Posted on 12/04/2006 7:52:47 PM PST by Pyro7480
a bunch of angry west europeons started worshipping printed texts...
= = =
YES, SOME Protesties put inordinate affection/worship toward on some ink on pages just as SOME Orthodox and RC's put inordinate affection/worship toward some icons/statues/images.
And this is supposed to say what about the majority of Protesties, Orthodox, RC's?????
?????????????????????????????
Am a bit puzzled.
Are you asserting that you do NOT BELIEVE:
Jhn 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
???
You are welcome to use any version, you won't find Satan in Ezekiel 28. I usually use NAB. Actually, NIV is pretty close to the Greek originals.
BTW, I gave you Ezekiel 28 from the Septuagint (Greek) and you didn't like it either.
Make up your mind, will you! No matter which version you will accept, you won't find what's not there, not even in KJV.
I looked all over to help you out. Try here http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/index.htm
Oh, is the Eucharist mentioned by name in the Orthodox translation? Oops, my mistake. The Orthodox don't have a translation. Why, they don't even have a Bible. Please be sure to have the Orthodox fathers include the Eucharist when they get around to writing their version.
BWAHAHAHAHA!!! The Orthodox don't even have a Bible. How do you know ours is wrong???? :OP
I was really unaware of it. I thought they were reading from the original Greek.
LMAO not only do you folks worship a book you pride yourselves of the fact that it's only a knock off and deride the folks who have the original...
in fact we do...
You see Kosta you have a prophecy in the verses in Ezekiel. Ezekiel starts with the human King of Tyre, but then Ez. 28:11-19 refers to the spiritual ruler of Tyre, Satan. It's an end time prophecy and it refers to Satan, no doubt about it. The angels of the nations are bad angels. Babylon and Tyre's angels are Satan. I know that you love the word of god or you would not be here, growing in the Word.
should be "God"
so says self proclaimed Popes infailable in matters of Scripture [protestants].
HD to Kosta: Well, what translation is the best? I suppose a number of Orthodox who can’t read Greek would like to know
What are you talking about? We were talking about post-Jamnia rabbis adding vowels to the Hebrew bible in order to 'purge' Christian bias. Adding vowels changed the words, as in the example I cited.
You, on the other hand, suggested that Greeks didn't have vowels either, which is wrong. And now you come up with 'which version of the Bible...?' Hello, earth to HD...
And if none of them are any good, why hasn’t the Orthodox developed one?
No need. All the books of the Bible are in the Church, as your own article mentions, the OT and the NT; just not neatly bound together, but everyone knows where they are.
The Gospels are on the altar; the Apostol (Epistles) are by the reader. Evening services use the OT. Sunday services use the Epistles and the Gospels. The Great Lent uses the Old Testament.
The link you provide actually defends the Scriptures. It seems to me you just have an ax to grind. My advice to every one is: state your beliefs and don't mind others. Let God sort out what is what.
There are many martyrs for the faith, probably more than there were back then, who live in third world countries. I would consider each one of them a saint. It's not a comfy place for Christians any more. We may well be among them someday. I hope not and if that's the case, I hope all of us stand firm in our faith. Love, Mxxx
so says self proclaimed Popes infailable in matters of Scripture [protestants].
= = = =
It's a lot better when folks tell the truth about us.
I don't know of any Protesties that fit the above description.
On the other hand . . .
Well, let's see. It must be limited to 1) those who can read Greek, and 2) nothing that was written in Hebrew or Aramaic (with the exception of the Septuagint which is OK).
Outstanding work, Quix. As I was passing through all these comments, and saw them piling on top of each other, I began to wish I had cataloged them. Thank you for doing so. There IS a tremendous double standard at work here.
Sorry for the dealy in responding; I will catch up as much as I can today.
That is a tangent to the issue that the sheep are supposed to repent (whatever precisely, that repentance entails). It is therefore somethigng that happens to sheep: they are lost. Therefore, the security that you impute to the same sheep in John 10 is imputed without warrant: sheep do get lost, sometimes they are found, and sometimes they are lost forever.
The Protestants like to make much of the literal meaning of "metanoia", "changing the mind", and the Catholic concept as penance. So, in what sense does the Gospel use the word: does it mean a purely intellectual changeover, or does it involves some penitential work? If we look at how St. John the Forerunner used the word, we have to go with the Catohlics: he wore a hairshirt, lived as a hemit, and fasted. That was the example of "metanoia" he gave. You do your own math.
It was not the sons feeling sorry or doing anything to earn the father's disposition towards him
The repentance of the son is what brought him home. His arrival produced forgiveness. It is notable that it is his suffering in the body (eating with the pigs, etc.) that produced the change of heart.
How do you know what any of them say? Have you seen them? Have you verify they even exist?
I'd be happy to loan you one of mine until the Church prints up their own. I'll even let you use my Revised Standard although you need to be careful of the faulty translation.
Hey, you can even share it among some of the Orthodox fathers there. I'm sure they be happy to see a copy.
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.