not fully comfortable with and one he expects will change over time.

He's a devout Christian who aspires to the ministry when he's through with golf. He celebrated his one-year anniversary this past Saturday. Hours before his final round tee-time, Baddeley spoke at Harbour Town's Easter Sunrise Service by the 18th green. Two days earlier, Baddeley closed his second round with an unlikely eagle at the famous lighthouse hole.
******************************************************

Congratulations Badds! Keep up the good fight and thank you for sharing your testimony of how Jesus Christ saved you.

In Him,

Eye

Who Dares to Change the Very Word of God?

The following was a comment I made on another Blogsite. For posterity's sake I'm posting it here for any who care to see some chicanery...


To all who desire to know the truth!

Fact: The Textus Receptus Greek text for John 1:9 is identical to the Westcott-Hort text covering the same verse! Please see below for a comparison of the Greek texts. Why then did the English translators of the Westcott-Hort text choose to give the Greek language a different meaning from what it says in Greek?

In case you were not aware of the above fact, you need to know this…

Fact: The King James Bible is the only English translation based on the Textus Receptus. The other modern versions use the Nestle-Aland Greek Text which predominantly derives its heritage from the work of Westcott and Hort.

(Greek NT - Textus Receptus) John 1:9:

ην το Φως το αληθινον ο Φωτιζει παντα ανθρωπον ερχομενον εις τον κο σμον


(KJV) John 1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

(Greek NT – Westcott -Hort ) John 1:9:

ην το Φως το αληθινον ο Φωτιζει παντα ανθρωπον ερχομενον εις τον κο σμον

(NASB) John 1:9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.

Other similar modern translations from the Nestle – Aland text:

(CEV) John 1:9 The true light that shines on everyone was coming into the world.
(RSV) John 1:9 The true light that enlightens every man was coming into the world.
(Holman NT) John 1:9 The true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world.

To the honest seeker of truth – do you see it? The Greek text found in the Textus Receptus and the Westcott – Hort New Testament texts are identical! In other words, they say the same thing in Greek. How then can you have two different English renderings from the same Greek sentence? The KJV states that man is coming into the world and the other English renderings state that the Light is coming into the world. Why is that if they both come from the same Greek text with no variation ? There is NO clear reason to change the meaning of the Greek text. As Jesus said, ‘Take heed therefore how ye hear…’


Another Fact: The Textus Receptus Greek text reads dramatically different from the Westcott – Hort/Nestle – Aland text. As a matter of fact, the omissions found in the Nestle – Aland New Testament text when compared to the Textus Receptus New Testament text are equivalent to the number of words found in First and Second Peter!

Here is another example of a doctrine – the blood of Jesus – that is eliminated in the Westcott – Hort text, but clearly stated in the Textus Receptus. You be the judge as to which is correct and which is not.

(Greek NT - Textus Rec.) Colossians 1:14
εν ω εχομεν τ ηυ απολυτρωσιν ςτα του αιματ ο ς αυτου την αΦβστν τωνα μ αρτιωυ


(KJV) Colossians 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, [even] the forgiveness of sins:

(Greek NT - W-H ) Colossians 1:14
εν ω εχομεν τ ηυ απολυτρωσιν την αΦβστν τωνα μ αρτιωυ


(You can clearly see the Greek text is not the same for the Westcott - Hort text as the Textus Receptus)

(NASB) Colossians 1:14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Not one mention of blood in the Westcott - Hort text and the NASB translators were faithful here to the underlying Greek, even though it is not the BIBLE!

In Him,

Eye