Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles
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: 289743
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. Post your comment on this thread.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-45) not displayed.
.
.
.
#46. To: buckeroo (#44)
(Edited)
Very true. I am always dismayed when I talk to American fundamentalists, who have no idea where the New Testament came from. Here's the short story: In the 300 hundred years after Christ was crucified, a lot of Christian groups sprung up in the Middle East, with widely different views of Christ's deity and humanity. There wasn't any New Testament. Some groups used word of mouth. Others collected various combinations of writings by the Apostles and others. In the early 4th century, leaders of the Western Church (Rome) and Eastern Church (Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem) decided Christianity needed an official version and a set of writings that would support it. It took them almost 100 years to put the New Testament together. During the 100 year process, there were many disagreements on what should be included. The four Gospels were universally accepted. Other books were hotly contested. The disputed books included Hebrews, James, 2nd and 3rd John, 2d Peter, Jude, Revelations, the Shepard of Hermas, Apocalypse of Peter, Epistle of Barnabas, and the Epistle of Clement. Finally in 396 AD, the new Testament was declared finalized. However there were still bibles produced in the east that contained Barnabas, but not Revelations for sometime after the decree. The decisions made about what to include in the New Testament are documented in the writings of the first seven Ecumenical Councils. Catholics and Orthodox look to those writings in addition to the New Testament because they tell why these particular books were chosen to be in the New Testament. Fundamentalist Protestants just don't have a clue about any of this. A few years ago I sat on a plane next to a fundamentalist preacher, who had his own unaffiliated church. He said flat out that what is wrong with American Protestantism is that they don't have any ties to history. Their congregations don't have any knowledge about the rich history of Christianity and how our current broad Christian views actually came into being. That's very sad.
I don't know that there is download since the version is brand new. Here is a write up on what the Orthodox Church believes about Romans 13. The salient point: Paul is being crystal clear here: we should consult our "conscience," i.e. our Christian conscience, according to the true Word of God, in order to judge the deeds of those rulers and whether they are set "for good" or for evil among us. If they are "for good," then tribute is indeed due. If they are for evil, then "fear" is due. Now, hand on heart, are your rulers true followers of God? Who is our ultimate ruler? Who should our earthly ministers follow and obey? Jesus Christ said it clearly: "I am the Alpha and the Omega." Christ is the beginning and the end. Only He rules. His ministers are but those following His Way and functioning by His example. To them, our tribute is due. Don’t deal with the rest.
Excellent point. I want to suggest that the Catholic Saint Jerome whom studied in Alexandria, Egypt under the auspices of the Egyptian Christian Copts, performed that deed with the direction of Pope Damasus I; Jerome's translation of Greek into Latin became the official Christian Holy Bible (Vulgate, circa ~400) for over a thousand years or into the early Renaissance Era of Europe (circa ~1400).
I want thank you again, hondo. I am reading Stout's book, "The New England Soul: Preaching and Religious Culture in Colonial New England." as a quick overview, it is interesting to note that ALMOST ALL the documented sermons that Stout offers has little or nothing to say concerning the Apostle Paul. BTW, Stout's research in this published work only discusses a timeline upto 1776. HAHAHAHAHA .. I wonder why? Anyone got a clue?
Not really sure, but around that time Tories became very unpopular and many left riding a rail after being tarred and feathered, and ended up in Canada or elsewhere. Wouldn't be surprised if some religious types were among them. Eventually they seemed to end up on FR and LP, claiming that they wuz hacked.
Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
Thanks for the commentary and critique and although I linked it into my database I want to find Romans 13 in a similar way that hondo showed in his post#1. Do I have to buy: hardcopy for fifty bucks to learn about their official translation? If it is a recent work, why is it NOT online to buy at a fraction of the price?
I read them all. Any one that I want to read. I also listen to people from all different denominations- go to temple on occasion, observe Jewish holy days- pray to keep all of the commandments- and read the Gnostic gospels. I also pray and ask for revelation. I am very confident that there is nothing that you could explain to me. :) You are not going to find understanding in any one single translation. It is not there. God is love and is spirit. The great spirit in the sky, is the Holy Spirit. People have understood this for thousands of years- and somehow it has totally evaded you. That is a heart matter. THE one and only way to understand the ministry of Jesus- and to know God, is to be reborn with the Holy Spirit. that means that you allow your spirit to be alive. What deity of yours is going to do that for you? What deity of yours has shown you the way? I say none have. Jesus did tho- and that is historical not just spiritual. Since that is not something you are interested in understanding- your pursuit of knowledge of the Bible- is hopeless, because all you are going to learn is the ways of man and religion. Good luck with that. Man is a mess. Jesus is the hope of the entire world. Best wishes tho- have fun.
