Forum - Banjo Ben Clark

Earth

#22

Joshua and Jesus are the same name. In fact, if we don’t see that, we miss the typology meant to be seen when Gabriel tells Mary to name him Jesus/Joshua. We tend to be so arrogant with our English language :wink:

We are in the golden age of translations! Today we are able to be more accurate to the original autographs than ever before! Praise God, for he has allowed us to discover many thousands more of the oldest found fragments in just the past few decades. And further, praise God that these oldest fragments and manuscripts prove that the translations we’ve had throughout the centuries have been accurate and faithful. Even when there were a few things added at times, either by scribes or others (John 5:4, etc.), it didn’t affect the central meaning of the text nor the truth of the gospel.

5 Likes
#23

Yes, but it will definitely confuse people if they read that “if Jesus had given them rest, they would not have sought another” but if it says Joshua they would know what it meant. Arrogant as we may be in our language, we have to keep in mind that everyone else is too, and they might not know that it’s the same name

2 Likes
#24

I agree with you, and it should distinguish Joshua. I’m just saying that we in general (not meaning you) think of English as authoritative, hence the attitude that things must read or sound familiar to be correct.

3 Likes
#25

Ok, yeah I get that. Having learned a second language, I do understand a lot of things that I wouldn’t have otherwise

2 Likes
#26

You correctly got straight to the heart of my post. I too have preferences (and reason for those preferences). Words do mean things. That is important, even essential. I absolutely understand where you are coming from. On the flip side, one of my favorite Bible books is the “Jesus Storybook Bible.” It’s not even what one would call a “translation,” but it conveys the good news (IMO) faithfully and effectively to a young audience. Is there a “spin?” Yes, the most obvious spin is that the entire Bible should be read through the lens of Jesus. I happen to support that spin with all my heart. Is this book a substitute for a complete translation for someone who is spiritually mature? Of course not. But I do think it faithfully delivers the message of truth, the gospel of our salvation. I think that most translations are useful in their various ways. I also think that what is most useful for one person may not be most useful for another. Thanks for your words and your heart, brother!

5 Likes
#27

That is good :+1: Those very words could launch arguments that would last years in some places, but in balance, I do like that response.

2 Likes
#28

This is smacking the nail squarely on the head.

To that, I’d like to add that even if you spoke fluent Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, whatever, and could read the originals, you would still be lacking one of the most critical components of translation… context. I believe one of the main reasons there are so many denominations of Christianity boils down to misunderstanding or entirely lacking the context of what we read.

3 Likes
#29

I think this might be one thing that Paul meant when he said not to be conformed to the world.

And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Romans 12:2

As Christians, we are to test everything we do by holding it up to the bible, even the type of bible we use. It is hard not to simply conform to this world, but this verse, and others, assure us that if we don’t, then we will draw nearer to God and will begin to crave His way of doing things and not our broken world’s way. We are also commanded to fill our minds with only that which is pure and honorable and noble (Philippians 4:8), a feat that is increasingly growing harder in today’s culture. This in mind, that is why it seems such a struggle to find the “correct” translation of God’s Word. We can do our research and debate all we want, but until we reach our final dwelling place someday, one must simply choose the version that they feel in their own heart is as close as possible, while keeping in mind our flawed human nature. That, with seeking the Lord daily, will guide us to the ultimate truth, the death and resurrection of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

But seriously, if your version mentions anything about iphones, tacos, football, or 6th grade pizza parties, y’all really need to scale back a few versions!:yum:

2 Likes
#30

Moses had tablets?

3 Likes
#31

OK…At least the Gospel message is so simple that we don’t need quibble over the better translation. Praise God for its simplicity.

In the essentials, Unity. In the non-essentials, Liberty. In all things, charity.

4 Likes
#32

Aw, man! I was just starting to like the message bible… :joy::joy::wink::roll_eyes::joy:

1 Like
#33

Thanks Mike for the kind words!! :slight_smile: I have so so much to be able to share it in a discussion forum, but we will see.

Jack, are you sure??

Gospel is a mystery. In an understandable language it says everyone cannot understand!

Luke 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

Matthew 11:27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

Because God did a marvellous work and wonder as he prophesied in Isaiah 29:14. Conventional wisdom perished, God’s wisdom was established.

I’ll put my thoughts together and share what is gospel. To sharpen our understanding.

2 Likes
#34

Mark, they all will “never get it!”. Context helps but you don’t really require it. In other words, from plain reading, corroborating with other scriptures, I can show in a convincing manner the intended meaning of a scripture is much different from what people believe it to be for. The reason for most of the divisions or denominations I believe is, they are not spiritual instead they are carnal. A reality check can easily reveal.

I Corinthians 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

1 Like
#36

removed it by messing around… lol

#37

It’s quite telling that in the first five hundred years of Christianity, the established (catholic) church split once. In the past five years, the southern baptists alone have split how many times? And that’s just the divisions of one denomination (I used them cuz that’s what’s all over SETX)

3 Likes
#38

I think you just proved my point. :wink:

When it’s all boiled down, most people believe they’re being lead by the spirit. Is the rapture a spiritual teaching? Pre-tribulation rapture theology originated in the eighteenth century. So, was everyone believing non-spirit lead teachings up until that point? Was everyone before then just wrong?

2 Likes
#39

Good points! It is scary how quickly division occurs in modern times. I do think differences predate these recorded splits. To me, it seems that the bulk of Paul’s letters were to address differences between churches and members within those churches (starting in 1 Cor 1 around verse 12). I am grossly over-simplifying, but the general response I read in Paul is A) if it is essential, fix it B) if it isn’t essential, get over it and love each other.

A couple nuggets that have stuck with me:

  1. I’ll use Ben as an example because I know he can take it… I’d say about 20% of my theology is errant. I’d say the same about Ben… 20% of his theology is off. I can’t tell you which 20% of my theology is incorrect, but I’d be glad to point out where Ben’s is wrong. :grin: (For any who don’t realize it: the above is just an illustration, and I don’t have any beef with Ben’s theology)

  2. Good theology is wonderful thing. However, there is not expected to be a theology exam to enter heaven.

I love the pursuit of knowledge of God. However, it breaks my heart to see division in The Church over things that are ultimately pretty petty. Jesus simply commanded us to love each other in the way that he did. It sounds like a simple command, but I still have a long way to go before I can say that I do that. I see that as the plank in my eye.

2 Likes
#40

Why, yes. Of course!!!

just kidding :wink:

3 Likes
#41

At least, not in your theology… :joy::joy::wink:

3 Likes
#42

Tying this thread to the recent Moon Landing… a thought occurred to me…

Interesting how we went there and - over the course of several different missions - stayed there less than 30 days combined - quite a short time… and managed to leave behind a whole lotta “stuff” (trying to be polite)… some useful scientific equipment (future waste) and much that is just (current) waste… from all that was jettisoned and will remain there for… 1,000 years… or more perhaps?

Now, I love nature but don’t consider myself a tree-hugger type either… so this notion strikes me…

How we, as humans, leave a trail behind us. We leave a mark (stain) and move on. Factor in the contributions of all countries who also explored there… and WOW…

I cannot think of a more dramatic example of some environment that was once untouched by us… pristine and pure… but no longer. :pensive: Throw satellites into the mix… and the example is more dramatic!

Imagine “visitors” arriving to our planet… and the closer they get, the more man-made “stuff” is in the way. :thinking:

Don’t get me wrong… The advancement of science and exploration is an amazing and extraordinary God-given blessing.

I guess I just wished we could do a slightly better job collectively at picking up after ourselves.

1 Like