Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What a clear picture of our suffering Lord, yet the so called experts say this is not scripture.
Wisdom 2:12-21
12 Therefore let us lie in wait for the righteous; because he is not for our turn, and he is clean contrary to our doings: he upbraideth us with our offending the law, and objecteth to our infamy the transgressings of our education. 13 He professeth to have the knowledge of God: and he calleth himself the child of the Lord. 14 He was made to reprove our thoughts. 15 He is grievous unto us even to behold: for his life is not like other men’s, his ways are of another fashion. 16 We are esteemed of him as counterfeits: he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness: he pronounceth the end of the just to be blessed, and maketh his boast that God is his father.
17 Let us see if his words be true: and let us prove what shall happen in the end of him. 18 For if the just man be the son of God, he will help him, and deliver him from the hand of his enemies. 19 Let us examine him with despitefulness and torture, that we may know his meekness, and prove his patience. 20 Let us condemn him with a shameful death: for by his own saying he shall be respected.
21 Such things they did imagine, and were deceived: for their own wickedness hath blinded them.
Can you not see the reference of the word spoken here with that of Jesus and the apostles?
Kapzpur, both are correct in what they are saying. In Mark 14:62, Mark simply records that Jesus said 'I am', in answer to the question put to Him. Luke simply stated what Jesus said in a different way than Mark did. Jesus affirmed in answer to the question, that He is the Son of God.
The King James states ''Ye say that I am'', which means ''I am as you say.'' Or, ''As you say, I am.''
The New King James states ''You rightly say that I am.''
The NASB states ''Yes, I am.''
Some Bible translations aim to bring a more literal word for word translation, while other Bible translations aim to bring the more literal meaning in from the Greek which may require adding words in the English which aren't in the Greek in order to capture the actual meaning of what was said. And also, there is the issue of smoothing out the reading so that it is more easily understood in the English.
Look at Luke 22:71. When Jesus answered in the previous verse, ''Ye say that I am'', the result was that the Sanhedrin said ''what need do we have of testimony? For we have heard it ourselves from His own mouth.'' Jesus' statement, ''Ye say that I am,'' was an affirmation that He was the Son of God.
The King James, the New King James, and the NASB all correctly state that Jesus said 'Yes', when asked if He was the Son of God. They simply state it differently.
Luke 22:70 in the Greek says Umeis legete oti ego eimi which is correctly translated as, 'you say that I am.' ---> Luke 22:70 Biblos Interlinear Bible
And that's the way the King James translates it. But as you see, it is an affirmation that He is the Son of God. The New King James and the NASB Both state the same thing in different words. All three correctly translate the meaning using different words to do so.
My point is that while both may technically be correct, they do convey a different message to the reader. One of them, therefore, is more accurate in its ability to express the meaning of the original Greek.
My point is that while both may technically be correct, they do convey a different message to the reader. One of them, therefore, is more accurate in its ability to express the meaning of the original Greek.
Actually, there are many such cases where the underlying Greek text is the same, however the translations are quite different and in-fact do change how the reader will understand or interpret what they are reading. For example:
KJV, ASV, YLT:
Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
NASV and other modern translations that I don't read:
Luk 17:21 nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or, 'There it is!' For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst."
Another example:
KJV, YLT and most interlinears:
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
ASV, NASV and most modern translations:
Gal 2:16 nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified.
Clearly there are difference in what we read and how we understand the scriptures. And many of the differences, though perhaps appearing on the surface to be minor, do have a bearing on doctrines being taught. There are countless similar cases within the varying translations if you look hard enough. To believe that the various bible translations are 100% unerring is quite naive, to say the least.
Actually, there are many such cases where the underlying Greek text is the same, however the translations are quite different and in-fact do change how the reader will understand or interpret what they are reading. For example:
KJV, ASV, YLT:
Luk 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
NASV and other modern translations that I don't read:
Luk 17:21 nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or, 'There it is!' For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst."
Another example:
KJV, YLT and most interlinears:
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
ASV, NASV and most modern translations:
Gal 2:16 nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified.
Clearly there are difference in what we read and how we understand the scriptures. And many of the differences, though perhaps appearing on the surface to be minor, do have a bearing on doctrines being taught. There are countless similar cases within the varying translations if you look hard enough. To believe that the various bible translations are 100% unerring is quite naive, to say the least.
Paul seemed to believe the apoc. books were scripture.
Heres a good reference he made to the potter using the same lump of clay for vessels of honour and dishonour.
Wisdom 15:7
7 For the potter, tempering soft earth, fashioneth every vessel with much labour for our service: yea, of the same clay he maketh both the vessels that serve for clean uses, and likewise also all such as serve to the contrary: but what is the use of either sort, the potter himself is the judge.
