The Correct Translation of the Bible

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by Joshuastone7, Feb 26, 2018.

  1. 4,087
    826
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    Greetings all...

    I believe I know what the correct translation of the Holy Scriptures is, and which one we should be using, and I want to share that here with you...

    Okay, so we have received these holy writings down through the ages, through copyist, translation, and physically hand to hand. From of our knowledge of the scribes who transcribed the Hebrew text we know that the process for copying the old wold text was taken very seriously. Each male had to make a copy, allowing for a large volume of text, and each text had to be perfect letter by letter, or it would render the entire scroll useless. This tradition is one that continues down to this day.

    Now, no doubt the same approach was taken with the Christian Greek scriptures because these men were still Jews who also were part of the previously mentioned copyist tradition.

    Now, with that said there are mistakes and errors. I might even confidently say that there are probably more imperfections that creeped into the Greek scriptures then the Hebrew, but we do have precedence of ancient text that we are able to fall back on. The Kumaran texts from the Essenes are one source that give us two thousand year old copies (and some predating even this by hundreds of years) of our modern texts that gives us the opportunity to determine how much the the writings of each we have today had been altered. Their discovery predated any previous text we had by a thousand years...

    Okay, what am I building up too? I could go on and fill an entire post on the old world texts and how they got to us, and the Dead Sea Scrolls and the like, but I would like to get to my point.

    For starters, no translation is perfect. Many are influenced by prejudice as to the context within, balanced by their own interpretation, while others simply make mistakes of translation.

    So, which Bible translation is the correct one?

    The answer is clear, it is a matter of your spiritual progress. The best translation for those needing milk is "any translation". Any Bible to a new one is the correct translation to them. Get them one, it doesn't matter which one. They need the basics of knowledge from God's word, and the correct translation for them is any, for every translation can give a new one truth of our Lords Word.

    Now, as we progress in knowledge, we become more aware of concepts in scripture, and knowledge of how these texts were transcribed, at which point we have the ability to explore different translations to compare why they transcribe differently.

    We also at the point of furthering our knowledge have the ability to study the original languages in order to more precisely understand what we are reading in order to come to a more complete picture of the text.

    Think of this, one starts with a telescope when beginning their journey of discovery within scripture, and this represents the entire palate of Bibles in the world, but as we work our way down to a microscope, we will explore individual text on a grander scale, based on all information available. Yet not everyone needs to study scripture with a microscope, for some the milk of knowledge is enough, and this is why many argue this translation or that translation is a false Bible, because they don't have enough insight to determine the larger picture, and to study why each translation transcribes each text as it does.

    For an example, we are part of a current conversation here: Matthew 27:52,52, and as part of that conversation we will take one scripture and use a microscope to define exact intent of context to the fullest possibility based on all available information world wide, and that is the correct translation, every available scrap of evidence world wide.

    We all have sources for text we use in study, and they vary based on what we are looking for. Many times I start with the original language, then go to Bible Hub where one may enter a single scripture, at which point some thirty different translations of that scripture are presented to compare.

    I could go on with how we allow scripture to speak for itself, and precedence, but I wanted create this thread because the subject came up in one of our other discussions, and this would be a good place for it.

    This is my opinion of the correct translation of the Holy Bible...
     
    ExLuther likes this.
  2. 4,087
    826
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    Here is something further I would like to add...

    There is a point when some will begin to see connections in scripture, when it would be my suggestion to use a single modern translation for this process. The reason I say this is continuity of terms used. Let me offer an example;

    (NWT) Dan 12:11 "And from the time that the constant feature has been removed and the disgusting thing that causes desolation has been put in place, there will be 1,290 days."

    (NWT) Mth 24:15 "Therefore, when you catch sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation, as spoken about by Daniel the prophet, standing in a holy place (let the reader use discernment)"

    (NIV) Dan 12:11 "From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days."

    (NIV) Mth 25:15 "So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniel--let the reader understand."

    So, it is my opinion at that the mid point of ones studies, somewhere between milk and meat of the text one should study a version that will allow them to understand the concepts and connections in scripture, because of their continuity of identities. And if it is us who is helping them, then it might be a good idea to suggest the one we are more familiar with so that they use the terms we use most often.

