Scripture. What is considered Scripture?

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

No, he is saying without the Bible, that you attack, you couldn't possibly prove 'anything.'

As I've said and you'll not accept coming from me: You don't read to understand AND you marginalize your opponent with 'special needs' and 'delusion.' Sorry, Cobra, you are lying to yourself. It isn't love, not even tough love. You haven't listened and it shows. There is no love without listening. There is just a wrecking ball you swing on an inerrant forum and a devil-may-care cavalier attitude toward those 'who you seek to wreck.' This isn't your first forum. You SHOULD have learned from your mistakes the first time so this didn't happen AGAIN :doh:


People just aren't going to like you. I learned in my pastoral class a long time ago: People don't care what you know, until they know you care. God spent a great deal of time conveying His love culminating in the life and death of His Son on earth and heaven, I think specifically because people don't care what you know, until they know you care. Another way the paradigm is given: Truth and relationship. Truth without relationship is an uncaring unthinking sledge hammer. Relationship without truth is a veneer of acquaintance.

Jesus said: The time is coming and is now here when TRUE worshippers will worship in Spirit (love) and Truth (what is right). Only with both can we be of any service to one another or God, thus the Lord Jesus Christ summed it up that all of everything given was based on two commands: To love God and Love one another.

Nobody that reads 'all the law and the prophets lay on these two commands' and think 'errant.' THAT isn't going to happen. They are going to work, rather, on honing their own love for the Savior and His people.

Again, no idea if I've reached you. You haven't heard a word I've said in thread but what you've latched onto to 'dig' into me back. That isn't love either.

You haven't listened to or understood a word cobra has said.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

I'm glad you watched that whole video I posted.

I got through the first hour. I hope I get a badge?

 

[daqq]

Originally Posted by Lon
No, but you won't listen to anything not your opinion The 1611 is important for a number of reasons. I'm not KJVonly in that I would make everyone read only it. That said, I read it most specifically because it is a word-for-word rather than idea for idea endeavor. It also has the greater wealth of academic work having been around since 1611 than any other translation. You cannot, for instance, use a concordance as well for the NIV as you can for the KJV specifically because of the different ways both are translated. Most commentaries and theology works reference the KJV for those 400 years as well.

Wrong:

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm

:rotfl: Your image file says the same thing Lon said about the KJV! (word-for-word). :chuckle:

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Lol, Psalm 12:7 shows the same as what I posted to him:
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/psa12.pdf

"you-shall-guard- them : you-shall-preserve- us"

Thanks for posting that.

Yes and notice it says forever! How can a bible last forever? It can't, as has been shown by the fact we no longer have the originals and when God makes a new earth and heaven, every existing bible will be destroyed. Only God's actual Words will last forever. Just as God's Words spoke creation into existence, His Word's are where the power is. Bibles are just one way to disseminate His Word's but are ultimately flawed. That is one reason why Jesus never wrote anything down.

Psalm 12:7
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/psa12.pdf

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

:rotfl: Your image file says the same thing Lon said about the KJV! (word-for-word). :chuckle:

Yes but it is only the 5th most accurate! (not including other versions) and where it brackets 'Thought for Thought' they are only an indication. The KJV clearly uses thought for thought and even strays into paraphrasing at times:

Isaiah 40:7
King James Bible
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the LORD bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass.

Interlinear
he dries up grass he decays blossom that spirit of Yahweh SHE reverses in him surely.

Quite different! Oh and look; SHE.

 

[daqq]

Yes and notice it says forever! How can a bible last forever? It can't, as has been shown by the fact we no longer have the originals and when God makes a new earth and heaven, every existing bible will be destroyed. Only God's actual Words will last forever. Just as God's Words spoke creation into existence, His Word's are where the power is. Bibles are just one way to disseminate His Word's but are ultimately flawed. That is why Jesus never wrote anything down.

Psalm 12:7
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/psa12.pdf

You really do have a reading comprehension problem just as your new found friends: the version you quote now in this post is from the side-bar in your interlinear, (correct?), but even that text is not in agreement with the Hebrew interlinear text right there on the page next to it! Can you not see that? Can you not tell the difference between the words "them" and "us"? Just like GO you apparently refuse to see it for what it says because in your mindset-paradigm it cannot possibly be speaking of both the Word and people of Elohim: for if it does, then that means you are yours are wrong. But it does indeed speak of Elohim keeping or guarding His words and sayings that are written and at the same time preserving His people into the age, (olam). And how does He do that? He preserves His people with His Word. You therefore are required to consume His Word and intake those holy, pure, and seven-times tried in the fire words and sayings into yourself and your very being: your heart, your mind, your soul, and then you yourself will be preserved into the age, (olam), and the Word will no doubt be with you because without the Word you will not be preserved. His Word endures forever, through his people: but without His Word becoming part of you, how is it you think you will be preserved into olam or the age to come? The only real reason therefore to say that the Word has error is because you do not wish to consume it. :chuckle:

The Septuagint here uses logia, which is "oracles" or "sayings", just as the YLT previously posted:

Psalm 12:6 LXX
6 τα λογια κυριου λογια αγνα αργυριον πεπυρωμενον δοκιμιον τη γη κεκαθαρισμενον επταπλασιως

Psalm 12:6 LXX Brenton Translation
6 The oracles of the Lord are pure oracles; as silver tried in the fire, proved in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

The same word is recorded as used by Stephen in the book of Acts:

Acts 7:37-38 YLT
37 this is the Moses who did say to the sons of Israel: A prophet to you shall the Lord your God raise up out of your brethren, like to me, him shall ye hear.
38 'This is he who was in the assembly in the wilderness, with the messenger who is speaking to him in the mount Sinai, and with our fathers who did receive the living oracles [λογια ζωντα] to give to us;

"λογια ζωντα" - "LIVING ORACLES"

The only alternative you really have is the so-called Oral Torah:
Would you like to go with that or the truth which is the logos-reasoning of the written Word?

 

[daqq]

Originally Posted by WatchmanOnTheWall
Yes and notice it says forever! How can a bible last forever? It can't, as has been shown by the fact we no longer have the originals and when God makes a new earth and heaven, every existing bible will be destroyed. Only God's actual Words will last forever. Just as God's Words spoke creation into existence, His Word's are where the power is. Bibles are just one way to disseminate His Word's but are ultimately flawed. That is why Jesus never wrote anything down.

Psalm 12:7
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...Tpdf/psa12.pdf

You really do have a reading comprehension problem just as your new found friends: the version you quote now in this post is from the side-bar in your interlinear, (correct?), but even that text is not in agreement with the Hebrew interlinear text right there on the page next to it! Can you not see that? Can you not tell the difference between the words "them" and "us"? Just like GO you apparently refuse to see it for what it says because in your mindset-paradigm it cannot possibly be speaking of both the Word and people of Elohim: for if it does, then that means you are yours are wrong. But it does indeed speak of Elohim keeping or guarding His words and sayings that are written and at the same time preserving His people into the age, (olam). And how does He do that? He preserves His people with His Word. You therefore are required to consume His Word and intake those holy, pure, and seven-times tried in the fire words and sayings into yourself and your very being: your heart, your mind, your soul, and then you yourself will be preserved into the age, (olam), and the Word will no doubt be with you because without the Word you will not be preserved. His Word endures forever, through his people: but without His Word becoming part of you, how is it you think you will be preserved into olam or the age to come? The only real reason therefore to say that the Word has error is because you do not wish to consume it. :chuckle:

The Septuagint here uses logia, which is "oracles" or "sayings", just as the YLT previously posted:

Psalm 12:6 LXX
6 τα λογια κυριου λογια αγνα αργυριον πεπυρωμενον δοκιμιον τη γη κεκαθαρισμενον επταπλασιως

Psalm 12:6 LXX Brenton Translation
6 The oracles of the Lord are pure oracles; as silver tried in the fire, proved in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

The same word is recorded as used by Stephen in the book of Acts:

Acts 7:37-38 YLT
37 this is the Moses who did say to the sons of Israel: A prophet to you shall the Lord your God raise up out of your brethren, like to me, him shall ye hear.
38 'This is he who was in the assembly in the wilderness, with the messenger who is speaking to him in the mount Sinai, and with our fathers who did receive the living oracles [λογια ζωντα] to give to us;

"λογια ζωντα" - "LIVING ORACLES"

The only alternative you really have is the so-called Oral Torah:
Would you like to go with that or the truth which is the logos-reasoning of the written Word?

And by the way, the side-bar text in the interlinear which you linked is probably just a site-wide standard translation they uploaded to the entire Hebrew interlinear. It does not likely mean that they are suggesting that is the correct rendering because the rendering is given below the Hebrew text and contains that portion I quoted earlier.

 

[daqq]

Yes but it is only the 5th most accurate! (not including other versions) and where it brackets 'Thought for Thought' they are only an indication. The KJV clearly uses thought for thought and even strays into paraphrasing at times:

Isaiah 40:7
King James Bible
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the LORD bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass.

