If Jesus Preached in Your Church, Which Bible Would He Use?

[JohnDB]

The only arguments against the HCSB I've seen to date are pretty weak. But a 50 page thread sounds much too scary to read!

I'm sure you could find a thread in this forum which is 50 pages long...maybe even a recent one.

 

[K2CHRIST]

Jesus read from the scriptures then he would read from them now.. Jesus Christ the same yesterday today and forever..

I like it!

Yes. He does that today. So many of the post seem to forget that He is the same today. And if we are listening, doesn't He use the Bible or Bibles you have. If we listen to Him we have noticed that He provides for us. He provided what we have and so if we have a variety of Bibles, wasn't that from God. What purpose would Satan have for giving you a Bible. If you don't listen to God, perhaps you might wind up with an incorrect Bible or book, because who then are you listening to? But if you listen to the Lord He will teach you and make sure you have what is needed. If for no other reason than He is your teacher. So He will read from the Bible and talk to you about it.

 

[Radagast]

I'm sure you could find a thread in this forum which is 50 pages long...maybe even a recent one.

And I've avoided all those because they looked very scary. My experience on other forums is that heat generally exceeds light after 20 pages or so.

 

[Cygnus]

(ESV) “You go up to the feast. I am not going up to this feast, for my time has not yet fully come.” After saying this, he remained in Galilee. But after his brothers had gone up to the feast, then he also went up, not publicly but in private.

This verse is saying Jesus wasn't ready to go to the feast...as Jesus....as himself, His public ministry. But rather Jesus did go as an observer in private.

There appears to be nothing wrong with that verse.

 

[K2CHRIST]

And I've avoided all those because they looked very scary. My experience on other forums is that heat generally exceeds light after 20 pages or so.

Yes, this type of thread (and there are many of them) tend to promote arguments over little unimportant differences instead of glorifying Jesus Christ, or leading people to Jesus Christ. Still, sometimes there are little nuggets of good information mixed in. So if I don't have much time, I avoid them, but if I do have time I like to read and see if something interesting is written and I usually find something.

 

[Malachi]

Yet the Septuagint is what Jesus and the rest of the NT writers quoted.

That is a common fallacy. In Judea and Galilee the traditional Hebrew Bible was used. Furthermore, the Septuagint is a corruption of the Hebrew.

 

[Radagast]

That is a common fallacy. In Judea and Galilee the traditional Hebrew Bible was used.

Actually, brewmama is correct. They did use the Septuagint, and the Gospels often quote the Septuagint word-for-word in the Greek, even in cases where the Hebrew is quite different. For example:

Matt 12:21: and in his name the Gentiles will hope (Greek: καὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν)
Isaiah 42:4b (Septuagint): and in his name shall the Gentiles hope (Greek identical except for one preposition: καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν)
Isaiah 42:4b (Hebrew): and the isles shall wait for his law.

Matt 21:16: Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise (Greek: ἐκ στόματος νηπίων καὶ θηλαζόντων κατηρτίσω αἶνον)
Psalm 8:2 (Septuagint): Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou prepared praise (Greek identical: ἐκ στόματος νηπίων καὶ θηλαζόντων κατηρτίσω αἶνον)
Psalm 8:2 (Hebrew): Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength.

Furthermore, the Septuagint is a corruption of the Hebrew.

No it isn't. It's a translation of the Hebrew (but probably from a different Hebrew than the one we use today). After all, if it was corrupt, why did the gospel writers use it?

 

[jasonc]

That is a common fallacy. In Judea and Galilee the traditional Hebrew Bible was used. Furthermore, the Septuagint is a corruption of the Hebrew.

Koine greek,was lingua francua.if the lxx is a corruption of the Hebrew ,it was found at the dead seas scrolls along with the older pre mss texts. Yet koine Greek was used in the Lord's day and the nt was written in it.there wasnt a byzantine empire there to tell Jesus thus the Greek he Should use.

 

[jasonc]

I don't like the lxx but it's what God wanted.who am I to say he is wrong.

 

[turnorburn]

This verse is saying Jesus wasn't ready to go to the feast...as Jesus....as himself, His public ministry. But rather Jesus did go as an observer in private.

There appears to be nothing wrong with that verse.

No, the verse says: I am not going up to this feast

 

[Cygnus]

No, the verse says: I am not going up to this feast

The "Jesus" they wanted to go to the feast was the Jesus they were following with the expectation that His message was to be presented openly to the crowd. Jesus in a sense said He would not go to the feast in that "office".

Yes, Jesus did go, but went in private. While at the feast He didn't do His "Jesus stuff"...in that sense Jesus didn't go to the feast.

 

[wwjd_kilden]

Jesus is the "word", He doesn't need a Bible to preach.

I knew someone would have said what I was going to say :D

 

[WIP]

I'm thinking that if Jesus actually would preach from a Bible it would be the original text however we would all hear it in our own language.

 

[JohnDB]

I'm thinking that if Jesus actually would preach from a Bible it would be the original text however we would all hear it in our own language.

That's the ticket...

So whose translation would that fall under?

Mine?
Cool beans!

 

[Jim Parker]

I knew someone would have said what I was going to say :biggrin

It's a common error of assuming that the modern English word "WORD" is equivalent to the ancient Greek word "LOGOS."

 

[Jim Parker]

That is a common fallacy. In Judea and Galilee the traditional Hebrew Bible was used.

AT the time of Jesus, the Hebrew in which the scriptures were written was no longer spoken. The most commonly used scriptures were the LXX.

Furthermore, the Septuagint is a corruption of the Hebrew.

The LXX is a translation of the Hebrew and it wan undertaken so that the average Jew, who no longer spoke the then ancient Hebrew, could read the scriptures in a language he did speak.
IF the LXX is a corruption of the Hebrew then so is the KJV a corruption of both the Hebrew and the Greek.

 

[wwjd_kilden]

It's a common error of assuming that the modern English word "WORD" is equivalent to the ancient Greek word "LOGOS."

you are missing the point

Jesus is God. Don't you think He knows the bible by heart, no matter what "version"?
Maybe we get it GodVersion

 

[th1b.taylor]

It's a common error of assuming that the modern English word "WORD" is equivalent to the ancient Greek word "LOGOS."

Jim, I don't wish to be rude but one cannot tightly define any word as you have without losing 90% of the beauty of the English Language. Context, often, does more to define a word used than Webster's ever does. I see people use him instead of Him but because of the context I know of whom they speak.

 

[Jim Parker]

Jim, I don't wish to be rude but one cannot tightly define any word as you have without losing 90% of the beauty of the English Language. Context, often, does more to define a word used than Webster's ever does. I see people use him instead of Him but because of the context I know of whom they speak.

Brother T; I was responding to the comment that Jesus is the "Word" meaning the modern, English usage of "word." What JOhn told us is that HE is the LOGOS which is vastly greater than just "word".

OF course Jesus is the word. ANd he is infinitely more as the LOGOS.

 

[Jim Parker]

you are missing the point
Jesus is God.

That was my point. (more or less)