Results 1 - 18 of 18
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | Ray | 101484 | ||
Hi compudex. I am sorry that my last post sounded argumentative. May I assure you that I did not mean anything personal; I was speaking in generalities. My only explanation in defense of how I sounded is that I had written what I thought was a good response and it was lost in cyberspace at the end. In that post I had quoted you correctly. Sorry about that. From the heart, Ray |
||||||
2 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | compudex | 101493 | ||
Hi Ray, There is no contention here on my part. Writing posts and answers to some of the question on this forum, and with my limited ability as an orator, sometimes, is hard to convey the intent of thought. By the time the thought gets from the brain, out the finger tips and to the keyboard, some things get lost. I even flucked English in high school once. But, the Lord has been patient with me. In wanting to be His disciple, I would say, our passions will be realized as we grow. As a man sows, so shall he reap. Ah, now I'm preaching. :-) Peace to you! |
||||||
3 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | Ray | 101597 | ||
Hi compudex, I can't see you flunking English; typing class maybe, but your English is grate." :)) I don't know how well you know me, but I have been stressing the capitalization of Man in the Scriptures on this forum, and that is why I keep capitalizing His disciples. This afternoon I looked at a few more Scriptures to compare. Matthew 13:54, "And coming to His home town He began teaching them in their synagogue, so that they became astonished, and said, "Where did this (Man) get this wisdom, and these miraculous powers? Is not this the carpenter's *Son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this Man get all these things? 57 And they took offense at Him/." What do you think? Were they being taught of God?/ What do you think? Was He the Prophet in His home town? Mark 2:7, "But there were some of the scribes sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, "Why does this Man speak this way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but (God) alone? [Lit., if not one, God] John 5:12, "Who is the *Man who said to you, "Take up your pallet, and walk?" Where, Why, Who? From the heart, Ray |
||||||
4 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | compudex | 101618 | ||
Well, thanks for the A on my English. I did much better in college. Concering what you wrote: Matthew 13:54 "And coming to His home town...". That is the problem right there. They knew (H)im as (h)im, Jesus, son of Joseph and Mary. They watched him grow up. They watched him do the daily chores of living in a small town. They knew he was a good kid (no disrespect intended) and did what his 'father', Joseph, told him to do, but that is how they thought of him. Not as (H)im. To capitalize the words within the quotes of the townspeople would not be proper; grammatically, because it is a quote. That would be a misquote. Furthermore, it changes the meaning of what is conveyed by their conversation. Yes, He was a prophet in His home town, but to the people, He was just the man next door. (small m) Were they being taught of God? Yes, for He is God, but they did not know that. They have eyes and cannot see, ears and cannot hear. SCRIBES - The more highly esteemed the Law became in the eyes of the people, the more its study and interpretation became a lifework by itself, and thus there developed a class of scholars who, though not priests, devoted themselves only to the Law. We have a saying today, "The letter of the law kills". I wonder where that came from? All they knew was the letter of the law. I don't see anywhere in the Gospels where they (Pharisees) preached about the love of God or any rememberance of the kindness He showed to them in the wilderness or how, by His love for them, He delivered them from Egypt. A far cry from the psalmist David, a repenter. I would be careful in changing the meaning of the Scriptures. Something to keep in the back of your head also is that these people had been without a prophet for 400 years. Just look at what has happened in our nation in just 200 years. Where will it be in another 200 years if the Lord tarries? My, my!! |
||||||
5 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | Ray | 101687 | ||
Hi compudex, These things are good to consider and I appreciate the chance to talk with you about them. You said that the quotes of the people should be in lower case because they thought of Him just as the man next door. You continued and said that if "Son" were capitalized it would change the meaning of what is conveyed by their conversation. I believe I have stated your point correctly; if not let me know. But lets notice a few more things and talk about the problems translators/interpreters of Bibles like the NASB and NKJ have; using this as an example. The quote of the people has the "son", but it also goes on and talks about (H)is mother, (H)is brother, (H)is sisters, and then the quote includes this (m)an again. So the question is, "Just who are they taking offense at?" If your point is followed, then we would have to print in our interpretation "son", his mother, his brothers, and his sisters and this man." So now the question; "Who are they taking offense at?" Are they taking offense at this man? No, I don't believe so. I believe that they are taking offense at Him/, this (Man) with miraculous powers, this carpenter's Son. I would say that capitalizing Son is what makes the quote of the people clear in meaning. 1) I would say that He is a Prophet in (His) home town. Whether the people know it or not; for after all, this is God's word. 2) I think that the problem that the translators/interpreters like the NASB and NKJ have to be concerned about more is their consistency about this Man. From the heart, Ray |
