WORDatTheNet

Home » Religious Deception » Third part of ‘J’ is the biblical letter that kills

Third part of ‘J’ is the biblical letter that kills


In Second part of  ‘J’ is the biblical letter that kills, we were able to eliminate the “old way of trying to be saved by keeping the Ten Commandments of God” as the biblical way that ends in death  in 2 Corinthians 3:6. Thus, ‘The Living Bible’ (TLB) translation has to be set aside, being incorrect.

Thief

The thief of the Words

In this article, we will touch on whether or not there is significant difference in the translation of the same verse between ” the letter killeth” or “the letter that kills” in King James Version (KJV) and American Standard Version (ASV) and the “written text that brings death” in International Standard Version (ISV).

But before doing it, we will preliminarily touch on the meanings of 2 Corinthians 3:6 in KJV, ASV and ISV.

To stress, ASV translation of the verse is substantially the same in KJV, with verse 6 of 2 Corinthians 3 stating as follows:

“6who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

Whereas KJV states that

Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

From the above quoted verse, KJV and ASV classifies the ministers of the new covenant or new testament into two; 1) ministers of the letter and 2) ministers of the spirit. It further gives the characteristic  of these ministers into either; 1) death causing or 2) life giving, more specifically, describing the letter as the one that kills and the spirit that gives life.

On the other hand, ISV refers to text instead of a letter that brings death. It states:

who has also qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant, which is not written but spiritual, because the written text[b] brings death, but the Spirit gives life.

By implication, when using the ISV and superficial analysis, the born-again Christians  and the like, who are basing  their doctrines on the text or bible could be considered as the ‘ministers’ of the written text that brings death, which is not acceptable to many Christians. Superficially also, the Roman Catholics would have an advantaged position because they may be considered as ministers of the spirit, as they are not strictly basing their doctrines from the text or bible.

But, considering the weakness of ISV translation, when it classifies the ministers of a new covenant into 1) not written and 2) but spiritual, which do not make sense, at all, it’s no longer tenable to follow the logic of Roman Catholics traditional belief of not strictly sticking to the letter or bible to be the work of the minister of spirit. Also, based on the same ground, ISV translation can be considered as substantially defective.

However, its translation on “written text that brings death” may be found correct, without adversely affecting the validity or correctness of the “letter that kills” of KJV and ASV translations. In fact, both can be accepted as significantly the same, despite the general notion that ‘letter’ refers to the letter in the alphabet but the written text refers to the bible, document, report or book, which can make you conclude otherwise. 

On the other hand, these two types of ministers in KJV and ASV are not found in TLB translation, as it instead designated a common minister, when it used “we” in “We do not tell them xxx” and it focuses on the scope and procedure on how the new covenant be said, when it states that:

6He is the one who has helped us tell others about his new agreement to save them. We do not tell them that they must obey every law of God or die; but we tell them there is life for them from the Holy Spirit. The old way, trying to be saved by keeping the Ten Commandments, ends in death; in the new way, the Holy Spirit gives them life”.

Hence, TLB , by consensus, fatally failed for the second time, in terms of translation of the verse.

Letter versus written text: Is there any difference?

The proposition is: ‘There is no significant difference between the letter and the written text in  2 Corinthians 3:6, as cited in KJV/ASV and ISV, respectively’.

Above can be proven, if you use historical evidence or related circumstance, which can reconcile the seeming difference between the meaning of the ‘letter’ and the ‘written text’. More specifically, if you consider the evolution of the name Jesus, which is being falsely revered as Christ and God by Christians.

In the first article entitled: ‘J’ is the biblical letter that kills, the development of the name Jesus was intimately related to ‘letter J’ in the English alphabet, as follows:

Secondly-the development of the name ‘Jesus’ is intimately connected to the evolution of letter ‘J’ in the English alphabet, which letter evolved into existence only about 500 years ago, without which, the name would had never existed and may still be Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous) until now, if the alleged Greek translation was sustained.

In short, the letter ‘J’, which can be used as a barometer to identify this biblical ‘letter that kills’, was instrumental in the development of the name ‘Jesus‘ in Jesus Christ. In fact, it is the only name that has  this peculiar historical character and background. That being so, the name, including, consequently, the Christian bible, can be cumulatively denominated as “the written text that brings death“, as a whole.

In short, the letter J, which is, by history, connected to the name Jesus, is actually the ‘literal’ letter that kills. This is so because said letter was instrumental in the evolution of fictitious name Jesus that  converted the truth in the bible into lie.

Also, previously, the Christians bible was, consequently, figuratively denominated as “the letter that kills”. as a whole, following the logic based on KJV and ASV translations. The is so because letter ‘J’ in Jesus and consequently, Jesus Christ per se and the bible itself are intimately connected to each other. In fact, technically, one does not exist in the absence of the other.

Hence, the ‘written text that bring deaths’ in ISV translation is still correct being the literal  equivalence of the bible, as the ‘written text that kills’, when it converted the bible into lie by using a fictitious name Jesus, as Christ.

In conclusion therefore, the written text that brings death is significantly the same to the letter that kills because the falsity of the name Jesus, which never existed in Bethlehem, when Christ, who has an existing Hebrew name, was born and until he was crucified,  adversely affected the written text or bible, which, consequently, brings death, more specifically, the death of the truth.

Related articles:

 >>>To Home Page to also proceed to The Forum

 

Advertisements

4 Comments

  1. […] Third part of ‘Jesus is the biblical letter that kills’ […]

  2. […] Third part of ‘Jesus is the biblical letter that kills’ […]

  3. […] in the third article, it was held that there is no significant difference between the “letter killeth” in […]

  4. […] name Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous) into the final present form Jesus by King James 500 years ago, after Letter ‘J’ in the English alphabet finally came into […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Archives

Categories

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 195 other followers

%d bloggers like this: