LF: What Version of the Christian Holy Bible Do You read?

Title: What Version of the Christian Holy Bible Do You read?
Source: LF
URL Source: http://hereandnow
Published: Feb 18, 2012
Author: buckeroo
Post Date: 2012-02-18 17:52:56 by buckeroo
Keywords: None
Views: 289569
Comments: 449

Assuming you have a Christian Holy Bible of one flavor or another, what version do you read?

As several examples, here are several variations: the New King James Version, New Living Translation, New International Version, New Revised Standard Version and so forth.

The NIV is revisionist history at it's worst, written by satist NWO neocon libtards. The following chart demonstrates just how far they strayed...

Warning: Beware of the Living Bible and the Good News Bible. They are merely Bible paraphrases, not translations. The wording is not true to the original Hebrew and Greek. The scriptures are perverted to support secular Christianity.

King James Bible
(Translation)

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Living Bible
(Paraphrase)

Obey the government, for God is the one who has put it there. There is no government anywhere that God has not placed in power.

2 So those who refuse to obey the laws of the land are refusing to obey God, and punishment will follow.

3 For the policeman does not frighten people who are doing right; but those doing evil will always fear him. So if you don't want to be afraid, keep the laws and you will get along well.

4 The policeman is sent by God to help you. But if you are doing something wrong, of course you should be afraid, for he will have you punished. He is sent by God for that very purpose.

5 Obey the laws, then, for two reasons: first, to keep from being punished, and second, just because you know you should.

6 Pay your taxes too, for these same two reasons. For government workers need to be paid so that they can keep on doing God's work, serving you.

7 Pay everyone whatever he ought to have: pay your taxes and import duties gladly, obey those over you, and give honor and respect to all those to whom it is due.

Using your comparison chart in your first post between the King James Version (KJV) and the Living Bible (LB), I want you to know that the New King James Version (NKJV) (note: NOT the KJV as in your chart) has the same meaning as the Living Bible (LB). Also, this same idea contained in your chart between Living Bible (LB) King James (KJV) version seems perpetuated all over the many variations that exist.

I do not believe for a moment that the Bible instructs us, "So those who refuse to obey the laws of the land are refusing to obey God, and punishment will follow" (LB) or "The policeman is sent by God to help you. But if you are doing something wrong, of course you should be afraid, for he will have you punished. He is sent by God for that very purpose." (LB) This is total poppycock for the lame brain creating, dull mass lunatics (whom can't think for themselves) submitting to a fuckin' dictator.

I checked the Coptic Church, too. They are the oldest group of "Christians" around even foreshadowing the Catholic Church by several hundreds of years and they use the English translation of the NKJV! Even the Arabic translation (SJV) converts to "submission unto the the Sultans." I don't believe many people understand the intent of Jesus Christ at all. He was a REBEL in his day, that is the reason for his crucifixion.

Like the gov the Coptics try their best to rip you off. The ones running the liquor store are known far and wide for trying to short change their customers.

The Coptics are pretty much centralized in Egypt and have been as much or more victimized through time as any of the Jews. Their first original writings came from Mark (one of the apostles of Christ) in Alexandria.

I was sure there was some subtle humour intended but I am studying the many variations of the Christian Bible right now. I am exceptionally curious about how the passage of Romans 13 has been interpreted in all these variations of English translation.

Jesus of Nazareth was a REBEL not some cheap submissive, humble servant of the government that is represented in all these English Bible translations.

Kings and even religious leaders try to spin to bible and tell us they we have to kiss their asses. Revolutionary preachers taught that "resistance to tyranny is obedience to God". They considered King George to be a false god (idol).

And we wonder HOW America failed? The entire American nation has been blinded into becoming a herd of sheep caged by ravenous wolves ready to strike at any moment. And, at the top of the list are the fucking ministers, pastors, priests and other BS artists that practice their Sunday SATANIC message of BS.

