Late yesterday I came across the following "parenthetical chapter" and saw that a notation was made on it's meaning. On first glance I thought perhaps this is indeed something added by man, something to be discarded but after further study today I now see it as this:
- Exodus (18:1 When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses' father in law, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel His Peopke, and that the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt;
18:27 And Moses let his father in law depart; and he went his way into his own land.)
The above is a parenthetical chapter. It is not designated as such in one copy of the King James (for the brackets are not displayed) but is in the King James, Companion Bible - E.W. Bullinger for Bullinger makes note of it. The verse which is the subject of this topic is shown in brackets in both publications of the King James, as shown below.....
Hello sister, I know what your saying concerning Exodus, but in that particular chapter there are a lot of words that have been added that are Italicized in that chapter, all that have been added are 21 words to be exact...as noted in the KJV I am looking at, but there are no parenthesis used.
One of the reason why I use many translations and look into the scriptures because if you read it without the italicized words..it is interesting as it gives a more pure word from the Lord..and I did it with that chapter...
It is interesting they have that many words italicized as these were added in.....are you sure that isn't why they just took it and placed parenthesis from 1-27?
- John 4:1-2 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized mroe disciples than John, (Though Jesus Himself baptized not, but His disciples,)
John 4:1-2 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, 2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
the parenthesis makes the content of the first part of the sentence confusing as the Parenthesis contradicts the first half of the sentence.... it is told in the first sentence that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus baptized , the parenthesis refute that statement and it does not fit properly as God's words fit together and are sound. I would go against any theologian on this matter as it is not sound in thought and all of God's words are as it contradicts what is not parenthesized.
Take a look at John 3:25-26 as this verse backs up the statement Jesus himself baptized and makes the parenthesized statement of Jesus not baptizing even more out of context and not belonging.
That was the point of my post. Jesus
does baptize but only baptizes His disciples. Special attention was given that with the parentheses so it is duly noted. Without seeing that special phrase, one would think He baptizes everyone and does so with water but....He doesn't. It is ONLY His Disciples He baptizes and it is ONLY with the Holy Spirit and fire.
The italicized words are added but not the other words. The parenthesis was added to draw attention to what was being taught. As Bullinger pointed out, the words many times seem to be out of place (
as does "Jesus baptized not") and there is a reason for that. It isn't that the words enclosed in parenthetical brackets were added, for they weren't, but that in the text words were transcribed showing a difference...something special being said, something to be noted. As print can't show the difference as does writing, the words are placed in parenthesis to point out....look at what is being said! As we use
bold to emphasis a point...they used parenthesis.
John 3:25-26 25 Then there arose a dispute between some of John’s disciples and the Jews about purification. 26 And they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified—behold, He is baptizing, and all bare coming to Him!
I have learned through the Holy Spirit that the verses bare witness with the others..and no where does the verses bare witness with the statement Jesus did not baptize but supports the facts that he did.
Jesus
does baptize but...not with water. It is with the Holy Spirit and fire.
- Matthew 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
Concerning the parenthetical chapter in Exodus, Bullinger commented in a side note. He said, "This chapter is a parenthesis (Ap.6). Introduced here because Jethro, though he lived among the Amelekites, yet was not under their curse (17:14-16)." So, I went to the appendix....
- Appendix 6, Figures of Speech, states..... Parenthesis; or, Parenthesis (2 Pet.1:19). Insertion of a word or sentence, parenthetically, which is necessary to explain the context.
Well, my question would be...who inserted the word or sentence? He answered that here...
Figures of Speech
- It is most important to notice these. It is absolutely necessary for true interpretation. God's Word is made up of "words which the Holy Ghost teacheth" (1 Cor.2:13, 1 Thess 2:13, etc.)
A "figure of speech" relates to the form in which the words are used. It consists in the fact that a word or words are used out of their ordinary sense, or place, or manner, for the purpose of attracting our attention to what is thus said. A figure of speech is a designed and legitimate departure from the laws of language, in order to emphasise what is said. Hence, in such Figures we have the Holy Spirit's own marking, so to speak, of His own words. This peculiar form or unusual manner may not be true, or so true, to the literal meaning of the words; but it is more true to their real sense, or truer to truth. Figures are never used but for the sake of emphasis. They can never, therefore, be ignored. Ignorance of Figures of speech has led to the grossest errors, which have been cause either from taking literally what is figurative, or from taking figuratively what is literal.
From that I understand that man places the parenthesis, the punctuation but the Words are His Words. Bullinger, who studied the text, notes additions, changes, etc. from the original and also makes note of how they were written, when special attention was placed on certain phrases, etc. So, instead of us ignoring the parenthetical words, sentences, etc. we are instead to pay special attention to them. At least...that is my understanding from this. 
It seems this man has 
and wrote the "additions, changes, to help the reader grasp more of the word the way HE SEES it in his doctrinal understanding and this is exactly what I am speaking about..The translators have in every translation added words they thought would help the reader to understand what is being said better, but the Lord said NOT TOO and they went right past the instructions given to them..
In what the entire bible says....in studying it these things start to emerge as they start not fitting in with the flow of the Lord's words...such as John 4:1-2
My husband, who is in the room where I am on the web is listening to TV and I want to give more time to this...in the mornings have been good for me, so I plan on coming back on this to continue in this discussion...there is more I believe I can bring though involved in looking into John 4 more and researching it so that you and I both can look at what I can find on it...as it stands right now the contradiction is not right as that parenthesis in the statement given takes away what is established in the beginning of the verse...
In Christ's love
Bullinger didn't rewrite, add or subtract. The King James is just as it was but he noted all differences from the text. He just explained why parenthesis was added...to bring attention to a phrase, word, sentence that is important in understanding. In his words, the Holy Spirit was drawing special attention to those words for our benefit and thus were written in a different manner in the text.
Home
Login
Register