Share This Episode
Matt Slick Live! Matt Slick Logo

Matt Slick Live (Guest Host Luke Wayne)

Matt Slick Live! / Matt Slick
The Truth Network Radio
January 13, 2022 5:24 pm

Matt Slick Live (Guest Host Luke Wayne)

Matt Slick Live! / Matt Slick

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 471 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


January 13, 2022 5:24 pm

Open calls, questions, and discussion with guest host Luke Wayne LIVE in the studio. Topics include---1- Is the new Jerusalem a literal city---2- How did Noah know which animals were clean and unclean and what did those categories mean before the law was given---3- Why do so many Christians say that the Bible is the word of God, when John 1 says that Jesus is the word---4- Why does John call Jesus the word---5- What do people mean when they talk about spirituality- Is it close minded to reject practices like Tarot cards---6- Is it ok to listen to the Bible instead of reading it---7- What is your response to King James Onlyism-

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Cross the Bridge
David McGee
The Christian Car Guy Show
Robby Dilmore
The Bible Study Hour
James Boice
The Christian Car Guy Show
Robby Dilmore
Grace To You
John MacArthur
The Bible Study Hour
James Boice

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network. Why is it apologetic to research what is found alive you have questions about Bible doctrine is a max why good afternoon everyone, I am Luke Wayne filling in for Matt would work with that at the Christian apologetics and research ministry that could harm.org. The ARM.org and would you know ask you to be a brand for Matthew three that a little bit of a thickness this week, but we are praying he will use on the road to recovery.

He will be on the mend and back in with you guys on Monday. In the meantime, God's providence. We plan for me to be on here anyway and I'm excited to be here answering you guys question for those of you who might've missed it yesterday or by way of reminder, borrow, we have a special guest coming on. I'm going to be interviewing a good friend of mine Chris Mortensen from Utah's voice for the voiceless. This is a Christian ministry that does frontlines work at engaging with the issue of prenatal infanticide. What we would normally call abortion they do sidewalk gospel ministry out in front of abortion facilities sharing the gospel and pleading for the lives of unborn babies in seen life change through that and then they also administer to the material needs bent and practical needs of the of single mothers who are in difficult situation to help alleviate the temptation to turn to to that way out and they also at the same time also engage in the political sphere meeting with all local City Hall members and state representative attempting to advocate for just laws and attending town halls and an unique as the name says boys for the voiceless of those who cannot speak out for themselves.

So if you want to know more about how you how Christian can engage in the political sphere or sidewalk gospel ministry on this important issue. This is an episode you are not going to want to miss so I really hope a lot of you guys will not only listen tomorrow but join in. Call and ask Chris your tough question and he is a great guy devoted I list all the things that the ministry.and it sounds like all they must've been must be a big organization. It's actually a small group of devoted guys who work full-time job and do this in their off hours and yet, by the grace of God there able to accomplish so much, how much more if more Christians were both doing so was going to be a great opportunity to talk about the thing and go real deep with a guy who's on the front line and so I hope you will join me and Chris tomorrow or what I what promises to be a a great and engaging conversation so that's that forgetting to the phone. Let's take a couple questions people have written in on line though Randall on you to ask how what oh what do you think about the new Jerusalem is a literal city allegory of the bride of Christ or what okay Randall that's a good good question, revelation, and not with all of the imagery can be complicated to sift through what elements are literal and figurative. This is where a lot of the political debates come out of the wrestling through this question which portions of the book are simple and which are literal description and so both the first straightforward thing that I want to say is that the general teaching of the New Testament is a literal hope of a physical resurrection to a bodily life. When Christ returns.

Just as Christ rose up out of the grave in the body in which he died, he will raise us up in the same way so the general hope taught by Scripture is a literal future hope bodily life and that is what we as Christian ultimately await our Savior to return and accomplish conservation, but when it comes to the very specific detail in Revelation 21 when it talks about the new Jerusalem, the specific precious stone. The gates of a single pearl of the pillars in the exact dimensions of you know, 14, 15,000 miles in of width and length and height are all of these things exactly what the city is going literally look like the place of our dwelling literally looked like. I suspect that these are simple. These are our prophetic images, meant to tell us of the grandeur and glory of our future open to tell us something about what God is giving to his people.

