What do we confess? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.
So we’re back to looking at the trainwreck of KJV-onlyism. This time, we’re going to finish up the first part of this travesty. As always, you can find the source material here.
Bible Question #18: What did Jesus say we are to do relative to each other?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For the answer see: James 5:16. Many ‘modern’ versions say something similar to:
“… confess your sins to one another …”
( Notice this could lead to gossip and further sinning ). But the King James says:
“… confess your FAULTS one to another …”
Notice the 2 different words. The Bible says that ONLY God can forgive sins. We are supposed to confess our SINS to Him. We should confess our FAULTS to one another, but SINS are confessed to God. Faults and sins are entirely different.
Can you see how ‘modern’ versions have led Catholics astray? And, if it has led Catholics astray; couldn’t the same thing happen to us if we, our spouse, our children, or our pastor, uses a ‘modern’ version?
The word here is paraptoma. In all honesty, I was expecting hamartia, but either way, it doesn’t matter. As I looked at the way this word is translated in other places in the KJV, I saw it is still read the same way as sins, such as in the Lord’s prayer about forgiving our trespasses.
Now the problem here is that no one is saying that you confess your sins to others to earn forgiveness, although in some sense you do. If I have wronged a fellow man and I need him to forgive me, I confess to him and he forgives me. He can do that. That doesn’t forgive me before God, but it forgives me before my fellow man.
The verse later on says to pray for one another that you may be healed. Now if I read that like Johnson reads this part, I could say “See? You are to pray for one another to be healed? Only God can heal!”
Not only this, but people in accountability programs will tell you that confessing your sins to one another can be a good practice. These are found in 12-step programs where if someone screws up, they have to go and talk to their sponsor about what they did. That requires humility and is a good deterrent if the person is being honest to not messing up.
I also like how the boogeyman of Catholicism was thrown out there in the end. I am not a Catholic, but they don’t get everything wrong and I personally think a confessional is a good idea. It’s not because a priest forgives you, but because confessing to someone can help mean you don’t carry the burden alone. I have had a number of struggles that I have had greatly lightened because I talked to someone. They didn’t even give me great advice many times. They just listened. That was enough.
Bible Question #19: Do modern ‘versions’ of the Bible have anyother problems?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, the answer is yes. In the Bible, the New Testament sometimes re-quotes the Old Testament. An example of this is in Mark 1:2
Compare the two Bibles again. In a ‘new version’ it says:
“As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, …”
Compare this to the King James, it says:
“As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, … ”
Comment: The scripture quoted in Mark 1:2 DID NOT come from Isaiah as stated in these ‘modern’ versions of the Bible. The scripture quoted is from Malachi 3:1 ! Check it out.
Not only do ‘modern’ versions misquote God; they even misquote themselves!
The KJV reading of: “As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, … ” is correct, because the verse is from Malachi 3:1, and Malachi was a prophet!
So far we have seen all kinds of problems in these ‘new’, ‘modern’, ‘more easily readable’, ‘more up to date’, etc. etc. versions of the Bible. This leads to the last Bible question:
Folks. This one is easy. Composite quotations were something that were done in ancient literature and when that was done, two quotes would be meshed together and often they would be attributed to the most well-known figure. You can listen to my interview with Seth Ehorn on this one.
Bible Question #20: Why is it important to have the true Word of God (vs. a corruption)?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The answer, to our question, is found in 1 Peter 2:2. Please turn there now.
In a ‘modern version’ it says:
“… long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up to salvation; ”
The King James Bible tells us to:
“… desire the SINCERE milk OF THE WORD, that ye may GROW thereby:”
My comment is that this verse, in ‘new’, ‘modern,’ versions, contains 2 problems:
First, we are to desire the sincere milk OF THE WORD. The purpose is “to grow thereby”. Modern versions leave out “OF THE WORD“. It’s God’s word that feeds us. If, like the modern verse, we leave out “the word” how can we grow? Or, if we get a corrupted translation, how can we grow on ‘junk food’?
Second, contrary to ‘modern’ versions, we DO NOT grow up to salvation. That says salvation is by works! We are saved by grace, and not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9) Think about it.
In this chapter, we reviewed the doctrine contained in a “broad” array of ‘new’, ‘modern’, ‘more easily readable’, versions of the Bible. We compared ‘modern’ doctrine to the KJV. And, we have found significant error.
But, all ‘modern’ versions do not follow this ‘broad’ profile. So, in the next chapter, we will analyze 3 versions of the Bible which need an individual, case by case, analysis.
Again, this comes down to different textual variants. However, one thing I consider is that we have an emphasis in our culture on referring to Scripture as the Word of God and think whenever we see the term “Word” that it refers to the Bible. Hebrews 4:12 is an example. I think it is more likely that this refers to the words spoken to the Israelites in the wilderness. Now this certainly did become part of Scripture, but I don’t think Hebrews is telling us something about Scripture as a whole here.
An ancient reader hearing about sincere milk in this case would easily fill in the missing gaps and the author would realize that. In the same way, saying that it means growing to salvation does not mean works salvation. What it means is more akin to growing in the salvation and being developed into a saved person. If we use the milk analogy, a baby drinks his mother’s milk not so he can grow into a human, but so he can grow as a human.
I wish that this was the most nonsense, but I’ve already looked ahead some and, yep, it doesn’t get any better from here.
In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)