Comment on Baptist

[jsanford108]

If you would only take responsibility for your self and get a study bible,then you would see that those scriptures were added to the bible. The Catholics canonized the bible.

You make a very true, and excellent point. Catholics did canonize the Bible.

But that is beside the point. If you read and believe the Bible, you have accepted that it is true. If you reject it, how can you have any knowledge of the Gospels?

Furthermore, our friend Bright Raven is absolutely correct. The Apostles accepted the Trinity. Writings of the time, which exist outside of the Bible, confirm this. Also, Gnostics were not trinitarians. They denied the hypo static nature d Christ, as well as His union in the Godhead. Don't believe me? Just look up a definition of Gnosticism. You are arguing against history here, which is backed up by a plethora of sources (which at times are even pitted against each other).

 

[jsanford108]

NIV is the best study bible, and the Holman study bible is also very good. Pay close attention to the foot notes. And besides that, the translators often take liberties with the translations of scriptures.

This is opinion: "best version." A more suitable approach would be to use a "most accurate" or "scholarly" version. Which cannot be done with the NIV. The Holeman is scholarly, but still relies on modern uses of language and connotative interpretation.

 

[CherubRam]

You make a very true, and excellent point. Catholics did canonize the Bible.

But that is beside the point. If you read and believe the Bible, you have accepted that it is true. If you reject it, how can you have any knowledge of the Gospels?

Furthermore, our friend Bright Raven is absolutely correct. The Apostles accepted the Trinity. Writings of the time, which exist outside of the Bible, confirm this. Also, Gnostics were not trinitarians. They denied the hypo static nature d Christ, as well as His union in the Godhead. Don't believe me? Just look up a definition of Gnosticism. You are arguing against history here, which is backed up by a plethora of sources (which at times are even pitted against each other).

Your words are lacking wisdom. For example the word Godhead is a modern made up word. The term "Godhead" is an English variant of the word "godhood" and was first introduced by John Wycliffe (1330-1384 C.E.) in English Bible versions as godhede. The word "Godhead" is a translation of three different Greek words, theion (meaning "divinity, deity", # 2304 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Acts 17:29, theiotēs (meaning "divinity, divine nature", # 2305 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Romans 1:20, and theotēs (meaning "deity", # 2320 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Colossians 2:9.

To translate three different Greek words as one word and deviously incorrect at that in the King James Bible, is no different than translating in the King James Bible, the Hebrew word she’ohl´ with three different English words of "hell" (10 times), "grave" (31 times), and "pit" (3 times).

This is not unlike having three different names for one street on a map (with the real name hidden), so that when a person used it, he wound up lost. Likewise of those who read Bibles with "Godhead" in it, thereby misleading a person that the trinity is "real".
Please study your bibles MORE thoroughly.

 

[CherubRam]

This is opinion: "best version." A more suitable approach would be to use a "most accurate" or "scholarly" version. Which cannot be done with the NIV. The Holeman is scholarly, but still relies on modern uses of language and connotative interpretation.

The Old King James Version is closest for word for word, even so, it has corruptions. Stop making up lies and false accusations, and do a better job of studying the bible. What some scholars won't tell you, the others will. If you don't look at all sides of what is said, then you are a dishonest person.

 

[jsanford108]

The word Godhead does not appear in literal translations. I have never read the word in any Bible of mine. Also, any word is "man-made." Even your very name is man-made (unless God spoke to your mother, telling her to give you your name). So to dismiss any attributable word as "man-made" is faulty. The Greek language is man-made. Latin is man-made. Unless you have a direct transcription of the Latin or Greek manuscripts, you are reading a version of the Bible that is translated. To to tell one to study their Bibles more thoroughly is moot; even hypocritical if you yourself are not studying the original Vulgate.

To demonstrate the extent of my post, do you believe that Peter is the foundation of the Church, as described in Matthew 16:18?

 

[jsanford108]

The Old King James Version is closest for word for word, even so, it has corruptions. Stop making up lies and false accusations, and do a better job of studying the bible. What some scholars won't tell you, the others will. If you don't look at all sides of what is said, then you are a dishonest person.