What Christ has bought for his people. The glorious hope that we have as believers more than it is meant to be a a mere list of of building material out of which our future city will be built, so I would tend to lean more toward the idea of a a figurative application of that passage, not in the sense that we don't have a literal bodily resurrection hope those big direct images are or are simple meant to tell us something about the nature of similarly earlier in early and rare earlier in Revelation and say Revelation chapter 17 when it talks about the harlot, the woman who is Babylon the great, the city who sits on the beast with seven heads that are seven ill and it describes her as wearing precious stones and pearls and gold.

Many of the same images are called up in a woman that represents symbolically a city who in turn doesn't simply mean the city is in the buildings but the people and so this is talking of talking to us about the nature of something in the symbolic images I think Revelation 21 is probably doing something similar telling us about the glory and grandeur of our hope, rather than merely a exact visual picture of what that's going to be I might be wrong and if I get there and it looks literally down to the detail exactly like Revelation 21 and praise God I will be delighted to be there and what God has been give out is grace in the age to come, and so now those are those those are important and challenging questions will be look at that that books like Revelation, so Randall I hope that is a helpful answer to your question for callers.

We do still have lines open and you can you can call in at 877-207-2276. Let's get to another online question Alex on Facebook wrote Noel was told to bring seven of every clean animal onto the ark and to every unclean, but how did no one know what clean and unclean animals were and what those categories mean before people were eating animal that was until after the flood, and before there was a law and spoke above the law and sacrificial system were clean and unclean was such an important category.

That's a great question, Alex. So let's stop and think about the flow of gin up into that before that after Genesis 3 in the fall. Genesis 4 introduces Cain and Abel and Cain and Abel worship God through sacrifice and Abel offers animal so even though the Mosaic law had not been instituted. There was a system of sacrifice people did bring free will offerings of the sort as acts of worship to God. And so this was a bit there was sacrificial worship and so the idea of cleaning uncritically. Animals had probably already been revealed, not for dietary purposes, but for sacrificial purpose. It's also some Christian scholars think that clean and unclean animals was used as a shorthand in the Moses was writing this book to people who already were receiving the law I was used as a shorthand to express which animal Noel was instructed to have seven of on the ark versus the two, and so there are multiple reasons why we can look at save this would've been a meaningful way to express another question that we had Johan on Facebook wrote, why do so many Christian faith that the Bible is the word of God and the Bible says the chief right now Johan the I get what you're saying John one says in the beginning was the word the word was with God the Word was God.

John 114 says the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, so clearly Jesus is referred to with the title of the work, but I think your what you're committing here is the fallacy of equivocation where a word or a phrase or term can be used in more than one way and you switch part way through your argument. Which one you're using and thus confused situation. It would be like if I'm at a Monticello and my athletic instructor tells me and the people around me. Okay, it's time to exercise your right arm or five at a political rally and a speaker says it's time to exercise your right to bear arms exercise right and arm in a completely different thing in those two can't in the same way this term. The word has a precise meaning and specific meeting in John one that it doesn't necessarily mean every other time. If you and so it is true that Jesus is the word, but that doesn't mean that the Bible in another sense is not the word of God, and in fact I would turn it back on you. How can you state that the Bible is not the word of God. When Jesus says that the Bible is the word of God.

In Matthew 15 six Jesus accuses the Pharisees the teachers the law think that because of their their elevating their tradition over what's commanded in Scripture, and he says, and by this you invalidate the word of God for the sake of your tradition. And so Jesus did call the Scriptures the word of God similarly went with challenging and tempting him. He rebuked state quoting from Deuteronomy man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

Again is the word of God and in quoting Scripture to the Pharisees, he says, but regarding the resurrection of the dead have you not read what was spoken to you by God and he quotes the Scripture. And so Jesus regarded the Scriptures as the word of God and so this is a bit a proper thing for Christians to do for us to say okay the Scripture Jesus that the Scripture is the very word of God. When we read the Scripture we are reading what God spoke to us. It's not just a recording of the word of God. It is the word of God and and that is why a Christian would rightly truthfully properly call the Scripture, the word of God. Even though the Scriptures would in a very different events refer to as the eternal word. The second person of the Trinity and so these are I get where you're question I understand why you would ask the factor is that you affected your confusing two different ways of using the term word and in so doing creating a seeming contradiction that just isn't that and so I would not similarly related to that. So why does John call Jesus the work also as an SSL think this talk about life passes us so you have lines for open your your mass Y call 77077 charismatic slave, welcome back Luc Wayne again Aaron format flick. If you are just joining us out for the week will be Lord willing back on Monday and I am still in in here.

