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.
@ Mr5150, I would be interested to hear a statement on post #60 and #65 as it directly refers to your opening post
Quote:
Originally Posted by URperson The mainstream belief of Hell as a place of Eternal Torment is not from scripture. It is from faulty translation. God will save everyone though Jesus Christ in due time.
@ Mr5150, I would be interested to hear a statement on post #60 and #65 as it directly refers to your opening post
To be honest if this were 1611 I would be happy to address your cites. As I demonstrated, when one uses a translation (such as the NKJV) that uses 21st century English suddenly a whole slew of apparent "errors" disappear.
I really don't want to discuss the fine points of translation from the original Greek to Elizabethian English.
If you were to repost three key points using a modern direct translation I would be happy to comment. And I say three, because I am at work and don't have the time to comment on 15 or 20 cites.
No the Bible is the inspired, infallible inerrant Word of God, which God is capable of keeping tainted by human error before reaching us. He is certainly powerful enough to keep it error free.
Incorrect! The original manuscripts were inspired, but not the translations! If you believe all translations are error free, then you will be in for a shock if I showed you the errors in the KJV etc.
Last edited by PurpleHeart; 06-16-2010 at 10:35 PM..
The Jews destroyed each old worn out version of the O.T. after they made a copy of it. So no original copy made by Moses or anyone exists. Should we therefore throw it all away? No.
The Qumran manuscripts found to be thousands of years old reveal the current texts we have are correct. So why sould not our modern O.T. texts be correct prior to the thousands of years old ones?
How do you know one of the oldest Grk. mss we have are not word for word of the original?
1. Do you have a reliable and credible source that the Jews destroyed each old worn out version of the O.T. after they made a copy of it?
2. You said, "The Qumran manuscripts found to be thousands of years old reveal the current texts we have are correct." Proof? Source please?
3. What is the oldest Grk. mss and have you personally seen it and read it? Do you read fluent Koine Greek?
Incorrect! The original manuscripts were inspired, but not the translations! If you believe all translations are error free, then you will be in for a shock if I showed you the errors in the KJV etc.
Why do you cult types harp on the KJV. See above post.
2. You said, "The Qumran manuscripts found to be thousands of years old reveal the current texts we have are correct." Proof? Source please?
Although the above question was addressed to someone else, I will provide a source.
The Dead Sea Scrolls attest to the accuracy of our Old Testament. Obviously, since the Dead Sea Scrolls were written in the 1st or 2nd century B.C., they don't help with regard to the New Testament, but they absolutely prove the reliability of the Old Testament manuscripts available to us today.
1. Do you have a reliable and credible source that the Jews destroyed each old worn out version of the O.T. after they made a copy of it?
2. You said, "The Qumran manuscripts found to be thousands of years old reveal the current texts we have are correct." Proof? Source please?
3. What is the oldest Grk. mss and have you personally seen it and read it? Do you read fluent Koine Greek?
The OT and tradition also state that the original was destroyed (ripped to shreds and burned, I believe) and Ezra, the scribe, rewrote it from his memory and that of others. Unfortunately, Ezra had his own agenda and this means that none of the patriarchs actually wrote what we read today...
To be honest if this were 1611 I would be happy to address your cites. As I demonstrated, when one uses a translation (such as the NKJV) that uses 21st century English suddenly a whole slew of apparent "errors" disappear.
I really don't want to discuss the fine points of translation from the original Greek to Elizabethian English.
If you were to repost three key points using a modern direct translation I would be happy to comment. And I say three, because I am at work and don't have the time to comment on 15 or 20 cites.
My argument also applies to the NKJV
Psalm 9:17 e.g. does not differ from the KJV
The wicked shall be turned into hell, And all the nations that forget God. (NKJV)
Whereas the NIV renders significantly different:
The wicked return to the grave, all the nations that forget God.
However in Jonah 2:2 “hell” has been changed to “Sheol”
And he said: I cried out to the LORD because of my affliction, And He answered me. Out of the belly of Sheol I cried, And You heard my voice.
Obviously the revisers where aware what Sheol means, yet they didn’t change the rendering in all instances, they seem to also have had their own agenda and lack scholarly honesty, or why have they changed hell in the one instance but not in the other, it’s always “sheol”
The point you deny is, that there have been mistranslations in the bible, if the KJV renders Hell and the NKJV does not, - does this not mean that “hell” in the KJV is a mistranslation? If you agree with this, you have to admit that universalists are least partly right, so what do you do?
PS:
Quote:
From what a lot of UR folk are saying, one could conclude that the KJV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, etc translations are faulty.
by your own words/reaction you declared the KJV unreliable for nowadays
Funny thing is, with all the talk about the some versions of the Bible being faulty translations, we must consider the time that the translations were made in.
Let's go to the Eternal Torture in Hell Doctrine. Keep in mind that when the King James Version of the English translation was made, Hell had a much different meaning. It did not mean a place where people are burned and tortured. (and it does not mean that in the Bible either) It meant "hole", or "unseen"
Another controversy is the "mistranslation" of Eternal, everlasting for the word "aionios" and aions. Let's put into consideration the meanings of the words at the time of the translation and also I will kindly paste the definition of everlasting.
Everlasting
1: lasting or enduring through all time : eternal 2 a (1): continuing for a long time or indefinitely (2): having or being flowers or foliage that retain form or color for a long time when dried b: tediously persistent <the everlasting sympathy-seeker who demands attention — H. A. Overstreet> 3: wearing indefinitely <everlasting twill pants>
Notice something? Not every definition says that it is something that will not end. There is one definition that says that it is just a long time. It is the same for other related words.
Also, there are a few instances where the Bible talks about something being an everlasting arrangement. Yet later, the arrangement comes to an end. (Circumcision was described to be an everlasting arrangement. Yet, after the ressurection of Jesus Christ, it is revealed that it is no longer required to cut foreskin off of a male reproductive organ. This was due to the change of ages)
Plus a lot of us tend to use ever and ages almost interchangably.
Compare, "I haven't seen you for ages." and "I haven't seen you forever."
So everlasting and eternal is not necessarily a mistranslation. It is more likely a misuse of the word.
Yes, the more precise translation would be age-lasting. But if you are reading the Bible a lot must be put in consideration.
Anywhere you are reading a Bible that has the word Everlasting and related words, consider the context, and consider every definition.
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.