    So, I've said it before, but I believe the Bible was written to the bride of Christ. Yes, all text is for teaching all mankind, but as we get deep into the context and prophecy, it takes our day to further it's study (IMO). I would even say the last 15-20 years were the most important time in this process. If it weren't for computers and the internet I don't think I would be at the level of study I am in the text. I am by no means saying I am the end all of Truth, nor do I believe I have all the answers, I simply believe I may be useful in Jehovah's kingdom to help others. (I hate feeling the need to explain we don't think we have all the answers. Today someone contacted me saying the very same thing, along with the government is making us eat sacrificed human flesh in our food, using mind control on targeted JW's to control their thinking and actions, and I needed to help him contact the GB to let them know. He said I shouldn't tell them where I learned this information from because he received it from Holy Spirit, but it didn't belong to him. He kept going from manic to depression in his writings, even mentioning threatening others around him, and hoping harm to them, but that he is directly doing Gods will even though the government was making him sin.) (SIGH) o_O

    Anyway, I have come to believe the Bible was written in a manner that could be understood at the proper time. Not to easy that all is discovered long ago, and not to complex to never be understood. I believe before a single word was recorded the ending was seen from the beginning, and was written as it is to be understood at the proper time. After all, as an example, aren't you like me and are amazed every time you hear the story about the Bedouin boy who stumbled on the Qumran texts after looking for his lost sheep, and throwing a stone in the cave to hear pottery shatter? Coincidence? Maybe, but the timing was nice. Perfect timing in the last 2000 years when they could actually be studied, and not lost...

    Now I also wanted to add something else to this thread. The approach I have discovered that the text follows at all times, a Biblical rule or precedence if you will. Text is literal, unless it directly connects itself in a way to prove conceptual.

    Let me offer a couple examples;

    Mth 24:35 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will by no means pass away."

    Now when reading this passage we could believe the earth would be destroyed (as many still do), had we not known the entire Bible, for when we do we have direct connections showing that in fact this is a metaphor.

    2Pt 3:6,7 "By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly."

    Ecc 1:4 "A generation is going, and a generation is coming, But the earth remains forever."

    Therefore we know whenever the text indicates the world will be destroyed, it's speaking of the world of mankind, not the literal earth.

    As well here;

    Jhn 10:30 "I and the Father are one.”

    And now a direct connection elsewhere that explains this text as a metaphor;

    Jhn 17:21 "I pray that they will all be one, just as you and I are one--as you are in me, Father, and I am in you."

    These are examples of Biblical precedence that applies throughout all Holy text.

    Now however, if there is no connection to another location in scripture indicating the context is conceptual, then what is being spoken of is literal. If one follows this precedence in scripture it will never let you down, for it has been my discovery that the Bible follows this process without fail at all times.

    This is how we recognize mistakes in others understandings. As an example, saying 1914 and the tree in Dan 4 represent the throne of David, when there is no connection, only an interpretation. While also someone might say the Trinity is fact because Jesus says he and the Father are one, but they fail to connect precedence in scripture that indicates this statement is metaphoric. This is how we determine others are on the wrong path up the mountain, or have set up camp half way up, because we have made those connections and have moved on...

    Anywho, this was suppose to be just an add on, but now it's the next day...

    Goodnight my friends, and may our Lord guide us all...
     
    SingleCell likes this.
  3. 0
    0
    0
    Earthbound

    Earthbound Guest

    I pulled the latter part of the quote from further in your post, snipping what was between, because they seem to go with one another in raising a question:

    If what you say is true, then how can one fault any doctrines that are built on certain translations. Can it not be said with equal measure that if an appropriate Bible Translation comes down to one's spiritual progress, then a doctrine based on a Bible translation selected for one's spiritual progress cannot itself be held to a higher standard than the level of the translation upon which it was based.

    I know Trinitarianism is an easy target, but, personally, I don't sweat the Trinity debate. Complete non-issue as far as I can discern from the Gentile Christian Bible. I suppose much of that has to do with my research into how the teaching was indoctrinated into the traditions of Christianity. Nor do I believe Jesus is going to turn a "trinitarian" away just because they have a particular view of a "godhead" in order to account for certain aspects of Christian belief if they, in spite of a confusing notion, are faithful followers of Jesus. Let it be so for now. Jesus is going to be looking past all that and peering at their heart, whether it is inclined toward him, whether they have faith and are faithful. Not whether they are right, but whether they are righteous. Every group of followers of Jesus has their own peculiar rafter in their eye that they obviously have no awareness of since they can see past it to make out a splinter in another group of followers' eye, right?

