Edited-Not Translated - Part 2

The verse in question for today for which I shall compare Scripture withScriputre is I Timothy 2:3&4. From Part One of Edited, Not Translated, we have established a formulaic format. First, the jpg of the 1599 Geneva Study Bible, showing the footnote that replaces the verse deletion:

Now for the other versions. First, the Protestant Versions:

New International Version (NIV)

3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

21st Century King James Version

3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Darby Translation

3 for this is good and acceptable before our Saviour God, 4 who desires that all men should be saved and come to [the] knowledge of [the] truth.

Wycliffe New Testament (WYC)

3 For this thing is good and accepted before God, our Saviour,
4 that will that all men be made safe, and that they come to the knowing of truth. [that will all men to be made safe, and to come to the knowing of truth.]

Next, the Roman Catholics:

The New Jerusalem Bible

3 To do this is right, and acceptable to God our Saviour: 4 he wants everyone to be saved and reach full knowledge of the truth.

And finally, the Orthodox EOB, page 444 :

There was no good way to clip just verse 3 & 4 out, so verses 1 & 2 are included for good measure.

In another blog, the issue was raised that God's Foreknowlege would predetermine the outcome of a Man's Eternal Destiny, and that there was nothing a Man gould do once God had foreseen it. The argument goes that Man cannot go against God's Wishes, as expressed by God's Foreknowlege. Yet, 1 Timothy 2:4 expresses what God's Wishes actually are, which must be dealt with as an accomplished fact. While God's Sovriegnty entails the ability to enforce his Wishes, it also entails the ability to not enforce them, letting the chips fall where they will. Paradoxically, Man's Free Will must be maintained, not in spite of God's Sovriegnty but because of it!

AN example of Foreknowledge not being Sovriegnty can be seen in the example of George Wahington. George Washington, probably the one of the best Weather Forecasters of his age because of what his Military Training entailed, knew what the Weather would be like when he crossed the Delaware on Christmas of 1776 en route to the surprise attack that became the Battle of Trenton. He did not control the Weather, but he had Foreknowlege of it and took advantage of it. He won the battle because of it. However, George Washington did not PREDESTINE anything! Foreknowlege did not make George Washinton God or embue him with any Sovriegnty or anything else, but it only contributed to his victory which could have been spoiled had the Hessians somehow knew to be on their toes for Washington's attack.

1 Timothy 2:4 is an important verse that express God's Will, settling once and for all the supposed Predestination-Foreknowlege Paradox. Like Revelation 22:19, this deletion is too significant an omission in the 1599 Geneva Study Bible because of Doctrinnal Consequences. This is tantamont to overturning established evidence, EDITING, NOT TRANSLATING the Bible.

I wish to convey my special thanks to Billy Birch whose critical inspiration for this post made this post possible.

Doctrinal Lineages

Desiridus Erasmus, in his landmark treatise "The Freedom of the Will", mentions Mani as one of the few "Christain" adherants to Predestination. Indeed St. Augustine, a minor saint, uses the Free Will Argument against his former co-religionists, the Manichaeans. The fact of the matter is that Predestination was a favorite doctrine of the competitors to Orthodox Christianity, such as the Gnostics. Gnosticism has ties to the Manichaens, Buddhism, and to the Occult. Indeed, it is the theme of the Gnostic Gospel of Judas, and the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas. A much better exposition of this, in much greater detail can be found in Maged Mikhail's Survey of Gnostic beliefs. Historically, the Bogomils evolved from the Manicheans and were active from the 900s to the 1800s, when they converted to Catholicism. Bogomil missionaries to France started the Cathars, also known as the Albigeneses in the Eleventh Century. The Albigenese Crusade of 1208 effectively destroyed them, even though they linger today. The Albigeneses were considered precursors to Reformed Thought. It is my personal opinion that Calvin followed them TOO closely.

The point is that Predestination is an old belief with origins outside of Christianity. Gnostics have made their attempts to intrude their scripture into Christain Scripture. In my younger days, this gave me intuitive support when I was surrounded by Calvinists. The knowlege to refute Calvinism, and especially Predestination was scant except for Eastern Orthodox Theology, which was exceptionally difficult to find during that era. My spiritual gut feeling sustained me until recent times, when the proofs of my beliefs became readily available. Calvinism, in its various forms, were simply not enough to sustain me spiritually. The closest I came within the realm of Protestantism was with the Hussites, who turned out to be a Church that started out as an Orthodox Church.

