A Celebrity Predictions Psychic's Blog

onthewingsoflove · July 2010

What about people who claim to talk to Jesus or to God himself
? What about all those saints that have talked to spirits of other saints? Dos that mean the church is not following the word of God for making them saints?
I believe in God but I also believe that the Bible has been manipulated by men a long time ago to fit their needs to control people. Many things have been left out.
And yes their are plenty of mediums who deceive and hurt people, or are just plane fake. But there are some who aren't. The ability to "see" the other side and communicate with spirits form that side is a God given ability as much as the other gifts he has given us. What are we supposed to do with them? Deny them? For the ones who have them of course.
Thare e are many people with "special" abilities who help a lot of people. Does that make them bad?
And btw, there are many things in the New Testament that contradict the Old One. Things that Jesus has changed and disagreed with from the O.T.
Anyway...I guess it comes down with personal belief of each individual.

Now I can show you throughout the Bible where God, and Jesus is God, said to call unto to Him! Therefore all true Christians ought to be talking to God :!: :!: Show me where any "saint in the Bible" spoke to another dead saint. What does the Bible say? Well Jesus did indeed tell a parable about a dead rich sinner man who went to hell calling out to Abraham, but that was a parable, a made up story to teach the people. You're talking about what men in this world takes upon themselves to do, and I'm talking about what God says about what they do. You said, "The ability to "see" the other side and communicate with spirits form that side is a God given ability as much as the other gifts he has given us." This is strictly your opinion because this so called gift is not listed in God's word as being one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Read 1st Corinthians 12 where Paul begins by saying, "Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant." And neither is it listed in Isaiah 11:1-3 where he lists the gifts. God's word is so true, "...the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not..." :twisted:

Those who allege that the Bible contains contradictions basically fall into two classes. First, there is the person who honestly believes this to be the case because he has heard the hackneyed charge repeated frequently; thus, he sincerely is misinformed about the facts. Second, there is that type of person who, from base motives, hates the Bible and so tries to pervert its testimony in order to discredit it. In either case, the Word of God is not at fault! There are no contradictions in the Bible, only difficult to understand passages or hard sayings as some Bible scholars say.

What Is a Contradiction?
It is fairly safe to say that most people have only a superficial concept of what constitutes a genuine contradiction. An important truth that must be hammered home repeatedly is this: a mere difference does not a contradiction make! What, then, constitutes a contradiction? In logic, the Law of Contradiction is stated as follows: “Nothing can both be and not be!” That is a very abbreviated form of the rule. Aristotle expressed it this way. “That the same thing should at the same time both be and not be for the same person and in the same respect is impossible.”

When one is confronted with an alleged contradiction, he must ask himself these important questions: (1) Is the same thing or person under consideration? (2) Is the same time period in view? (3) Is the language that seems to be self-contradictory employed in the same sense? It is quite important that these questions be answered correctly. For instance, Robert is rich. Robert is poor. Do these statements contradict one another? The answer is —not necessarily! First, two different people named Robert could be under consideration. Second, two different time frames might be in view; Robert could have been rich but, due to financial disaster, he became poor. Third, the terms “rich” and “poor” might have been used in different senses; Robert could be spiritually rich but economically poor. The point is this: it never is proper to assume a contradiction exists until every possible means of harmonization has been fully exhausted. Now, let this principle be applied to the Bible as well.

An infidel once announced that he had discovered a contradiction in the Bible. When challenged to produce it, he suggested that whereas Noah’s ark, with all of its inmates, must have weighed many tons (Genesis 6), the Hebrew priests were said to have carried the ark across the Jordan River (Joshua 3). The poor fellow, in his profound simplicity, did not even know the difference between Noah’s ark and the Ark of the Covenant! Slightly different “arks” —to say the least! Again, the Scriptures affirm that faith saves apart from works; on the other hand, the New Testament declares that faith apart from works cannot save. “Surely,” some contend, “this is a contradiction.” The fact is, it is not, for different types of works are addressed in the Scriptures. Salvation involves works of obedience to the commands of Jesus Christ (James 2:14; Philippians 2:12), but pardon cannot be obtained by works of the Mosaic Law (Romans 3:28; 4:2) or by boastful works of human merit (Ephesians 2:9). There is no contradiction in the Bible on this point.

The Bible records: “God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). And then: “And it repented Jehovah that he had made man on earth, and it grieved him at his heart” (6:6). The infidel cites both verses and claims that God simultaneously was satisfied and dissatisfied with His creation —neglecting to mention, of course, that the fall of man and hundreds of years of history separated the two statements! Judas, one of the Lord’s disciples, was empowered to perform miracles (Matthew 10:1-18), yet he is called “the son of perdition” (John 17:12). Is there a contradiction? No, for it was a couple of years after the time of the limited commission (Matthew 10) before Judas commenced to fall away from the Lord (John 12:6; 13:2,27). The time element is important in understanding some passages.

Critics have also charged the Bible with a mistake in connection with the time of Jesus’ trial and death. Mark writes that the Lord was crucified at the third hour (Mark 15:25), while John’s account has the Savior being tried at the sixth hour (John 19:14) —seemingly, therefore, three hours after His death. John’s time reference, however, was based upon Roman civil days, while Mark computed according to Jewish time. Again, the “contradiction” dissolves.

One of the implications of the Law of Contradiction is the concept that “nothing can have at the same time and at the same place contradictory and inconsistent qualities”. A door may be open or shut, but the same door may not be both open and shut at the same time. Open and shut are opposites, yet they are not contradictory unless they are affirmed of the same object at the same time. Here is the principle: opposites are not necessarily contradictory. Let this principle be applied to certain biblical matters. Does the Bible contradict itself, as is often suggested, when it asserts that God both loves and hates? No, for though these terms are opposites, when used of God they do not express His disposition toward the same objects. God loves every sinner in the world (John 3:16), but He hates every false way (Psalm 119:104). He loves righteousness, but hates iniquity (Psalm 45:7), and hence responds toward such with either goodness or severity (Romans 11:22). No contradiction exists here.

In dealing with so-called “contradictions” in the Bible, let these principles carefully be remembered.
No contradiction exists between verses that refer to different persons or things.
No contradiction exists between passages that involve different time elements.
No contradiction exists between verses that employ phraseology in different senses.
One need show only the possibility of harmonization between two passage that appear to conflict in order to negate the force of an alleged discrepancy.

Finally, this point needs to be made: the differences in various Bible accounts of the same events actually demonstrate the independence of the divine writers and prove that they were not in collusion with one another! God, although using human writers in the composition of the Bible, is nevertheless its ultimate Author. And since the perfect God cannot be the source of confusion (1st Corinthians 14:33) or contradiction (Hebrews 6:18), it must be acknowledged that the Bible is perfectly harmonious. This does not mean that men will not struggle with difficult passages. If seeming discrepancies are discovered, Christians should apply themselves to a diligent study in an effort to resolve them; but let us never foolishly charge God with allowing His sacred writers to contradict one another. Understand God does not make mistakes!

