problem related to praying in tongues

[hornetguy]

We also have hand written Testimony of Jerome, who had access to the entire Collection of Materials, who claimed he personally has read it several times and this is what he said about the other Greek Versions.

Jerome (374-420 A.D.) claim to have seen the Hebrew gospel of Matthew, he said he had translated it and on several occasions he quoted from it (On Famous Men 2 & 3).
A much earlier writer, Papias, who was a disciple of John the apostle, stated that Matthew recorded the sayings of Jesus in Hebrew and everyone translated them as best he could (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History III, 39, 16)

I would not disagree that there would be some differences in any translation....
But you are stating as fact that they are somehow erroneous, or inaccurate.
I disagree with that notion. I firmly believe that when an accurate version of the Word of God is needed, the Spirit guides those that are translating..... God would not allow falsely inaccurate translations to happen. I'm speaking of major translations, such as Hebrew to Greek, or Greek to English, or early English to Swahili.... I believe the Spirit makes sure the scripture loses NONE of it's meaning.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I would not disagree that there would be some differences in any translation....
But you are stating as fact that they are somehow erroneous, or inaccurate.
I disagree with that notion. I firmly believe that when an accurate version of the Word of God is needed, the Spirit guides those that are translating..... God would not allow falsely inaccurate translations to happen. I'm speaking of major translations, such as Hebrew to Greek, or Greek to English, or early English to Swahili.... I believe the Spirit makes sure the scripture loses NONE of it's meaning.

This is Jerome's translation of Matthew in Hebrew.
There's several big differences.

Here is Matthew 28, notice Verse 19 and 20. This is how Jerome's claims Matthew ended the Hebrew Version.

Here is our Greek Version:

19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Big Difference in the Translation of the Hebrew here: Might be why Papias said they did their best hahahahahahaha

19 GO
20 and (teach) them to carry out all the things which I have commanded you Forever

and

19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

 

[Cameron143]

Big Difference in the Translation of the Hebrew here: Might be why Papias said they did their best hahahahahahaha

19 GO
20 and (teach) them to carry out all the things which I have commanded you Forever

and

19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

The simplification, in one way, captures better the essence of the verse.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

The simplification, in one way, captures better the essence of the verse.

I know that between both Versions lies the Truth of what Jesus really said. and the simpler Version matches how God spoke to Abraham, the Prophets, and now here with His Disciples. I believe Matthew's Version in Hebrew would be written as direct as it happened. No reason for Jerome to lie here, he still added the Greek Version of Matthew 28 into his Latin Vulgate. He's still Trinity. But i believe Jesus said what we read in Matthew's Hebrew Version. Nothing about silly baptism, but ALL about Teach the Gospel, Teach the Gospel , Teach the Gospel until the Forever.

 

[hornetguy]

. Nothing about silly baptism,

I see your true colors....
smh....

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Why would Jesus stress Baptism when He never Baptized, told His Disciples to, never told other's to, and on the Cross did not make the Thief be baptized before going to Heaven. The greek Version of Matthew does not add up to anything Jesus taught, NOTHING EVER about Water Baptism. like He would suddenly mention it on his way out the door....Nope, don't buy it!

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I see your true colors....
smh....

God is Triune, but God did not command to be baptized that way by Water, ever? He did not command to be Baptized at all by Water!

 

[Cameron143]

I know that between both Versions lies the Truth of what Jesus really said. and the simpler Version matches how God spoke to Abraham, the Prophets, and now here with His Disciples. I believe Matthew's Version in Hebrew would be written as direct as it happened. No reason for Jerome to lie here, he still added the Greek Version of Matthew 28 into his Latin Vulgate. He's still Trinity. But i believe Jesus said what we read in Matthew's Hebrew Version. Nothing about silly baptism, but ALL about Teach the Gospel, Teach the Gospel , Teach the Gospel until the Forever.

It's a good point. It's like all those chasing the Holy Grail. More likely Jesus drank from an ordinary cup.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I think when the Other's Papias speaks about who translated Matthew, they just ADDED the Water Baptism part. Because in ALL of Jesus' Ministry, He never commanded anyone to be Water Baptized.

 

[Nehemiah6]

But i believe Jesus said what we read in Matthew's Hebrew Version. Nothing about silly baptism, but ALL about Teach the Gospel, Teach the Gospel , Teach the Gospel until the Forever.

If you are claiming that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew then translated it into Greek, then you are seriously in error (or have allowed yourself to be deceived).

