Biblical Christianity 101, a study of the book of Romans

[Drich]

Sex is a choice, sexuality isn't.

Very good!

Sex outside of a sanctified marriage is a sin, sexuality in of itself is not.

[jenny1972]

" again no... I Never said the bible was mis translated EVER. I SAID YOUR USE OF MODERN ENGLISH IS INCOMPLETE WHEN READING ANYTHING TRANSLATED!
Have you NEVER taken a foreign language course ever? In any translation you loose 10 to 30% of what is being communicated. Because certain elements will not translate. Hence the term lost in translation. Things like grammar, verbage, syntax, cultural, social sayings and idioms. You ever speak to someone who is just learning English and they may have the words right but they are in the wrong 'tense'(Past/Present) Show masculine properties when they are speaking of a female, or the words are in the wrong order? "


...... and therefore it is not perfectly translated when it is translated to another language you use word substitutes much of the time because the translators have no choice but to do that  right ?  well that would be sufficient for less important writings but if it is the Word of God thats pretty important right so every single word should be exact and not be compromised in the slightest as even a slight mistranslation of one word can change an entire concept (do not add or subtract from the Word remember?) so if it couldnt be translated perfectly there should have never been an attempt to do it and people instead should have kept the original and learned greek

---

yes like i said modern christianity at the very least is not correct because it does not follow the original greek christians do not investigate the original noone does that they just listen to their preacher who has it wrong because the book he learned from and his teachers are wrong its been a long long time since people went by the original greek translation . thats what corruption is

corruption: the process by which something, typically a word or expression, is changed from its original use or meaning to one that is regarded as erroneous or debased.

What are you talking about?!?! Maybe take a honest look at just this thread. I have quoted the greek many many times to establish clarity in this thread. You may have come from a church of snake handlers, but MOST Christian movements push the greek translation over any other.

i have been to many different modern churches and none have pulled out a greek bible and translated from a greek bible to english , people either use the KJV or modern english translated bible

---

drich do you interpret all of the bible literally or do you just pick and choose what is literal and what isnt literal?

With a prolonged study of the koine greek, Should also comes a study of OT Jewish literary styles as well as a study in historical recordings. Once one can identify which styles of recording/writting is being utilized then identifying "a story" over what is meant to be taken literal  is not difficult.

well i agree with you on that but convincing christians that they need to do that is another story

---

Sex is a choice, sexuality isn't.

Very good!

Sex outside of a sanctified marriage is a sin, sexuality in of itself is not.

so married gay couples who have sex are no longer sinning then right ?

[GrandizerII]

i have been to many different modern churches and none have pulled out a greek bible and translated from a greek bible to english , people either use the KJV or modern english translated bible

And in fact the translations generally are ok. Drich tries to make it sound like you need to know Greek in order to really understand the message ... which is very misleading, and makes Drich out to be some mystic with key to special knowledge that not many people (including Christians) have. That's a bit of a cultic thing actually.

[robvalue]

Why isn't it written in God language that everyone instantly understands and cannot misinterpret?

[Minimalist]

Fucking god can't manage that.

Some god.

[Drich]

since we have both acknowledged that modern translations have been corrupted by inaccuracies its kinda silly to quote these modern corrupted translations and base arguments on what these confused translations say .

Where have I acknowledged modern translations have been corrupted at all?

The TRANSLATIONS ARE PERFECT!

YOUR READING/COMPERHENSION Is What Is Corrupt!!! NOT THE TEXT. The Texts Convey Everything Humanly possible going from one language to another. Your inability to read a passage in its context is where your understanding fails.
EVERYTHING You Need to have a full understanding of a passage is in your bible. The problem is you feel you can take verses out of their context, and further abbreviate them and they still retain their same meaning. This is not a translation matrix error This is a user error. That why all I needed to do to refute every single oone of your false claims was to just put your passages Back into their original context.

i would be interested in knowing what these verses actually said in the original greek but the problem with that is learning the greek language and finding original text in greek

Despite muslim and Atheist propaganda, All Legitmate bibles are translated straight from the original greek texts. they are not reinterpretations of some older King James/english type of bible.

Bibles are translated from what are known as Codices/Codex. A codex is a single book or collection of hand written manuscripts, from the 2 or 3 century Some times later.. their are only 4 main codices (compliations of hand written Koine Greek manuscripts/this does not account for denominations who compile their own so they can have their own bible) from which 98% of all common bibles are written. (many many more indivisual manuscripts that support or confirm the indivisual books may say) but only 4 main collections/compliations.

A new codex is compiled when several older more reliable manuscripts are found that change a basic understanding. For instance The King James was translated from the oldest Codex known as the Textus Receptus in 1611. In it one of the commandments reads "thou shalt not Kill." In 1948ish the dead sea scrolls were found this was a massive collection of manuscripts dealing with the Old testament they contained manuscripts that dated back before Christ. In them we had a legitimate source material to see that the 'textus receptus' book of exodus Command Thou shalt not kill, was changed to 'You shall not Murder.' The difference between Kill and Murder?

The proabition on killing makes the taking of ALL Human life wrong. while Murder makes the Unauthorized taking of Human life wrong. In essence Not all life is sacred. Their are hundreds of minor verbage changes between the 4 different codices, but as far as content is concern nothing has changed. This murder example is the biggest change we've had to make since the bible was translated into English.

Now as far as accessing the Text in Greek we have excellent online tools that will allow you to do this. Blueletterbible.org is my favorite because it has all the major translations, tied to their various codices in a searchable concordance/lexicon format.

