|
Post by rdlb on Jan 18, 2014 10:17:55 GMT -6
I know it's me but I have read the kjv so much when I read another version I don't feel like I'm reading the Bible. I use Young's analytical concordance to the Bible. Smith Wigglesworth and John G. Lake are men I like to read about. Thanks for the above, I still believe the same but you make a good case.
rdlb, let me ask a stupid question, but humor me. I don't like the niv which is apparent, my question is since they have removed a number of verses, what if they had added a few verses of their own? Would that make the niv invalid as for as scripture? Just asking.
Revelation 22:19 ESV, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
I know Saint John was talking about the book of revelations but that would apply to any book of holy scripture. You are humored. No stupid questions. A thorough study of scriptural origins does indicate the possibility of additions to the scriptures as well as subtractions. It is unfortunate and time consuming to wade through these possible aberrations. It is why I loved my first parallel Bible as I was able to compare scriptural translations to each other. We are blessed with a number of quality web sites that we can use to verify any differences. With the Holy Spirit as our guide He will lead us to the truth. For myself personally I do not use or bother with Joseph Smith's translation, what there is of it, the JWs and even the Living Bible paraphrased, along with the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible. I do not and will not add to the scriptures what is not there, nor will I take away from them. Since you mentioned Young's analytical concordance, I will tell you of an experience I had in college. I took a class "A Literary Criticism of the Old and New Testaments". The Bible we used in the class was "Catholic" although I do not remember the version. While reading Mark 1:40-42 this version verse 41, indicated that Jesus moved with " indignation" put forth His hand. I went home that evening and look up the passage in my Strong's Exhaustive and discovered a problem with the words used in verse 41 and that Catholic version. Splagchnizomai, Strong's #G4697: occurs 12 times and means: to be moved as to one's bowels, hence to be moved with compassion, have compassion (for the bowels were thought to be the seat of love and pity). Needless to say I confronted the instructor after the next class in his office. He said my Strong's was too conservative and I needed to use Young's Analytical as it was more correct. Well he had a copy of Young's in his office so he looked up Mark 1:41. Gee, it matched Strong's and no where did it use the word "indignation". So I asked him, "then why are we using this version of the Bible if that scripture was mistranslated there must be others as well?" He had no answer just use the book I purchased from the book store. I failed in his class as all of my written tests were given an "F", I could not answer but what the Spirit gave me. When I received my final report card, I was given a "D". I guess he did not want me back.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2014 20:40:19 GMT -6
I have thought several times about buying copies of the Gospel of Thomas, the acts of Peter and the Gospel of Mary Magdalene. The Gospel of Mary Magdalene has Taoist and Buddhist concepts presented in the first century Christian Semanantics. Mary answered and said, "What is hidden from you I will impart to you." And she began to say the following words to them. "I," she said, "I saw the Lord in a vision and I said to him, 'Lord, I saw you today in a vision.' He answered and said to me, 'Blessed are you, since you did not waver at the sight of me. For where the mind is, there is your countenance' [cf. Matt. 6:21]. I said to him, 'Lord, the mind which sees the vision, does it see it through the soul or through the spirit?' The Savior answered and said, 'It sees neither through the soul nor through the spirit, but the mind, which is between the two, which sees the vision, and it is...'"
A sample of the Gospel of Mary. I'm not sure I can wrap my brain around that.
All these books can be purchased on Amazon if anyone is interested.
|
|
|
Post by rdlb on Jan 19, 2014 9:01:01 GMT -6
I have thought several times about buying copies of the Gospel of Thomas, the acts of Peter and the Gospel of Mary Magdalene. The Gospel of Mary Magdalene has Taoist and Buddhist concepts presented in the first century Christian Semanantics. Mary answered and said, "What is hidden from you I will impart to you." And she began to say the following words to them. "I," she said, "I saw the Lord in a vision and I said to him, 'Lord, I saw you today in a vision.' He answered and said to me, 'Blessed are you, since you did not waver at the sight of me. For where the mind is, there is your countenance' [cf. Matt. 6:21]. I said to him, 'Lord, the mind which sees the vision, does it see it through the soul or through the spirit?' The Savior answered and said, 'It sees neither through the soul nor through the spirit, but the mind, which is between the two, which sees the vision, and it is...'"
A sample of the Gospel of Mary. I'm not sure I can wrap my brain around that.
All these books can be purchased on Amazon if anyone is interested.
Nag Hammadi Library contains every one of the Gnostic writings found in PDF free download. Elaine Pagels " The Gnostic Gospels" khazarzar.skeptik.net/books/nhl.pdftheknowledgeden.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Gnostic-Gospels.-E-Pagels-1979.pdf
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2014 13:43:54 GMT -6
Thanks, I've saved both of those.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2014 22:39:58 GMT -6
I don't know. I never really thought about it. He is God. I AM that I AM.
|
|