Is YOUR church doctrinal statement ONE with SATAN?
- Thread starter ChosenbyHim
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
NOBODY CARES what a farthing is, a farthing is a symbol for the price paid to get out of prison. Do you really think God brought up the price of two sparrows so that we could know how much sparrows cost back then? Don't you know that "lo I come, in the volume of the book it is written of me"?
Everything in the bible is about the IMAGE of Christ and that's so that we can be CONFORMED to that image. And your not doing a good job of conforming.
Everything in the bible is about the IMAGE of Christ and that's so that we can be CONFORMED to that image. And your not doing a good job of conforming.
No I claim to be an inerrant word of God believer, that's why I appear to be acting like a prophet in your eyes. I can see things that you can't see because you want BELIEVE the bible.
The thing is, the things I know, you could know too if you would just believe what is written exactly as it's written.
The thing is, the things I know, you could know too if you would just believe what is written exactly as it's written.
Exodus 32:1-4,
"When the people saw that Moses delayed in coming down] from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said to him, “Get up, make us gods that will go before us. As for this fellow Moses, the man who brought us up from the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him!”
So Aaron said to them, “Break off the gold earrings that are on the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me.” So all] the people broke off the gold earrings that were on their ears and brought them to Aaron. He accepted the gold from them, fashioned it with an engraving tool, and made a molten calf. Then they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.”
"The one who has ears had better listen!" Matthew 11:15
"When the people saw that Moses delayed in coming down] from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said to him, “Get up, make us gods that will go before us. As for this fellow Moses, the man who brought us up from the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him!”
So Aaron said to them, “Break off the gold earrings that are on the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me.” So all] the people broke off the gold earrings that were on their ears and brought them to Aaron. He accepted the gold from them, fashioned it with an engraving tool, and made a molten calf. Then they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.”
"The one who has ears had better listen!" Matthew 11:15
I will give you that sometimes making the text closer to the current generation actually increases accuracy, but that only works in some situations. I don't believe that this covers all the deviations from the originals, so I'll agree to disagree on that one for now.
This same argument applies against KJV too, because society and language have significantly changed since. A lot of English speaking people struggle with KJV, and it gets worse if it's someone's second language. Shouldn't the Bible be relatively easily readable?
One genuinely curious question, do you believe that every nation has their own "chosen" translation in their own language like you believe KJV is for English?
(In that vein I urge you to look up the story about the Tibetan Bible, I read it a few months ago, a pretty amazing book, which is why this question actually popped into my head, and also because English is my second language...)
Also, what do you think about ESV?
Sorry, many questions! I don't intend to argue with you about it, I just want to figure out what you're thinking and why. This is not a salvation matter (I don't think even hardcore KJVonlyist would deny the ability to be saved by reading or hearing Word of God from other versions, no?) so I don't think there should be any divisions among Christians on beliefs like these. I agree that the Word of God never corrupts, it's from faith in God that you're deriving that belief and I can see that, we just disagree on application.
This same argument applies against KJV too, because society and language have significantly changed since. A lot of English speaking people struggle with KJV, and it gets worse if it's someone's second language. Shouldn't the Bible be relatively easily readable?
One genuinely curious question, do you believe that every nation has their own "chosen" translation in their own language like you believe KJV is for English?
(In that vein I urge you to look up the story about the Tibetan Bible, I read it a few months ago, a pretty amazing book, which is why this question actually popped into my head, and also because English is my second language...)
Also, what do you think about ESV?
Sorry, many questions! I don't intend to argue with you about it, I just want to figure out what you're thinking and why. This is not a salvation matter (I don't think even hardcore KJVonlyist would deny the ability to be saved by reading or hearing Word of God from other versions, no?) so I don't think there should be any divisions among Christians on beliefs like these. I agree that the Word of God never corrupts, it's from faith in God that you're deriving that belief and I can see that, we just disagree on application.
It bothers me that you don't understand anything about the art/science of translation. The earliest manuscripts that we have -- we don't have the originals -- are in foreign languages, so they must be translated into English. That is both a science and an art. The source languages (plural) are impossible to translate literally. 1) Words can mean different things in context, so the translators must decide on the best equivalence. 2) The verb tenses in the ancient languages are different than those in English, so again, the translators must decide on the best equivalence. 3) There are idioms used that have no parallel in English.