I work with Matt at the Christian apologetics and research ministry or carved out or of the lines are open and we are ready to take your calls at 872072276 would love to hear from you guys. You guys are before the break we were talking about the subject of why is Jesus called the word in John chapter 1. What does that mean what's the significance of that terminology. And why did John choose to use all think the call Jesus the word and some people have attempted to attach this to Greek philosophical use of the Greek word log off things like that but there's really a more straightforward answer to why John would use that is that it was a biblical Old Testament term tremendous significant passages like Isaiah 5510 through 11 for as the rain and the snow came down from heaven, and do not return there without watering the earth and making it bear and sprout and furnishings ceded to the sower and bread to the eater so will byword which goes forth from my mouth. It will not return empty, without accomplishing what I desire, and without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it God's word is pictured not merely as as speech would have sent forth on a mission to accomplish. Psalm 107 19 through 20. Baked then they cried out to the Lord in their trouble. He save them out of their distress. He sent his word and healed them and delivered them from their destruction or install one 4715 through 18, he sends forth his command to the earth's word runs very swiftly.

He gives snow like wool. He scatters the frost like ashes ashes.

He cast forth the ice like Bruckner fragment who can than before Colby goes on to talk about all the creative power in that, but God's word is pictured going forth on running accomplishing a mission. So there. These personal attributes given in the in this picture of the word of God, and indeed in first Samuel 321 we see in the Lord appeared again in Shiloh because the Lord revealed himself to Sam Samuel at Shiloh by the word of the Lord, the Lord appeared that's visual obstruction sound.

Just hearing speech. The Lord appeared by reviewing him help his word, and so when God appeared in the Old Testament and made himself known what people's fault, not just hurt what they saw was the word of the Lord will be be begin to see through this and many other passages but the word is a term used in the Old Testament for the second person of the Trinity.

A person who goes forth sent from the father to accomplish the mission and return. Who is God it's the Lord who appeared and yet is the word of God. And so when John wants that in the beginning was the word the word was with God and the Word was God.

He was in the beginning with God. This is using rich Old Testament language to speak in a Trinitarian fashion show chief as the eternal son of God's word spent for, but his ultimate redemptive mission accomplished on the cross and the that is why when we understand this from a biblical context. John want to complete the rich testimony of Jesus. His deity the triune nature of God and so these are super important things to understand all right what we are going to get now to Josh in Salt Lake City who is calling in right now John, Josh, you are on the air either a pilot had a question about spirituality and there I have spirituality like ceremony and tarot card reading and she said that him close minded for not thinking about I don't understand what spirituality is like a good not if it does that it probably not yet what if by spirituality, what your friend means.

This practice is like tarot card reading and things of that nature then the spiritualities are talking about his vehicle and computing with SQL spirit which Scripture warns us again. It's not close minded to two word of Jesus warns us against do not believe every spirit test the spirit the fee if there if that's close minded. I want to be quote I don't want to open my mind to deceiving spirits who are going to light the spray I want to listen only to the spirit of God the spirit speaks to the Scripture.

And so of that kind of spirituality occult spirituality peaks spiritual knowledge outside of the one true spirit of God through tarot card reading or other psychic or occult practices is something were warned in Scripture to avoid. And I certainly would not let any chiding or name-calling of close minded pressure you into participating in something that would not only be sinful, but would be a a danger ensnare to deceive you and lead you astray that God will make the farm where a gifted artist, your heart, that I will live in a naturalistic world we live in a supernatural world there are real spirits in this world and Scripture warns us against listening to any spirit that is not the spirit of Christ. All right, so that's not the kind of spirituality.

I agree there are currently. Is there anywhere dear where Scripture talks about this so that I can maybe try to give myself good ammunition against spiritual and so one of the one of the first place places when I was but I was just quoting from an first John four beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God because many false prophets have gone out into the world by this you know the spirit of God. Now it's good to give several things that we need to look at your first every spirit that can best that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that is coming and now is already in the world.

