 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Does 1 John support the Trinity? |
| Yes, 1 John completely supports the Trinity. (please explain). |
|
33% |
[ 1 ] |
| No, 1 John does NOT support the Trinity at all. (please explain) |
|
66% |
[ 2 ] |
| 1 John is contradictory on the subject of the Trinity. (Please explain) |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Not sure whether I believe in the Trinity or not and here's why: |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Rocket
House Cat
Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 156
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 2:18 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Pagan belief is still in effect today. It is a religion just like any other, you either believe it or you don't. I don't.
I also know that Yeshua didn't believe it either, so why do we have many of the Pagan beliefs in Christian churches today? Why do we use the word Easter for Resurrection Day? I know that for a long time I prayed on Good Friday at the 3 P.M. hour because that was when I learned Yeshua died. Now I question it, because the Bible says Yeshua was to rise in 3 days. Friday afternoon He died, so Friday nite to Saturday is 1 nite, Saturday is 1 day, Saturday nite is 2 nites, so where are the 3 days. Doesn't anyone ever question what the churches teach? Did you know the word Easter comes from a Pagan Goddess named Ishtar? Where does Lent come from. Yeshua never taught Lent. What about Christmas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1968
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
luvnlife,
Hi, 
There are two scriptures in your original post that should be addressed.
| luvnlife wrote: | | 1 John 3:16Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. |
Actually "of God" was added as it doesn't appear in the original language.
NWT 1 John 3:16 By this we have come to know love, because that one surrendered his soul for us; and we are under obligation to surrender [our] souls for [our] brothers.
Literal IN this WE-HAVE-KNOWN THE LOVE seeing-that that-one for-the-sake-of US THE soul OF-Him lays-down also WE ought for-the-sake-of THE brothers THE souls to-lay-down
| luvnlife wrote: | | 1 John 5:7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. |
Many Bibles don't contain those words as they are understood to be a spurious addition.
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dust
Growing Lion
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 894
Location: All over the western U.S.
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| luvnlife wrote: | | Why are there so many versions with such varying messages? Which bible is the most trustworthy, true-to-form bible? |
I've asked the same question.
My answer came by application of faith in God. I'm not talking about faith in my own personal beliefs. I am talking about taking an honest look at how, through-out history, God has helped man come to know Him. How He has helped man come to know the actual one and only true God.
For hundreds of years, and for many many people during that time, the KJV was the only version of the Bible readily available to those seeking God, and for those spreading the word of God to the world. These folks are the very folks to whom God is faithful.
So God was faithful to these Christians for hundreds of years in providing them with His word. It is God's faithfulness to these Christians, who's fruit is evident even now, that I align my faith in the KJV of God's word. Not necessarily discounting all other versions, but rather using the KJV as the hallmark to which all other versions must comply.
_________________
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Luvnlife
Lion King
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 1200
Location: US
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dust said: | Quote: | For hundreds of years, and for many many people during that time, the KJV was the only version of the Bible readily available to those seeking God, and for those spreading the word of God to the world. These folks are the very folks to whom God is faithful.
So God was faithful to these Christians for hundreds of years in providing them with His word. It is God's faithfulness to these Christians, who's fruit is evident even now, that I align my faith in the KJV of God's word. Not necessarily discounting all other versions, but rather using the KJV as the hallmark to which all other versions must comply. |
Dust;
Thank you for your response.
My problem with what you said though is this:
Reading the KJV is what prompted me to start this thread. See, 1 John seems to go back-and-forth with the idea that Jesus is God and Jesus is Gods son. Reading in other translations (such as the Interlinears) it is clear that some things were mysteriously omitted in the KJV in an attempt, I guess, to prove the idea of the Trinity.
Look at the verses in the first post on this thread. They are all from the KJV bible. The contradictions in these verses are what made me pose this question in the first place.
Luv  
_________________
Matthew 6:21
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Biblegateway Christian Viewpoints |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dust
Growing Lion
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 894
Location: All over the western U.S.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hello luvn,
| luvnlife wrote: | | Reading in other translations (such as the Interlinears) it is clear that some things were mysteriously omitted in the KJV in an attempt, I guess, to prove the idea of the Trinity. |
luvnlife, you have a particular view of the 'trinity' that you do not agree with. If that view is really what the KJV translators had in mind to put-forth, don't you think they could have been a little more clear?
In my research I do not see the KJV translators trying to overtly nor covertly trying to prove the idea of the trinity, in as much as they were trying to arrive at the most accurate English translation possible. They translated primarily from the Greek Textus Receptus and utilized various other biblical versions printed in various other languages to help determine the best and most-accurate English translation. I doubt that the more modern English translations utilized the same compilation of biblical texts as used by the KJV translators, thus accounting for many differences. The NWT, for instance, as I understand, is not translated from the Textus Receptus (the primary source for the KJV) let alone utilizing the multi-lingual secondary biblical texts as used by the KJV translators.
Why does it have to be the KJV thats tainted? Do you think your prefered translations are exempt from such a thing? I certainly dont.