||||||
6 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | compudex | 101700 | ||
Part 1: Hi Ray, I don't know how many versions of the Bible you have so I have included 7 versions (Part 2). It is interesting to note that some of them don't even capitalize the first letter of the sentence. I do agree they were taking offense of Christ (H)im. And since the incident took place inside the synagogue, more than likely, those who spoke out, where the elders. Because they had a heritage, or lineage, inside the synagogue, being Rabbis. Jesus stood up and started teaching. How dare he speak to these people in this manner, he is only a peasant. Exactly, they took offense to (H)im. Verse 58 says "their unbelief" would be the clue to the foregoing theme to be conveyed. Also, if we capitalize son as in "carpenter's Son", then we would be inferring deity to the carpenter. Maybe it is that not all translators are lead by the Spirit! I personally take offense of the NASB for twisting quotes! Ray, I am no scholar, but I have been told the some of the original languages didn't even have capital letters in their abc's. Most of the capitalization of the Scriptures came from inference of meaning. I really cannot say if this is true because I can only read English, sometimes :-). Indeed, He was a Prophet in His home town! And they did take offense of Him! I also have a copy of the Greek New Testament, but it does not translate on this web site because the text box will not accept that kind of font. If you would like I can email these verses to you. Maybe you know someone that can read it. I don't know anyone. BTW: The best Bible program I have found with as many versions, commentaries and dictionaries you want for free. Very, very good! God bless them for not making a profit upon God's Word! http://www.e-sword.net |
||||||
7 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | Ray | 101729 | ||
Hi compudex, I again admit to studying only from the NASB, NKJ, and the Greek because by now I feel so strongly that pronouns of Deity should be capitalized. If they are not, then I feel that they are not honoring to God. Now that isn't to say that they are bad translations; but they are not good "interpretations" of the Scriptures. And they do not claim to be "interpreters" or interpretations. What I am doing in pencil in my own personal copy is my interpretation as per capitalization of pronouns. We all have to decide for ourselves how we interpret the Scriptures for as you say the Greek does not help us there except by context, and comparison of Scripture with Scripture. The Jehovah's witness has to decide whether Jesus was God or a god. The modern day Jew has to decide whether Jesus was a prophet or the Prophet. We have to decide whether He was a man or a Man. These are important choices to be made. You wrote, "Also, if we capitalize son as in "carpenter's Son", then we would be inferring deity to the carpenter." Lets look at another Scripture and consider whether a capitalized Son would infer deity to Mary. Mark 6:3, "Is not this the carpenter, the *Son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us? And they took offense at Him./ 4 And Jesus said to them, "A *Prophet is not without honor except in (His) home town and among His relatives and in His own household." Matthew 13:55, "Is this not the carpenter's *Son? Is not His [sic] mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this *Man get all these things? 57 And they took offense at Him./ But Jesus said to them, "A *Prophet is not without honor except in (His) home town, and in His own household." The *starred pronouns are my interpretation and the parenthese are mine. NASB used in quotes. I would say that Jesus was the Son of Joseph and Mary in the sense that He was their God. Scriptures are not hesitant to talk of the "Son of David" for we know whose Son He is. He is the Son of Man, the Son of God. Personally, for my copy, I have Matthew 1:1 as "The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the *(Son) of David, the *Son of Abraham." And Matthew 1:20, "But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for that [the Child] which has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. And she will bear a Son [sic]; and you shall call His/ name Jesus, for it is He who will save (His) people from their sins." Where is the consistency if she bore a Son but it [He] is not the Son of Mary. Is "it" enough? She was "with child"; and bore a Son who was "God with us". Matthew 1:23, NKJ,""Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel", which is translated, "God with us."" (I chose the NKJ because the NASB has this quote in all caps and it would be confusing to our study if I typed it that way.) From the heart, Ray |
||||||
8 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | compudex | 101772 | ||
