One Disturbing Sentence
How can you be sure that you are reading an accurate translation of the Book of Truth (The Bible)?
Do you read the Book of Truth? Have you ever wondered why there are so many English translations? Have you ever looked up a verse in multiple translations and discovered that they do not seem to say the same thing? Have you ever wondered why different translations can be so different? Have you ever wondered if there is an easy way to tell which translations are the most accurate translations?
These questions have plagued the Children of Truth (followers of the Man of Truth) for years. The Book of Truth was written to be read by all people and not just ancient language experts. People should not have to learn how to read Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek to understand the message that the Father of Truth (Yahoveh aka Yahweh aka God aka The Lord) has recorded in the Book of Truth. People should be able to have confidence that they are reading a translation of the Book of Truth that is the result of a real effort to accurately convey the message that the Father of Truth has given to the entire human race in their own language.
Fortunately, there is a single sentence that you can look for in any translation that speaks volumes about the reliability of that translation. This sentence has a profound impact on the meaning of the passage that contains it because it changes the entire focus of the passage. This sentence has a profound impact on the entire message of the Book of Truth because it shapes how people see the Man of Truth (Yah'shua aka Yeshua aka Jesus aka Mashiach aka Messiah aka Christ). This sentence can create an unresolvable conflict about the the Man of Truth being the Messiah that cannot be overcome This is one disturbing sentence.
What is that sentence? The sentence is: (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean."). This is one disturbing sentence for a number of reasons. The first and foremost reason is that this sentence does not appear in all translations. This is not just a case of wording something different, for this sentence is worded considerably different from the NIV (New International Version) that I quoted in other translations that contain it. This sentence simply does not exists in some translations while it exists in others.
Its presences in some translations and its absence in others could mean that some translations were produced out of faulty Greek manuscripts that were significantly different than other accurate Greek manuscripts. If so, then how do you tell which Greek manuscripts are really what the Father of Truth said and which are frauds? If there are fraudulent Greek manuscripts that cannot be distinguished from the genuine Greek manuscripts then the Word of Truth has been compromised and the Father of Truth was not able to preserve His Word throughout the ages.
If there is no such discrepancy in the Greek manuscripts, then it is the translators that are questionable as well as the translation that they produced. If the Greek manuscripts contain this sentence then those translators that left it out either did so unintentionally or edited it out of their translation of the Book of Truth. If the Greek manuscripts do not contain this sentence then there can be little doubt that the translators edited it into of their translation of the Book of Truth. Either way, it means that someone has either added to or taken away words from the Book of Truth in their translation. This is one disturbing sentence.
So what is the story here? Is the problem with the Greek manuscripts or is it with the translators?
To answer these question we have to start by examining Mark 7:18-19. If you read the NIV translation or a translation based off of it then Mark 7:18-19 says: Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean."). (A New translation rarely starts from the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts but rather are based on a previous translation to which changes are applied to gain better clarity.)
However even a very surface examination shows a serious problem. If you read the KJV (King James Version) translation or or a translation based off of it then Mark 7:19 says: 18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive , that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; 19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats? Now it is obvious that there is a serious problem. The entire last sentence in the NIV ( (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.") ) is completely missing from the KJV and related translations. This is quite a discrepancy between the two translations. This is not a mere matter of choosing different English words or restructuring a sentence to improve the clarity for the people that cannot read Biblical Hebrew or Koine Greek. This is an out and out contradiction between the two translations. One translation says that the Man of Truth declared all food clean and the other translations does not. Which one is right?
In order to answer that question we have to dig a lot deeper than we usually do. We have to go an look at the Greek text that each were based off of. The Greek text used by each translation is different.
The original KVJ translation was based off of the Textus Receptus Greek text that was first published in 1516 AD. Western Europe did not have access to original Greek Manuscripts from the time that the Western Roman Empire fell (476 AD) until the Byzantine Empire came to an end (1453 AD). It was only then that the Greeks, who had kept the original Greek manuscripts, began to allow access to these manuscripts to non-Greeks and Greek scholars were force to move to western Europe where they could help people translate the Greek manuscripts into other languages. So everyone in Western Europe had to rely on the Latin translation from the original Greek manuscripts called the Latin Vulgate for about a thousand years. The first English translation, the Wycliffe translation, was a translation of the Latin Vulgate. The Textus Receptus Greek document was mostly based on six original Greek manuscripts but a few passages were back translations from the Latin Vulgate into Greek to fill in the gaps in the Renewed Covenant that were not contained in these six original Greek manuscripts. The more modern translations that are based on the KJV, such as the one that is normally used in our discussions, have made corrections in places when the original Greek manuscripts that were later recovered filled in the gaps in the original six Greek manuscripts.
