New Interpretation of the bible

[Bible Highlighter]

A good definition of a distraction. I'm glad you discovered that without my help.
I was pretty sure you would get there.

I asked you which translation says distraction as if those words were actually in Deuteronomy 17:17.
You still are refusing to answer that question.

Also, “heart turned away” does not mean distraction.

For the word “heart,” see definitions #4, #5, and #7 below.

Source:
King James Bible Dictionary - Reference List - Heart

As for the words “turn away,” check out the following dictionaries:

Source:
turn away

Source:
TURN AWAY English Definition and Meaning | Lexico.com

To turn away is defined as reject, dismiss, etc. and it is not defined as a distraction. So a person’s heart being turned away after many women and worshiping other gods is not a distraction over following God. It’s turning away one’s heart from God by one’s sin. All sin is rebellion against God.

 

[BeingThere]

I was asking you about which translation you were quoting from in that mentions the word distraction.

Anyways, the KJB says that this king should not multiply wives to himself because his heart will turn away if he does in Deuteronomy 17:17.

Deuteronomy 17:17
Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.

What does “heart turn away” even mean?
The Bible tells us in a couple of chapters later.
If one turns their heart away: It means they will not hear God, and they will be drawn away to worship and serve other gods.

Deuteronomy 30:17
But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them;

So the multiplying of wives will lead this king to worship other gods.
We see something similar to this as a warning from God in Scripture.
For Solomon had many wives.

1 Kings 11:2
“Of the nations concerning which the LORD said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love.”

Here's a translation of Deuteronomy 17:17:

The king must not take numerous wives so that his heart doesn't go astray. Nor can the king acquire too much silver and gold. (CEB)
​

I'm reading through this thread, but I must make my opinion clear to the topic: the modern doctrine which states the Bible must be read literally [rather than simply read for all its spiritual importance] is a gross limitation on God's word.

We can read far too into the Bible, but equally dangerous is to be limited by arbitrary human constructs on literature. No one would tell you to read purely literally The Chronicles of Narnia, The Lord of the Rings, The Pilgrim's Progress, so why should we listen to those who tell us how to read God's literature?

 

[BeingThere]

Sure they do. Every denomination in the various churches simply stresses different aspects of Christianity and scripture. Each of the early churches had similar differences and different needs that were addressed in the various letters. That's why each of the letters to the churches have different names. They were infant churches and had infant church problems. None of the letters in scripture were written to "Grown up" churches or people who had a copy of the Bible.

Jesus spoke in parables, telling those few who had ears to hear, to hear. He also said many will be called, but few chosen. Of course the few who may understand something of the new covenant share what they learn. Some who understand too much, if you will, start what may be considered cults.

This means that there is no correct denomination, but the Bible clearly mentions a true church. This "church" is not a human organization, but made of true disciples within any, every, and no denomination. So, it doesn't matter so much what others say about the Bible, but what we individually understand. If we are confused, let us commune with others for more information, different points of view--it's what humans do. In this light, there is no harm--and indeed a great benefit--for a Christian to speak with a Muslim or a Buddhist about God, Truth, etc.

 

[pescador]

Jesus spoke in parables, telling those few who had ears to hear, to hear. He also said many will be called, but few chosen. Of course the few who may understand something of the new covenant share what they learn. Some who understand too much, if you will, start what may be considered cults.

This means that there is no correct denomination, but the Bible clearly mentions a true church. This "church" is not a human organization, but made of true disciples within any, every, and no denomination. So, it doesn't matter so much what others say about the Bible, but what we individually understand. If we are confused, let us commune with others for more information, different points of view--it's what humans do. In this light, there is no harm--and indeed a great benefit--for a Christian to speak with a Muslim or a Buddhist about God, Truth, etc.

Great post!

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Same old excuse, despite recent findings. At least the ASV, and the NWT had it correct!

My laughing and falling out of my chair is about the NWT being correct.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

I’m fact I was very accurate

Friend, are you a Jehovah's Witness or Latter day saint? You seems uninformed about the science of translating the Bible.

 

[pescador]

__________________________________________

I'm not talking about that- and YOU know it!

No, I don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

The apostles mostly quoted from the Septuagint and you are correct. And for some strange reason, the KJV used the Masoretic text rather than the Septuagint. Hence, every translation after the KJV used the Masoretic text, let's continue that faulty tradition. I cannot fathom why Jerome would opt for the Masoretic text?

The name of God in Exodus 3:14, is 'YHWH', the tetragrammaton.

How did the KJV get JEHOVAH from YHWH?

Where on earth did the KJV derive a 'J' in translating YHWH to Jehovah?

One source said, the translators were using a German translation. Another source said a Latin translation.

I know the Catholic Vulgate (4th century) used the Septuagint.

If you have a copy of quotes in the NT published by the American Bible Society --- you will find that the King James quotes the LXX overwhelming over the Hebrew OT.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

__________________________________________________

Do a Google Search on "the original name of God re-discovered", and you will find out!

Yahweh, even the kingdom interlinear admits that.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Best thing she can do instead of putting your nonsense on here

So, you are too chicken to prove your case for what you believe by comparing your teachings with those whom the early Apostles taught? That speaks volumes about your false teachings that leads to eternal punishment.

Matthew 25:46
Easy-to-Read Version
46 “Then these evil people will go away to be punished forever. But the godly people will go and enjoy eternal life.”

The Greek Grammar is plain both uses of the word eternal is the same grammar in the same sentence. If you limit one, you have called Jesus a liar and thus blasphemed the Holy Spirit too.