Therefore, the first of all, the sex is pulled on right back with several other Josh and everybody like mass Y call 77077 is show Luke Wayne I am filling in for Matt Flick this week you'll be back with us on Monday. Lord willing, and will be provided welcome them back but I work with him here car and am excited to be taking your questions this week about so we left off before the before the break we were talking with Josh from Publix Betty about occult practices occult spirituality and why that is inappropriate for Christian to participate and though I will be getting back to him in just a second, but if you want to call in with your question again the number is 877-207-2276. Let's get back to Josh.

Josh is still with us. Okay, so Josh as I was the as I was explaining so were told not on first John or not to believe every spirit, but the test the spirit. The first tests were given is that spirit, the confess that Jesus Christ is has come in the flesh are from God. Now that's specifically this is John writing who wrote John chapter 1 so what he's talking about is the it the incarnation of the second person of the Trinity, the specific theology that he is already taught through his gospel, and so any spirit with the night that that explicit teaching about who Jesus is, is to be rejected. Beyond that, he goes on goes on to say you are from God, little children overcome the world, because greater is he that is in you that he is in the world they are from the world. Therefore they speak as from the world and the world listens to them. We are from God. He who knows God listens to us. He who is not from God does not listen to, but we know the spirit of truth in the spirit of error for the second test would be those the spirit agree with the teachings of the apostle.

The apostles is made clear.

Whatever does not agree with what they have taught with the New Testament with each other what the apostles instead is of the world is the spirit of antichrist is to be rejected. And so we have to look at the Scripture we have to look at the person of Jesus, and we judge every spirit. By the thing now those scriptures also give us specific practices that we are not you to access spiritual knowledge and among those would be for example, Deuteronomy 1810, there shall not be found among you, anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or who uses divination or who practices witchcraft or who interpret omen or who is a sorcerer so anyone who is using using cards or things like that to try to gain a spiritual death is that the form of divination or anyone who is looking for omens in nature and the stars or scope 30, things like that.

Practicing witchcraft any of these things we are forbidden to do once we get the books of the cane Chronicle we see the king specifically condemn for participating in the back cracked. Look for example at second Kings 21.

Click he made his son pass through the fire practice witchcraft and use divination and dealt with mediums and spirit that kind of spirituality that your friend is advocating. He did much evil in the sight of the Lord, provoking him to anger noticed the change in the New Testament. No acts 1616 talks about. For example, a slave girl who has a spirit of divination was identified as a demonic spirit that got pollens of casting out. But this, this spirit does fortune-telling and all exactly the kind of practices you're talking about. And so this is any spirituality that would be connected with interpreting omens or divination through tarot cards and things of that sort is a demonic occult spirituality that is sinful and angering to God. These are these are things that we are forbidden to participate. This is not how we gain knowledge from the true spirit. This is instead how we put ourselves willingly in the position to meet that make sense to Josh yeah it does kinda responded like not close minded all neurologist. The only person decide.

The Bible right wrong it out like out of people. I know many people don't like to read the Bible politically. On audiobook a lot.

That's why I do it and I think reading the Bible when we can. Looking at the actual words and and reading it carefully is is important, useful anyone who is capable, but listening to audio Bibles. Additionally, to take it in more and to surround yourself with. It is also good.

I do the same thing and I read the Bible to my family out loud so they gather and listen to it being read.

So, hearing the hearing, the hearing, the Bible red reading the Bible. These are ways that we hear the sure and indisputable voice of the Spirit of God. And so while people we live in a culture that wants to chase the novel, chase the experiential chase.

The new and but the fact of the matter is that where we can truly hear the very speech of God. The very word the very voice of God is in the words of his Scripture. And we ought to treat that accordingly back to studying your Bible is true spirituality that we do commune with the spirit of God through his inspired words.

There and so you're absolutely right that is that's not being close minded.

That's truly opening your mind to God in his voice instead of chasing after worldly knowledge that is truly no knowledge at all but is lies.

Dear really good!

All right close that that answer question Josh yeah good. Thank you so much. Have a good day. All right you two to okay that was Josh. We are now going on to Helen in North Carolina. Helen you are on the air thank you letter great job you're doing here.