Hondo - I just researched a wee bit about your excellent resource, Harry Stout. I'm buying his book: The New England Soul: Preaching and Religious Culture in Colonial New England. As a synopsis of the book:

Definitely a step up from reading the satanic rantings of an Obama worshiper like diva.

Strange as it may seem, the many variations we find with the Christian Holy Bible *IS* the very reason for the many variations of churches and interpretations of Jesus of Nazareth own words.

Church doctrine almost always is based on the Greek or Hebrew text, and seldom if ever translations.

I see. So how did Jerome translate the Greek and Coptic texts at the Library of Alexandria, Egypt for the Vulgate into Latin in circa ~379 CE?

The Bible has many faces. It can be studied as literature and explored as a set of stories and poetic expressions, or viewed as history which tells us of the beginnings and growth of God’s people. For some it is a guide to Archeology, pointing the way to buried civilizations. There is a place and a purpose for each of those aspects, but at the basis of all, the Bible is the Word of God. It is God’s message to a rebelling world of how it can return to Him. It is a love letter from God to us. But do we take this claim seriously? Or are we interested only in one aspect?

The earlier chapters of this book have shown that we can know that God exists, what He is like, how He can overcome evil, that He can perform miracles, and that Jesus is God without ever referring to the Bible as a sacred book. However, it must be said that while these arguments don’t rely on the Bible, they are guided by it. They take the path of reason to reach these conclusions, but they are directed by the revelation. Without the Word of God, there is no guarantee that anyone would ever reach these conclusions. Even if they did, there might not be many who found them, and there is no telling how long it would take or how much error might be included along the way. Also, reason can take us only one step farther. That step leads us to the Scriptures as God’s Word. If we are to have any knowledge of God’s saving grace and love, then we must have the Word of God. The big question is, “Is the Bible really a revelation from God?” That is the question we will try to answer in this chapter.

We know that the Bible came from God for one very simple reason: Jesus told us so. It is on His authority, as the God of the universe, that we are sure that the Bible is the Word of God. He confirmed the Old Testament’s authority in His teaching, and He promised an authoritative New Testament through His disciples. The Son of God Himself assures us that the Bible is the Word of God.

Jesus spoke of the whole Old Testament (Matt. 22:29), its central divisions (Luke 16:16), its individual books (Matt. 22:43; 24:15), its events (19:4–5; Luke 17:27), and even its letters and parts of letters (Matt. 5:18) as having divine authority. He called the Scriptures the Word of God (John 10:35). He said that they had been written by men moved by the Spirit when He said, “David himself said in the Holy Spirit” (Mark 12:36) and refers to events “spoken of through Daniel the prophet” (Matt. 24:15). In such statements He confirms the authorship of the most often disputed books, like Moses’ writings (Mark 7–10), Isaiah (v. 6), Daniel, and the Psalms. He also refers to the very miracles which critics reject as historical events. He cites the Creation (Luke 11:51), Adam and Eve (Matt. 19:4–5), Noah and the Flood (24:37–39), Sodom and Gomorrah (Luke 10:12), and Jonah and the great fish (Matt. 12:39–41). He said, “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of the letter of the Law to fail” (Luke 16:17). The fact that He considered the Scripture to be the final authority is seen clearly in His temptations, when He defends himself from Satan’s attacks three times with the phrase, “It is written” (Matt. 4:4ff).

Jesus told His disciples just before He left them, “These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you” (John 14:25–26). Jesus added, “When He, the Spirit of Truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come” (16:13). These statements promise that the teachings of Jesus will be remembered and understood, and that additional truths would be given to the apostles so that the church could be established. They set the stage for the apostolic era which began on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1ff) and continued until the last of the apostles died (John, about a.d. 100).

