Lead us not into translations: Pope thinks Lord’s Prayer could be improved

[Heleadethme]

10 hours ago, other one said:

actually the Bible agrees with the Pope...

BTW the Pope thinks that this is just a very bad translation...   I'm not sure I know anyone who really thinks that God himself tempts us...

 

"Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone." - James 1:13

The Lord Himself does not tempt anyone........but the devil does.  The Lord does LEAD us into temptation though......trials and testings.......remember it was the Holy Spirit who led Jesus into the desert where He was tempted by the devil.....for the proving of His faith.....in order to overcome.  The Pope is wrong, and it's obvious he does not understand the gospel and the true Christian faith. 

The prayer to lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil.......is like Jesus asking the Lord to take this cup from Him (crucifixion) if there be another way to deliver the world from sin.......we may certainly and ought to likewise pray accordingly for our own lives, and also for each other, and the Lord will at times answer  with an affirmative.........though not always.......because sometimes it's a matter of not my will but Thy will be done. 

[Justin Adams]

This is just par for the course really. No one can really claim 'inerrancy' but we hope that all we read from the MANY, MANY sources will allow us to begin to understand the mind of Yahweh and the way He does things.

He uses people where they are and in the frame of mind they are in to write down what He wants to be said. He does not treat them as marionettes and so He speaks and they relate and record. Hebrew scholars have been arguing for centuries about words without really thinking of the intent of those words to convey truths that the Lord wants us, in our stumbling ways, to reveal about Him.

For instance. Get in Daniel's mindset and see what was written in Aramaic from his very learned perspective. That is, very learned for those days, but not necessarily learned in the same way for us today.

To really understand what someone says about a particular item, one must get into their world view and see it as the writer saw it. Not in our 21st century materialistic and enlightened perspective, but in the frame of reference that the writer was experiencing at that time.

 

[Heleadethme]

9 hours ago, Neighbor said:

 Do most not know of the debate between forgive us our trespasses versus forgive us our debts?  Avoid vain arguments seems to be the guide for me on this one.

I agree with avoiding vain arguments......but the Pope rewriting the bible or any part of it is not a vain argument.  It comes across to me that the way the Pope wants to rewrite this particular passage of the Lord's prayer is because he is interpreting "lead us not into temptation" as meaning "lead us not into sin"......and this is just not what the passage means, at all.  He's right if he believes the Lord doesn't lead us to sin......BUT he isn't right in his understanding of that passage or what temptation means.......because that just is not what it is saying or implying.  It seems as though he is equating temptation with sinning......and that is just plain wrong here and everywhere in the bible.  Even worse, this might be a clue that he considers temptation as something that can't be overcome, since he is equating it with sin, it's as though he is assuming that if someone is tempted they are going to sin.  I would be very very careful of any of this man's re-writes......knowing how flesh strives always to justify sin.

[Justin Adams]

I am so sorry for people that even think that the pope has anything for us really. It is a man made construct, the office of pope, and so to even talk of that poor guy is giving him more copy than he or his words are worth. He is just another man with words.

[Justmemyselfandi]

8 hours ago, other one said:

I don't disagree with what you are saying,    but I'm saying that we should not be so caught up in our thinking that we can't listen to someone when they are right about something......   I find that about as frightening as those things you are speaking of here.    Just so you will know, that verse has bothered me since I was about ten years old when I first read it...

He is not right about something. Just because it fits into our understanding of diction today doesn't mean that we can change anything, because it was never ours to understand. We are not the recipient of the Lord's prayer. The Lord is. It was he that gave us that. It's his as if The Lord Gave us his own personal phone number to call him and old and crispy decided that wasn't hip enough and is trying to change that number just because he claims that God would simply change the number for the benefit of the callers, even though only one person is deciding that.

 

This is the same update material that got us female preachers. Gay and lesbian preachers and a parody of all the faiths.  It's another attempt at giving everything Christian oa make over from the human standpoint.  God doesn't need any of us, but we need him and i think this is yet another attempt to do a social update on Christianity. This is the same agenda that gave us female pastors, openly gays inside the community, even preaching from the pulpit. What next, indulgences, maybe. Oh wait, they've already tried that.

[Heleadethme]

9 hours ago, frienduff thaylorde said:

yeah they spend all their energy debating trespasses versus debts

.  and here is the thing. ITS THE SAME THING .  get over it .  I mean good night .

one reads debts and another read trespasses.  MEANS the same thing .  it was just how it was worded .

but this pope is a wolf in wool.   And sadly most the wool aint on his body,  its in his teeth and many still say....HEY its a lamb, its teeth are covered with wool. 

yeah go figure .

 

Debts and trespasses means the same.......and Matthew 18 shows us how debts are used as a parable to portray trespasses which need to be forgiven.  But I have to say, temptations does not mean sin and that seems to be what the Pope wants to turn it into, which is incorrect and misleading.....it completely misses the true meaning and understanding of that verse.  As always the self-righteousness of man subtly judges God as being somehow unrighteous.....(in this case subtly accusing God of leading people to sin)  and that is even the basis on which they embrace the interfaith lie.  oh, Jesus didn't really mean that He is the only way......no that must be wrong too and needs to be rewritten.....surely a righteous God would not say that......in other words implying that God is unrighteous.  I honestly wouldnt' be surprised if they rewrite the entire bible to agree with their agenda by the time this is through.....and ban the true bible.  Another dark ages........only this time it will be lit up with a light that is darkness.

[Justmemyselfandi]

8 hours ago, other one said:

I think we have done that....   but if I tell you all I know about the Pope, some Catholics here will sic the mods on us....

I am not afraid of the mods, when I talk about God  This web site is just another electronic world that can be turned on and off with a flip of a power switch. I have to justify everything I say or do on the day of judgement and I think I will need all the plus marks  I can get. The last 30 some odd years have been more full of holes than it was holy.

[other one]

3 minutes ago, Justmemyselfandi said:

I am not afraid of the mods, when I talk about God  This web site is just another electronic world that can be turned on and off with a flip of a power switch. I have to justify everything I say or do on the day of judgement and I think I will need all the plus marks  I can get. The last 30 some odd years have been more full of holes than it was holy.

I think i'll just not comment on that.

 

[Justmemyselfandi]

20 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

I am so sorry for people that even think that the pope has anything for us really. It is a man made construct, the office of pope, and so to even talk of that poor guy is giving him more copy than he or his words are worth. He is just another man with words.

It's all tradition, man.

[Guest shiloh357]

27 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

This is just par for the course really. No one can really claim 'inerrancy' but we hope that all we read from the MANY, MANY sources will allow us to begin to understand the mind of Yahweh and the way He does things.

 

The Bible is 100% inerrant.  Do you reject the doctrine of inerrancy?