Do you claim any religious faith? / How are you on sharing?

[oftheherd1]

Most Christians don't keep the sabbath, the seventh day, holy-they keep Sunday, by papal decree, as the sabbath-a violation of the fifth commandment....

Sunday-Sol's day. Those tricky Romans.....:lol:

Worship is reported in the New Testament as being on the first day of the week.

 

[oftheherd1]

The language in the KJV is beautiful, it's lyrical and sounds good to the ear but none of that makes it accurate. Many scholars have said that the translation isn't accurate. http://www.yalereviewofbooks.com/archive/spring04/review10.shtml.htm
http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~cpercy/courses/6362-wylde.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/24/weekinreview/24mcgrath.html?_r=1

I believe that God made the KJV accurate. And many scholars have said it is accurate. You believe the ones you want to believe and I will believe the ones I want to believe.

The KJV is very important from a language point of view as well as a political one, it has influenced much but the fact remains it was a political translation, probably a wise thing in those days, which were hugely more perilous than now. If you were the 'wrong' faith it cost you your head, England had already had Bloody Mary and then Elizabeth, King James was supposed to unite Scotland and England settling religious as well as political issues. It was wise to publish a Bible that put forward the King's and Parliament's views as being the word of G-d therefore making the people 'settle' down to being peaceful subjects! Ireland had been seeing conflicts between Catholics and Protestants since Henry the Eighths time, so religious warfare and bloodshed was common.

David W. Daniels, in his book Answers To Your Bible Version Questions, relates the Puritans petitioned King James to hear their complaints against the Church of England. John Rainolds petitioned for a new translation and King James consented, against the protests of the also present Bishop Bancroft of London.

Interestingly King James was an openly 'practising' homosexual which perhaps those who espouse the KJV while abhorring gays may not realise..

Another controversial claim that some think was begun long after his death by some who wished to discredit King James and return to other religious beliefs.

 

[oftheherd1]

Torah is part of the minuriae of the everlasting covenant between G-d and the Jews. Note the everlasting part. So acording to you, which is it about the covenant, did G-d lie or is it that he just can't keep a contract?

I believe he can do whatever he wants. I don't believe he lies. The Bible says he does not. But I think he can change his mind. Did he not repent of some punishments against the Jews?

 

[Josh Oakley]

Worship is reported in the New Testament as being on the first day of the week.

Where? I rusty on my biblical scholarship.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

 

[oftheherd1]

Acts 10:11-13
11] And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
[12] Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
[13] And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

People misinterpret this to mean that kashrut has somehow been suspended, when, the fact is that later in the chapter Peter recognizes it is God telling him to call no man unclean.....

In Galatians 2, you can read: [SUP]"11[/SUP]But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. [SUP]12[/SUP]For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

[SUP]13[/SUP]And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

[SUP]14[/SUP]But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?" so apparently Peter felt he was relieved of the burden of the law for some time after his encounter with Cornelius which was preceded by the vision you mention.

 

[oftheherd1]

LOL, around here, the bible has it's 'pick and choose' moments....

I can agree with that. But it cuts both ways.

 

[granfire]

Where? I rusty on my biblical scholarship.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

Ask your Boss!

 

[elder999]

I have to wonder. You say you have no agenda, and only wish to put forth facts. But you miss the mark so often. In all the reading I have done, there were 54 men first chosen. Some did die before the translation was complete.

"All the reading you have done" simply isn't enough:54 men were chosen, only 47 participated in the translation. They were organized into three groups at Westminster, Oxford and Cambridge. Each group was divided into subgroups, and those subgroups were assigned chapters of the Bible. They were charged from the onset under certain rules, the first of which hampered them:

1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the Truth of the original will permit.

This is, of course, the english translation of 1568, followed by the Church of England, and revised in 1577.

It sucks.

All were linguists, and adept in at one of the two languages; Greek or Hebrew.

Their Greek was apparently okay-and only okay-they also relied upon the Vulgate for numerous passages. Where they weren't satisfied with what the Bishop's bible said, they had a pre-approved list of English translations to consult, including Tyndale. The product of 1611 was also revised in 1760 and 1769-the Bible you know as the KJV was revised by one man, Benjamin Blaney, who mistakenly assumed that the committees had used the 1550 edition of the Textus Receptus, rather than a later one, and made something like 20,000 changes to that book that you believe those committees were blessed and moved by God to tranlsate.

Can you show where Aramaic survived to the 1600s? If there were Aramaic which was considered inspired and preserved, they would have certainly used it.

I asked you about it:

Matthew 27:46

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]46[/SUP]And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

OF course, the phrase that was supposed to be uttered in Aramaic, is transliterated in Greek, phonetically.

There you go again. The KJV says, in Matthew 28:1, "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre." In other words, the sabbath was ended, the time being "... as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week... " When you say the Bible says something, you really should specify which translation/version you are talking about. There are many. I only believe in the KJV. You can believe in another if you wish. That is your right. But to be honest, you need to say which version it is you are referring to. Not all who say they are Christians agree on the correct version of the Bible. But I believe in the KJV and will only try to defend it.

Here ya go:

Matthew 28:1

King James Version (KJV)

Matthew 28

[SUP]1[/SUP]In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

The end of the sabbath is sunset on Saturday, not sunrise on Sunday, when they went to see.......

I can't really comment of this. I don't have enough understanding of Greek. But considering your current track record, I am sure there is a good and reasonable explanation. My Greek/English interlinear Bible does translate as 'For a root' but I think is has something to do with the use or lack of use of the definite article in Greek.

I took Homeric Greek, Latin and Hebrew in high school-I'm the victim of a classical education. :lol: At one time, my father thought my facility for languages would make me a good minister........ I took koine Greek and Aramaic in college, virtually at the same time as high school-really, I got my degree at the end of the summer after I graduated from HS.