There is not and never will be an infallible, word-for-word translation. it is impossible!
All Bible translations are inaccurate; the ancient languages have no one-to-one correspondence to any other languages. That is fact!!
There is not and never will be an infallible, word-for-word translation. it is impossible!
All Bible translations are inaccurate; the ancient languages have no one-to-one correspondence to any other languages. That is fact!!
-
3
-
1
- Show all
No it doesn't cover all of the deviations. Some of the deviations were made to clear up things that weren't as clear in the original manuscripts and some deviations are purely to make word occurrences equal specific biblical values. And I do believe some words were changed just to be a stumbling block for bible doubters. I think Easter is one of the stumbling block verses.
I do believe God gave his word to all nations in their own language. I believe there are many other inspired versions in other languages. The foreshadowing of God translating his word into all language is given here in Acts. "The wonderful works of God" is the bible.
Act 2:7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
Act 2:8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Act 2:9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Act 2:10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Act 2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
I was saved with no bible, I was an atheist. I wasn't looking for God and I had no interest in God whatsoever but God had other plans for me. Then when I did get saved I read the NIV for years.
The bible we read has nothing to do with our salvation, all we got to do is ask to be saved and we will be saved. The bible has to do with forming the born again or second man in us. That may is born from the incorruptible word of God. A topic for another thread lol.
My rule of thumb on whether a bible is inspired or not has to do with WHICH Jesus that bible presents.
Daniel 3:25 English Standard Version (ESV)
25 He answered and said, “But I see four men unbound, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods.”
The Jesus presented in the ESV is a son of the gods, so no, it's not inspired. God has already told us in the KJV that the man in the furnace was Jesus.... God doesn't reveal things and then take the revelation back. God never works in reverse lol.
I do believe God gave his word to all nations in their own language. I believe there are many other inspired versions in other languages. The foreshadowing of God translating his word into all language is given here in Acts. "The wonderful works of God" is the bible.
Act 2:7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
Act 2:8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Act 2:9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Act 2:10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Act 2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
I was saved with no bible, I was an atheist. I wasn't looking for God and I had no interest in God whatsoever but God had other plans for me. Then when I did get saved I read the NIV for years.
The bible we read has nothing to do with our salvation, all we got to do is ask to be saved and we will be saved. The bible has to do with forming the born again or second man in us. That may is born from the incorruptible word of God. A topic for another thread lol.
My rule of thumb on whether a bible is inspired or not has to do with WHICH Jesus that bible presents.
Daniel 3:25 English Standard Version (ESV)
25 He answered and said, “But I see four men unbound, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods.”
The Jesus presented in the ESV is a son of the gods, so no, it's not inspired. God has already told us in the KJV that the man in the furnace was Jesus.... God doesn't reveal things and then take the revelation back. God never works in reverse lol.
Numbers 24:8 (KJV): "God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows."
Deuteronomy 33:17, (KJV) "His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns:
Job 33:9-10, (KJV) "Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?"
Psalm 29:6, (KJV) "He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn."
Isaiah 34:7, (KJV) "And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness."
So if the KJV is a literal translation of the ancient texts, how come there are repeated mentions of unicorns, a fictional animal that never existed?
Merriam-Webster "Definition of unicorn: a mythical, usually white animal generally depicted with the body and head of a horse with long flowing mane and tail and a single often spiraled horn in the middle of the forehead.
Deuteronomy 33:17, (KJV) "His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns:
Job 33:9-10, (KJV) "Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?"
Psalm 29:6, (KJV) "He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn."
Isaiah 34:7, (KJV) "And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness."
So if the KJV is a literal translation of the ancient texts, how come there are repeated mentions of unicorns, a fictional animal that never existed?
Merriam-Webster "Definition of unicorn: a mythical, usually white animal generally depicted with the body and head of a horse with long flowing mane and tail and a single often spiraled horn in the middle of the forehead.