God made man a free will individual. You have the right to believe whatever you want about the Bible. But just because you believe it doesn't make it true. That's why we are all on this site. Just because people believe that MJ is dead, doesn't make it true! As I said, the Bible makes it clear that these types of experiences should be avoided. The Bible itself tells us that it is God who is the author of His book. 2nd Timothy 3:16 states that “All scripture is inspired by God….” In 2nd Peter 1:20-21, Peter reminds the reader to “know this first of all, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, … but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” The Holy Spirit is God. Be careful of blaspheming the Holy Spirit of God. Why, because Jesus said, "Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:" (Mark 3:28-29) Now that's the truth and I dare you to research it for your self :!:

Now I may not know the Bible as well as I should, but I do know it better than some! ;) As I said, the Bible makes it clear that these types of experiences should be avoided. God has given us strong warnings in the Bible on the topic of whether or not we should attempt to contact the dead or other spirits (i.e. angels, saints, deceased family members or friends, etc). And anyone who has a problem with that, needs to take it up with God because those are His words and not mine :!: :!: :!: :!: As far as many things being left out of the Bible, you are absolutely right!!! "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen." (John 21:25) And if the Bible contained everything that occurred in biblical times it would be to big to handle :!: :!:

To everyone who reads this I apologize for such a long post, but I am, and will always be a defender of the faith, because I know who it is I serve. There is such a thing as righteous indignation, Jesus had it when He drove the moneychangers from God's holy temple :!: :!: :!: :!: :!:

Blessings to you all up "on the wings of love!"

onthewingsoflove · July 2010

Oh by the way, God tells us in Act 16 who is the giver of psychic gifts!

Truth_or_Dare · July 2010

What about people who claim to talk to Jesus or to God himself
? What about all those saints that have talked to spirits of other saints? Dos that mean the church is not following the word of God for making them saints?
I believe in God but I also believe that the Bible has been manipulated by men a long time ago to fit their needs to control people. Many things have been left out.
And yes their are plenty of mediums who deceive and hurt people, or are just plane fake. But there are some who aren't. The ability to "see" the other side and communicate with spirits form that side is a God given ability as much as the other gifts he has given us. What are we supposed to do with them? Deny them? For the ones who have them of course.
Thare e are many people with "special" abilities who help a lot of people. Does that make them bad?
And btw, there are many things in the New Testament that contradict the Old One. Things that Jesus has changed and disagreed with from the O.T.
Anyway...I guess it comes down with personal belief of each individual.
Now I can show you throughout the Bible where God, and Jesus is God, said to call unto to Him! Therefore all true Christians ought to be talking to God :!: :!: Show me where any "saint in the Bible" spoke to another dead saint. What does the Bible say? Well Jesus did indeed tell a parable about a dead rich sinner man who went to hell calling out to Abraham, but that was a parable, a made up story to teach the people. You're talking about what men in this world takes upon themselves to do, and I'm talking about what God says about what they do. You said, "The ability to "see" the other side and communicate with spirits form that side is a God given ability as much as the other gifts he has given us." This is strictly your opinion because this so called gift is not listed in God's word as being one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Read 1st Corinthians 12 where Paul begins by saying, "Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant." And neither is it listed in Isaiah 11:1-3 where he lists the gifts. God's word is so true, "...the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not..." :twisted:

Those who allege that the Bible contains contradictions basically fall into two classes. First, there is the person who honestly believes this to be the case because he has heard the hackneyed charge repeated frequently; thus, he sincerely is misinformed about the facts. Second, there is that type of person who, from base motives, hates the Bible and so tries to pervert its testimony in order to discredit it. In either case, the Word of God is not at fault! There are no contradictions in the Bible, only difficult to understand passages or hard sayings as some Bible scholars say.

What Is a Contradiction?
It is fairly safe to say that most people have only a superficial concept of what constitutes a genuine contradiction. An important truth that must be hammered home repeatedly is this: a mere difference does not a contradiction make! What, then, constitutes a contradiction? In logic, the Law of Contradiction is stated as follows: “Nothing can both be and not be!” That is a very abbreviated form of the rule. Aristotle expressed it this way. “That the same thing should at the same time both be and not be for the same person and in the same respect is impossible.”

When one is confronted with an alleged contradiction, he must ask himself these important questions: (1) Is the same thing or person under consideration? (2) Is the same time period in view? (3) Is the language that seems to be self-contradictory employed in the same sense? It is quite important that these questions be answered correctly. For instance, Robert is rich. Robert is poor. Do these statements contradict one another? The answer is —not necessarily! First, two different people named Robert could be under consideration. Second, two different time frames might be in view; Robert could have been rich but, due to financial disaster, he became poor. Third, the terms “rich” and “poor” might have been used in different senses; Robert could be spiritually rich but economically poor. The point is this: it never is proper to assume a contradiction exists until every possible means of harmonization has been fully exhausted. Now, let this principle be applied to the Bible as well.

An infidel once announced that he had discovered a contradiction in the Bible. When challenged to produce it, he suggested that whereas Noah’s ark, with all of its inmates, must have weighed many tons (Genesis 6), the Hebrew priests were said to have carried the ark across the Jordan River (Joshua 3). The poor fellow, in his profound simplicity, did not even know the difference between Noah’s ark and the Ark of the Covenant! Slightly different “arks” —to say the least! Again, the Scriptures affirm that faith saves apart from works; on the other hand, the New Testament declares that faith apart from works cannot save. “Surely,” some contend, “this is a contradiction.” The fact is, it is not, for different types of works are addressed in the Scriptures. Salvation involves works of obedience to the commands of Jesus Christ (James 2:14; Philippians 2:12), but pardon cannot be obtained by works of the Mosaic Law (Romans 3:28; 4:2) or by boastful works of human merit (Ephesians 2:9). There is no contradiction in the Bible on this point.

The Bible records: “God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). And then: “And it repented Jehovah that he had made man on earth, and it grieved him at his heart” (6:6). The infidel cites both verses and claims that God simultaneously was satisfied and dissatisfied with His creation —neglecting to mention, of course, that the fall of man and hundreds of years of history separated the two statements! Judas, one of the Lord’s disciples, was empowered to perform miracles (Matthew 10:1-18), yet he is called “the son of perdition” (John 17:12). Is there a contradiction? No, for it was a couple of years after the time of the limited commission (Matthew 10) before Judas commenced to fall away from the Lord (John 12:6; 13:2,27). The time element is important in understanding some passages.

Critics have also charged the Bible with a mistake in connection with the time of Jesus’ trial and death. Mark writes that the Lord was crucified at the third hour (Mark 15:25), while John’s account has the Savior being tried at the sixth hour (John 19:14) —seemingly, therefore, three hours after His death. John’s time reference, however, was based upon Roman civil days, while Mark computed according to Jewish time. Again, the “contradiction” dissolves.

One of the implications of the Law of Contradiction is the concept that “nothing can have at the same time and at the same place contradictory and inconsistent qualities”. A door may be open or shut, but the same door may not be both open and shut at the same time. Open and shut are opposites, yet they are not contradictory unless they are affirmed of the same object at the same time. Here is the principle: opposites are not necessarily contradictory. Let this principle be applied to certain biblical matters. Does the Bible contradict itself, as is often suggested, when it asserts that God both loves and hates? No, for though these terms are opposites, when used of God they do not express His disposition toward the same objects. God loves every sinner in the world (John 3:16), but He hates every false way (Psalm 119:104). He loves righteousness, but hates iniquity (Psalm 45:7), and hence responds toward such with either goodness or severity (Romans 11:22). No contradiction exists here.

