I don't agree with people who say the KJV is better than the NIV I think it doesn't make much of a difference.
They determine which is right by searching the scriptures. Bible Gateway passage: Acts 17:10-34 - Holman Christian Standard Bible
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How can a Jew reject Jesus as the Messiah?
- Thread starter ayin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- jesusisyhwh
I don't agree with people who say the KJV is better than the NIV I think it doesn't make much of a difference.
They determine which is right by searching the scriptures. Bible Gateway passage: Acts 17:10-34 - Holman Christian Standard Bible
dybmh
דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
I said Cain's offering was inferior. This can be seen in the text (Genesis 4:4), Abel brought the first and fattest of his flock,
I think you're making an assumption that the offering brought in this chapter is for atonement. However the text clearly states that offerings are not needed for atonement yet. If one does well, one is accepted (Genesis 4:7).
OK, ok
You don't accept the Talmud. I'll not use it as a source in this conversation with you. The important point is that a Paschal Lamb offering is of lesser sanctity and does not bring atonement. It's detailed clearly in Leviticus 7:1. The burnt offering is "most holy". If someone told you that the Paschal lamb offering is most holy and brings atonement, they were misinformed.Why do I think it's a warning? That's literally in the text. Genesis 4:15.
I also think you're misinterpreting the verse in Ezekiel 9:4. Those people were were marked because they recognized the abomination. They were righteous. This is what the mark meant. Not salvation righteousness.
Besides, you admit that the two signs were different. In Genesis it's Aleph-Vav-Tav. In Ezekiel, it's just Tav-Vav. So trying to equate the two as meaning the same thing is a bit of a stretch.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Are you aware that from very early day, Christians had very different collections of NT books? Some had 3rd Corinthians, others had 1st Clement. Still others only had a NT canon of 22 books because they excluded some that are part of the Protestant and Catholic canon of scripture.
Tumah
Veteran Member
May you be healed speedily.
Ehav4Ever
Well-Known Member
That's not what I was asking. I never mentioned the KJV and the NIV.
All Christian sects claim to be doing what you stated. They all claim to be searching the scriptures and they came to completely different conclusions on a pretty important issue. So what facts make it clear who is right in the specific issues that were just brought up. JW say Jesus is one thing and the Catholics say he was something else. Both sides claim to be "searching the scriptures." Are you saying that there is nothing more specific than just a general "search the scriptures?"
I have a King James Bible, but I would read an NIV because the teachings of Jesus are the same in both.
I think to have the answer for which teachings are correct, one has to search the scriptures for themselves. My pastor said to question what he says.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
So you believe that only books contained in the Textus Receptus are divinely inspired.
There were Bibles before the 1500s.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
You are very good at tap dancing. How many books are in the canon that you accept and what are they?
No thanks. I think it's about thinking vs. feeling, as simple as that.
I don't necessarily agree with the apocrypha but I don't object to it.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
So, is 1st Clement part of the canon that you accept?
Does your canon exclude 2 Peter, Jude, or Revelation?
Ehav4Ever
Well-Known Member
If that is the case, then it should be clear that the answer to this whole thread is that, Torah based Jews have searched Hebrew Tanakh and determined that Christianity is a path that we should not take.
See how much we actually agree on when we have the proper things clarified?
I agree with all of those writings.
Ehav4Ever
Well-Known Member
What about the gospels of Phillip, Thomas, Mary, and Judas?
Redemptionsong
Well-Known Member
By identifying himself as a Jew, with a blameless background under the law, Paul was showing that he understood what it meant to live by the law in righteousness. Yet, because he later experienced the baptism in the Holy Spirit, prophesied by Joel [Joel 2:28], he also knew that there was a better covenant than the one that he had previously experienced. This is not a reinterpretation of Jewish concepts, but a new and better covenant that was prophesied in scripture. No longer is the Jew called to live under the law; they are called to live by faith in Christ under grace. This is the only way to fulfil all of God's law in righteousness.
'For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
And if ye be Christ's, then ye are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.' [Galatians 3:26-29]
While it's possible some of the Jewish Christians thought that following both covenants is a self contradiction, Messianic Judaism still exists after decades. I don't think Messianic Judaism is wrong because to some people's convictions following both covenants isn't self contradictory. I believe that following the Torah isn't for every Christian.
Do you think Messianic Judaism is legalism?
I don't agree with those because they teach gnosticism, which is that we are saved through knowledge of the divine. Why would Jesus die for our sins if we are saved through what we know?