I really did want to call Leanne and talk a little bit about the King James only controversy ANR if that's a long ongoing affair with mom like fond of Christians I mean well-meaning but are just so ignorant when you try to explain things to them in that you scriptures that we have venue roles that were found and the more accurate type of translation today that we have available to and that that there were many mistakes in the King James only unit in the King James version of Scripture and I braved your your report on them only kind of God or an odd logic that they are so full of knowledge and wisdom and truth that you just share that with that and got the listen to you. Okay. Did you have a did you have a specific question on it or or just generally on the topic just tingly on the topic like would be great. I think that a lot of folks just like they don't even understand what they're reading.

Many times when you're reading the King James, etc. foreign might like to unite the type of English to ask it.

It's very difficult to understand even though I grew up with it a lot the poetry at that back it to not as accurate as it today if you could just give us the history of the different translation that would be wonderful and some of the translations that you have found more true to the original Hebrew and Greek.

We would logically hear that absolutely Helen, I am tied up. I'm happy to share what I can on that so and anyone listening right now who may have a different opinion than mine on this. I'd love to hear from you. I really enjoy talking if you were listening in your you hold to the King James only perspective I'd love to hear from you. Dr. love to talk with you about it and and I hear why you hold that in and be able to share with you directly. Again, you can you can call SSA 772072276 is so go ahead calling it online and right after this brace, I will answer Helen challenge challenge in and talk to you without Bible translations and changes only as a why I hold the view that I do so student for that right after this mass likewise is 770776 charismatic slave, welcome back to the show for those who are just joining this is not Matt slick I'm Luke weigh in on filling in for Matt this week you will be back with us on Monday. Lord willing, so just before the break Helen from North Carolina called in and asked me to expound on the subject of King James only, and so if you would like to talk talk talk to me about that subject. Raise your own views or if you have other questions you'd like me to answer before the end of the hour call and at 877-207-2276 would love to hear from you, but you King James only is him is a subject I've actually written a whole lot about it.

Say if the subject of interest to me, not because I think that all King James only at our non-Christian cultists. If there is cultic King James only of them but most can gentleness are not of that variety, thereby our brothers in Christ, and I think this is an important issue.

Understanding the reliability of translation English translations of the Bible and how we can we can access God's word in our own language.

The English that we speak today and I am not when I speak against King James only of them. I want to be clear for those of you who don't know King James only as a is the position that only the King James Bible.

Only the old KJV is the true word of God in English and any other translation of the Bible is is incorrect and should not be used in so instead, there are various versions of this position. But if in the end your position says only use the King James. Don't use any other Bible than you would be a form of King James only, and so when I speak against King James only is some I am not speaking against the King James Bible, which I actually believe is a fine translation of the Bible into the Elizabethan English of 400 years ago and I was raised in the King James Bible. My we were not King James only us as I got old enough to read for myself.

My father let me read in other translation that I understood better but would still insist that I memorize scripture in the King James because he was convinced it was the most accurate and so many of the verses that I have memorized today are still in my own mind memorized and not in King James and I have to translate them myself if I'm reciting them to someone is not accustomed to the King James English. So if I'm reciting Romans 12 one into I might say to you, I urge you therefore, brothers, but in my own mind. I'm thinking I beseech you therefore, brethren, and bit so I love the King James Bible.

I do and most of the places where there is apparent disagreement between the King James Bible in modern translations is not actually because one of those translation disagrees with the other, but it's because the English language has changed. There are legitimate differences, both in translation and in manuscripts but in most cases. King James only as will point the passage is saying these. You see, the translations disagree. When if you actually understand the old English they don't disagree at all, but that's actually what the problem comes in is that the King James only asked doesn't understand the old English that their reading and thinks the verse is saying something different than it really is and therefore they think it disagrees with the modern translation, which is speaking more clearly in the English they themselves read and understand and so it's it, but this is one of the reasons why reading a modern translation, even if you go to a church where you you you preach and study in the King James Bible.

Keep keep studying that absolutely am not telling you to leave your church.

If it's the gospel believing Christian church, but also as an addition, it's helpful to read a modern translation because you will realize passages that maybe you've never understood or misunderstood your whole life because you didn't grasp that older English that's one of the most important reasons why modern translations are in fact so important because just as the King James Bible was a great translation into the English of its day translations like the new American Standard. The English standard version, or even the NKJV, the new King James version are fantastic translations into our English. The English that we speak today and so these are these are helpful translations even if you use them as study aids along with reading the reading the KJV, I still read the KJV devotional.