The Douay-Rheims is actually the most literal translation.

 

[Bright Raven]

The word Godhead does not appear in literal translations. I have never read the word in any Bible of mine. Also, any word is "man-made." Even your very name is man-made (unless God spoke to your mother, telling her to give you your name). So to dismiss any attributable word as "man-made" is faulty. The Greek language is man-made. Latin is man-made. Unless you have a direct transcription of the Latin or Greek manuscripts, you are reading a version of the Bible that is translated. To to tell one to study their Bibles more thoroughly is moot; even hypocritical if you yourself are not studying the original Vulgate.

To demonstrate the extent of my post, do you believe that Peter is the foundation of the Church, as described in Matthew 16:18?

The word Godhead appears three times in the KJV; Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9.

 

[CherubRam]

The word Godhead does not appear in literal translations. I have never read the word in any Bible of mine. Also, any word is "man-made." Even your very name is man-made (unless God spoke to your mother, telling her to give you your name). So to dismiss any attributable word as "man-made" is faulty. The Greek language is man-made. Latin is man-made. Unless you have a direct transcription of the Latin or Greek manuscripts, you are reading a version of the Bible that is translated. To to tell one to study their Bibles more thoroughly is moot; even hypocritical if you yourself are not studying the original Vulgate.

To demonstrate the extent of my post, do you believe that Peter is the foundation of the Church, as described in Matthew 16:18?

The Old Testament repeatedly says that Yahwah is the foundation and that Christ is the Capstone. So what do you think is the truth?

 

[jsanford108]

The Old Testament repeatedly says that Yahwah is the foundation and that Christ is the Capstone. So what do you think is the truth?

Ah, so you don't believe the words of Christ, Himself?

 

[jsanford108]

The word Godhead appears three times in the KJV; Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9.

Apologies. You are right. My fault on that one.

 

[CherubRam]

Ah, so you don't believe the words of Christ, Himself?

I do not want to insult you. Please, please, stop talking to me. Go and do a better study of your bible before you say anything more.

 

[CherubRam]

The term "Godhead" is an English variant of the word "godhood" and was first introduced by John Wycliffe (1330-1384 C.E.) in English Bible versions as godhede. The word "Godhead" is a translation of three different Greek words, theion (meaning "divinity, deity", # 2304 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Acts 17:29, theiotēs (meaning "divinity, divine nature", # 2305 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Romans 1:20, and theotēs (meaning "deity", # 2320 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Colossians 2:9.

To translate three different Greek words as one word and deviously incorrect at that in the King James Bible, is no different than translating in the King James Bible, the Hebrew word she’ohl´ with three different English words of "hell" (10 times), "grave" (31 times), and "pit" (3 times).

This is not unlike having three different names for one street on a map (with the real name hidden), so that when a person used it, he wound up lost. Likewise of those who read Bibles with "Godhead" in it, thereby misleading a person that the trinity is "real".
Please study your bibles MORE thoroughly.

 

[DAN P]

The word Godhead does not appear in literal translations. I have never read the word in any Bible of mine. Also, any word is "man-made." Even your very name is man-made (unless God spoke to your mother, telling her to give you your name). So to dismiss any attributable word as "man-made" is faulty. The Greek language is man-made. Latin is man-made. Unless you have a direct transcription of the Latin or Greek manuscripts, you are reading a version of the Bible that is translated. To to tell one to study their Bibles more thoroughly is moot; even hypocritical if you yourself are not studying the original Vulgate.

To demonstrate the extent of my post, do you believe that Peter is the foundation of the Church, as described in Matthew 16:18?

Hi and the Original text were written in GREEK and not in Latin !!

And in 1 Peter 2:L6 Jesus is the chief corner stone and not Peterf !!


As far as Matt 16:18 means , , the verb I WILL BUILD IS ASCRIBED to Jesus and is in the Greek FUTURE TENSE !!

It iks obvious that you are the one NOT understanding the bible !!

dan p

 

[jsanford108]

Hi and the Original text were written in GREEK and not in Latin !!

