Posts Tagged ‘Pharisees’

Sabbath commandment? How about the Love commandment? Works religion vs. Grace

June 9, 2012
English: Resurrection of Christ

English: Resurrection of Christ (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Jesus violated the rules and regulations set down in the laws of Moses over and over again, and the Pharisees used the Sabbath over and over to condemn even his good works, and picking corn on the Sabbath to eat. Gleaning corn on the Sabbath so you can eat another day –which you did because you broke the Sabbath laws that told you to pick your Sabbath corn the day before– is comparable to taking a job where you have to work on the Sabbath to get your paycheck.

If the Sabbath is or was at an end, there is no good reason to believe that not one of the disciples or even Paul had the guts to come right out and say that the Sabbath day God created was at an end. None of them ever did or taught this and all of them were murdered save John.
Why don’t we see in Revelation woe unto those who keep the false seventh day Sabbath instead of the right one the catholic church made?
 Instead we see the opposite in Rev 22:14 Blessed [are] they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.


It’s amazing how works religions push for the commandments they can handle. But the most important commandments given both in the tablets handed to Moses and from the mouth of Jesus Christ, are the ones nobody talks about when they talk about how you have to keep the law:

Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?

Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

Matthew 22:35 Then one of them, [which was] a lawyer, asked [him a question], tempting him, and saying,

36 Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

IF you don’t keep those two commandments, which are MUCH more important than the Sabbath, then you deserve hell fire and brimstone as much as any Sabbath-violator or Sunday observer, for violating God’s commandments.

That’s why when the rich man came to him in Matthew 10 asking what he should do to have eternal life. It was a lesson to us. Jesus’ response was to list the easier commandments and ask if he had kept them: no “adultery, Do not kill, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and thy mother”.

Check. Check. Check. Check. Check. He kept those all his life. Maybe Jesus left out the Sabbath because he knew something about this young man.

So Jesus pointed to the one commandment he could not keep, to love the Lord thy God with all thy might, and thy neighbor as thyself.

What good is the Sabbath if you break the two greatest commandments every day all day? We all break those two commandments constantly.

Which brings us to Jesus Christ for the redemption of sins.

The Lord’s Day, Sabbath, and the Early Church

June 2, 2012
English: Jesus resurrected and Mary Magdalene

English: Jesus resurrected and Mary Magdalene (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The first day is “the Lord’s day” for a reason. It is not invented. The Sabbath is the last day of the week for sure, our Saturday, and some Christians have been confused on the nomenclature, sure, but it started from the time of the earliest Christians, from the apostles.

In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first [day] of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.-Matthew 28:1

Now when [Jesus] was risen early the first [day] of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.– Mark 16:9

“I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,” Rev 1:10

The reason that the Jews of Jesus day who followed him began to come together for fellowship and praise on the first day of the week was because Jesus had risen that day of the week. This is one of the historical evidences for his resurrection, because the Jews were so, say, fanatical about the Sabbath.

It’s true that our Saturday, the last day of the week, is the true Sabbath from the times and laws of Moses, but the first day of the week is historical.

Read the early church writings (even from 95 AD) about the practice: http://www.bible.ca/H-sunday.htm
God bless the people who compiled those excerpts for the rest of us.

And it is not for nothing that half of the listed incidents of Pharisees criticizing Jesus was all about the Sabbath. Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath.

Scriptural grounds for and against KJBO

February 19, 2012

The points they use against the KJB (‘What about generations past”) exposes their own bankruptcy on that very issue. How do they know which one of these has the “original Greek”? Well, they have their own “priestly scholars”, meaning the scribes and Pharisees they trust to tell them what the Greek means.

That is, they have to pick one and say “That one reference standard proves the KJB is wrong”.

Oh yeah? They can’t prove anything, because they claim that the only acceptable true standard to say XYZ is excactly what the Word of God says, are the long-gone “original autographs”.

Besides, they cannot point to any scripture at all that they can use to say that God would never preserve his word in later eras, in times to come, in a new language. Nor can they point to even one scripture that hints that God would be happy with one hundred “acceptable” variations from his Word to be used to cite “scipture”. Not one.

But I’ve seen enough examples here & elsewhere from people who do know Koine Greek (hundreds, maybe thousands) that even the Greek doesn’t help them.

