It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Misquoting Jesus in the Bible

page: 8
5
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2017 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn
ohhhhh, now I get it (had to read it multiple times), the "it" in the sentence there is talking about a Doctorate in Theology. Now I understand the "you" as well.


I was thinking to myself, how is that a general "you"???! I just couldn't get it until I figured out the "it". lol, I was thinking 'you get it' as in 'you understand it' (similar to the opening of the sentence). If you read it like that it gets really hard to notice it's a general "you" after that.
edit on 29-4-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 29 2017 @ 03:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: whereislogic
... since some people don't want to get anywhere near this information, acknowledge it as being factual/certain/true/unambiguous/clear, certainly not talk about it in that manner or draw attention to it, or respond to it in any rational or honest manner when they are talking about their God and their theology on forums such as this one. Can't have people waking up to these enemies of God on a conspiracy site of course:
Jeremiah 23:27a (KJB):

Which think to cause my people to forget my name...
NW:
They intend to make my people forget my name...
NASB:
who intend to make My people forget My name...
...

Regarding the bolded phrase:
James 4:4

4 Adulteresses,* [Or “You unfaithful ones.”] do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is making himself an enemy of God.
How Religion Survived: Awake!—2001

A Handmaiden of the Soviet State

Regarding the relationship between the Orthodox Church and the Soviets, Life magazine of September 14, 1959, observed: “Stalin gave some concessions to religion, and the church treated him like a czar. Orthodoxy’s collaboration is ensured by a special government ministry and the Communists have utilized the church ever since as an arm of the Soviet state.”

Matthew Spinka, an authority on Russian church affairs, confirmed the existence of a close Church-State relationship in his 1956 book, The Church in Soviet Russia. “The present Patriarch Alexei,” he wrote, “has deliberately made his Church a tool of the government.” Indeed, the Orthodox Church, in effect, survived by becoming a handmaiden of the State. ‘But is that so reprehensible?’ you may ask. Well, consider how God and Christ view the matter.

Jesus Christ said of his true disciples: “You are no part of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world.” And God’s Word pointedly asks: “Adulteresses, do you not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God?” (John 15:19; James 4:4) Thus, as the Bible presents it, the church made itself a religious harlot with whom “the kings of the earth committed fornication.” It has shown itself to be part of what the Bible calls “Babylon the Great, the mother of the harlots and of the disgusting things of the earth.”—Revelation 17:1-6.
...

Should the Clergy Preach Politics?

...
How Politics Affected Preachers

The idea that God would use churchmen as politicians was promoted especially by Augustine, an influential fifth-century Catholic theologian. He envisioned the church ruling over the nations and bringing peace to mankind. But historian H. G. Wells wrote: “The history of Europe from the fifth century onward to the fifteenth is very largely the history of the failure of this great idea of a divine world government to realize itself in practice.” Christendom did not bring peace even to Europe, much less to the world. What had been thought of as being Christianity lost its standing in the eyes of many. What went wrong?

Many who claimed to preach Christianity were drawn into politics with good intentions, but then they found themselves participating in evil. Martin Luther, a preacher and a translator of the Bible, is famous for his efforts to reform the Catholic Church. However, his bold stand against church doctrines made him popular with those who had political motives for rebellion. Luther lost the respect of many when he too began to speak out on political issues. Initially he favored the peasants who were rebelling against oppressive nobles. Then, when the rebellion turned savage, he encouraged the nobles to crush the rebellion, which they did, butchering thousands. Not surprisingly, the peasants considered him a traitor. Luther also encouraged the nobles in their own rebellion against the Catholic emperor. In fact, Protestants, as Luther’s followers came to be known, formed a political movement from the beginning. How did power affect Luther? It corrupted him. For example, although he at first opposed coercing religious dissidents, he later encouraged his political friends to execute by burning those who opposed infant baptism.

John Calvin was a famous clergyman in Geneva, but he came to have enormous political influence as well. When Michael Servetus demonstrated that the Trinity has no basis in Scripture, Calvin used his political influence to support the execution of Servetus, who was burned at the stake. What a horrific departure from Jesus’ teachings!

Perhaps these men forgot what the Bible says at 1 John 5:19: “The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.” Did they have a sincere desire to clean up the politics of their day, or was it the prospect of power and of having friends in high places that attracted them? In any case, they should have remembered the inspired words of Jesus’ disciple James: “Do you not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God.” (James 4:4) James knew that Jesus had said of his followers: “They are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world.”—John 17:14.