The NIV translation was based off of the Westcott-Hort Greek text that is often more simply known as the Greek New Testament that was first published in 1881 AD. This Greek text was based off of four older complete Greek manuscripts that each contained the entire Renewed Covenant. (One manuscript even contained the entire Septuagint (Greek Translation of the Original Covenant.)) According to the compilers, Westcott and Hort, they found no evidence that the Greek manuscripts used to compile the Textus Receptus had been tampered with an any manner when they compared them to the manuscripts used to compile the Greek New Testament during the the 28 years it took them to do so. In fact, they reported that the occurrence of a trivial difference that had no significance in meaning was only about 1 in 60 words while a difference that had any significance in meaning was less than 1 in 1000 words. In other words, the Textus Receptus was reliable and the Father of Truth had indeed preserved His word through out the ages.
That being the case then why is there a complete sentence in the NIV ((In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")) that is not in the KJV? Did the KJV translators leave it out by some mistake and the translations that used it as a starting point kept repeating the mistake? Or did the NIV translators add it and the translations that used it as a starting point kept repeating the mistake? The answer is plain to see if you simple look at Mark 7:19 in the Textus Receptus and the Greek New Testament (GNT). You can plainly see that the entire sentence is missing from both Greek texts (Mark 7:19 Greek texts). You do not have to be able to read Koine Greek to see that both Greek texts end with the same word translated as "meat" in the English text in the Greek to English mapping that is inserted between the two Greek texts. You can see that the variation of the Greek word translated as "meat" is the last word in both Greek texts.
However, the NIV does not rely completely on the Greek New Testament but also upon other Greek manuscripts that contain only parts of the Renewed Covenant but are older than 400 AD. So just to be thorough I searched the web and found a list of these other manuscripts. I then went and read Mark 7:19 in each manuscript. This took me a good part of a Saturday afternoon. (Oh the wonders of the internet! It is great that I could do this from the comfort of my home in an afternoon instead of having to travel all over the world to read these manuscripts. Not only that but the websites for most of the manuscripts not only made the Koine Greek contained in the manuscripts available but also transliterated the Greek into English characters. Most even gave an English translation of each word. For most of the Greek manuscripts there was no need to be able to read Koine Greek as long as you could read English.) Not one single Greek manuscript contained this sentence. For example, you can see for yourself in the Codex Sinaiticus.
Even if a Greek manuscript had contained this sentence then it still would not have proof that this one Greek manuscript containing it was right and all others were wrong. The oldest manuscripts are partial manuscripts that have usually survived because they had some sort of mistake that could not be fixed. The original writers of the Renewed Covenant were all Jews and the scribes that kept making copies of the Renewed Covenant had learned how to do so from the Jewish believers. They used as system known as the jot and tittle system to insure that there were no mistakes. Basically each letter of a copy goes through a 32 point inspection by a more experienced scribe to ensure that it looks exactly like the letter from the original document. (Hebrew letters are made from jots and tittles that is why it is called the jot and tittle system.) If a mistake is found and it cannot be fixed then that portion is not allowed in the overall document. However, since the Word of Truth that surrounded the mistake is considered holy they would not simply throw the portion with the mistake in the trash or burn it. Instead they would place it in a metal box and give it a burial. This was especially common in Alexandria, Egypt. Needless to say, manuscript pieces that were buried in a metal box in the desert lasted a lot longer than manuscripts which people actually used. So often the reason that the oldest manuscripts are still around is because they contain some sort of mistake. If all of the Greek manuscripts but one contain the same text then the text that is different is undoubtedly the mistake. We are not to base our understanding of the Word of Truth on a single Greek manuscript that is different from all other Greek manuscripts. The Book of Truth (the Bible) says that every word must be established by at least two witnesses (2 Corinthians 13:1).
So you might be wondering if that sentence is not any of the Greek manuscripts then why does it appear in the NIV and similar translations? The short answer is because the NIV translators thought that it should have been there.
