The word of God is not a secret code that needs unlocked.
- Thread starter Brasspen
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
being crucified was not the result of the Messiah making a miscalculation. it was His purpose.
and the charge brought against Him for which He was crucified was that He claimed to be YHVH - the King of the Jews - but was not.
so it was unbelief, because they rejected their own God, and sought to put Him to death for being their God.
and the charge brought against Him for which He was crucified was that He claimed to be YHVH - the King of the Jews - but was not.
so it was unbelief, because they rejected their own God, and sought to put Him to death for being their God.
-
2
- Show all
Agreed... He wanted to get to the Cross to redeem mankind.
In the mean while, to get to the Cross...
Jesus showed the beauty of how the Law was to be correctly implemented for the Jews.
Till Jesus did that, the Law of Moses was being distorted and made to appear to be an ugly and cruel way.
By correctly revealing how to live under the Law, was God's eloquent solution to how to get himself crucified.
Those who are loving the actions of Jesus in the Gospels are loving true Judaism as it was to be manifested at that time
in history. For Israel under the likes of David revealed God's glory in how one nation in the Devil's world could be run.
grace and peace ........
In the mean while, to get to the Cross...
Jesus showed the beauty of how the Law was to be correctly implemented for the Jews.
Till Jesus did that, the Law of Moses was being distorted and made to appear to be an ugly and cruel way.
By correctly revealing how to live under the Law, was God's eloquent solution to how to get himself crucified.
Those who are loving the actions of Jesus in the Gospels are loving true Judaism as it was to be manifested at that time
in history. For Israel under the likes of David revealed God's glory in how one nation in the Devil's world could be run.
grace and peace ........
It's what the Bible teaches...
Not, what the Jews simply "choose" to believe.
Throughout the Gospels Jews were asking Jesus when he was to set up His kingdom.
Isaiah spoke of it, and were awaiting to see the Messiah reigning over them on earth.
Zechariah 8:22-23 speaks of the Millennium, and how the Jews will at that time will be held
the highest regard and standing before the Lord and mankind. That is why Satan wishes to
induce antisemitism into ignorant believers, and the world.
The Devil does not want the Jew to survive to fulfill Bible prophecy.
That is not speaking of the future Church.
But, the future status of Jews. Jews who will be believers during the Millennium.
grace and peace ..........
Not, what the Jews simply "choose" to believe.
Throughout the Gospels Jews were asking Jesus when he was to set up His kingdom.
Isaiah spoke of it, and were awaiting to see the Messiah reigning over them on earth.
Zechariah 8:22-23 speaks of the Millennium, and how the Jews will at that time will be held
the highest regard and standing before the Lord and mankind. That is why Satan wishes to
induce antisemitism into ignorant believers, and the world.
The Devil does not want the Jew to survive to fulfill Bible prophecy.
Many peoples and strong nations will come to seek the Lord
of Hosts in Jerusalem and to plead for the Lord’s favor.”
The Lord of Hosts says this: “In those days, 10 men from nations
of every language will grab the robe of a Jew tightly, urging:
Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.”
That is not speaking of the future Church.
But, the future status of Jews. Jews who will be believers during the Millennium.
grace and peace ..........
You're glossing over the fact that God said he would make those of other nations his people and call them by another name.
Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God. Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. Hosea 1:9-10
And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto my chosen: for the Lord GOD shall slay thee, and call his servants by another name: Isaiah 65:15
For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. Romans 2:28-29
Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God. Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. Hosea 1:9-10
And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto my chosen: for the Lord GOD shall slay thee, and call his servants by another name: Isaiah 65:15
For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. Romans 2:28-29
No one can obey that amplification of the law.
As Paul states in Romans 3.
10 There is no righteous person, not even one;
11 There is no one who understands,
There is no one who seeks out God;
12 They have all turned aside, together they have become corrupt;
There is no one who does good,
There is not even one.
13 “Their throat is an open grave,
With their tongues they keep deceiving...
We are saved by grace through faith!