In dealing with so-called “contradictions” in the Bible, let these principles carefully be remembered.
No contradiction exists between verses that refer to different persons or things.
No contradiction exists between passages that involve different time elements.
No contradiction exists between verses that employ phraseology in different senses.
One need show only the possibility of harmonization between two passage that appear to conflict in order to negate the force of an alleged discrepancy.

Finally, this point needs to be made: the differences in various Bible accounts of the same events actually demonstrate the independence of the divine writers and prove that they were not in collusion with one another! God, although using human writers in the composition of the Bible, is nevertheless its ultimate Author. And since the perfect God cannot be the source of confusion (1st Corinthians 14:33) or contradiction (Hebrews 6:18), it must be acknowledged that the Bible is perfectly harmonious. This does not mean that men will not struggle with difficult passages. If seeming discrepancies are discovered, Christians should apply themselves to a diligent study in an effort to resolve them; but let us never foolishly charge God with allowing His sacred writers to contradict one another. Understand God does not make mistakes!

God made man a free will individual. You have the right to believe whatever you want about the Bible. But just because you believe it doesn't make it true. That's why we are all on this site. Just because people believe that MJ is dead, doesn't make it true! As I said, the Bible makes it clear that these types of experiences should be avoided. The Bible itself tells us that it is God who is the author of His book. 2nd Timothy 3:16 states that “All scripture is inspired by God….” In 2nd Peter 1:20-21, Peter reminds the reader to “know this first of all, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, … but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” The Holy Spirit is God. Be careful of blaspheming the Holy Spirit of God. Why, because Jesus said, "Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:" (Mark 3:28-29) Now that's the truth and I dare you to research it for your self :!:

Now I may not know the Bible as well as I should, but I do know it better than some! ;) As I said, the Bible makes it clear that these types of experiences should be avoided. God has given us strong warnings in the Bible on the topic of whether or not we should attempt to contact the dead or other spirits (i.e. angels, saints, deceased family members or friends, etc). And anyone who has a problem with that, needs to take it up with God because those are His words and not mine :!: :!: :!: :!: As far as many things being left out of the Bible, you are absolutely right!!! "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen." (John 21:25) And if the Bible contained everything that occurred in biblical times it would be to big to handle :!: :!:

To everyone who reads this I apologize for such a long post, but I am, and will always be a defender of the faith, because I know who it is I serve. There is such a thing as righteous indignation, Jesus had it when He drove the moneychangers from God's holy temple :!: :!: :!: :!: :!:

Blessings to you all up "on the wings of love!"

You are obviously a firm believer in the Bible. My only belief is in God. And the road I have chosen to get to Him is a direct one. Not through any book. Because there are many books who claim to be from God. The Bible itsself has differnt versiuons. Then there's the Coran. And the Tora. etc. I have strugled with this problem for a long time until I chose to go straight to the source and get my answers there. And I did. Every time. And to this day, it's the best decision I ever made.
That is MY way of doing it. That does not mean that I do not agree with your way of finding God in the Bible. That is your choice and if that leads to to God, it's great.There are many ways to reach God and it doesn't matter whcih one you take as long as you get there.
Now I know you're gonna disagree with me and tell me it's the ONLY way. And that's fine too. It's your belief. But not mine So pls don't try to force it on me.
That does not mean however that I think the Bible is completrly wrong, or that God didn;t speak directly to the people who wrote the Bible. But you see, althought I love men, I don;'t trust them as much as trust God. God doesn';t make mistales but people do. The words in the Bible, as in any other religious book, are men's interpretatiuons of what God told them.

Now to answer some of your questions.
1) When I was talking about saints I didn't necesarly mean the one sin the Bible, but all saints canonized by the Church - who is after all following God's words, right?
Saint Joan of Arc - ] She was beatified in 1909 and canonized in 1920. She identified Saint Margaret, Saint Catherine, and Saint Michael as the source of her revelations.
Saint Francis of Rome had visions of the Purgatory ( not other saints but part of the other side)
Saint Margret
saint Catherine of Genoa
And the list can go on. Google this and you can find for yourself.
So if having visions of the other world ( Saints, demons, Jesus, Haven, Hell, Purgatory, etc) is ok to make someone a saint, others peoploe should be condemented if they have these visions too? :roll:

2) Thank you for that explaination of what "contradiction" means but I'm not in the first grade. I know what it means.
What I was refering to was the fact that in the Old T. it was ok to stone someone ( for whatever reason) and Jesus tought against that.
Jesus changed and tought agains some of the old beliefs. This being one of them.

3) When I was talking about the things left out of the Bible I wasn;t refering to things that Jesus did that the appostole didn't write about. I am talking about the actual putting together of the documents to make the Bible. There were things written that didn;t make the "final cut"
You can read about it online if you want to know about it!
There is a secret archive in the Vatican as well.

As for some of our gifts not being from God, I don't belive that. God is the creator and the devil is the destroyer. The Devil can not create anything. GOD created everything and he's the only one that can create.
Everything we are and have can be used in one direction or another. That's what free will is. That doesn not mean it didn;t come from God. Or that it can't be used in a good direction.

To sum it up, my problem is not with God, but with men, their taking over of the Bible and of God and not letting people think for themselves.

Infinitylady · July 2010

What about people who claim to talk to Jesus or to God himself
? What about all those saints that have talked to spirits of other saints? Dos that mean the church is not following the word of God for making them saints?
I believe in God but I also believe that the Bible has been manipulated by men a long time ago to fit their needs to control people. Many things have been left out.
And yes their are plenty of mediums who deceive and hurt people, or are just plane fake. But there are some who aren't. The ability to "see" the other side and communicate with spirits form that side is a God given ability as much as the other gifts he has given us. What are we supposed to do with them? Deny them? For the ones who have them of course.
Thare e are many people with "special" abilities who help a lot of people. Does that make them bad?
And btw, there are many things in the New Testament that contradict the Old One. Things that Jesus has changed and disagreed with from the O.T.
Anyway...I guess it comes down with personal belief of each individual.
Now I can show you throughout the Bible where God, and Jesus is God, said to call unto to Him! Therefore all true Christians ought to be talking to God :!: :!: Show me where any "saint in the Bible" spoke to another dead saint. What does the Bible say? Well Jesus did indeed tell a parable about a dead rich sinner man who went to hell calling out to Abraham, but that was a parable, a made up story to teach the people. You're talking about what men in this world takes upon themselves to do, and I'm talking about what God says about what they do. You said, "The ability to "see" the other side and communicate with spirits form that side is a God given ability as much as the other gifts he has given us." This is strictly your opinion because this so called gift is not listed in God's word as being one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Read 1st Corinthians 12 where Paul begins by saying, "Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant." And neither is it listed in Isaiah 11:1-3 where he lists the gifts. God's word is so true, "...the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not..." :twisted:

Those who allege that the Bible contains contradictions basically fall into two classes. First, there is the person who honestly believes this to be the case because he has heard the hackneyed charge repeated frequently; thus, he sincerely is misinformed about the facts. Second, there is that type of person who, from base motives, hates the Bible and so tries to pervert its testimony in order to discredit it. In either case, the Word of God is not at fault! There are no contradictions in the Bible, only difficult to understand passages or hard sayings as some Bible scholars say.

