Posts by realJFpenguin

15

What translation of the Bible do you use?

by Miss Chievous in

after leaving the org i got a compemporary english version of the bible and although it is not a word perfect translation it is so easy to read, something i never found with the nwt.

it is the youth version of that translation and along side the scriptures it has small sections on bible history, major themes running through the scriptures, questions and answers on important issues, advice on real life situations and how to be christian.

makes bible reading much more enjoyable.

realJFpenguin

For a study Bible - i.e., one that represents the Scriptures as closely as possible to their original form, I like the following translations:

New American Standard Bible

New King James Version

New Revised Standard Version

These were all translated by committees of scholars from a variety of backgrounds, all of whom hold a Ph.D. in Biblical languages and can probably understand the structure of the languages they are reading. Some rely more heavily on different manuscripts, as EndOfMysteries showed above, which accounts for the slight differences between them.

More readable, but slightly less exact, is the New International Version. They generally leave a note in the margin if they have to paraphrase something for clarity's sake.

English Standard Version is another decent one, although more heavily paraphrased. It breaks things down more and is a good choice for those with low literacy levels, or people from whom English is their second language. Contemporary English Version is another good one.

4

Bible Older than Originally Thought

by jamiebowers in

http://www.newser.com/story/78357/new-find-adds-centuries-to-age-of-bible.html?utm_source=syn&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=sci.

.

realJFpenguin

I think the writer of that article needs to do his homework.

They've found the Bible in fragments much, much older. Actually, the earliest portions of Scripture date back more than 3300 years, although you won't find the original manuscripts, as the scribes were in the practice of cutting up old, worn-out manuscripts as they hand-copied them letter-by-letter and counting the letters to make sure no errors had been introduced in the text.

In fact, I'd read an article once that said they unearthed on old cuneiform tablet containing some fragment of the creation story, which would mean that Adam and his descendents kept written records of their history and Moses may have edited and translated these sources when he wrote the book of Genesis.

As to the murder and mayhem, a lot of God's overt wrath can be understood if we study a little history. When it says that Israeli kings such as Manasseh "did evil in the sight of the Lord" and needed to be punished, that was an understatement. They were subjecting Israel to such practices as burning their children alive on the altar in order to appease neighborhood deities. These practices came straight from their pagan neighbors. A lot of the surrounding countries were regularly engaging in these rituals. Orgies and mutilation were a common part of idol-worship, and they often involved temple slaves--a form of sex trafficking that the world would shriek at today. When God said things like "My face is against you," or "I will surely give you over to your enemies," you'd better believe you'd done something to deserve a serious intervention.

49

Should I believe in the Trinity?!

by TTWSYF in

hello all, i had some questions regarding the booklet 'should you believe in the trinity?

' i should mention that i'm a catholic and my brother is a jw baptised some 15-20 years ago.

since he found 'the truth' he had been quite vocal regarding the manyu, many false teachings of the catholic church.

realJFpenguin

Hello,

I won't say I've read all the Church Fathers, but recently I've studied parts of Adversus Praxeam by Tertullian, Dialogue with Trypho by Justin Martyr, and various bits and pieces of the others.

What you will find if you start investigating that tract, is that the church fathers are, for the most part, misrepresented and even deliberately misquoted. (Apparently there are entire books out there refuting that tract.) For example, they say that Justin believed Jesus was a created angel, citing one or two words from a ream of discourse in which he demonstrates that Theophanies, or passages in the OT where the "Angel of the LORD" interacts with the patriarchs, are actually appearances of the LORD Himself. In another quote, they make it appear Tertullian believed Jesus was not God... quoting a work in which he argued FOR the Trinity doctrine proper against Sabellian heresy.

Many of the early Christians, especially the Apologists, had flaws in their theology as they tried to apply ontological ideas to understand what, in Scripture, is described in strictly spiritual terms and not explained philosophically. However, with the exception of maybe the Shepherd of Hermas, all those guys you quoted believed in the Trinity. Origen was a little off track in that he screwed up trying to explain HOW the Son was "begotten," thus leaving the door open for Arianism to say that if Jesus was begotten at a certain point in time, then "There was a time when the Son was not" (Watchtower theology). Athanasius pointed out to Arius's followers that the Bible doesn't reveal to us when or how God begets a Son, so we ought not to turn to philosophy for explanations of this mystery as Origen did.

The brochure doesn't quote Ignatius for obvious reasons, although a later Watchtower article tries to misrepresent him in a fascinating way... by quoting exclusively epistles NOT written by Ignatius himself, and claiming that they represent his views. Here's the article that details what they do to mangle history: http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/apl/jw/ignatius.txt Of course, they rely on ignorance--the average reader is not going to dig up the genuine Ignatian epistles and count the references to "Jesus Christ, our God," or quotes such as these below:

"Await Him that is above every season, the Eternal, the Invisible, who became visible for our sake, the Impalpable, the Impassible, who suffered for our sake, who endured in all ways for our sake (Polycarp 3)."

"There is only one physician, of flesh and of spirit, generate and ingenerate, God in man, true Life in death, Son of Mary and Son of God, first passible and then impassible, Jesus Christ our Lord (Ephesians 7).

I was completely floored when I started to do research on this topic. There's a distinct feeling of violation when you realize you've been deliberately lied to.

I'm actually addressing a lot of the Biblical topics in that tract in my blog, "Sealed for Eternity."

Hope that helps for starters.

Because of Him,

RealJFpenguin