And in 1 Peter 2:L6 Jesus is the chief corner stone and not Peterf !!


As far as Matt 16:L18 means , , the verb I WILL BUILD aIS ASCRIBED to Jesus and iks in the Greek FUTURE TENSE !!

It iks obvious that you are the one NOT understanding the bible !!

dan p

Hello. The original manuscripts were written in Hebrew and Aramaic. Transcribed to Greek. Some manuscripts were Greek.

As far as "I will build" being future tense, there is no disagreement there.

As for 1 Peter, it says Christ is the cornerstone. Once again, no disagreement. None of this disagrees or conflicts with Peter being the foundation of the Church. Foundation does not equal to cornerstone.

 

[CherubRam]

There is no hurry for you to comment jsanford108. I'm going to take a break. I will be back later.

 

[jsanford108]

I do not want to insult you. Please, please, stop talking to me. Go and do a better study of your bible before you say anything more.

Insult away friend. I am not thin skinned by any means. I am talking to you because you are the one who made a post rife with opinion and error. Not saying that you did not have many accurate and true points. But they were muddled and mixed with falsehoods.

You accuse people of not reading their Bibles, despite not even having the most accurate and literal translation, as your preferred translation. I own DRV (my favorite), KJV, and Holeman. Also have the Latin Vulgate, with commentary, for reference. This isn't me accusing you of not reading your Bible enough. I am sure you read it frequently. However, that doesn't mean that you have the most accurate ideas, as a result of your translation. (I am sure we would agree that translations such as the NAB and Message are far too removed from their "source" to be remotely reliable).

 

[CherubRam]

Insult away friend. I am not thin skinned by any means. I am talking to you because you are the one who made a post rife with opinion and error. Not saying that you did not have many accurate and true points. But they were muddled and mixed with falsehoods.

You accuse people of not reading their Bibles, despite not even having the most accurate and literal translation, as your preferred translation. I own DRV (my favorite), KJV, and Holeman. Also have the Latin Vulgate, with commentary, for reference. This isn't me accusing you of not reading your Bible enough. I am sure you read it frequently. However, that doesn't mean that you have the most accurate ideas, as a result of your translation. (I am sure we would agree that translations such as the NAB and Message are far too removed from their "source" to be remotely reliable).

Here is what I make use of and a lot more: Online Bible Study Tools.
www.biblegateway.com/
www.biblestudytools.com/
biblehub.com/
www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm
www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm
www.linkedword.com/gen/1/-1/0
Bible Dictionaries.
www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/
www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionaries/
www.studylight.org/dictionaries/hbd/
Ancient Greek Bible Text Online.
codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx
English Translation of the Greek Septuagint Bible.
www.ecmarsh.com/lxx/

 

[jsanford108]

Here is what I make use of and a lot more: Online Bible Study Tools.
www.biblegateway.com/
www.biblestudytools.com/
biblehub.com/
www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm
www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm
www.linkedword.com/gen/1/-1/0
Bible Dictionaries.
www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/
www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionaries/
www.studylight.org/dictionaries/hbd/
Ancient Greek Bible Text Online.
codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx
English Translation of the Greek Septuagint Bible.
www.ecmarsh.com/lxx/

I do like many of these sources. I always urge people to keep who their translators are, in mind. For instance, Martin Luther added words to his translation, which then shows up in later translations as well. Just a note for thought. I do like many of your sources though. Well chosen.

 

[CherubRam]

I do like many of these sources. I always urge people to keep who their translators are, in mind. For instance, Martin Luther added words to his translation, which then shows up in later translations as well. Just a note for thought. I do like many of your sources though. Well chosen.

Thank you very much jsanford108. I only want to teach. I hope everyone one will make use of the different sources.

 

[TulipBee]

In timeless spaceless demension of the heavens, there are no 1, 2, and 3. Point A to point B creates space and time. How do you measure 3 isn't 1? How does it work in another demension? Bible tells you something you don't really understand so you you go along with fairy tales