The curious case of John 5:4

[Johann]

St. SteVen said:
THE point is that you claim that EVERY word is inspired.
But when we encounter a questionable verse, you say it "isn't a salvific issue".

Does a text have to be salvific to be inspired?

We can let the non-salvific texts go? (not required to be inspired)

[

I’m not stepping into the trap with your ἐκπείραζε (ekpeirazo) question, my friend. The one storming this forum and casting doubts on the Bible is you-you can leave me out of this.

As far as I'm concerned, you have lost the battle and are not forthcoming about what YOU believe. It seems to me that you may not even know WHAT you believe.

There’s a reason why Jesus chose not to respond to His opponents.

Adieu

J.

 

[Lambano]

I suppose there's a good reason for that. - LOL

[ cc: @Lambano

No, I am willing to accept @Johann's experience in these Christian/Muslim disputes. He has the experience; I do not.

 

[Matthias]

How would you help someone …

The common internet forum brawl response (as depicted in a Western):

A too common internet discussion forum deadly response (as depicted in a Western):

An under the radar internet discussion forum response to the common internet forum responses (as depicted in a Western):

***

The purpose of the thread has been thwarted. An all too common internet discussion forum experience.

* My commentary on internet discussion forums. *

 

[Lambano]

I have to point that if the battleground is "your holy writings are corrupt; our are not" logically requires that we produce the "original autographs" to prove it, which we can't. And to say that "those verses are not salvic" is to concede the point that the writings HAVE been corrupted, but "that's not important now". (Airplane! reference.)

 

[Lambano]

(Airplane! reference.)

 

[Lambano]

The purpose of the thread has been thwarted. An all too common internet discussion forum experience.

It sounds like you took reasonable actions. But my point is that you should've taken the opportunity to change the battlefield, because pointing out the manuscript issue only concedes the point the opponent was arguing.

 

[ChristinaL]

why would you lead him to an unintelligible bible? Most people who do not reasd old english can not comprehend what the word says.

The KJV also has errors. which if you lead with your reasoning, would cause them to discount any bible.. Because of the perfect KJV is proven not perfect. well throw it all out

Oh dont YOU start now....first of all if you are talking of the original 1611 ok yeah it can be kind of hard to read but its not old English and only a weak lazy person couldnt comprehend it. Secondly are you really that dense that you dont know all you have to do is get a later KJV edition if you wanted a more readable one?

And you are getting some really bad info because the only bibles that are really full of errors are the modern translations not the KJV. I challenge you to bring up any "errors" in the KJV because I can answer them very easily

 

[Johann]

I have to point that if the battleground is "your holy writings are corrupt; our are not" logically requires that we produce the "original autographs" to prove it, which we can't. And to say that "those verses are not salvic" is to concede the point that the writings HAVE been corrupted, but "that's not important now". (Airplane! reference.)

Clearly-

Claiming that the Bible must be entirely without any copying differences in order to be authoritative sets up a false standard. We can be confident that what we have is more than sufficient for understanding God’s will, especially concerning salvation. Rather than conceding corruption, we affirm the reliability of the Bible where it matters most.

J.

 

[Matthias]

It sounds like you took reasonable actions.

I was caught off guard by the student, who had been caught off guard by the Muslim. I don’t doubt that there are other things I could have done.

I could have started this thread in the Apologetics forum. The story in the OP, after all, sprung from that ground. I chose not to for a reason: I wanted to focus on the plight of the unprepared student, for the benefit of those who might find themselves one day in the same situation I found myself in.

But my point is that you should've taken the opportunity to change the battlefield…

That points to the importance of being prepared to handle a situation before the situation arises. (The purpose of this thread.)

… because pointing out the manuscript issue only concedes the point the opponent was arguing.

I don’t think it concedes the point to the Muslim. It arms us to speak intelligently to the Muslim about the reliability of scrpture.

 

[Rockerduck]

or maybe the KJV added verses that were not in the original.

We have to be careful and not make statements of facts which can not be proven. There is no perfect english text.

Over 20,000 manuscripts that agree in the majority texts. Over 2000 Latin manuscripts that agree. All these have the verses that were removed because the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus did not contain them. Also, the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus did not agree with each other, so they mixed together to make one codex. Would you rather trust 40,000 manuscripts that agree versus two or three that don't agree with them or each other?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Oh dont YOU start now....first of all if you are talking of the original 1611 ok yeah it can be kind of hard to read but its not old English and only a weak lazy person couldnt comprehend it.

I have the origional KJV, I also have my mothers old Scofield reference KJV. About 3 years ago I was packing to move and I saw it, and opened it to read it. Now after growing up reading the kjb and studying it deeply before I crossed to the NKJ bible at the age of 16. The parts that i read I found to be confusing, and I found it not to be an easy read. because we do not use that language today.

A lazy person. what a Joke. and here I thought you would enjoy a normal conversation.

