Is the NIV dishonest?

[donadams]

Its speaks against apostolic succession.

i never said anything about apostolic succession, i was asking about the use of the word tradition

 

[donadams]

Its speaks against apostolic succession.

did the apostles have authority to make more apostles?

 

[donadams]

What the difference between NT scripture and introduced traditions is that what your asking? Those who teach and preach should do so from the NT and not go beyond what is written.

If Paul considered anything in judgments he made it was the law not traditions. It's clear to me He saw all the law as law.

Such as,
The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. 18For Scripture says, “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,” and “The worker deserves his wages.

Those who were standing near Paul said, “How dare you insult God’s high priest!”
Paul replied, “Brothers, I did not realize that he was the high priest; for it is written: ‘Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people.

Paul does not follow this advise!

1 cor 11:23 as i received of the Lord (not sacred scripture) i have made known unto you!

 

[donadams]

What the difference between NT scripture and introduced traditions is that what your asking? Those who teach and preach should do so from the NT and not go beyond what is written.

If Paul considered anything in judgments he made it was the law not traditions. It's clear to me He saw all the law as law.

Such as,
The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. 18For Scripture says, “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,” and “The worker deserves his wages.

Those who were standing near Paul said, “How dare you insult God’s high priest!”
Paul replied, “Brothers, I did not realize that he was the high priest; for it is written: ‘Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people.

I am only asking about the use if the word tradition, Im not concerned at this moment about what are and what are not valid christian traditions

please stop assuming things

again why do some versions use "tradition" only for negative statements and "teaching" for positive statements?

thks

 

[WIP]

the word tradition!

if it is in a negative context it called "tradition" if its in a positive context it called "teaching"

Tradition could imply something that is done because, "That's how we've always done it."
Tradition could also mean the handing down of sound teaching from one generation to another.

I could see a concern if the former definition is being implied but if the latter, which is how I believe it is used, then I don't see any reason for concern.

Even in our own denominations and especially in the Catholic church, much of what is taught are traditions that have been handed down, are they not?

 

[WIP]

I am only asking about the use if the word tradition, Im not concerned at this moment about what are and what are not valid christian traditions

please stop assuming things

again why do some versions use "tradition" only for negative statements and "teaching" for positive statements?

thks

In your opening post, you said both the KJV and NIV use "tradition" in the negative statements and that they didn't in positive statements, which sounds like the opposite of the issue you are trying to make.

 

[donadams]

In your opening post, you said both the KJV and NIV use "tradition" in the negative statements and that they didn't in positive statements, which sounds like the opposite of the issue you are trying to make.

no the KJV uses "tradition" in both cases

the NIV uses two words" tradition" only in reference to the negative aspect of tradition and "teaching" in reference to the positive aspect of tradition

NIV) Mt 15:3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?


KJV) Mk 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

NIV) Mk 7:8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.


KJV) Mk 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition...

NIV) Mk 7:13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition...


[positive examples]


KJV) 2 thes 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

NIV) 2 thes 2:15 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

 

[donadams]

Tradition could imply something that is done because, "That's how we've always done it."
Tradition could also mean the handing down of sound teaching from one generation to another.

I could see a concern if the former definition is being implied but if the latter, which is how I believe it is used, then I don't see any reason for concern.

Even in our own denominations and especially in the Catholic church, much of what is taught are traditions that have been handed down, are they not?

yes you right

 

[Free]

again why do some versions use "tradition" only for negative statements and "teaching" for positive statements?

You would have to email the publisher(s) to see if they can answer the question or if any on the translation committee(s) will provide one. Just for another comparison of one of the verses you provided:

1Co 11:2 I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you. (NIV)

1Co 11:2 I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the teachings, just as I passed them on to you. (NIV, 1984)

Here is the meaning of the word used in your examples:

paradosis
Thayer Definition:
1) giving up, giving over
1a) the act of giving up
1b) the surrender of cities
2) a giving over which is done by word of mouth or in writing, i.e. tradition by instruction, narrative, precept, etc.
2a) objectively, that which is delivered, the substance of a teaching
2b) of the body of precepts, especially ritual, which in the opinion of the later Jews were orally delivered by Moses and orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subsequent generations, which precepts, both illustrating and expanding the written law, as they did were to be obeyed with equal reverence

 

[Randy]

Paul does not follow this advise!

1 cor 11:23 as i received of the Lord (not sacred scripture) i have made known unto you!

In that case yes but His source was the head of the body of Christ. He also received the gospel by revelation not from any man. But he did consider the law as well in judgments he made.