    By way of example, look at how many years passed by during the years of Christianity in the hands of the Gentiles when all men and women knew about God and the Bible was determined and fed by the Papacy the Gentile Christians came to establish in the wake of the dissolution of the world power that carried out Jehovah's Judgment against His covenanted nation in 70CE?

    For centuries, everything the commoners and non-parishioners knew about God, Jesus, and the apostles came from the Papacy. Centuries! Since Athanasius' day, the doctrine of the Trinity was institutionalized and imposed upon believers everywhere. They knew no different, for centuries. Was their faith and worship in vain, these common men and women who knew no better, and placed their faith in the things heard? Today, it's an entrenched Christian tradition, like Christmas and Easter. But I don't view it as any worse or better than some of the unscriptural doctrines of the papacy-like "Governing Body" over the members of the Watchtower organization. Like the apostle Paul said, the divisions must come. He didn't like it, he worried over it, but they were and would be inevitable. The sifting work continues.

    Let me state for the record that I am tremendously appreciative of the ready access we have to the Biblical record! But I also feel we are both blessed and cursed through the availability of these writings today. Blessed because we have personal and ready access to them at any moment, day or night. Cursed, because too often there is an agenda behind a given translation, an agenda driven now by pseudo-Papacies appearing now as translation committees and councils, deciding what the "commoners" should read at this verse, or that verse.

    People should be able to have confidence that when they pick up a Bible— any Bible, it should contain the same message it had when originally written, faithfully and bias-free. While the Masoretes did, indeed, take an exacting approach to the available texts, the Masoretes did not exist before 600CE— some 300 years after the Athanasian Creed became the de facto standard for each and every believer.

    But, again, what are we to think of those who trust in men to provide an understandable translation, and then believe what is written therein, while retaining the belief that men are incapable of altering a letter or iota of scripture?

    Are we to view these believers as inferior in some way— after all, they are placing their faith in the things heard, right? Can we view them as followers of Jesus in the first place, even if they, in their imposed ignorance at the hands of their "shepherds," believe what we know to be erroneous doctrine and yet they are convicted in their faith that they are being obedient as to the Word?

    This ventures more into the topic of canonization, really, but ever since my research days I have always found it humorously remarkable how we, as Christians today, can point to the reliability of the transmission of scripture with the Qumran / Dead Sea Scrolls as an example, appreciating that someone thought them precious enough to preserve, yet at the same time categorically reject the other writings the Essene community valued as much!

    Too, it might be helpful to clarify that the texts among the Qumran scrolls, insofar as our Christian Greek Bible is concerned, did not have among them anything of our "New Testament," unless I am mistaken? Only Jewish writings such as Daniel and Isaiah... pre-Jesus. Someone should verify that, though, as I am trusting my memory, rarely a reliable source, lol!

    This would mean that in establishing the validity and accuracy of the "New Testament" texts, we have to exclude the Dead Sea Scrolls / Essene / Qumran scrolls, since they did not include any of the apostolic letters or even the Revelation of Jesus Christ in their body of sacred writings. Again, if memory serves.

    Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
    Timothy
     
    Utuna likes this.
  4. 4,087
    826
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    A valid question, and I would have to say my impressions are based on a lessor of evils within the world we live in, for an ideal situation would be a single text directly from God in all our own languages, but that's not what we are presented with in our world.

    I will say that I put faith in Jehovah that everyone will have the opportunity to learn about what is really necessary for survival, and that includes all eligible humans throughout history. So if what is necessary to survive is faith in Christ perfect life, dying for our sins, and was raised again, then all Christian denominations teach this. But, I also have faith that they will have the opportunity to learn about his true nature, for most who read Scripture on their own, without outside influence (in my observation) are inclined to understand the uniquely individual nature of Father and son. Now of course this is balanced with their own actions based on their acceptance of Gods rule. (More on that later.)

    Now, "how can one fault any doctrines that are built on certain translations"? I would answer that by saying that doctrines are based on interpretations of the text, rather then the translations of them, the doctrines precede the translations. The level of appropriate translation is directly attached to the spiritual progress of the reader. So therefore as one progresses spiritually they should learn more of what is expected of them in their lives, and this is more important then individual doctrines of any given sect, but that is not the end of it, for one still can believe and yet not survive.

