26 Feb 17
Originally posted by MarshallPriceNot really sure about what you're driving at.
As an unbeliever, I place no divine value in The Bible. But I understand that many people do and I have no qualms with that in and of itself.
In any case, if I were to believe a book was divinely inspired, why wouldn't I want it preserved? If I were to believe that it was the word of God, I would want it to be as preserved as possible. The means of ...[text shortened]... d be secondary to the content, which would be the word of God.
Just my two cents on this bit.
According to the scriptures God inspired and preserves His Word. Man is only the instrument.
26 Feb 17
Originally posted by SuzianneIn principle I agree, but how the scriptures are preserved isn't a matter of inspiration per se. It has more to do with the method of preservation than by direct inspiration.
If man can be inspired to write the words down, other men can be inspired to preserve it.
Preservation is accomplished by the method of the multiplicity of copies, and by whom it is entrusted to keep the record.
In the whole world is there not a more comprehensive documentation of anything related to God's involvement in human history than what we find in God's Word. Contrary to popular understanding the sheer volume of a precise record of God's Word dwarfs any other single record compiled by man regarding any event or person in human history. In fact, man made historical information is dubious and open to question as evidenced by varying accounts not verifiable by more than just a few authoritative historians. Whereas the preponderance of exact copies of the original autographs is witnessed by and attested to by hundreds if not thousands of Godly men and women throughout history.
Everything else produced by man to the contrary is merely a cover-up designed to drown out God's Word, including corrupt translations.
26 Feb 17
Originally posted by FMFNo.
Aren't [b]all Bibles (that are in English) the "Word of God in English"?[/b]
Change the words and the meanings change. It's a copyright issue. Modern translations require that they contain a percentage of difference to obtain a copyright. It's about the money.
Flexibility not dogmatism is key to understanding this issue. I personally adhere to the concept that the KJV is inerrant, but I also reference as many sources as needed to come as close to the knowledge of the truth as my flawed understanding will allow.
In the end I am true to my faith. As yet I am not perfected.
26 Feb 17
FMF: Aren't all Bibles (that are in English) the "Word of God in English"?OK, so which Bible are "the Word of God in English" and which Bibles are not? You have already claimed, specifically, that the KJV is the Word of God in English. Are there any other versions that are too? Which versions of the Bible, by contrast, are not "the Word of God in English" in your view?
Originally posted by josephw
No. Change the words and the meanings change. It's a copyright issue. Modern translations require that they contain a percentage of difference to obtain a copyright. It's about the money.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSome education ?
Some education is sorely needed.
Although none of the extant Greek New Testament manuscripts contain the Tetragrammaton, scholar George Howard has suggested that the Tetragrammaton appeared in the original New Testament autographs,[9] and that "the removal of the Tetragrammaton from the New Testament and its replacement with the surrogates κυριος ...[text shortened]... ngs of the Church Fathers".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton_in_the_New_Testament
" ... It is not for you to know times times or season which the Father has set by His own authority.
But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and unto the uttermost part of the earth." (Acts 1:7,8)
The Lord Jesus instructed the apostles that they would be HIS - [Jesus Christ's] witnesses.
You are mustering up every bit of intellectual ability merely to rebel against this. Christ you reject. Christ's teaching you also reject. And Christ's command to His apostles you reject to the uttermost. This is your saying "No! We are JEHOVAH's witnesses !!"
All you have done in this "could be" evidence and such and such was suggested, is just your rebellion against the new covenant. All I saw was some "maybe, maybe" grasping at straws.
Your religion, in saying "We are Jehovah's Witnesses here to tell you Jesus Christ is an arch-angel Michael," is just your going door to door in revolt proclaiming -
"We do not want this man to reign over us." (Luke 19:14)
26 Feb 17
Originally posted by FMF
OK, so which Bible [b]are "the Word of God in English" and which Bibles are not? You have already claimed, specifically, that the KJV is the Word of God in English. Are there any other versions that are too? Which versions of the Bible, by contrast, are not "the Word of God in English" in your view?[/b]
Originally posted by sonshipSubstituting the usual emotionalism that has led to an abject ignorance among Christians, Its ok you don't need to study, just shake your tambourine and clap your hands, pathetic!
[b]Some education ?
'This means everlasting their taking in knowledge of you the only true God and of the one you sent forth, Jesus Christ' - John 17:3 which every child of Jehovah witnesses knows by heart.
Indeed no rolling about church floors, no snake dancing, no happy clappy tambourine prancing about for us, just pure waters of life and Biblical truth.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhereas knocking on doors handing out what is basically a religious comic book and trying to convince people that if they join your pernicious religious organisation they will be able to play with the hand drawn lambs and tigers on the front cover...is the apotheosis of apostolic mission work?
Substituting the usual emotionalism that has led to an abject ignorance among Christians, Its ok you don't need to study, just shake your tambourine and clap your hands, pathetic! ....no happy clappy tambourine prancing about for us, just pure waters of life and Biblical truth.
Originally posted by FMFIt's not that.
You suggest that not all versions of the Bible are the "Word of God" and yet you are unwilling to give any examples of versions that are not?
It's just that I'm unwilling to subject myself to your interrogation.
I will not answer any further questions without my lawyer present.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
27 Feb 17
4 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSubstituting the usual emotionalism that has led to an abject ignorance among Christians, Its ok you don't need to study, just shake your tambourine and clap your hands, pathetic!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strawman much.
How long are you going to depend upon these tried and true stereotypes you've leaned on for years, to rationalize teaching "another Jesus" ?
So there is a conspiracy theory here. Paul should have known to write in Hebrew YHWH everywhere before Jesus ?
'This means everlasting their taking in knowledge of you the only true God and of the one you sent forth, Jesus Christ' - John 17:3 which every child of Jehovah witnesses knows by heart.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But look at the FRUIT of all the teaching these children have gotten. Thier heart is cold, suspicious, aloof, distant, concerning the Lord Jesus Christ .
I know John 17 too. I even put the entire chapter to song and sing it. Many of us love the name of Jesus. You JWs are BOTHERED by the name of Jesus.
This is because something is wrong.
You are being taught "another Jesus" for sure.
Indeed no rolling about church floors, no snake dancing, no happy clappy tambourine prancing about for us, just pure waters of life and Biblical truth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is comfort in stereotypes and blanket generalizations.
All this to justify your being deceived to suspicion the Son of God, in favor of the "another Jesus" the Jehovah's Witnesses want to teach you.
27 Feb 17
Originally posted by josephwIt's just a single straight forward on-topic question about a claim you have made in a public arena.
It's not that.
It's just that I'm unwilling to subject myself to your interrogation.
I will not answer any further questions without my lawyer present.