What Is a Contradiction?
It is fairly safe to say that most people have only a superficial concept of what constitutes a genuine contradiction. An important truth that must be hammered home repeatedly is this: a mere difference does not a contradiction make! What, then, constitutes a contradiction? In logic, the Law of Contradiction is stated as follows: “Nothing can both be and not be!” That is a very abbreviated form of the rule. Aristotle expressed it this way. “That the same thing should at the same time both be and not be for the same person and in the same respect is impossible.”

When one is confronted with an alleged contradiction, he must ask himself these important questions: (1) Is the same thing or person under consideration? (2) Is the same time period in view? (3) Is the language that seems to be self-contradictory employed in the same sense? It is quite important that these questions be answered correctly. For instance, Robert is rich. Robert is poor. Do these statements contradict one another? The answer is —not necessarily! First, two different people named Robert could be under consideration. Second, two different time frames might be in view; Robert could have been rich but, due to financial disaster, he became poor. Third, the terms “rich” and “poor” might have been used in different senses; Robert could be spiritually rich but economically poor. The point is this: it never is proper to assume a contradiction exists until every possible means of harmonization has been fully exhausted. Now, let this principle be applied to the Bible as well.

An infidel once announced that he had discovered a contradiction in the Bible. When challenged to produce it, he suggested that whereas Noah’s ark, with all of its inmates, must have weighed many tons (Genesis 6), the Hebrew priests were said to have carried the ark across the Jordan River (Joshua 3). The poor fellow, in his profound simplicity, did not even know the difference between Noah’s ark and the Ark of the Covenant! Slightly different “arks” —to say the least! Again, the Scriptures affirm that faith saves apart from works; on the other hand, the New Testament declares that faith apart from works cannot save. “Surely,” some contend, “this is a contradiction.” The fact is, it is not, for different types of works are addressed in the Scriptures. Salvation involves works of obedience to the commands of Jesus Christ (James 2:14; Philippians 2:12), but pardon cannot be obtained by works of the Mosaic Law (Romans 3:28; 4:2) or by boastful works of human merit (Ephesians 2:9). There is no contradiction in the Bible on this point.

The Bible records: “God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). And then: “And it repented Jehovah that he had made man on earth, and it grieved him at his heart” (6:6). The infidel cites both verses and claims that God simultaneously was satisfied and dissatisfied with His creation —neglecting to mention, of course, that the fall of man and hundreds of years of history separated the two statements! Judas, one of the Lord’s disciples, was empowered to perform miracles (Matthew 10:1-18), yet he is called “the son of perdition” (John 17:12). Is there a contradiction? No, for it was a couple of years after the time of the limited commission (Matthew 10) before Judas commenced to fall away from the Lord (John 12:6; 13:2,27). The time element is important in understanding some passages.

Critics have also charged the Bible with a mistake in connection with the time of Jesus’ trial and death. Mark writes that the Lord was crucified at the third hour (Mark 15:25), while John’s account has the Savior being tried at the sixth hour (John 19:14) —seemingly, therefore, three hours after His death. John’s time reference, however, was based upon Roman civil days, while Mark computed according to Jewish time. Again, the “contradiction” dissolves.

One of the implications of the Law of Contradiction is the concept that “nothing can have at the same time and at the same place contradictory and inconsistent qualities”. A door may be open or shut, but the same door may not be both open and shut at the same time. Open and shut are opposites, yet they are not contradictory unless they are affirmed of the same object at the same time. Here is the principle: opposites are not necessarily contradictory. Let this principle be applied to certain biblical matters. Does the Bible contradict itself, as is often suggested, when it asserts that God both loves and hates? No, for though these terms are opposites, when used of God they do not express His disposition toward the same objects. God loves every sinner in the world (John 3:16), but He hates every false way (Psalm 119:104). He loves righteousness, but hates iniquity (Psalm 45:7), and hence responds toward such with either goodness or severity (Romans 11:22). No contradiction exists here.

In dealing with so-called “contradictions” in the Bible, let these principles carefully be remembered.
No contradiction exists between verses that refer to different persons or things.
No contradiction exists between passages that involve different time elements.
No contradiction exists between verses that employ phraseology in different senses.
One need show only the possibility of harmonization between two passage that appear to conflict in order to negate the force of an alleged discrepancy.

Finally, this point needs to be made: the differences in various Bible accounts of the same events actually demonstrate the independence of the divine writers and prove that they were not in collusion with one another! God, although using human writers in the composition of the Bible, is nevertheless its ultimate Author. And since the perfect God cannot be the source of confusion (1st Corinthians 14:33) or contradiction (Hebrews 6:18), it must be acknowledged that the Bible is perfectly harmonious. This does not mean that men will not struggle with difficult passages. If seeming discrepancies are discovered, Christians should apply themselves to a diligent study in an effort to resolve them; but let us never foolishly charge God with allowing His sacred writers to contradict one another. Understand God does not make mistakes!

God made man a free will individual. You have the right to believe whatever you want about the Bible. But just because you believe it doesn't make it true. That's why we are all on this site. Just because people believe that MJ is dead, doesn't make it true! As I said, the Bible makes it clear that these types of experiences should be avoided. The Bible itself tells us that it is God who is the author of His book. 2nd Timothy 3:16 states that “All scripture is inspired by God….” In 2nd Peter 1:20-21, Peter reminds the reader to “know this first of all, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, … but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” The Holy Spirit is God. Be careful of blaspheming the Holy Spirit of God. Why, because Jesus said, "Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:" (Mark 3:28-29) Now that's the truth and I dare you to research it for your self :!:

Now I may not know the Bible as well as I should, but I do know it better than some! ;) As I said, the Bible makes it clear that these types of experiences should be avoided. God has given us strong warnings in the Bible on the topic of whether or not we should attempt to contact the dead or other spirits (i.e. angels, saints, deceased family members or friends, etc). And anyone who has a problem with that, needs to take it up with God because those are His words and not mine :!: :!: :!: :!: As far as many things being left out of the Bible, you are absolutely right!!! "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen." (John 21:25) And if the Bible contained everything that occurred in biblical times it would be to big to handle :!: :!:

To everyone who reads this I apologize for such a long post, but I am, and will always be a defender of the faith, because I know who it is I serve. There is such a thing as righteous indignation, Jesus had it when He drove the moneychangers from God's holy temple :!: :!: :!: :!: :!:

Blessings to you all up "on the wings of love!"
You are obviously a firm believer in the Bible. My only belief is in God. And the road I have chosen to get to Him is a direct one. Not through any book. Because there are many books who claim to be from God. The Bible itsself has differnt versiuons. Then there's the Coran. And the Tora. etc. I have strugled with this problem for a long time until I chose to go straight to the source and get my answers there. And I did. Every time. And to this day, it's the best decision I ever made.
That is MY way of doing it. That does not mean that I do not agree with your way of finding God in the Bible. That is your choice and if that leads to to God, it's great.There are many ways to reach God and it doesn't matter whcih one you take as long as you get there.
Now I know you're gonna disagree with me and tell me it's the ONLY way. And that's fine too. It's your belief. But not mine So pls don't try to force it on me.
That does not mean however that I think the Bible is completrly wrong, or that God didn;t speak directly to the people who wrote the Bible. But you see, althought I love men, I don;'t trust them as much as trust God. God doesn';t make mistales but people do. The words in the Bible, as in any other religious book, are men's interpretatiuons of what God told them.

