A request

I'm curious. Who produced the NT Greek to Hebrew translation and when?

Personally, I prefer John's version where he refers to the Word instead of the Son of God. There are many "sons of God" mentioned in the OT Bible but only One Word of God. That disarms the unitarians who say that there are many sons of God but they cannot say the same thing about the Word of God, found in both the OT and the NT.
Yes, but the fact that they say Son here, emphasizes the fact that In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with God and the Son was God.

NO one , except the JWs can say the Son was not the Son this way. Or the Son was not God.

Who produced?

You need to click the link and read all about it. https://www.hebrewgospels.com/_files/ugd/c68db9_a93ec196f4b144948b2632acae6fefab.pdf

It is from a medieval Hebrew manuscript

Table of contents are before the actual scriptures of John.

Table of Contents

Evidence of Authenticity and Interest Readings... iii

About the Translation ..................................................... xix

Footnotes Symbols and Abreviations ....................... xxi

Translation of the Hebrew Gospel of John ............ 1

Glossary ................................................................................ 81

We all have our pet preferences.... hence all the bickerings here.

But if there is something from a true historical doc that this seems to be are you not the least curious to know the Hebrew
wordings of that day.

Others here would not read or listen if something came down the road in Latin.... all languages of the day.

Aren't we all going to be surprised to make it through those Pearly Gates only to be told we were all wrong because the true translations were only in Jive or Pidgin English?

IMO if it was written and authenticated it is worth at least reading.
 
Yes, but the fact that they say Son here, emphasizes the fact that In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with God and the Son was God.

NO one , except the JWs can say the Son was not the Son this way. Or the Son was not God.

Who produced?

You need to click the link and read all about it. https://www.hebrewgospels.com/_files/ugd/c68db9_a93ec196f4b144948b2632acae6fefab.pdf

It is from a medieval Hebrew manuscript

Table of contents are before the actual scriptures of John.

Table of Contents

Evidence of Authenticity and Interest Readings... iii

About the Translation ..................................................... xix

Footnotes Symbols and Abreviations ....................... xxi

Translation of the Hebrew Gospel of John ............ 1

Glossary ................................................................................ 81

We all have our pet preferences.... hence all the bickerings here.

But if there is something from a true historical doc that this seems to be are you not the least curious to know the Hebrew
wordings of that day.

Others here would not read or listen if something came down the road in Latin.... all languages of the day.

Aren't we all going to be surprised to make it through those Pearly Gates only to be told we were all wrong because the true translations were only in Jive or Pidgin English?

IMO if it was written and authenticated it is worth at least reading.
This is how John 1:1 is understood.

In the beginning was the Son. The Son was with the Father and the Son was God. :)

The Word is the Son and He is not the Father but He is God :)
 
This is how John 1:1 is understood.

In the beginning was the Son. The Son was with the Father and the Son was God. :)

The Word is the Son and He is not the Father but He is God :)
Yep... but how many do you think would sign up if a yes or no question was asked in the way we understand John 1:1 to
read if they believe the Word was the Son, or if they believe the Word was Jesus... or even if the Word was God.

Nas95 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

We do have those who claim the Word was neither Jesus or the Son.

I understand the diehards of the NWT of the JWs who believe their translator could not error... and say was "a" god

But is ok... I merely posted. NO ONE has to read it or even check out the link.
 
@Studyman

Studyman, let me go a little slower with you no pun intended. So, to see if you believe what you are saying let me ask you this simple question: The Word in John 1:1 is God, period, without any qualifications. So, are you ready to confess that Jesus Christ was God manifest in the fest, yes, or no? If no, then "you do not believe" in the true deity of Jesus Christ as the God of Genesis 1:1.

I'm coming back to consider the rest of your post, but you need to answer my question, with a yes or no, if no, then explain yourself.

First, I find it absolutely fascinating that you, a die hard Calvinist, was chosen by folks on this forum who know and have argued against your religion and called it a false religion for years, starting thread after thread after thread showing you Scripture after Scripture after Scripture which prove without a doubt that the religious doctrines you promote are not based on Scripture, but on the religious opinion of popular theologians they disagree with. And you have not recanted, repented, became renewed in the spirit of your mind, or admitted even once, that you can even be capable of being wrong about anything you preach, which they have also testified in the past. But now they join forces with you, even promoting you as their debate champion.

That is absolutely Fascinating, but nothing new with the religious system of this world.