We cannot be righteous and that is impossible for us.
As Paul states in Romans 3.
10 There is no righteous person, not even one;
11 There is no one who understands,
There is no one who seeks out God;
12 They have all turned aside, together they have become corrupt;
There is no one who does good,
There is not even one.
13 “Their throat is an open grave,
With their tongues they keep deceiving...
We are saved by grace through faith!
We cannot be righteous and that is impossible for us.
-
1
- Show all
I believe the Bible is a code yes. There's an earthly meaning and a heavenly meaning. The earthly is how to apply it and be successful here on earth. And the heavenly is the spiritual.
I think of it like dreams. Dreams can come from God. Dreams are often metaphors and similar to parables. I think God can talk to our spirit easier that way and we won't fight him.
God is a little mysterious. If you don't think so maybe you don't know him as well as you think. He's not a God of confusion though, but he's still mysterious at times. I mean who would have thought Jesus had to die if they were alive back then. Things are done that are confusing to us at least in the present bc we don't understand the future.
In my opinion the reason God is mysterious is bc he can only explain so much to us that we could even understand. He uses parables bc we need an earthly meaning to understand something completely foreign.
I think of it like dreams. Dreams can come from God. Dreams are often metaphors and similar to parables. I think God can talk to our spirit easier that way and we won't fight him.
God is a little mysterious. If you don't think so maybe you don't know him as well as you think. He's not a God of confusion though, but he's still mysterious at times. I mean who would have thought Jesus had to die if they were alive back then. Things are done that are confusing to us at least in the present bc we don't understand the future.
In my opinion the reason God is mysterious is bc he can only explain so much to us that we could even understand. He uses parables bc we need an earthly meaning to understand something completely foreign.
-
1
- Show all
The Apocrypha was not considered canonical by the King James Version (KJV) translators or by King James himself. While the Apocryphal books were included in the original 1611 KJV, they were placed in a separate section between the Old and New Testaments, signaling that they were viewed differently from the canonical books. This was consistent with the Protestant tradition at the time, which generally did not consider the Apocrypha to be on the same level as the canonical Hebrew Scriptures or the New Testament.
The KJV translators included the Apocrypha primarily for historical and instructional purposes, as the books were seen as valuable for moral lessons and historical context. However, the translators also followed the guidelines from the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of the Church of England, which stated that the Apocryphal books were to be read "for example of life and instruction of manners" but not to be used for establishing doctrine.
By the mid-17th century, many Protestant groups began omitting the Apocrypha from their Bibles altogether, and eventually, most editions of the KJV printed for Protestant audiences did not include the Apocrypha. This decision reflected the general Protestant view that the Apocryphal books were not inspired Scripture but were nevertheless important historical and literary works.
While the KJV translators were given the rule to follow the Bishop’s Bible as a base text, the translators did not strictly adhere to this rule; rather, they went beyond it, exercising significant flexibility in their translation work. The KJV is substantially closer to Tyndale’s Bible than to the Bishops' Bible, especially in the New Testament. Scholars estimate that up to 80–90% of Tyndale's New Testament wording was retained in the KJV, especially in well-known passages. overall, less than 50% of the KJV text is directly traceable to the Bishops' Bible, with a majority of its language and structure coming from other English translations and original-language sources. So no, by looking at the end result, is not merely an update of the Bishop’s Bible (Although that was the initial intent of the king’s rule).
As for your claim that scholars have detected an influence of the Douay-Rheims: Well, Modern scholarship today has an axe to grind against the King James Bible because it directly challenges their preference for the Alexandrian texts and their never-ending shape-shifter Bible mentality. Jesus said for us to beware of the scribes and not to blindly trust them. The scribes of our day would be the scholars. Most such as yourself prefer to bend the knee to the scholar in what they say vs. what the Bible plainly says.
The KJV translators looked to the LXX, and the Latin Vulgate was used for the Apocrypha. But as I said before, they did not regard this as Scripture. The LXX, and the Latin Vulgate were only used as a secondary source at times to back up or confirm other Greek manuscripts they had. The LXX or the Latin Vulgate was not used as a primary source at any point when it came to sacred Scripture.