Even so, while recognizing that Christians should be no part of the world’s badness, many object to being politically neutral, truly “no part of the world.” They claim that such neutrality prevents Christians from actively showing love for others. They believe that church leaders should speak out and play a role in combating corruption and injustice. But is the neutrality that Jesus taught really incompatible with active concern for others? Can a Christian keep separate from divisive political issues and at the same time provide practical help for others? The following article analyzes these questions.

[Footnote]

Politics has been defined as “the activities associated with the governance of a country or area, especially the debate or conflict between individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power.”—The New Oxford Dictionary of English.

[Picture on page 4]

Church leaders compromised with rulers, such as Emperor Constantine, to receive political power

Prove to Be a Real Follower of Christ

“Do not be loving either the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” (1 John 2:15) The world and its fleshly spirit stand in opposition to Jehovah and his holy spirit. Hence, Christ’s true followers do not merely refrain from being a part of the world. They reject it at heart, knowing that as the disciple James wrote, “friendship with the world is enmity with God.”—Jas. 4:4.

edit on 29-4-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2017 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Are you trying to convince me, or yourself??? A Bible translated from "unverified" documents is itself an unverified document.

What made the AV so special compared to other earlier translations? You're basically saying its special...better yet, SANCTIFIED, because YOU invest YOUR faith in it.



posted on Apr, 29 2017 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede


Now out of all of this I want you to note that Ehrman will not venture into the OT which, by the way, must also be judged in the same manner as that of the NT. (by his standards). He will not ague the OT because he knows better than try to argue the very same tactics he used on the NT when the DSS will prove him a liar and atheist. It would be impossible to argue corrupt copy of OT when in fact for over two thousand years it has proven him wrong even without his autographs,

In real life the AV bible has undergone more critical observation than any other piece of literature in this world and has been proven to be the inspired words of God.


First off, how do you figure anything in the bible was ever "proven" to be the word of God?

Secondly, im quite sure Dr. Ehrman knows the OT just as well as he knows the NT... being a "professor" of religious studies... and a former Christian pastor.... fundamentalist... not to mention an historian... and i highly doubt he would be proven a liar in any case... or an atheist for that matter. I do believe he has a book on the authorship of the books in the bible as well

Seed... clearly you just don't like the man... just admit it, because you're just spewing nonsense now

This video isn't about the OT so why would he even bring it up?


edit on 29-4-2017 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2017 @ 06:45 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

No what I am saying is there is ONE English Bible that has to be the fulfillment of God's words in Psalm 12:6 and 7. So I have found that there is only one Bible that has ALL the Words, Verses, Phrases and Sections in it. After years of comparison the only one is the AV. Over three hundred plus Bible do not agree with one another let alone the AV. The AV defines every word in it by the context, many Bibles in English don't do that. They are rewritten and change words to give a meaning that is not consistent with other or the AV. But in the AV you cant get all the meanings these other Bibles limit themselves too without owning 350 plus Bibles or going back to a unverifiable copy in hopes to get understanding that is found clearly in the AV already.

The AV has a built in Cross-reference of God's doctrines and not that of any Denomination that is found in many of their privately interpreted versions. And their cross-references are forced into the text unlike the AV the supernatural cross-reference is flowing from the actual Words, Verses, Phrases and Section found therein.

The AV preserves the words of God, Just as God wanted it to be spoken by God to us. ALL other English versions preserve their denominational desires, and lead to more confusion. The very words of the AV are directly translated or Transliterated correctly as God wanted them spoken to this generation.

The AV, God's preserved word to this Generation, like the Living Word, Jesus Christ, is persecuted and hated by the religious elite of our day.

No need to convince you you would never seek out the truth and find the answer of Psalm 12:6,7.



posted on May, 1 2017 @ 06:49 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

No, what you really want is Scholars not knowing anything other than to debate and question the word of God, so you would not be held accountable to the Words of God as found in the AV.



posted on May, 1 2017 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I don't think you're in a position to discuss accountablity, when you claim that the AV is the only translation that translates by context, yet you also claim the source text to be "unverified". It sounds to me that you're the one trying to dismiss yourself of accountability and the leg work that comes with true scholarship. You have put yourself in a very small psychological box.

