I Corinthians: Conclusion
I Corinthians 16:1-24
We begin with an examination of the terms “Paul’s Missionary Journeys” and “The Jerusalem Council” which are both part of a long tradition of churches and theologians misreading, misunderstanding, misapplying, and misrepresenting everything God has been trying to teach man for 5,000 years.
We’ll also discuss the perfect Bible translation, and whether or not we have one in English, along with the “Doctrine of Preservation” as it relates to the promise of supernatural preservation of God’s written word for all time. We note the supernatural production of the Bible, and it’s codification by supernatural sign gifts toward the end of Paul’s ministry.
Hear an analysis of alleged errors in the King James and New King James translations, along with Paul’s practices for greetings, and authenticating his letters by hand, how this relates to Hebrews, and Paul’s commands regarding his fellow laborers: Timotheus, Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achiacus.
Find the contradiction:
Brother Charlie Garrett claims the KJV introduces a contradiction in Heb 9:23. He compares 3 passages to establish the contradiction:
Exodus 25:9, “According to all that I shew thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it.”
Hebrews 8:5, “Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.”
Hebrews 9:23, “It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these (blood); but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.”
Get the Audio Version Here.
I know of a few mistakes in the King James but will mention one which Bob Enyart did most of a show about. KJ version, Exodus 13:18 says, “But God led the people about, through the way of the wilderness of the Red sea:” The Hebrew used to describe the water is “Yam Suf” which does not include anything about “red” but means “Sea of Reeds” or “Sea of Rushes.” Bob pointed out that there are no reeds or rushes in the Red Sea and that if you follow the Hebrew’s path as described by the Word in order to get to the Red Sea they would have had to turn back almost 180 degrees, travel around the Gulf of Suez within only 50 miles of Cairo and about 300 miles out of their way. But what body water does have reeds and would be exactly in the path of their travels is the Gulf of Aqaba. That’s were the Hebrews crossed, not the Red Sea.
Also, one other thing, God reserves the right to refer to bodies of water as he sees fit (He named them first). The Gulf of Aqaba is a part of the Red Sea. And I agree it is the most likely place of the crossing. Thank you for offering some interesting insight my friend!