The download site is broken. You can buy a paperback version on-line for $13.99 at Amazon or Barnes and Nobel. Here is some more Christian theology for your consideration (this is jwpegler's view -- which has its roots in 2,000 year old Orthodox Christianity, a bit of Lutheranism, and some personal interpretations as well): Is the Bible the "inspired" Word of God or the "inerrant" Word of God? In other words, did God dictate word-for-word what the authors of the New Testament books wrote or did God just inspire them to what to write what God was communicating? It's an important question. Paul wrote a lot of letters to various peoples to convince them to accept Christ. The Roman Empire was the major political authority of the day. Paul tried to convince them that accepting Christ would not endanger their political authority. (Romans 13: It's okay to pay taxes, just accept Christ.) It worked. The Romans did accept Christ and it changed the history of the world. Paul also wrote the "Letters to the Hebrews" to try to convince them that Christianity was an extension of their historical beliefs, so they should accept Christ. In this case, it didn't work. Most Hebrews rejected Christ. (Dispensationalist Christians love to point to Hebrews as evidence that we need to kiss the Likud Party's ass to be saved. They don't just don't understand the historical context of Paul's writings.) Traditional Christianity believes that the New Testament is the inspired word of God, not the inerrant world of God. American dispensationalists believe otherwise. Paul was God's messenger, not his secretary. Paul was a salesman for Christ. Like all great salesmen, he tailored his message to his audience. He did a great job, for Christ. But he lost one big deal (the Hebrews). No salesman wins every deal.
LOL
I see .... what does the following passage mean: Certainly, since you read all of them [Bibles] you can find a moment to explain this single passage? I haven't suggested that I WOULD explain anything. Far from it, I have a relatively simple question and to this moment in the thread, you have yet to answer it. GREAT!!! So help me out on that one example I have cited above.
It's an important question. Good stuff, you suggest. Here is my perspective: The written Bible (The Old Testament) sprang from the Jewish Tankh and the forerunner of the Tanakh came from the Jewish Talmud comprised of Palestinian an Babylonian oral traditions for hundreds of years. When I was in a military class, there was an experiment on oral communications wherein there was a set of mutually exclusive participants comprised of four separate students, for notation: s1, s2, s3, and s4 where s1 was permitted to take his time and read some fairely minor details from a documents script. Once s1 completed his reading, the documented script was removed for the remainder of the exercise. s2 was invited to to come into the classroom. s1 then orally delivered the data to s2 with some fairely accurate reconstruction and then asked s2 if he was satisfied with the data. When s2 assured s1 that he was confident with the details, s1 was removed and now, s2 delivered the data to s3. Here was the main change in data and was very inaccurate. Once s2 was confident with the data (of course) s2 left the experiment and s3 came in .... and so on with s4. Now, s1 returns and retrieves the data from s4. The data was completely distorted and stripped of details that were very important within the experiment and ALL new data was delivered. This experiment categorically PROVES that the dissemination of information from one person to another through an oral approach can yield tragic results in the real world. So, let's go back to the the Jewish Talmud which was the oral tradition information dissemination of the Jews from generation to generation, in fact about 1500 years from Abraham/Sarah (circa ~2000 BCE) to the fall of Israel by the Babylonians and the resultant exile of the Jews from Israel to Babylon (circa ~500 BCE). When the Jews came back to Israel (circa ~500 BCE), they also brought back some interesting ideas from Sumerian/Babylonian religious thought that I think merged some of the oral traditions of the Jews into some more refinement concerning their monotheism, such as designing a written word, the Tanakh (circa ~400) But thousands of years elapsed before the Tanukh! Data handed down from cow herder to sheep herder begat this... begat that ... begat here ... begat there! Don't you think that there would be inaccuracies of the earlier generations through all that oral traditions? I do. As for the New Testament, we are confronted by the same situation although the Vulgate was designed (circa ~ 400 CE) just a few generations away (relatively speaking) from the Crucifixion of Christ (circa ~30 CE) Now, the Apostles traveled widely all over the Mediterranean area. All were crucified or put to death but John. He died about circa ~100 CE. It is important to know that because of the wide and varied traveling they independently pursued that differences occurred with the many early Christian Churches. Indeed, Mark established his domain in Alexandria Egypt and his foundations established the Copts whom created the GREATEST libraries around. But, none of their individual works or deeds were unified except through the Holy Roman Church, primarily via the Vulgate by Jerome whom studied in Alexandria and translated many of the canons later accepted in to the Vulgate. But, back to your question, it is obvious to me that we are dealing with fallible people separated by lengthy trips and as a result many variations in traditions. So, I agree with your view about Paul, as well. And any of the original texts are interpretations, although I would wager fairely accurate.