There’s nothing conclusive on their side but the relevant verses are:

(1) the verses that promise preservation in Psalms,
(2) “Not one jot or tittle shall pass away till all be fulfilled” (*See note),
(3) “God is not the author of confusion”,
(4) No prophecy…is of private interpretation
(5) But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
(6) “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.” (I Corinthians 1:10)

What did Jesus found his church on?

October 21, 2011

Answering dribbles of doubts with the Word of God….

Christianity was not created for many years (centuries perhaps) until after Jesus died.

You might say that the Roman Catholic Church was “not created” as such “for many years”. But “Christianity” as in followers of Christ, that’s been from since Jesus and his disciples walked in the flesh, as you can see from the definitions below.

Jesus Himself did not declare that He was a non-Jew. Notably, He celebrated Passover. He was described by John the Baptist as the Jewish Messiah. So the evidence that He retained his Jewishness until His ascension is plentiful enough, and a very convincing argument can be made along those lines.

Ha. More than that, he was the Son of David, and through Abraham’s seed all the world is blessed. And not only Jesus is Jewish, let’s see who is a Jew?

Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Romans 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

And a common misconception:

And yet the Holy Roman Catholic Church traces its founding to Peter. Peter, whom Jesus specifically spoke of as the one He would build His church on.

The word “church” comes from ekklesia — “the called-out ones”, the body of Jesus Christ. Matthew 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Which church is founded upon the person of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, God Incarnate, who was crucified as an expiatory sacrifice for the sins of the world, arose from the dead to prove victory over death, sin and incidentally Satan, and ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the throne of God, and is coming back soon.

Elsewhere, like Luke 4, the word used is ho synagogue – this synagogue. It is not a translation artefact; why would Jesus Himself not say ‘synagogue’ unless He were contemplating something new, something not-Jewish?


In Luke 4 he was in an actual synagogue, it was not “church”, like he was describing in Matthew 16, which was when the disciples were called from among the world to be separate. “Be ye separate” like it says in Revelation.

2 Corinthians 6:17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

That is what a “church” is. Not those grotesque million-dollar palaces they call “churches”:

Jeremiah 7:4 Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of the LORD, The temple of the LORD, The temple of the LORD, are these.

Of course we can never know…

We CAN know what we are told in the Bible, and it is plenty enough unless you do not receive a love for the truth.

But obviously there are many millions who subscribe to the notion that Jesus was in fact founding a new church, a new religion, a new faith – one that required Jews to be converted. Saint Paul certainly thought so, and he was only barely after Christ, time-wise.

Sorry but Paul didn’t think so. There were a lot of new things to accept — Christ was a “stumblingblock” to the Jews of the day for sure– but Christ was the continuation of the same thing God was doing from Adam on. This is what Paul was explaining in major parts of all his various epistles, especially the book of Hebrews, that it salvation was ALWAYS by grace from the beginning, and Jesus himself said he came as fulfillment of the law and the prophets:

Matthew 5:17 ¶Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Matthew 5:17 ¶Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

So Jesus was the Messiah, and the Jews that “await the Messiah” today are testimony to the fact that Jesus and the apostles were the true Bible-observant and Bible-believing Jews of his day, and the ones that rejected Christ were just more of the same tradition of a rebellious and stiff-necked people. It was Jesus with his disciples who continued the work of the grace of God among the Jews, and then the Gentiles who believed by faith were “grafted” to the “natural” branch, which was by faith anyway.

Acts 7:37 This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.
51 ¶Ye stiff necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

Matthew 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

So the true church of Jesus Christ is the body of believers, and it is built on the foundation stone, the rock Christ Jesus.

Jesus Christ: Freedom from Sin and Shame

June 26, 2010

JESUS CHRIST: FREEDOM FROM SIN AND SHAME

I have read another story with sadness written by a well-intentioned author, who unfortunately shares a lot of the misunderstandings so common in today’s world about what Jesus is all about. As a matter of fact, part of the problem is that one of the greatest sins is the use of the Christian faith to keep people subjugated to arbitrary rules that in the words of Jesus, no man can bear, and laying grievous burdens on people that they themselves would not move with one little finger.

