Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Gen 22:6How did old Abraham tie his son? | Gen 22:5 | martia | 80764 | ||
Gen.22:6 I would like to know how Abraham tied his son up .No mention was made of a struggle and Abraham was old.What did he use?Leather strips? | ||||||
2 | Gen 22:6How did old Abraham tie his son? | Gen 22:5 | Biblebeliever | 80810 | ||
Simple: His son was a type of Jesus Christ and Abraham a type of The Father.Did Jesus put up a fight?Both sons laid down their lives willingly.Read John 10:18 in your old KJV to see this.Also notice the KJV's wording in Genesis 22:8 "God will provide HIMSELF a lamb".22:9 Isaac is bound and laid on the wood like Christ on the cross.22:13 The sacrifice has a crown of thorns! I don't know how much of this you'll find in another translation,but I know it's in my KJV. | ||||||
3 | Gen 22:6How did old Abraham tie his son? | Gen 22:5 | Morant61 | 80815 | ||
Greetings Biblebeliever! Gen. 22:9 NIV - "When they reached the place God had told him about, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood." NASB - "Then they came to the place of which God had told him; and Abraham built the altar there, and arranged the wood, and bound his son Isaac, and laid him on the altar on top of the wood." KJV - "And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood." ASV - "And they came to the place which God had told him of. And Abraham built the altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar, upon the wood." RSV - "When they came to the place of which God had told him, Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar, upon the wood." NRSV - "When they came to the place that God had shown him, Abraham built an altar there and laid the wood in order. He bound his son Isaac, and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood." NKJV - "Then they came to the place of which God had told him. And Abraham built an altar there and placed the wood in order; and he bound Isaac his son and laid him on the altar, upon the wood." NET Bible - "When they came to the place God had told him about, Abraham built the altar there21 and arranged the wood on it. Next he tied up22 his son Isaac and placed him on the altar on top of the wood." I guess this is in all of the translations! ;-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
4 | Gen 22:6How did old Abraham tie his son? | Gen 22:5 | Biblebeliever | 80833 | ||
I noticed that you only used verse 9 to back up the new carts(2 Sam.6:3). Why didn't you mention the other portions that were mentioned?LIKE VS.9 you old rascal!? NIV "God himself will provide the lamb".Merely providing A lamb.NASV "God will provide FOR HIMSELF the lamb".Now HE is not THE LAMB provided for sin,but provides it for himself.I guess God needed an attonement for his sin here huh? NKJV"God will provide FOR HIMSELF the lamb".Your using the old James White "hope they don't catch my slight of hand" trick. But this Satanic messing with the blood attonement is typical for false bibles.The NIV and NASV remove the blood of Christ from Col.1:14 so that THE BLOOD isn't what saves a man.In Acts 8:35-38 the eunuch has the following words ripped out of his mouth when trying to get saved "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God"!!! And when Philip tells him what MUST TAKE PLACE before baptism "If thou believest with all thine heart,thou mayest."These words are taken to show the eunuch getting saved by water! Don't call yourself a Christian and tell me that all this satanic garbage is O.K. with you. And don't be decietful and think I won't catch it. I was reading an NASV back in 1976 when you probably didn't even know JN.3:16 yet.You need to get right Brother. | ||||||
5 | Gen 22:6How did old Abraham tie his son? | Gen 22:5 | Morant61 | 80871 | ||
Greetings Biblebeliever! First of all, you really need to calm down my friend! You don't know me, yet you accuse me of deception and of not being a Christian. :-( What gives you the right to say those things? Secondly, there was no attempt to deceive. You made mention of Isaac being tied down in the KJV. I simply listed all of the other translations of that verse. Further, I was leaving for work, so I didn't have time to list every verse in the chapter. :-) Thirdly, I was familiar with John 3:16 by about 1970. ;-) Though, back then, I was reading the KJV. Finally, before I go into the examples you cite, allow me to ask you a couple of questions. 1) How was the Textus Receptus put together? 2) How many manuscripts were used in putting the text of the TR together? 3) What was the age of the manuscripts used in putting together the text of the TR? 4) What was the theory used in evaluating manuscripts when putting together the text of the TR? Allow me to answer these questions. 1) Just like Greek texts today, the TR used a variety of Greek manuscripts and made textual decisions when those manuscripts disagreed with one another. 2) The TR was based upon 6 primary manuscripts. 3) None of these manuscripts were older than the 12th century. 4) The textual theory used was to count the manuscripts. If 5 manuscripts agreed in a reading, those 5 must be right. Now, why is this relevant to this discussion? Simply this: We now have literally thousands of manuscripts. Why would the TR be the most accurate Greek text, when it was only based upon six manuscripts, all of which were copies almost 1,200 years after the originals? We now have thousands of manuscripts, some of the dating back to only a couple of hundred years after the originals. This is why modern translations disagree with the TR in some places. (By the way, they all agree far more often than not!) For instance, you mention Col. 1:14. Some manuscripts include the phrase 'through his blood' and some don't. Why is it Satanic to choose one over the other? How would you choose? Why wasn't the TR satanic when it choose one reading over another? Textual choices are made all of the time. I may not agree with each and every one, but the modern Greek texts have the advantage of vastly more evidence than did the TR. They also have older manuscripts than did the TR. Now, if you want to carry on a polite discussion about this issue, I would be more than happy to do so. But, I will not tolerate name calling or personal attacks. I have never, ever, filed an abuse report on anyone, but I will if this kind of attitude continues. I have no problem with the KJV. I grew up reading it. Many of the verses I have memorized, I memorized from the KJV. But, none of the translations are right all of the time - and this includes the KJV. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6 | Gen 22:6How did old Abraham tie his son? | Gen 22:5 | Biblebeliever | 80925 | ||