He as one of the Bible that I that I read and study and I still when I write my articles and am trying to understand the of of verse try to dig into a passage.

It's one of the translations all consult, but I do not believe that we are doing ourselves any favor by using exclusively a translation that was written, it was translated into an English that we don't speak beyond that at the time that the King James Bible was translated knowledge of of Greek and especially Hebrew was in its infancy and will in Western Europe and in England where where the King James Bible was being produced and so there are places where we understand the Greek and the Hebrew much better now than they did then and that's not to insult that we are standing on their shoulders. We have grown from their study. They were brilliant men who did incredible work and they themselves didn't want to work to stop with them. That was not the attitude of the translators back in 1611, but think to give you an example, if you go to Titus 213 and the time that the King DHT James translators were working. They did not yet understand what's called the Granville Sharp rule and I will go into all the grammatical details, but it's how certain Greek words work in certain grammatical contact and because they didn't understand it, the translation in this verse.

The KJV is not wrong, but it is less clear. Less clear on a very important point. When you read the KJV on that passages is looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ. Now this is frankly the Colts love use the KJV on this verse because it allows you the grammar in the KJV allows you to make a distinction between the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ as to entirely separate entities. Here now.

That's not what the KJV is actually saying.

But the grammar is ambiguous enough. It's vague enough that it can be read that way looking for the blessed hope of the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ. But if you read any modern translation better understanding of the Greek grammar. We know that it would actually say looking for the blessed hope and the and the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ great God and Savior are both being used as titles of Jesus Christ. Jesus is being called not only Savior. These explicitly and directly being called by Paul, our great God and that when you read it properly is even what the KJV is saying, but it says it vaguely it says it's unclearly you can read it improperly. There where as the unknowing. The Greek grammar better as scholars do today.

They can render it more clearly and straightforwardly, unambiguously, as looking for the blessed hope and the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Christ Jesus. And that is who Jesus is. He is our great God and Savior another place that you can look is in the book of Jude in the book of Jude.

We see verse four.

Political result of got it in the NASB right, elevate the holders of the KJV in the KJV. It says there are certain men who crept in unawares who were before before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness and denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ and I will therefore put you in remembrance though he wants to do this and and that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not so again when we read this in the KJV verse five. Who was it that save them out of the land of Egypt. Will the Lord will which Lord denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ. Sounds like it's talking about two separate Lord. Here are only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ know what you can't see in the English and again this is where sticking to one English translation without any other studies can hurt you but you can't see in the English is that in the Greek are only Lord God and the KJV. Here is our only decibel takes God are only master God and it's our Lord Jesus Christ, our curios Jesus Christ that says I want to remind you that you want to do this but the Lord of the curios it actually is referring to Jesus save the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe in the KJV that's obscured by the way it's worded, but if we look at a modern translation say the NASB will see for certain persons have have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord Jesus Christ that we have our only Master and Lord is Jesus Christ. Now I do. I want to remind you that you once knew this, that of the Lord after saving a people out of the land of Egypt subsequently destroyed those who did not believe Thor only Master and Lord of Jesus Christ and that Lord save the people out of the land of Egypt. What's that doing is identifying Jesus as the God of the Old Testament. The God who delivered the people out of the land of Egypt. In Exodus is Jesus, our only Master and Lord, and again the KJV isn't wrong here, it's just less clear. I'm not saying this is an error in the in the KJV, it's simply a unclear passage that the obscurity is taken away by modern scholarship in the Greek that allows us to translated more clearly and specifically and into the English that we actually speak today and now yes there are differences between the KJV and modern translation that go down to differences in manuscripts and what should our attitude toward that the if there is a solid Christian translation that prefers one set of manuscripts and a solid believing Christian translation. The prefers another set of manuscripts is one the word of God and the other to be thrown out. Well I would actually say that that's an un-biblical attitude toward Bible translation. Where would I guess that I will see when we look at Jesus himself as a reddish and the Greek Septuagint, including where they had minor differences treated both as the word of God is viewed bottle Jesus is bottle for our attitude toward Bible translation is for both of the King James only as another program powered by the Truth Network


Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime