Jump to content

Top 10+ Reasons Why the devil is not God. (Lucifer is not Jesus) (countdown)


The OC

Recommended Posts

I've come across a few articles online and YouTube videos where people have conflated Jesus with the fallen angel. Usually this comes from a misunderstanding of the Morningstar argument.

 

Top 10+ Reasons Why the devil is not God. (Lucifer is not Jesus) (countdown)
 
Many examples below were extracted from What Is the Extent of Satan's Power? (blueletterbible.org)
 
The Morningstars argument states in Job 38:7
Job 38:7 - “When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” King James Version (KJV) Comment: In The Old Testament we read in The Book of Job 38:7 (KJV) .The verse mentions morning stars in the plural. And just as there are thousands of different stars visible to the naked eye, there are at least two or more morning stars.
  1. Our God The Holy Trinity is omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, and eternal. Satan is not, he's a fallen angel. Though he would like people to think so, he is not the opposite of God. God is all-powerful, everywhere present, and all-knowing. Satan is none of these. He does not have unlimited power, he cannot be everywhere at once, and he does not know everything. 
  2. God is uncreated while Lucifer/Satan is a created being. He is a created, limited being. He depends upon God for his existence.
  3. God gave us the gift of free will and respects our choices, Satan interferes and tempts us to sin.
  4. When Satan approached God, he did not come as an equal, but rather as a subordinate. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them" (Job 1:6).
  5. Cannot Tempt Without God's Permission. Satan was unable to tempt Jesus without the permission of the Holy Spirit. Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil (Matthew 4:1). He also could not tempt Job without God's permission. And the LORD said to Satan, "Behold, all that he has is in your power; only do not lay a hand on his person." So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD (Job 1:12).
  6. Cannot Influence Nature Without God's Permission. When it came to influencing nature, Satan was not able to do it without God's permission. And the Lord said unto Satan, Behold, all that he has is in your power; only upon himself put not forth your hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the Lord. . . . While he [a servant] was yet speaking, there came also another, and said, The fire of God is fallen from heaven, and has burned up the sheep and the servants, and consumed them; and I only am escaped alone to tell you. and, behold, there came a great wind from the wilderness, and struck the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young men, and they are dead; and I only am escaped alone to tell you (Job 1:12,16,19).
  7. Cannot Physically Harm Without God's Permission. When Satan wanted to physically harm Job, he had to first ask God's permission. The LORD said to Satan, "Where have you come from?" Satan answered the LORD, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it." The LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and turns away from evil. He still persists in his integrity, although you incited me against him, to destroy him for no reason." Then Satan answered the LORD, "Skin for skin! All that people have they will give to save their lives. But stretch out your hand now and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse you to your face." The LORD said to Satan, "Very well, he is in your power" (Job 2:2-6).
  8. Kill Without God's Permission. Satan cannot take a human life without first getting God's permission. The LORD said to Satan, "Very well, he is in your power; only spare his life" (Job 2:6). The Bible does say that Satan has the power of death. Since the children have flesh and blood, He too shared in their humanity so that by His death He might destroy him who holds the power of death, that is, the Devil (Hebrews 2:14). However this does not mean that he has the ultimate authority to cause people to die, only God has that authority.
  9. God is the truth but the devil is a liar so he's lying about being God.
  10. Jesus died for the sins of the world, Lucifer did not.
  11. I would say the #1 reason why Lucifer is not Jesus.can be found in Isaiah Chapter 14 - 12 
 
Isaiah Chapter 14 - 12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! 13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. 15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. 
 
Through his pride Lucifer wants to dethrone God, while Jesus was content to take His place at the right hand of The Father. Lucifer is filled with pride while Jesus on the other hand is meek. 
Matthew 11:29 Context 26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight. 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. 28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

Jesus said I and the Father are one. So like Jesus, God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are equally of a meek nature.

