Is Cleopas (Luke 24:18) & Clopas (John 19:25) the same person? The reason I ask, is because in the KJV, ‘Clopas’ (John 19:25) is translated ‘Cleophas,’ which is the ‘defined’ spelling in Strong’s Concordance, translated from the Latin Vulgate. Also, Young’s Literal Translation (YLT) translates ‘Clopas/Cleophas’ (John 19:25) as ‘Cleopas’ – the same spelling in Luke 24:18. However, the Greek words for ‘Cleopas’ (Luke 24:18) & ‘Clopas/Cleophas’ (John 19:25) come from different Greek words & have different Greek definitions.

I’m asking, because if it is the same person, perhaps just spelled differently (like Steve & Stevie), does that mean that James, the son of Alphaeus (Luke 6:15) – [who Alphaeus is believed by many Christians to be the same as Clopas/Cleopas in John 19:25 (c.f. – Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40)] – ‘may’ be the cousin of Jesus too, in addition to John the Baptist, and James & John (the sons of Zebedee)?

Also, I noticed that Matthew (Levi) also has a father named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14). I don’t know how common the name ‘Alphaeus’ was in 1st Century Palestine, but since Matthew (Levi) & James the son of Alphaeus were both from Galilee & both had a father of the same name, is it possible that they were brothers? Also, ‘if’ they were brothers, then would that mean that ‘if’ James, the son of Alphaeus, &
Matthew (Levi) were brothers, then would that mean that Matthew was ‘also’ the cousin of Jesus?

Just wondering. Any thoughts?

In regards to Acts 8, I assume you are referring to v.37 in the KJV:

“And Philip said, ‘If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.’ And he answered and said, ‘I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.'”

Strong’s Concordance states “Early mss do not contain this verse,” & in the John MacArthur Study Bible, the study notes state, “This verse is not found in the oldest & most reliable manuscripts.” The reason verses like this (as well as the other 16 verses that are mentioned above, as ‘missing’ from the KJV), aren’t in other translations isn’t because they were later ‘removed’ from the original manuscripts, but rather, they were ADDED later, such as 1 John 5:7 (“The Comma Johanneum”):

http://www.gotquestions.org/Comma-Johanneum.html

Furthermore, the Biblical understanding that the Ethiopian eunuch had to believe before being baptized does not need to be ‘added’ to Acts 8, because this ‘important fact’ is stated in other passages, including in Acts 16:30-33, when Paul & Silas’ jailor asks them what he must do to be saved:

“And brought them out, and said, ‘Sirs, what must I do to be saved?’ And they said, ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.’ And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed [their] stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.”

As you can see these passages state that their jailor BELIEVED FIRST, & THEN he & his BELIEVING household were baptized AFTER they believed.

Not sure what passage you are talking about in 1 Timothy 3, since none of the passages in that chapter are ‘missing’ in other versions of the Bible, but in regards to Psalm 138:2, Christians like myself who respect the TRANSLATION of the KJV, but also read other translations that are not KJV, follow Psalm 138:2. Remember, the KJV is a ‘translation’ of the Inspired Scriptures, which were penned in Hebrew, Aramaic, & Greek, NOT ‘1611 English,’ but that doesn’t mean that it is the ‘only’ translation God says we MUST read.

Lastly, since you pointed out these verses to try to ‘prove’ the superiority of the translation of the KJV, could you please address the TRANSLATIONAL contradiction of Acts 9:7 & Acts 22:9 from the KJV? So far. NO ONE who is ‘KJV only’ has addressed this:

“And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, HEARING A VOICE, but seeing no man.” (Acts 9:7)

“And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they HEARD NOT THE VOICE of him that spake to me.” (Acts 22:9)

By the way, the Greek words for ‘hearing/heard’ (akouō) & ‘voice’ (phōnē) are the SAME words used in Acts 9:7 & Acts 22:9. So how could the men who were with Saul hear the voice of Jesus (Acts 9:7), but later when Paul recollected his experience, he stated they ‘heard not the voice’ (Acts 22:9)? When you read them in the KJV, it appears to be a contradiction, & ‘translationally,’ it IS! Other translations fix this ‘translational contradiction’ by replacing the word ‘heard’ with ‘understood’ in Acts 22:9, since ‘akouō’ can be translated that way also. The point is that this is an example that the King James VERSION is just a TRANSLATION from the Inspired languages, & that other VERSIONS of the Bible many times TRANSLATE verses, like these, better than the KJV, because in verses like these, they TRANSLATE the original Hebrew, Aramaic, & Greek more accurately than the KJV.