It is an interesting phenomenon that Christians in the United States are leaving their churches but not their faith, because the churches are not meeting their spiritual needs. I’m talking about the ones who continue dedicated, continue in fellowship with other believers, but joining missions that actually put the love of Christ in action for their fellow man, helping them with both their physical needs and sharing the answer to their spiritual yearnings as well.

Jesus said he came not to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved!

I’ll try to help disentangle.

It’s true that the Roman Church and a few protestant churches have used the story of Jesus Christ to “a lot of damage because it has been used throughout the centuries by the Church to make people feel unworthy, guilty, and inherently evil.”

In fact, though, Jesus Christ came to free us from guilt completely, totally, and once and for all. That’s the beauty of it.

And yet despite this fact, people often confuse Christ’s story with the atrocities committed supposedly in his name. Despite the fact that Jesus Christ drove the money-changers out of the temple in Jerusalem at the sharp end of a big bad bull whip, over the centuries the church was infiltrated by avaricious charlatans who whipped up penance by the truckloads for their great cathedrals and their luxurious digs, and now many people conflate the two.

I guess it’s not the only instance in history when people are trying to blame you for the charges racked up to your credit sheet by the imposter. During Martin Luther’s time, the priests around him did not even attempt to look like they paid any heed to their own scriptures, only presenting their false credentials to the poor gullible parishioners.

John Knox, as a Roman Catholic priest, never even knew there was such a thing as a “Bible” until he saw it on a list of banned books. But reading it stirred him up against the crimes committed by the hierarchies.

The idea of “original sin” as some kind of hidden gene that all humanity inherits, as is said was described by Augustine, is the result of theologians with too much time on their hands and too much influence from the ancient Greek navel contemplations. Augustine never let go of his admiration of the practice of following endless intellectual labyrinths, what we used to call discussing “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin”.

It is also a distraction from how it really works. In the real world of sin, shame, redemption and the power of the resurrection, children are born totally innocent. Augustine should have paid attention to the verses where Jesus took the tots to his lap, and said “Except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of Heaven.”

See, little children can do some mischievous things without thinking, but there comes a time during their growing years when they have to begin making choices. Think of it this way: a child is innocent until he is guilty, and then he is guilty. All babies go to heaven without exception. Adults who know better than to whisper that little bit of gossip are a different matter. Great fires are started by the tiniest flames.

In other words, in God’s balance sheet, you pay for your own sins, not someone else’s, not Adam’s.

Now consider this about the Adam story. God gave them a paradise on earth, an easy life, everything they could want or need, and there was only one little itsy-bitsy teeny-weeny tiny rule: Do not eat from that one tree. When they ate from it, they knew it was wrong, and that was the “first sin”. The result was they now knew what it was to do wrong, kind of like Pandora’s box.

From then on, all of us know that there is such a thing as “right and wrong”. The problem with many is they invent intellectual cover for pretending they should not be held accountable for their rights and wrongs, by invoking images of priests in the Middle Ages demanding great sums of money for penance. Sin is not about the burdens placed on gullible followers by big bad brutes and money-changers and Pharisees. It is about what you did yourself.

It’s like the words God spoke about taking care of the widows and orphans in your midst. It’s not about Caesar confiscating the wealth of the realm for the poor, with his own cut in the middle for the tax collectors, it’s about you yourself taking money out of your own pocket and helping the poor yourself. It’s about the Salvation Army giving, not the cover story from Karl Marx imitators.

You know what right and wrong is. You know you have done wrong in your life, no matter what it was. That’s right, “nobody’s perfect”. And inside is your own conviction telling you the universal truth that “whatsoever a man seweth that shall he also reap”. Dirty old clergy don’t matter. But now there is also the knowledge now that we can be free from the burden of that knowledge, completely free!

One can yell all they want about Augustine or whatever else you want, but even those who never heard of Christianity know within themselves that they should not lie for advantage over someone or cheat their neighbor out of his due. How do they know, and how do we know?