If there is any cross referencing in the AV, it came from the source texts, but you're only seeing a very small portion of it. The rest cannot be seen in any kind of translation. You must know the ancient languages. Pastors who won't learn the ancient languages to teach the Word to the congregations are not doing their jobs.
edit on 1-5-2017 by BELIEVERpriest because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2017 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Here's an interesting experience from someone who went to a College Seminary to become a Priest and became a counselor in training at a Monestary in the US, then psychology professor and counseling professor at a University or College (secular I presume if I'm following the storyline correctly):

edit on 1-5-2017 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2017 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: whereislogic

Sounds like he wound up joining the Jehovah's Witness people. For him, the issue wasn't so much the Bible, as it was the emptiness of denominational ritualism. All he had to do was let go of the ritualism and study the Bible for what it is. Though, I don't know that he is really any better off with the JWs. I would think that someone who considers themselves to be a free thinker would prefer to study the Bible without the JW goggles over his eyes.
edit on 1-5-2017 by BELIEVERpriest because: typos



posted on May, 1 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

That is not true. The AV defines words by their context.

While all the copies are unverifiable it is God who inspired the translators to rightly interpret and correct any errors therein.

I study my AV Bible With having top go back to manuscripts that are in error. So I do a lot of "leg work" when it comes to the English words of the AV as it is necessary to get a correct Application or to teach sound doctrine. I am fully accountable to the context of the AV and to God for my teaching.

No, the cross-reference came from God as he correctly inspired the English words to the translators. Thereby, it is God who created the cross-reference system and not men or their denominations. The cross-reference system God placed in the AV is very extensive, utilizing hundreds of Words, Phrases, verses and sections of scriptures.

No one not even my professors when asked will tell you they are correctly speaking or using any of the languages. All they had was fallible men using unverifiable documents. The Hebrew spoken by Moses is unknown to anyone living today, so is the Chaldean and the Koine Greek. So you see unless we were there at the time it was spoken it would be very difficult to know how Koine, Chaldean or the ancient Hebrew were in fact used and spoken.

I learned the Koine Greek. Hebrew and Chaldean as taught at the Seminary I went to, however if we are honest we would understand there is no way to verify if we are indeed speaking and using those languages correctly.

This is why it is that we have only one person to trust when it comes to his words and that is God. If he says he will preserve his words to every generation forever then he has and will. If God can't keep his word then he is not worth following, for it is by his word I am saved and know he will give me salvation and that all through faith.

I have faith God kept his word and has indeed preserved his word to this generation of English speaking people. And that is found int he AV. From there I can study the English words he inspired in preserving his words to us and teach personal application, sound doctrine and salvation.

For example the word Eschew or any of its variants like Escheweth, Eschewed and Eschews.

Job 1:8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?
When you study the word Eschew as a Noun, an Adjective, or a Verb you will see that it has more than one meaning. Its main meaning it is "to Turn off or from" it also means "to dislike", and it can also be interpreted as "Hate, Shun, Abhor". It can mean some one is "disgusted by something", "Doesn't meddle in it", "doesn't rub elbows with it" or "wink at it".

Now the three main examples of Escheweth I showed in the paragraph above was "Hate, Shun and Abhor" are singled out in different translations. But they are just three narrowed points of meaning of the word Eschew. Why narrow a translation to just one point of interpretation when you can use a word like Eschew to get all the meanings across. You see I do my leg work when I study and I didn't even have to go to any dead languages or old manuscripts to get the meanings of the Word Eschew, Escheweth or Eschews. So you see as a Pastor I did my job, and not only taught them a power word to use in everyday speech, but also all its variants and meanings as found in the 350 plus translations men have made, and give them an application with a challenge for everyday life.



posted on May, 1 2017 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

You claim to observer supernatural cross referencing in the AV. I claim that the cross referencing system of the heptameter is superior. I use most of the same source materials used by the AV translators. What objective evidence can you provide to support the idea that the AV is Divinely Inspired. Your own personal faith is not a sufficient argument, as it is purely subjective.

If as you say, there is no way to accurately understand the dead languages or to vet the variants, then how can you sit there and tell me that the AV is any more Divinely Inspired than a phonebook???