During this period, the apostles became the agents of the complete and final revelation of Jesus Christ and He continued “to do and teach” through them (Acts 1:1). They were given the “keys to the kingdom” (Matt. 16:19) and by their hands did believers receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:14–15; 19:1–6). The early church built its doctrines and practices on “the foundation of the apostles” (Eph. 2:20). It followed the “apostles’ teaching” (Acts 2:42) and was bound by decisions of the apostolic council (Acts 15). Even though Paul had received his apostleship by a revelation from God, his credentials were confirmed by the apostles in Jerusalem.

Some of the New Testament writers were not apostles, though. How can we explain their authority? They used the apostolic message which was “confirmed to us by those who heard” (Heb. 2:3). Mark worked closely with Peter (1 Peter 5:13); James and Jude were closely associated with the apostles in Jerusalem and were probably Jesus’ brothers; Luke was a companion of Paul (2 Tim. 4:11) who interviewed many eyewitnesses to produce his account (Luke 1:1–4). Paul’s writings are even equated with Scripture by Peter (2 Peter 3:15–16). In each case (with the exception of Hebrews; we don’t know for sure who wrote that book), there is a definite link between the writer and the apostles who gave them information (cf. 2:3).

Now if Jesus, who was God in the flesh and always spoke the truth, said that the Old Testament was the Word of God and that the New Testament would be written by His apostles and prophets as the sole authorized agents for His message, then our entire Bible is proven to be from God. We have it on the best of authority—Jesus Christ Himself.

How is that possible? First, the NT wasn't written in a collective manner with some texts integrated into the canon and others not before Jesus' crucifixion; that even was some 300+ years later. But, just preceding the time of Jerome's synthesis and reproduction of the NT, here comes the Talmud! (circa ~200 CE):

There was no Bible, as a complete Jewish history (OT) was always oral not written and to this very day many Jews reject the Talmud altogether as is pointed out in the video.

The Mishnah is not part of the Bible, but a record of Jewish oral tradition. The O.T. Canon was closed prior to the writing of the Mishnah.

MISHNA [MISH nah] (repetition) — the first, and basic, part of the Talmud and the written basis of religious authority for traditional Judaism. The Mishna contains a written collection of traditional laws (halakoth) handed down orally from teacher to student. It was compiled across a period of about 335 years, from 200 b.c. to a.d. 135. The Mishna is grouped into 63 treaties, or tractates, that deal with all areas of Jewish life—legal, theological, social, and religious—as taught in the schools of Palestine. Soon after the Mishna was compiled, it became known as the “iron pillar of the Torah,” since it preserves the way a Jew can follow the Torah. For many Jews, the Mishna ranks second only to the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures. Indeed, many Jews consider it part of the Torah. Because it is the core for both the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds, the Mishna serves as a link between Jews in the land of Israel and Jews scattered around the world.

Lets break this down a bit (I am not arguing, I am trying to learn this stuff) ...

Fix the above stuff before we can go on. Because THE REALLY BIG STUFF IS history of the Zealots, IMO.

Tanakh - A New Translation of THE HOLY SCRIPTURES According to the Traditional Hebrew Text. (copied from title page)

TORAH The Hebrew word Torah means teaching or instruction. Used originally to refer to specific instances of instruction in Israel’s story (cf. Exod. 13:9; 18:16; Num. 19:2; Deut. 17:8–11; Josh. 1:7–8; Jer. 6:19), Torah later became a technical term referring to the Pentateuch. It is also used in a broader sense to refer to the totality of Jewish teaching, both written and oral. Because Israel’s Torah abounds in commandments and statutes, both ethical and ritual, the word law is frequently used as synonymous with Torah. The understanding of Torah as law is already apparent in the LXX, where Torah is translated as nomos (law), and the NT builds on this understanding. However, Israel’s Torah is more than legal codes. It is God’s instruction to Israel on how to keep the covenant, instruction set in the context of story and promise. So it is that Matthew can speak of Jesus as coming to fulfill the law, the Torah (cf. also TBC on 5:17–48).