    So this next thought processes is based on your followup here:

    We are saved by our faith in our Lords sacrifice, but are judged based on our actions on Gods right to rule, through our spiritual progress. As we progress in the text we learn of qualifying actions, and it is at that point we become responsible for those actions, where before we were excused of them. So, one can believe, but yet progress enough to understand sin is the direct refusal to except Gods right to rule our lives, and then refuse to act on that, at which point their continued sin is counted against them. We have inherited sin, but it is my belief that the absence of Gods Word, automatically gives them access to the 1000 year reign on earth, in order to learn of Gods right to rule, baring any disqualifying matters.

    Rom 2:14 "For when people of the nations, who do not have law, do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves."

    Doctrines of those who translated each Bible are irrelevant at a certain point of progress, for we are all judged based on our acceptance of Gods right to rule in our life (beyond our faith in Christ), and this is presented in our actions. Doctrine is important in the beginning of our studies, because we have questions, and we want answers to them. What happens at death, what is the nature of God, what will the future bring? These are matters that young ones will encounter, and so doctrine answers these questions, whether they are correct or not. Hence why organizations such as the Watchtower play an important role. This is simply the nature of the world we live in, and I believe was foreseen from the very beginning, and allows for accomplishment of Gods plans.

    Now if someone begins to understand that the doctrines they have been taught are not supported within the text, then the translations that better suit them, are those more inline with what was originally intended to be transcribed in the original language, in which their own doctrine had veered from. But it is my experience that most people who take a path outside mainstay doctrine do so at their own peril, for most appear to fall even further away from truth, rather then benefit from the freedom of information that we have today. Objectiveness seems to be a gift not so readily available in the world. Now whether this also translates into their actions, and acceptance of Gods right to rule their lives, I do not know, that's not usually a subject that's brought up, but I would still say we are judged on our spiritual progress, and our implementation of our current understanding in our lives, especially given the circumstance we learn in.

    I agree that spiritual progress is a non-issue. Our Lord will not turn away ones simply for not having made the step of understanding headship. This concept of the relationship between Father and son is a complex one, just as many other subjects in Scripture, and is simply one of those understandings that come with spiritual maturity. In my opinion.

    Not only this, but it was illegal to believe anything other then what Catholicism taught or you risked your life, for you could be put to death simply by not believing the Trinity. The Catholic church down till this day has actively perused the reversal of the Protestant Reformation.

    A famous example of one who had to hide their spiritual progress was Sir Isaac Newton, who studies of the Scriptures were his main work in life, and had come to the conclusion that the Trinity was in violation of the first commandment. I am in the midst of reading his work on scripture, and hope to have a post on that subject soon...

    It has been my opinion that our Lord knew ahead of time the conditions we would find ourselves in today, before even inspiring the first writings. Hence the conditional arrangement for survival, a sliding scale if you will, based on our own knowledge.

    I am reminded though of the moment I first had the desire to search for truth. I came across a Watchtower at about the age of 16, this now being 27 years ago. The magazine spoke of the New World, and it being made a paradise again. It amazed me, and even though I had believed in God since before I could remember, I had this instant desire to learn more. You see, it's that feeling within our hearts that I believe our Lord looks for. I wouldn't have realized it at that moment, but looking back I can see that he was reading my heart. That was the moment that I had the opportunity to show my interest in Gods right to rule, that question raised in the Garden. Had I not felt as though I wanted to allow God to rule my life, then that would have disqualified me from service, and probably would have certainly led me down a life that would have had nothing to do with Scripture.

    Now, we don't have the ability to offer anyone a perfect translation. Besides the world we live in, everyone is a tower unto themselves, therefore we can't really teach anyone anything. In fact I've seen young ones come here to our forum, on a great path to learn the basics of Scripture, only to veer off into conspiracy theories and teaching of demons.

    So, if faith in our Lords arrival, death, and resurrection is what determines survival, we must also understand that there is a path to death. We both should know and understand that not all, even with faith, will survive. So it comes down to spiritual progress and maturity. If one has come to learn our Lord was resurrected, but yet refuses to believe it, or believes it but yet knowingly lives contrary to Gods right to rule in their lives, as they have come to understand it, then they do not qualify to survive. We are all judged based on our own level of understanding.

    As an example, is one condemned by there fornication? Let's say they are a believer, but yet their spiritual progress had not allowed them to come to the understanding that God restricts such behavior. They survive into the 1000 year reign in order to learn more clearly, and to progress spiritually.

    So all the debates about who's right, and who's wrong, is all frivolous, for it's our spiritual progress and our heart condition that matters.

    This brother, I believe is the true faith...