"Most scholars do not believe that Matthew is a translation and several theories have been have put forward to explain Papias: perhaps Matthew wrote two gospels, one, now lost, in Hebrew, the other the preserved Greek version; or perhaps the logia was a collection of sayings rather than a gospel (some have suggested it is in fact Q); or by dialektōi Papias may have meant that Matthew wrote in the Jewish style rather than in the Hebrew language.[3] "

What is even more serious is your calling baptism "silly baptism". Since the commandment to be baptized was a commandment of Christ, that would be considered a blasphemous statement by the majority of Christians down through the ages.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

If you are claiming that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew then translated it into Greek, the you are seriously in error (or have allowed yourself to be deceived).

"Most scholars do not believe that Matthew is a translation and several theories have been have put forward to explain Papias: perhaps Matthew wrote two gospels, one, now lost, in Hebrew, the other the preserved Greek version; or perhaps the logia was a collection of sayings rather than a gospel (some have suggested it is in fact Q); or by dialektōi Papias may have meant that Matthew wrote in the Jewish style rather than in the Hebrew language.[3] "

What is even more serious is your calling baptism "silly baptism". Since the commandment to be baptized was a commandment of Christ, that would be considered a blasphemous statement by the majority of Christians down through the ages.

Most Scholars are from Today, but those 200 years ago and those Closest to the Source, Like Papias and Jerome, would have a better Testimony than your modern scholars.

 

[hornetguy]

Why would Jesus stress Baptism when He never Baptized, told His Disciples to, never told other's to, and on the Cross did not make the Thief be baptized before going to Heaven. The greek Version of Matthew does not add up to anything Jesus taught, NOTHING EVER about Water Baptism. like He would suddenly mention it on his way out the door....Nope, don't buy it!

Your opinion..
Jesus didn't baptize because that was not his "job" .... he was the teacher. How would he make the thief on the cross be baptized? That tired old chestnut needs to be retired.... except without it, you have no "example" of baptism "not being necessary"
So, was Mark's gospel mis-translated, as well? I believe it was written in Greek, was it not?

15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.

Odd, how all the apostles taught and practiced it, along with all Christians up until the RCC decided sprinkling infants was ok.
Read the 1st century historians about the practices of the church. All of them practiced baptism.... it was understood to be necessary.

You believe what you will..... silly baptism, indeed.

 

[Cameron143]

Silly baptism seems to be the fifth kind of baptism I've been introduced to on this site.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Your opinion..
Jesus didn't baptize because that was not his "job" .... he was the teacher. How would he make the thief on the cross be baptized? That tired old chestnut needs to be retired.... except without it, you have no "example" of baptism "not being necessary"
So, was Mark's gospel mis-translated, as well? I believe it was written in Greek, was it not?

15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.

Odd, how all the apostles taught and practiced it, along with all Christians up until the RCC decided sprinkling infants was ok.
Read the 1st century historians about the practices of the church. All of them practiced baptism.... it was understood to be necessary.

You believe what you will..... silly baptism, indeed.

The original Version of Mark 16, did not include those Verses. So, my point still stands!
It's thoroughly agreed by as near as the Church Fathers until today's scholars that someone added to Chapter 16 of Mark.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

If we know that Water Baptism was added to Mark 16, it should not shock us that it was also added to Mathew 28.

 

[Beckie]

And this rudeness from a supposed Christian. Another reason I am leaving.

been nice if you would have seen his apology

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

If we know that Water Baptism was added to Mark 16, it should not shock us that it was also added to Mathew 28.

I personally believe when the Book of Acts erupted and the Holy Spirit fell, that people wanted to also be Water Baptized. And before most of the Scroll keepers were killed, they Added in places to what they Saw and concluded God would have said this because this seems to go with the Holy Spirit.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Since, there's NO RECORD of the 3,000, on Day of Pentecost, not a single person, Water Baptized, but Chapters later, almost everyone is Water Baptized...would suggest, it became a NEW TRADITION to do. Clearly, not taught by Jesus, but obvious Accepted by Jesus, since He was Water Baptized Himself (John).

 

[ResidentAlien]

I've been snooping around that Rapture Forums site and it seems they have many of the same problems there as there are here, even though it's heavily moderated. The reason it shut down was because of people not following the rules and creating disturbances. From the list of rules I looked at it would be difficult to not break one of them.

I'm sure there are good people there but I don't think it's the utopia a lot of people are describing. If it's your home base and you like it I'm sure it would be a shock to suddenly have the rug yanked from under you. Hopefully the new policies they have in place will prevent further disruption.

I feel fortunate here that there isn't a long list of rules and heavy moderation. I don't always like what people say but I always have the option to just ignore them or call them out. I've been on forums that were heavily moderated and those that aren't; the once that aren't are decidedly better in my opinion.