You make a lot of claims, but you have contributed very little content.
edit on 1-5-2017 by BELIEVERpriest because: added point



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 06:56 AM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

How does the heptameter encourage you in right living in this world? How does it encourage obedience to God's word? How does it teach sound doctrine like that of Jesus Christ and the apostles including Paul? It doesn't

Points of of support the AV is the preserved word of God.

1) has all the words, verses, phrases and sections in it, all others remove words, replace words with limited meaning, omit verses and sections of the Bible.

2) Defines all the words in it by the context all others do not and leave you searching Manuscripts in dead languages for the meaning of which you cant be sure of are correct.

3) Built in Cross-reference of the Words, Verses, Phrases and Sections. Which unlike counting syllables encourages one to have faith in God alone.

I can tell you the AV is preserved because it is the only one that meets the preservation promise of Ps 12:6, 7. You must understand it takes more than human logic it takes faith in God as well. Something that it seems you are lacking in your study of His words.

I showed you how I do leg work of the English language of the AV yet you claim I have contributed little to the context. That is false, I have added greatly but you will not accept it. Nothing I can do to force you to believe I can only give you the truth and let you be accountable to it.

As a matter of fact all you have contributed is saying the heptameter as a way to count Hebrew syllables, Which are consonants only seeing the Hebrew has no vowels, then putting of the Hebrew consonants into strings of numbers and then make up something you think they are to mean. Which is what exactly?


edit on 2-5-2017 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I already explained how the numbers of the heptameter reveal the thematic structure of the text, which can then be cross referenced with other portions of text with the same patters. Beyond that, the heptameter also tracks and maps prophecy. The first 40 syllables of Matthew 24 predicted the fall of the Temple 40 years after Jesus died. I won't go into it any further, since I would likely be wasting my time explaining it. If you are interested in following that, you can look for the videos on the Matt 24-25 meter through the link I provided in my first post on this thread.

Now, I do believe that God will preserve His Word for those who seek it. That promise is made in Proverbs 25:2, which the AV fails to translate correctly.



Proverbs 25:2 (corrected translation)
"It is the glory of God to conceal the Word, and it is the glory of kings to seek the Word"


However, Psalm 12:7 is another verse, in which the AV failed to translate correctly (both grammatically and contextually). Just follow the context from vs 5-7.


Psalm 12:5 AV
For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him.


Verse 5 establishes the context. God will rise for the oppressed and the needy, the humble. He will set them in safety.



Psalm 12:6 AV
The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.


Verse 6 then establishes the fact that God's Word has quality, value, and integrity. If He promises that He will protect the humble, then His promise is better than refined precious metals.




Psalm 12:7 AV
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.


The word wrongly translated "them" in the AV, is a Hebrew construct which refers to the people that God made the promise to in verse 5. If you would look at the Hebrew word tissrenu (תִּצְּרֶ֓נּוּ), you would notice the prenominal suffix nu. It really means 'us/ours', implying that the author (David) was including himself with the oppressed people. It cannot apply to God's Word.

So God promised to protect the humble (spiritually) out from that generation, forward. It is not a promise to preserve the Word in English, or in any other language or translation.


Now, before you reply, I want you to read Psalm 12:5-7 over and over again in the AV. The reason being, you don't need to know the Hebrew to know that the translation is unclear. You don't need to know the Hebrew to know that God is promising to protect the humble, not promising to preserve His Word.

However, you do need to know the Hebrew to realize that the AV translators made a very simple grammatical error, translating what should have been "us", as "them". It's petty sad when they can't tell the difference between us and them.
edit on 2-5-2017 by BELIEVERpriest because: typos



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

So the utterances of a particular speech, which you or no one knows because the Ancient Hebrew is lost. What you have is Paleo Hebrew and modern Hebrew. Hebrew as a language was actually lost until the early 1900's when they brought back what they knew from German Yiddish Hebrew.

But no matter it still only works if you are absolutely sure how to speak a certain form of Hebrew which you don't. The NT is still far more important for Salvation than the OT or Psalms.

You are incorrect, the them in Psalm 12:6 and7 is referring to the words that were purified seven times. See you want me to believe you about thematic structure in numbering syllables with no vowels of a language no one speaks today, yet you cannot put the them in the right place in plain English. Now you see why God is in control and put periods, colons, semicolons and commas along with the English terms. For thematic pauses and thematic changes. Typical JW teaching mistake that the them is people and not the words that were purified seven times. The "them" of the Thematic Grammar of the English is a subjective case that refers to the last supportive noun which is "words". If you skip that noun "words" and take it all the way back to people then you violate the Thematic Construction and Structure of the English language. Do that and you can make the Bible say what you want it too, and you wont have to be held accountable because those who violate the Grammar will have myriad of teachings that confuse the TRUTH.

