Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    47,925

    Default SINCE WE ARE ON THE TOPIC -

    "Trust...but Verify"

    Ronald Reagan



    Anything told by man, assembled by man or written by man needs verification for a number of reasons. One is imperfection. No matter how well intentioned...you know the rest. Second is a potential for a hidden agenda. Anyone that has studied history will know that power has always used religion for its own uses. Any work of theology driven by an emperor or a king should be doubly tested because as we know now...even the most well intentioned leader still has his own agenda.

    So no...I do not accept what any church leader tells me. I will find out for myself. If I can. And if I cannot I will stay with the theme of the story, and if a detail seems out of place I will ignore that detail and chalk it up to those imperfect agendas of history. The other thing is this best said by Shakespere in Hamlet.

    “There are more things on heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

    Geneva Bible -

    The Geneva Bible is one of the most historically significant translations of the Bible into English, preceding the King James Version by 51 years. It was written powerfully and matter of factly. King James despised the revolutionary and “seditious” Geneva Bible. He thought the Geneva Bible's study notes on key political texts threatened his authority, so he outlawed it and ordered a new translation of the Bible – the King James.

    How many American Churches use the Geneva Bible?


    The Ethiopian Bible -

    It’s nearly 800 years older than the King James Version and contains 81-88 books compared to 66. It includes the Book of Enoch, Esdras, Buruch and all 3 Books of Maccabbee, and a host of others that were excluded from the KJV.


    They were written on goat skin in the early Ethiopian language of Ge’ez. Carbon dating, however, gives a date between 330 and 650.

    So.......
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,761
    History if full of examples where people use whatever is available to have their own way. Using the Bible is no different to using any other thing in this life if the person just wants their own way.
    Now, if a person genuinely wants to know God; what He is like, what He loves, what He hates, why He does what He does, etc..., well then, a lot of translations will get that person to where they need to be.
    It all depends on the person.
    I was born for a storm, and a calm does not suit me. - Andrew Jackson

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    8,688
    Trust but verify is one of my favorite Regan quotes. Another of my favorites is from Jefferson: "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."

    Even consider the time and place something was written. It could give clues to why they decided to write or word something. If it was a hostle environment to the ideas being passed on I would expect it to be tonned down on paper for deniability with the intention of giving the real reasons in person. Like tradecraft.
    Geek Warlord
    Dungeons & Dragons & Deadlifts

    Muscle Wizard Casts: Fist


    CRG-1 DPS
    CRG-2 CRG x 2
    SGF-1 Shotgun Gunfighting
    Trauma care under fire
    Spetsnaz Sniper
    HRO-5 Terrorist & Active Shooter Interdiction
    HRO-6 CQB: Fighting in Structures
    CRG-4 Force on Force
    HRO-5 Terrorist & Active Shooter Interdiction - 3 day
    TWOTU edition
    Trauma Medicine for the CCW Operator
    Pistol Ground Fighting (Taint Shooting Progressions)

    TWOTU since May 2015

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    921
    Wouldn't mind grabbing a copy of the Geneva Bible. I don't use the King James for precisely the reasons mentioned, because you're certainly not wrong, someone can misuse the Bible. That doesn't make it non-authoritative or a particular codification of the canon wrong, it makes the one who misuses it an idiot (and possibly worse).

    I must note that there's an implied false equivalency between age and reliability. The fact the Geneva Bible is older than the King James Version doesn't make it better, and the fact the Ethiopian Bible is older and contains a lot more books doesn't make it better.

    To be clear, my point in the other thread wasn't to say one translation or another is better than another but simply to make the point about the sufficiency and authority of Scripture. Arguments over translations can be helpful (many times are not), and arguments over which collection of canon is in fact canon are more important. But that wasn't the point.

    ETA: Bearing in mind meaning of words, meaning in context, and context more generally are necessary parts of understanding any text, including the Bible. We must simply be careful to exegete rather than eisegete the Scripture.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,675
    It probably makes most sense to read the texts in the original language in which they were written, and to add in a good dose of historical and cultural context to understand what they *actually say*.

    The problem is bad enough with modern languages across culture: there are some things I could say or write in Haitian Creole that simply wouldn't translate without context, and the fact is that even if you had the context and might "get the gist" of the phrase, it still won't "hit" the same way that it does for a native speaker - and that doesn't take into account regional linguistic nuances.