Hi Ray, Yes, I agree that diety should be capitalized. But, BUT, you CAN NOT change quotes! Jesus was not the Son of Mary, He was the son of Mary. The inference is a man talking about a man. Not a man talking about God. He, Jesus, was his neighbor as far as he knew. You CANNOT change what others say! Pretend, just pretend, you grew up with Jesus in the same neighborhood. You and he went for walks. You went to get water together. Now He preaches in the synagogue. What do you say? Isn't this the guy I fetched water with? Not isn't ths the Guy I fetched water with. You are adding diety to where these people didn't know He was diety. If you capitalize these words then it shows that they knew exactly who He was, and they didn't. He was the guy next door! Honestly, Ray, I think you are missing the context of the Scriptures. You know He is diety and I know He is diety but they didn't. And that is why WITHIN the quotes He is he, Son is son. You have to put these things in context as to who is speaking. I don't want to be rude Ray, but I think you are beating a dead horse. I still do not like how the NSAB has re-written these passages. BTW: The Living Bible, if you have one, check to see if they translated "virgin" (Mary, mother of Jesus) to a young woman. Now there is a piece of work. Peace to you! |
||||||
9 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | Ray | 101789 | ||
Hi compudex, In your pretend story, you and this guy feched water together. Why do you say that He [sic] preaches in the synagogue? The pronouns should agree; in either lower or upper case. You are interested in quotation marks. Lets look at an example of what Jesus said in Matthew 26:75. "And Peter remembered the word which Jesus had said, "Before a cock crows, you will deny Me [sic] three times." And he went out and wept bitterly." The question I would pose to you is "Did Peter deny "Me" or "me"? Did He deny the Man or the man? If Peter denied the "man" (the Galilean verse 69, of Nazareth verse 7l, and didn't know the man, verse 74) then the quote of Jesus should be, "Before a cock crows, you will deny me [sic] three times." I would go with the NKJ. Matthew 26:74, "Then he began to curse and swear, saying, "I do not know the Man!" Immediately a rooster crowed. And Peter remembered the word of Jesus who had said to him, "Before the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times." So he went out and wept bitterly." I want to know this Man more and more; better and better. From the heart, Ray |
||||||
10 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | compudex | 101802 | ||
Good, you caught it. "Now He preaches in the synagogue". Shouldn't that be he. Because in the pretend story I knew him, not as Him. Did Peter deny "Me" or "me"? Both. Peter denied Christ (Me) to himself. But to the his accusers, Peter denied the man. If Peter's accusers were followers of Jesus, Peter would have no cause to fear his association with Jesus. If the accusers were followers of Christ, the accusations would never have come. The accusation to Peter was, "You are one of this man's followers, this man ...this man that calls himself the Messiah. This man that our courts have found guilty of blasphemy. You are an accessory to his sedition." Thus the swearing comes forth from Peter's mouth, the cursing, trying to save his own skin. If Peter had conveyed the idea of Man rather than man the crowd, no doubt, would have stoned him. Yes, to himself, Peter denied the Man. The bitter weeping shows us that. But, to the crowd, he denied the man, for the crowd did not know the Man. As far as Jesus' words, ..."you will deny me...", now this is a different story. Was Jesus telling Peter that he was going to deny the divine Me or the human me? Yes, both. To himself, the Man and the man. To the crowd, the Man and the man. How bitter that weeping must have been. Picture the convulsions of Peter's body, hard to breath, eye lids smashed shut with grief, the tears and his runny nose gushing like water from a broken damn, unable to even stand and when falling to the ground, not even feeling it because of the guilt that now wrenches his aching body. To have been with the King of the universe for three years. To have been chosen by the Majesty on High to be the rock of His church. ... And I turned my back on Him. Oh, death were are you? Do what you will with the capitalization Ray. Peace to you! |
||||||
11 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | Ray | 101826 | ||
Hi compudex, In your pretend story, if you knew that He [sic] preaches in the synagogue, that is, you are being taught of God, can we agree that it is the same Person that you fetched water with? Whether it is a "guy" or a "Guy" are you talking about the same Person? In other words, for Matthew 13:55, whether it is "son" or "Son" does the verse talk of the same Person? I ask this because the bottom line for me in my study is that I am a "counter of pronouns". In other words, if a word is talking about the Man (man?) Jesus Christ, I capitalize it and I "count" it. My question for you is, would you "count" the word carpenter's "son" as a word that is talking about Christ? If you would, then I would not argue with you and I would let you capitalize what you will, also. If one studies from the King James which does not capitalize pronouns and he/she has the mindset that although the pronouns are lower case they still talk about God, I think that is great. If you count the carpenter's son of Matthew 13:55 as being God's Son, I think that is great. Whether we think of the God/Man or the God/man, let the pronouns concerning Him be "counted". From the heart, Ray |
||||||
12 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | compudex | 101837 | ||