I believe all that is written in Scriptures. Including that the Christ "of the Bible", the "Scepter of God's Kingdom" my Redeemer, was with God even before Genesis. And HE is Advocating between me and His God even now.

The Christ you promote in Genesis, sending Eve into danger with no warning or "no assistance at all", your own words, doesn't exist in Scripture. At least I can find no evidence that it does.
 
Last edited:
@synergy
So stop your foolish act of looking outside the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.
If you desire to debate this subject, then start a thread on whatever subject you desire to name it, and then prove your point, I'm sure many will have a word to say.

I'm going to give you a quote from a man of God that he wrote shortly after the KJV came out out.

" Priests say that we know not the original, and our Bibles are not rightly translated, nor cannot be pronounced according to the original; besides in translations there are errors, for no translation is simply authentical, and the undoubted Word of God. We demand of you, answer if you can; as to how know you that your Hebrew and Greek copies are true copies? Is it not possible for any to write contrary to their copy, if copies may beprinted false, they may be written false, the art of Printing is not above 350 years old. Can you produce the first original copy, or any of those the Apostles wrote? If not, the cause is the same and you know the original no more than those that know not Greek or Hebrew? If you may depend upon the faithfulness of the Writer and Printer of your Copies, why not others upon those that did it upon oath? Doctor Fulke in his confutation of the Rheims Testament justifieth the English Translation of the Bible, in his “New Testament Confutation,” printed in 1589. But we receive not the truth by tradition. I would know of you that are so for Hebrew and Greek, &c., if the knowledge of the tongues be sufficient to teach those that have those tongues the mind of the Spirit of God in the Scriptures or no? If yea, then all that know these tongues know the mind of God; if no, then it is but an insufficient help, and what is an insufficient help worth more than nothing. The knowledge of Greek and Hebrew is a help to read a Greek and Hebrew Bible, because else they cannot read them. So the knowledge of the English tongue is of necessity to read the English Bible. The cause is the same; but the understanding the English tongue, and reading it in the Bible cannot give them to understand, the meaning of it no more than the knowledge of the tongues Greek and Hebrew though it helps them to read the Bible in those tongues, yet is not able to give them to understand the meaning of it. That this is so, some of them, who know the tongues confess; for Apollo was a learned man, he saw the first copies of the Bible, and if that could have caused him to know the mind of God what need had he to learn of Aquila a tradesman {one of the laity as the Priests use to say} and Priscilla his wife the mind of God as he did. Acts.18:26. Also what is the reason that those that know the tongues cannot agree among themselves? What is the mind of God in his Word, that some of you in your expositions are as contrary to each other as light is to darkness; the natural man cannot perceive the things that be of God; a natural man may be, and some are learned men it’s confessed; some of the Jesuits are good Scholars, &c., for they know the tongues, &c.; then it will follow a man may be such a learned man and yet cannot understand nor perceive the things of God. Nicodemus was a great scholar and teacher in Israel yet how simple was he concerning the meaning of Christ’s words. Tell me then what a help their human learning is to them in spiritual knowledge in the things of the Spirit. The Word saith that he reveals to us the deep things of God by his Spirit, I Cor.2:10; he saith not by Greek and Hebrew. If our translation be true then we can tell the meaning of it as well as you; if it be not true tell me what is that Preaching worth that is proved by a false translation, and if we must believe contrary to our translation because you say so, what is this but an implicit faith and human? And seeing you so differ among yourselves about the meaning of the word or the mind of God in it, tell me, how I may know which of you I am to believe? Also you confess that one word {in the ‘original’} could bear nine or ten divers significations; how know you which of them is the mind of God in that place, unless he reveal it to you? And if God please he can reveal it to a simple man, and God doth do so, and this is that for which Christ thanks his Father, because he hath hid these things from the wise and the learned, and revealed it unto babes, “the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee; and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed; and the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee; and he saith, I am not learned.” “For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes; the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.” Isa.29:10-12. Neither of them can read it, both put it off for they cannot understand it, the unlearned thinks as he hath been taught, that if he were learned in Greek and Hebrew he could understand it; but the former who was such a learned man could not do it, it is hid from the learned; for it’s not in being learned, nor in not being learned. What then will some say, it is because God hath not revealed it to them therefore they do not know it. The Lord saith that none can know the things of God, but he to whom the Spirit will reveal them. “But as it is written, eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit, for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him, even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him. But we have the mind of Christ.” I Cor.2:9-16. “I have more understanding than all my teachers, for thy testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts.” Psal.119:99-100. The knowledge of Greek, Hebrew and English are all human learning of equal excellency, necessity, and use for the translation and reading of the Bible; and as without the knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, the Bible could not be translated into English, so he that translated the Bible into English, could not have done it without the knowledge of the English tongue; therefore there is the same use and help and necessity of the English tongue as of the Greek or Hebrew tongue; so there is the same to be said for the French and Dutch tongue, and all other tongues and therefore why the Greek and Hebrew tongues should be of any more use and excellency than other tongues, there is no reason to be given for it. As Aaron the Priest set up the golden calf it was called a god and Aaron made Proclamation, Exod.32:4-8, &c., and the people idolized it and danced about it, so the Priests have set up Greek and Hebrew as a god, and the people rejoice exceedingly in it, for they idolize it and fall down and worship it, because the Priest have made a Proclamation for it and commended it for such a rare thing to help them to the knowledge of the mind of God. A golden business by custom is turned into necessity and it is in such an esteem as they do idolize it and worship it, as they did the calf. " (Samuel Richardson 1650)
 
