Deborah_ Posted July 7, 2019 Group: Senior Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 790 Content Per Day: 0.25 Reputation: 878 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/07/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted July 7, 2019 51 minutes ago, Jostler said: We don't get to decide what that definition is. The Bible does. I agree. But we do have to look at the whole Bible carefully to ensure that we are not missing anything. There are some who would limit the term 'prophet' to those bringing revelation from God to the Church for all time; but there are many people who are called 'prophets' in the Bible who would not fit that definition. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deborah_ Posted July 7, 2019 Group: Senior Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 790 Content Per Day: 0.25 Reputation: 878 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/07/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted July 7, 2019 7 minutes ago, Justin Adams said: Generally I agree with Jayne, except the 'closed canon' idea. Since Qumran and other text discoveries, newer translations have clarified and added important information. Considering all that the earlier translators had to work with they did a great job with the 1611 and earlier renditions. But I see nowhere except in 'doctrine' and certain 'bodies of bishops' (Mostly forerunners of the RCC) that the 'canon' is closed. Thus, if the Lord wishes to impart something new, thru something old that is freshly discovered (like at Qumran) who are we to disallow it? I don't quite understand you. The discoveries at Qumran haven't changed the canon, and although our translations have improved nothing has been added to it. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayne Posted July 7, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 107 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 3,820 Content Per Day: 1.30 Reputation: 4,806 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/31/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted July 7, 2019 9 minutes ago, Deborah_ said: I absolutely agree. The question is whether there are also other, lesser, non-foundational ways of being apostles and prophets - and I believe we do have examples of such in the Bible. I can agree with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Adams Posted July 7, 2019 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 25 Topic Count: 61 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 9,605 Content Per Day: 3.97 Reputation: 7,795 Days Won: 21 Joined: 09/11/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted July 7, 2019 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Deborah_ said: I don't quite understand you. The discoveries at Qumran haven't changed the canon, and although our translations have improved nothing has been added to it. "...there are differences (some quite significant) between the scrolls and the Masoretic text. Furthermore, these differences have made scholars rethink variant readings found in other ancient manuscripts. How should scholars treat these variants with relationship to the Masoretic text? Should they try to determine which readings are the most original and then incorporate them in a new critical edition of the Hebrew Bible? Or should they continue to use the Masoretic text as their base? Does a single version of the Hebrew Bible exist that is older than all others presently known, and if so, where is the original Bible? These questions are not merely academic; for any changes made to scholarly editions of the Masoretic text will have repercussions for decades of research and will affect all future Bible translations." https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-artifacts/dead-sea-scrolls/the-masoretic-text-and-the-dead-sea-scrolls/ Of note: there are at least three 'canons'. The Ethiopian is the most complete but frowned on by western seminarians. Edited July 7, 2019 by Justin Adams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jostler Posted July 7, 2019 Group: Mars Hill Followers: 25 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,679 Content Per Day: 1.39 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 16 Joined: 01/19/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted July 7, 2019 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Justin Adams said: "...there are differences (some quite significant) between the scrolls and the Masoretic text. Furthermore, these differences have made scholars rethink variant readings found in other ancient manuscripts. How should scholars treat these variants with relationship to the Masoretic text? Should they try to determine which readings are the most original and then incorporate them in a new critical edition of the Hebrew Bible? Or should they continue to use the Masoretic text as their base? Does a single version of the Hebrew Bible exist that is older than all others presently known, and if so, where is the original Bible? These questions are not merely academic; for any changes made to scholarly editions of the Masoretic text will have repercussions for decades of research and will affect all future Bible translations." https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-artifacts/dead-sea-scrolls/the-masoretic-text-and-the-dead-sea-scrolls/ Of note: there are at least three 'canons'. The Ethiopian is the most complete but frowned on by western seminarians. in textual analysis, the oldest known versions are considered the most authoritative. the Qumran scrolls are far older than any texts extant prior to their discovery. I'm not aware of any textual differences that affect doctrine.... I've familiarized myself with those textual issues, but I'm also far from an expert. The Septuagint is the oldest known document containing the OT (i think ) and is unusually helpful in that it shows us how JEWISH scholars translated Hebrew into Greek some 200 years before Jesus was born. The Septuagint (LXX) has been incredibly useful in revealing the differences in how ancient and modern Hebrew are used. There is no controversy that has any real effect on the doctrines taught in the MT and King James translation....it might be fodder for haters of God to claim His Word is unreliable but I am fully convinced He was and is fully capable of standing guard over His Words and delivering to us: Quote Jde 1:3 Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. faithfully and purely all we need to know to follow and obey Him. Quote Gal 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. Edited July 7, 2019 by Jostler 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.917b740e0751353518523b1470e12310.jpg)
Recommended Posts