Fixing the scripture ...

[Nietzsche]

It makes sense for God to avoid writing books. Books are static while His word is contemporary. And since He knows every language, He never has to translate.

Would it be too much to ask for him to get off his all-powerful *** and release an updated edition every couple centuries?

"Yeah guys, scratch the shellfish and mixed fiber thing, I was going through a bad time.."

 

[12jtartar]

Nietzsche,
The Bible unlike other books never needs updating, it was when written, and will always be the most up to date book in existence. Even though it does not mention the things that are currently used, all the principles are the same and will never change. God had written that He knows what we need even before we ask, and He has answered everything in His word, Matt 6:8. What are called Recursive Principles, can be applied to any circumstance we find today!!!

 

[rosends]

An example.

Let's start with some examples of Psalm 34:15-17.

King James Version

• The eyes of the LORD [are] upon the righteous, and his ears [are open] unto their cry.
• The face of the LORD [is] against them that do evil, to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth.
• [The righteous] cry, and the LORD heareth, and delivereth them out of all their troubles.

New Jerusalem Bible

• The eyes of Yahweh are on the upright, his ear turned to their cry.
• But Yahweh's face is set against those who do evil, to cut off the memory of them from the earth.
• They cry in anguish and Yahweh hears, and rescues them from all their troubles

Segal

• The eyes of the LORD are toward the righteous, His ears toward their outcry.
• The face of the LORD is against evildoers, to cut off their memory from the earth.
• They cry out, and the LORD hears, and from all their troubles He saves them.

The bracketed emendation found in the KJV is not uncommon, but the other two examples are more accurate. Clearly the KJV is trying to make sense of something that otherwise does not - at least not on the surface. What's going on here?

It looks like the KJV is taking sides in the debate between rashi and the Ibn Ezra. Rashi says "righteous" and the Ibn Ezra says "the evil doers who repent". The Vulgate prefers "righteous".

 

[Muffled]

Would it be too much to ask for him to get off his all-powerful *** and release an updated edition every couple centuries?

"Yeah guys, scratch the shellfish and mixed fiber thing, I was going through a bad time.."

The word is up-to-date throough the Holy Spirit and does not need a book or an update.

 

[McBell]

The word is up-to-date throough the Holy Spirit and does not need a book or an update.

If the updates are done through the Holy Spirit what was the purpose of the word?

 

[paarsurrey]

Jayhawker Soule,
I really do not understand what you are trying to get at.
I do hope that you know that The KJV is not the Original Autographs.
If you want to know exactly what the original writings said, you need to consult, either a concordance or an Interlinear Bible.
If you read in the prefaces of many Bibles, especially the Bibles that follow the habit of the KJV, to substitute the Titles, LORD, or GOD, where the Original Autographs had God's Personal, or Proper Name, in Hebrew YHWH, called The Tetragrammaton, or The Four letters in Hebrew, for God's Name.
In the Originals God's Proper Name was in His Book over 7,000 times. I believe it is an enormous sin to remove God's name from His own book, when it was God's Holy Spirit that guided men as they wrote, 2Tim 3:16,17, 2Pet 1:20,21. The translators that removed God's personal name from His own book have judged themselves, Matt 5:17-19, Rom 14:22.

I agree with the part of sentence I have colured in magenta.
Holy Spirit is not G-d, it is only a creation of G-d and His servant.
Regards

 

[Muffled]

If the updates are done through the Holy Spirit what was the purpose of the word?

I believe it was meant to lead people to the Holy Spirit. The law was a tempoarary replacement because people were not ready for the Holy Spirit at that time.

 

[Muffled]

I agree with the part of sentence I have colured in magenta.
Holy Spirit is not G-d, it is only a creation of G-d and His servant.
Regards

I believe there is no valid reason for considering it a sin at all. I could see it s a sin against JWism but who cares about that?

i believe there is no evidence to support this false notion.

 

[2ndpillar]

The word is up-to-date throough the Holy Spirit and does not need a book or an update.

Dear muf,
Apparently you belong to the school of progressives, and you should be a happy camper seeing that your progressives seem to control the White House and Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, your house is built on sand. Heeding the testimony of Yeshua is the foundation which will withstand the rain, winds, and hail. Heeding the testimony of the false prophet Paul, who is all things to all men, and the "worthless shepherd" (Ze 11:17) /Petros (sand), is a loosing proposition.

Mt 24:35," "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

 

[Muffled]

Dear muf,
Apparently you belong to the school of progressives, and you should be a happy camper seeing that your progressives seem to control the White House and Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, your house is built on sand. Heeding the testimony of Yeshua is the foundation which will withstand the rain, winds, and hail. Heeding the testimony of the false prophet Paul, who is all things to all men, and the "worthless shepherd" (Ze 11:17) /Petros (sand), is a loosing proposition.

Mt 24:35," "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

I believe Paul never claimed tobe a prophet so he can't be a false one. As a teacher in the church filled with the Holy Spirit he has the truth and certainly he is an apostle to the gentiles.