There are two methodologies commonly used in translating from the original languages into other languages. One methodology is called word-for-word translation where each word is translated from the source language into the target language and then changes in word order, etc., are applied to make the meaning more clear in the target language.
Do you read the Book of Truth? Have you ever wondered why there are so many English translations? Have you ever looked up a verse in multiple translations and discovered that they do not seem to say the same thing? Have you ever wondered why different translations can be so different? Have you ever wondered if there is an easy way to tell which translations are the most accurate translations?
These questions have plagued the Children of Truth (followers of the Man of Truth) for years. The Book of Truth was written to be read by all people and not just ancient language experts. People should not have to learn how to read Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek to understand the message that the Father of Truth (Yahoveh aka Yahweh aka God aka The Lord) has recorded in the Book of Truth. People should be able to have confidence that they are reading a translation of the Book of Truth that is the result of a real effort to accurately convey the message that the Father of Truth has given to the entire human race in their own language.
Fortunately, there is a single sentence that you can look for in any translation that speaks volumes about the reliability of that translation. This sentence has a profound impact on the meaning of the passage that contains it because it changes the entire focus of the passage. This sentence has a profound impact on the entire message of the Book of Truth because it shapes how people see the Man of Truth (Yah'shua aka Yeshua aka Jesus aka Mashiach aka Messiah aka Christ). This sentence can create an unresolvable conflict about the the Man of Truth being the Messiah that cannot be overcome This is one disturbing sentence.
What is that sentence? The sentence is: (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean."). This is one disturbing sentence for a number of reasons. The first and foremost reason is that this sentence does not appear in all translations. This is not just a case of wording something different, for this sentence is worded considerably different from the NIV (New International Version) that I quoted in other translations that contain it. This sentence simply does not exists in some translations while it exists in others.
Its presences in some translations and its absence in others could mean that some translations were produced out of faulty Greek manuscripts that were significantly different than other accurate Greek manuscripts. If so, then how do you tell which Greek manuscripts are really what the Father of Truth said and which are frauds? If there are fraudulent Greek manuscripts that cannot be distinguished from the genuine Greek manuscripts then the Word of Truth has been compromised and the Father of Truth was not able to preserve His Word throughout the ages.
If there is no such discrepancy in the Greek manuscripts, then it is the translators that are questionable as well as the translation that they produced. If the Greek manuscripts contain this sentence then those translators that left it out either did so unintentionally or edited it out of their translation of the Book of Truth. If the Greek manuscripts do not contain this sentence then there can be little doubt that the translators edited it into of their translation of the Book of Truth. Either way, it means that someone has either added to or taken away words from the Book of Truth in their translation. This is one disturbing sentence.
So what is the story here? Is the problem with the Greek manuscripts or is it with the translators?
To answer these question we have to start by examining Mark 7:18-19. If you read the NIV translation or a translation based off of it then Mark 7:18-19 says: Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean."). (A New translation rarely starts from the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts but rather are based on a previous translation to which changes are applied to gain better clarity.)
However even a very surface examination shows a serious problem. If you read the KJV (King James Version) translation or or a translation based off of it then Mark 7:19 says: 18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive , that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; 19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats? Now it is obvious that there is a serious problem. The entire last sentence in the NIV ( (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.") ) is completely missing from the KJV and related translations. This is quite a discrepancy between the two translations. This is not a mere matter of choosing different English words or restructuring a sentence to improve the clarity for the people that cannot read Biblical Hebrew or Koine Greek. This is an out and out contradiction between the two translations. One translation says that the Man of Truth declared all food clean and the other translations does not. Which one is right?
In order to answer that question we have to dig a lot deeper than we usually do. We have to go an look at the Greek text that each were based off of. The Greek text used by each translation is different.
The original KVJ translation was based off of the Textus Receptus Greek text that was first published in 1516 AD. Western Europe did not have access to original Greek Manuscripts from the time that the Western Roman Empire fell (476 AD) until the Byzantine Empire came to an end (1453 AD). It was only then that the Greeks, who had kept the original Greek manuscripts, began to allow access to these manuscripts to non-Greeks and Greek scholars were force to move to western Europe where they could help people translate the Greek manuscripts into other languages. So everyone in Western Europe had to rely on the Latin translation from the original Greek manuscripts called the Latin Vulgate for about a thousand years. The first English translation, the Wycliffe translation, was a translation of the Latin Vulgate. The Textus Receptus Greek document was mostly based on six original Greek manuscripts but a few passages were back translations from the Latin Vulgate into Greek to fill in the gaps in the Renewed Covenant that were not contained in these six original Greek manuscripts. The more modern translations that are based on the KJV, such as the one that is normally used in our discussions, have made corrections in places when the original Greek manuscripts that were later recovered filled in the gaps in the original six Greek manuscripts.