You are having your own debate.

There is not biblical translation that says that John says the Word was The God.

Unitarianism - 1
Trinitarianism - 1

Spend some time reading this explanation of where it is and how it was translated.

From an ancient manuscript from The Hebrew Gospels , John https://www.hebrewgospels.com/_files/ugd/c68db9_a93ec196f4b144948b2632acae6fefab.pdf


YOCHANAN

1. In the beginning was the Son of Eloah. The Son of El was both with El, and the Son of El was Eloah

And that right there, boys and girls is the proof that The Son of God was God.


14. And so El was made flesh and dwelt among you. And we saw his light - and that he is echad alone, and was brought forth
from the Father, who is full of grace and truth.

Check mate.

I briefly looked at the manuscript itself. I knew that this manuscript wasn't part of historical early discussions of the Bible Canon. I can say that the script of the manuscript is late. Post 10th century.

I'm skeptical of the origin. If you're debating a "Jew" of this modern era, you're not going to convince them using this manuscript.

Though I believe that John 1:1 is a significant witness to the Divinity of Jesus Christ, it is not the most important or "bullet proof" witness to the Holy Trinity. It is a part of the discussion but the weight of evidence is so overwhelming in the context of the manuscriptal witness early within the Greek OT that John 1:1 is basically the "icing on the cake".

Just my penny.
 
First, I find it absolutely fascinating that you, a die hard Calvinist, was chosen by folks on this forum who know and have argued against your false religion for years, starting thread after thread after thread showing you Scripture after Scripture after Scripture which prove without a doubt that the religious doctrines you promote are not based on Scripture, but on the religious opinion of popular theologians they disagree with. And you have not recanted, repented, became renewed in the spirit of your mind, or admitted even once, that you can even be capable of being wrong about anything you preach, which they have also testified in the past. But now they join forces with you, even promoting you as their debate champion.

That is absolutely Fascinating, but nothing new with the religious system of this world.

I believe all that is written in Scriptures. Including that the Christ "of the Bible", the "Scepter of God's Kingdom" my Redeemer, was with God even before Genesis. And HE is Advocating between me and His God even now.

The Christ you promote in Genesis doesn't exist in Scripture.
Wait a minute.

I am no defender of Calvin and am at polar opposites with the idea of predestination but in truth I feel I could
join that debate in defense of the Divinity of Jesus Christ.

What my beliefs are other then this title have no bearing on who could , would or should make the debate 2 on 2.

You either do or do not believe Christ Jesus to be God, one of the three in the Godhead.

This is a yes or no choice not a "well I have to think about it" or "show me proof"

I DID. I started a thread with 11 proofs from NT scripture... which of course has morphed into a different direction.

Be that as it may... I know that RB has this belief too.

Now for your information... RB had original intentions to debate 3 people at the same time who are polar opposites when it comes to the belief of the divinity of Jesus.

He has asked each one, over the years to debate certain points and each time his request was ignored by them.

He asked me if I would put out a feeler about it and I did. See the following

A request

@Peterlag , @Runningman , @Keiw1

Will you please debate @RedBaker ~ one on one or all 3
of you together? And if not, please tell us all why not.

Pretty certain you know the subject.

And can be as soon as tomorrow if you so choose'

As you can see it was not the forum folks that asked him... it was his idea.

Admin said he would set it up but wanted even numbers on each side. One on one , Teo on two etc.