 

[pescador]

Yahweh, even the kingdom interlinear admits that.

God's "name" (actually His title) is YHWH, which can't be pronounced. His English name is "I am".

Exodus 3:13-15, "Moses said to God, “If I go to the Israelites and tell them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’—what should I say to them?”

God said to Moses, “I AM that I AM.” And he said, “You must say this to the Israelites, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” God also said to Moses, “You must say this to the Israelites, ‘The Lord—the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation.’

Luke 22:70, "So they all said, “Are you the Son of God, then?” He [Jesus] answered them, “You say that I am.”

 

[Daniel Marsh]

So yeah. I am not giving up. What translation did you quote in Deuteronomy 17:17?

Move your mouse over the quote, it is ASV

 

[SkyWriting]

You are contradicting it’s evident.

Which evident am I contradicting?

 

[klutedavid]

If you have a copy of quotes in the NT published by the American Bible Society --- you will find that the King James quotes the LXX overwhelming over the Hebrew OT.

Well that's not true.

Old Testament
For the Old Testament, the translators used a text originating in the editions of the Hebrew Rabbinic Bible by Daniel Bomberg (1524/5),[146][failed verification] but adjusted this to conform to the Greek LXX or Latin Vulgate in passages to which Christian tradition had attached a Christological interpretation.[147] For example, the Septuagint reading "They pierced my hands and my feet" was used in Psalm 22:16[148] (vs. the Masoretes' reading of the Hebrew "like lions my hands and feet"[149]). (wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version#Old_Testament)

Why did these protestant translators use the Masoretic text to translate the Old Testament. Then consult the Septuagint and worse still the Vulgate, for verses (Christological), they knew had been corrupted in the Masoretic text.

Something does not make sense.

They knew the apostles were quoting from the Septuagint.

They new the Vulgate used the Septuagint.

Still they persisted.

This KJV translation is not a genuine translation of the Hebrew and the Greek, it is a strange hybrid translation.

 

[BeingThere]

But Christianity is based on just one word, LOVE.
Christian ethics is a distraction from the fundamental doctrines of Christianity.

This is how a universal Church can exist outside the confines of human religious structure. As much as people believe the Catholic Church, or the Eastern Orthodox Church may be the one true church, Jesus meant something far greater and more God-like, aiming at true universalism outside human organization. God is Love, is Light, and most have not seen or heard what he has in store for us. The gospel penetrates far deeper than ritual, doctrine and habit. It means Life Itself.

 

[BeingThere]

"The Orthodox make the valid point that the supposed sola scriptura of Protestantism has resulted in thousands, if not tens of thousands, of competing understandings of Scripture. "

Please list them friend.

As errant believers annex authority from a priestly class and even responsible leaders around them, they can develop radical beliefs "justified" by their own interpretation of scripture. On the other hand, a universal, "true church" retains authority over the beliefs of its membership. The Bible has no such apparatus for containing belief, because it is lifeless [as a book, not as to what it describes].

 

[BeingThere]

Early editions of BOM, 2 Nephi 30:6, which in early editions of the Book of Mormon, read: "[T]heir scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and a delightsome people."

That is hate language and pure racism.

Scripture makes it plan if you hate people you are not of God.

It's only hateful and racist if that's how you interpret "white and delightsome." Don't get me wrong, it would be--let us say--irksome to use that sort of descriptive metaphor today, but white and delightsome is meant to mean pure and tasteful, as white is the absence of all color, clean. After all, we paint home interiors white by default, and white exhibits the least dust on cars. I don't pretend to know whether the author of that verse meant something more nefarious, but it is impossible to prove intention, even more so since the descriptors are valid and precise to the purpose.

 

[BeingThere]

I tend to take ethe view that a lot of the differences in denominations are used by God so all beievers have a "family" that they fit in with. For example, you may have two people who equally love God but one gets bored in a traditional high church and the other finds happy clappy completely over the top. However both can be part of the body in these different environments. Also, the Church is made up of one body with many parts and they could be considered different parts of the same body.

My Bible teaches me that judging others is best left to God. I take the view that if someone believes in their heart and confess with their mouth that they are Christian and the left is best left for God to judge the rest and that goes for me just as much as anyone else.

Having said that, we are also called to be wary of false teachers so we do still need discernment.

Hear, hear. Agreed; so many differing cultures on this planet--of course there will be different outward forms of religion. Expression can vary while the central truth lives inside. Jesus' church is universal and not limited by human-imposed dogma and cultural pressure. I second the need for discernment. People need to think critically and watch for the fruit of different practices.

 

[BeingThere]

No capitalization or punctuation or book titles or verse numbers.

If anyone is interested in it, The Unvarnished New Testament reads as the original Greek would, without verse numbers, single column--like a novel, if you will. The translator also translates directly from the Greek, without filtering the language through Catholic doctrinal authority: whereas Spirit, which is in nearly all translations, reads breath at times in The Unvarnished New Testament, as in "God's breath." Not to confuse or somehow discourage any believers, but this is actually how the Greek should read. Other interesting simplifications and clarifications, along with poignant and beautiful language make this a penetrating and inspiring read. The effect is as if the saints were speaking directly to you, in a common tongue and descriptive language.

 

[BeingThere]

Yahweh, even the kingdom interlinear admits that.

Didn't the Jews have more than one name for God? I'm fairly certain that one name was "unspeakable," as speaking his name would make him common in our minds. Things definitely tend to lose some of their mystery and beauty the moment we start to describe them; I can see the logic in it. Is this YHWH?