Honestly... I have to spend some more time trying to figure out why you don't see the common threads, that connect all of those interpretations. I am speechless that you don't see it. I'll have to figure you out later, buck. Lent is here. 40 days. See you after Easter. bye.
Me to. Here is the KJV again: Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. How did Kingdom of Heaven "suffer" violence? Seems pretty fishy to me. Yeah ... I scratch my head on this one. Why "figure" me out? Why not just interpret the passage? WoW ... are leaving me hanging here?
buck- honestly- I really am observing Lent, and praying and fasting and that has been a great experience, but I don't want to leave you hanging, and I apologize if that answer sounded curt. I didn't mean for it to sound negative. I honestly want to help you understand. BUT.. You have burned me in the past, and I really do not want to waste valuable energy arguing with you, or playing cyber games. If you are sincere about seeking this knowledge, I can think of nothing more valuable to do- right now- than hang out with you and discuss your questions. I want you to be honest, are you being authentic here? The message of all of those verses is the same. The Kingdom of Haven suffered violence when He was beaten to a bloody pulp, mocked and humiliated- and hung on a cross to be a curse, to absorb the wrath of God, to fulfill the law of atonement for sin- for every person on Earth. The violent take the Earth by force- and God sends us a savior- that whoever shall believe in Him shall be set free. God in not violent. He does not take the Earth by force. Each person has free will. Those verses are also to set the stage that Jesus knew that he would suffer violence- and he knew he was not going to bring an overthrowing of the violence. Jesus knew the violence of man was not going to stop- but that he was still willing to die- to make the statement that HE was the way to the Father and to Heaven. It leaves us a working legacy. That verse teaches us about the character of Jesus. Here is a man who knew exactly what violence he was going to face- and he faced. WHY would he do that? He did it because he is who he says he is- and.. Jesus showed us how to live in peaceful resistance ,to the violence of the world. The Bible speaks of the past, present and future at the same time. Just like there is the Trinity. To someone who does not understand the supernatural existence of God- these things make no sense at all. To gain understanding of anything in the Bible- you MUST first accept that God's ways are not man's ways. So listen- honestly- I want to take this time for my spiritual retreat- but I will respectfully address any sincere questions you have. Please don't play games. If you have an honest question, I will answer honestly and kindly, to the best of my ability. Just because it is the internet and we don't know each other- doesn't mean it is cool to waste each other's time. Ok?
I am always dismayed when I talk to American fundamentalists, who have no idea where the New Testament came from. Here's the short story: In the 300 hundred years after Christ was crucified, a lot of Christian groups sprung up in the Middle East, with widely different views of Christ's deity and humanity. There wasn't any New Testament. Some groups used word of mouth. Others collected various combinations of writings by the Apostles and others. In the early 4th century, leaders of the Western Church (Rome) and Eastern Church (Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem) decided Christianity needed an official version and a set of writings that would support it. It took them almost 100 years to put the New Testament together. During the 100 year process, there were many disagreements on what should be included. The four Gospels were universally accepted. Other books were hotly contested. The disputed books included Hebrews, James, 2nd and 3rd John, 2d Peter, Jude, Revelations, the Shepard of Hermas, Apocalypse of Peter, Epistle of Barnabas, and the Epistle of Clement. Finally in 396 AD, the new Testament was declared finalized. However there were still bibles produced in the east that contained Barnabas, but not Revelations for sometime after the decree. The decisions made about what to include in the New Testament are documented in the writings of the first seven Ecumenical Councils. Catholics and Orthodox look to those writings in addition to the New Testament because they tell why these particular books were chosen to be in the New Testament. Fundamentalist Protestants just don't have a clue about any of this. A few years ago I sat on a plane next to a fundamentalist preacher, who had his own unaffiliated church. He said flat out that what is wrong with American Protestantism is that they don't have any ties to history. Their congregations don't have any knowledge about the rich history of Christianity and how our current broad Christian views actually came into being. That's very sad. You have obviously been talking to the wrong people. The books of the New Testament were complete prior to the end of the First Century. http://www.errantskeptics.org/DatingNT-ChronologicalOrder.htm “You have to understand that the canon was not the result of a series of contests involving church politics. The canon is rather the separation that came about because of the intuitive insight of Christian believers. They could hear the Good Shepherd in the Gospel of John; they could hear it only muffled and distorted way in the Gospel of Thas miomxed in with a lot of other things. “When the pronouncement was made about the canon, it merely ratified what the general sensitivity of the church had already determined. You see, the canon is a list of authoritative books more than it is an authoritative list of books. These documents didn’t derive their authority from being selected; each one was authoritative before anyone gathered them together. The early church merely listened and sensed that these were authoritative accounts. “For somebody now to say that the canon emerged only after councils and synods made these pronouncements would be like saying, ‘Let’s get several academies of musicians to make a pronouncement that the music of Bach and Beethoven is wonderful.’ I would say, ‘Thank you for nothing! We knew it because of sensitivity to what is good music and what is not. The same with the canon.” Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, Ph.D. Paul joins OT and NT as both Scripture 1 Timothy 5:18 (ESV) For the Scripture says, *“You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, *“The laborer deserves his wages.” Deuteronomy 25:4 (ESV) OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
I have 100+ Bibles, however I generally read the ESV, NIV, NLT, NASB1995, and the KJV for English translations. I also have Bibles in Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and several other languages, which I refer to occasionally.
OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
In other words, printers removed the Apocrypha from the Bible, not any church. That is not correct. The so-called missing books of the OT, known as the Apocrypha (meaning “hidden” or “doubtful”), are not missing and do not belong in the OT for many reasons. (1) Unlike the canonical books, the apocryphal books do not have either an explicit or implicit claim to be inspired by God. In fact, some even disclaim being prophetic (cp. 1 Mac 9:27; 14:41). (2) They were written between 250 B.C. and the first century A.D., but according to Judaism, the Spirit of prophecy had departed from Israel before that time, by about 400 B.C. (3) The Jewish historian Josephus gave the names and numbers of the authentic Jewish OT, which correspond exactly with the 39 books of our OT (Against Apion 1.8). (4) Judaism, which produced these books, has never accepted them into its Bible (the Hebrew Scriptures, corresponding to our OT). (5) Neither Jesus nor the apostles ever cited any of the Apocrypha in the NT as inspired. (6) Most of the church fathers of the first four centuries of the Christian church did not accept these books as inspired. (7) Jerome, the great Roman Catholic scholar (c. A.D. 420) who translated the Latin Vulgate Bible, emphatically rejected the apocryphal books. (8) The acceptance of these books in A.D. 1546 by the Roman Catholic Church is unjustified since: (a) they were the wrong group to make this decision (Christians, not Jews); (b) it took place at the wrong time (sixteenth century A.D.); and (c) it was done for the wrong reasons (for example, to support the doctrine of prayers for the dead [see 2 Mac 12:45] in response to the Reformation and biblical teaching to the contrary [Heb 9:27]).
OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
The Greek Orthodox Church has recently release a new English translation of the New Testament called the Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible. The OC used the NKJV for their NT.
OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
You are confusing 2 completely separate things: A.) When were the individual documents written? B.) When were the individual documents selected for inclusion into the official Christian Bible (the New Testament)? The answer to B is 396 AD. Prior to 396 AD, there were a lot of very, very different collections of writings that circulated among Christian. The Four Gospels were universally accepted. Many of the other books, that I name above, were NOT.
The American Orthodox Study Bible is based on NKJV. But the Bible used in Greek mass is the Patriarchal version on of 1906, written in Greek. That has now been translated into English for the first time.
Throughout history the Jews have been clueless. Ignore those retarded Messiah deniers.
Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
No. Prior to 396 AD (and for sometime after), many Bibles included the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, and many others books that were not included in the final New Testament. A lot of Christians revered these books. Many of the Bibles in circulation did NOT include Revelations and other disputed books. These are called FACTS, not American dispensationalist propaganda.
Hey buck- I have looked back here a few times, to see if you answered. Unless I missed it, you didn't answer. That's cool- BUT.. I really am going deep into prayer for the whole weekend now, and I am not getting back online here. What I want to leave you with is that I honestly believe that you are valuable enough to have an honest discussion with-and that the Lord loves you, whether you call yourself a deist or not. Salvation is something that is written about FOR you. You are JUST as entitled to salvation as I am ,and no matter what you have done or called yourself- you are savable and wanted, as am I. (that goes for anyone reading) Ok? So we are equal in the eyes of the Lord. I am not an authority to you. The Lord is the authority and then there is everyone else. I just have a fear of the Lord, and a love for Jesus that is YET untapped in you- or at least in your postings here. The Bible can either be a book of lies and distortions OR the most simplest thing written, in the history of the world- laying out peace and healing and an abudnant life. It all starts with what we are afraid of. I, personally, am deeply afraid of a life where Jesus rots in a tomb. I have made a choice that my perception of life will not be from the eyes of a human being- who is not possible of healing, love and peace. And since I chose that- my life is blessed, safe and peaceful. THOSE are the consequences of my choice. We all make choices and live and die with those choices. I am praying for you. I am seeking your understanding of those scriptures in a new way, so you can make informed choices. I want that peace for you, in your life. In fact, I pray that anyone reading this- will have the same peace I have. I have to jet, and go into a spiritual weekend. I will look back here sometime next week to see if you want to chat. Take care. Oh and here is a tune: www.youtube.com/watch? v=GCi8P7W_tAw
Show me, in the canons of the Holy Bible where there is a reference to a "trinity." Thank you.