The Didache gives a reason why the Kosher Dietary Laws forbid the eating of Deep Sea Fish. Aside from the health reasons such as the worms that devoured Herod from eating raw fish, this dietary law derrived as a lessonthat it was best to select friends from reputable places. As the Deep Sea represents an unknown place, friends from unknown places often turn out to be unsavory. I extend the arguments to Doctrines. My antennae went up decades ago when I became aware of Predestination's lineage. There was nothing to allay my suspicions. The proof of my suspicions was extremely slow in coming, and only now with the internet have I had access to the evidence.

I had many a hint from the Bible about problems with Predestination, especially from Deuteronomy 30:19 and Revelation 22:19, but some of the Bibles I read backpeddled those verses. While these were only hints, I discovered the complex reason behind the backpeddling. When I finally set about the task of comparing Scripture with Scripture, I discovered that Desiridus Erasmus wrote his early translation of the Bible, the Textus Receptus, from a Byzantine manuscript. This Bible went through four editions. Unfortunately, the First Edition was rushed, causing irreparable harm to Erasmus'es reputation as a translator, even though he corrected his errors in later editions. The Textus Receptus eventually evolved into the Tyndale Version. I learned later that some the Bibles from whence I studied were influenced by Calvin's Geneva Bible, famous for its footnotes which were the cause of the previously mentioned backpeddling. As I looked into the matter, I came to the conclusion that the footnotes were often attempts modify the meaning of Scripture rather than interpret it. This led ultimately to my previous post "Edited, Not Translated".

It came as no surprise to learn that when the King James Version came out to compete against the Geneva Bible, that the footnotes annoyed the Court of King James, and that this had something to do with the King James Bible's ascendency over the Geneva Bible in the English Speaking World. We are now entering a new era with the scheduled publication of the first Eastern Orthodox Bible ever in the English Language, the EOB Version.

Edited-Not Translated

In previous posts, I dealt peripherally with attempts to modify the Bible from without via the selection of scripture. Today, I will deal with the attempt to edit Scripture itself. Appropriately, I have selceted Revelation 22:19 that deals with that topic. While this verse tells the consequences of the editing of Scripture, the intent is to show how it has been done, and not to sermonize about it.

At this juncture, I must state that I have been criticized for not delving into hermeneutics, with the parsing and interpretation of the Bible's language that it entails. To make such a criticism ignores the Reduction to an Absurdity Method of Mathematics which is the prevalent mode of analysis of this blog. The analysis used is prone to counterproductive Paradoxes induced by the Self-Referentiality that hermeneutics introduces. Nevertheless, when the findings do not include paradoxes, I will use hermeneutics, as I did here to Compare Scripture with Scripture. Additionally, hermeneutics uses Inductive Reasoning, whereas I have stated before that the methodology I generally use is Deductive Reasoning.

There is no proper way to quote Revelation 22:19 in the 1599 Geneva Study Bible, but I will display it:

What is important about this particular citation of scripture is that it isn't there. It has been replaced with a footnote that says that it has been combined with verse 18. Verse 20 is included to show that this verse, in fact, has been skipped.

Following John Calvin's precept that we should compare Scripture with Scripture, I have included other versions of the Bible for the very comparison that John Calvin reccommends:

New International Version

And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

Weymouth New Testament

and that if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take from him his share in the Tree of Life and in the holy city--the things described in this book.

The KJV Strong's Version

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

The Darby Translation

And if any one take from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life, and out of the holy city, which are written in this book.

The New American Standard Bible

and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

These are all fine Protestant versions of the Bible that say the same thing. Lets see what the Roman Catholics have to say:

The New Jerusalem Bible

if anyone cuts anything out of the prophecies in this book, God will cut off his share of the tree of life and of the holy city, which are described in the book.

Praise the Lord! Even the Catholics agree! The Eastern Orthodox are in the process of publishing their own Eastern Orthodox Bible in English. Just for fun, let's look at what they say. It's still in manuscript form and will be published late in 2009, so if you turn to page 567 in the pdf, you find:



It looks like even the Orthodox agree with the rest of Christondom on this point.

Let us examine why someone would want to have this verse "de-emphasized" from the Scripture. It states that if someone, even one of the Elect should willfully remove this verse from scripture, then Predestination is no longer in effect because a Willful Act overrode it. Isn't that what happened here?

This debunks Predestination. To replace it, I concur with the Doctrine of Divine Grace which is best summarized in the Protestant Hymn: Whosover Will, May Come!