I pray that our Lord, God, & ONLY Savior of our souls, who has saved us ‘by grace through faith’ – & NOT whether we espouse to a particular TRANSLATION of the Bible – convicts you & opens your eyes that “KJV-‘ONLY’-ism” is nothing more than legalism – something Jesus would be opposed to (Matthew 15:1-3).

In Christ,
Steve.

For the naysayers, I would encourage you to ask yourself why you believe what you believe. Do you believe in the virgin birth, the blood atonement, the bodily resurrection and ascension of Jesus and His imminent return, the eternal deity of Jesus Christ, the Trinity, or salvation by faith alone? If you do, then you should understand that we believe these things because they are told to us in a book.

In modern versions these core fundamentals are been attacked at worst, and at best they are being diluted. If these things matter to you, then you should appreciate a video of this kind that presents this issue in a kind and easy-to-understand manner. We are told in Jude to contend for the faith that was once delivered to the saints, so these things should not only matter they should be something that we are willing to take an uncompromising stand on.

I find it ironic that many of the complaints against this video have to do with the idea that it is hurting the church’s efforts at fulfilling the Great Commission. The truth is it’s very discouraging to be talking to a cultist and to turn to a key passage (like Acts 8 or I Timothy 3) and find that the passage you need has been altered to a point that it is unusable to defend the faith. If you spend any time at all in dealing with people about their souls, you’ll find that modern versions are faulty weapons (Ephesians 6), they’re rifles that misfire on the battlefield. It makes me wonder just how evangelistically active those who raise this argument really are.

God placed His word above His very name in Psalm 138:2. It matters to Him, it should matter to us.

It’s a pretty big deal.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Greek-Hebrew-Bible.html

I pray for God to convict us all to return to His original purpose of why God created us, saved us, & taught us.

Your brother in Christ,
Steve.

However, I do know that all this infighting is a ridiculously poor testimony to new and non-believers and could possibly drive some people away from Christ. The Bible does not speak kindly of those who lead others astray.

God commands us to preach the Gospel to the world. That message is found in all translations discussed here so far (I think. If not, that’s pretty good evidence to not use that particular version…) He does NOT command us to debate which English version should replace the original languages.

If I can use an NIV to lead someone to Christ then praise God. As for spiritual growth that comes after:

James 1:5 – If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. (KJV)

If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him. (NKJV)

If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. (NIV)

If you genuinely have a problem with one or more versions/translations/flavors of the English Bible, then go to God in prayer and ask Him which one you should read. He says in His word He will answer you.

Otherwise, get off of this discussion board and obey the command Christ gave you: Preach the Gospel. We are supposed to be salt and light and the world is only getting darker…

Much love in Christ,
John

PS: I didn’t intend to come across as mean spirited or for one camp or the other. I merely want to remind everyone of the focus of our shared faith and where we should look for all answers to everything… ever: Jesus Christ the Son of God. Love y’all!

Does it have to be spelled out for you that we’re talking about an English translation. Good grief! If the Chinese want to either translate from the KJV or from the TR, then they too will have a fully preserved, plenary translation of the Bible.

Jesus answered, “why tempt ye me” when being addressed by the scoffing, condemning crowd of unbelievers. Instead of using the liberal tactic of asking a ridiculous question to detract from the real issue at hand, why don’t you simply answer the question that was presented?

Do you believe the Creator has the ability to perfectly preserve His Word from the originals? I’m assuming your answer is yes. Therefore, pick one. Which one, Greg? Or has the Alpha and Omega fallen short?

If you don’t believe God has the power to preserve, just stop talking and move on with your life and away from this discussion. To limit God in this manner is down right foolish.

Bob