Posted on 09/22/2016 7:57:02 PM PDT by marshmallow
GERMANY, September 21, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) — The German Bishops have presented a new “Unified Translation” of the Bible that follows a significant modernization of the language and will be binding for all German-speaking areas starting in 2017.
On Tuesday, the German Bishops Conference (DBK) presented in Fulda the fruit of many years of scientific work: a new edition of the so-called “Unified Translation" (Einheitsübersetzung) of the Bible into German. It’s called “unified” because, from the original published from 1962 onward, these editions are supposed to be used ecumenically, unifying Catholics and Protestants in Germany. The original aim, however, was thwarted in 2005 when Protestants reverted to the Luther translation.
The leader of the research project was the bishop (now emeritus) of Erfurt, Joachim Wanke, who explained that the new edition is a “moderate revision” of the older text. Wanke added that a translation is always also an interpretation. The new edition shows more “braveness” to present “biblical jargon,” he said, reported by kath.net.
According to Jewish tradition, the personal names of God cannot be pronounced, so “Yahweh” is substituted by “Lord” in the new edition. In fact, every paragraph has a change, explained Michael Theobald, president of the German Bible Association.
When the apostle Paul calls two new followers, they are not two men anymore, Andronicus and Junias; rather, a new discovery showed that apparently it was one man and one woman, hence Andronicus and Junia. This led to the discussion that the word “apostle” must be applied to women as well as men (Author’s note: In German, different genders of the word exist and usually gender-ideologists insist on using male and female forms).
Other changes are more ideological.
Most frightening is the change to the iconic Isaiah passage (7:14): “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son”.....
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...
And here you are, doing the very thing you are condemning.
If this were baseball he’d be 0-3. He’d be out.
Peter means *pebble* and is the feminine form of the word.
*Petra* means *bedrock* and is the masculine form of the word.
Here Paul identifies who petra is,and that is Christ. This link takes you to the Greek.
http://biblehub.com/text/1_corinthians/10-4.htm
1 Corinthians 10:1-4 For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock (petra) that followed them, and the Rock (petra) was Christ.
http://biblehub.com/text/romans/9-33.htm
Romans 9:30-33 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, as it is written,“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock (petra) of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
http://biblehub.com/text/1_peter/2-8.htm
1 Peter 2:1-8 So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander. Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation— if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.
As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe,
“The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone,”
and
“A stone of stumbling, and a rock (petra) of offense.”
They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.
All occurrences of *petra* in the Greek.
The IH is strong with this one ...
The Catholic Bible has a few ‘selective’ renderings of words, such that the DR is not in agreement with so many translations. But that will escape your understanding. The Catholic Bible starts early changing meanings to fit the traditions, like the passage in Genesis regarding ‘someone bruising someone’s heal’. But don’t fall into a tizzy, the Mormons do the same stuff using their Book of Mormon.
Regarding the immaculate conception:
No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture. But the first scriptural passage which contains the promise of the redemption, mentions also the Mother of the Redeemer. The sentence against the first parents was accompanied by the Earliest Gospel ( Proto-evangelium ), which put enmity between the serpent and the woman : "and I will put enmity between thee and the woman and her seed; she (he) shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her (his) heel" ( Genesis 3:15 ).
The translation "she" of the Vulgate is interpretative; it originated after the fourth century, and
cannot be defended critically.
Of the major translations on the DR renders this passage this way.
The catholic encyclopedia admits it cannot be defended yet they continue with it.
Bad translation = bad theology
And that is one of several variant markers ...
So you prefer to ignore the rest of the Bible passages which point to Christ as The Rock. Would Augustine approve? LOL
The Messiah, who is The Rock in the scriptures, named him Kephas. It seems to me that was divine will not subject to our approval or interpretation. He gave Kephas the keys of the kingdom of heaven and the authority to bind and loose on earth. It is truth. I have posted many times the scripture that shows the one holy catholic apostolic church is built on the foundation of Kephas, the other apostles, and the prophets with Messiah Himself being the chief cornerstone. It is all true.
Do you even know what the APOSTLE’s stated were the requirements to be an actual Apostle?
Yet the ECFs, who catholicism places so much trust in differ in their view on this verse and what it means.
Some say Peter, some say his confession, others Christ.
So which one do you like this week for this topic?
Thank you!
Not necessarily.....
And you know why?
The Day of Pentecost had not yet come so the church leaders were not yet filled with the Holy Spirit for guidance in church matters. And there is no mention of them seeking the Holy Spirit's leading in putting forth the two men.
Additionally, if you present God with two choices and draw lots, ONE of them is going to be *chosen* regardless if God wants either of those men or not.
So they think they're asking God who He wants, and He's probably saying *Neither* knowing that He was working on Saul of Tarsus. But how is He going to get that message across if Peter takes it on himself to offer God two choices and they draw lots, which doesn't give God any choice at all.
Because ONE of them is going to be "chosen" whether God is in it or not.
Repeat it as much as you like, it still wont be true. Your religion has made up many things and called them articles of the Christian faith - threatening damnation to ALL Christians who DARE question them. You want a list?
I can show you everything I believe because they are found in God’s word. I don’t have to make up a thing.
Yet some ECFs reject the claim the rcc makes. Some who reject this support other parts of the rcc doctrine. You can’t have it both ways.
Ooops.
Mistake here. I had the masculine and feminine forms confused. It should have read.......
*Peter* means *pebble* and is the masculine form of the word.
*Petra* means *bedrock* and is the feminine form of the word.
Apply that principle to Protestant claims; since Protestants do not agree they cannot be correct in abandoning the one holy catholic apostolic church. It was a tragic historic mistake.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.