Now to answer some of your questions.
1) When I was talking about saints I didn't necesarly mean the one sin the Bible, but all saints canonized by the Church - who is after all following God's words, right?
Saint Joan of Arc - ] She was beatified in 1909 and canonized in 1920. She identified Saint Margaret, Saint Catherine, and Saint Michael as the source of her revelations.
Saint Francis of Rome had visions of the Purgatory ( not other saints but part of the other side)
Saint Margret
saint Catherine of Genoa
And the list can go on. Google this and you can find for yourself.
So if having visions of the other world ( Saints, demons, Jesus, Haven, Hell, Purgatory, etc) is ok to make someone a saint, others peoploe should be condemented if they have these visions too? :roll:

2) Thank you for that explaination of what "contradiction" means but I'm not in the first grade. I know what it means.
What I was refering to was the fact that in the Old T. it was ok to stone someone ( for whatever reason) and Jesus tought against that.
Jesus changed and tought agains some of the old beliefs. This being one of them.

3) When I was talking about the things left out of the Bible I wasn;t refering to things that Jesus did that the appostole didn't write about. I am talking about the actual putting together of the documents to make the Bible. There were things written that didn;t make the "final cut"
You can read about it online if you want to know about it!
There is a secret archive in the Vatican as well.

As for some of our gifts not being from God, I don't belive that. God is the creator and the devil is the destroyer. The Devil can not create anything. GOD created everything and he's the only one that can create.
Everything we are and have can be used in one direction or another. That's what free will is. That doesn not mean it didn;t come from God. Or that it can't be used in a good direction.

To sum it up, my problem is not with God, but with men, their taking over of the Bible and of God and not letting people think for themselves.

But what the Devil does is that he takes the very things of God and perverts them. He takes the very things and turns them to corruption. He takes them to decieve many into believing that something is of God when it is not. That why it is important to seek God for understanding and truth. That was why having the Holy Spirit to help guide you in all truth so that you will not fall victim to deception. The enemy can take the Word and twist it. He tried to do that when tried tempting Christ while he was on the mount for 40 days. (Matt. 4:1-11).

In regards to versions of the bible. Many of todays versions are gradually taking out the very foundations and roots of the things of God.

Truth_or_Dare · July 2010

@Infinitylady - I know about how the Devil corrupts ad that's exactly hy I'm skeptical of man made things and writtings. And I want to take everything through my "filter" and with God's help, try to make sense of this life.

Thanx for the link..intresting site..I came across it a while ago too. :)

Unknown · July 2010

If you don't think that the Bible has been rewritten, edited and revised, please think again. Many "books" have been omitted, others have been combined, multiple translations, modernization of language and differing of opinions of meanings etc.This has all been done to suit the "powers that be" at the time of each new bible's publication. The word of god has been altered by men of power as a means to control religion and other men/women (aka the masses).

Tanakh
The Tanakh is a name used in Judaism for the canon of the Hebrew Bible. The Tanakh is also known as the Masoretic Text or the Miqra. The name "Tanakh" is a Hebrew acronym formed from the initial Hebrew letters of the Masoretic Text's three traditional subdivisions: The Torah ("Teaching", also known as the Five Books of Moses), Nevi'im ("Prophets") and Ketuvim ("Writings")—hence TaNaKh. The name "Miqra" is a Hebrew word for the Tanakh, meaning "that which is read", meaning to read aloud. Elements of the Ancient Greek translation, the Septuagint, are incorporated in various forms in Christian Bibles, in which, with some variations, it is called the "Old Testament". Significant differences exist between the Masoretic text and the Septuagint text. The Old Testament typically is not printed with the traditional Hebrew subdivisions, though the distinction "Law and the Prophets" is used several times in the New Testament.

Hebrew Bible
The Hebrew Bible is a term referring to the books of the Jewish Bible (Tanakh) as originally written mostly in Biblical Hebrew, with some Biblical Aramaic. It is also called the Hebrew Scriptures. The term closely corresponds to contents of the Jewish Tanakh and the Protestant Old Testament (see also Judeo-Christian) and does not include the deuterocanonical portions of the Roman Catholic or the Anagignoskomena portions of the Eastern Orthodox Old Testaments. The term does not imply naming, numbering or ordering of books, which varies with Biblical canon.

The term "Hebrew Bible" is an attempt to provide specificity with respect to contents, while avoiding allusion to any particular interpretative tradition or theological school of thought. It is widely used in academic writing and interfaith discussion in relatively neutral contexts meant to include dialogue amongst all religious traditions, but not widely in the inner discourse of the religions which use its text.

Vetus Latina
Vetus Latina is a collective name given to the Biblical texts in Latin that were translated before St Jerome's Vulgate Bible (382-405 AD) became the standard Bible for Latin-speaking Western Christians. The phrase Vetus Latina is Latin for Old Latin, and the Vetus Latina is sometimes known as the Old Latin Bible. It was, however, written in Late Latin, not the early version of the Latin language known as Old Latin. There was no single "Vetus Latina" Bible; there are, instead, a collection of Biblical manuscript texts that bear witness to Latin translations of Biblical passages that preceded Jerome's.

Old Testament
The Old Testament is the collection of books that forms the first of the two-part Christian Biblical canon. The contents of the Old Testament canon vary from church to church, with the Orthodox communion having 51 books: the shared books are those of the shortest canon, that of the major Protestant communions, with 39 books.

All Old Testament canons are related to the Jewish Bible Canon (Tanakh), but with variations. The most important of these variations is a change to the order of the books: the Hebrew Bible ends with the Book of Chronicles, which describes Israel restored to the Promised Land and the Temple restored in Jerusalem; in the Hebrew Bible God's purpose is thus fulfilled and the divine history is at an end, according to Dispensationalism and Supersessionism (see Jewish Eschatology for Jewish beliefs on the subject). In the Christian Old Testament the Book of Malachi is placed last, so that a prophecy of the coming of the Messiah leads into the birth of the Christ in the Gospel of Matthew.

The Tanakh is written in Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Aramaic, and is therefore also known as the Hebrew Bible (the text of the Jewish Bible is called the Masoretic, after the medieval Jewish rabbis who compiled it). The Masoretic Text (i.e. the Hebrew text revered by medieval and modern Jews) is only one of several versions of the original scriptures of ancient Judaism, and no manuscripts of that hypothetical original text exist. In the last few centuries before Christ, Hellenistic-Jewish scholars produced a translation of their scriptures in Greek, the common language of the Eastern portion of the Roman Empire since the conquests of Alexander the Great. This translation, known as the Septuagint, forms the basis of the Orthodox and some other Eastern Old Testaments. The Old Testaments of the Western branches of Christianity were originally based on a Latin translation of the Septuagint known as the Vetus Latina, this was replaced by Jerome's Vulgate, which continues to be highly respected in the Catholic Church, but Protestant churches generally follow translations of a scholarly reference known as the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. In 1943, Pope Pius XII issued the Divino Afflante Spiritu which allows Catholic translations from texts other than the Vulgate, notably in English the New American Bible.