The NIV translation was based off of the Westcott-Hort Greek text that is often more simply known as the Greek New Testament that was first published in 1881 AD. This Greek text was based off of four older complete Greek manuscripts that each contained the entire Renewed Covenant. (One manuscript even contained the entire Septuagint (Greek Translation of the Original Covenant.)) According to the compilers, Westcott and Hort, they found no evidence that the Greek manuscripts used to compile the Textus Receptus had been tampered with an any manner when they compared them to the manuscripts used to compile the Greek New Testament during the the 28 years it took them to do so. In fact, they reported that the occurrence of a trivial difference that had no significance in meaning was only about 1 in 60 words while a difference that had any significance in meaning was less than 1 in 1000 words. In other words, the Textus Receptus was reliable and the Father of Truth had indeed preserved His word through out the ages.
That being the case then why is there a complete sentence in the NIV ((In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")) that is not in the KJV? Did the KJV translators leave it out by some mistake and the translations that used it as a starting point kept repeating the mistake? Or did the NIV translators add it and the translations that used it as a starting point kept repeating the mistake? The answer is plain to see if you simple look at Mark 7:19 in the Textus Receptus and the Greek New Testament (GNT). You can plainly see that the entire sentence is missing from both Greek texts (Mark 7:19 Greek texts). You do not have to be able to read Koine Greek to see that both Greek texts end with the same word translated as "meat" in the English text in the Greek to English mapping that is inserted between the two Greek texts. You can see that the variation of the Greek word translated as "meat" is the last word in both Greek texts.
However, the NIV does not rely completely on the Greek New Testament but also upon other Greek manuscripts that contain only parts of the Renewed Covenant but are older than 400 AD. So just to be thorough I searched the web and found a list of these other manuscripts. I then went and read Mark 7:19 in each manuscript. This took me a good part of a Saturday afternoon. (Oh the wonders of the internet! It is great that I could do this from the comfort of my home in an afternoon instead of having to travel all over the world to read these manuscripts. Not only that but the websites for most of the manuscripts not only made the Koine Greek contained in the manuscripts available but also transliterated the Greek into English characters. Most even gave an English translation of each word. For most of the Greek manuscripts there was no need to be able to read Koine Greek as long as you could read English.) Not one single Greek manuscript contained this sentence. For example, you can see for yourself in the Codex Sinaiticus.
Even if a Greek manuscript had contained this sentence then it still would not have proof that this one Greek manuscript containing it was right and all others were wrong. The oldest manuscripts are partial manuscripts that have usually survived because they had some sort of mistake that could not be fixed. The original writers of the Renewed Covenant were all Jews and the scribes that kept making copies of the Renewed Covenant had learned how to do so from the Jewish believers. They used as system known as the jot and tittle system to insure that there were no mistakes. Basically each letter of a copy goes through a 32 point inspection by a more experienced scribe to ensure that it looks exactly like the letter from the original document. (Hebrew letters are made from jots and tittles that is why it is called the jot and tittle system.) If a mistake is found and it cannot be fixed then that portion is not allowed in the overall document. However, since the Word of Truth that surrounded the mistake is considered holy they would not simply throw the portion with the mistake in the trash or burn it. Instead they would place it in a metal box and give it a burial. This was especially common in Alexandria, Egypt. Needless to say, manuscript pieces that were buried in a metal box in the desert lasted a lot longer than manuscripts which people actually used. So often the reason that the oldest manuscripts are still around is because they contain some sort of mistake. If all of the Greek manuscripts but one contain the same text then the text that is different is undoubtedly the mistake. We are not to base our understanding of the Word of Truth on a single Greek manuscript that is different from all other Greek manuscripts. The Book of Truth (the Bible) says that every word must be established by at least two witnesses (2 Corinthians 13:1).
So you might be wondering if that sentence is not any of the Greek manuscripts then why does it appear in the NIV and similar translations? The short answer is because the NIV translators thought that it should have been there.
