Author: Obadiah
Date: November 8, 2009, 1:07 am
# of Replys: 16

Let's see. We're still not answering the question and we're still posting irrelevant texts about a whole different kind of scribe.

I believe the verse you're fumbling for is Jeremiah 8:8, but its meaning is the subject of considerable debate.

Precisely what 'precaution' was taken during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah?

Author: Kingjew
Date: November 7, 2009, 1:40 pm
# of Replys: 16

Alright, there are good scribes (Nicodemus) and others that are just a vexation to the Spirit.

Don't tell me that scribes(from the past and living today) wrought and work for God.

But, I'll give you a few examples also of really bad to the heart/soul scribes, as mentioned in:

1) Mark 2:16 or Luke 5:30 or Luke 15:2 (the publicans and sinners are better off than the scribes and Pharisees with their
hearts of stone)
2) Mark 2:6-7 (they thought to themselves that, Jesus was a blasphemer)
3) Mark 3:22 (the scribes kept repeating that, Jesus has Beelzebub, and by the authority of the devil casts he out devils)
4) Mark 11:18 (the Word of God is poweful or what? They are shaking in their !)
5) Luke 6:7 (the scribes and their close friends the Pharisees kept a wachtful eye on Jesus that they might accuse Him of
wrong doing)
6) Luke 6:11 (here the scribes and Pharisees are pushing their knwoledge of the law to the limit; HA...anyway I'm jesting)
7) Luke 23:10 (the chief priests and scribes have nothing on Jesus, they are scared. Like dogs when are scared, start
barking loud...lol)
88) John 8:3 (this is well known, I think, about the scribes and Pharisees bring an adulteress to Jesus)


Finally, JESUS had enough of them (scribes and Pharisees) and utters a series of woes upon them:

9) Matthew 23:
- 13. (But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!)
- 14. (Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!)
- 15. (Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!)
- 16. (Woe to you, you blind guides,)
- 23. (Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!)
- 25. (Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!)
- 27. (Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!)
- 29. (Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!)

and to finish, Matthew 23:33. It's bad to stay away from Christ ourselves, but worse is to keep others from him.

PS. I can't find at the moment a passage that talks about, scribes caught trying to change the Word. Therefore, precaution was taken in order to lock the Word so that it could not be change from it's original meaning! Ezra or Nehemiah but I'm not sure. Beware of the false scribe...hehe

Author: Obadiah
Date: November 7, 2009, 1:12 pm
# of Replys: 16

kingjew:

You've responded entirely as I anticipated: you didn't answer my point, since it's entirely too logical for you to address, but instead posted something completely irrelevant and emotionally charged. Do I have you KJV-only guys down, or what?

The scribes that Jesus criticizes in the gospels are Jewish scribes; the scribes who perpetuated the NT manuscripts were Christian scribes. (Actually, the Jewish scribes tended to keep better track of their sacred documents, but that's another story.)

Do you realize that the only reason you even have an OT is because Jewish scribes preserved it?

And what on earth does Ezekiel 5:6 have to do with this discussion? It's part of an indictment of the people of Jerusalem during the 6th century BCE. It says nothing at all about scribes, textual preservation or anything else germane to this thread.

Author: RTCrudgi
Date: November 7, 2009, 12:03 pm
# of Replys: 16


Another quote out of context and does not apply to this situation.


Apples to Oak Trees comparisome. As for your use of the word "another" above would you please explain who the first group of "corruption" to whom you refer is?

Blessings,
Randy

Author: Kingjew
Date: November 7, 2009, 9:52 am
# of Replys: 16

Obadiah:

God told what? I guess that explains Ezekiel 5:6 , NOT.

Have you read at least one of the gospels in the NT concerning the so called scribes? Not exactly a welcoming committee of

brotherhood! Them and the Pharisees, another lovely bunch of corruption.

Author: Obadiah
Date: November 6, 2009, 10:14 pm
# of Replys: 16

kingjew:

So, every time a NT author quotes just part of a verse, that's wrong because God told the OT author to write down the whole verse?

And why stop with the verse? Why not the whole chapter? The whole book? The entire OT?

Author: RTCrudgi
Date: November 6, 2009, 5:09 pm
# of Replys: 16


That's not a decision that is a misplaced judgment. One BTW without any knowledge of the scribe to whom you refer.

What Moses was instructed to write - he wrote. What Matthew was led to write - he wrote. What Luke was led to write - he wrote. In all three cases the meaning has been well preserved. Including the meaning and intent behind Christ's quotaion of Scripture as revealed in Matthew and Luke.

Your feeling aside IMHO you are mistaken. Perhaps you should look at the statement in context because your point is contextually mistaken. BTW Luke appears to write to a reader (Theophilus) who understands the OT background in my understanding of Luke 1:1-4. If you pay attention to the personal pronouns (the "us" and "us" and "you") are quite telling that Theophilus would be familliar with the Deuteronomy passage.



I agree that we should use good common sense and good judgment. Part of that common sense would be to understand the context and what was common sense in the 1st and 2nd century context. Setting aside our twentieth century mindset is difficult to near impossible but necessary before we come to such judgments.

Blessings,
Randy

Author: henrywm
Date: November 6, 2009, 4:49 pm
# of Replys: 7

I am nearly finished with the book now. I am in the last appendix which applies the principles of the book to real emails sent to Answers in Genesis.