 

 
The Bible is a book about God, not the devil. The Bible doesn’t answer every question about warfare, nor does it grant us permission to focus our attention on the devil. Any approach to warfare that magnifies the devil’s power does not reflect biblical spiritual warfare. God’s Mission Has an Enemy: 10 Facts about Spiritual Warfare - IMB
 
Sources
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"We're all pawns in a game greater than our understanding"
♟ Chess: The Great War Between Light and Darkness 
 
Re: Mashiach Ben Joseph and Mashiach Ben David 
 
These are Talmudic beliefs, most Trinitarian Christians wouldn't refer to Jesus as Mashiach Ben Joseph, we see Christ as The One and Only Messiah, He is The Messiah from the tribe of Judah, from the direct blood lineage of King David or (St. David) whereas His adopted father was St. Joseph the husband of The Blessed Virgin Mary (The Theotokos)
 
The dual nature of Christ when He walked on earth, was both human and divine, not this heretical idea of two separate Messiahs.
 
This has a slight resemblance to the theological and doctrinal aspects of Hitler's Positive Christianity
 
"The Nazis claimed racial "Aryanhood" and ethno-religious non-Jewishness for Christ who was instead known as a "Nordic Amorite"
 
Unless you're referring to the Saints of The Church, Christians DO NOT "consider Jews elevated to a Divine Status" 
 
I've never heard of a Christian venerating a Talmudist or Kabbalist. It would be unheard of to refer to Rabbi Schneerson as a saint in Christian circles. This is because most Jews and Christians DO NOT worship the same deity, Jews and Christians ARE NOT in communion.
 
I'm not sure why content creators like Adam Green is pushing this false narrative. 
 
In future, anytime the subject of Jesus Christ is brought up, whether in person, on the Net, over the phone, or on mainstream media, try to make it a habit by asking yourself the following question;
 
"Which version of Jesus Christ is being discussed?"
 
Here is a small list of some of the more popular heretical and blasphemous views:
 
Many of these heresies have been weaponized to push forward the luciferian agenda.
 
Who Is Jesus, According to Other Religions?
 
Just a prophet = Islam
 
A Nordic Amorite = Hitler's Positive Christianity
Just a man = Atheism/Humanism
 
A heretical rabbi = Judaism/Talmudism
One of two separate Messiahs - Moschiach Ben Josef = Judaism/Talmudism
An extraterrestrial = Conspiracy theorists / sci-fi crowd / Kabbalists
 
The [anti] Christ Consciousness powered by 5G Tech? = New Age Movement
The 5th Buddha = Buddhism
An ascended master = Freemasonry
 
The Archangel Michael = Jehovah's Witness
An Avatar = Hinduism
A Saint = Sikhism
A holy man = Bahai
 
An androgyne = LGBTQ+ community
A fallen angel = Luciferianism/Theistic Satanism and possibly Gnosticism
Artificial Intelligence = Transhumanist movement
 
For Christians, Israel doesn't only refer to a piece of land or a nation of people, it also means one who has repented and turned away from their sins.
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Evaluating Judaism

Evaluating Judaism – No Other Foundation (ancientfaith.com)

June 13, 2023 · Fr. Lawrence Farley
 

The world is filled with wonders:  it is apparently a controversial thing to affirm that Judaism was a true religion worshipping the one true God.  A sentence affirming this in the recent online OCA Essential Orthodox Christian Beliefs:  A Manual for Adult Instruction has given great offence to those reading it with hostile eyes, and so I will try to explain it again perhaps a little more clearly.  What follows are of course my own thoughts, not the official line of the OCA or of Ancient Faith, or of anyone else.  And, like those offering the OCA online Essential Orthodox Christian Beliefs, I am always happy to explain, add, revise, and clarify.  My main point of clarification is that in my essay I was speaking about the Judaism of Paul’s day, not the Rabbinic Judaism of today.  As usual, I was writing as an exegete, not a social commentator of religion.

 

By the statement that the apostles regarded Judaism as a true religion and as worshipping the one true God, I meant that Christianity did not regard Judaism as worshipping a false god or an idol in same way as did (for example) the ancient pagans or the modern Hindus.  St. Paul described the formerly pagan Thessalonian Christians as those who “turned to God from the idols to serve a living and true God” (1 Thessalonians 1:9) and his Jewish spirit was provoked when strolling through Athens and seeing how the city was full of idols (Acts 17:16).  He did not so regard his fellow Jews in this way, presumably because he felt that they already worshipped the living and true God.   Judaism in Paul’s day was a true religion in the midst of a world filled with idolatry.

