Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | Morant61 | 217810 | ||
Greetings Makarios! Interesting question my friend! I did a little checking, and I could not find any evidence that there is a manuscript question involved. It appears that some just simply mistranslated the word entirely - for some reason. Here are some sample comments about Is. 14:12: Clarke writes: "But the truth is, the text speaks nothing at all concerning Satan nor his fall, nor the occasion of that fall, which many divines have with great confidence deduced from this text. O how necessary it is to understand the literal meaning of Scripture, that preposterous comments may be prevented! Besides, I doubt much whether our translation be correct. heilel, which we translate Lucifer, comes from yalal, yell, howl, or shriek, and should be translated, “Howl, son of the morning;” and so the Syriac has understood it; and for this meaning Michaelis contends:" Barnes indicates that 'lucifer' comes from the Vulgate. Keil and Delitzsch comment: "Lucifer, as a name given to the devil, was derived from this passage, which the fathers (and lately Stier) interpreted, without any warrant whatever, as relating to the apostasy and punishment of the angelic leaders. The appellation is a perfectly appropriate one for the king of Babel, on account of the early date of the Babylonian culture, which reached back as far as the grey twilight of primeval times, and also because of its predominant astrological character." Let me know if you find any more info about the manuscripts. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
2 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | Makarios | 217837 | ||
Greetings Tim! Good point about the misinterpretation of 'morning star' in Isaiah 14:12: it is not associated with the fall of Satan. Many do believe that this is a 'dual reference' to Satan, but there is no real way to prove that through Scripture. I have searched for Textus Receptus manuscript information about Isaiah 14:12 and, aside from a bit of misleading KJV Onlyism stuff, did not find any substantive information to lead anyone to believe that the rendering of "Lucifer" originated any earlier in history than the Vulgate. It could be that this misinterpretation survived from the Vulgate to the KJV and only with the modern translations is now sufficiently corrected. I myself have always favored translations based on the NU/Alexandrian manuscripts more so than the Textus Receptus, in which Erasmus himself completed by copying the last 7 verses or so of Revelation right out of the Vulgate. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
3 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | Vintage68 | 217841 | ||
Hi Makarios Your statement about Erasmus sounds as though he is not to be trusted. Therefore, would you be so kind as to provide a brief synopsis concerning the difference between these two translations. I have provided sort of a parallel to make it easier.:-) KJV The Revelation 22:15-21 15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie. NAS 15 Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying. KJV 16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. NASB 16 "I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star." KJV 17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. NAS 17 The Spirit and the bride say, "Come " And let the one who hears say, "Come " And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who wishes take the water of life without cost. KJV 18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: NAS 18 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; KJV 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. NAS 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. KJV 20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. NAS 20 He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming quickly " Amen Come, Lord Jesus. KJV 21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. NAS 21 The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all. Amen. Vintage68 |
||||||
4 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | Makarios | 217846 | ||
Greetings Vintage68! If you would like to learn more about Erasmus and the Textus Receptus, here are a few good articles: http://www.scriptorium.org/articles/faqs/faq_0032.html http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/TR.html http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ERASMUS.PDF http://www.bible-researcher.com/kutilek1.html (*) As for my comment about the last 7 verses of Revelation, please see paragraph 5 (from the top) of the link in which I have placed a (*). This will explain what I mean in more depth. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
5 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | DocTrinsograce | 217847 | ||
Dear Makarios, Let's hasten to say that Erasmus was a learned man, but that his doctrine always and ever reflects the Romanist position. Therefore, anyone seeking truth from the Scripture alone, will discover a different authority in Erasmus. Martin Luther wrote to Erasmus, "I myself openly concede that to you, which I never did to any one before:- that you not only by far surpass me in the powers of eloquence, and in genius, (which we all concede to you as your desert, and the more so, as I am but a barbarian and do all things barbarously,) but that you have damped my spirit and impetus, and rendered me languid before the battle; and that by two means. First, by art: because, that is, you conduct this discussion with a most specious and uniform modesty; by which you have met and prevented me from being incensed against you. And next, because, on so great a subject, you say nothing but what has been said before: therefore, you say less about, and attribute more unto "Free-will," than the Sophists have hitherto said and attributed: (of which I shall speak more fully hereafter.) So that it seems even superfluous to reply to these your arguments, which have been indeed often refuted by me; but trodden down, and trampled under foot, by the incontrovertible Book of Philip Melanchthon "Concerning Theological Questions:" a book, in my