Is it possible for believers to believe the Bible has mistakes in it?

[kjw47]

Leading biblical scholars don't agree. But of course, you completely dismiss them -- even though they're the ones who have made it possible for you to read the bible in English in the first place. The NWT is more a paraphrase (even though it states differently), than it is a translation.

The ,leading biblical scholars of Jesus day scoffed at him and the apostles, they were teaching --Jesus received his power from satan. They called his new religion a sect( cult) They turned the peoples hearts to hatred towards Jesus and his followers, all were murdered eventually basically.
So much for the worlds scholars.

 

[savagewind]

I attended many different denominations, the JW teachers are the only teachers I ever found who teach Jesus' real truths--The truths this world hates, because its not what is taught in a building called a church.

You talk a whole lot about "Jesus truths" and I invited you in a thread to share with us what they are. You have not shared.

 

[kjw47]

You talk a whole lot about "Jesus truths" and I invited you in a thread to share with us what they are. You have not shared.

Here at Matt 6:33--- Therefore, keep on seeking- FIRST-the kingdom and his( Jehovah) righteousness and all these other things will be added.( sustenance, covering, spirituality)

This is ultra important for a follower to be doing daily-- How can it be possible for one to accomplish this other ultra important truth from Jesus if they do not do the Above? John 4:22-24)

 

[savagewind]

Here at Matt 6:33--- Therefore, keep on seeking- FIRST-the kingdom and his( Jehovah) righteousness and all these other things will be added.( sustenance, covering, spirituality)

This is ultra important for a follower to be doing daily-- How can it be possible for one to accomplish this other ultra important truth from Jesus if they do not do the Above? John 4:22-24)

I don't disagree with you. I think most Christians are aware that Matthew 6:33 is paramount.
22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, because salvation begins with the Jews.+23 Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshippers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him.24 God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth.”

I was a JW but it was not them who woke me up.. There are many who I believe are awake who were never Jehovah's Witnesses. Thanks to them I can honesty say the JW way is not the only way. And believe me sir (I think you are male) I don't owe them my allegiance because I woke up in the governing body organization. God gives every fine and perfect gift. My being awake is not by any human effort. It comes from God. Jehovah if you will.

 

[sojourner]

The ,leading biblical scholars of Jesus day scoffed at him and the apostles, they were teaching --Jesus received his power from satan. They called his new religion a sect( cult) They turned the peoples hearts to hatred towards Jesus and his followers, all were murdered eventually basically.
So much for the worlds scholars.

Those aren't the same kind of scholars. The group you mention are the religious authorities -- more in the way of apologists and enforcers than academics. The bible scholars I'm referring to are academics and exegetes, who study the texts purely to ascertain and maintain textual integrity. Most academicians would disagree that the NWT is a good translation, as far as textual integrity is concerned.

 

[sojourner]

I attended many different denominations, the JW teachers are the only teachers I ever found who teach Jesus' real truths--The truths this world hates, because its not what is taught in a building called a church.

Sounds fishy to me. Any time you run across a group who refuses to collaborate with others, who stands in direct opposition to others, claiming access to an exclusive truth, you've got to question that group's integrity. JWs teach truth as they and they alone perceive it.

 

[sojourner]

Here at Matt 6:33--- Therefore, keep on seeking- FIRST-the kingdom and his( Jehovah) righteousness and all these other things will be added.( sustenance, covering, spirituality)

This is ultra important for a follower to be doing daily-- How can it be possible for one to accomplish this other ultra important truth from Jesus if they do not do the Above? John 4:22-24)

How are you so sure that they're not doing that?

 

[savagewind]

The difference between religous leaders as scholars and real scholars is PLACE. Real scholars are not concerned about their relative place. They are after the truth. Religious leaders (I think all of them) are concerned first with keeping their position so then they really can't be trusted.

 

[sojourner]

The difference between religous leaders as scholars and real scholars is PLACE. Real scholars are not concerned about their relative place. They are after the truth. Religious leaders (I think all of them) are concerned first with keeping their position so then they really can't be trusted.

I'm not so sure I agree in many, if not most cases. I'm sure -- in fact I know -- that there are self-interested and unscrupulous leaders who do that sort of thing. But the majority of them don't have that sort of self-interested positioning as an impetus. I think it has more to do with what I stated above: religious authorities are apologists. Academics are exegetes.

 

[savagewind]

Do what sort of thing? I was talking about putting the treaching of doctrine above conscience. If they went with their conscience above doctrine they wouldn't be in the same position to lead. They would either humble themselves under God's mighty hand or start a new religion.

 

[sojourner]

Do what sort of thing? I was talking about putting the treaching of doctrine above conscience. If they went with their conscience above doctrine they wouldn't be in the same position to lead. They would either humble themselves under God's mighty hand or start a new religion.

