The Holy Bible

[GVF]

Every time that Jesus and his Apostles refer to Scripture, they Aramaic and Hebrew words they use actually refer to the Septuagint. Which was the Jewish scripture at the time of Christ and contained 46 books, to include the 'apocryphal' texts of Maccabees, Sirach, Wisdom, etc.

That would be an accurate statement as there were many prophesies in the OT that were fulfilled in the NT and they made those references to show those fulfillments. I don't think anyone questions the OT as the Jewish Law/Law of Moses/Old Law, etc.

 

[therealUT]

That would be an accurate statement as there were many prophesies in the OT that were fulfilled in the NT and they made those references to show those fulfillments. I don't think anyone questions the OT as the Jewish Law/Law of Moses/Old Law, etc.

The Septuagint contains 46 Books my friend.

 

[Lexvol]

Does Freedom of Religion have to be touched if their morals are legislated upon everyone?

Yes, and that is where we must agree to disagree, because I draw a distinction.

 

[therealUT]

Yes, and that is where we must agree to disagree, because I draw a distinction.

I respect that.

 

[GVF]

Good article OE. I agree with the translation problems noted, and it is very diffucult to get an exact translation. What I'm really looking for is not whether they are translated correctly as much as whether they are the "inspired Word of God" . The method used by Ivan Panin sounds interesting to say the least. It remonds me of the Bible Code somewhat.

I'm really interested in whether the books that we have should be there, and whether others should be included. One of the books which is considered gnostic, Paul's epistle to the Laodiceans, is actually mentioned in the bible. In Colossians 4:16, he tells the Colossians to read the epistle from Laodicea.

It is a deep subject to be sure, as most topics on religion are.

Has there ever been an actual letter to Laodicea. The book of Ephesians, some hold could also be the reference here as it's literary style was more towards a circular letter and not one of Paul's traditional style. tradition has these letters being read aloud to the audience church, and in some cases carried to the next group.

 

[GVF]

The Septuagint contains 46 Books my friend.

That's your take. What did that have to do with the post.

 

[GVF]

And, the Vulgate version of the same chapter and verse:
Notice how different those editions are. One has to wonder if Queen Elizabeth I and King James intentionally altered that in order that their version be accepted...

They say the same thing. No alter of meaning. One being easier to read.

 

[therealUT]

That's your take. What did that have to do with the post.

That is historic fact.

 

[GVF]

Interesting that you bring that up. I was reading through one of Scott Hahn's many books, and he referenced a study that showed that over 90% of all Protestan theologians (all ministers in their respective churches) who learned Greek and then read the Septuagint and the Greek New Testaments, converted to Catholicism. I just found that very, very interesting.

The denominational makeup of the different protestant theologians making the change would also be interesting.

 

[therealUT]

They say the same thing. No alter of meaning. One being easier to read.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Those two pasages do not have the same meanings.

 

[GVF]

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Those two pasages do not have the same meanings.

They both say all scripture is inspired of God

profitable for doctrine / useful for teaching (doctrine is teaching is it not) profitable/useful - both words imply gain

reproof / refutation - both imply to study

instruction / training - both to teach

man of God / the one who belongs to God - both show allegiance/ownership

perfect / competant - both imply preparednes

furnished / equipped to all/every good works - same

 

[GVF]

That is historic fact.

To Catholocism or Protestantism?

 

[GVF]

Is that all Muslims?...or just the ones that disregard the parts speaking to non violence, mercy, and love and blow people up? Take many of the Gay and Lesbian crowd that attend a church and somehow get past that part that speaks to homsexuality is an abomination. Mankind seem to delight in putting a human spin on the scriptures, how convienient it is it always seems to benefit the 1st person.

That was the best reading of the day.

 

[GVF]

The extremely religious right would love to have a theocracy. These are the people who lobby for Amendments to ban gay marriage, greater legislation against alcohol consumption, more Federal control over what is appropriate for television, etc. I would state that the fundamentalist Christians, in America, are using a less direct method, than radical Islam, to attain a theocracy, however, they are most definitely aimed at that end state.

I'm not a religious right, maybe middle or right middle, but most definitely moderate conservative and not hard line. But, I do understand the basis for their battles even if they do cross too far right in political agenda. We have been pushed so far to the left, having many of our religious freedoms jeopordized, that a balance has to be fought for and found. Prayer in school for example. I would not condone forcing open prayer on everyone. I also do not condone stripping it from everyone and making it illegal. There should be a quiet time for election of prayer, or a prayer place for participators at a specified time of day. Or a place provided for voluntary assembly. This way, all could have their freedom and no one offended. But, the liberal left is driving religion from all parts of the american establishment that was based on those freedoms. Now, the religious are losing their freedoms.

 

[therealUT]

I'm not a religious right, maybe middle or right middle, but most definitely moderate conservative and not hard line. But, I do understand the basis for their battles even if they do cross too far right in political agenda. We have been pushed so far to the left, having many of our religious freedoms jeopordized, that a balance has to be fought for and found. Prayer in school for example. I would not condone forcing open prayer on everyone. I also do not condone stripping it from everyone and making it illegal. There should be a quiet time for election of prayer, or a prayer place for participators at a specified time of day. Or a place provided for voluntary assembly. This way, all could have their freedom and no one offended. But, the liberal left is driving religion from all parts of the american establishment that was based on those freedoms. Now, the religious are losing their freedoms.

First, if the gov't provides schooling to the citizens, then the gov't has the ability to allow and disallow what it wishes in its school system. Period. If you want your kids to pray in schools then send them to private schools. They will also receive a better education at private schools.

Besides removing Nativity scenes from public view, I have a hard time seeing that religions in the US are losing their freedoms.

 

[therealUT]

To Catholocism or Protestantism?