But the fact of the matter is, Jesus Christ IS indeed freedom from those sins. The proof of his victory over both your sin, the victory over guilt, and the baggage that comes with it, is in the Resurrection, a fact that is corroborated historically by every objective measure of historical truth that historians themselves apply to other areas of study. Only in this area do they bring their own biases with which to judge it. And yet, history is also full of thousands of skeptics and scholars who set about to disprove it, and being honest researchers, received Christ at the end of their journey.

I am one, after all.

That beautiful hymn, Amazing Grace, is the best showcase example of the power of salvation in Jesus Christ. It is the confession of the worst of scum, a slave trader, who took unwilling Africans into slavery across the Atlantic, who came to Christ. When I found this out, it put an even greater electric charge into hearing that song. “Amazing Grace, How sweet the sound, That saved a wretch like me”.

It testifies to the power of the gospel of salvation to both save a soul, and make the person into a new creature. John Newton went on to mentor the man who gets the credit more than any other for pushing England into eliminating the abomination of slavery in the British Empire. WIlliam Wilberforce has his rewards in both the earth and heaven.

It is the testimony of the onerous sin of the taking of one’s fellow human being for slavery, something that was prohibited by even the laws of Moses.

And that is the power of Incarnation, and the death and resurrection.

If the explanation in this little note doesn’t clarify the matter for you, don’t worry, sometimes it takes time for the cobwebs of diversions of false doctrines, like Jesus said, “traditions of men”, that “make of none effect the commandments of God”.

So remember, the real story and the power it speaks about is what transformed the early Roman Empire, inspiring them to abandon slavery and infanticide, inspired the establishment of learning centers that became our universities, centers for care for the sick that became hospitals,

It is the life-giving manifestation of God’s love that inspired Saint Francis to fight tenaciously against the Crusades, a rare Christian hero to Muslims today. It inspired Santa Theresa to fill the need of the poorest of the poor, taking in the sick and infirm aged who lay dying in the streets of Mumbai, and inspired her to call to account the “leader of the free world” at the time for the treatment of the helpless babes in the womb.

It is not just a nice story but it is a story that turned the mutineers of the Bounty from murderous envious backstabbers into such a harmonious community on the isolated Pacific Island where they were found in later years.

Once accepted, it is the truth that sets you free, the love that brings harmony to mankind.

–Alan

Absalom the first “Communist”

May 8, 2010

There is nothing new under the sun, it says in Ecclesiastes.

They lie to the poor, tell them they’re getting a bad deal whether they are or not, get them mad at the unjust rulers, get them to help you throw them out, and after you take over you can let them know that some animals are more equal than others and anybody who steps out of line is against the “workers” because the new rulers are the only legitimate representatives of the “poor”. (Wink wink, and please don’t notice they got there by robbing the poor in the first place..)

Read about the first such Communist in the Bible, Absalom a son of David. He went for awhile to the gate of the city to as to greet the folks with grievances to David the King, tell them their cause was just, poor them, and how much he would like to be king so he could help all these poor people! All he did was make a mess.

David was the one who cared of course. 1 Samuel 22:1 ¶David therefore departed thence, and escaped to the cave Adullam: and when his brethren and all his father’s house heard it, they went down thither to him.
2 And every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented, gathered themselves unto him; and he became a captain over them: and there were with him about four hundred men.

2 Samuel 15:2 And Absalom rose up early, and stood beside the way of the gate: and it was so, that when any man that had a controversy came to the king for judgment, then Absalom called unto him, and said, Of what city art thou? And he said, Thy servant is of one of the tribes of Israel.
2 Samuel 15:3 And Absalom said unto him, See, thy matters are good and right; but there is no man deputed of the king to hear thee.
2 Samuel 15:4 Absalom said moreover, Oh that I were made judge in the land, that every man which hath any suit or cause might come unto me, and I would do him justice!
2 Samuel 15:6 And on this manner did Absalom to all Israel that came to the king for judgment: so Absalom stole the hearts of the men of Israel.

They have a new catch word, “social justice”. Beware of thieves wearing placards that say “Social Justice”.

They’ll even tell you this is the “Christian” thing, this is what Jesus preached, because like Jesus said of the Phariseesa and the scribes, they are of their father the devil, for he is liar from the beginning.

