volgadon
-
Posts
1446 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by volgadon
-
-
"that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works?"
I believe requires that scripture be sufficient, trustworthy and authoritative or else how can one be sure.
None of which requires scripture to be perfect and infallible.
-
The Holy Spirit has confirmed it. Choose to disbelieve if that is what you want to do.
So why bring up scholars then in the first place?
-
Like I already said, ultimately it is only the confirmation by the Holy Spirit that counts. It is the fact that Mormons are so good at this that I am drawn to them.
Smacks of a dodge. If you have sources supporting your reading, please provide them.
-
Yes. He was their Hebrew bible scholar.
Not all that impressive when we consider that he has degrees in a field not known for rigorous biblical scholarship and worked at an institution not known for rigorous biblical scholarship, to say the least. Where has he supported your reading and who is the anonymous individual?
-
Ok, I need to make a correction, Stan Udd seems to have been a professor of Bible, but all his degrees are theology.
-
Stan Udd at the Grace University of the Bible and someone else on a Jewish newsgroup.
You mean a Stan Udd who is nowhere on the faculty or staff of Grace University and an anonymous individual on a nameless Jewish newsgroup?
-
Two Hebrew bible scholars agree with the meaning that I have proposed.
Names?
-
Isaiah 45:6
I am the Lord and there is none else. (Nothing besides God exists)
Read v. 5 & 7 for the context.
-
I seriously doubt that Paul, Peter, James, John, Luke etc. thought for even one minute that the scriptures they had in their time had copying or translating errors even though the Pentateuch was "inspired" 1500 years before them, copied numerous times,(they didn't have the original either) and even translated into Greek. (Septuagint)
I find it very hard to credit your statement when the raison d'etre for the group known as scribes was to correct copyist errors as well as errors in interpretation.
The Septuagint was even quoted in the New Testament therefore you have a God-breathed translation.
The Septuagint was quoted by the Greek writers because it was the most commonly available translation into Greek. It is full of places which obviously are translation errors, such as Isaiah 40:3.
-
Do you believe the Bible is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works? If yes then why bring it up, if not then the Bible is not the word of God.
I believe that scripture is profitable (or in other words, useful) for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. None of this requires infallibility.
-
Because, obviously, the concept of zero is heretical.
Math is heretical.
-
It only by taking these words precisely that the truth is derived. This truth has been confirmed by direct revelation.
That does not answer my question. I can take these words precisely without having to treat them as a precise mathematical specification. I am not really impressed by you direct revelation bit either. I am not required to believe any revelation contradicting established doctrine unless it comes from the Lord's designated and authorised representative on this earth. You'll have to do better to establish the validity of your prooftext for panentheism.
Watch the video below. Is he really saying that the bathroom does not, has never, and never will exist?
I can provide plenty of examples of how "one" in the Bible and the world surrounding it was not a precise mathematical specification.
-
Isaiah 45:6 "I am the Lord, and there is none else"
If the above verse is taken as a precise mathematical specification (no weasel wording allowed) then it literally states that God exactly equals the mathematical universal set.
In other non mathematical terms this means that {God exists and nothing at all besides God exists}.
Ultimately my understanding of the meaning of this verse does not come from Math, or English or even Hebrew. It comes from direct revelation by God himself.
Why do we have to take an ancient Judean text as a precise mathematical specification?
-
Babylonian Talmud
Mishnah
Syriac Version
Targum
Palestinian Targum
Umm, no, these aren't families of ancient Biblical texts.
The Mishnah is a codification of the Jewish oral law containing very few biblical quotes. The talmuds are discussions of the Mishnah.
The other three examples you've provided are paraphrases on the Bible.
What I meant by families are groups of manuscripts showing a clear relationship to each other.
However the advent of the Dead Sea Scripture has shown the even the much maligned Samaritan is actually more accurate than the tradition Masoretic Text
What has been shown is that the Samaritan Pentateuch is an example of the late Palestinian type out of which the Masoretic grew as well.