And what about all those folks, seeking after God, and spreading His word, who for hundreds of years only had the KJV readily available to them? I think those were/are God's children to whom He would make His word available, just as he has made His word available to this generation of His children. Oh it's a bit more complicated now.....but seek and ye shall find!
I think you would do well to put your faith in God's faithfullness to all his children, not just those of this particular generation who have received a copy of the NWT or any of the other translations that, as you have pointed out, contradict the KJV.
P.S. Im glad you pointed out the opposing differences between the KJV and the NWT, I would've gotten flack.
_________________
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Luvnlife
Lion King
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 1200
Location: US
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dust said: | Quote: | Why does it have to be the KJV thats tainted? Do you think your prefered translations are exempt from such a thing? I certainly dont.
And what about all those folks, seeking after God, and spreading His word, who for hundreds of years only had the KJV readily available to them? I think those were/are God's children to whom He would make His word available, just as he has made His word available to this generation of His children. Oh it's a bit more complicated now.....but seek and ye shall find!
I think you would do well to put your faith in God's faithfullness to all his children, not just those of this particular generation who have received a copy of the NWT or any of the other translations that, as you have pointed out, contradict the KJV. |
The point is not, Dust, that all the other translations differ from the KJV as far as the verses I cited. Some are the same or close to the same as the KJV.
It might interest you to know that the KJV is and has been my 'preferred' version. Its the one I have read most of my life.
However, there are contradictions in the KJV.
John 4:1 says 'Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.'
In other words, God wants us not just to read but to question and understand.
Many, many verses in the bible state that Jesus is the son of God. Then there are those few that seem to point towards Jesus BEING God. It seems logical to compare the KJV with the Interlinear bible, doesn't it?
Dust said: | Quote: | | I think you would do well to put your faith in God's faithfullness to all his children, not just those of this particular generation who have received a copy of the NWT or any of the other translations that, as you have pointed out, contradict the KJV. |
Thank you for the advice but I do have faith in God. It's man I question.
Luv
_________________
Matthew 6:21
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Biblegateway Christian Viewpoints
Last edited by Luvnlife on Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:02 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JB
Grizzly Bear
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 738
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| When it comes to the twelve tribes of Israel as is spoken of in James 1 there are three conflicting views. My suggestion for you is to ask Yehu what He thinks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Luvnlife
Lion King
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 1200
Location: US
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JB wrote: | | When it comes to the twelve tribes of Israel as is spoken of in James 1 there are three conflicting views. My suggestion for you is to ask Yehu what He thinks. |
Why??
Luv
_________________
Matthew 6:21
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Biblegateway Christian Viewpoints |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dust
Growing Lion
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 894
Location: All over the western U.S.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| luvnlife wrote: | | Many, many verses in the bible state that Jesus is the son of God. Then there are those few that seem to point towards Jesus BEING God. |
And there-in lies the centuries old controversy. Any understanding of this, I think, can only arise from a position of confidence in God's word.
| luvnlife wrote: | | It seems logical to compare the KJV with the Interlinear bible, doesn't it? |
I myself would use any biblical resource as secondary to the historically established authority of the KJV.
| luvnlife wrote: | | God wants us not just to read but to question and understand. |
Indeed, but understanding comes after faith. So, in this era of multiple bible versions, you do well to search-out which are worthy and which are not. As I previously pointed out, the KJV was the only bible version available to God's children for hundreds of years. This is an indication that God approved the KJV.
Also, common sense dictates that if God goes through the process of writing and compiling His word over a thousands-of-years period, then He intends to deliver that word to His children.
As it is here in our time we do have spurious versions readily available to us, along with authoritive versions, but we also have the instance of the KJV being the only version readily available to the body-of-Christ over a hundreds-of-years period, thus establishing the authority of the KJV, and providing todays body-of-Christ certain discernment based upon what God provided to the historical body-of-Christ.
1 Corinthians 2:15
But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one [he can read the meaning of everything, but no one can properly discern or appraise or get an insight into him].
_________________
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Luvnlife
Lion King
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 1200
Location: US
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dust: | Quote: | | I myself would use any biblical resource as secondary to the historically established authority of the KJV |
What did the scholars who translated the KJV use as their reference/source?
Why would you not trust or believe the source that was used in interpreting/translating the KJV?
Why would you not question inconsistencies in the KJV and explore further?
Dust: | Quote: | | Indeed, but understanding comes after faith. So, in this era of multiple bible versions, you do well to search-out which are worthy and which are not. As I previously pointed out, the KJV was the only bible version available to God's children for hundreds of years. This is an indication that God approved the KJV. |
I have faith. It's not blind faith, though. I choose to follow the directive of the bible and seek out answers rather than just accept that which contradicts itself.
Dust: | Quote: | | Also, common sense dictates that if God goes through the process of writing and compiling His word over a thousands-of-years period, then He intends to deliver that word to His children. |
Once again, I will assume your comment was not meant to be offensive or insulting. I do have common-sense and common-sense tells me when something doesn't make sense, it requires further investigation/study.
Luv
_________________
Matthew 6:21
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Biblegateway Christian Viewpoints |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dust
Growing Lion
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 894
Location: All over the western U.S.