judgment, worthy not only of being immortalized, but of being included in the ecclesiastical canon: in comparison of which, your Book is, in my estimation, so mean and vile, that I greatly feel for you for having defiled your most beautiful and ingenious language with such vile trash; and I feel an indignation against the matter also, that such unworthy stuff should be borne about in ornaments of eloquence so rare; which is as if rubbish, or dung, should he carried in vessels of gold and silver. And this you yourself seem to have felt, who were so unwilling to undertake this work of writing; because your conscience told you, that you would of necessity have to try the point with all the powers of eloquence; and that, after all, you would not be able so to blind me by your colouring, but that I should, having torn off the deceptions of language, discover the real dregs beneath. For, although I am rude in speech, yet, by the grace of God, I am not rude in understanding. And, with Paul, I dare arrogate to myself understanding and with confidence derogate it from you; although I willingly, and deservedly, arrogate eloquence and genius to you, and derogate it from myself." In Him, Doc |
||||||
6 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | alex39 | 217860 | ||
What did he (Luther) say? (Can someone translate into the venacular? I think he was admonishing Erasmus but I'm not sure????) By the way, did Luther write his anti-semitic works before or after he believed? I don't know his dates of importance, but the work known as The Little Black Book sounds like he's (supposedly) christian but he sure hates the jews, and is all for destroying them off the face of the earth. I do know that he wanted the first 4 chapters of Luke omitted because it was too jewish, so I put him in the same category as Origen. What am I missing? Why is he so revered when he totally ignores the entire letter of 1 John. That letter basically boils down to - if there is hatred in your heart, then the love of God is not in you. What am I missing here, concerning Luther and his anti-semitism? Did he not write those things attributed to him? Alex |
||||||
7 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | DocTrinsograce | 217863 | ||
Hi, Alex... Luther was, in a nutshell, saying that Erasmus wrote well, but was teaching false doctrine. Very briefly we might say it like this: "Erasmus, your writing is like fine gold-trimmed china and expensive silverware... but you serve up manure on it." All great men of the faith have flaws. I remember Professor Calhoun of Covenant Seminary saying, "When we look at Oliver Cromwell, we should not ignore the wart on his nose... but neither should we study it to the exclusion of all else." We should look at historical figures in the light of the culture and period of history within which they lived. May the future be as gracious to us! Interesting that you chose those particular issues concerning Luther. There are at least three others that I find much less excusable from the vantage point of five centuries later. :-) Textual criticism is the particular specialty of Bible scholars. The canonicity of specific books will never cease, until the Lord returns. Actually, there is much value in that study. We have far greater confidence in the canon now then ever before. (Ephesians 4:11-17) As to His "antisemitism" this is a brushing of paint that applies to all believers, especially those who base their authority on Scripture alone. As a Jew, this is something that I have carefully considered, especially after the Lord graciously saved me. I do not find Luther saying anything more scathing than what we find in the Scriptures themselves. I think that Stephen sums it up very well as he finishes his exposition of Jewish History up to and including the tribunal that was sentencing him to death. "You men who are stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears are always resisting the Holy Spirit; you are doing just as your fathers did. Which one of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? They killed those who had previously announced the coming of the Righteous One, whose betrayers and murderers you have now become; you who received the law as ordained by angels, and yet did not keep it." (Acts 7:51-53 NASB) From the largely Gentile perspective of modern Bible readers, these words lose their acidity. Believe me, they are harsh and denunciatory. Much more so by a people who held themselves in such high esteem. See their reaction in verse 54. In a world that confuses respect for beliefs with respect for people, we will be continually criticized, condemned, and censured for saying the same things that the Holy Spirit has said in the Word. In Him, Doc |
||||||
8 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | alex39 | 217885 | ||
Thank you Doc, for explaining further the quotation you used. I was pretty sure I understood it, but... I can agree with you about looking at the times and culture of people when we read their works. We are all given different levels of understanding and light (individually and as generations) - but, how hard can it be to understand the simple words of John in 1Jn. 4:8 "He who does not love does not know God..."? Didn't Jesus say somewhere (in the language of today), "If you cannot love the guy down the street whom you can see and touch, how can you love God, whom you cannot see and touch?" I'm sorry, but I cannot make and accept excuses for someone who claims christianity and fosters hatred in his heart for a people, any people (and even more so when the object of that hatred is God's chosen people.) But I do thank you for answering me. Alex |
||||||
9 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | DocTrinsograce | 217890 | ||
Hi, Alex... Where exactly have you read that Martin Luther fostered "fosters hatred in his heart for a people, any people (and even more so when the object of that hatred is God's chosen people.)" I have read a lot of the Reformers, and I do not see them stating anything that Scripture does not already state. Perhaps I have missed something. Would you cite your sources, please? In Him, Doc |
||||||