 

[donadams]

You would have to email the publisher(s) to see if they can answer the question or if any on the translation committee(s) will provide one. Just for another comparison of one of the verses you provided:

1Co 11:2 I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you. (NIV)

1Co 11:2 I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the teachings, just as I passed them on to you. (NIV, 1984)

Here is the meaning of the word used in your examples:

paradosis
Thayer Definition:
1) giving up, giving over
1a) the act of giving up
1b) the surrender of cities
2) a giving over which is done by word of mouth or in writing, i.e. tradition by instruction, narrative, precept, etc.
2a) objectively, that which is delivered, the substance of a teaching
2b) of the body of precepts, especially ritual, which in the opinion of the later Jews were orally delivered by Moses and orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subsequent generations, which precepts, both illustrating and expanding the written law, as they did were to be obeyed with equal reverence

thanks

does this also apply in the new covenant?

 

[donadams]

In that case yes but His source was the head of the body of Christ. He also received the gospel by revelation not from any man. But he did consider the law as well in judgments he made.

but you said "Those who teach and preach should do so from the NT and not go beyond what is written"
???

so you don't really believe the doctrine of "sola scriptura?"

 

[donadams]

another question would be, what are these traditions? 2 thes 2:15

mt 16:16-17?
1 cor 11:23-30?

what else?

thks

 

[Free]

thanks

does this also apply in the new covenant?

Does what apply? We are talking about translation differences. What does that have to do with the old and new covenants?

 

[Randy]

did the apostles have authority to make more apostles?

There were 12 apostles despite any other counts. There are 12 foundations of the new Jerusalem named after the 12 not 13.
An office beyond the life of the body as they will sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Isreal. To sit on one of those 12 thrones is not for any man to give. Only one abandoned that office and the 11 sought to replace that one.
Leaders and overseers were appointed. Barnabas was appointed by the Lord. James was a leader as well.

Jesus passes out gifts of the spirit. Apostles, teachers, etc..
Signs miracles and wonders follow a true apostle of the Lord. But even if one performed such signs, I would still ask my Lord for authentication.

James the son of Zebedee was put to the sword. Did they seek to replace Him? No, because he didn't abandon his office.

So, no and don't think I'm alone in this though you might consider your Pope as one. In general Protestants don't hold to any modern-day Apostle.

 

[Randy]

but you said "Those who teach and preach should do so from the NT and not go beyond what is written"
???

so you don't really believe the doctrine of "sola scriptura?"

Come on Don meaning the OT and NT. Paul's source was the head of the body of Christ in your example.

 

[donadams]

Does what apply? We are talking about translation differences. What does that have to do with the old and new covenants?

your quote: orally delivered by Moses and orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subsequent generations,

does this also apply in the new testament under the apostles?

case of the bereans

The Bereans incident!

The berean incident supports both scripture and tradition!

(((NOT SCRIPTURE ALONE!)))

acts 17:3 Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ.

(There is no single verse in the O.T. that says this)

one verse that refers to suffering is Isa 53 but it does not say it refers to Christ.

acts 8:30-35

35 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?

31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:

33 In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.

34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?

35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.

The fact that Isa 53 refers to Jesus Christ is only according to apostolic tradition of Paul and Philip!

The jews and I have communicated with them on this site DO NOT accept Isa 53 as reference to Christ but to Israel itself, and they say Paul is a hetetic and traitor.


The bereans believed both the scripture and tradition!!!


(sacred tradition is found all over yhe new testament, and was handed down decades before the new testament was written, and centuries before the canon was itself collected by apostolic authority and approved by the pope of rome in 381-2 at the council of rome!)

examples

Matthew 4:4
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (every word the apostles heard from Christ)

mt 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

mt 16:16-17

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Lk 11:28 blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.

acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words...

acts 4:31 and they spake the word of God with boldness.

1 cor 11:23 as I received of the Lord I have handed down to you...

1 thes 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

2 thes 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

thks

 

[donadams]

There were 12 apostles despite any other counts. There are 12 foundations of the new Jerusalem named after the 12 not 13.
An office beyond the life of the body as they will sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Isreal. To sit on one of those 12 thrones is not for any man to give. Only one abandoned that office and the 11 sought to replace that one.
Leaders and overseers were appointed. Barnabas was appointed by the Lord. James was a leader as well.

Jesus passes out gifts of the spirit. Apostles, teachers, etc..
Signs miracles and wonders follow a true apostle of the Lord. But even if one performed such signs, I would still ask my Lord for authentication.

James the son of Zebedee was put to the sword. Did they seek to replace Him? No, because he didn't abandon his office.

So, no and don't think I'm alone in this though you might consider your Pope as one. In general Protestants don't hold to any modern-day Apostle.

yes scripture requires the apostles continue until Christ returns mt 28:19 acts 1:8
authority same as Christ Jn 20:2-23

21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.

22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

apostles are God breathed not just the scripture some of them wrote!

I suppose you don't include Paul cos that makes 13? not to mention titus and timothy

 

[donadams]

Come on Don meaning the OT and NT. Paul's source was the head of the body of Christ in your example.

please resoond to post #37

 

[Randy]

please resoond to post #37

You're quoting the NT. Thats scripture. Their source was God.

What is your point in all this?