-
Can you post more info, or provide a link where you get your information? I am having a discussion with a friend at work about the coming forth of the Bible. I'm trying to get him to watch the new BYU produced documentary series Fires of Faith. But, I'd love to read more of this info.
I used to debate this with evangelical anti-Mormons on facebook.
Usually I'm not terribly keen on posting wikipedia links, but these have useful charts. Biblical manuscript - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Categories of New Testament manuscripts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here is a nice introduction. Textual Criticism
I'll post my other resources as I come across them.
-
Additionally, I would suggest that your implication that the Bible translations are rife with editorial additions meant to skew readers towards one doctrine or another is rather overblown--especially when we have roughly 30,000 manuscripts to compare now.
Far more pertinent to the discussion is what number of those manuscripts are late and what number are all from the same textual family. 30,000 isn't terribly impressive once we see how many are late descendants of only a few manuscript groups.
-
Performance artist gives birth in NYC art gallery | ksl.com
NEW YORK (AP) - A performance artist who said giving birth is the "highest form of art" has delivered a baby boy _ inside a New York City art gallery.
Marni Kotak gave birth at 10:17 a.m. on Tuesday, the Microscope Gallery in Brooklyn said in a brief statement, adding that everyone was recuperating on Wednesday. It said the baby was 21 inches long and weighed 9 pounds, 2 ounces
Don't think she gave any encores.
-
Would you really have us be so uncertain of scripture that we simply rely on what the church leaders say instead? Or, do you mean to imply that realistically, LDS would do better to just study the Triple, since the Bible is translated and transmitted with so many errors that we really do not know what's what???
We don't rely exclusively on either.
-
The Bible has no mistakes. As I said in the post, our translations have none worth fussing about. Find me the original manuscripts to the Bible, and if it is truly God-breathed/inspired, do you suppose he included error?
God reveals himself to a prophet in order to convey a message to man. He tailors the content and form to our finite and fallible understanding. This tailoring includes the prophet who conveys the message received during his encounter with God.
-
I have nothing to fear... nothing will ever happen to my house!
I think the chances of my house hitting an iceberg are pretty slim.
-
The Jerusalem Bible - the most scholarly of all English Bibles says, in response to Moses question:
We can certainly debate that, the new JPS is every inch as scholarly when it comes to the Hebrew Bible, as is Robert Alter's recent translation, if not more so.
But if they ask me what his name is, what am I to tell them. And God said to Moses. "I am who I am. This' he added is what you must say to the sons of Israel: "I Am has sent me to you." And God also said unto Moses, "You are to say to the sons of Israel: Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob has sent me to you."
I am that I am is probably a better translation in this case, asw the Hebrew doesn't use the word "who." Not that it matters a whole lot.
Robert Millet says that he thinks the expression represents what is known as a Hiphil construction, a causative form of the verb [to be]; in short, the Lord's words would mean "I cause to exist" or "I cause to be." This form expresses continuos duration and so it implies that God maintains of sustains.
Robert Millet is far from the only one to hold that opinion. It is certainly reasonable. Other options include causing rain and lightning; tumultuous noise; always existing; costantly present with his people.
-
Who are these sons of the mighty? Royalty? Judges' children? The sons of generals?
Gods. The verse states "among the sons of elim" (בִּבְנֵי אֵלִים).
-
Which brings me to what I already said: "Even if they did, that isn't what the Trinity doctrine states anyway, so they would be incorrect."
On my mission we had some trinitarians state just that, but they were drunk...
-
I have been given a strong hint by a couple of posters to move to another forum if I want to discuss things in the manner in which I have been discussing LDS beliefs. Since I have not come here to offend anyone, I will take the hint and this will be my last post on this forum. Thanks to all who have been so polite and gracious. I have really enjoyed my time here and have learned more than I knew when I came here.
Frankly, they had no business whatsoever to tell you that.
God-breathed
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
How refreshing in a protestant.
If all have sinned and fallen short, then none can be perfect, right?
Since the scriptures are sufficient, who needs grace?
Whatever floats your boat.