Hello Ray, "In your pretend story, if you knew that He [sic] preaches in the synagogue, that is, you are being taught of God, can we agree that it is the same Person that you fetched water with?" Ah - that is the whole point, did THEY know they were being taught by God? "My question for you is, would you "count" the word carpenter's "son" as a word that is talking about Christ?" Yes, to us, because we know the ending to the story. But if we were back there in the synagogue with these men, no. He was just a man. The neighbor's boy. It is good to study. But put the pronouns in the context of time and who is speaking. It was a historical event. You can't change history. Peace to you! |
||||||
13 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | Ray | 101958 | ||
Hi compudex, You said, "Ah, that is the whole point, did THEY know they were being taught by God?" So, YOU knew in your pretend story to capitalize "He preaches" because you know the Man (the Guy, the Fellow). But you would say that THEY would say as did the scribes, Matthew 9:3, "And behold, some of the scribes said to themselves, "This fellow blasphemes." But I would say as does the NKJ, "And at once some of the scribes said within themselves, "This Man blasphemes." 1) 1 Corinthians 1:13 entered my mind for this discussion. "Has Christ been divided?" In the context, the brethren were quarreling among them about which MAN they were from. "I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Cephas," and "I of Christ." ***I intentionally put MAN in all caps so that you can decide to put it in lower or upper case. Is there a difference between these men and the Man Jesus Christ? The writer goes on and asks "Is Christ divided?" NKJ. Paul explains that a man was not crucified for you. You were not baptized in the name of a man. And verse 14 says that he thanked God that no one was baptized into Paul's name. ( No one was of Paul) But I think it of interest also that some ancient manuscripts want to leave "God" out of verse 14. I believe that that fact points out the quarrel. The bottom line is that we are baptized in the name of God; and God is not divided. 2) Continuing in that line of thought, can we here in Matthew 13:55 say, "We are of the carpenter's son." Can we divide God on the pages of Scripture and say, here he is a man, and here he is the Man? Luke 11:17; Matthew 12:25; John 13:3; Luke 9:47. Jesus knew men. He knew their thoughts. He knows our thoughts. Even though men may not know Him, He is who He is. Luke 9:32-36. Luke 9:35, "And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, "This is My Son, My Chosen/ One; listen to Him!" And when the voice had spoken, (Jesus) was found alone. And they kept silent, and reported to no one in those days any of the things which they had seen." ***I believe that He is the God/Man, God with us. From the heart, Ray |
||||||
14 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | compudex | 101974 | ||
Hello brother, You said: But you would say that THEY would say as did the scribes, Matthew 9:3, "And behold, some of the scribes said to themselves, "This fellow blasphemes." Yes. You said: But I would say as does the NKJ, "And at once some of the scribes said within themselves, "This Man blasphemes." If this was correct you would also have to capitalize "fellow". (1Co 1:12) Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos: and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. (1Co 1:13) Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized into the name of Paul? In context they were saying that our group is better than yours. It was a vanity thing. Like today, "Well, I belong to the Baptist Church." "Well, we belong to the Church of Christ". "Well, we belong to the Full Gospel Church". In otherwords it is called PRIDE. It didn't have anything to do with a man, per say. It was a congregational thing. Thinking that one is better than the other. And Paul was telling them, "Hey, you guys, it doesn't matter who baptized you. You were baptized into the body of Christ and He is one. Why are you causing all this strife? Is this how we should conduct ourselves? Get your act together and preach Christ only!" NOTE: It should be noted for this forum the above mentioned churches are used here only for reference as to context of this thread and is not to be construded that there is one that is preferred over the other. You say: Can we divide God on the pages of Scripture and say, here he is a man, and here he is the Man? I say in Spirit No, but in contexual transmission of thought, Yes. Just as Pilate's change of thought about Christ: KJV: (Joh 19:5) .... And Pilate saith unto them, Behold, the man! This conveys that Jesus was just like any other human. KJV: (Joh 19:14) .... And he saith unto the Jews, Behold, your King! This conveys that Jesus was who He said He was. NOTE: Personaly, I believe Pilate was then converted. The versions of the Bible do vary and it is good to view these things. I told you before the Living Bible reduces the virgin Mary, to just a young woman. For the phrase, "young woman" does not mean she was a virgin. Thereby taking away from the meaning that Jesus was divine. Ray, are we trying to convert each other? I accepted Jesus as my saviour 10/22/72. Baptized 10/29/72 at the Full Gospel Lighthouse in Oak View, CA Baptized into one body! Now a resident of Tucson, AZ Read my bio if you like. Peace to you! |
||||||
15 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | Ray | 102034 | ||