 

But there was something important lacking in his fellow Jews in his day:  they stumbled at a step where they should have mounted up, so that after Jesus came, their religion was fast becoming deficient—viz. they needed to augment their faith in the God of Abraham with faith in Jesus as the divine Messiah.  It was only through faith in Jesus (and therefore through baptism into His Church) that they could retain their covenantal status as the Israel of God and inherit the blessings promised to Israel by the prophets.  Unlike the pagan Thessalonians, they didn’t need to switch gods; they only needed to accept Jesus as the Messiah and become Christians.

 

In this the Jews did not differ from those in other religions—as I said in my piece, “the Church calls them all [i.e. those of all religions, including Judaism] to join in the saving worship of the Trinity, to accept Christian baptism, and to live as part of the Church”.

 

Conversion from Hinduism (for example) involves renouncing one’s ancestral gods, and turning from one’s scriptures to accept a different God and different Scriptures.  Converting from Judaism does not involve renouncing the God of Israel or accepting different Scriptures.  Rather, converting from Judaism involves fulfilling one’s ancestral faith, not renouncing it in a way that converting from Hinduism does.  That is what I meant when I said that Judaism is a true religion.  One could paraphrase by saying that the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God (Romans 3:2).

 

I am aware that this declaration about converting from Judaism to Christianity is controversial, and that those practising Rabbinic Judaism will of course disagree with it.  But the declaration represents the teaching of the New Testament and so, as a Christian, I am struck with it, regardless of whether or not it jeopardizes my coveted status as a “known modern ecumenist”.  Those who have read my body of work over the past twenty years or more know that I have always asserted that the Orthodox Church is the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church confessed in the creed, and that I have never held what is sometimes called “the branch theory”, and that whatever my many failings, that sort of ecumenism is not among them.

 

As said above, this twin declaration about the Judaism of Paul’s day being a true religion and its need to embrace Christ should all be uncontroversial to Christians who accept the New Testament and, fun though it may be, one need not draw dramatic unwarranted conclusions from it, attributing to me things I do not hold.  But we should speak a little more about just how Orthodox Christianity should regard Rabbinic Judaism which rejects the claim that Jesus is the Messiah.

 

Here the picture is a little less clear, since the New Testament was written before Rabbinic Judaism emerged and solidified in the wake of the Temple’s destruction.  I suspect that this will be somewhat controversial, and so I assure the reader in advance that I intend no offence to anyone.  My intention rather is simply to state what I think is the teaching of the New Testament.  For ease of presentation, I will number the points I would like to make.

 

1. Ever since the cross, Resurrection, and ascension of Christ, all the blessings promised by God to His covenant people only come through faith in Christ and membership in His Church.  That is, salvation, forgiveness, rebirth, sonship, and access to the Father are only available through Jesus. (John 14:6, Acts 4:12, Ephesians 2:18).  That does not mean (in my view anyway) that all non-Christians are going to hell after they die.  But it does mean that the experience of salvation and transformation is this life is only available in Jesus.  (The fascinating topic of the ultimate fate of non-Christians will not be addressed here.)

 

Jews practising Rabbinic Judaism need to come to faith in Jesus as their Messiah just as do the Gentiles and join the Church.  That is what St. Paul meant when he said that God shows no partiality (Romans 2:11) and why he preached to the Jew as well as to the Gentile, insisting that the Gospel was the power of God for salvation to everyone who had faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek (Romans 1:16).  Paul obviously thought that in his day Judaism was now insufficient and needed the addition of faith in Christ Jesus—that was why he worshipped in their synagogues, sacrificed in the Temple and strove mightily to bring them to Christian faith.

 

2. Rabbinic Judaism is not synonymous with Mosaic religion.  Specifically, Rabbinic Judaism lacks the Temple and its sacrifices, which were considered as the means of forgiveness and salvation for as long as it stood.  (See the Song of the Three Young Men 15, in Daniel 3, with its prayer that after the destruction of the Temple by the Babylonians Israel had “no burnt offering or sacrifice or oblation or incense, no place to make an offering before God or to find mercy”.  Note:  it was through the sacrifices mandated in the Law through Moses that Israel’s worshippers “found mercy”).