    That problem is exponentially worse when you add oh, I dunno, 2000 years between writer and reader - and it is further exacerbated when your translator is either a committee with dubious and questionable education and intentions, or was commissioned by such a committee.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Beyond The Wall
    Posts
    47,925
    Quote Originally Posted by Faramir2 View Post
    I must note that there's an implied false equivalency between age and reliability. The fact the Geneva Bible is older than the King James Version doesn't make it better, and the fact the Ethiopian Bible is older and contains a lot more books doesn't make it better.
    Maybe...and maybe not...but as I recall from my studies (I was once going to be a pastor...before I realized that hating as many as I do disqualified me), the Nicean gang (and that is what they were) included only those books in the NT who either knew or interviewed people who knew Christ. So perhaps they DID think age was equivalent to value...or perhaps the closer a text was to the time of the event...the more correct it was. So...do the math
    Gabriel Suarez

    Turning Lambs into Lions Since 1995

    Suarez International USA Headquarters

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    921
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel Suarez View Post
    Maybe...and maybe not...but as I recall from my studies (I was once going to be a pastor...before I realized that hating as many as I do disqualified me), the Nicean gang (and that is what they were) included only those books in the NT who either knew or interviewed people who knew Christ. So perhaps they DID think age was equivalent to value...or perhaps the closer a text was to the time of the event...the more correct it was. So...do the math
    Contemporaneity to Christ is about reliability of the book's author, whereas the matter of "how old is the translation and how long before another was it put together" presumes accuracy purely by how long ago it was put together, which leaves the false equivalency in place. Two different concerns, although neither is wholly irrelevant. And that leaves aside the fact that the Geneva and KJV issue is about reliability of translation of a certain approved canon, while the Ethiopian Bible is a different canon altogether. Yet another issue.

    My point is simply that the logic you've apparently relied on is unsound. Yeah, some translations are better than others, but that just doesn't have anything to do with the reliability of a certain purported canon or the method by which that canon was put together, and neither does the age of the canon or translation, standing alone.
    Last edited by Faramir2; 09-29-2021 at 04:02 PM.

  8. #8
    Shannon Hogan's Avatar
    Shannon Hogan is offline Suarez International Affiliate - Salt Lake City
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Northern Utah
    Posts
    1,201
    Here you go: Makes one ponder all the other books that were not included for whatever reason. Thanks Gabe for bringing up the older books. I will look into them! I hear that the Catholic Bible has other books not included in the KJB.