Their side has 2 confirmed from what I understand. And I believe his side does also.

Otherwise it will be one on one.

And a separate area for viewer to comment, from what I munderstand.

But whether or not you are a Calvinist does not have a bearing on this debate... only who you believe Jesus is.
 
First, I find it absolutely fascinating that you, a die hard Calvinist, was chosen by folks on this forum who know and have argued against your religion and called it a false religion for years, starting thread after thread after thread showing you Scripture after Scripture after Scripture which prove without a doubt that the religious doctrines you promote are not based on Scripture, but on the religious opinion of popular theologians they disagree with. And you have not recanted, repented, became renewed in the spirit of your mind, or admitted even once, that you can even be capable of being wrong about anything you preach, which they have also testified in the past. But now they join forces with you, even promoting you as their debate champion.
A few words concerning your ranting spirit.

1. ) No one is prompting me, (not even sure if they even like me) not even myself, I just said would debate any who deny the deity of Jesus Christ.

2.) You are using some of those deceitful debating tactics that I said were many, around an hundreds plus. I believe in unconditional election of grace, which this debate is not about, but would love to debate you concerning. Under the umbrella of Calvinism are a few different groups among which I'm not part of, such as the Reformed faith community of believers. I do not believe in infant baptism, and other doctrines that makes them of the Reformed Calvinist community. I'm a Particular Baptist believers ~ men like Samuel Richardson, John Brine, John Gill, etc., much Like John the Baptist!

3.) Repent of WHAT? Studyman, you do not know me, I have changed on many doctrines that was first taught to me by some sincere, godly men, yet wrong in their understanding. I was first taught against unconditional election; taught free will of the sinner; taught in a secret rapture of the saints; taught in a present burning hellfire; etc., etc. all which I have seen the truth on and have repented and changed! No problem for me to changed with another saint providing me with scriptures proving my error. You do not know me.

Now, a question for you...why did you not give me a simple yes or not to my question that I asked you to do? I know why, and trust others do also know why.

Studyman, let me go a little slower with you no pun intended. So, to see if you believe what you are saying let me ask you this simple question: The Word in John 1:1 is God, period, without any qualifications. So, are you ready to confess that Jesus Christ was God manifest in the fest, yes, or no? If no, then "you do not believe" in the true deity of Jesus Christ as the God of Genesis 1:1.

I'm coming back to consider the rest of your post, but you need to answer my question, with a yes or no, if no, then explain yourself.
 
Last edited:
@Jim
The only divine revelation you have access to came through the ancient Hebrew and Koine Greek languages. There is no indication anywhere that any translation is to be considered divine revelation.
The KJV is for the English speaking people of this word! If not then where is God's revelation to us who speak English?

2nd Peter 1:20​

“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”

Jim, not going to debate this now, but will if that's where folks want to go.

2nd Timothy 3:16​

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

Jim, most of God's children are of the ranks of fishermen, tax collectors, carpenters, common every day folks, the blue collars workers, etc. These folks are not educated according to the world's standards, but they have the true wisdom of God that you and I should be seeking after, and seeking to be their friends. We have more so-called Dr.'s in religion and the church has never been so dumb spiritually speaking as it is now concerning spiritual truths! Enough for now on this subject.
 
@Stuidyman
was chosen by folks on this forum
Btw, no one chose me, I offered to debate, just like you could make the same offer to debate me if you will, along with any other person who desires to be part of it.

Right now, I think this should most likely be given a week for folks to decide and for rules to be set. I do have to leave to go out of town sometime toward the end of the week and may not be back until late Monday afternoon. But, the folks in charge can do as best for them. I do not even know who's sheriff in town.

So Studyman, jump in and show us what you truly believe concerning Jesus' deity...was he indeed God manifest in the likeness of sinful flesh, or no. I know what you believe, I just want others to know and to hear straight from your mouth. I have said once and will say it again, you religion is a mixture of Jehovah Witnesses, and SDA.
 
IMO if it was written and authenticated it is worth at least reading.
Who did the authenticating?
  • Jesus authenticated the Hebrew OT Scriptures by reading from them.
  • The Apostles authenticated the Greek OT (LXX) Scriptures by quoting from them.
  • The Apostles authenticated the Greek NT Scriptures by writing them.
Are there any other authenticated scriptures?
 
@Jim

The KJV is for the English speaking people of this word! If not then where is God's revelation to us who speak English?