The Hebrew Bible divides its books into three categories, the Torah ("Instructions"), the Nevi'im ("Prophets") (according to some Christians, essentially historical, despite the title), and the Ketuvim ("Writings)," which according to some Christians might better be described as "wisdom" books (the Song of Songs, Lamentations, Proverbs, etc). The Christian Old Testaments ignore this division and instead emphasise the historical and prophetic nature of the canon-thus the Book of Ruth and the Book of Job, part of the Writings in the Hebrew Bible, are reclassified in the Christian canon as history books, and the overall division into Instructions, Prophets and Writings is lost. The reason for this is the over-arching Messianic intention of Christianity - the Old Testament is seen as preparation for the New Testament, and not as a revelation complete in its own right, see Supersessionism for details.

Protocanonical books
The protocanonical books are those books of the Old Testament which were coextensive with the Hebrew Bible and which have always been considered canonical by almost all Christians throughout history. The term protocanonical is often used to contrast these books to the deuterocanonical books or apocrypha, which "were sometimes doubted" in the early church.

Supersessionism
Supersessionism and replacement theology or fulfillment theology are Christian interpretations of New Testament claims, viewing God's relationship with Christians as being either the "replacement" or "fulfillment" or "completion" of the promise made to the Jews (or Israelites) and Jewish Proselytes. Biblical expressions of God's relationships with people are known as covenants, so the contentious element of supersessionism is the idea that the New Covenant with the Christians and the Christian Church replaces, fulfills or completes the Mosaic Covenant (or Torah) with the Israelites and B'nei Noah.

The word supersessionism comes from English supersede, first known to have been used with the meaning replace in 1642. Prior to this time the word is attested in Scottish legal English to describe restraining orders against debt collection, restraint being its original Latin sense. (The Latin for replace is succedere.) The preposition super is applied to intensify the verb sedere, as in English hold up. Both forms can mean to delay. Hence the term supersessionism does not come from the Latin Church Fathers' description of their own views but as the application of a modern term to older views.

The Septuagint
The Septuagint, or simply "LXX", is the Koine Greek version of the Hebrew Bible, translated in stages between the 3rd and 2nd Centuries BC in Alexandria. It was begun by the third century BC and completed before 132 BC. It is the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean Basin from the time of Alexander the Great (356-323 BC).

The Septuagint was held in great respect in ancient times; Philo and Josephus ascribed divine inspiration to its authors. Besides the Old Latin versions, the LXX is also the basis for the Slavonic, the Syriac, Old Armenian, Old Georgian and Coptic versions of the Old Testament.[5] Of significance for all Christians and for Bible scholars, the LXX is quoted by the New Testament and by the Apostolic Fathers.

Latin Vulgate
The Vulgate is a late 4th-century Latin version of the Bible, and largely the result of the labors of Jerome, who was commissioned by Pope Damasus I in 382 to make a revision of the old Latin translations. By the 13th century this revision had come to be called the versio vulgata, that is, the "commonly used translation", and ultimately it became the definitive and officially promulgated Latin version of the Bible in the Roman Catholic Church.

The Vulgate is a compound work, only some parts of which are due to Jerome.
* Jerome's independent translation from the Hebrew: the protocanonical books of the Old Testament, with the exception of the Psalter. This was completed in 405.
* Translation from the Greek of Theodotion by Jerome: Song of the Three Children, Story of Susanna, and The Idol Bel and the Dragon
* Translation from the Septuagint by Jerome: the Psalter, the Rest of Esther.
* Free translation by Jerome from a secondary Aramaic version: Tobias and Judith.
* Revision by Jerome of the Old Latin, corrected with reference to the oldest Greek manuscripts available: the Gospels.
* Old Latin, more or less revised by a person or persons unknown: Baruch, 3 Esdras,[3]Acts, Epistles, and the Apocalypse.
* Old Latin, wholly unrevised: Prayer of Manasses, 4 Esdras, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and 1 and 2 Maccabees.

Jerome did not embark on the work with the intention of creating a new version of the whole Bible, but the changing nature of his program can be tracked in his voluminous correspondence. He had been commissioned by Pope Damasus in 382 to revise the Old Latin text of the four Gospels from the best Greek texts, and by the time of Damasus' death in 384 he had thoroughly completed this task, together with a more cursory revision from the Greek Septuagint of the Old Latin text of the Psalms. How much of the rest of the New Testament he then revised is difficult to judge today, but little of his work survived in the Vulgate text.

In 385 Jerome was forced out of Rome, and eventually settled in Bethlehem, where he produced a new version of the Psalms, translated from the Hexaplar revision of the Septuagint. He also appears to have undertaken further new translations of other Septuagint books into Latin; but these are not found in the Vulgate text. But from 390 to 405, Jerome translated anew all 39 books in the Hebrew Bible, including a further, third, version of the Psalms, which survives in a very few Vulgate manuscripts. This new translation of the Psalms was labelled by him as "iuxta Hebraeos" (i.e. "close to the Hebrews", "immediately following the Hebrews"), but it was not ultimately used in the Vulgate. The translations of the other 38 books were used, however, and so the Vulgate is usually credited to have been the first translation of the Old Testament into Latin directly from the Hebrew Tanakh, rather than the Greek Septuagint. Jerome's extensive use of exegetical material written in Greek, on the other hand, as well as his use of the Aquiline and Theodotiontic texts of the Hexapla, along with the somewhat paraphrastic style in which he translated makes it difficult to determine exactly how direct the conversion of Hebrew to Latin was

Martin Luther
Martin Luther (10 November 1483 – 18 February 1546) was a German priest and professor of theology who initiated the Protestant Reformation. Strongly disputing the claim that freedom from God's punishment of sin could be purchased with money, he confronted indulgence salesman Johann Tetzel with his Ninety-Five Theses in 1517. His refusal to retract all of his writings at the demand of Pope Leo X in 1520 and the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V at the Diet of Worms in 1521 resulted in his excommunication by the pope and condemnation as an outlaw by the emperor.

Luther taught that salvation is not from good works, but a free gift of God, received only by grace through faith in Jesus as redeemer from sin. His theology challenged the authority of the pope of the Roman Catholic Church by teaching that the Bible is the only source of divinely revealed knowledge and opposed sacerdotalism by considering all baptised Christians to be a holy priesthood. Those who identify with Luther's teachings are called Lutherans.

His translation of the Bible into the language of the people (instead of Latin) made it more accessible, causing a tremendous impact on the church and on German culture. It fostered the development of a standard version of the German language, added several principles to the art of translation, and influenced the translation into English of the King James Bible. His hymns influenced the development of singing in churches. His marriage to Katharina von Bora set a model for the practice of clerical marriage, allowing Protestant priests to marry.

