Origen had some influence on the Textus Receptus by means of Erasmus. Erasmus quoted from Origen in his Annotations in defense of some of his textual decisions.Origen was one of the biggest heretics in history.
Origen is one of the reasons we stay away from the New Versions. My goodness, I have never seen anyone quote him in defense of their positions!
I'm convinced you're on drugs.I don't think the Christians causing division in Titus 3:10 were causing it because they wanted blue curtains instead of green or Lasagna instead of tacos before Wednesday night prayer... My wife disagrees with me at times but I don't go file for divorce because she's not a clone of me.
They're the same? The same. Then this statement must be true: all dividers are heretics and all heretics are dividers.As I've stated, causing division and being a heretic are the same.
That he had enough of it to reject Vaticanus:What do the facts concerning Erasmus and Origen say for the spiritual discernment of Erasmus?
In the context of Titus 3:9-10 they are the same.I'm convinced you're on drugs.
View attachment 977
They're the same? The same. Then this statement must be true: all dividers are heretics and all heretics are dividers.
What happened to the heresy of false unity? "One love" under a "one world" order, "one religion", "Coexist". Is that heresy divisive?
I think you need to go back to high school.
The Bible does not say controversies, it says foolish questions. Then it says avoid heated arguing (contention). Conversely, a controversy is a dispute, an open disagreement that is not necessarily emotionally driven like a heated argument is.If you are involved in foolish controversies, genealogies (did Jesus come from the line of David?), Quarrels about the law (Scripture) you are questioning the established doctrines of the church. Verse 10 says what to do with those who stir up division in such a way. So if one questions the doctrine of a church whether speaking truth or not what are they?
I like what you did there. You take the KJV quote of "foolish questions" and compare it to the single word "controversies" in the ESV-leaving out the "foolish" that was in front of it. By definition a foolish controversy is not a reasonable difference of opinion.The Bible does not say controversies, it says foolish questions. Then it says avoid heated arguing (contention). Conversely, a controversy is a dispute, an open disagreement that is not necessarily emotionally driven like a heated argument is.
Controversies are sometimes necessary to solve problems. The opposite would be denying the problem exists, excessive use of cold shoulder, or sweeping things under the rug hoping they will go away on their own, very unhealthy. The LORD had a controversy with his own people. Paul had a controversy with Peter and the Grecians.
The ESV was designed for passive, compliant, one-world Socialist soy boys. You might want to check out some of the people who were on the translating board and what they believe.
Verse 10 does not say "stir up division", it says a "heretic". There is no guarantee that verse 10 absolutely must correlate to verse 9 anyway, it is possible that it is the next bullet point in a short list of instructions. Even if it is related to verse 9, nothing in verse 9 says anything about division: foolish questions for example can sneak in heresies like ecumenical tolerance and "unity with the world" into the church. Such is a far more dangerous problem than dividing yourself away from heretics.
Your thought-for-thought subjective eisegetical twisting of the text to force it to say what you want is evidence of the danger of having a hundred versions to mix and match readings from.
You do not soundly deal with the specific data, verifiable facts, and scriptural truths that I have presented as you make unproven assertions that are simply not true. You do not practice what you preach.try responding to specific data rather than making the same general claim based on nothing 20 times in a row.
You make your broad-sweeping generalization without providing any specifics that prove what your statement suggests.Right? Better go become an Atheist now, because the New Versions have even more influence from Origen.