2nd Peter 1:20​

“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”

Jim, not going to debate this now, but will if that's where folks want to go.

2nd Timothy 3:16​

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

Jim, most of God's children are of the ranks of fishermen, tax collectors, carpenters, common every day folks, the blue collars workers, etc. These folks are not educated according to the world's standards, but they have the true wisdom of God that you and I should be seeking after, and seeking to be their friends. We have more so-called Dr.'s in religion and the church has never been so dumb spiritually speaking as it is now concerning spiritual truths! Enough for now on this subject.

A theology based upon your own immediate need. A theology of your necessity.

Using the KJV, I'll give you my thoughts on this....

Php 1:15 Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:
Php 1:16 The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
Php 1:17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
Php 1:18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.

We can rejoice to find Christ within the pages of the KJV. We can rejoice in such. I do rejoice. I know the KJV better than any other translation. In many ways is better than most translations today.

However, it is not exacting in many places. We are all bound by language. Earthly languages. It is so deeply driven into our minds that is impossible to separate ourselves from it. We "hear our own voice" in our "native tongue". This isn't always good nor always evil. There is a balance to be found in this. A balance that takes a lifetime to begin to understand.

Unbelief is often written into the words of human language. English is no different. Hebrew is no different. Greek is about as close you can get to know the revelation of God once given to the saints.

Even then, there is a better way. Love. You can't go wrong with love..... even if that love takes our lives from us. We have more enduring reward. Things that don't fade away. Eternal things in Jesus Christ. We can know Him deeper than the limited words of human language.
 
@Jim

The KJV is for the English speaking people of this word! If not then where is God's revelation to us who speak English?
I believe in the inerrancy of the scriptures as initially provided by the original authors. That cannot be applied to any of the subsequent copies or translations.
2nd Peter 1:20
“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”
That has nothing whatsoever to do with copies or translations.
Jim, not going to debate this now, but will if that's where folks want to go.
That is a debate that you could not possibly win. You have neither the ability nor the authority to establish what you wish to believe.
2nd Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”
Again, that cannot apply to any copies or translations.
 
Who did the authenticating?
  • Jesus authenticated the Hebrew OT Scriptures by reading from them.
  • The Apostles authenticated the Greek OT (LXX) Scriptures by quoting from them.
  • The Apostles authenticated the Greek NT Scriptures by writing them.
Are there any other authenticated scriptures?
Who authenticated what was translated into the English Bible.

All old people from back then would have been dead.

Example... who authenticated Easter in Jimmy's translation? I have heard it was he, himself
 
Who authenticated what was translated into the English Bible.
English Text is not on the same level as the Inspired original Hebrew and Koine Greek Text.

The English Text would normally be produced by a committee of Hebrew and Greek Professional Scholars, Linguists, Philologists, Historians, and Classicists. Exceptions are cults like the JWs.
 
@synergy

If you desire to debate this subject, then start a thread on whatever subject you desire to name it, and then prove your point, I'm sure many will have a word to say.

I'm going to give you a quote from a man of God that he wrote shortly after the KJV came out out.