You are correct, I didn't answer. You have confused me with that which is simple. If what you say is true, how do you read: Just asking, of course.
This is good news! How do you reconcile the apparent differences of text within the two versions that hondo68 posted in #1 of this thread? Don't the two versions read differently?
I am not catholic. Catholicism is a religion. I don't have a religion. I am a non-religious follower of Jesus the Christ. Ask a Catholic. I don't beleive in most things Catholics believe in - you would have to ask a Catholic. The power of God is within us, when we accept the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the kingdom of Heaven (aka -Kingdom of God).. (again, see the theme from the other verses?) Jesus lives in the faithful, by the indwelling - Holy Spirit. Have a good weekend. God bless you, buck. Hope that is helpful.
This thread is not designed to dispel your personal beliefs or religion, you are free to be what-ever-you-want. Have you read Flavius Josephus?
A.) When were the individual documents written? B.) When were the individual documents selected for inclusion into the official Christian Bible (the New Testament)? The answer to B is 396 AD. Prior to 396 AD, there were a lot of very, very different collections of writings that circulated among Christian. The Four Gospels were universally accepted. Many of the other books, that I name above, were NOT. I am very aware of the differencee between when the NT books were completed and the canon. The books of the NT were all completed prior to 100 AD. Several of the early church fathers wrote what books were part of the NT long before 396 AD, and they didn't need a church council to tell them what was canon, and neither do I. If you feel differently that's your issue, not mine.
OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
Church doctrine almost always is based on the Greek or Hebrew text, and seldom if ever translations.
OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
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?
“Governing authorities” (cf. also NRSV; NIV; NASB; NJB) translates a phrase that is central to the interpretation of the paragraph. Like our “authority,” exousia refers broadly in secular and biblical Greek to the possession and exercise of (usually legitimate) power. As an abstract noun, the word usually denotes the concept of authority. Jesus’ well-known words in Matt. 28:18 use the word in a typical way: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” But the word can also have a concrete application, in which case exousia denotes a sphere over which authority is exercised (e.g., a “dominion”; cf. Luke 23:7) or the being who exercises authority.18 The latter is clearly how the word is used in Rom. 13:1. The NT refers to two different kinds of “beings” who exercise authority: a person in government (a “ruler”)19 and spiritual “powers.”20 A few scholars have argued that Paul may be referreferring at least partially to spiritual beings in Rom. 13:1.21 But this is unlikely.22 As parallel terms in this context suggest (cf. “rulers” [archontes] in v. 3), the “authorities” occupy positions in secular government. Paul qualifies them as “governing” in order to indicate that they are in positions of superiority over the believers he is addressing.23 Paul calls on believers to “submit”24 to governing authorities rather than to “obey” them; and Paul’s choice of words may be important to our interpretation and application of Paul’s exhortation. To submit is to recognize one’s subordinate place in a hierarchy, to acknowledge as a general rule that certain people or institutions have “authority” over us. In addition to governing authorities (cf. also Tit. 3:1), Paul urges Christians to submit to their spiritual leaders (1 Cor. 16:16) and to “one another” (Eph. 5:21); and he calls on Christian slaves to submit to their masters (Tit. 2:9), Christian prophets to submit to other prophets (1 Cor. 14:32), and Christian wives to submit to their husbands (1 Cor. 14:34 [?]; Eph. 5:24; Col. 3:18; Tit. 2:5).25 It is this general posture toward government that Paul demands here of Christians. And such a posture will usually demand that we obey what the governing authorities tell us to do. But perhaps our submission to government is compatible with disobedience to government in certain exceptional circumstances. For heading the hierarchy of relations in which Christians find themselves is God; and all subordinate “submissions” must always be measured in relationship to our all-embracing submission to him.26 ESV|°Let every person be subject to the governing authorities °. For there is no authority except °from God °, and those that exist have been °instituted by God. °Therefore whoever resists the °authorities resists what God has °appointed , and those who °resist will °incur judgment °. For rulers °are not a terror °to good conduct , but °to bad . °Would you °have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is °good, and °you will °receive his approval, °for he is God’s servant °for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword °in vain . °For he is °the servant of God , an °avenger who carries out God’s wrath °on the wrongdoer. Therefore °one must be in subjection , not only °to avoid God’s wrath but also °for the sake of conscience. °For because of this you also °pay taxes, for the authorities are °ministers of God , °attending to °this very thing . °Pay to all what °is owed to them : °taxes to whom taxes are owed , °revenue to whom revenue is owed , °respect to whom respect is owed , °honor °to whom honor is owed . 