    22 Lost Books Referenced in The Bible


    Below is a list of the books that the Bible references, or tells us to look at, that are lost forever. A few have pseudepigraphical (fake copies that claim to be the original) versions, but none have the original versions. Note that many conservative Bible scholars would argue that even though these books are referenced or quoted, none of them were intended to be a part of the canon of the Bible.
    Book of the Wars of the Lord – “Therefore it is said in the Book of the Wars of the LORD, “Waheb in Suphah, and the valleys of the Arnon, and the slope of the valleys that extends to the seat of Ar, and leans to the border of Moab” (Num 21:14-15)
    Book of Jasher “And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar?” (Joshua 10:13). Also referenced in 2 Samuel 1:18.
    Manner of the Kingdom – “Then Samuel told the people the rights and duties of the kingship, and he wrote them in a book and laid it up before the LORD. Then Samuel sent all the people away, each one to his home” (1 Samuel 10:25)
    Acts of SolomonNow the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written in the Book of the Acts of Solomon?” (1 Kings 11:41)
    Chronicles of the Kings of Israel – “And the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, how he warred, and how he reigned, behold, they are written in the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel.“ (1 Kings 14:19). This book is also referenced in 1 Kings 16:14, 1 Kings 16:20, 2 Kings 1:18, 2 Kings 14:28
    Chronicles of the Kings of Judah – “Now the rest of the acts of Rehoboam and all that he did, are they not written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah?” (1 Kings 14:29)
    Book of the Kings of Israel – “Now the rest of the acts of Jehoshaphat, from first to last, are written in the chronicles of Jehu the son of Hanani, which are recorded in the Book of the Kings of Israel. (2 Chronicles 20:34). This is mentioned on many occasions, though under a more expanded name, as the Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel, see 2 Chronicles 16:11, 2 Chronicles 27:7, 2 Chronicles 32:32, and etc.
    Annals of King DavidJoab the son of Zeruiah began to count, but did not finish. Yet wrath came upon Israel for this, and the number was not entered in the Chronicles of King David.” (1Chronicles 27:24).
    Book of Nathan the Prophet, Book of Gad the Seer“Now the acts of King David, from first to last, are written in the Chronicles of Samuel the seer, and in the Chronicles of Nathan the prophet, and in the Chronicles of Gad the seer.” (1 Chronicles 29:29). In this case, it appears as though these three books are all written by real prophets, bringing up interesting questions. One apologist has hypothesized that perhaps these three separate books were at one point composed into our contemporary books of Samuel, this is plausible but there is no way to confirm this.
    History of Nathan the Prophet“Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, from first to last, are they not written in the History of Nathan the prophet, and in the Prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the Visions of Iddo the seer concerning Jeroboam the son of Nebat?” (2 Chronicles 9:29).
    Prophecy of Ahijah“Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, from first to last, are they not written in the History of Nathan the prophet, and in the Prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the Visions of Iddo the seer concerning Jeroboam the son of Nebat?” (2 Chronicles 9:29). The question here is whether Ahijah was a real prophet, and if so, why his books are lost, if not, why they are referenced in Scripture.
    Visions of Iddo the Seer“Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, from first to last, are they not written in the history of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the Visions of Iddo the seer concerning Jeroboam the son of Nebat?” (2 Chronicles 9:29). This is also mentioned in 2 Chronicles 9:29. Also the same question as above can be posed, if Iddo was a real prophet, then why are his books lost, if not, why they are referenced in Scripture.
    Iddo Genealogies“Now the acts of Rehoboam, from first to last, are they not written in the records of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer, according to genealogical enrollment?” (2 Chronicles 12:15)
    Story of the Prophet Iddo – “The rest of the acts of Abijah, his ways and his sayings, are written in the Story of the prophet Iddo.” (2 Chronicles 13:22)
    Book of Shemaiah the Prophet“Now the acts of Rehoboam, from first to last, are they not written in the records of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer, according to genealogical enrollment?” (2 Chronicles 12:15).
    Book of Jehu“Now the rest of the acts of Jehoshaphat, from first to last, are written in the Chronicles of Jehu the son of Hanani, which are recorded in the Book of the Kings of Israel. (2 Chronicles 20:34).
    Story of the Book of KingsAccounts of his sons and of the many oracles against him and of the rebuilding of the house of God are written in the Story of the Book of the Kings. And Amaziah his son reigned in his place. “(2 Chronicles 24:27)
    Acts of UziahNow the rest of the acts of Uzziah, from first to last, Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz wrote.” (2 Chronicles 26:22). This appears to be a lost book written by Isaiah the prophet.
    Acts of the Kings of Israel“Now the rest of the Acts of Manasseh, and his prayer to his God, and the words of the seers who spoke to him in the name of the LORD, the God of Israel, behold, they are in the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel.“ (2 Chronicles 33:18)
    Sayings of the Seers – “And his prayer, and how God was moved by his entreaty, and all his sin and his faithlessness, and the sites on which he built high places and set up the Asherim and the images, before he humbled himself, behold, they are written in the Chronicles of the Seers” (2 Chronicles 33:19). In most Hebrew manuscripts “Seers” is replaced by the name “Hozai.”
    Laments for Josiah – “Jeremiah also uttered a lament for Josiah; and all the singing men and singing women have spoken of Josiah in their laments to this day. They made these a rule in Israel; behold, they are written in The Laments.” (2 Chronicles 35:25)

    fulminis instar "Like thunderbolts, fast as lightning."
    Hogan Clan motto.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by Faramir2 View Post
    Contemporaneity to Christ is about reliability of the book's author, whereas the matter of "how old is the translation and how long before another was it put together" presumes accuracy purely by how long ago it was put together, which leaves the false equivalency in place. Two different concerns, although neither is wholly irrelevant. And that leaves aside the fact that the Geneva and KJV issue is about reliability of translation of a certain approved canon, while the Ethiopian Bible is a different canon altogether. Yet another issue.

    My point is simply that the logic you've apparently relied on is unsound. Yeah, some translations are better than others, but that just doesn't have anything to do with the reliability of a certain purported canon or the method by which that canon was put together, and neither does the age of the canon or translation, standing alone.
    Bolded: You are gaslighting here, whether intentional or not. Gabe asked questions, made statements of personal convictions, and posted interesting facts. Never mind your confused argument, the gaslighting is unacceptable in rational discussion.

    Rest of the above post: The discussion was about translations AND canon, part of the overall discussion that the Bible we have, while the best we know, has been heavily edited over the millennia. The rest, no offense to you personally and I hope I misunderstand you, is poppycock. Age of canon, translation versions and errors, all must be considered when researching and evaluating the validity of ANY historical work, to include Scripture.

    I don’t understand your point other than maybe trying to posit that none of this matters as Scripture is enough?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sparks, NV
    Posts
    235
    The church I attend believes in a 100% inspiration / infallibility in the original writings, it does not teach that translations / variants are inspired or infallible. It's been documented that most translations / variants are 98 -99% true to the original 5300+ known original documents

    Numerous bible versions are available on the youversion app. I use it all the time. As well as a couple of the devotionals. It's a free app and not very many ads at all.

    We were just talking about the "lost books" and how the protestant canon came to be 66 books in the class I attend last night.
    Last edited by USN-PO2; 09-29-2021 at 07:53 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •