The Dangers of the Hebrew Roots Messianic Movement
- Thread starter Praus
- 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.
You're right! I've found so many errors in both. However, we can't discount one for the other because what I've often found is many errors in translations are sourced in a misunderstanding of culture (hence my original contribution to this thread a few days ago). Context is paramount. I can share some NT errors at the core of many firmly held doctrines that are solved with an understanding of the Hebrew culture.
Again, no one should choose one translation over the other (personally, I'd rather read English), but I believe we need to be receptive to when each applies...not dismissive.
Again, no one should choose one translation over the other (personally, I'd rather read English), but I believe we need to be receptive to when each applies...not dismissive.
T
I believe that you are spot on here. I am not surprised by that 
If one were to do a study of textual criticism they might become discouraged because of the many errors that need to be addressed. Not a good or healthy study for young Christians. Inerrancy doesn't really exist in an absolute sense. The Word of the Lord has however been preserved.
Blessings
Timberdoodle
If one were to do a study of textual criticism they might become discouraged because of the many errors that need to be addressed. Not a good or healthy study for young Christians. Inerrancy doesn't really exist in an absolute sense. The Word of the Lord has however been preserved.Blessings
Timberdoodle
Okay, I think I see what you mean.
You aren't referring to any people dying in order to ascend the mountain,
you are referring to animals dying in sacrifice in order for the elders to ascend the mountain.
Yes, there had to be sacrifice for atonement of sin reconciling them to God in friendship,
along with the fellowship sacrifice to prepare them for the fellowship of covenant.
The blood of the sacrifices was used as the blood of the covenant for ratifying it between the people,
represented by 12 pillars, and God, represented by the altar, with Moses probably passing back
and forth between them as mediator.
Half of the blood was then sprinkled on the altar, which represented God, and the other
half of the blood was sprinkled on the people, sealing them in covenant.
So yes, for the elders to enter into the presence of God, they had to go by the blood of sacrifice,
and the covenant ratified on Sinai would be an illustration of that principle,
which is also the principle by which God must be approached in the New Covenant.
To be received by God in fellowship, we must approach him through the blood (death) of the sacrifice
of Christ Jesus which cleanses our sin, or we will defile the presence of God (Lev 16:16) and be received in wrath (Nu 1:51, 3:10, 4:15, 20, 8:19).
Now that I understand whose death you were talking about, animals and not people,
we are in agreement again.
Another star for your crown!
It will soon be too heavy to wear!
You aren't referring to any people dying in order to ascend the mountain,
you are referring to animals dying in sacrifice in order for the elders to ascend the mountain.
Yes, there had to be sacrifice for atonement of sin reconciling them to God in friendship,
along with the fellowship sacrifice to prepare them for the fellowship of covenant.
The blood of the sacrifices was used as the blood of the covenant for ratifying it between the people,
represented by 12 pillars, and God, represented by the altar, with Moses probably passing back
and forth between them as mediator.
Half of the blood was then sprinkled on the altar, which represented God, and the other
half of the blood was sprinkled on the people, sealing them in covenant.
So yes, for the elders to enter into the presence of God, they had to go by the blood of sacrifice,
and the covenant ratified on Sinai would be an illustration of that principle,
which is also the principle by which God must be approached in the New Covenant.
To be received by God in fellowship, we must approach him through the blood (death) of the sacrifice
of Christ Jesus which cleanses our sin, or we will defile the presence of God (Lev 16:16) and be received in wrath (Nu 1:51, 3:10, 4:15, 20, 8:19).
Now that I understand whose death you were talking about, animals and not people,
we are in agreement again.
Another star for your crown!
It will soon be too heavy to wear!
T
Okay, I think I see what you mean.
You aren't referring to any people dying in order to ascend the mountain,
you are referring to animals dying in sacrifice in order for the elders to ascend the mountain.
Yes, there had to be sacrifice for atonement of sin reconciling them to God in friendship,
along with the fellowship sacrifice to prepare them for the fellowship of covenant.
The blood of the sacrifices was used as the blood of the covenant for ratifying it between the people,
represented by 12 pillars, and God, represented by the altar, with Moses probably passing back
and forth between them as mediator.
Half of the blood was then sprinkled on the altar, which represented God, and the other
half of the blood was sprinkled on the people, sealing them in covenant.
So yes, for the elders to enter into the presence of God, they had to go by the blood of sacrifice,
and the covenant ratified on Sinai would be an illustration of that principle,
which is also the principle by which God must be approached in the New Covenant.
To be received by God in fellowship, we must approach him through the blood (death) of the sacrifice
of Christ Jesus which cleanses our sin, or we will defile the presence of God (Lev 16:16) and be received in wrath (Nu 1:51, 3:10, 4:15, 20, 8:19).
Now that I understand whose death you were talking about, animals and not people,
we are in agreement again.
Another star for your crown!
It will soon be too heavy to wear!
You aren't referring to any people dying in order to ascend the mountain,
you are referring to animals dying in sacrifice in order for the elders to ascend the mountain.
Yes, there had to be sacrifice for atonement of sin reconciling them to God in friendship,
along with the fellowship sacrifice to prepare them for the fellowship of covenant.
The blood of the sacrifices was used as the blood of the covenant for ratifying it between the people,
represented by 12 pillars, and God, represented by the altar, with Moses probably passing back
and forth between them as mediator.
Half of the blood was then sprinkled on the altar, which represented God, and the other
half of the blood was sprinkled on the people, sealing them in covenant.
So yes, for the elders to enter into the presence of God, they had to go by the blood of sacrifice,
and the covenant ratified on Sinai would be an illustration of that principle,
which is also the principle by which God must be approached in the New Covenant.
To be received by God in fellowship, we must approach him through the blood (death) of the sacrifice
of Christ Jesus which cleanses our sin, or we will defile the presence of God (Lev 16:16) and be received in wrath (Nu 1:51, 3:10, 4:15, 20, 8:19).
Now that I understand whose death you were talking about, animals and not people,
we are in agreement again.
Another star for your crown!
It will soon be too heavy to wear!
Post well done.
Timber