Why does the Law cause contention among professing Christians?

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

The CJB is a translation from the original Hebrew without the stop at being translated into non-conversational Greek which had no words for some of the Hebrew text. So, what version do you use? Quote the same verse from the version you use so we can all be edified.

There is no original Hebrew version of the NT.

The version I quoted was a literal translation made directly from the Greek. That is the only 'version' I rely on.

 

[Least]

How about a literal translation? No point in reading translations that add things that aren't in the original text like the CJB does.

However, if you are discharging [completing, executing, concluding] the regal law according to the scripture, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself', you are doing excellently. James 2:8​

The Literal Translation says this:

James 2:8 If, indeed, royal law ye complete, according to the Writing, `Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,' -- ye do well;

So what writing is the verse referring to?

Leviticus 19:17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
Leviticus 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

The "Lawyers" during the time of Jesus even understood this:

Luke 10:25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
Luke 10:26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?

Luke 10:27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
Luke 10:28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

 

[just-us-2]

There is no original Hebrew version of the NT.

The version I quoted was a literal translation made directly from the Greek. That is the only 'version' I rely on.

So, post a link to an online version of it or at least tell me what the actual title is so I can look into buying one.

 

[Praus]

The CJB is a translation from the original Hebrew without the stop at being translated into non-conversational Greek which had no words for some of the Hebrew text. So, what version do you use? Quote the same verse from the version you use so we can all be edified.

What?

link -> Messianic Bible translations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Complete Jewish Bible is an English translation of the Bible by Dr. David H. Stern. It consists of both Stern's revised translation of the Old Testament plus his original Jewish New Testament translation in one volume.

"The Old Testament translation is a paraphrase of the 1917 Jewish Publication Society version, though Bruce Metzger notes that where Stern disagreed with the JPS version he translated from the Masoretic Text himself.[1] The New Testament is Stern's original translation from the ancient Greek; the publisher describes it as "Jewish in manner and presentation."[2]"

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

So, post a link to an online version of it or at least tell me what the actual title is so I can look into buying one.

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/jam2.pdf

You won't have to pay anything. It's a free download. Click the leftmost link in my signature.

If you do want a hard copy, there is an interlinear by Jay Green that is good.

 

[just-us-2]

There is overwhelming EVIDENCE that the New Testament was NOT originally written in Greek. This is a link to the book where I got my information and the confidence I have in using the CJB as one of several translations I use to study. Click to see inside the book and read pages 13-15.
Lost in Translation Vol. 1: Rediscovering the Hebrew Roots of Our Faith: John Klein, Adam Spears: 9781589301993: Amazon.com: Books

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

There is overwhelming EVIDENCE that the New Testament was NOT originally written in Greek.

There is not overwhelming evidence; there is no evidence. The common people of Jesus' day spoke Aramaic. Only the learned scholars, like Paul, knew Hebrew; and he wrote in Greek.

The targumists came into existence because the common people (like the disciples) had forgotten how to speak Hebrew, and needed someone to translate the scriptures from Hebrew into Aramaic.

The Jewish Targums, by Bruce M. Metzger

 

[JaumeJ]

I will not say it was originally penned in Greek or in Hebrew, but reason allows it must have been written in Hebrew since many of the first converts were learning the Gospel and its origin, the Old Testament, in Hebrew.

As for it being translated from the original Greek, there are probably a great number of versions of the Word with the New Testament books sourced from the Greek. Just about any version fully equipped with helps includes the Greek translations and meanings.

No one version of the Word is sufficient without the Holy Spirit teaching the reader for no human is capable of seizing the understanding from Yahweh, it is a gift to be received in all humility.

For me, the jury is still out on whether the NT Books were all originally Hebrew or Greek. Actually, the Word being with us today is a miracle, and I have faith the Father has kept all the truth we need for salvation within the words it contain, that is unless one believes such errors as Moses having horns instead of rays emiting from his head makes any difference at all in our salvation. Not important, but the Gospel is our Way because of Yeshua, amen.

There is overwhelming EVIDENCE that the New Testament was NOT originally written in Greek. This is a link to the book where I got my information and the confidence I have in using the CJB as one of several translations I use to study. Click to see inside the book and read pages 13-15.
Lost in Translation Vol. 1: Rediscovering the Hebrew Roots of Our Faith: John Klein, Adam Spears: 9781589301993: Amazon.com: Books

 

[just-me]

For me, the jury is still out on whether the NT Books were all originally Hebrew or Greek. Actually, the Word being with us today is a miracle, and I have faith the Father has kept all the truth we need for salvation within the words it contain, that is unless one believes such errors as Moses having horns instead of rays emiting from his head makes any difference at all in our salvation. Not important, but the Gospel is our Way because of Yeshua, amen.