In his later years, Luther became strongly anti-Judaic, writing that Jewish homes should be destroyed, their synagogues burned, money confiscated and liberty curtailed. These statements have made Luther a controversial figure among many historians and religious scholars

Tyndale Bible
The Tyndale Bible generally refers to the body of biblical translations by William Tyndale. Tyndale’s Bible is credited with being the first English translation to come directly from Hebrew and Greek texts. Furthermore it was the first English biblical translation that was mass produced as a result of new advances in the art of printing. The term Tyndale's Bible is not strictly correct, because Tyndale never published a complete Bible. Prior to his execution Tyndale had only finished translating the entire New Testament and roughly half of the Old Testament. Of the latter, the Pentateuch, Jonah and a revised version of the book of Genesis were published during his lifetime. His other Old Testament works were first used in the creation of the Matthew Bible and also heavily influenced every major English translation of the Bible that followed.

The chain of events that led to the creation of Tyndale’s New Testament started in 1522. It was in this year that Tyndale illegally acquired a copy of Martin Luther’s German New Testament. Tyndale was inspired by Luther’s work and immediately set out to imitate Luther’s work but in English. He made his purpose known to the Bishop of London at the time Cuthbert Tunstall. However Tunstall rejected Tyndale’s offer of creating an up-to-date modern English Bible. After this rejection Tyndale moved to the continent and ended up in Hamburg where he completed his New Testament in 1524. During this time period Tyndale frequented Wittenberg where he consulted with Martin Luther and his associate Melanchthon.[3] The first version of Tyndale’s New Testament was put into print in 1525 in Cologne however the process was not finished. From there Tyndale moved the publishing process to Worms where the first recorded complete edition of his New Testament was published in 1526. Two revised versions were latter published in 1534 and 1536, both personally revised by Tyndale himself. After his death in 1536 Tyndale’s works have been revised and reprinted numerous times. Furthermore much of his work can be seen in other, more modern versions of the Bible, especially that of the King James Bible.

Coverdale Bible
The Coverdale Bible, compiled by Myles Coverdale and published in 1535, was the first complete Modern English translation of the Bible (not just the Old Testament or New Testament), and the first complete printed translation into English (cf. Wycliffe’s Bible in manuscript). The later editions (folio and quarto) published in 1539 were the first complete Bibles printed in England. The 1539 folio edition carried the royal licence and was therefore the first officially approved Bible translation in English.

The place of publication of the 1535 edition was long disputed. The printer was assumed to be either Froschover in Zurich or Cervicornus and Soter (in Cologne or Marburg). Since the discovery of Guido Latré in 1997, the printer has been identified as Merten de Keyser in Antwerp. The publication was partly financed by Jacobus van Meteren in Antwerp, whose sister-in-law, Adriana de Weyden, married John Rogers. The other backer of the Coverdale Bible was Jacobus van Meteren’s nephew, Leonard Ortels (†1539), father of Abraham Ortelius (1527-1598), the famous humanist geographer and cartographer.

Although Coverdale was also involved in the preparation of the Great Bible of 1539, the Coverdale Bible continued to be reprinted. The last of over 20 editions of the whole Bible or its New Testament appeared in 1553.

Coverdale based his New Testament on Tyndale’s translation. For the Old Testament, Coverdale used Tyndale’s published Pentateuch and possibly his published Jonah. He apparently did not make use of any of Tyndale’s other, unpublished, Old Testament material (cf. Matthew Bible). Instead, Coverdale himself translated the remaining books of the Old Testament and the Apocrypha. Not being a Hebrew or Greek scholar, he worked primarily from German Bibles—Luther’s Bible and the Swiss-German version (Zürich Bible) of Zwingli and Juda—and Latin sources including the Vulgate.

Matthew Bible
The Matthew Bible, also known as Matthew's Version, was first published in 1537 by John Rogers, under the pseudonym "Thomas Matthew". It combined the New Testament of William Tyndale, and as much of the Old Testament as he had been able to translate before being captured and put to death, with the translations of Myles Coverdale as to the balance of the Old Testament and the Apocrypha, except the Apocryphal Prayer of Manasses. It is thus a vital link in the main sequence of English Bible translations.

Great Bible
The Great Bible was the first authorized edition of the Bible in English, authorized by King Henry VIII of England to be read aloud in the church services of the Church of England.

The Great Bible was prepared by Myles Coverdale, working under commission of Sir Thomas Cromwell, Secretary to Henry VIII and Vicar General. In 1538, Cromwell directed the clergy to provide "one book of the bible of the largest volume in English, and the same set up in some convenient place within the said church that ye have care of, whereas your parishioners may most commodiously resort to the same and read it."

Although called the Great Bible because of its large size, it is known by several other names as well: the Cromwell Bible, since Thomas Cromwell directed its publication; Whitchurch's Bible after its first English printer; also the Chained Bible, since it was chained in "some convenient place within the said church". It has also been termed less accurately Cranmer's Bible, since Thomas Cranmer's preface appeared only in the second edition.

Taverner's Bible
Taverner's Bible, more correctly called The Most Sacred Bible whiche is the holy scripture, conteyning the old and new testament, translated into English, and newly recognized with great diligence after most faythful exemplars by Rychard Taverner, is a minor revision of Matthew's Bible edited by Richard Taverner and published in 1539. First editions of Taverner's Bible are extremely rare.

The successful sale of Matthew's Bible, the private venture of the two printers Grafton and Whitchurch, was threatened by a rival edition published in 1539 in folio (Herbert #45) by "John Byddell for Thomas Barthlet" with Richard Taverner as editor. This was, in fact, what would now be called "piracy," being Grafton's Matthew Bible revised by Taverner, a learned member of the Inner Temple and famous Greek scholar. He made many alterations in the Matthew Bible, characterized by critical acumen and a happy choice of strong and idiomatic expressions. He is, perhaps, the first purist among the Biblical translators, endeavouring, whenever possible, to substitute a word of native origin for the foreign expression of his predecessors. He prepared "an experimental translation of the Gospel of Matthew (with a little of Mark), using only words of pure Saxon ancestry" (Daniell 2003:220). This was a radical step in a day when so many others wrote a form of English that adhered so closely to Latin.
Sample of Taverner's Bible, Mark 1:1-5

His revision seems to have had little influence on subsequent translators, although a few phrases in the King James Bible can be traced to it. Daniell sums up its influence, "indeed a version which had no inflluence" (2003:220).

It was not reprinted in its entirety. Quarto and octavo editions of the New Testament alone were published in the same year as the original edition, and the Old Testament was reprinted as part of a Bible in 1551. The Old Testament and Apocrypha were also issued by Day and Seres in five sections (Herbert #81, #82, #86, #87, #94) between 1549 and 1551.

Bishops' Bible
The Bishops' Bible was an English translation of the Bible produced under the authority of the established Church of England in 1568. It was substantially revised in 1572, and this revised edition was to be prescribed as the base text for the Authorized King James Version of 1611.