To historians!

 

[GVF]

First, if the gov't provides schooling to the citizens, then the gov't has the ability to allow and disallow what it wishes in its school system. Period. If you want your kids to pray in schools then send them to private schools. They will also receive a better education at private schools.

Besides removing Nativity scenes from public view, I have a hard time seeing that religions in the US are losing their freedoms.

True. And i really hope we have the money to send him to privat school. Public Ed. was a joke when I was in high school and i'm sure it still is. It took me 3 semesters to learn how to make in in a private college classroom.

I don't think the gov't should lean one way or the other. If they yield to either the left or the right, they are discriminating someone. To not mix church and state, I think you'd need to remain neutral. That would mean providing avenues of freedom and exercise in either direction by choice only of the individuals. When they banned prayer, they did not separate church and state, they jumped right in the middle of it.

I think the immediate effect of losing religious freedoms has not been realized. The movement seems to have gone that way. Atleast from what you see publiczed all the time. It is hard to find news on what is holding steadfast. We have publications such as the christian chronical and the gospel advocate to keep up with what's going on in world religion of the church in the states and in the missions fields, but that is not a broad spectrum source. Who knows, hopefully it is not as bad or targeted as it seems.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

II Timothy 3:16

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

My main point in this thread is what exactly constitutes "all scripture". Is is strictly the 66 books of the protestant bible, or does it include the books in the Catholic bible? Should I consider the gnostic texts to be a part of "all scripture" too? How about the Book of Mormon, or the Quran? What exactly was Paul referring to when he penned those words? Was he referring to all of the christian texts in circulation at the time, and all texts to come after, or was he referring strictly to those texts that would be included in a canon which didn't even exist yet?

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Has there ever been an actual letter to Laodicea. The book of Ephesians, some hold could also be the reference here as it's literary style was more towards a circular letter and not one of Paul's traditional style. tradition has these letters being read aloud to the audience church, and in some cases carried to the next group.

Yes there is an actual letter to Laodicea. As soon as I find it, I'll put it here.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Prayer in school for example. I would not condone forcing open prayer on everyone. I also do not condone stripping it from everyone and making it illegal. There should be a quiet time for election of prayer, or a prayer place for participators at a specified time of day. Or a place provided for voluntary assembly. This way, all could have their freedom and no one offended. But, the liberal left is driving religion from all parts of the american establishment that was based on those freedoms. Now, the religious are losing their freedoms.

When they banned prayer, they did not separate church and state, they jumped right in the middle of it.

Just to clear it up a bit. They did not ban prayer from school. Children are free to pray whenever they so choose. What is illegal is school led prayer, which would be an endorsement of religion.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

The Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans:

He salutes the brethren, exhorts them to persevere in good works, and not to be moved by vain speaking. Rejoices in his bonds, desires them to live in the fear of the Lord.

Paul an Apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, to the brethren which are at Laodicea.
Grace be to you, and peace, from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ.
I thank Christ in every prayer of mine, that you may continue and persevere in good works, looking for that which is promised in the day of judgment.
Do not be troubled by the vain speeches of anyone who perverts the truth, that they may draw you aside from the truth of the Gospel which I have preached.
And now may God grant that my converts may attain to a perfect knowledge of the truth of the Gospel, be beneficent, and doing good works which accompany salvation.
And now my bonds, which I suffer in Christ, are manifest, in which I rejoice and am glad.
And our Lord will grant us his mercy, that you may have the same love, and be like-minded.
Wherefore, my beloved, as you have heard of the coming of the Lord, so think and act reverently, and it shall be to you life eternal;
For it is God who is working in you;
And do all things without sin.
And what is best, my beloved; rejoice in the Lord Jesus Christ, and avoid all filthy lucre.
Let all your requests by made known to God, and be steady in the doctrine of Christ.
And whatever things are sound and true, and of good report, and chaste, and just, and lovely, these things do.
Those things which you have heard and received, think on these things, and peace shall be with you.
All the saints salute you.
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen.
Cause this Epistle to be read to the Colossians, and the Epistle of the Colossians to be read among you. .

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

I posted this in another thread, but nobody wanted to tackle it. I'll give it another try.

No one has seen God at any time, The Only Begotton Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him. (John 1:18 NKJV)

So if no one has ever seen God, then what about:

Then Moses went up, also Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and they saw the God of Israel. And there was under His feet as it were a paved work of sapphire stone, and it was like the very heavens in its clarity. But on the nobles of the children of Israel He did not lay His hand. So they saw God, and they ate and drank. (Exodus 24:9-11 NKJV)

So the question is, if no one has ever seen God, then who did Moses and the elders see when they went on the mountain? If it was in fact God that they saw, did God forget about that meeting when He told John what to write in John 1:18?

 

[WA_Vol]

Carbon dating vs. the bible.

Any thoughts?

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Carbon dating vs. the bible.

Any thoughts?

I believe that God created the earth around 4.5 billion years ago. I don't think that the creation days, or for that matter, the genealogies in Genesis which the fundies use to calculate the young earth theory, are meant to be taken literally.

 

[GVF]

I posted this in another thread, but nobody wanted to tackle it. I'll give it another try.

No one has seen God at any time, The Only Begotton Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him. (John 1:18 NKJV)

So if no one has ever seen God, then what about:

Then Moses went up, also Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and they saw the God of Israel. And there was under His feet as it were a paved work of sapphire stone, and it was like the very heavens in its clarity. But on the nobles of the children of Israel He did not lay His hand. So they saw God, and they ate and drank. (Exodus 24:9-11 NKJV)

So the question is, if no one has ever seen God, then who did Moses and the elders see when they went on the mountain? If it was in fact God that they saw, did God forget about that meeting when He told John what to write in John 1:18?