An "abuse report"? are you kidding? You should try sitting under some real preaching for a while to shed that candy coating Brother.I take it your not used to people talking straight with you.#1 The Authorized version did not only use the Receptus,but the Majority of manuscripts.#2 Dear Brother,who really cares about this manuscript garbage? Doesn't it bother you inside to see "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God" removed from your bible? Doesn't the New Man inside you quiver even just a little to see the preciouse blood of Jesus Christ removed from Col.1:14? If your MORE disturbed and offended by MY ATTITUDE than these things being attacked in the word of God,or yourself being attacked than the blood and diety of Jesus Christ being attacked then we certainly have no more to talk about.Prov.27:5"Open rebuke is better than secret love." Prov.27:6"Faithful are the wounds of a friend;but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful." | ||||||
7 | Gen 22:6How did old Abraham tie his son? | Gen 22:5 | Morant61 | 80931 | ||
Greetings Biblebeliever! I am used to straight talking my friend, but I am not used to Christian brothers being rude. Hopefully, I never will become accustomed to that! Was I rude to you? I asked you in another post about how the text of the Textus Receptus was arrived at. Did every single manuscript used by the Textus Receptus agree exactly on every point? If not, how were the readings decided upon? My desire is to see the text be as accurate as it can be. So, I am not offended by textual choices as long as they reflect the best possible evidence. For instance, you cite the example of Acts 8:37. Without going into all of the details, it is clear that some manuscripts include this verse, while others do not. Why do you automatically assume that those which do include it are accurate, while those which do not are inaccurate? On what basis do you make this decision? If someone disagrees with your choice, why would you assume that they are attackig the Word of God? Which reading is the Word of God? If all of the manuscripts included Acts 8:37, and someone removed it anyway, I would agree with your point. But, many manuscripts do not include it. Therefore, a decision has to be made. The general thinking is that there would be no reason to remove Acts 8:37 if it were original, but there would be reasons to add it if it were not. Therefore, most translations today leave it out. You can agree or disagree with their decision, but they have only done exactly what you have done when you decided that it must be original. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
8 | Gen 22:6How did old Abraham tie his son? | Gen 22:5 | Biblebeliever | 80943 | ||
This will probably be my last response. I am still shocked (I mean this) that those things that I mentioned have no effect on you one way or another. You have to admit that you do not have A BIBLE that you can hold in your hand and believe totaly.You have to examine the manuscript evidence available and decide did God really say this or not??How this must hurt your Christian joy not just being able to pick up a book and rest on the preciouse promises of God! There is always a doubt.Is this a scribal error? Is this passage a gloss? Is this WORD FOR WORD what God said to me? I couldn't live like that.I know you think I'm wrong.I'm undoubtedly wrong about alot in life.Will you please pray about these things? | ||||||
9 | Gen 22:6How did old Abraham tie his son? | Gen 22:5 | Morant61 | 80963 | ||
Greetings Biblebeliever! Thank you for the gentler tone my friend! Allow me to touch upon your points, and if I have misunderstood you, please let me know. It sounds to me like you believe that there is one 'real' text in existence out there somewhere. Which one is it? We literally have thousands of manuscripts, and not one of them totally agrees with any other one all of the time. Even the texts used by the TR differed with one another. So, how do you think that the text of the TR was established? Erasmus made decisions based upon the manuscripts which he had available (not very many). Sometimes, the manuscripts he had did not even include large portions of Scripture, so He 'made up' whole Greek passages by working backwards from the Latin. I know that it is difficult to accept for many my friend, but there is no 'offical' Bible. There are thousands of copies, but no originals. This is not to say that we cannot know what God said. I believe in inerrancy and inspiration. I believe that God protected His Word. Even though the manuscripts differ in many places, most of the differences are minor issues. What I have been trying to get you to realize is that the KJV was produced in exactly the same manner that modern translations are produced. The only difference is that modern scholars have vastly more manuscripts to consider than did those during the time of King James. So, the evidence is greater for the modern texts. Is there doubt? There is always doubt my friend. Even if we had an 'offical' Greek and Hebrew text, that text must still be translated. Translators are only human. Anytime you pick up a translation, you are relying on the ability of those who translated the text, and upon the ability of those who made the textual decisions about the text, and upon the ability of those who made the copies of the manuscripts. Yet, through all of this, God's Word lives. But, God's Word is not the KJV translation, nor is it the NIV translation. God's Word is the original words penned in Hebrew and Greek by the inspired authors. I hope we get to know one another better and interact more in the future my friend! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||