• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Bad Translation Leads to Women Being Abused Twice Over

Dr. K.R. Allen said:
Steve not inconvenient but I already know you well enough to know your predispositions and presuppositions that you have towards certain views, especially in regard to your quest to either be personally Jewish or Hebraic centered in all things,........
Click to expand...
you greatly misunderstand my predispositions and presuppositions. i am on no such quest and it would be an insult to brush off my interest in the culture and context of my Savior's teaching in that manner.
i did ask the questions because i feel that they shed light on truth, not because i am clueless.
he that hath an ear, let him hear.
 
That was my point and you just made my point again. You've even said as much yourself with your statements on the Nazarite vows you desire to follow for your own life, etc.

In any case, if you really are interested in evidence that points out a position that you likely have not yet examined carefully, and if you truly are serious about seeking out an answer to the preservation of the manuscripts and in what language and why then those works are there for "all who have eyes" to see to follow your phraseology.

The multiplicity of languages that the words of Christ and the apostles were transmitted into is plenty, but the words in which God chose to preserve them was not and primarily it was through the common koine Greek tongue that dominated the majority of the culture at that time.

Grab those books if you truly want to examine some solid resource material.
 
"The 5:32b phrase is NOT connected to the 5:32a phrase."

Ahh...ok...now it finally makes sense....thanks!
 
i have no desire to derail this thread, but for some reason my personal beliefs are being impugned.

1) i brought up the questions to point out that no matter how much we venerate the greek scriptures that have been handed down to us, if Yeshua taught the common folk (including the children) in their own language rather than greek we may have no record of his actual word usage. unless, of course, it was recorded in hebrew or aramaic.

2) why this would have anything to do with my personal understandings of the hebrew culture i can only surmise.
You've even said as much yourself with your statements on the Nazarite vows you desire to follow for your own life, etc.
Click to expand...
you either misunderstood my statements, or you mis-remember them. i was given a nazarite vow and have no desire to break it until led by the Lord to do so, which probably does mean for the rest of my life. (i asked the Lord for a "samson annointing" because of my weakened state. i felt that he said "do what samson did" so i proceded to not cut a hair of my head. i did not realize for several months that i was under a nazarite vow.)
none of this has anything to do with the question of whether or not we are able to read Yeshua's actual words today.
 
Ahh...ok...now it finally makes sense....thanks!
Click to expand...

Amazing how this gets rid of so much confusion on this text and doctrine. The keys to it are straight forward and simple:
1. The 5:32a clause has to do with a man who puts away a woman unjustly and he makes her experience adultery.
2. The kai sets off another phrase and in this case the woman is doing something with another man in order to get put put away so she can be with another man. Thus again that man who joins with her is unjust.

The whole context of this is about unfaithful men who either put away a woman unjustly or take to themselves another man's woman who gets herself put away in order to be with him.

The power in getting the verb tenses properly translated!
 
Steve again that is my point. You think God has told you to live out a Nazarite vow along with other Jewish traditions and customs. You keep admitting it by your very words (a Nazarite vow is an OT Hebraic vow; not a NC vow or way of life). But if you don't see that by your own words then so be it. It's no big deal to me one way or the other (although one could make a case for 1 Cor. 11:14 as the NC rule for today but that is whole other subject not germane to this point about the Greek text and through what language God preserved his word).

we may have no record of his actual word usage. unless, of course, it was recorded in hebrew or aramaic.
Click to expand...

To the contrary, as the works I listed would show, we do actually have the original words of God as so inspired and penned in the Greek of which our Greek copies reflect from the original source material. As for the Greek we do in fact have the words of God as he so chose to preserve them in the Greek language for all of history. The word of God has not been lost as it cannot be as he promised us it would be preserved. Since we do not have any full Hebrew manuscripts from that time period preserved for us we know by default that if God did preserve it for us then by his choice he chose the Greek as a proper and efficient means of getting his truth to us for the last 2000 or so years. Unless we want to claim that indeed God did not preserve and give it to use and somehow it has been hidden from us for all this time, which is what the new mystic school of thought is saying.

Matthew 24:35 tells us the words of God will never pass away. There has always been preserved the Word of God for us (see also Isa 40:8; Psalm 119:89).