" Priests say that we know not the original, and our Bibles are not rightly translated, nor cannot be pronounced according to the original; besides in translations there are errors, for no translation is simply authentical, and the undoubted Word of God. We demand of you, answer if you can; as to how know you that your Hebrew and Greek copies are true copies? Is it not possible for any to write contrary to their copy, if copies may beprinted false, they may be written false, the art of Printing is not above 350 years old. Can you produce the first original copy, or any of those the Apostles wrote? If not, the cause is the same and you know the original no more than those that know not Greek or Hebrew? If you may depend upon the faithfulness of the Writer and Printer of your Copies, why not others upon those that did it upon oath? Doctor Fulke in his confutation of the Rheims Testament justifieth the English Translation of the Bible, in his “New Testament Confutation,” printed in 1589. But we receive not the truth by tradition. I would know of you that are so for Hebrew and Greek, &c., if the knowledge of the tongues be sufficient to teach those that have those tongues the mind of the Spirit of God in the Scriptures or no? If yea, then all that know these tongues know the mind of God; if no, then it is but an insufficient help, and what is an insufficient help worth more than nothing. The knowledge of Greek and Hebrew is a help to read a Greek and Hebrew Bible, because else they cannot read them. So the knowledge of the English tongue is of necessity to read the English Bible. The cause is the same; but the understanding the English tongue, and reading it in the Bible cannot give them to understand, the meaning of it no more than the knowledge of the tongues Greek and Hebrew though it helps them to read the Bible in those tongues, yet is not able to give them to understand the meaning of it. That this is so, some of them, who know the tongues confess; for Apollo was a learned man, he saw the first copies of the Bible, and if that could have caused him to know the mind of God what need had he to learn of Aquila a tradesman {one of the laity as the Priests use to say} and Priscilla his wife the mind of God as he did. Acts.18:26. Also what is the reason that those that know the tongues cannot agree among themselves? What is the mind of God in his Word, that some of you in your expositions are as contrary to each other as light is to darkness; the natural man cannot perceive the things that be of God; a natural man may be, and some are learned men it’s confessed; some of the Jesuits are good Scholars, &c., for they know the tongues, &c.; then it will follow a man may be such a learned man and yet cannot understand nor perceive the things of God. Nicodemus was a great scholar and teacher in Israel yet how simple was he concerning the meaning of Christ’s words. Tell me then what a help their human learning is to them in spiritual knowledge in the things of the Spirit. The Word saith that he reveals to us the deep things of God by his Spirit, I Cor.2:10; he saith not by Greek and Hebrew. If our translation be true then we can tell the meaning of it as well as you; if it be not true tell me what is that Preaching worth that is proved by a false translation, and if we must believe contrary to our translation because you say so, what is this but an implicit faith and human? And seeing you so differ among yourselves about the meaning of the word or the mind of God in it, tell me, how I may know which of you I am to believe? Also you confess that one word {in the ‘original’} could bear nine or ten divers significations; how know you which of them is the mind of God in that place, unless he reveal it to you? And if God please he can reveal it to a simple man, and God doth do so, and this is that for which Christ thanks his Father, because he hath hid these things from the wise and the learned, and revealed it unto babes, “the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee; and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed; and the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee; and he saith, I am not learned.” “For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes; the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.” Isa.29:10-12. Neither of them can read it, both put it off for they cannot understand it, the unlearned thinks as he hath been taught, that if he were learned in Greek and Hebrew he could understand it; but the former who was such a learned man could not do it, it is hid from the learned; for it’s not in being learned, nor in not being learned. What then will some say, it is because God hath not revealed it to them therefore they do not know it. The Lord saith that none can know the things of God, but he to whom the Spirit will reveal them. “But as it is written, eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit, for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him, even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him. But we have the mind of Christ.” I Cor.2:9-16. “I have more understanding than all my teachers, for thy testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts.” Psal.119:99-100. The knowledge of Greek, Hebrew and English are all human learning of equal excellency, necessity, and use for the translation and reading of the Bible; and as without the knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, the Bible could not be translated into English, so he that translated the Bible into English, could not have done it without the knowledge of the English tongue; therefore there is the same use and help and necessity of the English tongue as of the Greek or Hebrew tongue; so there is the same to be said for the French and Dutch tongue, and all other tongues and therefore why the Greek and Hebrew tongues should be of any more use and excellency than other tongues, there is no reason to be given for it. As Aaron the Priest set up the golden calf it was called a god and Aaron made Proclamation, Exod.32:4-8, &c., and the people idolized it and danced about it, so the Priests have set up Greek and Hebrew as a god, and the people rejoice exceedingly in it, for they idolize it and fall down and worship it, because the Priest have made a Proclamation for it and commended it for such a rare thing to help them to the knowledge of the mind of God. A golden business by custom is turned into necessity and it is in such an esteem as they do idolize it and worship it, as they did the calf. " (Samuel Richardson 1650)
That clearly reveals why there are hundreds of christian denominations scattered all across the English world. Everyone is a Pope with his own Bible.
 
@praise_yeshua
Even then, there is a better way. Love. You can't go wrong with love..... even if that love takes our lives from us. We have more enduring reward. Things that don't fade away. Eternal things in Jesus Christ. We can know Him deeper than the limited words of human language.
Brother, I agreed, I just read through 1st Corinthians 13, one reason is because I need those words ingrained on my mind and hidden in my heart.
 
Who authenticated what was translated into the English Bible.

All old people from back then would have been dead.

Example... who authenticated Easter in Jimmy's translation? I have heard it was he, himself

There is a reason Easter is there but it is based upon doctrine and not translating Pascha.

Easter can be celebrated as we know it now.....up to a month or more from the High Sabbath of the Atonement.

The Bishops Bible of the era also had Easter. The Geneva Bible did not.
 
Back
Top Bottom