What they don’t tell you is that Jesus said to take it out of your own pocket, not some other poor schmucks’. And then trusting the tax collectors with it? Jesus made clear that you cannot trust tax collectors with benign compassion for the poor. See here in Matthew 17:

Matthew 17:24 ¶And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?
25 He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.
27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.

–trutherator

What the Bible says about Theology Degrees

May 5, 2010

Seen on the ChristianWorldview yahoo group, an article apparently written by one David Martyn Lloyd-Jones on “The Unsearchable Riches of Christ—Studies in Ephesians”. He is apparently opposed to theology degrees for Christians.

Paul had more degrees from the Sanhedrin than you could count, but he counted it all DUNG to “win Christ”. Yes, I shouted that. Christians often seem deaf to it otherwise.

John 7:15 And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?

Philippians 3:8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

Acts 4:13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.

You get out there and obey and witness and study these things to show thyself approved, it’s the best way to learn the stuff.

And here’s a good tip if you really really want to learn your stuff. Seek out the guy who actually makes a ministry of witnessing, it’s usually two or three or four in a church, if it’s a “good” church, and they carry gospel tracts and literature around. They’ll be the ones who are considered maybe a little funny or awkward by the rest of them.

And then go with them and watch them and help them and accept their mentoring. It’s not just inviting them to church…

Mark 6:7 ¶And he called unto him the twelve, and began to send them forth by two and two; and gave them power over unclean spirits;

Scofield’s Dispensations: Diabolical Deceit

April 29, 2010

Peter talked about “dispensation”, but he’s definitely not talking about Cyrus Scofield‘s version of it.

Scofield’s “dispensations” were not Paul’s “dispensations”. Scofield’s dispensations were a total “confidence” scam, just like the guy himself, having spent time in prison for one scheme. They should have locked up his Darby perversion of the word in the cell with him, and thrown away the key, together with this false dispensationalism and this false “pre-trib rapture”.

Paul’s dispensations are pure grace, grace, grace, as in the verses he penned all through his epistles.

AND Paul made clear in Hebrews 13 that the shining saints of the Old Testament were all saved by faith in Jesus Christ, and faith alone, and that their works were /fruits/ of their faith.

Included in that famous list of FAITH is a guy who gave his wife to the Pharoah as his sister, the wife who disbelieved God’s word that she would bear a son in her old age, a material-minded Esau, the deceiver Jacob, the impatient Moses kept back from the Promised Land for his act of disobedience, and so on.

Who can doubt that Enoch, Abel, Noah, and all their best works put together, came short of the glory of God? Jesus told us if we do /ALL/ that we are commanded, we are still “unprofitable” servants. (Luke 17:10) Does that sound like someone who /deserves/ salvation based on their works?

“Lest any man should boast!”

Sure, there is a sense in which it became more evident after Jesus Christ came in the flesh, the whole law, set up for works, is only our /schoolmaster to bring us to Christ/. Paul couldn’t make more plain that the whole purpose of the OT, the laws and the prophets, the whole thing, was to show us there was NO WAY we could earn salvation.

There are things that are different after Christ, whence The law came by Moses, but grace and truth by Jesus Christ. God’s expectations of us are now both much less and much more. Much less in terms of Do this, Don’t do that, Eat this, Don’t Eat That, and so forth, and much more in terms of the new commandment Jesus gave us, and the emphasis on the two first and greatest commandments.

English and Bible Versions: God is Not the Author of Confusion

April 26, 2010

One interesting bit is from a Shakespeare web site:
http://www.shakespeare-online.com/biography/shakespearelanguage.html
where we find this little paragraph:

“.. By about 1450, Middle English was replaced with Early Modern English, the language of Shakespeare, which is almost identical to contemporary English….”

…thus presenting us with another voice that says we do not need a proliferation of “versions” today.

I suspect though that just like our English was stabilized by the universal and daily use of “The Holy Bible” over centuries, so the language of the Bible in Hebrew stabilized that language.

It is indisputable that the quick adaptation of the KJB in the 17th century and its ubiquitous use throughout the English-speaking world has kept the language itself stable through time and across geographies.

Somebody wrote once in debate on this:

“> Languages change, and translators are fallible.”

Just translators? How about prophets, kings, fugitive Egyptian princes, shepherd boys, beloved physicians, converted Pharisees, tax collectors, and fishermen, and the rest of the common folk who God used to put quill to canvas?

