Adventist Online

You think your "new" bible version is safe to use? All Christians must watch this video.

i gotta say ive always known the NIV to be satanic from a long time. its actually produced  by a the same company that publishes the satanic bible and alot of homosexual books as well. now tell me why do millions of people read and uses the NIV bible. even on 3ABN they use it alot. how can the remnant church be using and teaching from a corrupted bible. and anyone who wanna post garbage trying to defend their beloved NIV, ESV, NLT, NKJV and all other corrupt bible versions need to watch the video before they make a comment.

Views: 2064

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Joshua, unfortunately the best I can do is to watch snippets of the video (partly because I'm online using a prepay T-stick). But every segment I have watched so far, concerns or alarms me. I wish I could say otherwise, but everything, to me, is straining out gnats, and swallowing camels.

I have viewed two other sections -- a comment on Isaiah 14:12 about Lucifer, and another section about disarming the people.

I'd like to comment briefly on the first of these.

The speaker sounds an alarm because the NIV has "morning star" in place of "Lucifer" in Isa 14:12.

The KJV reads, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!"

Whereas the NIV reads, "How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn!"

Now "Lucifer", according to the KJV margin, literally means "day star", and in the context of the thought, this "day star" is associated with the morning (or more correctly, the dawn). So technically, to render the name "Lucifer" -- in literal terms -- as "morning star" is quite reasonable.

My main thought on this, however, (which is really a parallel thought,) relates to the Bible use of the name "Elohim". We normally say that "Elohim" relates exclusively to God --  that it is one of the Divine names. But this is simply not true. While Elohim certainly does apply to the true God, Elohim is frequently applied to false gods too. For example,

"Then shall the cities of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem go, and cry unto the gods unto whom they offer incense: but they shall not save them at all in the time of their trouble." (Jer 11:12)

When we read this verse in the Hebrew, "gods" is literally "Elohim", exactly the same name applied to the true God. And so the charge that the NIV uses "morning star" in relation to the Devil is by no means a grievous wrong -- the Bible frequently does the same kind of thing.

I see what you mean, but there is more to it than what you say as far as the first part goes. The problem with removing Lucifer's name was that in itself. In Luciferianism, Lucifer is their god or guide to enlightenment. When they remove his name they remove him as the one being cast out because...

Also if you watched what he said also, Jesus is the Morning Star as stated elsewhere in the Bible. It is Jesus being cast out instead of Lucifer/Satan. I have always read it as Lucifer was Son of the Morning, not the Morning Start itself, in as I said, Jesus is said to be the Morning Star.

Even though the Bible as you say uses the same terms for the same meaning (?), Jesus or God's titles were specific to Him. I am not familiar with Elohim as much as other names, but I will look into it.

Now you may be right, but the purpose behind the changes is not as important as why the changes were made. The word usage. It has a purpose to the agenda Studying the occult and these societies you will see clearly what these blasphemous changes represent and that is the defamation of God's character and promotion of Satan's government. Satan knows the Bible better than us and has not problem confusing the languages so that we may go back and forth over literal translations. 

I do not believe everything in the video say nor agree with some of their teachings, but I believe it is the truth they are teaching that is important, not so much the messengers themselves. If Jesus warned that His word would be corrupted one day, I see no conflict with the NIV being part of that deception. Many of us have read it but if we believe Jesus and we see error, we should put it away. It is not the only Bible out there and there are better translations even then.

Thanks Joshua. I'm mindful that some of my views can rub people up the wrong way (i.e. irritate them). Some (not necessarily here,) are tempted to become passionate and abusive, but you have done well. I am glad to read your response. We all need to be able to stand on our convictions.

Have any of you tried the Geneva Bible?  When the KJV first came out, the Protestants wanted nothing to do with it because King James had been raised Roman Catholic and used Catholic scholars and corrupted manuscripts for the translation.  (His mother was Mary, Queen of Scots.  He only nominally converted when his cousin, Elizabeth I died childless and he assumed the English throne.)  Anyway, the Geneva Bible was translated by some of the greatest Protestant scholars of the age.  It is the only book known to have outsold the King James Version of the Bible.  While it is 90% the same, there are some differences.  For example, the image of Daniel 2 had THREE elements comprising the feet, not just two as is presented in the KJV.

If you want to check out the Geneva Bible, you can read it at www.biblegateway.com.  I am not opposed to the KJV.  I use it as my personal study Bible, but I think all would be blessed by being open to the idea that God has preserved the Scriptures in the original languages, not necessarily in the modern English.  I am so thankful for modern technology that makes these other options available for free on the Internet!  Thanks for sharing this video.  :)

I think the Geneva bible is another if not better alternative to KJV because of the information you just gave. I'll have to bookmark that site as I don't have one, of course :)

But I just got a new NKJV Bible from Pastor Doug Bachelor of Amazing Facts  :( 

Personally, I do not think there is anything wrong with using the NKJV.  Compare the various translations if you get stuck on a verse, but the Holy Spirit can still reveal truth and draw the mind.

As I don't think there is anything wrong with the NIV.

If you are aware of all that is wrong with the NIV and will have another translation to make up for the lost verses and altered wording, you'll be doing a lot of cross-referencing but it is a personal choice. In light of the evidence against it,  can't with a clear conscious say that Satan did not have a hand in its manipulation just as he did with later modern translations. Not just that, the publishers of those Bibles as I researched myself were indeed non-Christian and part of the occult societies.

I would hope you encourage anyone young in the faith or becoming Christian to use another translation or at least warn them in light of the information in the video. :)

Please take your medication!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Stay clear of the Clear Word, it is a paraphrase not a Bible.

Idon't tthink that Jackie Blanco intended the Clear Word to be a Bible or any type of Authrative text. Sometimes I look for some light reading material and enjoy reading the Clear Word. I understand that you cannot use it if you a serious Bible student.

He may not have intended it to be used as Bilble, but it is being used that way.  It should be taken off the market because we cannot replace the word of God with tradition.

 

H. Leon Bryan

RSS

Site Sponsors

 

Adventist Single?
Meet other Single
Adventists here:
Join Free


USA members:

Support AO by
using this link:
Amazon.com

 

© 2019   Created by Clark P.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service