I do not believe so and certainly view that group as regressive. If it is progress it is progress backwrds to barabarianism.

 

[2ndpillar]

I believe Paul never claimed tobe a prophet so he can't be a false one. As a teacher in the church filled with the Holy Spirit he has the truth and certainly he is an apostle to the gentiles.

I do not believe so and certainly view that group as regressive. If it is progress it is progress backwrds to barabarianism.

Dear muf,
According to the supposed associate of Paul, Luke, Paul supposedly spoke personally with "Christ", and although he at one point gave his own opinion on a matter concerning women, he considered his words the words passed to him personally from God, and he would curse even the angels in heaven if they should deem to differ with him. (Gal 1:8) His believers and followers also believe he speaks for God, and therefore would be God's prophet. But then they also consider what Luke said, who professed to be a conduit for 2nd hand hearsay (Luke 1:1-3), the word of God also. No rime or reason.

What Paul was filled with according to him was a messenger from Satan (2 cor 12:7), and in Romans 7:20, "the sin which indwells in me." Not much from Paul is worth repeating, but that part sounds unflinchingly true.

 

[Muffled]

Dear muf,
According to the supposed associate of Paul, Luke, Paul supposedly spoke personally with "Christ", and although he at one point gave his own opinion on a matter concerning women, he considered his words the words passed to him personally from God, and he would curse even the angels in heaven if they should deem to differ with him. (Gal 1:8) His believers and followers also believe he speaks for God, and therefore would be God's prophet. But then they also consider what Luke said, who professed to be a conduit for 2nd hand hearsay (Luke 1:1-3), the word of God also. No rime or reason.

What Paul was filled with according to him was a messenger from Satan (2 cor 12:7), and in Romans 7:20, "the sin which indwells in me." Not much from Paul is worth repeating, but that part sounds unflinchingly true.

I believe you are mistaken. Christians filled with the Spirit believe God speaks through them not to them. As such we are not speaking for God but God's words.

I believe this is not in the text.
1Co 7:40 But she is happier if she abide as she is, after my judgment: and I think that I also have the Spirit of God.

 

[2ndpillar]

I believe you are mistaken. Christians filled with the Spirit believe God speaks through them not to them. As such we are not speaking for God but God's words.

I believe this is not in the text.
1Co 7:40 But she is happier if she abide as she is, after my judgment: and I think that I also have the Spirit of God.

Dear muf,
The quote from 2 cor 12:7 is," there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, to keep me from exalting myself"
Apparently Paul carries in his body/flesh, a messenger of Satan. Messengers from Satan are demons/unclean spirits. The Spirit of God does not share space with demons.

With respect to your believing that God speaks through your Spirit filled "Christians" and "not to them", I don't think you will get much support from even your own "Christians" on that wild leap. 1 John 2:27 states that the anointing teaches the individual about all things. That would be a personal revelation to the individual from the Spirit of God. Plus the average "Christian" doesn't think they can speak for God, and they struggle even to get along with their neighbors. Other than that, your double talk kind of reminds me of George Orwell's 1984, I don't know what to say about your double speak.

 

[s13ep]

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away."

What do Christians take from this verse?

 

[2ndpillar]

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away."

What do Christians take from this verse?

Dear s,
Apparently they don't think much of it, for in the most part they nail "my words" onto a cross, which is a foremost symbol of paganism, which was instituted as a symbol the church/state used to conquer under. (the cross banner/Labarum of Constantine, often used with Constantine's image on front)

 

[s13ep]

Dear s,
Apparently they don't think much of it, for in the most part they nail "my words" onto a cross, which is a foremost symbol of paganism, which was instituted as a symbol the church/state used to conquer under. (the cross banner/Labarum of Constantine, often used with Constantine's image on front)

Hmm. This sounds possible by my definition, and probable by my wisdom (or what's left of it)---but I can't say for sure whether I believe in it's truth.

 

[Ingledsva]

I missed this. And I must admit to being more than a little impressed. So what if the second and third verse was switched (i.e., fixed) by some early scribe?

This is almost certainly what occurred, and translators have been saddled with the consequences ever since ...

Actually I think you were right in the first place.

Read the set up - 34:1 and the end 34:22, especially the first few words. also 34:6 in context to King David.

King David did evil, but was redeemed by his crying out to YHVH.

So "the righteous" doesn't necessarily fit.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away."

What do Christians take from this verse?

Not a Christian - but - it uses LOGOS.

In this case it is the Divine Message/Divine Law.

*

 

[paarsurrey]

Use the Koran to "correct" the Bible?
:biglaugh:
No agenda there...

No occasion to laugh. It is a serious matter.
One aspect as to why Quran was revealed was to fix the Bible (OT& NT).
Regards

 

[rosends]

No occasion to laugh. It is a serious matter.
One aspect as to why Quran was revealed was to fix the Bible (OT& NT).
Regards

Yes, and the Book of Mormon was revealed to fix the Quran. You should defer to the Book of Mormon.