49.7% difference AMP|°LET EVERY person be loyally subject to the governing (civil) authorities °. For there is no authority except °from God °[by His permission, His sanction], and those that exist °do so by °God’s appointment . °Therefore he who °resists and sets himself up against the °authorities resists what God has °appointed and arranged [in divine order]. And those who °resist will bring down judgment °upon themselves °[receiving the penalty due them]. For °civil authorities are not a terror °to [people of] good conduct , but °to [ those °of] bad behavior . °Would you °have no dread of °him who is in authority? Then do what is right and °you will °receive his approval and commendation . For he is God’s servant °for your good. But if you do wrong, [you should dread him and] be afraid, for he does not bear and wear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant °to execute His wrath °( punishment , vengeance) on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be subject , °not only °to avoid God’s wrath and escape punishment , but also °as a matter of principle and for the sake of conscience. °For this same reason you pay taxes, for [ the civil authorities ] are °official servants under God , °devoting themselves to attending to °this very service . °Render to all men their dues. [Pay] taxes to whom taxes are due , °revenue to whom revenue is due , °respect to whom respect is due , °and honor °to whom honor is due . 55% difference NASB95|°Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities °. For there is no authority except °from God, and those which °exist °are established by God. °Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the °ordinance of God °; and °they who °have opposed will °receive condemnation upon themselves. For rulers °are not a cause of fear for °good behavior , but for °evil . Do you want to °have no fear of °authority? °Do what is °good and °you will °have praise from the same; °for it is °a minister of God to °you for good. But if you do °what is evil , be afraid °; for °it does not bear the sword for nothing °; for it is °a minister of God , an °avenger who brings wrath °on the °one who practices evil . Therefore °it is necessary to °be in subjection , not only because of °wrath, but also °for conscience ’ sake . °For because of this you also °pay taxes, for °rulers are °servants of God , °devoting themselves to °this very thing . °Render to all what °is due them : °tax to whom tax is due ; °custom to whom custom ; °fear to whom fear ; °honor °to whom honor. 55% difference
OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
In the West the church primarily used Latin after the end of the second century, and unofficial translations were made. In the fourth century Pope Damasus I invited Jerome to revise current Latin translations based on Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. Jerome completed the new translation after 18 years of work at Bethlehem. Jerome’s translation came to be the accepted Bible, and by a.d. 1200 was called the Vulgate, the official version for the Roman Catholic Church.
OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
Questions About The Bible 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? How important is the Bible? 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. HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THE BIBLE CAME FROM GOD? 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 CONFIRMED THE AUTHORITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 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 PROMISED THE NEW TESTAMENT 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.
OBAMA HAS SPENT MORE MONEY THAN ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
Nice definitive explanation. How come it does not take into account the issues that Paul was confronting with Rome from on a historical basis in order to arrive at the explanation? I have been reading "Romans: A Shorter Commentary" by C. E. B Cranfield and 13:1-7 are not what you think from a general or broadview position. In fact, I find your discussion further PROOF of the dolts that read and interpret the scriptures as reason NOT to read their ideas other than in a mocking sort of way. I think the entire Bible MUST be taken from a historical context, too.
You are ignorant of history, like most American dispensationalists. There is no point in having a conversation with someone who is too stubborn to learn.
We know that the Bible came from God for one very simple reason: Jesus told us so. 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.