Interlinear
he dries up grass he decays blossom that spirit of Yahweh SHE reverses in him surely.

Quite different! Oh and look; SHE.

:doh: She? You are committing a similar error to what GO and his commentators were attempting to do if you think that means what I think you think that means. :nono:

 

[daqq]

Originally Posted by WatchmanOnTheWall
Yes but it is only the 5th most accurate! (not including other versions) and where it brackets 'Thought for Thought' they are only an indication. The KJV clearly uses thought for thought and even strays into paraphrasing at times:

Isaiah 40:7
King James Bible
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the LORD bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass.

Interlinear
he dries up grass he decays blossom that spirit of Yahweh SHE reverses in him surely.

Quite different! Oh and look; SHE.

:doh: She? You are committing a similar error to what GO and his commentators were attempting to do if you think that means what I think you think that means. :nono:

Ya know... that could actually help you if only you paid attention, understood, and believed some of the things already said from the scripture roundabout these parts.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

You really do have a reading comprehension problem just as your new found friends: the version you quote now in this post is from the side-bar in your interlinear, (correct?), but even that text is not in agreement with the Hebrew interlinear text right there on the page next to it! Can you not see that? Can you not tell the difference between the words "them" and "us"? Just like GO you apparently refuse to see it for what it says because in your mindset-paradigm it cannot possibly be speaking of both the Word and people of Elohim: for if it does, then that means you are yours are wrong. But it does indeed speak of Elohim keeping or guarding His words and sayings that are written and at the same time preserving His people into the age, (olam). And how does He do that? He preserves His people with His Word. You therefore are required to consume His Word and intake those holy, pure, and seven-times tried in the fire words and sayings into yourself and your very being: your heart, your mind, your soul, and then you yourself will be preserved into the age, (olam), and the Word will no doubt be with you because without the Word you will not be preserved. His Word endures forever, through his people: but without His Word becoming part of you, how is it you think you will be preserved into olam or the age to come? The only real reason therefore to say that the Word has error is because you do not wish to consume it. :chuckle:

The Septuagint here uses logia, which is "oracles" or "sayings", just as the YLT previously posted:

Psalm 12:6 LXX
6 τα λογια κυριου λογια αγνα αργυριον πεπυρωμενον δοκιμιον τη γη κεκαθαρισμενον επταπλασιως

Psalm 12:6 LXX Brenton Translation
6 The oracles of the Lord are pure oracles; as silver tried in the fire, proved in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

The same word is recorded as used by Stephen in the book of Acts:

Acts 7:37-38 YLT
37 this is the Moses who did say to the sons of Israel: A prophet to you shall the Lord your God raise up out of your brethren, like to me, him shall ye hear.
38 'This is he who was in the assembly in the wilderness, with the messenger who is speaking to him in the mount Sinai, and with our fathers who did receive the living oracles [λογια ζωντα] to give to us;

"λογια ζωντα" - "LIVING ORACLES"

The only alternative you really have is the so-called Oral Torah:
Would you like to go with that or the truth which is the logos-reasoning of the written Word?

You are obvious new to the interlinear word for word translation. The paraphrased right hand column is not meant to match the word for word translation on the left. That would be silly and serve no purpose. It is meant to help the read understand the non-grammatical word for translation. It is an aid but like all translations (that you are used to, like the KJV) they detract from the pure meaning the text and therefore loose some of the original meaning. Think of it like the difference between a photo and a painting. All you have been use to till now were paintings by different artists of the same scene now you have a photo and it is confusing for you but once you get used to it you will realise that you are looking at a clearer image (meaning of the original text). The only way to improve on this is to learn the original Hebrew or Greek.

And again you are confusing God's Words and The Word's of God written down by men.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

And by the way, the side-bar text in the interlinear which you linked is probably just a site-wide standard translation they uploaded to the entire Hebrew interlinear. It does not likely mean that they are suggesting that is the correct rendering because the rendering is given below the Hebrew text and contains that portion I quoted earlier.

Now your catching on, well done.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

:doh: She? You are committing a similar error to what GO and his commentators were attempting to do if you think that means what I think you think that means. :nono:

You don't get around much: http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?127576-Is-the-Holy-Spirit-Female

 

[2003cobra]

Because it isn't a fight I'm willing to die for. The ONLY KJV argument I've been against, is one where only KJVers are saved. I used to be against some insisting their members only read it, but a church member has to make that choice. It used to bother me, but again, just something not worth the fight over it.

