Results 1 - 10 of 10
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | kalos | 178561 | ||
We know what the Bible means by what it says -- not by reading minds or by ignoring the Greek definition of the words being used. If it's true that what the Greek word lust means and what Jesus means are not the same thing, then either Jesus, the Gospel writer, or the translator picked the wrong word, didn't they? How is it that Jesus used a word that did not really mean what he had in mind when he used it? |
||||||
2 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178629 | ||
How do you know what word Jesus used, as He was more than likely speaking in Aramic, or Hebrew. The Greek translation was only used for the publication of the NT, as at that time more people spoke Greek than any other language. To say that Jesus used a word that did not really mean what He had in mind is an insult to Him, and offensive to me. ebrain. |
||||||
3 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | mark d seyler | 178634 | ||
Hi Edwin, We accept the Greek New Testament to be the divinely inspired Word of God. Even if Jesus gave the original Sermon on the Mount in Aramaic, or Hebrew, nonetheless, it is the Greek record that was given to us by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, we consider the Greek words to be authoritative. Rather than believing that Jesus spoke something different than Matthew recorded, and therefore Matthew's record is somehow deficient, I accept Matthew's record, in Greek, to be correct and accurate, and that if Jesus did speak these things in another language, that Matthew, as inspired by the Holy Spirit, gave the correct teaching in the Greek language. I hope this helps to clarify the matter. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
4 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178656 | ||
Hi Mark. Thank you for your post. What is important here is not so much the Greek translation of what Jesus said, but rather His Teaching, what He wished to convey. It is clear to me that He is saying that from the Divine point of view, thinking about it is just the same as actually doing it. The word translated "Lust", used in this verse indicates what is in a man's mind when he is looking at a woman, Which state of mind God judges as being the same as if the man had in fact commited adultery with her. It makes no difference how you interpret the Greek word used, it's meaning in this passage of Scripture is exactly as I have indicated above. To suggest that Jesus did not use the right word, is an insult to Him. To say that the Holy Spirit translated the word used by Jesus with the wrong Greek word, is to insult the Holy Spirit. If as you say the Greek NT, is inspired by the Holy Soirit, then please explain the following At Matthew 26:64 Jesus's words are given as "You have said so", at Mark 14:64, as "I AM", and at Luke 22:70, as "You say that I am". Has the Holy Spirt made a mistake, or is it human error ?. At Matthew 20:20, it is the Mother that asks, whereas at Mark 10:35, it is the Sons that ask. Al four Gospels have different versions of , "the inscription above His head", see Matt27:37. Mark 15:26, Luke 23:38, and John 19:19. Every blessing. Edwin. |
||||||
5 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | mark d seyler | 178666 | ||
Hi Edwin, We could talk about the differences in how the apostles recorded the sign above Jesus' head, and these other things, and I will do that with you if you wish, but before we do that, I would like to know from you: Do you believe that the Greek New Testament was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and as such, is an accurate record of what happened, and what Jesus said, and taught? Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
6 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178720 | ||
Hi Mark. Thank you for your post, asking if I believe that the Greek New Testament was inspired by the Holy Spirit. I believe that there is what I would describe as both Primary, and Secondary Inspiration. Primary Inspiration is responsible for the "Autographs", only, and not the copies, or the translations, and that Secondary Inspiration is applicablt to all three groups. As the autographs are no longer available for study, secondary only needs to be considered here. In my lifetime more that fifty different versions of the English Bible have been published, although a number were only of the NT. Non of these are exact word for word translations, as we do not have the originals, and in any case they are in a different language, I am not however saying that the translators did not have Divine assistance in producing their version. Any Reference Bible, will have marginal notes, and footnotes indicating such things as "Meaning of word unknown", or "The earliest manuscripts do not include", or "can also be translated as", ect, ect. Take for example Mark 16:9-20, which is considered as a later addition. Now have a look at v18, and tell me do you realy think that the