There are two methodologies commonly used in translating from the original languages into other languages. One methodology is called word-for-word translation where each word is translated from the source language into the target language and then changes in word order, etc., are applied to make the meaning more clear in the target language.
This is the method used by the KJV translators and is
why some words are in italics. The italicized words are words
that were either added to form proper English or the translators were uncertain
that the words were properly translated. The words were italicized to
show that this was the case because the translators held the very words of the
Book of Truth in high regard and did not want these words to be
mistaken as being the words of the Father of Truth.
In fact,
the structure of the entire English language was restructured to be
more like that of Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek when William
Tyndale made the first English translation of the Book of Truth from
the Hebrew and Greek text in phases that started with the Renewed
Covenant in 1526 and ended with the complete Book of Truth in
published within four years of his death. (He was executed in 1536 at
the behest of the Church of England for translating the Bible into
English.)
The other methodology is called thought-for-thought translation where the translator reads a portion of the source language that forms a thought and then attempts to write something in the target language that conveys the same thought.
The other methodology is called thought-for-thought translation where the translator reads a portion of the source language that forms a thought and then attempts to write something in the target language that conveys the same thought.
This is the method used
by the NIV translators for this verse.
This methodology is often useful in
cases where the translator can ask the source for clarification to be
sure that the correct thoughts are being translated. For example, a direct
translation between the speaker of the source language and the
hearers of another language. This is often done by translators
for missionaries that are speaking to large crowds who speak a
different language. The value of this method rests upon knowing
for certain the thoughts of the originator of the source language so
that they can correctly translated those thoughts into the target
language.
So which is the right methodology for translating the Book of Truth? The Book of Truth itself answers this question.
It says that we cannot know for certain the thoughts of the Father of Truth unless He tells us (Isaiah 55:9). It say that we cannot know His thoughts based on our ability to find them out (Romans 11:33-34). It says that we can only know those thoughts of His that the the Spirit of Truth (Ruach HaQodesh aka The Holy Spirit aka The Holy Ghost) reveals to us (1 Corinthians 2:9-11). The Spirit of Truth has revealed His thoughts in the Book of Truth (2 Peter 1:19-21).
It is the very words in the Book of Truth that we live by (Matthew 4:4). It is His words in the Book of Truth that tell us what He thinks so that we can do His will (2 Timothy 3:14-17). If we add to His words or take away from His words then we will not spend eternity with Him (Revelation 22:18-20).
The Book of Truth clearly comes down on the side of word-for-word translations and against thought-for-thought translations when it comes to the Book of Truth. That is why we have been using a translation that based on the word-for-word methodology by men that took great pains to ensure that we knew when they added even something as small as "of" when necessary for clarification. These men have made every reasonable effort to handle the Word of Truth carefully.
On the other hand the NIV translators of Mark 7:19 simply added their own opinion to the actual words of the Man of Truth. They literally put their own words in his mouth. The NIV translators had no right to put words in the mouth of the Man of Truth that he never said because they thought that he should have said them. The sentence that says (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.") is not part of the Book of Truth because it is not in any of the Greek manuscripts that record what the Man of Truth actually said. That is why it is one disturbing sentence.
In an American court of law this would be called hearsay and thrown out as inadmissible evidence. The fact that the NIV translators took such liberties with this verse by adding an entire sentence that was nothing more than their own opinion makes their entire work suspect and unreliable. This is the danger of thought-for-thought translations and why they should be avoided altogether.
Since this one disturbing sentence, (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean."), was never said by the Man of Truth and is not part of the Book of Truth then we will not go into any depth at this time over all of the most of the problems that it causes.
However there is one problem with it that must be addressed. If he had actually said this then he would have been breaking the Law of Truth because he would have been changing it and thus breaking one of the commandments (Deuteronomy 12:32). We would have no hope because then he could not have died in our place as our sinless sacrifice (Romans 5:6-8). We could not have been made righteous unless he was sinless (2 Corinthians 5:21). He would not have been sinless in that case because sin is transgression of the Law of Truth (1 John 3:4). This is there most important reason that (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.") this is one disturbing sentence.
So you can be sure that the original language manuscripts accurately contain the words of the Book of Truth. You can be sure that the Father of Truth has preserved His word throughout the ages in the Book of Truth and that it does indeed endure forever (1 Peter 1:25). You can be sure that if you are reading a word-for-word translation that there was a real effort to make the most accurate translation of the Book of Truth into your language. All you have to do is look at Mark 7:19 and see if it contains this one disturbing sentence. If it contains (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.") then you would be better off to find a translation where people did not put words in the mouth of the Man of Truth that he never said in order to assign meanings that he never meant.