He wasn’t sure what my point was, so I clarified:

“Okay, spelled out, those are only a partial list of all the fallible people who put to paper the first-draft and the final editions of the “original autographs” in the Bible that we all agree was THE INERRANT word of God at that time.”

So the argument against a “translation” that has proven itself against all comers, including spurious criticisms that Jesus warned us against in Matthew 23:24. The Pharisees had traditions of men for making the word of God of none effect, straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel when it came to “interpreting” it, but now, since knowledge has increased and evil men wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived, we have better stuff! We have “translations”!

God is not limited to “original” languages, and he proved it in Acts 2. He did it again in 1611.

I believe in translating it, but if they’re doing the “dynamic translation” thing instead of the “formal translation” thing then they are off track and missing the mark of the highest calling of God.

Like taking the phrase “white as snow” and making it “white as wool”? That’s taking away from and adding to, that’s not translating!

If we encounter a new word in a book, we can just look it up in a dictionary or consider the context. If a translator ahs trouble finding a suitable word, then just use the original word, a transliteration, or better yet, a word borrowed from English, the indisputable de-facto international language today.

We have thousands of imported words in English, why rob those who speak other languages of the same blessings?

Better than ‘dynamic’ translations would even be a direct translation of the KJB!

>What Acts 2 proves is that God is perfectly able and willing where appropriate to put his word in any languages he so pleases to do, and he is not limited by the wise pontificating of Pharisee school graduates indoctrinated way beyond their faith in his promises to preserve his word.

He has limited himself to preserving his word without confusion. “God is not the author of confusion”.

Not only “by their fruits ye shall know them”, and we can see the fruits of disbelief in the modern versions. For example, he did not produce two “original” Old Testaments in Hebrew, just one. The other one is not.

So Acts 2 shows is that he is NOT the author of confusion. To drive home the point, when it comes to getting the word of God into tongues, Paul wrote I Corinthians 12, speaking directly about the gift of tongues that we read about in Acts 2.

1 Corinthians 14:27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

Alright class, pop quiz: How many do the “interpret” thing?

All of the complaints from modern version advocates about the English of the KJB, ALL of them, apply TEN TIMES MORE to Koine Greek and Solomon’s Hebrew. Those languages are DEAD, they are MUCH older than English.

–trutherator

KJB English is for the 21st century

April 23, 2010

KJB critics complain about “archaic language”, and they say that the Bible was written in living languages at the time. But how would they know they were “not archaic forms” any more than the KJB is?

I suspect though that just like our English was stabilized by the universal and daily use of “The Holy Bible” over centuries, so the language of the Bible in Hebrew stabilized that language, and the Greek of those days as well.

NOT the other way around. They certainly didn’t need to “revise their versions” every twenty years. Thank God they couldn’t anyway.

I’ll bet the Hebrew in the Masoretic wasn’t the street talk of those days, especially the Psalms, the Proverbs, the Song of Solomon, Job, Jeremiah and the prophets, and rest of it too.

Modernists can jump up and down about how “poetic” Genesis One is so they can avoid a six-day Creation, then they turn around and say the rest of has to be in conversational English for this decade.

Here’s one quote:

“> Languages change, and translators are fallible.”

Just translators? How about prophets, kings, fugitive Egyptian princes, shepherd boys, beloved physicians, converted Pharisees, tax collectors, and fishermen, and the rest of the common folk who God used to put quill to canvas?

God is not limited to “original” languages, and he proved it in Acts 2. Seems like one overeducated intellectual thought Acts 2 is on his side of the fence, probably going to say something about getting the word of God into the languages people speak. God did it in 1611.

What Acts 2 proves is that God is perfectly able and willing where appropriate to put his word in any languages he so pleases to do, and he is not limited by the wise pontificating of Pharisee school graduates indoctrinated way beyond their faith in his promises to preserve his word.

All of the complaints about the English of the KJB, ALL of them, apply TEN TIMES MORE to Koine Greek and Solomon’s Hebrew. They are MUCH older than English, and we see from history that the self-important Pharisaical tendencies of over-educated intellectuals get them tripped off into rabbit holes.

–trutherator