Again, while this was the initial rule set out, this is not the result of the translation work in the end. The translators ended up going far beyond the Bishop’s Bible.
If you like to be liberal with God’s Word, then this is how you approach the Bible. You approach it as a Science and not as a Holy text preserved throughout time. If you simply believe the Bible in what it says about itself, then you will believe God’s Word is perfect and that it will be preserved forever.
Textual Criticism is a term that was born out of German Rationalism.
…..
The KJV translators included the Apocrypha primarily for historical and instructional purposes, as the books were seen as valuable for moral lessons and historical context. However, the translators also followed the guidelines from the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of the Church of England, which stated that the Apocryphal books were to be read "for example of life and instruction of manners" but not to be used for establishing doctrine.
By the mid-17th century, many Protestant groups began omitting the Apocrypha from their Bibles altogether, and eventually, most editions of the KJV printed for Protestant audiences did not include the Apocrypha. This decision reflected the general Protestant view that the Apocryphal books were not inspired Scripture but were nevertheless important historical and literary works.
While the KJV translators were given the rule to follow the Bishop’s Bible as a base text, the translators did not strictly adhere to this rule; rather, they went beyond it, exercising significant flexibility in their translation work. The KJV is substantially closer to Tyndale’s Bible than to the Bishops' Bible, especially in the New Testament. Scholars estimate that up to 80–90% of Tyndale's New Testament wording was retained in the KJV, especially in well-known passages. overall, less than 50% of the KJV text is directly traceable to the Bishops' Bible, with a majority of its language and structure coming from other English translations and original-language sources. So no, by looking at the end result, is not merely an update of the Bishop’s Bible (Although that was the initial intent of the king’s rule).
As for your claim that scholars have detected an influence of the Douay-Rheims: Well, Modern scholarship today has an axe to grind against the King James Bible because it directly challenges their preference for the Alexandrian texts and their never-ending shape-shifter Bible mentality. Jesus said for us to beware of the scribes and not to blindly trust them. The scribes of our day would be the scholars. Most such as yourself prefer to bend the knee to the scholar in what they say vs. what the Bible plainly says.
The KJV translators looked to the LXX, and the Latin Vulgate was used for the Apocrypha. But as I said before, they did not regard this as Scripture. The LXX, and the Latin Vulgate were only used as a secondary source at times to back up or confirm other Greek manuscripts they had. The LXX or the Latin Vulgate was not used as a primary source at any point when it came to sacred Scripture.
Again, while this was the initial rule set out, this is not the result of the translation work in the end. The translators ended up going far beyond the Bishop’s Bible.
If you like to be liberal with God’s Word, then this is how you approach the Bible. You approach it as a Science and not as a Holy text preserved throughout time. If you simply believe the Bible in what it says about itself, then you will believe God’s Word is perfect and that it will be preserved forever.
Textual Criticism is a term that was born out of German Rationalism.
…..
In response to this: "As for "textual Criticism", that is what all of the Bible translators are actually doing when they
conduct a translation. Hunting through early manuscripts, translations, for the true written words of the text."
You said this:
You really need to do your homework and stop being hypocritical about this matter. It is utterly ludicrous that you slam textual critics for the careful work they do when the KJV translators and their direct predecessors did exactly the same thing. Or, you can continue and I will be certain that you're a stubborn, unteachable fool who isn't worth my time to correct and whose posts aren't worth reading.
conduct a translation. Hunting through early manuscripts, translations, for the true written words of the text."
You said this:
You really need to do your homework and stop being hypocritical about this matter. It is utterly ludicrous that you slam textual critics for the careful work they do when the KJV translators and their direct predecessors did exactly the same thing. Or, you can continue and I will be certain that you're a stubborn, unteachable fool who isn't worth my time to correct and whose posts aren't worth reading.
-
2
- Show all