You can be sure that the message of the Book of Truth is accurate. You can be sure that you need to come into the House of Truth because you have sinned against the Father of Truth by breaking the Law of Truth (Romans 3:21-23). You can be sure that you can only come into the House of Truth by submitting in total surrender to the Man of Truth because you believe that the Father of Truth raised him from the dead (Romans 10:8-10). You can be sure that everyone that does not come into the House of Truth will spend eternity suffering in the Lake of Fire (Revelation 20:15).
Come into the House of Truth.
So which is the right methodology for translating the Book of Truth? The Book of Truth itself answers this question.
It says that we cannot know for certain the thoughts of the Father of Truth unless He tells us (Isaiah 55:9). It say that we cannot know His thoughts based on our ability to find them out (Romans 11:33-34). It says that we can only know those thoughts of His that the the Spirit of Truth (Ruach HaQodesh aka The Holy Spirit aka The Holy Ghost) reveals to us (1 Corinthians 2:9-11). The Spirit of Truth has revealed His thoughts in the Book of Truth (2 Peter 1:19-21).
It is the very words in the Book of Truth that we live by (Matthew 4:4). It is His words in the Book of Truth that tell us what He thinks so that we can do His will (2 Timothy 3:14-17). If we add to His words or take away from His words then we will not spend eternity with Him (Revelation 22:18-20).
The Book of Truth clearly comes down on the side of word-for-word translations and against thought-for-thought translations when it comes to the Book of Truth. That is why we have been using a translation that based on the word-for-word methodology by men that took great pains to ensure that we knew when they added even something as small as "of" when necessary for clarification. These men have made every reasonable effort to handle the Word of Truth carefully.
On the other hand the NIV translators of Mark 7:19 simply added their own opinion to the actual words of the Man of Truth. They literally put their own words in his mouth. The NIV translators had no right to put words in the mouth of the Man of Truth that he never said because they thought that he should have said them. The sentence that says (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.") is not part of the Book of Truth because it is not in any of the Greek manuscripts that record what the Man of Truth actually said. That is why it is one disturbing sentence.
In an American court of law this would be called hearsay and thrown out as inadmissible evidence. The fact that the NIV translators took such liberties with this verse by adding an entire sentence that was nothing more than their own opinion makes their entire work suspect and unreliable. This is the danger of thought-for-thought translations and why they should be avoided altogether.
Since this one disturbing sentence, (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean."), was never said by the Man of Truth and is not part of the Book of Truth then we will not go into any depth at this time over all of the most of the problems that it causes.
However there is one problem with it that must be addressed. If he had actually said this then he would have been breaking the Law of Truth because he would have been changing it and thus breaking one of the commandments (Deuteronomy 12:32). We would have no hope because then he could not have died in our place as our sinless sacrifice (Romans 5:6-8). We could not have been made righteous unless he was sinless (2 Corinthians 5:21). He would not have been sinless in that case because sin is transgression of the Law of Truth (1 John 3:4). This is there most important reason that (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.") this is one disturbing sentence.
So you can be sure that the original language manuscripts accurately contain the words of the Book of Truth. You can be sure that the Father of Truth has preserved His word throughout the ages in the Book of Truth and that it does indeed endure forever (1 Peter 1:25). You can be sure that if you are reading a word-for-word translation that there was a real effort to make the most accurate translation of the Book of Truth into your language. All you have to do is look at Mark 7:19 and see if it contains this one disturbing sentence. If it contains (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.") then you would be better off to find a translation where people did not put words in the mouth of the Man of Truth that he never said in order to assign meanings that he never meant.
You can be sure that the message of the Book of Truth is accurate. You can be sure that you need to come into the House of Truth because you have sinned against the Father of Truth by breaking the Law of Truth (Romans 3:21-23). You can be sure that you can only come into the House of Truth by submitting in total surrender to the Man of Truth because you believe that the Father of Truth raised him from the dead (Romans 10:8-10). You can be sure that everyone that does not come into the House of Truth will spend eternity suffering in the Lake of Fire (Revelation 20:15).
Come into the House of Truth.
Labels: Bible Translation, History
posted by The House Of Truth @ January 12, 2014
<< Home