Buck- what annoys me about you, the very most is that you ask personal questions and then you rebuke the answer. It totally annoys me. It is so rude. THAT is why humans need a savior, to learn to be kind to one another. Anyway- yes I have read. I tell you my personal faith, because you seem to be ignorant to the fact that not everyone reads the cannon, which is what YOU asked about. People who call themselves Christians do not all have faith in the same things. THAT fact speaks directly to the reason there are different translations and interpretations. Jesus warned us about men and power trips and their religion. He told us to rebel against religion. You talk about a rebel.. he was a rebel against religion. Read the Bible. I am telling you who I am, so you can start to understand the foundation of what I am sharing with you. For example, gary and I do not have faith in the same things at all. His brand of christian and mine are not the same. I look at gary's behavior and I do not see Jesus. THAT is all I need to know. I don't think the source of his religion and my faith is the same, as a matter of fact. He and I do not operate the same, read the same things in the Scriptural- or have the same understanding of God. SO- you are going to get two very different explanations of Scripture from the two of us. You should understand that every person who you seek answers from is going to put our experiences into our understanding. My experiences with Jesus are personal- profound, radical, healing and audacious. I had a radical transformation and walk in great blessings and good health. That is what I bring to the table. Don't want to know about that? Then stop asking me. And yes, history is very important and sound theology is very , very important- but the Bible says that all understanding starts with the fear of the lord- and is given to us by the Holy Spirit. Gary has neither. Gary is all about religion- nothing spiritual or supernatural. There are people, such as myself, who believe God is spirit and supernatural. KNOW the difference and you will gain understanding of why there are so many interpretations. Want to know WHO is the closest to Holy and accurate- then look at the person's life and the blessings - peace and good health of the person. THAT is called the fruit. Matt 7:16 You can identify them by their fruit, that is, by the way they act. Can you pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Like there is proof in the pudding.... well, there is proof in the fruit. So- know WHO you are talking to, and what they believe- while you seek. In fact, want to get directly to the heart of WHO is God, and what are HIS ways? Stop reading everyone's opinions and get on your knees and pray. You have a brain and a heart. Open them to God, and He will answer you. God bless you buck. This is a great season to be seeking. I pray you find all your answers. :) Blessed be the name of the Lord, Jesus.
There are also huge differences between the Jewish, Protestant, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox versions of the Old Testament.
I am not interested in your personal faith. If you are annoyed, it is because of THAT fact. I am interested in WHAT VERSION OF THE BIBLE YOU READ. You don't seem to have a handy Bible available. Why?
Comments (86 - 449) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThe New Testament was NOT dropped from heaven.
Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate
#47. To: buckeroo (#42)
Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate
#48. To: jwpegler (#46)
Finally in 396 AD, the new Testament was declared finalized. However there were still bibles produced in the east that contained Barnabas, but not Revelations for sometime after the decree.
#49. To: All (#39)
#50. To: buckeroo (#49)
(Edited)
a timeline upto 1776. HAHAHAHAHA .. I wonder why?
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#51. To: jwpegler (#47)
#52. To: buckeroo (#40)
(Edited)
#53. To: buckeroo (#51)
(Edited)
Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate
#54. To: hondo68 (#50)
Eventually they seemed to end up on FR and LP, claiming that they wuz hacked.
#55. To: diva betsy ross (#52)
read them all. Any one that I want to read. I also listen to people from all different denominations- go to temple on occasion, observe Jewish holy days- pray to keep all of the commandments- and read the Gnostic gospels. I also pray and ask for revelation.
I am very confident that there is nothing that you could explain to me.
You are not going to find understanding in any one single translation. It is not there.
#56. To: jwpegler (#53)
Is the Bible the "inspired" Word of God or the "inerrant" Word of God? In other words, did God dictate word-for-word what the authors of the New Testament books wrote or did God just inspire them to what to write what God was communicating?
#57. To: buckeroo (#55)
#58. To: diva betsy ross (#57)
Honestly... I have to spend some more time trying to figure out why you don't see the common threads, that connect all of those interpretations.
I am speechless that you don't see it.
I'll have to figure you out later, buck. Lent is here. 40 days. See you after Easter.
bye.
#59. To: buckeroo (#58)
(Edited)
#60. To: jwpegler (#46)
Paul, in 1 Timothy 5:18 joins both Old and New Testament references, and calls them Scripture.
[4] *“You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain. Luke 10:7 (ESV)
[7] And remain in the same house, eating and drinking what they provide, for *the laborer deserves his wages. Do not go from house to house.
#61. To: buckeroo (#0)
#62. To: hondo68 (#14)
American printers discovered that they could leave out the Apocrypha and sell the Bible for the same price, and no one would care because it wasn’t used much. Some of the homegrown religious groups naïvely assumed that whatever was not in their Bible was not in the canon. Later, when Catholics became a significant segment of the population, a non-Catholic would say, “That’s not in the Bible” to a Catholic, completely unaware that it was the printer who left it out. A Lutheran pastor told me that one of his parishioners was insistent that the Lutheran Church did not recognize the Apocrypha as canonical. The parishioner was astonished when he saw the church by-law that says it is. Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox Christians use the Apocrypha, and it is part of the Bible for them. Many independent churches and low-church denominations think it is a Catholic addition when it is really a printer’s subtraction.
#63. To: jwpegler (#29)
The New Testament was originally written in Greek.
#64. To: GarySpFC (#60)
(Edited)
The books of the New Testament were complete prior to the end of the First Century.
Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate
#65. To: GarySpFC (#63)
(Edited)
The OC used the NKJV for their NT.
Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate
#66. To: GarySpFC (#62)
Judaism, which produced these books, has never accepted them into its Bible (the Hebrew Scriptures, corresponding to our OT).
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#67. To: GarySpFC (#60)
(Edited)
“You have to understand that the canon was not the result of a series of contests involving church politics. The canon is rather the separation that came about because of the intuitive insight of Christian believers. They could hear the Good Shepherd in the Gospel of John; they could hear it only muffled and distorted way in the Gospel of Thas miomxed in with a lot of other things. “When the pronouncement was made about the canon, it merely ratified what the general sensitivity of the church had already determined."
Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate
#68. To: buckeroo (#58)
(Edited)
Prov 1:28-33 (NIV) "They will call to me but I will not answer; they will look for me but will not find me. Since they hated knowledge and did not choose to fear the Lord, since they would not accept my advice and spurned my rebuke, they will eat of the fruit of their ways and be filled with the fruit of their schemes. For the waywardness of the simple will kill them, and the complacency of fools will destroy them; but whoever listens to me will live in safety and be at ease, without fear of harm."
#69. To: diva betsy ross (#59)
Just like there is the Trinity.
#70. To: diva betsy ross (#68)
Unless I missed it, you didn't answer.
I have made a choice that my perception of life will not be from the eyes of a human being- who is not possible of healing, love and peace. And since I chose that- my life is blessed, safe and peaceful. THOSE are the consequences of my choice.
(KJV) Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
#71. To: GarySpFC, diva betsy ross, hondo68 (#61)
I generally read the ESV, NIV, NLT, NASB1995, and the KJV for English translations
#72. To: buckeroo (#69)
(Edited)
Don't you realize that all of you together are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God lives in you? 1 Corinthians 3:16
#73. To: diva betsy ross (#72)
I am not catholic. Catholicism is a religion. I don't have a religion. I am a non-religious follower of Jesus the Christ.
#74. To: jwpegler (#64)
You are confusing 2 completely separate things:
#75. To: buckeroo (#44)
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.
#76. To: GarySpFC (#75)
Church doctrine almost always is based on the Greek or Hebrew text, and seldom if ever translations.
#77. To: buckeroo (#56)
#78. To: buckeroo (#76)
#79. To: buckeroo (#76)
#80. To: GarySpFC, hondo68 (#77)
3-4. For those engaged in government are not a cause for fear to the good work but to the evil. Dost thou wish not to fear the authority? Do what is good, and thou shalt receive praise from it; for it is God's minister to thee for good. But, if thou doest evil, fear; for it is not to no purpose that it is armed with the sword; for it is God's minister, an agent of punishment for wrath to him who does evil.
These two verses are puzzling. The difficulty is that Paul seems to take no account of the possibility of the government's being unjust and punishing the good work and praising the evil. There seem to be three possible explanations: (i) Paul is so taken up with his own good experiences of the Roman authority that he is oblivious of the possibility that it might do what is unjust. But Paul himself had had other experiences (see Acts 16.22f, 37; 2 Cor 11.25ff). And could he ever forget that it was this same authority which had condemned and executed his Lord? (ii) Paul, though fully aware of this possibility, is here, as Calvin suggests, speaking only `of the true and natural duty of the magistrate', from which however `those who hold power often depart'. But it is hard to see how the giving of such a one-sided picture could be compatible with a serious pastoral purpose. Moreover, it would be in striking contrast to the realism of 8.35-39. (iii) Paul means that consciously or unconsciously, willingly or unwillingly, in one way or another, the power will praise the good work and punish the evil. The promise of v.3 is absolute: the Christian, in so far as he is obeying the gospel, may be sure that the power will honour him. It may indeed intend to punish him, but its intended punishment will then turn out to be praise. It may take his life, but in so doing it will but confer a crown of glory. On the other hand, if he does evil, it must needs punish him - though it may be by shameful honours or a false security. This third explanation, though admittedly difficult, seems preferable to the other two.
C. E. B. Cranfield. Romans: A Shorter Commentary (Kindle Locations 4650-4655). Kindle Edition.
#81. To: GarySpFC (#74)
(Edited)
they didn't need a church council to tell them what was canon, and neither do I.
Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate
#82. To: GarySpFC (#79)
HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THE BIBLE CAME FROM GOD?
#83. To: buckeroo (#73)
(Edited)
#84. To: buckeroo (#82)
Iran’s main drive for acquiring atomic weapons is not for use against Israel but as a deterrent against U.S. intervention -- Major General Zeevi Farkash, head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate
#85. To: diva betsy ross (#83)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]