The Bible

[KiwiChristian]

The Bible is not a book but a collection of 66 books, written over a span of 1600 years across 3 continents, by over 40 writers inspired by God in 3 languages yet it has ONE primary theme ( The Glory of God and salvation of mankind ) and zero errors or contradictions.
 

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

73 books. The Septuagint was used as scripture by the Apostles and NT writers. When the canon was closed at the end of the 4th century  is was closed on the OT list of books found in the Septuagint.

over 80% of OT quotes found in the NT come from the Septuagint.

Paul a temple trained Pharisee and highly educated, quoted and used the Septuagint 

the Septuagint was used by the apostles and all Christians for 1500 years

when the canon was closed it was closed using the OT canon of the Septuagint.

No man can add or subtract from scripture. Yet a disgruntled Augustinian monk decided that his man made theology was correct HE alone knew the truth. He wanted to reject 4 books from the NT he added the word "alone" to Rom 3:28 and successfully removed 7 books from the OT. For me I think I'll use the OT that the apostles used and not the one that a disgruntled monk decided on.

Often the "temple canon" is brought up to justify what Luther did. Here's where I have an issue with that argument. The NT writers considered the Septuagint as scripture and quoted from it as scripture. EVEN Paul who was a Pharisee and trained using the temple canon, used the Septuagint and quoted from it as scripture. I found a great article that breaks down this:

http://www.oldschoolscript.com/blog/2013/11/17/paul-the-paraphraser-or-paul-the-septuagint-quoter

the writer identifies as an (Ana)Baptist... his word not mine. So for me it's pretty compelling that the bible has 73 books and not 66.

[Neighbor]

The English language Bible is in it's various versions  are  transliterations of Bibles from other languages, and from  various writs and scrolls.  Usually of Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic origin with many second generation transliterations coming from Latin and German origins. The English language versions are best efforts of a host of serious transcribers, none of whom were writing under inspiration of God,  and none have never claimed to be inspired.

The various versions have differences, omissions, and differing difinitions, but each are sufficient in  collaborative effort  of the human authors to  make known the word of God, to all that have been indwelled  by God the Holy Spirit. The information used by scholars  is  available in the more complete and more accurate versions in the original languages available only to scholars  that understand and study those languages.

If and until a person is called to their repentance by the Holy Spirit it matters not a wit what version of a Bible may have been  read by them, for it's truths are spiritually discerned.

From the ES Version comes the following:

1 Corinthians 2English Standard Version (ESV)

Proclaiming Christ Crucified

2 And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. 2 For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 3 And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, 4 and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, 5 so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.

Wisdom from the Spirit

6 Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. 7 But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But, as it is written,

“What no eye has seen, nor ear heard,
    nor the heart of man imagined,
what God has prepared for those who love him”—

10 these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. 11 For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. 13 And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.

14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. 16 “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.

 

To repeat: "

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.  The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.  “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ."

 

 

Offline

Edited June 30, 2017 by Neighbor
spelling changed from tha to that

[Your closest friendnt]

3 hours ago, Davida said:

God Has always been in charge of HIS WORD.

“The word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘Jeremiah, what do you see?’ And I said, ‘I see an almond branch.’ Then the LORD said to me, ‘You have seen well, for I am watching over my word to perform it’”

- Jeremiah 1:11–19

Interesting quote, why "almond branch", and why would the Lord give this example. 

[Your closest friendnt]

45 minutes ago, Yowm said:

Looking at the Bible Knowledge Commentary...

Jer 1:11.
God's first confirming vision caused Jeremiah to see the branch of an almond tree. The Hebrew word for "almond tree" is shaqeid, from the word "to watch or to wake" shaqad. The almond tree was named the "awake tree" because in Palestine it is the first tree in the year to bud and bear fruit. Its blooms precede its leaves, as the tree bursts into blossom in late January.
1:12.
The branch represented God who was watching to see that His word is fulfilled. God used a play on words to associate the almond branch with His activity. The word for "watching" is shoqeid, related to the Hebrew noun for "almond tree." Jeremiah's vision of the "awake tree" reminded him that God was awake and watching over His word to make sure it came to pass. (Bible Knowledge Commentary)

Thank for replying, there is a lot of information in the post. 

This passage in Jeremiah had a message for the people. 

This was an almond branch, and if we have an almond tree we also have other branches. 

This branch was just spoting out it can just been seen, and was without any buds, some observations. 

There were many other branches, why no comment is made about the other branches. 