Romans 9:21
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
Paul seemed to believe the apoc. books were scripture.
Heres a good reference he made to the potter using the same lump of clay for vessels of honour and dishonour.
Wisdom 15:7
7 For the potter, tempering soft earth, fashioneth every vessel with much labour for our service: yea, of the same clay he maketh both the vessels that serve for clean uses, and likewise also all such as serve to the contrary: but what is the use of either sort, the potter himself is the judge.
Romans 9:21
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
Interesting...The scripture that most will quote in support of their particular beliefs concerning the matter is 2 Tim 3:16. Here are two reputable translations with two very different possible meanings and understandings:
KJV:
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
and, using the same Greek text, a much different understanding comes out, as translated by the American revision committee of 1901, here:
ASV
2Ti 3:16 Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.
The word "is" (for both translations) is not in the actual Greek but is being supplied by the translators. Where it is placed in the translation causes a very different understanding of the text.
The KJV reading would tell the reader that all scripture (what ever those scriptures might be) is inspired by God. It does not tell us what those particular scriptures are, but rather all of them are inspired.
The ASV, on the other hand (using the same Greek text), says something quite different. It tells the reader that every scripture inspired by God is....., leaving room for doubt, or interpretation, that some scripture, or what some call scripture, may not be inspired by God.
And there are countless debates as to what the true reading should be.
I do know that the ASV took a lot of heat for that rendering and consequently never received a favorable market share of bible sales. The NASV, some 70 years later, and knowing the public outcry, reverted back to the KJV translation idea, like this:
2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
Here, the NASV does not place the word is in italics (at least in the versions I have), as it should be, and consequently gives the reader the idea that it's in the Greek text. It's not. But that is what those translators want it to say and what they want the reader to believe and understand.
Again, there are differences between translations.
Paul seemed to believe the apoc. books were scripture.
Heres a good reference he made to the potter using the same lump of clay for vessels of honour and dishonour.
Wisdom 15:7
7 For the potter, tempering soft earth, fashioneth every vessel with much labour for our service: yea, of the same clay he maketh both the vessels that serve for clean uses, and likewise also all such as serve to the contrary: but what is the use of either sort, the potter himself is the judge.
Romans 9:21
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
Interesting...The scripture that most will quote in support of their particular beliefs concerning the matter is 2 Tim 3:16. Here are two reputable translations with two very different possible meanings and understandings:
KJV:
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
and, using the same Greek text, a much different understanding comes out, as translated by the American revision committee of 1901, here:
ASV
2Ti 3:16 Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.
The word "is" (for both translations) is not in the actual Greek but is being supplied by the translators. Where it is placed in the translation causes a very different understanding of the text.
The KJV reading would tell the reader that all scripture (what ever those scriptures might be) is inspired by God. It does not tell us what those particular scriptures are, but rather all of them are inspired.
The ASV, on the other hand (using the same Greek text), says something quite different. It tells the reader that every scripture inspired by God is....., leaving room for doubt, or interpretation, that some scripture, or what some call scripture, may not be inspired by God.
And there are countless debates as to what the true reading should be.
I do know that the ASV took a lot of heat for that rendering and consequently never received a favorable market share of bible sales. The NASV, some 70 years later, and knowing the public outcry, reverted back to the KJV translation idea, like this:
2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
Here, the NASV does not place the word is in italics (at least in the versions I have), as it should be, and consequently gives the reader the idea that it's in the Greek text. It's not. But that is what those translators want it to say and what they want the reader to believe and understand.
Again, there are differences between translations.
Thanks A.S. that backs up what I have been saying.
All scripture is inspired by God but not everything in our bible is scripture.
2Ti 3:16 Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.
Another translation difference in our bibles is one regarding baptism, often debated here: Here are two reputable translations of Acts 2:38:
KJV
Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
ASV
Act 2:38 And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Is it "for", or "unto"?
The basic meaning of the Greek word εις, under consideration, is to, or moving towards and into something, that something here being remission of sins.
It would seem that if your sins are not forgiven, then you would be baptized for, or in-order to, have your sins forgiven. This is the reading as understood by many bible translations and I would suppose by the denominations and translation committees that agree with that idea.
On the other hand, if you believe that Christ died for your sins (as the Gospel proclaims, 1 Cor 15:3) and that those sins are forgiven and remitted (as Jesus said in Mat 26:28), you would understand the passage to teach that you are bring baptized into or because your sins are forgiven, seeing it would be difficult to understand the idea of going to or going into something that did not already exist.
How you understand the Gospel will ultimately decide what you believe concerning the purpose of baptism. I would also imagine that what a particular translator, or translation committee, believes will also have a direct bearing on how they choose to translate the text and what the readers will ultimately be left with to determine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
