Perhaps the Poorest Translated Verse, found in Romans 10

[Karraster]

[SUP]14 [/SUP]How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? [SUP]15 [/SUP]and how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! [SUP]16 [/SUP]But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

Paul quotes (the "gospel message") from several passages in Isaiah 52 and 53. He compares the "suffering servant" of Isaiah, with Yeshua. Paul makes clear that much of Israel has not believed thus far, but this too is part of God's mysterious plan -- to open the door for gentiles to come to faith, who in turn, will provoke more of Israel to faith.

I following chapters, Paul will go on to speak the importance of gentiles ministering to Israel, to show gentiles that they have a responsibility to Israel as part of their faith.

 

[chubbena]

Here's what Spurgeon said about Romans 10:4. Poor translation or not, the law is not done away.

Christ the End of the Law

He's a legalist in today's standard.

 

[MarkMulder]

In continuing a study of Romans, I find several erroneous translations, but possibly one of the worst is found in Romans 10.

Do you understand greek? If not I'm just gonna skip this thread.

[Acts 8:30]

 

[chubbena]

Well the carpenter's son didn't have any formal training in theology neither.

 

[phil112]

...................Now, I and my church generally refer to that as Resurrection Sunday, but, then since it isn't in Scripture as such, I guess it is PAGAN also?.................. .

Does your church do foot washing and communion more often than easter and christmas? Why not? Those two Christ told us to do. The other two are man made holidays put into service with no biblical accommodation whatsoever.

 

[crossnote]

Here's what Spurgeon said about Romans 10:4. Poor translation or not, the law is not done away.

Christ the End of the Law

He's a legalist in today's standard.

A legalist in today's standards? Maybe an antinomian in today's legalists standards. Here is a quote from his summary...

There is not a word about conversion in the old covenant, we must look to the new covenant for that, and here it is—"Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and an new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them."

 

[phil112]

Karraster, I will tell you this: You are being dishonest, intellectually and spiritually, by not; A. Telling us some of your posts are copy and paste, and B. Not telling us what part of your posts are copy and paste, and C. Linking to the original site.

 

[chubbena]

A legalist in today's standards? Maybe an antinomian in today's legalists standards. Here is a quote from his summary...

There is not a word about conversion in the old covenant, we must look to the new covenant for that, and here it is—"Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and an new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them."

You are quite a fast reader. However, a good reasoning of upholding the law is neglected, like many do to the bible.

 

[Karraster]

[SUP]17 [/SUP]So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

"Hearing" ("shema") is not passive listening, but hearing with understanding of obedience. This was lacking on the part of most of Israel (i.e., Romans 10:2). The word "hear" is best translated by a combination of four English words, "hear, heed, understand and obey".

So then, true faith comes by hearing, heeding, understanding and obeying the Word of God. The Word is powerful and transformative, within a heart that yields to God's Word.

 

[crossnote]

You are quite a fast reader. However, a good reasoning of upholding the law is neglected, like many do to the bible.

I think Spurgeon covered the reason...His law is written on our hearts as believers...stone never accomplished that.

 

[chubbena]

You are quite a fast reader. However, a good reasoning of upholding the law is neglected, like many do to the bible.

for example:
he is the law's fulfillment. It is impossible for any of us to be saved without righteousness. The God of heaven and earth by immutable necessity demands righteousness of all his creatures. Now, Christ has come to give to us the righteousness which the law demands, but which it never bestows. In the chapter before us we read of "the righteousness which is of faith," which is also called "God's righteousness"; and we read of those who "shall not be ashamed" because they are righteous by believing unto righteousness." What the law could not do Jesus has done. He provides the righteousness which the law asks for but cannot produce. What an amazing righteousness it must be which is as broad and deep and long and high as the law itself. The commandment is exceeding broad, but the righteousness of Christ is as broad as the commandment, and goes to the end of it. Christ did not come to make the law milder, or to render it possible for our cracked and battered obedience to be accepted as a sort of compromise. The law is not compelled to lower its terms, as though it had originally asked too much; it is holy and just and good, and ought not to be altered in one jot or tittle, nor can it be. Our Lord gives the law all it requires, not a part, for that would be an admission that it might justly have been content with less at first. The law claims complete obedience without one spot or speck, failure, or flaw, and Christ has brought in such a righteousness as that, and gives it to his people.

 

[chubbena]

I think Spurgeon covered the reason...His law is written on our hearts as believers...stone never accomplished that.

See #51. Did he remotely imply the law is done away i.e. ended? I can quote what he said about the 10 commandments if you so wanted.

 

[crossnote]

See #51. Did he remotely imply the law is done away i.e. ended? I can quote what he said about the 10 commandments if you so wanted.

No one said the law was done away with #46/#50.
The means of administering the Law has gone from stone tablets to tablets of flesh.
(interpretation) the law is written on the believers hearts.

 

[chubbena]

See #51. Did he remotely imply the law is done away i.e. ended? I can quote what he said about the 10 commandments if you so wanted.

you are welcome.
When God gave to Israel his law,—the law of the first covenant,—it was such a holy law that it ought to have been kept by the people. It was a just and righteous law, concerning which God said, "Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein: I am the Lord your God. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the Lord." The law of the ten commandments is strictly just; it is such a law as a man might make for himself if he studied his own best interests, and had wisdom enough to frame it aright. It is a perfect law, in which the interests of God and man are both studied; it is not a partial law, but impartial, complete, and covering all the circumstances of life. You could not take away one command out of the ten without spoiling both tables of the law, and you could not add another command without being guilty of making a superfluity. The law is holy, and just, and good; it is like the God who made it, it is a perfect law. Then, surely, it ought to have been kept. When men revolt against unjust laws, they are to be commended; but when a law is admitted to be perfect, then disobedience to it is an act of exceeding guilt.