 

After the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. Mosaic religion was mutilated and deficient, lacking its beating heart, which is why it was so widely mourned by the Jews as a terrible catastrophe.  Obviously the Jews at the time had to carry on somehow, and they found refuge in the thought that prayer and penitence might somehow take the place of sacrifice.  It was something of a stopgap solution, but what else could they do?  For us it is enough to note that Rabbinic Judaism should not be equated with the religion of the Old Testament.  The former became a religion of a Book in a way that the latter never was.

 

3. The New Testament regarded the Judaism of its day as valid, but now outdated. In the words of Hebrews 8:13, the Old Covenant centered on the Mosaic Law had become “obsolete” and therefore as “growing old and ready to vanish away”. The sacrifices, central to forgiveness before Christ came, were now superfluous.  They might still “sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh” and for removal of ritual impurity, but they could not and never could “purify the conscience from dead works to serve the living God” or “make perfect those who drew near” to God through them (Hebrews 9:13-14, 10:1).  The sacrifice of Christ on the cross revealed anew and once and for all the limitations of animal sacrifice.  With Christ a new and hitherto unimagined cleansing and power had come into the world, and in its light one could see as never before the limitations of Judaism.  As with the Law, so with the Temple sacrifices:  “what once had splendour has come to have no splendour at all, because of the splendour that surpasses it” (2 Corinthians 3:10).

 

Though the apostles had no quarrel with the Temple and its sacrifices while the Temple stood (Acts 21:26 is clear about that), their spiritual center had shifted.  Jesus’ death was now the true and saving sacrifice, and His Church the true Temple.  Like circumcision, once so central to Jews, the Temple cult had been rendered spiritually superfluous.  To paraphrase Paul in Galatians 6:15, “neither Temple nor its sacrifices count for anything, but a new creation”.  The Temple and its cult could function as an image, a promise, and a prophecy of God’s presence in Israel, but it no longer could function as the effective means of its realization.  The realization and the reality were now found in Christ.

 

4. The New Testament’s fervent and violent denunciation of the Jews was not aimed at Judaism as a religion or at all Jews because they were Jewish. Rather these denunciations presupposed a determined and violent persecution of the nascent Church on the part of the local Jews. We see this in 1 Thessalonians 2:14f:  the Jews upon whom God’s wrath had come were those Jews who killed the Lord Jesus and drove Paul out and hindered him from speaking to the Gentiles.  Paul’s words here were not aimed at all Jews everywhere.  Here, as in many places in the Bible, context is everything.  Presumably the Jews who did nothing to oppose Paul and the Christian movement were not in his mind when he wrote this.

 

We see this also in the denunciation in Revelation 3:9 where the local Jews of Philadelphia were denounced as “a synagogue of Satan”.  The offence which warranted such verbal violence was not simply the Jewishness of the local Jews, but their persecution of the local Christians.

 

This all means that the wrath of God upon the Jews depended to a great extent upon whether or not they persecuted the Christians and upon the violence of their rejection of Christ—precisely the same yardstick which determined the wrath of God upon the Gentiles.   If anyone hates Christ and blasphemes against Him (as we find in some places in the Talmud) then divine wrath may be expected in response, whether the blasphemer be Jew or Gentile.  In my (admittedly limited) experience, not all Jews regard everything in the Talmud as authoritative.  It is one thing to say that a Jew does not enjoy the access to the Father enjoyed by the Christian.  It is quite another to say that the wrath of God abides on him as it did upon the Jews who ran St. Paul out of town simply because he is a Jew. Discernment—not always found in fundamentalists—is required.

 

One final point about this debate as a whole:  it is unhealthy and unhelpful to conduct such debate in a spirit of quarrelsome judgmentalism, reading texts with hostile eyes.  If one truly has the wisdom which is from above, one will discuss and debate with a spirit that is pure, peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits.  One will humbly inquire and investigate the meaning of a text before rushing to denunciation and delighting in derision.  The harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace (James 3:17-18).  True debate is not conducted in a spirit of angry judgmentalism masquerading as zeal for truth and traditionalism, keen to pounce upon imprecision and take the mote from the neighbour’s eye while retaining a log in one’s own.

As James 3:15 reminds us, such “wisdom” does not from down from above, but is earthly, natural, demonic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, alexa said:

Isaiah 14:12

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

 

What does this bible verse mean to you?

 

 

 

.

Edited by The OC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Jason57 said:

I'll never believe the free will stuff. We didn't have free will in our being created. If I had been told how life was gonna be I would've turned donw life.