Holy Spirit wants christians to put the Lord to the test by drinking deadly poison in order to prove that thay are the real thing, when Jesus who was asked the same question, said "Thou shall not put the Lord thy God to the test".? Now let me explain what I mean by "Secondary Inspiration". The Holy Scriptures whether autographs, copies, or translations are like no other writings in the universe, they are Supernatural, spiritual. and spiritual things have to be spiritually dscerened, the natural man is just not able to understand The Bible, and this is where the Holy Spirit comes in, He causes the man to be "Born again", then the man will say, "now I understand it, now it all makes sense, it's a different book alltogether", oh no it is not, the book is just the same as it has allways been, it's you the reader who havs been changed, and thereby been enabled to understand it. I may say something more on this subject at a later date, but for the time being, I hope the above will help to answer your question. The Lord bless you brother. Edwin. |
||||||
7 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | jlhetrick | 178724 | ||
Hi Edwin, I'm just following along. I follow you up to this comment: "Now have a look at v18, and tell me do you realy think that the Holy Spirit wants christians to put the Lord to the test by drinking deadly poison in order to prove that thay are the real thing, when Jesus who was asked the same question, said "Thou shall not put the Lord thy God to the test".?" I'm not arguing that these verses were or were not in the original; should or should not be in the current versions. But in none of the several versions I consulted did I find them to say or in any way insinuate the understanding that the Holy Spirit expects us to "test God". I believe it's important to take it like it's written, which is, "IF they drink any deadly poison.." It doesn't say "when" and it doesn't say "you should" or "do this in order to". I'm only pointing this out because I thought your argument to be sound up to this point. Jeff |
||||||
8 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178768 | ||
Thank you Jeff. Please refer to my reply to Hank of 7.25 am to-day 10/24/06. Every blessing. Edwin. |
||||||
9 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | jlhetrick | 178782 | ||
Hello again Edwin, I took a look at the post you refered me to. It didn't necessarily address my point but it came closer. You wrote: It was not the Holy Spirit that tempted Jesus, but the Devil, although it was in fact the Holy Spirit who wrote Psalm 91:11-12. It will not be the Holy Spirit who will ask you to drink deadly poison, but a servant of the enemy of God, who will say something like "If you really are a christian, then do this for it is written, ect, ect". The point of my first post was your interpretation of the verse in Mark. Whether or not the verse was original or not wasn't my question. My question was your interpretation of the verse. Your point in discrediting the verse was "do you really think that the Holy Spirit wants Christians to put God to the test by drinking deadly poison." My point was that the verse doesn't say that. The verse doesn't insinuate that. Once again, the verse doesn't say "when" or "drink deadly poison", etc. It says "IF". You might remember that poisoning was a usual way in which people murdered others in that time. If this verse says anything to me, it is that no one will take my life unless God wills it. This is consistent with Isiah 54:17. We agree that there have been very ignorant people as well as false teachers that have used this verse to support some very bizarre practices such as snake handling and such. No insult intended brother, but it appears that you are interpreting the verse in the same way they do. The difference is that after your interprestation you reject it, because you know that it doesn't hold up when compared to the rest of Scripture. This is to your credit. Perhaps I should ask a more specific question. Do you belive that Mark 16:18 is telling Christians to drink deadly poison? If so, is it saying to do this in order to test God? Consider Isaiah 43:2 (NASB95) 43:2 "When you pass through the waters, I will be with you; And through the rivers, they will not overflow you. When you walk through the fire, you will not be scorched, Nor will the flame burn you. This verse does in fact say "WHEN" referring to walking through the fire. How do we interpret this? Or do we throw it out based on your argument? Are these statements symbolic? See Daniel 3: 19-30. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
10 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178861 | ||
Hi Jeff. In your post of 2.06pm 10/24/06, you quote me as saying "It will not be the Holy Spirit who will ask you to drink deadly poison" You then go on to ask me "Do you belive that Mark 16:18 is telling Christians to drink deadly poison?" Please explain why you are asking me a question to which you have allready given my answer? Edwin. |
||||||