All those links I left you that you did not read or even bother to click on???.. That was me showing you the greek to English translated and framed in context. (Something you claim no Christian does any more.)
Here is the example I had open when we were discussing mat 5 If the drop down has not been left open click on 'tools'

the interlinear will give you the passage word for word in English stacked next to the greek. each word is assigned a number click on the number and it will define the word show you how it was used and all the different times it was translated one way verse another, and why. Plus it cross references two other greek dictionaries to show you exactly what the word means.

The bibles tab will stack up all the different translations next to each other, click on one translation it will take you to that codex/greek passage where you can have interlinear access to it.

The cross ref tab allows you to see any and all other bibles verses this verse maybe referencing and or other verses that may reference this verse.

Commentaries are just that. Someone explains in painfully great detail every single aspect known of the words and verses here.

the dictionary tab is self explainatory

Misc are usally maps or art work tied to the passage

Any body can use this resource, if they want to know the truth. I am proof of that.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/esv/mat/...onc_934017

We have access to All these codac

[jenny1972]

" Where have I acknowledged modern translations have been corrupted at all?
The TRANSLATIONS ARE PERFECT! "

here :
" In any translation you loose 10 to 30% of what is being communicated. Because certain elements will not translate. Hence the term lost in translation. Things like grammar, verbage, syntax, cultural, social sayings and idioms. You ever speak to someone who is just learning English and they may have the words right but they are in the wrong 'tense'(Past/Present) Show masculine properties when they are speaking of a female, or the words are in the wrong order? "

preachers in churches absolutely do not direct people to learn the greek language learn the nuances of that language learn the nuances of the culture to determine if it was meant to be literal or not and read the bible in the original greek . by translating online its the same problem with translating offline your translating and corrupting 10-30% of the original text thats a huge amount when 1 word can change an entire idea/teaching. every christian is going to say what you said that  "The TRANSLATIONS ARE PERFECT!" because they (and you) have been trained not to question it even after you got done telling me why it should be questioned - that  a whopping 10-30% of all translations are imperfectly translated

[Jackalope]

Sex is a choice, sexuality isn't.

Very good!

Sex outside of a sanctified marriage is a sin, sexuality in of itself is not.

That's your claim.

Your "god" can smite me if he doesn't like it.

[Drich]

...... and therefore it is not perfectly translated

Ah..No. The translation is flawless literally could not be better.. The assumption you can read anything translated in your language and get 100% of the intended text without accepting all of it's context is where the flaw lies.

To say the translation is flawed means one could translate more closly or do a better job. Not the case here. What I have been tring to get you to understand that your reading of the text is wrong. Not the translation. You can not read ANY translated material like you can any English sourced material. You have to frame it in context inorder to full grasp the meanings because our word do not full match up with anyone elses words

This is not due to a flaw in translation, it is due to incompatiablity between languages. certain words simply do not get fully expressed between languages. again that has nothing to do with the translation, because as I have shown you one can extrapolate full meaning from a translated text if you stay true to the full context. The errors arise when YOU Took the translated text out of context and assigned modern western definations to a text that did not orginate in the language or from this culture.

when it is translated to another language you use word substitutes much of the time because the translators have no choice but to do that  right ?

No not at all. when we make a literal translation we use the closest possible word to the original. Sometimes it is an exact match (about 70% of the time) others ideas have to be expressed because the cultures are so different (The words Agape, eros, Phila, Storge' Must all be translated into the single word love, a word we use that means 10 different things to us, so depending on who is reading the word will flesh out a completely different meaning), but again not a translation error just a contextual one based on the readers understanding of that word. One that can be resolved when context is used to fish out the meaning.

Like you and the word believe yesterday. You assumed that the word believe was only an intellectual thing. that belief had nothing to do with any physical act. I showed you yesterday that while belief was an 'intellectual thing' it also had a physical component. (Believeing a parachute will save you by actually putting it on verses intellectually believeing it will save you and not using it.) the "believe" of the bible was the same "believe" we would use to put on a parachute and jump out of the plane. Not just an intellectual choice to accept something. Again same word, no better word more closly fits the Greek, (therefore no translation error) it all has to do with your perception of that word not what it means in the English. IF you hadn't just used 1/2 a verse to define the meaning of that passage, you could see Paul describing the 'acts' of the version of belief, he was talking about belief that resulted in action per the examples of acts taken by said believers this should move your definition of 'belief' to now include action.

 well that would be sufficient for less important writings but if it is the Word of God thats pretty important right so every single word should be exact and not be compromised in the slightest as even a slight mistranslation of one word can change an entire concept (do not add or subtract from the Word remember?) so if it couldnt be translated perfectly there should have never been an attempt to do it and people instead should have kept the original and learned greek

Again, lazy or dishonest interpretation is the problem not translation. Our words often have different meanings. some people (believe or not) intentionally use the wrong meaning of a word to try and create a contradiction.

i have been to many different modern churches and none have pulled out a greek bible and translated from a greek bible to english , people either use the KJV or modern english translated bible

I would say the vast majority of bible based churches do. Feel good name/claim it churches don't churches that teach doctrine over scripture don't.. but again most do.

well i agree with you on that but convincing christians that they need to do that is another story

"You shall know them by their fruit"
I have the feeling you and I have a vast difference in our understanding of the word Christian.

so married gay couples who have sex are no longer sinning then right ?

I used the word sanctified to define what type of marriage that allows for sex, and it not be a sin.
To be sanctified one must follow the rules (outlined in 1 cor 7) Anything outside of that is sexual sin.. Hetro/gay makes no difference all the same sin.

[Drich]

Very good!

Sex outside of a sanctified marriage is a sin, sexuality in of itself is not.

That's your claim.

Your "god" can smite me if he doesn't like it.

Actually it's not. I am not the author I am just relaying the rule.