Which is your favourite version of the New Testament?

Originally Posted by theophilus

Modern translations are based on manuscripts that existed before the Catholic Church became powerful, so they can't have been influenced by the church. On the other hand there is a modern translation produced by a group that denies the Trinity that has been altered to support the beliefs of that group.

https://carm.org/bad-translations-je...ld-translation

How do your scholars explain from Moses on up until this very day-- Israel taught , served and worshipped a single being God--The God Taught to Matthew, John, Peter, Paul and Jesus his first 30 years--strange not one of them denied that being the true God, but taught it. Someone is wrong about God and it is not Israel.

[davidmartin]

OK kjw i'll bite
The word 'trinity' isn't found in scripture. How the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit integrate into one God is not explained in detail by Jesus
The doctrines all came later from church theologians
I think the most reasonable thing is everyone believe what they want about it.
Maybe Jesus was one with God, but not literally God, but a perfect reflection of God.
Maybe Jesus always existed, if our souls are eternal which as far as I know everyone agrees on, then maybe they have always existed too like Jesus
These kind of thoughts and meditating on the trinity lead to deeper insights into God's nature which we shouldn't fight about. But if this is admitted it also means the rather rigid idea of God purely derives from the Old Testament has to be thought more deeply about, as endlessly takes place in Judaism. This is the great debate on God's nature, not likely to be resolved any time soon!

[sky]

The word Trinity is not used but Jesus does speak of ' The Father Son and Holy Spirit '

[theophilus]

Originally Posted by kjw47

How do your scholars explain from Moses on up until this very day-- Israel taught , served and worshipped a single being God--The God Taught to Matthew, John, Peter, Paul and Jesus his first 30 years--strange not one of them denied that being the true God, but taught it. Someone is wrong about God and it is not Israel.

When the wise men found Jesus they worshipped him. They understood that the Messiah would be God in human form. The Jews rejected him and today their descendants no longer have the understanding of God that their ancestors had.

Originally Posted by davidmartin

OK kjw i'll bite
The word 'trinity' isn't found in scripture. How the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit integrate into one God is not explained in detail by Jesus
The doctrines all came later from church theologians
I think the most reasonable thing is everyone believe what they want about it.
Maybe Jesus was one with God, but not literally God, but a perfect reflection of God.
Maybe Jesus always existed, if our souls are eternal which as far as I know everyone agrees on, then maybe they have always existed too like Jesus
These kind of thoughts and meditating on the trinity lead to deeper insights into God's nature which we shouldn't fight about. But if this is admitted it also means the rather rigid idea of God purely derives from the Old Testament has to be thought more deeply about, as endlessly takes place in Judaism. This is the great debate on God's nature, not likely to be resolved any time soon!

The bible explains, most refuse to believe because they were taught error.
At Proverbs 8= Gods master worker, can only be the one whom God created all other things through. But at Prov 8 ( not God speaking here) he says like the pangs of a womans pains he was brought forth( created-DIRECT, first and last) Came to be beside him( God) as his master worker. He grew especially fond of me. There is no doubt this the being who came to earth and was named Jesus as a mortal. Collosians 1:15--The FIRSTBORN of all creation. Creation began before the earth was formed not at Jesus birth. Making this truth----- Let us( YHWH(Jehovah) and his master worker) create man in our image.
Most refuse to believe this truth.

Originally Posted by theophilus

When the wise men found Jesus they worshipped him. They understood that the Messiah would be God in human form. The Jews rejected him and today their descendants no longer have the understanding of God that their ancestors had.

Not when you apply bible fact.
While on earth, Jesus was made LOWER than the angels( Heb 2:7-9)= mortal--Gods word is clear, not even an angel is to be worshipped, so none lower either. The greek word used-Proskenaue( spelled wrong)--5 different meanings from Greek to English--1) worship to God--2) Obesiance to a king--3 Honor to? and 2 others--Jesus receieved obesiance. Worship is translating error. Just like the capitol G in the last line of John 1:1 is error. Now they do not have a leg to stand on.

Another error in trinity translations
Truly i tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.-- comma error
Truly i tell you today, you will be with me in paradise.-- is correct
Bible fact--Clearly teaches Jesus was in Hades for 3 days--He coud not be in paradise the first day.

There is no i am that i am in the hebrew language-- i will be what i will be is correct

In the Hebrew language--Elohim( not a name) a Hebrew wordwith various meanings--Hebrew rule--NEVER plural(GODS) when used for the true living God.

There are way too many facts against a trinity existing.

[theophilus]

Originally Posted by kjw47

While on earth, Jesus was made LOWER than the angels

That is right. He was made lower than the angels. He relinquished his position of equality to the Father to become a man so he could redeem us from our sins. After his resurrection he resumed his former position and he once again equal to the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Originally Posted by theophilus

That is right. He was made lower than the angels. He relinquished his position of equality to the Father to become a man so he could redeem us from our sins. After his resurrection he resumed his former position and he once again equal to the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Again you err, The bible clearly teaches he was raised to a higher position. He was the archangel, a prince, raised to a kingship. And a name above other names(Phillipians 2:9-10)--Yet the bible teaches God gave these things to him. God did not say--Here me have a kingship or here me let me gve me the name above other names. God gave these things to another being( Jesus)-- one is God-The giver--The reciever is not God. Same at Rev 1:1)

[Spirited]

I became a Christian in 2013 after meddling in spiritualism/mediumship and the paranormal for most of my teenage years. I didn't know too much at the time of which Bible translations to go for, or the best order to read them in. I bought a NIV Bible and opened page 1 of Genesis and just read it page by page through until the last page of Revelations. It took me the best part of a couple of years of maybe 20-30 minutes a day of reading but I can now at least say I've read the entire Bible. I now revisit books at a time to study them in greater detail. I don't think there is a right or wrong, but whatever works for you. I tried a Bible in one year but I couldn't get on with it. I do like the KJV, The Good News Bible, Gideons and the English Standard Bible. I've recently started reading a modern re-telling of the NT written by author John Henson who is a retired baptist minister of the church I go to. I find whatever the version, you always learn a little something extra or pick up on something you didn't consider before, so it's all good development in the bigger picture.

[Honza]

Originally Posted by Spirited

I became a Christian in 2013 after meddling in spiritualism/mediumship and the paranormal for most of my teenage years. I didn't know too much at the time of which Bible translations to go for, or the best order to read them in. I bought a NIV Bible and opened page 1 of Genesis and just read it page by page through until the last page of Revelations. It took me the best part of a couple of years of maybe 20-30 minutes a day of reading but I can now at least say I've read the entire Bible. I now revisit books at a time to study them in greater detail. I don't think there is a right or wrong, but whatever works for you. I tried a Bible in one year but I couldn't get on with it. I do like the KJV, The Good News Bible, Gideons and the English Standard Bible. I've recently started reading a modern re-telling of the NT written by author John Henson who is a retired baptist minister of the church I go to. I find whatever the version, you always learn a little something extra or pick up on something you didn't consider before, so it's all good development in the bigger picture.

That is interesting thankyou.