People who have studied for years know this to be the truth and they have verified it through archaeology and language studies over and over and over and over for ages. Men like Dr. Daniel Wallace, Dr. Robert Dick Wilson (Ph.D and OT authority and author of Scientific Investigation of the OT, who could read the NT in 9 different languages by the age of 25), Dr. Gleason Archer, fluent in 15 languages and one who has done extensive studies in archeology and even in legal evidences, Dr. John Warrick Montgomery who has 9 graduate degrees in different fields, and many other brilliant men who have set their minds to this question of the original manuscripts all have arrived at the same conclusion and that is God's word was chosen by God himself to be preserved perfectly in the Greek manuscripts. We have some variations but none that affect any doctrine and of all the variations we can almost with certainty scientifically discover what was the original verse or word or phrase in question. Of those that we can't not a single doctrine of Scripture is in question because the variation is usually a letter or a name or something of the like.

But, you may think you know more than these men, or maybe you have some evidence of the Hebrew manuscripts being the inspired writings which have somehow now been lost, and if you do then by all means refute their works with archaeological evidences and with original source material. Few have been brave enough to even try and none to date who have had had much of anything to show for it.

But who knows maybe you do have something to to offer that none of these men have seen or know of in there many years of labor in the original source materials of Hebrew and Greek language studies. If so then by all means do share.

But, I doubt very seriously you have done much study in this field, much less as much study as those men above have done. And if you do not care to purchase those books I have listed earlier than you can go here and read about the Hebraism error of trying to insert the idea that the original NT words of God were inspired and penned only in original form in Hebrew. Though I am not a Textus Receptus only version manuscript proponent this site below I will post and their articles captures some of the key errors of those who have been deceived and caught up in regard to this the NT was originally written in Hebrew error. It follows along the lines of mysticism, and many of which, such as your own claim, have also heard God telling them to follow the Nazarite vows as well (the drive towards a Judaic or Hebraic way of life), as these people promoting this ideology have come forth from a new school of thought stemming from Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research.

http://watch.pair.com/peshitta.html

&

http://watch.pair.com/peshitta2.html

If you find some errors in these documents in regard to the points they make about the originals being in Greek then I challenge you to show what the error is or if you find some errors in the books should you buy those and read them.
 
i am not saying what you think that i am arguing. we are talking past one another, so i am going to just drop it rather than going over and over old ground.
 
Hummm...ok, well feel free to pm me if you so choose and want to try and help me understand what you are saying.
 
"The whole context of this is about unfaithful men who either put away a woman unjustly or take to themselves another man's woman who gets herself put away in order to be with him.

The power in getting the verb tenses properly translated!"

Why are the things that really are straight forward so difficult for so many teachers to explain? Your simple explanation opened my eyes to finally understand something that has caused me to be confused for quite some time! It makes perfect sense and matches up with the other scriptures (kill another "contradiction"). At the Calvary Chapels I have attended I heard three different "pastors" go over (notice I didn't use the word teach) this verse and never once shed any light on it. Again, thank you so much for helping me finally have a true understanding.
 
At the Calvary Chapels I have attended I heard three different "pastors" go over (notice I didn't use the word teach) this verse and never once shed any light on it. Again, thank you so much for helping me finally have a true understanding.
Click to expand...

You are very welcome brother.

Why are the things that really are straight forward so difficult for so many teachers to explain?
Click to expand...

Well for numerous reasons as I'm sure you already know. I'm even working on some of them in the 17 reasons why people read the Bible and miss polygyny. I think a large portion of our problem in the Christendom circles is Christoplatonism. Instead of a Judeo-Christian view of Scripture we read it through a platonic lens along with pieces of a Christian lens and thus synthesize the two and form Christoplatonic interpretations.

But, as you thank me let me give credit to Professor Luck too! The brother did wonders for me in helping me see the proper tenses of these verb constructions. And that is also another reason for the problem. People have at times not interpreted the Bible consistently with a literal hermeneutic. And even in translation sometimes people fail to translate the verbs or other grammatical portions in a proper way by sticking to a strict literal approach.

Another major reason, and one of most common of all, is because people approach the text with the presupposition that a woman can never truly ever be free from a man. When people bring that unbiblical presupposition into the text they wind up forcing their ideology into not only interpretation but also into translation of the Hebrew or Greek phrases.

And that is a serious problem with many as they think a union cannot be broken when in reality it can be broken and an innocent member can indeed be set free. Those who already have their minds made up against that idea come to the text and have to force the idea of that into the biblical text.

Just some common reasons off the top of my head.
 
Again I think you are "spot on". I was reminded of something I heard RC Sproul state in one of his messages, he was quoting
Sinclair Ferguson:

“People read the Bible the way they hear the Bible taught”

People most likely also teach from the Bible the things that they were taught as well...thus any error taught to them is magnified exponentially through the generations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top