I've burned a few Bibles. After they were damaged. My body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, not a 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!
bible vs Bible
- Thread starter questfortruth
- Start date
-
- Tags
- blaspheme
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
later I found this:
The earliest alphabetic writing – Phoenician, Hebrew, and others of the same family – had no capitalization, no spaces, no vowels (see abjad) and few punctuation marks.
Punctuation - Wikipedia
So in (Jesus')Yeshua's- the Israelite time there was no capitalization, please, Right?
Regards
Last edited:
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Why? Bible is the message from God. So, why to insult the message?
Tinker Grey
Wanderer
It's a message from man. If god is insulted, let it say so.
lots of spiritual writings are divine.
ISTA - Internet Sacred Text Archive Home
the book is written by men about god. god didn't write the book. otherwise it'd be called the gospel of god, duh.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
paarsurrey said: ↑
Was there any capitalization practice in the ancient times also, please?
If not, why not, please?
To add further, the practice of inverted commas never existed in (Jesus') Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah's time in Hebrew or Aramaic the languages Mary , Jesus and the his disciples spoke. They never spoke Greek, one gets to know, please, right?:
"The double quotation mark derives from a marginal notation used in fifteenth-century manuscript annotations to indicate a passage of particular importance (not necessarily a quotation); the notation was placed in the outside margin of the page and was repeated alongside each line of the passage.[6] In his edition of the works of Aristotle, which appeared in 1483 or 1484, the Milanese Renaissance humanist Francesco Filelfo marked literal and appropriate quotes with oblique double dashes on the left margin of each line.[7] Until then, literal quotations had been highlighted or not at the author's discretion.[7] Non-verbal loans were marked on the edge. After the publication of Filelfo's edition, the quotation marks for literal quotations prevailed.[7] During the seventeenth century this treatment became specific to quoted material, and it grew common, especially in Britain, to print quotation marks (now in the modern opening and closing forms) at the beginning and end of the quotation as well as in the margin"
Quotation mark - Wikipedia
Right?
Regards
Was there any capitalization practice in the ancient times also, please?
If not, why not, please?
To add further, the practice of inverted commas never existed in (Jesus') Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah's time in Hebrew or Aramaic the languages Mary , Jesus and the his disciples spoke. They never spoke Greek, one gets to know, please, right?:
"The double quotation mark derives from a marginal notation used in fifteenth-century manuscript annotations to indicate a passage of particular importance (not necessarily a quotation); the notation was placed in the outside margin of the page and was repeated alongside each line of the passage.[6] In his edition of the works of Aristotle, which appeared in 1483 or 1484, the Milanese Renaissance humanist Francesco Filelfo marked literal and appropriate quotes with oblique double dashes on the left margin of each line.[7] Until then, literal quotations had been highlighted or not at the author's discretion.[7] Non-verbal loans were marked on the edge. After the publication of Filelfo's edition, the quotation marks for literal quotations prevailed.[7] During the seventeenth century this treatment became specific to quoted material, and it grew common, especially in Britain, to print quotation marks (now in the modern opening and closing forms) at the beginning and end of the quotation as well as in the margin"
Quotation mark - Wikipedia
Right?
Regards
That does not mean He did not understand Greek, according to the Gospels Jesus was the son of a carpenter, so assuming they did business among the Greek speaking population etc.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
He's as pure as driven snow.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
I just warn the friends here @ RF to be careful and not be mislead by the "inverted commas" and or the quotation marks in the Gospels that these are the sayings of Jesus, it is not the case as the four Gospels are the third person narratives of anonymous narrators as rightly admitted by the Catholic Encyclopedia:
“The first four historical books of the New Testament are supplied with titles (Euangelion kata Matthaion, Euangelion kata Markon, etc.), which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of those sacred writings. The Canon of Muratori, Clement of Alexandria, and St. Irenæus bear distinct witness to the existence of those headings in the latter part of the second century of our era. Indeed, the manner in which Clement (Stromata I.21), and St. Irenæus (Against Heresies III.11.7) employ them implies that, at that early date, our present titles to the Gospels had been in current use for some considerable time. Hence, it may be inferred that they were prefixed to the evangelical narratives as early as the first part of that same century. That, however, they do not go back to the first century of the Christian era, or at least that they are not original, is a position generally held at the present day. It is felt that since they are similar for the four Gospels, although the same Gospels were composed at some interval from each other, those titles were not framed, and consequently not prefixed to each individual narrative, before the collection of the four Gospels was actually made. Besides, as well pointed out by Prof. Bacon, “the historical books of the New Testament differ from its apocalyptic and epistolary literature, as those of the Old Testament differ from its prophecy, in being invariably anonymous, and for the same reason.”
” It thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are not traceable to the Evangelists themselves.”
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Gospel and Gospels
" According to (anonymous) Mathew" " According to (anonymous) Mark", and these names (Matthew, Mark, Luka and John) have been given to these anonymous narratives most probably and or most certainly as a deception measure to the simple minded followers of (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, to win them over for Hellenism (of dying, rising deity) by the Hellenist Paul, his Associates and the Pauline-Church, it transpires, please , right?
Regards
Last edited:
To me it is Not the Big Bang because the Big Bang had a beginning.
In the Bible I find God had No beginning but is from everlasting ..... Psalms 90:2 (No starting point for God)
God can supply the abundantly needed dynamic Strength and Powerful energy needed to create - Isaiah 40:26 B.
Thus, the eternal God sent forth His mighty spirit to create the material realm of existence according to Psalms 104:30.
It says so at 2 Timothy 3:16 that ALL Scripture is inspirited by God...... - 2 Peter 1:21
Sure men wrote ( last time I looked only people write ) so God used men as His secretary.
Jesus taught that Scripture's message is religious truth - John 17:17
Religious truth from his God.
First of all, to me it is more like one Gospel with four writers:
The Gospel account according to Matthew
The Gospel account according to Mark
The Gospel account according to Luke
The Gospel account according to John
Matthew Levi (shortened from the Hebrew Mattithiah) was the son of Alphaesus - Matthew 9:9; Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27-32
Mark (whose name is also John surnamed as Mark) and his mother's name was Mary - Mark 14:51-52; Acts 12:12-13
Barnabus was the cousin of Mark - Acts of the Apostles 4:36; Colossians 4:10
Paul asks for Mark at 2 Timothy 4:11
Luke 's account is attributed to Luke in the Muratorian Fragment ( c.170 C.E. (common era))
and also accepted by Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria.
Paul speaks of Luke at Colossians 4:14
John's account was accepted by the 2nd century Christians.
Clement of Alexandria , Irenaeus, Tertullian and Origen testified to John's writership.
Eusebius quotes Irenaeus as saying " John" the disciple of the Lord.....
John was the one mentioned as being close to Jesus at Matthew 17:1; Mark 5:37; Mark 9:2; Mark 14:33
Seems to me then Catholics think all named Bible named people would be anonymous.
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Honestly that is rude @questfortruth
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
" 2 Timothy 3:16, 2 Peter 1:21 "
Just to inform the participants in this thread that verses " 2 Timothy 3:16, 2 Peter 1:21 "* are not from (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah, please. Right?
First the followers of Yeshua must quote , for a meaningful discussion/debate verse/verses from Yeshua, and then the discussion debate be within the purview of such verses, not out of them, please. Right?
And to do vice a versa is obviously wrong and would mislead one, please, right?
Regards
_______________
*Holy Bible King James Version (Red Letter Edition)
The Roman Catholic Holy Bible with the words of Jesus in red.
World Messianic Bible
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Please show a minimal level of tolerance. Otherwise, I will be banned because you have disliked something.
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
You were directly rude toward @ChristineM and no you are not going to be banned by me disliking one comment you make.
Is it illegal to say you were rude? Did i brake any law toward @questfortruth??
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
please, be tolerant.
Tinker Grey
Wanderer
Whatever floats your boat