Hervey I am not trying to get under your skin but I am trying to rightly divide the Word of God
You said
rkbo:
Your conversation within this forum have become very unprofitable. You use whatever translation that suits your purpose at any give time. And you are now trying to invite a hostile communication between other's who post here.
(Now Hervey do you realy think I am trying to invite hostile communication between other posters?)
You said >Not that all scholars are to be unquestioned but let's look at it like this. If 50 of them say this is the context and that is the grammer and the word meaning is such and such. I should give this more weight than if one none scholar gives his own private interpretation.
Little do you know anything about me , or if I am a scholar or not ! And yet you have made more than one comment about me, that you can not back up, because you have no idea who I am, nor my background !
And I won't play your silly games of cat and mouse either.
(Hervey you are being defensive here. IF I was talking about you I used your name. No cat and mouse here. )
You are quoting from the (NAU) here. Does that mean that those who put togther the (NAU) are scholars, and those who put together the (KJV) are not ? Have you even taken the time to compare the two ?
I'll bet you don't even know this, but the (NAU) , also like the (NIV) are 90 % private interpretation, instead of "translations"
The greatest "translation", even though it has its problems and flaws also, is the (KJV) - "translation". Does this mean that you should only read the (KJV) ? No , not at all, but these other bibles are "very" skeptical pieces of work.
The bibles of the our modern times, such as the (NAU) and the (NIV) were "never" interested in doing a translation ! They were more interested in doing their own "private interpretation".
(Hervey you attack the New American Standard Uptdated and the NIV. What authoritative sources do you use to do this? Also why don't you attack all the other sources I quoted? )
Look at I Corinth. 11:34 in the (NAU), and notice that it is telling the one who is hungry to go home to eat !
The full context of the whole chapter of I Corinth. chapter 11 in the ( KJV ) deals with those who ate the Lord's supper, and Paul is reproving them to go to their own homes to eat and quit shaming those who have not.
The (NAU) and the (KJV) are in total opposite contrast, of each other as to "who" is to "go home to eat" ! In other words, as to where the "blame" was to lie, in this reproof by Paul to these Corinthians. IN the (KJV) Paul blames those who have eaten the Lord's supper, but in your (NAU) they are blaming , by the wording, those who were hungry ! This tells you that the (NAU) does not make any sense ! Those who were hungry were not participating in the Lord's supper to begin with ! In the (KJV) Paul was reproving the glutton's and the drunks, who were eating the Lord's supper, and was telling "them" - "what have you not houses to eat and to drink in ? And shame them that "have not" Verse 22 ) !
By your own admission rkbo , you are claiming that those who put the (KJV) together, were not scholars, because those who put the (NAU) together were scholars, because of the total contrast between the two bibles ! You can't claim both groups to be scholars, because of the direct contrast between the two !
I can clearly see that you , as well as Apologist , have "no idea" what the "Lord's supper" was !
( Hervey now who's getting hostile? I would just rebutt that last statement by saying........we do too.)
First let me state, what it was not > The Lord's supper was "not" a religious ceremony !
Now, please allow me the privilage to tell you and Apologist what the Lord's supper was --> The Lord's supper was a "full fledged meal -> Matthew 26:26 " ! That was purchased by Jesus Christ and his disciples. It was the "Last supper" between himself and his disciples. Do you know what the word > "Last" means ? ? That is right, the Lord's supper , was also his - the "Last supper ".
(Yep it was their last meal together . So. )
Jesus Christ told his disciples that he would "Not" eat again with them until he came into his Father's kingdom -> Matthew 26:29. The verse which states - when two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them, does not apply when you come together to eat the Lord's supper ! The reason why, is because he is not going to eat again until he enters his Father's kingdom. Nor did he tell them to continue doing the Lord's supper ! Nor do you find any records in the Word which state that they - his disciples, continued doing the Lord's supper !
I Corinth. 11:20 is "clear" ! !
"When you come together, this is "not" to eat the Lord's supper" ! !
(OOps You only quoted what you wanted to take out of context again. I thought you wasn't going to do that. Hervey I see your intelligence, I will not insult that, I see your sincerety, I will not insult that either, I will how ever stand against false teaching. I am called to do this. The Lords Supper is a clear teaching and you have bent all the rules of Bible interpretation to teach a false doctrine. I don't know why you would do this. As I've said before, it is not a small thing and ask you to change your mind. No need to repeat myself cause my posts are there to reread. Use what ever translation you want. )
Love IN Christ - Hervey
(Yes)