Agreed. we can compare each others translations, and increase in the knowledge of our Lord. Hopefully that's what will happen here. That would be a great milestone that I haven't seen yet. But it's the way to go, I do believe. Maybe it would put a smile on our Fathers face. Ya think?

 

[just-me]

Facetiously speaking, was the book of Hebrews written in Greek, or was the book of Greeks written in Hebrew? Hillary’s answer; “What difference does it make? The prophets are dead!”

 

[just-us-2]

There is not overwhelming evidence; there is no evidence. The common people of Jesus' day spoke Aramaic. Only the learned scholars, like Paul, knew Hebrew; and he wrote in Greek.

The targumists came into existence because the common people (like the disciples) had forgotten how to speak Hebrew, and needed someone to translate the scriptures from Hebrew into Aramaic.

The Jewish Targums, by Bruce M. Metzger

And Aramaic is a form of Hebrew from what I have read - similar to different dialects in Germany, for instance - High German, Low German, etc.
And no matter what one's point of view, one is always going to be able to find an "expert" who agrees with them and has written a book or website to pump their thoughts. To me it makes sense to study Jesus' words in the context of the lifestyle of the people who lived at the time He walked the earth, since that was the era when the New Testament books were written. (No, not precisely at the time Jesus was on earth but looking at the eons of time, they were written in the near time frame.) It also makes sense for the sake of seeing a more full picture of certain illustrations in the Bible. For instance just a simple little tidbit like this quote from "Sitting At The Feet Of Rabbi Jesus":"...this passage about King Solomon: Who is this coming up from the desert: "like a column of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and incense made from all the spices of the merchant? Look! It is Solomon’s carriage, escorted by sixty warriors, the noblest of Israel." (Song of Songs 3:6-7) During royal processions, the fragrance of expensive oils would inform the crowds that a king was passing by." ...makes a lasting impression.

Regardless, the question is, "Are you going to study as God commands?"
God preserved His word throughout all time for US, so we could have salvation and follow His Great Commission to teach others.

One last comment--"...the common people (like the disciples) had forgotten how to speak Hebrew, and needed someone to translate the scriptures from Hebrew into Aramaic." Yeah, right. So then Jesus would have said, "As it is written in the Septuagint of 300 BC, rather than "in the law of Moses."

 

[just-us-2]

What?

link -> Messianic Bible translations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No offense meant personally, but one can't take ANYTHING on Wikipedia as fact. There are many facts on the site, of course, but anyone can post anything there. I could post that the first Bible was written in German and get away with it, when it is a fraction true - Martin Luther was German, and he worked hard to get the entire Bible printed for the layman since before that, only the Church could have Bibles and teach any way they wanted. Enter Gutenburg! Yay!!!

 

[Praus]

No offense meant personally, but one can't take ANYTHING on Wikipedia as fact.

Maybe you can't...

This is from the translator of the CJB. -> http://www.hendrickson.com/pdf/intros/9781598566611-intro.pdf

Greek Text Used for the B’rit Hadashah. There are more than five thousand ancient manuscripts of all or part of the New Testament, more than for any other document from antiquity. Due to scribal errors and other factors, they do not agree with each other at every point. Textual criticism, which sets out to determine the correct reading of a text from disagreeing and imperfect sources, is far beyond the competence of most Bible translators, including me. Fortunately there exist critical editions of the Greek text of the New Testament, wherein specialists have investigated, compared and judged the accuracy of the differing textual readings found in the manuscripts. My translation of the B’rit Hadashah is based primarily on the United Bible Societies’ The Greek New Testament; 42 but I also consulted a number of English and Hebrew versions and commentaries.

There are many facts on the site, of course, but anyone can post anything there. I could post that the first Bible was written in German and get away with it, when it is a fraction true - Martin Luther was German, and he worked hard to get the entire Bible printed for the layman since before that, only the Church could have Bibles and teach any way they wanted. Enter Gutenburg! Yay!!!

Martin Luther isn't writing posts on Christian Chat. What are you teaching here other than easily disproven falsehoods?

 

[just-us-2]

I refuse to have a battle of wits with anyone who has no ammunition.

Let's get back to where this contention always get started. This little issue seems to have started way back at post #251 which was a comment made to a post not even directed toward the poster, then it grew, and grew, and grew, and blew up into a stinking mess that clearly illustrates how the contention over the law starts and gets sidetracked. Even the question I posed at the end of post #252, has not been answered and probably won't be.