I don't believe we have any of those here. What would be the point of arguing other than winning an argument? Does it hurt you? :nono: Does it hurt them? :nono: Nope.

I’ve been at a KJV only church where the pastor declared over the pulpit “you are not welcome here unless you read the KJV.”

They don’t hurt me. They hurt the Kingdom of God.

Look at the testimony here of John w!

 

[2003cobra]

AND I showed you it is not an idol, but esteemed as from Him. AND I said insomuch as the Word is God, I worship Him.

See, if you are only going to quote a portion of what one says and use it for your own glory, regardless and to the detriment of your opponent, "even if it isn't true" and you well know it isn't, then it is something you know to be 'no quite right' or 'true' yet you print it anyway. Unscrupulous reporters with no regard for those they are reporting on how it might affect them, do that. They are self-interested. Story-interested. Careless and without scruples. How about you? Same? In bed with the unscrupulous or do you have some morality and ethics? :think: Again, post as you will for your own reputation and agenda. To me? Looks like a lie. "But I posted it exactly as you wrote it!" Exactly? :nono: Including all dialogue that went with it? :nono: I don't think so. It looks like purposeful misrepresentation, you know, like a purposeful and willful lie?

Post as you will.

I notice you seem unwilling to retract the statement that you worship the Bible. Or are you?

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Cobra brought up this earlier but it was not answered can someone explain whether the altar of incense was in the Holy of Holies or not?

Hebrews 9:3-4
3 Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, 4 which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant.

Exodus 40:2-5
2 “Set up the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, on the first day of the first month. 3 Place the ark of the covenant law in it and shield the ark with the curtain. 4 Bring in the table and set out what belongs on it. Then bring in the lampstand and set up its lamps. 5 Place the gold altar of incense in front of the ark of the covenant law and put the curtain at the entrance to the tabernacle.

 

[2003cobra]

Watchman,
I think Word-for-Word is great for people who understand the idioms and construction of the language. I prefer the NRSV, which is on the left side of your chart, because I don’t know all the idioms.

Here is a one-page helpful comment by a well-known Greek expert.

https://www.billmounce.com/monday-with-mounce/what-accurate-translation

You can find his interlinear translation on line too, I think.


And, if you liked that:

https://www.billmounce.com/monday-with-mounce/what-“accurate”-translation

 

[Lon]

Your underhandedness has hurt yourself more than me.

Er, no. OWN your own poor behavior. This is like throwing a rock through your neighbor's window because YOU get ticketed for an illegal vehicle on the street. :doh:

Wrong:

Spoiler

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm

Er, hate to tell ya... (can you read a chart?) :idunno:

I've made TOL friends with cobra.
You vitriol is

:doh: Because YOU agree with his poor ideas!

You haven't listened to or understood a word cobra has said.

:doh: Because YOU agree with his poor ideas! (he made the same mistake you did quoting a source that COMPLETELY disagreed with him!) :doh:

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Shalom.

Scripture. What is considered Scripture?

Shalom.

Jacob

jsanford asked you:

Jacob, why do you have 3+ threads, started around the same time, asking the same questions (the books of the Bible)?

You answered: "Different related questions."

and after just half a dozen posts you bow out?

What does that mean?

 

[daqq]

You are obvious new to the interlinear word for word translation. The paraphrased right hand column is not meant to match the word for word translation on the left. That would be silly and serve no purpose. It is meant to help the read understand the non-grammatical word for translation. It is an aid but like all translations (that you are used to, like the KJV) they detract from the pure meaning the text and therefore loose some of the original meaning. Think of it like the difference between a photo and a painting. All you have been use to till now were paintings by different artists of the same scene now you have a photo and it is confusing for you but once you get used to it you will realise that you are looking at a clearer image (meaning of the original text). The only way to improve on this is to learn the original Hebrew or Greek.

And again you are confusing God's Words and The Word's of God written down by men.

Nope, I went and checked on the main page after I said that: it is exactly what I said it was.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Er, no. OWN your own poor behavior. This is like throwing a rock through your neighbor's window because YOU get ticketed for an illegal vehicle on the street. :doh:



Er, hate to tell ya... (can you read a chart?) :idunno:



:doh: Because YOU agree with his poor ideas!

It's nothing like that and rather than try to hide behind an analogy I will say it like it is:

I upset you because you could not admit you wrong in our debate or could not think of a way to argue against me. So instead you trawl though my posts and find where I used a rude word in a conversation with someone else, which I was using to make a point about how using bad language is not good behaviour and rather than take it in the context that it was meant you then reported me for using bad language.

That is very sad and childish behaviour.