Yeah, that's what I was talking about, too. religious leaders toe the party line because that's what they, themselves, believe.

 

[kjw47]

I don't disagree with you. I think most Christians are aware that Matthew 6:33 is paramount.
22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, because salvation begins with the Jews.+23 Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshippers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him.24 God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth.”

I was a JW but it was not them who woke me up.. There are many who I believe are awake who were never Jehovah's Witnesses. Thanks to them I can honesty say the JW way is not the only way. And believe me sir (I think you are male) I don't owe them my allegiance because I woke up in the governing body organization. God gives every fine and perfect gift. My being awake is not by any human effort. It comes from God. Jehovah if you will.

Those who are of God--live to do his will-Matt 7:21--- Jesus clearly taught about appointed teachers called the faithful and discreet slave in these last days--At Hebrews 10:26-- teaches one must be submissive to teachers( Jesus' real teachers)

this is Gods will. God always used imperfect men on earth to head his spiritual feedings, satan always had gotten bad teachings in sooner or later-- the wise corrected them.

 

[kjw47]

Those aren't the same kind of scholars. The group you mention are the religious authorities -- more in the way of apologists and enforcers than academics. The bible scholars I'm referring to are academics and exegetes, who study the texts purely to ascertain and maintain textual integrity. Most academicians would disagree that the NWT is a good translation, as far as textual integrity is concerned.

There are 0 translations with integrity that refuses to put Gods personal name back in the ot in the nearly 6800 places men who had 0 right removed it and replaced it with--GOD--LORD. A great atrocity by the will of satan. Scholars know 100% for sure its truth. God hid all of these truths from supposed scholars-Daniel 12:4--- Only through Jesus real teachers are they given, at the proper time.

 

[savagewind]

Those who are of God--live to do his will-Matt 7:21--- Jesus clearly taught about appointed teachers called the faithful and discreet slave in these last days--At Hebrews 10:26-- teaches one must be submissive to teachers( Jesus' real teachers)

this is Gods will. God always used imperfect men on earth to head his spiritual feedings, satan always had gotten bad teachings in sooner or later-- the wise corrected them.

What you are really saying is God is well pleased when people searching for him go hungry. There are a billion people who were never able to be fed by your faithful and discreet slave who, according to your belief that only a few people teach "Jesus truths", must go hungry until they are found by you.

Scripture say "God is not far of from each one". Is God not able to feed us?

 

[savagewind]

Should I put on my list of unanswered questions the question "is God not able to feed those people loving God"?

 

[sojourner]

There are 0 translations with integrity that refuses to put Gods personal name back in the ot in the nearly 6800 places men who had 0 right removed it and replaced it with--GOD--LORD. A great atrocity by the will of satan. Scholars know 100% for sure its truth. God hid all of these truths from supposed scholars-Daniel 12:4--- Only through Jesus real teachers are they given, at the proper time.

Dear God! The only instances where God's name has been substituted for LORD is when it appears as the tetragrammaton -- which is unpronounceable. By substituting "LORD," the texts can be easily read out loud. The reason this was done is because scholars know 100% for sure that "Jehovah" is a miss-mash of different names cobbled together, that has less to do with God's name than does the term "LORD." And, BTW, the translators have every right to make translational decisions that make sense, clarify meaning, and make the texts more understandable.

 

[Dr. Strange]

I see only two alternatives for the saying of Jesus Christ "look out that you are not misled".

On the one hand it is teaching Jesus really isn't leading because how is it possible to believe in him to follow and also believe by following him a person can be misled?

On the other hand if he really did say it and you end up lost and away from him you can blame the Bible for putting the fear in you that you might get lost while following him.

I can't accept either one. Is there reason attached to "look out that you are not misled" that I might be able to trust?

Please give the reason why Jesus said "follow me and look out I do not mislead you".

Because reason says you are either following him or not. If you are following him you can't be misled. If you aren't following him why is he making rules for you?

First, your quote, "follow me and look out I do not mislead you," is misquoted. The NAB, ed., 1970, says: "Take care not to be misled." Further examination, Luke 21:8 He replied: "Watch out that you are not deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am he,' and, 'The time is near.' Do not follow them. , no other version says what you quoted. Not even the first, the earliest, The First New Testament, Marcion's Scriptural Canon: And he said, . . . Many will come under my name, saying, 'I am the Christos. . . .' Do not follow them, p. 122. Your question is still an interesting question given the right translation. The answer lies in the meaning of name, "Christos." Jesus was Jewish and to be called the Christos, the anointed one, had every thing to do with the one expected as the deliverer, their Messiah. This designation was assigned to different groups or Jews with varying degrees of significance. That significance could have been political, social and religious. Jesus' was not significant because of religious reasons and socially he was surrounded by those we now call the apostles. What Jesus was significant for was political. Christ - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . Jesus' warning is about the future state of affairs. The word, "kairos," translated "SEASON," http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/luk21.pdf , or the moment, is not about the parousia. It is about the current political condition and is a warning about the Romans destroying Rome. The Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed., 1968. "Jesus urges flight from Jerusalem rather than defense of the city through misquided messianic hope (14-23). NAB footnote Mk. 13, 1-37. p. 1125. Jesus was a revolutionary.