 

On going process, sorry but this has nothing to do with God's free will.:classic_sad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

Why is it then that everyone has it ?

They don't. None of us had free will to come here in the first place.

 

Romans 11:32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

 

This proves complete free will isn't true. I also would rule out the idea of Hell and eternal conscious torment.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, alexa said:

 

Are you sure about this ?

I am. However, I would advise you to research the words Gehenna, Hades, Sheol and Tartarus. None of them refer to an underground fire chamber. It's worth researching Hell. If Hell is real, then Jesus is only the potential saviour of the world, and God can't do what he instructs us to do :Forgive.

 

I'm not saying I'm 100% right, but going by traditional church teachings, most of humanity (including people you know and care for) are screwed infinitely for finite sins or unbelief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Jason57 said:

and God can't do what he instructs us to do :Forgive.

In fairness, and I’m not religious, from what I understand of the Christian based faiths, you need absolution and to acknowledge your sins before you die. From a Christian point of view, God IS giving you the chance to avoid hell. Hence God can forgive.

Some other faiths have similar teachings even if packaged differently.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bombadil said:

In fairness, and I’m not religious, from what I understand of the Christian based faiths, you need absolution and to acknowledge your sins before you die. From a Christian point of view, God IS giving you the chance to avoid hell. Hence God can forgive.

Some other faiths have similar teachings even if packaged differently.

I believe that's the Catholic views and Christianity from the time of Constantine onwards. Whenever Yeshua talked about Hellfire, he was talking to the Jews about Gehenna fire. Gehenna fire was a city dump where trash was thrown every day. It was a constant fire where sinners and criminals found guilty were thrown as a punishment.

 

As I've said, if Hell as religion teaches is real, the vast majority of humanity is going there, including slef professing Chistians who may be following a wrong doctrine. I guess Yeshua  did say the road to lif is narrow, and few find it. The road to destrcution is wide and many enter into it. Although that doesn't say eternal conscious torment, just destruction.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jason57 said:

I believe that's the Catholic views and Christianity from the time of Constantine onwards. Whenever Yeshua talked about Hellfire, he was talking to the Jews about Gehenna fire. Gehenna fire was a city dump where trash was thrown every day. It was a constant fire where sinners and criminals found guilty were thrown as a punishment.

 

As I've said, if Hell as religion teaches is real, the vast majority of humanity is going there, including slef professing Chistians who may be following a wrong doctrine. I guess Yeshua  did say the road to lif is narrow, and few find it. The road to destrcution is wide and many enter into it. Although that doesn't say eternal conscious torment, just destruction.

I appreciate the Bible as read today has been vastly manipulated.

 

I guess it could come down in Gehenna etc, to whether the word of god was being followed or abused for personal benefit.

I agree that I if the  bible is correct the vast majority are going to hell.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bombadil said:

I appreciate the Bible as read today has been vastly manipulated.

 

I guess it could come down in Gehenna etc, to whether the word of god was being followed or abused for personal benefit.

I agree that I if the  bible is correct the vast majority are going to hell.

I prefer to go by the saying of Socrates :" True wisdom is admitting how little we know"

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The Bible and other Christian texts are too symbolic and cryptic and have been re-translated too many times to be taken at face value, so it's quite possible that Jesus and Lucifer are cryptically similar, e.g., they are light bringers. They both descend to Earth. 

 

Jesus and Adam are similar (unique creations). Adam gets kicked out by God and also experiences a descent, so to speak - a fall.

Edited by Grumpy Grapes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little critical thinking and questioning will lead you to understanding that Jesus and Lucifer, as "gods" a fictional.  There is ample evidence for Jesus being a real person who was a teacher and graduate of various mystery schools.  The Bible is a mixture of exaggerations, parables, astrology, and occult teachings.  I think many of the books could have contained useful informations, but were picked apart during the FirstCouncil of Nicaea and formed into what would work best for the Church.  If you really want to understand the Bible and a majority of its stories, characters, and deeds, then read about the ancient mystery schools and biblical astrology.  Many P. Hall'sThe Secret Teachings of All Ages is a great place to start. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Grumpy Grapes said:

The Bible and other Christian texts are too symbolic and cryptic and have been re-translated too many times to be taken at face value, so it's quite possible that Jesus and Lucifer are cryptically similar, e.g., they are light bringers. They both descend to Earth.