 

[Married_Richenbrachen]

in response to:



Ah, the distortion abounds! GOD'S WORD says: "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith." Galatians 3:24 (NAS)

To repeat what has been posted before, people who revere the law and the Old Testament are NOT saying that we are saved by works! Also posted before: The biggest cause by far is that certain people can't understand (or refuse to acknowledge) the difference between revering the entire Bible, even the Law given to Moses, and saying we need to abide by the law to be saved, and accusing others of trying to teach that. It is willful misinterpretation - and that is sin. Using the excuse that the law is all condemnation is just plain stupid.
Bottom line: Contention destroys edification of the body."

Now, if you can show me anywhere in this thread where anyone is saying we "obtain salvation by works", I will admit my mistake in overlooking it. If not, what was the point of such a comment if not to stir the pot and cause contention?

​

IF you find it please post the number of the post so we can all see.

Ah, I see I summarised a little too much, and it became confusing. When people start trying to obey the Mosaic law, I understand that puts them under the whole law (Christ is of no value to them), and hence I used the phrase to describe this as "obtain salvation by works".

Original question: But do you not think that when people start trying to obtain salvation by works, this is not a warning sign of what is in their heart?

Revised question: But do you not think that when people start yoking themselves under even some of the Mosaic law, this is not a warning sign of what is in their heart?

 

[letti]

The Jewish people were never able to give enough or"perfect" their righteousness under the law of Moses(The old covenant).The whole reason the New Covenant was given through Jesus Christ.Old covenant(Dead)New covenant(Alive)in faith through Jesus Christ.

 

[just-us-2]

Ah, I see I summarised a little too much, and it became confusing. When people start trying to obey the Mosaic law, I understand that puts them under the whole law (Christ is of no value to them), and hence I used the phrase to describe this as "obtain salvation by works".

Original question: But do you not think that when people start trying to obtain salvation by works, this is not a warning sign of what is in their heart?

Revised question: But do you not think that when people start yoking themselves under even some of the Mosaic law, this is not a warning sign of what is in their heart?

The phrase you used originally to express the thought also expressed in your revision of the question isn't the problem in itself. The problem is that this same thought (obtain salvation by works/yoking themselves under even some of the Mosaic law) is being concluded with no basis for it. When I, and others, post that we revere (wait - let's try a different word - "respect") the entire Bible including the law, as given by God and valuable for teaching and is NOT saying "I want to be obligated to live by the Old Testament laws so I can earn my salvation by doing the works of the law." But I have said that over and over and either I have a poor command of the English language and can't write what I think plainly (not a problem I have ever had, even when writing a weekly newspaper column), or certain individuals just love to annoy -- but that wouldn't happen in here because we are all Christians and we do as the Bible says, as far as being kind and not causing contention -- so, I wonder what the problem is...

All Scripture is God-breathed and is valuable for teaching the truth, convicting of sin, correcting faults and training in right living;
2 Timothy 3:16 (CJB)

and for those who don't like the CJB:

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness ; 2 Timothy 3:16 (NAS)

 

[Married_Richenbrachen]

For those who start yoking themselves under some of the Mosaic law, does Romans 14 apply? I think Romans 14 is talking not about attempted obedience to the Mosaic law, but other disputable matters where Christians may have different opinions. Is this interpretation correct?

Romans 14:2 - 6 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

Romans 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

 

[Praus]

I refuse to have a battle of wits with anyone who has no ammunition.

GBU sister, I think it's a sign that I should have a discerning peek at the CJB, that's good fruit. I'm curious what's different from the extremely solid JPS 1917 translation.

Let's get back to where this contention always get started. This little issue seems to have started way back at post #251 which was a comment made to a post not even directed toward the poster,

No idea, I'll look presently, it's something about the law I think...

then it grew, and grew, and grew, and blew up into a stinking mess

I think a tangled web is a much better metaphor.

that clearly illustrates how the contention over the law starts and gets sidetracked.

Clearly illustrate? You only needed to ask.

Even the question I posed at the end of post #252, has not been answered and probably won't be.

Have you ever read this, teacher?

Women's Purpose <- link
"We can teach other women and children but a teacher is an authority over the students, therefore we cannot teach men and be in God’s perfect will."

 

[Graybeard]

=just-us-2;1242649]and for those who don't like the CJB:

scuse my ignorance.....but what Bible is the CJB......Canadian Jewish Bible?

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness ;

2 Timothy 3:16 (NAS)

Was not Timothy referring to The Torah?..