This book is, strictly speaking, less a book about defending creationism, and more about Bahnsenian presuppositional apologetics, but all the examples center around the evolution/creation debate. I think this is a great book for anyone who wants an overview of the presuppositional method.

Next week I will attend a debate between Dinesh D'Souza and Christopher Hitchens. To prepare for it I have started listening to one of their previous debates. During Hitchens' opening statement things I read about in the book were constantly popping up in my head. During the follow-up session, I saw areas where D'Souza could have addressed the root presuppositional issues but didn't.

This book will be helpful when I watch them debate next week.

Author: Kingjew
Date: November 6, 2009, 12:53 pm
# of Replys: 16

Well, I have come to a decision that, it was probably due to laziness on behalf of the old scribes.

It should be there because without it looses half of its meaning. Moses was instructed by God to write down both parts.

I feel, it leaves the reader hanging. For example, A man shall not live by bread alone. Then what else shall a man live by, tell me don't leave me hanging. I am being a little facetious but it's only to make a point.

I understand, the original scribes of whatever ancient records you have(including my KJV & Bible software package installed on my computer), didn't include "but by every word of God". Fine, but doesn't mean we are not to use common sense and good judgment.

Author: RTCrudgi
Date: November 6, 2009, 11:23 am
# of Replys: 16


Deuteronomy 8:3



The earliest manuscripts we have of the Luke 4:4 document reflect the NET, NIV, et al as explained in the NET notes.
Ë1,13 33 Ï latt) complete the citation with ἀλλ᾿ ἐπὶ παντὶ ῥήματι θεοῦ (ajll’ ejpi panti rJhmati qeou, “but by every word from God”), an assimilation to Matt 4:4 (which is a quotation of Deut 8:3). The shorter reading is found in א B L W 1241 pc sa. There is no good reason why scribes would omit the rest of the quotation here. The shorter reading, on both internal and external grounds, should be considered the original wording in Luke.
sn A quotation from Deut 8:3. Jesus will live by doing God’s will, and will take no shortcuts.


It is possible that scribes in copying this passage either confused it with the Matthew passage or sought to harmonize it with the Matthew passage. Perhaps the phrase was added to better reflect Deut 8:3. Whatever the reason the inclusion or removal of the phrase does not really affect the intent nor the contextual meaning of the text in question. Neither can one accuse others of "adding to" or "taking away" since the meaning and intent is changed.

IMHO the evidence shows that Luke did not have the phrase in the origional manuscript. So the modern translations better reflect the origional as Cobra said. However, in this case the rest of the phrase being placed in really does not matter.

Blessings,
Randy

Author: Jimd
Date: November 5, 2009, 10:24 pm
# of Replys: 2

Exodus 20:13 prohibits murder. Is suicide anything less than self-directed murder?

tngirl, I hope and pray this is not something you are considering. If it is, please seek counsel from your pastor, parent, counselling center or other trustworthy friend.

Regards.

Author: Obadiah
Date: November 5, 2009, 8:03 pm
# of Replys: 2

There are examples of people committing suicide but to my knowledge the subject itself is never discussed.

Author: tngirl
Date: November 5, 2009, 7:54 pm
# of Replys: 2

Author: Obadiah
Date: November 5, 2009, 7:13 pm
# of Replys: 12

DIB (mentioned above) gives an excellent presentation on the Malachi passage, which he cites largely from G.P. Hugenberger.

It's a great read, but to summarize, the text does not say that "God hates divorce." It's talking about one who "hates and divorces" -- i.e., one who divorces without proper grounds. The subject of the verb isn't God at all.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Randy:

As I said above, I was sharing my own experience. It's entirely possible yours is different.

I agree completely that marriage is a two-way street, and that rarely if ever is one party solely to blame for its demise.

Author: Kingjew
Date: November 5, 2009, 6:56 pm
# of Replys: 16



Someone might ask, Where ?



So, it is correct to add, "but by every word of God", at the end of Luke 4:4.

Author: pastorjohn
Date: November 5, 2009, 6:17 pm
# of Replys: 16

Of course. Pastors have to deal with this issue. though it is difficult to get men to admit their weakness. No one wants other people to know that they sometimes lose control of their desires.

The man with the problem must learn to be accountable - that he is not free to indulge at the expense of other people and the destruction of himself. He must see the problem as serious - like stealing a baby's bottle - or slicing off a person's finger.

John

Author: lisalinley
Date: November 7, 2009, 12:42 pm
# of Replys: 1

yes its really good thing to travel the Israel.I went there i saw many Holiy place in Israel.Its good Country.

Author: FoC
Date: November 5, 2009, 5:40 pm
# of Replys: 12

Malachi 2:13-16.
God truly hates a divorcing.
And yet HE gave a writ of divorce to His beloved
Theres a bit more to the story than an out of context verse in Malachi .

Author: kylerhockey
Date: November 5, 2009, 5:26 pm
# of Replys: 16

Does anybody have any experience with setting captives free: the way of purity?

Author: danpsmith
Date: November 4, 2009, 3:13 pm
# of Replys: 5

i am loving myself its really good thing if you love himself.Its nice habbit