A Voice in the
October 9, 2001
As Moses Lifted up the Serpent
It happened to be the serpent. But if that incident had been some other animal by which they had been dying, the object of the incident was that it was raised up on the pole... signifying the salvation Jesus would provide when He would come 1500 years later and be hung on the cross. The people were dying of the serpents, thus, a serpent was hung up. Humanity is dying of "sin"; thus, when Jesus died on the cross He "bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live unto righteousness; by whose stripes you were healed." (Pt2:24)
In the wilderness the people did not 'do' anything for salvation to be healed of the serpent bites... they merely 'looked'... putting their faith/repentance into a response. In the same way, salvation from sin is not any "work" (Eph2:9), but putting faith/repentance into a response and receiving Christ. Like the old song says, "Look to the Lamb of God, Look to the Lamb of God, For He alone is able to save you, Look to the Lamb of God"
"knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your vain way of life received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." (1Pt1:18-19)
Salvation vs Regeneration? (October Article on John ch3)
Tit 3:5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He SAVED us, through the washing of REGENERATION and renewing of the Holy Spirit,
What -is- "Salvation" if not "regeneration". Thus, this is what we continually observe... many people think that they were "saved" by one (or many) of several formulae, but they do not understand regeneration and have never been born from above. Thus, they are not truly saved. Jesus said you CANNOT GET TO HEAVEN without it.
VW-Edition: Bible names, philosophy, printing? (Oct9,2001)
What you are seeing as "differences" are no different than what exists today between various languages. Since I happen to be acquainted with Japanese since I was born and grew up there as a child, let me illustrate again. In recent years a Japanese item, the "futon". has gained acceptance and is sold in American furniture stores. Americans butcher its pronunciation by calling it a [foo'-tahn], when in actuality, in Japanese it is pronounced [F-tone']. But then, Japanese butcher "McDonalds" by saying [mah-koo-dah-no-~roo-do]. In whatever way these things are pronounced, each ethnicity is talking about the same thing. A similar thing is going on with these Biblical names. For instance, to carry the above observations of Paul/Paulus into Japanese, "Paul" is pronounced [poh'-~ru]. John is [yo-hah'-ne]. In both languages, even though said differently, they are still refering to Paul and John. However, it was necessary to correct/fix the matter of "James", because that name simply doesn't exist in the Scriptures. As for Jude/Judas? Well, in that case it was a matter of consistency. And again, one wonders why, if it was "Judas" every place else, why did they render it "Jude" for just one place? (A certain Catholic "saint" comes to mind..??)
Not to keep beating a dead horse here, but, back to "James" for a minute. I heard one of the present-day "famous" people once ask the audience to turn to "James ?:??" and then went on to pontificate his own knowledge of the Greek with something like, "You know, this is REALLY 'EEEEOWWKOBOSS', it is REALLY Jacob". And I've heard from a couple of subscribers that they have heard various people say similar things. We have also noted on other occasions how many preachers/teachers, some of them who militantly stick with '???-only' as being "without error", in their speaking will expound upon the Hebrew/Greek and say things like, "Our text (which they otherwise label as being 'without error') says 'this', but in the originals it REALLY MEANS 'that'... the Heb/Grk word is -ACTUALLY- 'blah, blah, or blah'. In my mind I always have wondered, if the originals "really say" something different, why did the translating scholars not render it that way in our English texts to begin with? -THAT- is what the VW-Edition is all about. Fixing "James" into "Jacob" is merely one of -many- such things. Most things are less-blatant than "James". But all four KJV, NKJV, LITV, MKJV have issues here and there. Some are rather doozies. I'm not documenting them all; if I did, I will never get the Edition finished, and at the present rate, it's yet a year off to completion. But people who are reading it occasionally send in comments... they are noticed. And I know we are going in the right direction with this.
People occasionally ask about "printing" it. It needs to get finished, first... if we are still here long enough for that to happen.