TALMUD — a collection of books and commentary compiled by Jewish rabbis from a.d. 250–500. The Hebrew word talmud means “study” or “learning.”
This is a fitting title for a work that is a library of Jewish wisdom, philosophy, history, legend, astronomy, dietary laws, scientific debates, medicine, and mathematics. The Talmud is made up of interpretation and commentary of the Mosaic and rabbinic law contained in the Mishna, an exhaustive collection of laws and guidelines for observing the law of Moses. As a guide to following the law, the Talmud also serves as a basis for spiritual formation. More than 2,000 scholars or rabbis worked across a period of 250 years to understand the meaning of God’s word for their particular situation. Out of these efforts they produced the Talmud.
The wide variety and comprehensive detail of the Talmud’s subject matter conveys a deep thirst for learning. Questions as minute as why God created a gnat and as universal as the origin of the universe filled the teachers of Israel with wonder. A passion for truth and understanding led the Jewish teachers deep into the marvels of the human experience.
The Pharisees were the first to give greater attention to the laws of Moses. The Roman historian Josephus reported that their oral tradition included regulations that were not recorded in the Mosaic Law at all. The Mishna collected all of these oral regulations into one permanent record. In response to the Mishna, wide discussions concerning its content and meaning began, resulting in the Talmud.
The centers for these learned discussions were the academies in Babylonia and Israel. As a result, two Talmuds, the Babylonian Talmud and the Jerusalem Talmud, were created. Because the Babylonian rabbis were far more thorough in word-by-word interpretation of the Mishna than were the rabbis in Israel, the Babylonian Talmud is much more complete. An English edition of this work fills 36 volumes and almost 36,000 pages.
The Talmud is divided into six major sections. The first of these deals with agriculture and crops and the offerings, tithes, and prayers associated with them. The second section is about holidays and festivals such as the Sabbath, Passover, Rosh Hashanah and others. A third section discusses laws about marriage, divorce, property, and related subjects. Another section concerns the rules governing the courts. The next section deals with the laws pertaining to the Temple and the sacrifices and Jewish foods. The final section discusses the laws of ritual purity.
At some points during Jewish history, traditions and the Talmud have been considered equal to or better than the Scripture itself. Jesus encountered such an attitude among the Pharisees even before the existence of the Talmud (Matt. 15:3). Christians must be careful not to make the same mistake in regard to our own traditions.

So, if you had a chance to view that video: it is the ORAL LAW not the Bible that establishes the Jewish traditions. Jesus was a Jew, for sure. Why would he reference a document (the Bible) that wasn't around at his time?

I watched the video. The Orthodox and Conservative Jews see authority for their belief system in the written Word, whereas Reformed Jews do not. My mentor and best friend for ten years was a Jew, who converted to Christianity.

And Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew. What faction of the Jews did he represent? At his time: the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes and the Zealots represented the known Jewish factions according to Josephus' in "Jewish Antiquities.

It is important to understand the historical roots of his Jewish background and the historical roots in Jewish in-fighting AND the Roman bloodbath.

Are you saying that Jesus of Nazareth was not a Jew? If Jesus was Jew, he had to have identified with one of those four Jewish factions, already suggested. If he was not a Jew, what was he, then?

How come, at a young age, did Jesus goto Egypt? For a vacation? Or, was he taken to avoid the Romans? If he was identified as a Jewish Zealot, it is understandable about his journey. If he belonged to any of the other Jewish factions, it is not understandable unless there is some data to show that Joesph and Mary were shamed by the Galilee Jewish community for Jesus' birth.

Are you saying that Jesus of Nazareth was not a Jew? If Jesus was Jew, he had to have identified with one of those four Jewish factions, already suggested. If he was not a Jew, what was he, then?

No. I am saying he was not a member of any of those groups. He wasn't required to be a member of a group.

No, his parents took him to Egypt to escape Herod. He was less than two years old.