 

The King James Bible is the only Bible that hasn't been messed around with & as for Lucifer/Satan he is the creation of God,

I make peace, and create evil: Isaiah 45:7

 

Lucifer used to be known as the morning star until God kicked him out of heaven.

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! Isaiah 14:12

 

As for Jesus, he didn't descend to earth, he was born here & ascended to heaven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, alexa said:

 

The King James Bible is the only Bible that hasn't been messed around with & as for Lucifer/Satan he is the creation of God,

I make peace, and create evil: Isaiah 45:7

 

Lucifer used to be known as the morning star until God kicked him out of heaven.

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! Isaiah 14:12

 

As for Jesus, he didn't descend to earth, he was born here & ascended to heaven.

So the King James Bible is Identical to the original texts? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, alexa said:

 

It's the nearest you'll get.

The KJB was formed in 161 after the Hampton Court Conference based off of the 1604 Book of Common Prayers from English translations from the 14th Century by followers of John Wycliffe.  From the 14th Century to 1604, and after, the books were revised several times and went trough further translations.  The last revision was 1769. The translations of the text are based off of the translation itself, which can be inaccurate to the original word meaning, and the accuracy of those actually doing the translation. So saying it is the nearest you can get is lazy and untrue.  

 

The nearest we can get to the original texts of Scriptures and Gospels are from the Dead Sea Scrolls (Est. 3rd century BCE to 1st century CE) and Nag Hammadi Scriptures (3rd and 4th centuries CE).  Most of the Scriptures and Gospels we read now in the Bible, any version, are based off of translations from texts that were written decades and centuries after the "life" of Jesus.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The All Eye said:

The KJB was formed in 161 after the Hampton Court Conference based off of the 1604 Book of Common Prayers from English translations from the 14th Century by followers of John Wycliffe.  From the 14th Century to 1604, and after, the books were revised several times and went trough further translations.  The last revision was 1769. The translations of the text are based off of the translation itself, which can be inaccurate to the original word meaning, and the accuracy of those actually doing the translation. So saying it is the nearest you can get is lazy and untrue.  

 

The nearest we can get to the original texts of Scriptures and Gospels are from the Dead Sea Scrolls (Est. 3rd century BCE to 1st century CE) and Nag Hammadi Scriptures (3rd and 4th centuries CE).  Most of the Scriptures and Gospels we read now in the Bible, any version, are based off of translations from texts that were written decades and centuries after the "life" of Jesus.

 

My apologies - The KJV is the Bible I read now & will be in the future. I find that all these other new versions have been changed very badly from the KJV & it's a deliberate ploy.

The KJV maybe harder to read but the 'thy' 'thee' and the 'thou &  'Ye' all mean something, and when you find all these taken away for easy reading it changes the context entirely.

 

In early modern English, beginning in the late fifteenth century, thou, thee and thy were singular forms for the subjective, objective and possessive, and ye, you and your were plural. In the 1500s and 1600s, ye and then the thou / thee / thy forms, faded away, to be replaced by the all-purpose you.

 

Well you got one thing right I am lazy but not when it comes to reading  :classic_biggrin:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The All Eye said:

The KJB was formed in 161 after the Hampton Court Conference based off of the 1604 Book of Common Prayers from English translations from the 14th Century by followers of John Wycliffe.  From the 14th Century to 1604, and after, the books were revised several times and went trough further translations.  The last revision was 1769. The translations of the text are based off of the translation itself, which can be inaccurate to the original word meaning, and the accuracy of those actually doing the translation. So saying it is the nearest you can get is lazy and untrue.  

 

The nearest we can get to the original texts of Scriptures and Gospels are from the Dead Sea Scrolls (Est. 3rd century BCE to 1st century CE) and Nag Hammadi Scriptures (3rd and 4th centuries CE).  Most of the Scriptures and Gospels we read now in the Bible, any version, are based off of translations from texts that were written decades and centuries after the "life" of Jesus.

I'm not sure how to edit but the first sentence should read:

 

The KJB was formed in 1611 after the Hampton Court Conference based off of the 1604 Book of Common Prayers from English translations from the 14th Century by followers of John Wycliffe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...