    PS: I would like to add one thing. Jehovah has always had his prophets on earth, in times of need, and as I've said before, I believe the texts that were inspired, were written to the remaining of Christs brothers on earth, at the proper times to understand the fulfillment's of the events transcribed. Therefore it is only as complex as to be understood in its proper time...

    All love...
     
    Utuna likes this.
  5. 2,942
    318
    83
    Utuna

    Utuna Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2013
    Messages:
    2,942
    Likes Received:
    318
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Hi Josh,

    I believe that those who have a correct understanding of what the Bible says and what it wants us to understand won't be stumbled by mistranslations. God's will is much higher than anything Man can conceive and isn't just the sum of a+b+c+d=e (which is scriptural soup in my opinion).

    As the saying goes : “When a wise man points at the moon the imbecile examines the finger.”

    There are whole reasonings intertwined all together within the Bible's pages and one can easily debunk false beliefs once one manages to get the whole picture, or at least a reliable one even though not complete. Said otherwise, the Bible debunks itself (see example of the Trinity). Besides, at times, it's not just a question of translation and the Bible itself is rife with puns, which means that many other known or unknown meanings are possible.

    In the NT, texts from the OT were quoted from the LXX and the apostles didn't seem to be worried by the differences between them both.
     
  6. 2,942
    318
    83
    Utuna

    Utuna Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2013
    Messages:
    2,942
    Likes Received:
    318
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Hi Tim !

    No translation is perfect because the final result depends on the understanding by the translator of the original language, on his religious bias, on his command of the language of destination and also on what said language enables him to convey (There are words in French that would take a whole sentence in English for a translator to render and vice-versa....).

    There are differences of translation between the English versions themselves and I can see as many differences between the French versions themselves and also between the French and English versions and the same pattern goes on for as many languages you will consider...

    Regarding the Qumran scrolls, during the first century CE, the Middle East was a boiling saucepan on religious grounds and especially the Jewish system. There were Messianic expectations, constant rebellions against the Roman empire (with projections on religious matters) and a growing rejection of the Temple and its priesthood, considered by the orthodox ones as impure and corrupt. Interestingly, John the Baptist's teaching was in line with this religiously seething period since he told people that they could have their sins forgiven through baptism and not through the due sacrifices in the Temple.

    IMO, the Qumran scrolls are the witnesses of the end of a certain period. The Jewish system had come to its "logical" and "natural" conclusion (just like God had intended, Gal 3:24) that is a dead-end and people in general were waiting for something new, something greater... And Jesus came...
     
  7. 2,767
    401
    83
    jehovahisgod

    jehovahisgod Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2013
    Messages:
    2,767
    Likes Received:
    401
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    any work jehovah sends!
    Location:
    statesboro ga
    Friends for many years I used the New World Translation I was partial to it. I know that they have taken great care to ensure that it is accurate as possible. But it's absolutely worthless as a study Bible out in the field if the person's don't like Jehovah's Witnesses! Recently the King James Bible which has always been thought of as the Holy Bible came out with the most wonderful thing the Divine name King James Bible it puts back the name Jehovah and all the places that it should be all seven thousand times!

    And people just don't know what to say when you tell them you have always called the King James Bible the Holy Bible and now that they have put the name Jehovah back in the Bible where it belongs is it now the Unholy Bible to you? That usually humbles them up so much that it starts quite a conversation and I end up having quite a Bible study with the King James!

    I get the opportunity to tell them how King James pulled the name Jehovah out of the Bible and why he did it! And these people get quite a kick out of it when I take them on Google and show them all of King James's boyfriends!
    Another absolutely wonderful Bible is the family recovery Bible which is often used when there is a drug and alcohol problem involved. But I agree with you that any Bible is far far better then no valuable any Bible you can get these people to read and enjoy and study gets the word of God flowing in their mind and in their hearts and starts the renewing process once their mind and hearts begin to be renewed they will automatically seek out the most accurate of God's word. And then they can go out and start some teaching
     
  8. 162
    13
    18
    Imabetterboy

    Imabetterboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2018
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Interesting!

    I don’t think the is any true translation of the Bible! It can be interpreted many ways! And who knows who’s version is correct? Perhaps the one that meets “our criteria” what we THINK is right!.

    I don't know!

    If Your Trinitarian than you slant your version towards supporting that! If you don't believe in a trinity you slant your Bible to support that! If you don’t believe God is a trinity or an angel than you translated to support Jesus is not God or an Angel. If your a Jew you don't translated at all for they believe the NT is false.

