Notrash said:Did God choose the particular word, or did men choose some of them? Why are their differences in the KJV from Tyndale? etc etc. Why does Tyndale render a word meaning assembly; "ecclesia" and the KJV renders it "church". Answer: Because the KJV was to support the institutionary church of England. This is just a minor example of the idea of subjective choices of words, how they influence peoples thinking and their presence in even the KJV translation.
I am very confused now about your position concerning the word of God. Are you telling me that God is pleased with the merchandising of his word by corrupt men and institutions and that 100 + translations and paraphrases is really his will or are you trying to convince me that only the elite who can read the original languages has any hope of ever knowing exactly what God has said to mankind and translations are of absolutely no concern to God at all?
Do you not see that this proliferation of translations in recent years is fulfilling a prophecy of the corruption of the truth and fits with the apostate attitude of the last days?
2Pe 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
At this point though I am not trying to convince you to my position. I brought this up because of your comments and so you will understand where my authority lies. Obviously we differ on our authority for the Christian faith.
Notrash said:If what your saying had any substance, the word oikonomia would have had a different word or tense or associated adjective in the Gospels as compared with in the Epistles in the original languages and not just in some of the translations. But making this emphasis, your actually putting the KJV on pedestal above the original languages.
Your conclusion is not true. I use dictionaries and lexicons to attempt to determine the mind of the Lord. I do accept that he has given words in the English language that will make me understand the revelation of his will. He said that the thoughts of God was revealed through "words" (I am reading that in the English) and therefore, the English is just as important to me as the original languages because I understand the English language and use it all the time. In the originals, I have only the definitions and have no clue of the nuances of those languages. However, though I look closely at the Hebrew or Greek word, I do not question the English words that God has chosen to translate those languages.
Notrash said:This idea of dividing 7 as 4 and 3 with reference to oikonomia has no support in the original languages and I personally put little emphasis other than a passing consideration on its being used 7 times in the NT.
Seven dispensations complete the purposes of God in time, i e to restore through Jesus Christ all that Adam has lost through the fall and put away sin completely and totally. I have read the beginning of the Bible when all that God made was good and I have read the last two chapters and I noted that the last thing in chapter 20 was his finally and completely putting away sin by putting away sinners. This is consisitent with God's use of the number 7 in his word.
Why does the division of the number 7 have no support in the original languages and how can you dogmatically say that" You surely have not had time to study that out to see. You summarily rejected what I said about the number. I can tell you it is true whether you attach any particular significance to it or not. That of course would be up to you.
Notrash said:Again, not all translations translate it 'dispensation", but some translate it "administration'.
One then needs to find a 1550 Websters and other English dictionaries to determine the meaning of the word 'dispensation' as the English translators intended it's readers to understand. Most importantly, one needs to find a koinia greek dictionary from about 50 bc to 50 AD to obtain the correct translation of 'oikonomia'.
I am thinking this a pretty silly statement. Think this through. If God was in no way involved in translation, the case you seem to be making, then I would agree with you that he would not be able to teach us spiritual truths based on those words alone but would of necessity direct us to the original languages. This would either leave many of us with no way to be sure of the truth or make us dependent upon those very few who have ability to read Hebrew and Greek to teach us. This is the trail back to popery.
[/quote]Notrash said:Most people, including many Christians, are unfamiliar with the application of the word economy in relation to God. Economy is the anglicized form of the Greek word oikonomia, which occurs throughout the New Testament (1 Timothy 1:4; Ephesians 1:10; 3:2; 3:9; 1 Corinthians 9:17; Colossians 1:25). Oikonomia is a compound of two nouns:
oikos, which means house, and nomos, which means law.
Hence, economy denotes a household administration, management, or arrangement.
More generally, an economy is a plan to carry out a certain purpose. Websters New Collegiate Dictionary offers the following definition of economy:
6. Theol. a. The Creators plan;
the design of Providence. (emphases added)
God is like an immensely wealthy householder who desires to dispense His unsearchable riches (Ephesians 3:8) to all of His people, the members of His household. However, to accomplish this enormous task He needs a plan, an arrangement, an economy.
Yes, this is true. This is how the NT is expressed. Jesus Christ is the householder. That is, he is the head of the household. The church is the house. The believers are his family of which he is the firstborn son See Ro 8:29.
The house that Jesus built:
Heb 3:1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; 2 Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house.
3 For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.
4 For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.
5 And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;
6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.
The family:
Eph 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
Upvote
0