ECT THE PRACTICAL NECESSITY OF AN INFALLIBLE & AUTHORITATIVE INTERPRETER

W

whitestone

Well-known member
Totton Linnet said:
Both the testimonies and the selection of them were by the Holy Ghost
Click to expand...

These eyewitnesses,in Luke would have been who,Mary,Joseph,Elizabeth ect?(the 12 had not yet been chosen,so they were not there to witness the events).

Then in Acts 16 or so he changes from 2nd,3rd person(they,them ect.) to 1st person (we,us ect.) so there's two portions in his writings one set that was delivered and another he himself was eyewitness to.
 
H

HisServant

New member
chrysostom said:
I rest my case
Click to expand...

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/revelation/related-topics/babylon-is-rome.html

Although the idea that Babylon is Rome may seem intriguing at first, we believe there are significant liabilities attending the view. Chief among them are the problem of language—making OT passages which speak of Babylon be reinterpreted hundreds of years later to denoting an entirely different city—and the lack of the necessary historical significance in Rome’s early history to account for her as the mother of harlotry and abominations.
Click to expand...

Babylon CANNOT be Rome... unless you are chronologically impaired. Let alone, to believe it to be so is an acknowledgement that you believe the Holy Spirit inspired a lie to be written.
 
Totton Linnet

Totton Linnet

New member
Silver Subscriber
Amazing no of wimmin in Luke's writings...he is a Greek. Also companion of John Mark who was Peter's nephew
 
W

whitestone

Well-known member
here I'll give some help,,,in the second line from the bottom is http://biblehub.com/greek/2532.htm and at the very of the top sentence is the first four letters of http://biblehub.com/greek/706.htm

lol,now bare in mind that what is in the link is a fragment so the way it wore away left the last few letters of one word and then the first few of the next.

two words are not words at all but rather nomina sacra or sacred names. they are abbreviated(line drawn over them). the text is Alexandrian type 3-400ad.

If there is an competent interpreter whom you can trust ask them,,,if not I bet you wouldn't trust one either way.
 
serpentdove

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
Authoritative :idunno: accursed Ga 1:8

You will never hear Galatians read in a Roman Catholic
lips.gif
brothel (Re 17:5). :eek:linger:

We are saved by grace alone (Eph 2:8-9), through faith alone (Eph 1:13; 2Ti 1:10), in Christ alone (Isa 45:21,22; 59:16; Ac 4:12). :poly: Roman Catholics :eek:linger: deny this (Jude 1:11). :burnlib:

See:

Got Freedom, Part 1 Michael Youssef
 
W

whitestone

Well-known member
lol, my thoughts exactly.

All the day long we see in thread to thread the "professional Greek theologians". They are confident that the KJV is mistranslated,they point out the incorrect renderings. They say that they have studied this for years and are sure of their ability to evaluate and offer better translations,,,but set an fragment in front of them and they disappear.

At first I thought "cool beans,I finally get to look at these in depth!",,,but the thing is the competent translators dwindle when the fragments appear. All the day long there are the expert opinions on commas and text,well,,,until there is an text.

p.s. "in the post #26,,in the second line of the fragment is "ANOY",with a line above it it translates to "human being",,,but who would know?
 
H

HisServant

New member
whitestone said:
lol, my thoughts exactly.

All the day long we see in thread to thread the "professional Greek theologians". They are confident that the KJV is mistranslated,they point out the incorrect renderings. They say that they have studied this for years and are sure of their ability to evaluate and offer better translations,,,but set an fragment in front of them and they disappear.

At first I thought "cool beans,I finally get to look at these in depth!",,,but the thing is the competent translators dwindle when the fragments appear. All the day long there are the expert opinions on commas and text,well,,,until there is an text.

p.s. "in the post #26,,in the second line of the fragment is "ANOY",with a line above it it translates to "human being",,,but who would know?
Click to expand...

Well, there are certain worlds that the KJV does have translated poorly... they mostly have to do with supporting the Anglican hierarchy and doctrine.

For instance, the translators wanted to replace the word 'church' with congregation or assembly and were prevented from doing so. Also some of the names of places and people are wrong and they were not able to correct them either.
 
genuineoriginal

genuineoriginal

New member
Cruciform said:
Your claim is that each individual believer is the infallible interpreter of Scripture? Please post your proof for this wholly unsubstantiated assertion.
Click to expand...


Romans 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.​

 
john w

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
Anyone:Chapter, verse, that asserts that respective members of the boc are not to interpret scripture.
 
W

whitestone

Well-known member
Cruciform said:
:darwinsm:​
Click to expand...

The fragment that I posted Louis De Alcasar is said to have used a similar type text(renders the mark 616 instead of 666) in his work. Now Irenaeus spoke much about this in A.H.,he said that it was an error on the part of the translator.

He in the preface to A.H., book 1,chapter 2 begins to Identify the origins of these type writings as,,, "the commentaries,as they call them,of the disciples of Valentinus",,and explains that the heresy was promulgated by Ptolemaeus and his disciples a school that budded off from Valentinus.

In A.H. book 1 chapter 3.2 Irenaeus points out their teachings of the "Iota and Etta"(in the Gnostic belief). In A.H. book 5 chapter 30.1 Irenaeus explains this number 616 and that it reduces the number by 50 to 616 because they(Valentinus/Ptplemaeus) had altered the number.

Also in A.H. book 5 chapter 30.1 Irenaeus refers to "most approved and ancient copies" so there are both copies he saw of Revelation and commentaries that contained the errors/change containing both the letters "Iota and Etta".

In the fragment in the third line from the top there is found "Etta",looks like the upper case letter "H" in English. Then Chi,Iota,Sigma(616) instead of Chi,Xi,Sigma(666) which should suffice to establish that the fragment is most probably an commentary instead of a copy of the Revelation because of the "Etta" preceding the number instead of arithmos http://biblehub.com/greek/706.htm ,,,so "H",Etta not being the last letter of the word number strongly indicates that this does not follow the wording in the text of Revelation 13:18 KJV .

but then if someone could not interpret this for their own-selves well then they have no choice but to hope that there is an interpreter to do so. I mean no offense but I am not Catholic nor preterit,,then again I can read the text.

p.s. I'll include A.H. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103.htm from a source you feel comfortable with so you can check my quotes,,,,
 
Bradley D

Bradley D

Well-known member
Cruciform said:
Your claim is that each individual believer is the infallible interpreter of Scripture? Please post your proof for this wholly unsubstantiated assertion.
Click to expand...

All believers have the Holy Spirit within them. There is no one person, such as the Pope, that interprets Scripture for us.
 
Cruciform

Cruciform

New member
Bradley D said:
All believers have the Holy Spirit within them.
Click to expand...
This has hardly been a help regarding the formulation of doctrine, given the multiplied thousands of man-made non-Catholic sects that have been the practical result of your claim, with more being concocted every week. The central organizing principle of Protestantism has been---and will always remain---a hopelessly subjective interpretive chaos. There is simply no way to avoid it within the Protestant system.

There is no one person, such as the Pope, that interprets Scripture for us.
Click to expand...
Who here has claimed that only one person authoritatively interprets Scripture in the Catholic tradition?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top