You are blaming the translators for an error, but those who you got your teaching from are the ones who made the real error and violated the English grammar. Again it is God inspired the words in English to the translators. God knows the difference and how to inspire it into English as a way to preserve it. Take the only verse that says he will preserve his words to every generation then you effectively leave me in confusion all their days with nothing to rely on but other men.

You see I don't need to count syllables to know the thematic structure of the ENGLISH language I get it from the context and the Grammar that God has preserved his words, everyone of them just as he wanted us to have them.

No one need the Heptameter and count syllables to see in the Plain English Jesus says the Temple will be destroyed. God preserved his words for those who seek it but for those who don't as well. For they will be held accountable to the words he has spoken and preserved whether they seek it or not.


edit on 2-5-2017 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 08:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon


Secondly, im quite sure Dr. Ehrman knows the OT just as well as he knows the NT... being a "professor" of religious studies... and a former Christian pastor.... fundamentalist... not to mention an historian... and i highly doubt he would be proven a liar in any case... or an atheist for that matter. I do believe he has a book on the authorship of the books in the bible as well Seed... clearly you just don't like the man... just admit it, because you're just spewing nonsense now This video isn't about the OT so why would he even bring it up?

I do not doubt that Ehrman knows the OT as well as the NT. But that is the problem. He doesn't know the NT. To know the NT is to understand the NT and he has confessed many times that he does no understand what he spent many years trying to learn. The basic teaching of Jesus is to understand suffering. It is taught throughout the entire OT and NT. It went over his head simply because foremost he is an atheist and being an atheist he has absolutely no clue as to what he teaches.

You have stated that - " i highly doubt he would be proven a liar in any case... or an atheist for that matter."

Bart Ehrman May 12, 2014
Quote
I’m not a believer in a God who is active in the world, who intervenes when people are in need, who answers prayer — so that would cover a lot of orthodoxies!
Unquote

Quote
Bart Ehrman May 12, 2014
Yes, everyone suffers. And no, I won’t see my children. And either will everyone else. This life is all there is. So we should enjoy it as much as we can for as long as we can. It’s not a dress rehearsal for something else!
Unquote

Need I say any more? You see Akragon, that you cannot believe that which you don't understand and If you cannot understand then you cannot teach that which do not understand. That is why our American universities have failed so greatly. I told you that I have followed this man for quite some time and I know what he is. I sat and listened to his lectures many times and he has but one central theme. He does not teach people that which is the subject matter but instead he tears down and tries to destroy that which he does not believe. Example - the very 1st minute of one lecture that I listened to was that he inferred that the entire literature of the NT was of no value. That was his entire lecture all condensed in that very first one minute. There was nothing more to be learned because he offered nothing more from academia. He offers nothing but negativity because he does not understand and he is a complete atheist.



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Well, the existence of the heptameters has already been observed in the Koine Greek of the NT, which clearly has both consonants and vowels. The Masoretic tradition did a fine enough job a preserving the consonants and vowels of the ancient language, that the same heptameter can clearly stand out in the OT as well. You're just ignoring evidence. Clearly you have made a second nature practice of ignoring evidence, as you have convinced yourself that the AV is somehow superior to its source materials. I mean, I've heard some ridiculous ideas in my lifetime, but that one takes the cake all the way home.

Tell me, why didn't God just have the AV translators rewrite His Word from scratch??? Why have them do any translating in the first place? Please, do answer that question at the very least.

It seems like you have flipped every weakness in the AV around into a form of divine inspiration. 'Oh, its not a mistranslation, its divine correction.' Sorry, but you're dead wrong, and I have demonstrated that with elementary level Hebrew grammar.

Psalm 12:5-7 is not a promise to preserve the Word, it is a promise to preserve humble believers. You don't need Hebrew to know that, all you need to do is read the passage in its context. You have taken the passage out of context like so many other ATSers have done. Its a dirty trick, executed by atheists and agnostics...people who do not walk in the Spirit, and now you have reduced yourself to their level. Use 1John1:9 and try again please.


edit on 2-5-2017 by BELIEVERpriest because: typos



posted on May, 2 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

Welcome back..