I'm not showing off-I'm telling you that I don't need a Grfeek/English inrilinear Bible, or even a Greek/English dictionary. Greek has definite articles-we used some in reference to "tekton,"-and it's "a root", which subtly changes the meaning....



I really could go on like this all day, really.

Well, I can hardly wait, so please tell us (and from the KJV) and how it means that Jesus was married?

Matthew 23:8
But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren

John 1:38
Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith unto them, What seek ye? They said unto him, Rabbi, (which is to say, being interpreted, Master,) where dwellest thou?

John 1:49
Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.

John 3:2
The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

John 6:25
And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?

And maybe I'd leave it to Canuck, but "Rabbi" is a title that doesn't merely mean "teacher," it's applied to married men, and Christ, as depicted in the Gospels, was indeed a rabbi-how else would he come to teach in a temple?

Matthew 13:54

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]54[/SUP]And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works?

Jesus was married.

 

[Josh Oakley]

Ask your Boss!

Nah. Offtheherd1 is right there. He will probably get back to me quicker than the chaplain.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

 

[CanuckMA]

Can you show where Aramaic survived to the 1600s? If there were Aramaic which was considered inspired and preserved, they would have certainly used it.

There are a couple of men in my congregation who can read Aramaic. We can all 'speak' it because a number of our prayers are in Aramaic

 

[granfire]

Nah. Offtheherd1 is right there. He will probably get back to me quicker than the chaplain.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

Just call the Essex... yiddish word for bed bug....

 

[CanuckMA]

You probably didn't mean it that way, but it seems you were evading. So it is the inspired and preserved word of God?

G-d dictated Torah to Moses at Sinai. He also gave him the Oral Torah, that was eventually written down as the Mishna.

 

[CanuckMA]

I believe that God made the KJV accurate. And many scholars have said it is accurate. You believe the ones you want to believe and I will believe the ones I want to believe.

KJV Exodus 20-13 Thou shalt not kill.

JPS 1917 edition Exodus 20-12 Thou shalt not murder.


Huge difference. And The JPS is the accurate translation of the Hebrew. So right there it's not accurate.

 

[CanuckMA]

And maybe I'd leave it to Canuck, but "Rabbi" is a title that doesn't merely mean "teacher," it's applied to married men, and Christ, as depicted in the Gospels, was indeed a rabbi-how else would he come to teach in a temple?

I hate to contradict you, but Rabbi is applied to any one who has recieved smicha. They are usually married, but it is not a requirement.

 

[elder999]

There are a couple of men in my congregation who can read Aramaic. We can all 'speak' it because a number of our prayers are in Aramaic

Aramaic is the liturgical language of several Eastern Christian churches, in the form of Syriac.

 

[elder999]

I hate to contradict you, but Rabbi is applied to any one who has recieved smicha. They are usually married, but it is not a requirement.

BY all means, contradict me-was Rabbi applied to unmarried men prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.?

 

[Carol]

KJV Exodus 20-13 Thou shalt not kill.

JPS 1917 edition Exodus 20-12 Thou shalt not murder.


Huge difference. And The JPS is the accurate translation of the Hebrew. So right there it's not accurate.

This is not unique to English either. In Spanish, the verb matar means to kill or wound.The word matador means killer (not bullfighter). The word for bull is toro, and the suffix -ador tyically means "one who does". A bullfighter is a toreador, and cannot be called a matador until s/he succeeds in actually killing a bull.

The verb asesinar means to murder, and is of the same Arabic root as our verb "to assassinate". Murder (noun) is asesinato

In many versions of the Spanish bible, including the RVA, Éxodo 20:13 reads:
No matarás
Do not kill.

Whereas in others such as the NVT, Éxodo 20:13 reads:
No cometerás asesinato
Do not commit murder.

Here is a Nazarene discussion in Spanish of what the Hebrew text actually means. It was written by a fellow in Puerto Rico -- should Babelfish easily to English if anyone wants to read a translation.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...qIl_2-&sig=AHIEtbRhLE9nY9IWLvDUubymRJD5iUc2lw

The bulk of the article talks about what has already been discussed, although the last line is worth translating given that martial arts brought us all together here:

Definitivamente, el matar en defensa propia y en la guerra no cae bajo la prohibición del mandamiento que lo que en realidad dice es “No cometerás asesinato”.

Definitely, killing in self-defense and in war do not fall under the prohibition of the commandment that actually says "Do not commit murder".

 

[Zenjael]

I am a Buddhist. I am also an atheist, and I do not believe in the super natural. I am also an existentialist, secular humanist.

 

[cdunn]

BY all means, contradict me-was Rabbi applied to unmarried men prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.?

Human knowledge transmission being what it is, I would cautiously extend that right up to whatever edition you were using; have you ever heard of the Cotton Patch bible?

After they had checked out, the Lord's messenger made connection with Joseph in a dream and said, "Get moving and take your wife and baby and highball it to Mexico. Then stay put until I get word to you because Herod is going to do his best to kill the baby." So he got right up, took the baby and its mother and checked out by night for Mexico. He stayed there until the death of Herod. (This gave meaning to what the Lord said through the prophet: "I summoned my son from Mexico.")

"Reverend," answered Nat, "you are God’s Man; you are the nation’s Leader!"

 

[Tez3]

Contemporary reports have long been known of King James' homosexuality, it's the modern Christians who are disputing this I'm afraid. He was actually buried with one of his lovers, Villiers. James wrote long erotic letters, which still survive, to his male lovers.


Thinking about it, it would surprise me if Jesus hadn't been married.