Douay-Rheims Bible
The Douay-Rheims Bible (also known as the Rheims-Douai Bible or Douai Bible, and abbreviated as D-R) is a translation of the Bible from the Latin Vulgate into English undertaken by members of the English College, Douai. The New Testament was published in Reims (France) in 1582, in one volume with extensive commentary and notes. The Old Testament, which was published by the university of Douai, followed nearly thirty years later in two volumes; the first volume (Genesis to Job) in 1609, the second (Psalms to 2 Machabees plus the apocrypha of the Clementine Vulgate) in 1610. Marginal notes took up the bulk of the volumes and had a strong polemical and patristic character. They also offered insights on issues of translation, and on the Hebrew and Greek source texts of the Vulgate. The purpose of the version, both the text and notes, was to uphold Catholic tradition in the face of the Protestant Reformation which up till then had ovewhelmingly dominated Elizabethan religion and academic debate. As such it was an impressive effort by English Catholics to support the Counter-Reformation. The New Testament was reprinted in 1600, 1621 and 1633, while both the Old Testament volumes were reprinted in 1635, but neither thereafter for another hundred years. In 1589, William Fulke produced an attempted refutation of the Rheims New Testament, setting out the complete Rheims text and notes in parallel columns with those of the Bishop's Bible. This work sold widely in England, being re-issued in three further editions to 1633; and it was predominantly through Fulke's editions that the Rheims New Testament came to exercise a significant influence on the development of 17th Century English.

Much of the text of the 1582/1610 bible, however, employed a densely latinate vocabulary, to the extent of being in places unreadable; and consequently this translation was replaced by a revision undertaken by bishop Richard Challoner; the New Testament in three editions 1749, 1750, and 1752; the Old Testament (minus the Vulgate apocrypha), in 1750. Although retaining the title Douay-Rheims Bible, the Challoner revision was in fact a new version, tending to take as its base text the King James Bible rigorously checked and extensively adjusted for improved readability and consistency with the Clementine edition of the Vulgate. Subsequent editions of the Challoner revision, of which there have been very many, reproduce his Old Testament of 1750 with very few changes. Challoner's New Testament was, however, extensively revised by Bernard MacMahon in a series of Dublin editions from 1783 to 1810; and these various Dublin versions are the source of some Challoner bibles printed in the United States in the 19th Century. Subsequent editions of the Challoner bible printed in England most often follow Challoner's earlier New Testament texts of 1749 and 1750; as do most 20th century printings, and on-line versions of the Douay-Rheims bible circulating on the internet.

Although the Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible (in the United States), the Revised Standard Version, the New Revised Standard Version and the New Jerusalem Bible are the most commonly used in English-speaking Catholic churches, the Challoner revision of the Douay-Rheims is still often the Bible of choice of English-speaking Traditionalist Catholics.

Geneva Bible
The Geneva Bible is one of the most historically significant translations of the Bible into the English language, preceding the King James translation by 51 years. It was the primary Bible of the 16th century Protestant movement and was the Bible used by William Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Milton, John Knox, John Donne, and John Bunyan, author of Pilgrim's Progress. It was one of the Bibles taken to America on the Mayflower, it was used by many English Dissenters, and it was still respected by Oliver Cromwell's soldiers at the time of the English Civil War.

What makes this version of the Holy Bible significant is that, for the very first time, a mechanically printed, mass-produced Bible was made available directly to the general public which came with a variety of scriptural study guides and aids (collectively called an apparatus), which included verse citations which allow the reader to cross-reference one verse with numerous relevant verses in the rest of the Bible, introductions to each book of the Bible which acted to summarize all of the material that each book would cover, maps, tables, woodcut illustrations, indexes, as well as other included features — all of which would eventually lead to the reputation of the Geneva Bible as history's very first study bible.

Because the language of the Geneva Bible was more forceful and vigorous, most readers preferred this version strongly over the Bishops' Bible, the translation authorised by the Church of England under Elizabeth I. In the words of Cleland Boyd McAfee, "it drove the Great Bible off the field by sheer power of excellence".

Authorized King James Version
The Authorized King James Version is an English translation of the Christian Holy Bible begun in 1604 and completed in 1611 by the Church of England. Printed by the King's Printer, Robert Barker, the first edition included schedules unique to the Church of England; for example, a lectionary for morning and evening prayer. This was the third such official translation into English; the first having been the Great Bible commissioned by the Church of England in the reign of King Henry VIII, and the second having been the Bishop's Bible of 1568. In January 1604, King James I of England convened the Hampton Court Conference where a new English version was conceived in response to the perceived problems of the earlier translations as detected by the Puritans, a faction within the Church of England.

James gave the translators instructions intended to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs about an ordained clergy. Other translations of the period, the New Testament was translated from the Textus Receptus (Received Text) series of the Greek texts. The Old Testament was translated from the Masoretic Hebrew text, while the Apocrypha were translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), except for 2 Esdras, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate.

While the Authorized Version was meant to replace the Bishops' Bible as the official version for readings in the Church of England, it was apparently (unlike the Great Bible) never specifically "authorized", although it is commonly known as the Authorized Version in the United Kingdom. However, the King's Printer issued no further editions of the Bishops' Bible; so necessarily the Authorized Version supplanted it as the standard lectern Bible in parish church use in England. In the Book of Common Prayer (1662), the text of the Authorized Version replaced the text of the Great Bible — for Epistle and Gospel readings — and as such was "authorized" by Act of Parliament.

By the first half of the 18th century, the Authorized Version was effectively unchallenged as the English translation used in Anglican and Protestant churches. Over the course of the 18th century, the Authorized Version supplanted the Latin Vulgate as the standard version of scripture for English speaking scholars.

The translators also tended to enliven their text with stylistic variation, finding multiple English words or verbal forms, in places where the original language employed repetition.

The Authorized Version is notably more Latinate than previous English versions, especially the Geneva Bible. This results in part from the academic stylistic preferences of a number of the translators – several of whom admitted to being more comfortable writing in Latin than in English – but was also, in part, a consequence of the royal proscription against explanatory notes. Hence, where the Geneva Bible might use a common English word - and gloss its particular application in a marginal note - the Authorized Version tends rather to prefer a technical term, frequently in Anglicised Latin. Consequently, although the King had instructed the translators to use the Bishops' Bible as a base text, the New Testament in particular owes much stylistically to the Catholic Rheims New Testament, whose translators had also been concerned to find English equivalents for Latin terminology. In addition, the translators of the New Testament books habitually quote Old Testament names in the renderings familiar from the Vulgate Latin, rather than in their Hebrew forms (e.g. "Elias", "Jeremias" for "Elijah", "Jeremiah").

While the Authorized Version remains among the most widely sold, modern critical New Testament translations differ substantially from it in a number of passages, primarily because they rely on source manuscripts not then accessible to (or not then highly regarded by) early 17th Century Biblical Scholarship. In the Old Testament, there are also many differences from modern translations that are based not on manuscript differences, but on a different understanding of Ancient Hebrew vocabulary or grammar by the translators. For example, in modern translations it is clear that Job 28: 1-11 is referring throughout to mining operations, which is not at all apparent from the text of the Authorized Version.

21st Century King James Version
The 21st Century King James Version is a minor update of the King James Version. However, unlike the New King James Version, it does not alter the language significantly from the 1611 version, retaining Jacobean grammar (including "thee" and "thou"), but it does attempt to replace some of the vocabulary which no longer would make sense to a modern reader. The 21st Century King James Version is also known for its formatting. Passages considered "more familiar" are in bold print, while "less familiar" passages are placed in a sans-serif print. Passages from the Revised Common Lectionary are marked with diamonds, and the translations of names are sometimes included with brackets.

The 21st Century King James Version has also been released in an edition with the Apocrypha and without the unusual formatting; this is known as the Third Millennium Bible.

A Celebrity Predictions Psychic's Blog

Comments