Secondly are you really that dense that you don't know all you have to do is get a later KJV edition if you wanted a more readable one?

Verily Verily I say unto you.

How can a normal person understand what this means? Who speaks in this language?

And you are getting some really bad info because the only bibles that are really full of errors are the modern translations not the KJV.

Sorry Bud. The KJB has many errors. There is no perfect english bible the english language in itself is flawed

I challenge you to bring up any "errors" in the KJV because I can answer them very easily

lol. So your better than the many others?

again, I grew up with the KJB, and I currently us the NKJB which is really not much different.

You want to worship your idle.. feel free. thjat fact you even made a post like this shows me you are not a person I should look to for the truth about bible versions

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Over 20,000 manuscripts that agree in the majority texts. Over 2000 Latin manuscripts that agree. All these have the verses that were removed because the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus did not contain them. Also, the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus did not agree with each other, so they mixed together to make one codex. Would you rather trust 40,000 manuscripts that agree versus two or three that don't agree with them or each other?

since when is the MAJORITY to be trusted?

I do not trust ANY english bible completely. they all have flaws.. There are 4 words for love ALl with completely different meanings. and only one english translation. for this reason alone, any english bible is flawed. andf not perfect.

so your going to go to a muslim or any other person and tell them your bible is perfect.. They will laugh in your face.

.

 

[Rockerduck]

since when is the MAJORITY to be trusted?

I do not trust ANY english bible completely. they all have flaws.. There are 4 words for love ALl with completely different meanings. and only one english translation. for this reason alone, any english bible is flawed. andf not perfect.

so your going to go to a muslim or any other person and tell them your bible is perfect.. They will laugh in your face.

.

No way. I'll Challege a Muslim with his Koran against the KJV. The Koran has massive flaws as it was written 300 yrs after Mohamed. Plus I've yet to see any religion stand against the Holy Spirit preaching.

 

[ChristinaL]

I have the origional KJV, I also have my mothers old Scofield reference KJV. About 3 years ago I was packing to move and I saw it, and opened it to read it. Now after growing up reading the kjb and studying it deeply before I crossed to the NKJ bible at the age of 16. The parts that i read I found to be confusing, and I found it not to be an easy read. because we do not use that language today.

A lazy person. what a Joke. and here I thought you would enjoy a normal conversation.

Verily Verily I say unto you.

How can a normal person understand what this means? Who speaks in this language?


Sorry Bud. The KJB has many errors. There is no perfect english bible the english language in itself is flawed

lol. So your better than the many others?

again, I grew up with the KJB, and I currently us the NKJB which is really not much different.

You want to worship your idle.. feel free. thjat fact you even made a post like this shows me you are not a person I should look to for the truth about bible versions

"how can a normal person understand what this means" Very easy. Read it and look it up if you need to.

As for errors in the KJV I challenged you to prove it, and you cant because there arent any that cant be explained.

PROVE YOURSELF. You arent the only one who claims here that the KJV is full of errors. well I say to ALL of you Put up or shut up. I have seen the sites myself that claim the KJV is garbage but their conclusions are completely errant

 

[Matthias]

KJV is fine. It’s this thread that is now garbage.

 

[ChristinaL]

KJV is fine. It’s this thread that is now garbage.

Whats really difficult here is that you often cant get these people to back themselves up and if they do try, and you answer them adequately, they ignore you or come up with some intellectually deficient response to your answer.

Or alternatively.....years ago I had a mentor, a bible teacher who often told me one thing...that when you have adequate resources to answer many questions yourself, like books or online stuff, he told me in no uncertain terms to get off my butt and look them up myself and come at him with the truly difficult stuff. THAT TOO is hard to get people to do here

 

[marks]

Internet discussion forums -> commentary hell.

I guess it's what you make it.

Much love!

 

[Matthias]

Whats really difficult here is that you often cant get these people to back themselves up and if they do try, and you answer them adequately, they ignore you or come up with some intellectually deficient response to your answer.

What’s really difficult here for me is justifying my own use of time.

[For me this forum is primarily an escape from my work with neglected, abused and at risk children. (Quite often, especially with teens, they don’t want help but are in desperate need of it.) The irony is that my presence here is a ”hair of the dog that bit me” remedy. Running from trauma to trauma to escape trauma. A psychiatrist would probably have a field day with that.]

Professors I worked with think what I’m doing here is a waste of time and talent. I’m working in the gutter; they’re still working in an ivory tower.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

No way. I'll Challege a Muslim with his Koran against the KJV. The Koran has massive flaws as it was written 300 yrs after Mohamed. Plus I've yet to see any religion stand against the Holy Spirit preaching.

lol.. Well I will challenge them with almost any English bible.

I do nto worship a English translation

 

[Matthias]

I guess it's what you make it.

Much love!

No. It is what it is. It will remain this way until the Messiah returns.