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| luvnlife wrote: | | What did the scholars who translated the KJV use as their reference/source? |
My study indicates these scholars used the Greek Textus Receptus as their primary source, utilizing biblical text of various other languages as secondary sources, in an effort to develop the most accurate English rendering.
| luvnlife wrote: | | Why would you not trust or believe the source that was used in interpreting/translating the KJV? |
I use a lexicon for clairification from time to time.
| luvnlife wrote: | | Why would you not question inconsistencies in the KJV and explore further? |
I have investigated what others preceive to be inconsistencies, especially those dealing with the Father/Son/HolySpirit concept. I've debated this concept in-depth with Judaic believers, who, on the surface, denounce this concept vehemently. However, Judaic beliefs in The Logos are quite deep (and yes, they do believe in the Logos). Though they will not freely admit it, their concept of The Logos is quite similar (if not identical) to the concept of The Logos as put-forth by John....at least up to the point where John says.....'and the Word became flesh'. Although I personally have not had any doubts as to the consistency of God's word as presented to me in the KJV (this based purely on faith in the power and providence of God), it's through investigation into the meaning of The Logos, that I was able to expanded my knowledge on the subject. Fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, as it is written.
| luvnlife wrote: | | I have faith. It's not blind faith, though. I choose to follow the directive of the bible and seek out answers rather than just accept that which contradicts itself. |
Hmmm....I am not trying to be insulting, but I am sorry luvnlife, I am not buying it. How can you possibly believe in something you see to be inconsistent? Logically, the only answer to this question is that you choose to believe what you want to believe and throw the rest out. Do you see the folly in this? Try not to feel insulted, I am speaking to the situation.
| luvnlife wrote: | | Once again, I will assume your comment was not meant to be offensive or insulting. |
Good, I suppose, from a certain POV my comments can seem a bit pointed and harsh.
I do agree with your comments on common sense.
_________________
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1968
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Have better manuscripts been discovered than those on which the textus receptus was based?
During the three and one-half centuries since the King James Version was made dozens of manuscripts have been found that were copied many centuries earlier than any manuscript used by Erasmus. The manuscripts he used were copies of copies of copies of copies of copies. When material is copied a number of times by hand, extra words and phrases generally find their way into the text in the course of copying and occasionally the eye of a copyist may jump from one word of a phrase to a similar one, and thus omit something or perhaps copy it twice. |
The KJV is a fine Bible. But I agree with luvnlife that where there are inconsistancies we should look to the original language source.
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dust
Growing Lion
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 894
Location: All over the western U.S.
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Have better manuscripts been discovered than those on which the textus receptus was based? |
Better by who's standard?
Apparently not God's.
God put the KJV into the hands of his English speaking children, who used it almost exclusively for hundreds of years to spread the gospel around the world. Currently we have much easier to read English versions, which are written in modern-day dialect, but the exclusivity of the KJV over such a long period of time (a time in which the fruit produced is highly evident in the spreading of the gospel), allows us to discern that God approved the KJV, giving it full authority over all other available versions both past and present. It makes logical sense that God would do this for us, so we would not have to wonder about the authority of the various versions.....of course this logic comes after faith in the almighty power and providence of God. God spent thousands of years developing His written word, He has not left those of faith, here in the latter times, in a lurch wondering which version has His full authority. God's invisible power and providence in this can clearly be seen, and understood from the discernable history of the KJV from it's inception to this very day.
Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
_________________
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1968
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 4:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dust,
The KJV is a fine Bible. But I agree with luvnlife that where there are inconsistancies we should look to the original language source.
With your human reasoning, you would make the KJV inspired in its translating, without questing its accuracy.  Do you call that reasonable? There is no reason to believe that. Like all translations, it contains errors. Most are not critical. The KJV does contain errors, especially when compared to the earlier copies of manuscripts then the KJV translators used.
Your last post is yet another end around reasonable logic, or common sense, used here. You are in effect encouraging "instead of using common sense just trust the KJV because it has been around for a while". 
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
knuckle
Young Wolf
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Posts: 501
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 4:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi All------------
Luv,Jesus is called God's son in some instances because that is who He is.In other instances He is referred to as God because that is the office He holds.
Here is a picture of it
Gen 44:18 Then Judah came near unto him, and said, Oh my lord, let thy servant, I pray thee, speak a word in my lord's ears, and let not thine anger burn against thy servant: for thou art even as Pharaoh.
Was Joseph Pharaoh?No but as governor the position given to him in Egypt those who hungered came to see him,not Pharaoh.
Father gave Jesus this same position over all creation.
In the targums(Aramaic translation of the Hebrew scriptures the people of the day had),the idea is expressed as the Memra--The Word of John 1--
it is how the Jews(not knowing the Father/Son relationship) rationalized how this huge omni present God could appear to man in one specific place yet still be everywhere else at the same time.There are places in the Hebrew scriptures where it appears as if there are two YHVH.The problem is the Jews worshiped One True God.
Gen 19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
here is the transliteral
And Yahweh rains on Sodom and on Gomorrah sulphur and fire from Yahweh, from the heavens.
here we have God speaking to Hosea in the third person
Hos 1:7 But I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the LORD their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen.
I hope this helps
much love---------knuckle |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