I do not doubt that Ehrman knows the OT as well as the NT. But that is the problem. He doesn't know the NT. To know the NT is to understand the NT and he has confessed many times that he does no understand what he spent many years trying to learn.


Meaning he doesn't understand why he spent so much time teaching Christianity... when as soon as he actually learned what the earliest texts contain, he figured out a lot of it was simply not true.

i can relate... but again, to say he doesn't understand what he once preached is totally ignorant. Though you are welcome to your opinions.


The basic teaching of Jesus is to understand suffering. It is taught throughout the entire OT and NT. It went over his head simply because foremost he is an atheist and being an atheist he has absolutely no clue as to what he teaches.


Well for one thing, he isn't an Atheist... He is an agnostic, and if you've followed him for so long as you say, you should know this... He IS an atheist when it comes to Christianity... and for that matter so am i... even though i am most definitely not an atheist. Just as you are most likely an atheist when it comes to the gods of other religions

SO it didn't go over his head... it simply didn't make sense to his belief system anymore.. again, i can relate


You have stated that - " i highly doubt he would be proven a liar in any case... or an atheist for that matter."


Which still stands by the way... despite your quotes



Need I say any more?


not really... i know you just dislike him... you've made it very obvious. Though i am not surprised in the least... Christians hate him... despise him because he punches huge holes in many peoples belief systems, based on facts not just opinions... I've heard him called the anti-Christ IN CHURCH... the devil incarnate... and a long list of other things. Nothing new here...

but by all means i do enjoy a polite discussion on THE TOPIC of the thread... ahem



*glances around the room*


You see Akragon, that you cannot believe that which you don't understand and If you cannot understand then you cannot teach that which do not understand.


and again... he DOES understand it... he doesn't agree with it anymore... thats why he's no longer Christian... and yet again, i can relate...

You can not say someone as educated as this man is, does not understand the material he spent and continues to spend his life on... He preached it, studied it day and night as a pastor... And is one of the best scholars of the NT that there is... because he's studied the material... not just the book, but the origins of where said book came from. He tells it like it is in reality, not based on Christianity or theology, or his own opinion of the theology of it... just the facts plain and simple. And.... he invites those that listen to take the material given as they will.

and notice as i've said before... NO ONE ever calls him a liar... no one actually questions what he says about the material... because they all know its true... they can only argue the theology of it


He does not teach people that which is the subject matter but instead he tears down and tries to destroy that which he does not believe. Example - the very 1st minute of one lecture that I listened to was that he inferred that the entire literature of the NT was of no value.


And as i've said before... you're expecting him to preach...

that's not what he does... he gives the reality of the material in question... not whats in the bible, but what the bible is based on from the material we have... meaning of course... NOTHING original... NOTHING from the first century... very little from the second century


That was his entire lecture all condensed in that very first one minute. There was nothing more to be learned because he offered nothing more from academia. He offers nothing but negativity because he does not understand and he is a complete atheist.


Well i didn't see the lecture you're speaking of.. but im sure it didn't last only one minute...

why were you even there if you didn't know what you were going to hear?

were you expecting him to give you factual material that would strengthen your beliefs?

You should have been at a Lane Craig lecture IF that was what you're looking for


edit on 2-5-2017 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2017 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon


Meaning he doesn't understand why he spent so much time teaching Christianity... when as soon as he actually learned what the earliest texts contain, he figured out a lot of it was simply not true. i can relate... but again, to say he doesn't understand what he once preached is totally ignorant. Though you are welcome to your opinions.

No, that is not what I mean. There is a great difference in a teacher and a professor. Any one can teach from a printed source such as the bible. Most anyone that can read will eventually realize that most all bibles do not agree word for word and do bring about various conflicting understandings. Any so called teacher can teach a class on what their literature tells them to teach. That is what a preacher does. He/she attends the particular school of their choice of theology and joins their club. You learn only what the club teaches and if you question that authority you will never be a member of that club.



Well for one thing, he isn't an Atheist... He is an agnostic, and if you've followed him for so long as you say, you should know this... He IS an atheist when it comes to Christianity... and for that matter so am i... even though i am most definitely not an atheist. Just as you are most likely an atheist when it comes to the gods of other religions


An agnostic is - Quote "the philosophical view that the existence of God or the supernatural are unknown and perhaps unknowable." Unquote

Review what you have written. Did I not show you plainly that this man denies any afterlife? Would you please re read what you have misunderstood? Here, I will reprint it for you. ----
--------------------------------------
Quote
Bart Ehrman May 12, 2014
I’m not a believer in a God who is active in the world, who intervenes when people are in need, who answers prayer — so that would cover a lot of orthodoxies!

Bart Ehrman May 12, 2014
Yes, everyone suffers. And no, I won’t see my children. And either will everyone else. This life is all there is. So we should enjoy it as much as we can for as long as we can. It’s not a dress rehearsal for something else!
Unquote
------------------------------------------

Bart Ehrnman professor of theology says "This life is all there is." Not the agnostic view which is that the existence of God or the supernatural as unknown and perhaps unknowable. Now Ehrman did not say that a deity is unknown or unknowable but made a statement that there is no existence beyond this existence. He does not leave the possibility of an existing afterlife but destroys that premise with the statement that there is no existence beyond this existence. That is not agnostic and shows me that you do not even understand what you are. An agnostic leaves the possibility of an afterlife of some sort while an atheist will not.

Now the reason that I try to listen to others is to learn. Learning does not necessarily mean that one believes or even understands that which they learn. Bart learned what his peers taught him but that does not mean that he understands what he has learned. in fact he admitted that he could not understand why suffering exists. Certainly he learned that suffering does exist but he does not understand it as the NT literature portrays it. He has no idea why Jesus appeared to His creation and then this confusion developed into that he can not believe that Jesus even came to this creation or that Jesus ever existed. He carried this into the club mentality of the universities throughout America who are thoroughly indoctrinated in this theology. Ehrman sells books and CD's. He found out where and how the money game was played and that there is more money in the bilking of university mush minds than that of the church. The country is full of this and has been for the past century.
Certainly my opinion of course --



posted on May, 3 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Koine Greek is also a dead language with no dictionaries from that time period. We do have secular documents but we cannot rely on such for the Word of God today. By the time of the AV no one knew how to really speak it correctly. Plus there are no full complete Koine Greek NT Bibles in any collection on the earth. At best they have 70% that is why certain men's works were considered and so were old Syriac Bibles as well. There is no full and complete Koine Greek NT so you are either being disingenuous or you are ignorant of that truth when you make a claim the heptameter in the KOINE GREEK New Testament were already clear.

Who is to say that God did not preserve it through them from scratch. Just because they had most of the available documents doesn't mean God was not orchestrating. God would not allow men to be in violation to he word to "STUDY TO SHOW THYSELF APPOVED UNTO GOD, A WORKAMN THAT NEEDETH NO BE ASHAMED, RIGTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH.

I just love it. You and others have accused us and think we are just puppets to our God, but now that it comes to the AV translators all of a sudden they are not puppets.

The problem is that many argue against the AV because it is the preserved word of God. Like I said it is just as hated and persecuted as the Living Word was when he walked the earth some 2,000 years ago.

Already showed you that the THEM in Psalm 12:7 can only be connected to the first supportive noun of which the Lord is going to preserve and it is in verse 6 and it is the word WORDS. To apply it to any noun prior to the noun WORDS is to through English Grammar to the wind. And with that being said you cause confusion as to what God's real meaning to the verses are and hide the truth from those who seek it. There is no change of context seeing the Them can only be tied to Verse six of the Noun WORDS. So the context changed at the period at the end of verse five in the English.

You would best to use 1john 1:9 yourself or better yet the one Peter gave Simon in Act 8:22


edit on 3-5-2017 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2017 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn



You would best to use 1john 1:9 yourself or better yet the one Peter gave Simon in Act 8:22


I only offer up advice that I put into practice, myself...every day, hour, and/or minute. Whenever it is called for. That is how I've come as far as I have.

Sorry, but there is no reason to believe the AV is any more special than the translations which came before it, or the one's that came after. The miracle is that we still have documents to translate from. That is God's promise to preserve the Word in action. Just because those documents require vetting, does not make them unreliable.



Proverbs 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal the word, but the glory of kings is to search out the word.


That was God's promise, and it still stands today. I own a copy of the AV, and I still use it from time to time, but it is nothing more than a translation.

edit on 3-5-2017 by BELIEVERpriest because: added points.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join