    And you translate in all sincerity, believing your right! But are You?

    And what has faith got to do with it? Nothing???
     
  9. 4,087
    826
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    And yet in the end, there's only one right answer.
     
  10. 162
    13
    18
    Imabetterboy

    Imabetterboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2018
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Hi, Joshua!
    And what do you suppose is the one right answer?
     
  11. 4,087
    826
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    That depends on the subject, does it not?

    My post was speaking in general terms of each individual subject.

    Each sentence in the Bible, only has one right answer...
     
  12. 162
    13
    18
    Imabetterboy

    Imabetterboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2018
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Joshua, "generally" each sentence has a right answer to the way the reader see it!

    For example ** John 6:62 What, therefore, if you should see the Son of man ascending to where he was before.

    A simple sentence, but to you, who understand Jesus pre-existed, than you see that as Jesus ascending to heaven.

    However, because I don't understand Jesus had a pre-existence, see it as Jesus ascending from the grave to be again with his disciples as he did for 40 days before his ascention to heaven.

    Almost, all doctrine teachings can be slanted to the belief of the reader. And so what you believe becomes the critera that detimines what the text says.

    One needs to find scriptures that are not ambigious.
     
  13. 4,087
    826
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    I completely disagree with you, each and every sentence only has one right answer. Jhn 6:62 either means what it says, or it doesn't, and hides some other meaning, for some ridiculous reason.

    There is only one right answer...
     
  14. 162
    13
    18
    Imabetterboy

    Imabetterboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2018
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Lols! Of course! It means he came up (ascended) out of the ground to be where he was before he was buried. Among his disciples, before he ascended to heaven.
     
  15. 4,087
    826
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    Ok, if you say so. o_O
     
  16. 162
    13
    18
    Imabetterboy

    Imabetterboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2018
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Joshua!

    No, I'm not realy saying that, I don't know, it is how I understand it! It says one thing to you and another thing to me. And that is because the sentence is ambigious. The word used for ascend is the same to mean, to come up, to rise up, as from a resurrection or to come up out of the water as Jesus did at his baptism. Matt 3:16, Mark 1:8.:)

    The sentence can read perfectlly true to your understanding and it does the same to my way.

    It's because of these abnormalities in the Bible we get all various forms of Christian beliefs.

    Cheers.
     
  17. 4,087
    826
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    I've studied every single Biblically based religion and every individual understandings that I could possibly go through in all my years of study, and the one thing I can tell you with complete confidence is, the Bible is not ambiguous in any way, it does not beat around the bush, and says exactly what it means. It has it's own rules for understanding it, and until you establish those rules you will apply figurative or literal interpretation to wherever you wish, and that is the reason for "all various forms of Christian beliefs."

    In my humble opinion...
     
  18. 162
    13
    18
    Imabetterboy

    Imabetterboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2018
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Joshua! My learned friend! I am pleased you are well versed in all Christians Religions! Not many people can acheive that end considering the thousands that exist!

    However, with all due respect to your high acheivement in that area! To me it does not remove the ambigiuity of Jn 6:62. The only possible way I can see that being resolved is that you have talked to Jesus in person, to have him explain what he meant. (and I doubt that happened)

    But on the other hand the context surrounding Jn 6:62 seems to indicate that he was talking about being resurrected from the grave and that he would resurrect others. Jesus repeatedly said, “...I will raise him (believers) up at the last day. I don't think Jesus was interested in teaching a preexistence, but rather a more important point of being given life by means of a resurrection and if they witness him resurrected after his death and buriel would no doubt give them extreme confidence he was the Messiah..

    But, I am just a Bible student with a strong urge to know truth. Maybe there is another way. I don't know!!!

    I'm all ways wary of those who claim to have special knowledge that others don't have! But I'm prepared to listen.

    Brotherly Love.
     
  19. 4,087
    826
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    826
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    I worded my sentence very carefully to highlight something to you, you did not read it correctly. What was I really saying, that I've learned and studied every religion?

    The meaning was exact, as there was only one right answer, not what you felt I was saying.
     
  20. 162
    13
    18
    Imabetterboy

    Imabetterboy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2018
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    I Thing I understood you correctly.

    To you there is only one right answer,? And I am of the same opinion. But mine differs from yours!:)

    Brotherly love!
     

Share This Page