For those who are not offended yet
God's Law in Man's Heart

 

[eternally-gratefull]

In continuing a study of Romans, I find several erroneous translations, but possibly one of the worst is found in Romans 10. Not accusing any translators of fraud or deliberate deception, just that man is capable of error and that ideology/ preconceived notions, along with threat of life or limb, could taint or sway one's opinion.

Though, to my dismay, I've found such errors in my beloved KJV as well as most modern translations I have sought, I maintain the original autographs to be the inerrant Word of the Most High Almighty, and with the help of the indwelling Spirit bestowed upon believers of Messiah, that no error is big enough to hide the truth, when a proper study of all scripture is engaged upon.

My hope is that any would join in a discussion to cast light upon a true understanding of the Word. Although I do not find it helpful to be inundated with out of context verses to push a personal agenda, no rules of engagement are imposed other than to be courteous.

At the time of this Romans letter, Paul faced several problems. As for the Jews, some maintained the view that gentiles had to become Jews first as part of their faith in Yeshua, while others denied the righteousness of God by asserting their own special place with no regard for God's worldwide intentions. Ironically, those who would ignore history, risk repeating it.
Romans 10


Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)


10 Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.

I believe "Brethren" in this context are both Jewish and gentile believers in Yeshua. Though focused on Israel, Paul's message is also for the gentiles in the congregation, as he will later remind the gentiles of the "obedience of faith," (see also Romans 1:1-7) with particular regard to those Jews who do not yet believe in Yeshua. Paul makes clear in Romans 11 that his "ministry to the gentiles" is on behalf of Israel's salvation.

I have yet to come to what I believe to be the worst translated verse, it is but a few verses away...

well your translation is fine according to the greek.

Paul was talking about his physical brothers. No one denied his hope for gentiles to be saved. But he had a special heart for his natural brothers. This is what Paul is conveying here.

However, You are correct. there are some mistranslations in all english bibles. We must be careful

 

[eternally-gratefull]

[SUP]2 [/SUP]For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.


Paul continues to treat his Jewish brothers with respect who do not yet believe Yeshua is the Messiah. This is important to remember throughout the rest of the letter. Not only that, Paul had Godly love, in my estimation.

True,

Paul was one of them who had a true zeal for God when he killed Christians. He thought in his heart of hearts he was doing it for God. Luckily for him and us, Jesus confronted him and changed his heart.

 

[crossnote]

you are welcome.
When God gave to Israel his law,—the law of the first covenant,—it was such a holy law that it ought to have been kept by the people. It was a just and righteous law, concerning which God said, "Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein: I am the Lord your God. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the Lord." The law of the ten commandments is strictly just; it is such a law as a man might make for himself if he studied his own best interests, and had wisdom enough to frame it aright. It is a perfect law, in which the interests of God and man are both studied; it is not a partial law, but impartial, complete, and covering all the circumstances of life. You could not take away one command out of the ten without spoiling both tables of the law, and you could not add another command without being guilty of making a superfluity. The law is holy, and just, and good; it is like the God who made it, it is a perfect law. Then, surely, it ought to have been kept. When men revolt against unjust laws, they are to be commended; but when a law is admitted to be perfect, then disobedience to it is an act of exceeding guilt.

For those who are not offended yet
God's Law in Man's Heart

I know enough about Spurgeon where he agrees with Paul about the weakness of the written law...

For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
(Rom 8:3-4)

Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law.
(Gal 3:21)

For on the one hand, a former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness (for the law made nothing perfect); but on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God.
(Heb 7:18-19)

...besides if I am forced to chose between Paul and Charles...I'm going with Paul.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Romans 10:4

King James Version (KJV)

4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

I could see a legalistic person being against such a verse, or people who are involved in mixture of covenants (what they call "balance"). Legalism refuted in one verse.

Ahh,

I should have known. I thought it was 10: 10 since that is the one she copied and commented on. I should have known..lol

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Acts
12


1 .) Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.
2 .) And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.
3 .) And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
4 .) And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
5 .) Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him.

OK, LET'S RUN WITH YOUR STANDARD.............

John 3:16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 11:35) Jesus wept.

Galatians 3:28) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Philemon 1:1) Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ, and Timothy our brother, unto Philemon our dearly beloved, and fellowlabourer,


Just a few examples of something being in Scripture "only" one time............do we rip them out too?

The word used their is pascha. Translated passover. I was used alot in the nt,

Luke used the same word in Luke 22 Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew near, which is called Passover.

also in verse 11 of the same chapter: [SUP]11 [/SUP]Then you shall say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says to you, “Where is the guest room where I may eat the Passover with My disciples?”’

 

[eternally-gratefull]

If a Christian understood the state of being in covenant with God which we have inherited, for lack of a better word right this minute, then he/she would know that righteousness is not by the law, but it is not to be ignored as many prefer to do today. But most just don't get it.

lol. Yes we should.

The law can not make me a good person. or show me how to obey God.

it can only show me how unrighteous I am. Which was why it was given.

But some people want to keep following a law which can not show us how to be righteous.. And condemn those of us who want to know TRULY how to act like God. and not follow some old law which is unable to do this.

Thats sad.