Also note that Marcion's translation says, "He said," meaning what Jesus said. I've been reading this thread and I've seen a lot of assumptions. I say assumptions because I don't see any documentations. Some I've found credible others, I see as useless opinions. I'm sure that threads are or, can be a learning process. That process begins with knowing how to read the Bible. The first time I picked up a Bible I read a passage and with that passage came references to the OT, and more references began to take me throughout the Bible. What is spoken in the NT is verified in the OT. This then is the first way to interpret the NT. Two thousand years of Christian thought means that Christianity is progressive. Every interpretation, even every translation brings us to our modern understanding. Better tools (hermeneutics) better science. Today there are tens of thousands of Protestant denominations each with their own doctrine or interpretation. Not even the Church is all together in agreement. So, how does one know that one's interpretation is correct?

As for your last questions, the answer lies in what I just said. For me, I suppose that I am agnostic. I consider that a step up from Catholicism. Above I quoted twice from Catholic sources that came out of Vatican II era. The commentary is the best in existence and yet it has been removed from the book market. Same with the Bible. The biblical scholarship in both were the best in the history of Christian history. Again, this is what Vatican II was about. The problem was that they both did not work with Catholic doctrine and the hierarchy. Conservative Catholics and hierarchy did not have to work to hard to remove this scholarship. Hence, throughout Christian history one finds corruption and doctrine now rules whether Protestant or Catholic.

There are great attempts to bring Christianity back to its roots. The struggle continues. Apply the above answer to the future. The warning is still true.

No literal reading is an interpretation of the Bible. One must verify, first by references then, by biblical scholasticism and don't forget Christian history.

 

[Dr. Strange]

I would love to hear it.

Please understand that I am not suggesting that time is greater than God. I simply see time as being a part of God in some way. I also believe that God has plans and intentions for humanity. But many times these plans don't come to pass. I also believe that when God states something thats going to happen in the future, it has nothing to do with the concept of God seeing it outside of time. I believe prophecy is when God tells us what He is going to do in the future. Not because He has already seen it outside of time, but because He is great enough to make His word come to pass.

This is interesting from the standpoint of prophesy speaking for God and then implying that God will do something in the future. Prophesy disappeared in around 200 AD in the Early Church. There was a reason, a purpose for a prophet in the Early Church. Prophesy just seemed right given circumstances of the Early Church and that the OT, the Jewish religion had prophets. The Didache ( Text, Translation, Analysis, and Commentary, p. 72) spoke to this issue of wayward prophets. It was agreed that the "household" (what we would call churches) would accept prophets as long as they adhered to their own self-definition of, just "passing through." They also had to adhere to speaking in the Spirit.

There is so much importance here surrounding this belief of prophecy, by God, through prophets about the future of mankind but then, there is the question of disbelief that this thread approaches.

To believe that God interferes with Creation is a real stretch of a Christian's imagination given that Christianity deems God as perfect. It is contradictory to say that God would correct Creation in any way. That goes along with mankind decrying natural disasters, mentally or physically deformed babies or even our own Civil War where both sides declared God's Word as there authority and destiny to victory. This last example leads us to begin to philosophize. This then is beyond the prophet speaking for God.

Lastly, speaking in the Spirit, then was defined within households as presented by The Didache. It (Spirit) is once again a tool to which reading the Bible is not a literal reading. If you do not understand Genesis 1: 27 then the rest of the Bible is affected by your, one's initial understanding of the Creator. If verse 27 is not seen as man being created after the "likeness" of God (Genesis 5: 1) then man's spirit is a profanation of God's Spirit and nothing of God had prophesied or taught has anything to do with a perfect or loving God.

 

[Dr. Strange]

The mistakes have been found and corrected--The New world translation.

One must first understand that faith has nothing to do with belief.

 

[Dr. Strange]

In light of the perceived fact that the only ones knowing Jesus truths at present are the faithful and discreet governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses how do they explain that Jesus promised to be with believers in him until the end? How do they explain the scriptures at Matthew 28:20 and Matthew 18:20 "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them."

What Matthew 18:20 speaks of is a function of the community of believers. The evidence of this can be seen in The Didache. One can now relate this function to all communities of believers, whether Catholic or Protestant.