Hi compudex, I'll try and answer your post from the top down. I appreciate this talk with you very much. For Matthew 9:3 I do capitalize "Fellow" just as you would capitalize "Guy" in your pretend story if you were to truly understand that "He was preaching". For 1 Cor l:13 the concern that Paul had was first of all that Christ had been divided and the application is there for us as you say because we are His [sic] spiritual body and we should not be divided. I do know where you are coming from as far as how people were thinking, but I still would say that no matter what they were thinking, if the pronoun is referring to Jesus then it should be capitalized. As far as Pilate is concerned I do not think that he changed his thought about Christ. John 19:5 in the King James has "Behold, the man!" but the NASB and the NKJ which concern themselves with capitalization both have "Behold, the Man!" Note: If Pilate was converted He chose some wrong people to be friends to, namely, Herod. I have a Living Bible somewhere,but I don't know exactly what verse you are referring to. It would probably be good to compare it with the other verses that talk of the virgin and see how they compare in meaning. That way, it could be determined if they were trying to deceive or not. A young woman could still be a virgin, but does the Greek in your selected verse necessarily mean virgin. Now, are we trying to convert each other? No, I know that we both love the Lord. For me, I feel that I have gotten to know Him better through my years of capitalization study. I know that He is a saviour. I know that He came as a light. I know that in Him was life. I know that He is a rock. His word is truth. But I know that He is my Savior. He is the Light of the world. In Him is the whole message of Life. He is my Rock. He is the Truth. The Jews knew that He was the King. Pilate, I think, knew that He was the Truth. But they sought to kill Him anyway. So I am no better because He is my King and I know Him to be the Truth. But I want to know (Him) better. For this is my interpretation of John 14:6,7, "Jesus said to him, 'I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life,/ no one comes to the Father, but through Me. If you had known (Me), you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him." That is enough for me. From the heart, Ray |
||||||
16 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | compudex | 102044 | ||
Ray, Note: If Pilate was converted He chose some wrong people to be friends to, namely, Herod. Yes, but the friendship only happened just before Christ was crucified. Consider the works of Josephus the historian: Antiquities of the Jews - Book XVIII CONTAINING THE INTERVAL OF THIRTY-TWO YEARS. FROM THE BANISHMENT OF ARCHELUS TO THE DEPARTURE FROM BABYLON. (8) These Jews, as they are here called, whose blood Pilate shed on this occasion, may very well be those very Galilean Jews, "whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices," Luke 13:1, 2; these tumults being usually excited at some of the Jews' great festivals, when they slew abundance of sacrifices, and the Galileans being commonly much more busy in such tumults than those of Judea and Jerusalem, as we learn from the history of Archelaus, Antiq. B. XVII. ch. 9. sect. 3 and ch. 10. sect. 2, 9; though, indeed, Josephus's present copies say not one word of "those eighteen upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them," which the 4th verse of the same 13th chapter of St. Luke informs us of. But since our gospel teaches us, Luke 23:6, 7, that "when Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether Jesus were a Galilean. And as soon as he knew that he belonged to Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod ;" and ver. 12, "The same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together for before they had been at enmity between themselves;" take the very probable key of this matter in the words of the learned Noldius, de Herod. No. 219: "The cause of the enmity between Herod and Pilate (says he) seems to have been this, that Pilate had intermeddled with the tetrarch's jurisdiction, and had slain some of his Galilean subjects, Luke 13:1; and, as he was willing to correct that error, he sent Christ to Herod at this time." But, when Herod sent Jesus back to Pilate is when Pilate chose the different wording. Anyway, Ray, I think we should end this thread before we take up all the disk space. Yes, he is He and god is God. No translaters can take that away. No versions of Scripture can put away Divinity. And no pronouns. I love you brother. Keep the faith. We will get together again, either here or there, I am sure. Peace to you and your house! |
||||||
17 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | Ray | 102097 | ||
Hi compudex, I don't mean to try and get in the last word, but I have to clear up something you said at the last. You wrote, "Yes, he is He and god is God. No translators can take that away. No versions of Scripture can put away Divinity." The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures printed by the Jehovah's Witnesses is one that can try to put away Divinity. In John 1:1 they say that "the Word was a god." In the King James, for instance, when a pronoun of Deity is a he, then he is He. But God is always God there. Not so in the NWT, where they make Him a god. And you have to know that I am not happy to see people type with all lower case print and talk about god. But what is this "And no pronouns."? Are you giving me an ultimatum? :)) I love you too. Thanks for the time together. From the heart, Ray |
||||||
18 | Spirit or spirit? | Prov 5:21 | compudex | 102101 | ||
I meant that no pronoun written on a piece of paper can make God anything less than God. How can man change God? NWT, yes I know. I was raised by one. In my teens. Peace! |
||||||