This was about this branch, what was the peculiarity about this branch, and why has to be mentioned in this manner, and in this most peculiar way, that the Lord needed this branch, not the other branches, he had the other branches, but he can not performed his promise, till that time of this branch. 

 

[Willa]

Jer 1:11  AMP  Moreover, the word of the Lord came to me, saying, Jeremiah, what do you see? And I said, I see a branch or shoot of an almond tree [the emblem of alertness and activity, blossoming in late winter].

Jer 1:12  Then said the Lord to me, You have seen well, for I am alert and active, watching over My word to perform it.

[Your closest friendnt]

1 minute ago, Willa said:

Jer 1:11  AMP  Moreover, the word of the Lord came to me, saying, Jeremiah, what do you see? And I said, I see a branch or shoot of an almond tree [the emblem of alertness and activity, blossoming in late winter].

Jer 1:12  Then said the Lord to me, You have seen well, for I am alert and active, watching over My word to perform it.

Reading carefully this passage, we cannot say that this is referring to a yearly even, let,s give it another twist. 

The tree had many branches, year after year, and it produce almonds, and the Lord said nothing.

But at the right time as soon as the shoot appeared, the Lord made this comment. 

All these examples they are used as a figurating picture of something to happen in the plan and propose of the Lord. 

While we understand about the almond tree, and we had almond trees at home, and I understand the cultural meaning to people, and the joy that the tree is still producing. 

There is something else the almond tree has nothing to do with the spring. 

It's the only tree that blossoms in winter, in cold weather, it needs cold weather to blossom. 

In the Mediterranean countries winter just starts in January. 

What is the prophetic meaning, and what is the specific word the Lord had promised, and beggins to undertake and needed this branch to perform it.

What is the mission of this brunch , what kind of fruit will bring forth, that the other branches could not. 

What special almonds will it produce. 

[KiwiChristian]

7 hours ago, Judas Machabeus said:

73 books. The Septuagint was used as scripture by the Apostles and NT writers. When the canon was closed at the end of the 4th century  is was closed on the OT list of books found in the Septuagint.

over 80% of OT quotes found in the NT come from the Septuagint.

Paul a temple trained Pharisee and highly educated, quoted and used the Septuagint 

the Septuagint was used by the apostles and all Christians for 1500 years

when the canon was closed it was closed using the OT canon of the Septuagint.

No man can add or subtract from scripture. Yet a disgruntled Augustinian monk decided that his man made theology was correct HE alone knew the truth. He wanted to reject 4 books from the NT he added the word "alone" to Rom 3:28 and successfully removed 7 books from the OT. For me I think I'll use the OT that the apostles used and not the one that a disgruntled monk decided on.

Often the "temple canon" is brought up to justify what Luther did. Here's where I have an issue with that argument. The NT writers considered the Septuagint as scripture and quoted from it as scripture. EVEN Paul who was a Pharisee and trained using the temple canon, used the Septuagint and quoted from it as scripture. I found a great article that breaks down this:

http://www.oldschoolscript.com/blog/2013/11/17/paul-the-paraphraser-or-paul-the-septuagint-quoter

the writer identifies as an (Ana)Baptist... his word not mine. So for me it's pretty compelling that the bible has 73 books and not 66.

Really? You want to go into this?

I dont know whether to allow you to hijack the thread or not.

 

Lets start a new topic for the question of the apocrypha.

 

The purpose of this thread is not what is or is not included in the Bible, but that the Bible is not ONE book.

Let us stick on THIS topic, please.

[KiwiChristian]

6 hours ago, Davida said:

God Has always been in charge of HIS WORD.

“The word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘Jeremiah, what do you see?’ And I said, ‘I see an almond branch.’ Then the LORD said to me, ‘You have seen well, for I am watching over my word to perform it’”

- Jeremiah 1:11–19

Yes, the catholic cult had NOTHING to do with compiling the Bible.

 

it was divinely assembled.

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

19 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

The Bible is not a book but a collection of 66 books, written over a span of 1600 years across 3 continents, by over 40 writers inspired by God in 3 languages yet it has ONE primary theme ( The Glory of God and salvation of mankind ) and zero errors or contradictions.
 

 

1 hour ago, KiwiChristian said:

Really? You want to go into this?

I dont know whether to allow you to hijack the thread or not.

 

Lets start a new topic for the question of the apocrypha.

 

The purpose of this thread is not what is or is not included in the Bible, but that the Bible is not ONE book.

Let us stick on THIS topic, please.

seems to me you are saying its a collection of books and you claim 66 of them.... I'm disputing your claim of it being a collection of 66 books so I feel I am on point.