Which came first, Faith, or God's plan in Jesus?

[tabibito]

What exactly are you supposing to achieve by translating the word 'scripture' into feminine case?

Feminine case doesn't exist. Scripture is in Koine Greek, a feminine noun, the case is nominative. It was necessary to show that the adjective "god breathed" is associated with "scripture".

Which text/lexicon, exactly, did you use for that translation, or are you using all the ones you just stated?

I use the Byzantine Majority Text. But in this case that is irrelevant - All except the Tischendorf show the same wording.

Any comments on the post-reformation and counter-reformation efforts of the papal inquiry to destroy all protestant literature (along with all Protestants), such as the Old Latin Waldensian Bible? Do you think it was a good or a bad thing that Mathurin-Léonard, a general under Napoleon, along with roman catholic clergymen, had Pope Pius VI deposed, to separate civil authority from the papacy? In other words, do you think that the papacy should be allowed to interfere with any matters of Bible Publication at all/ should it have any say at all in how the Bible is written?

Claim and counter claim abound. Overall it is irrelevant. Protestant translated Bibles are tainted with Calvinistic precepts just as thoroughly as the Roman Bibles are tainted with Rome's precepts and the Orthodox group's with theirs. However, the published copies of the Koine manuscripts are true copies, in so far as I can determine ... so what translators play with when they translate becomes a non-issue.

[37818]

(432) Such as... ?

Sometimes when a fellow believer is using a particular translation. In reply I might use that translation also.

For an another reason, an example [Exodus 12:6] for clarity of a true meaning of a text:
KJV- ". . . And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening."

John Darby translation, ". . . And ye shall keep it until the fourteenth day of this month; and the whole congregation of the assembly of Israel shall kill it between the two evenings."

The Jewish Tanakh, ". . . And you shall keep it for inspection until the fourteenth day of this month, and the entire congregation of the community of Israel shall slaughter it in the afternoon."

(433) Any comments?

Sure, those NT passages identify Christ as God. Not just merely the Lord.

(434) Well, I haven't read up enough on those theologies to comment; but I do know that almost 2000 years ago the Apostles were accused of heresy (Acts 24:14). Heretic or heresy or heresies are generally words used derogatorily to refer to Christians who just follow the Bible, and reject the Pontiff. I accept both the unity of Christ with the Godhead, and the difference of the Father, the Son, the Spirit. The only problem, I often see, is people try to use this to degrade Jesus, replace Him with Mary.

Well, that is effectively what they are doing. But you do realize they do not see it in that way. It has got to be pointed out that God can only be accessed through Christ alone (2 Timothy 2:5; John 14:6).

Jesus told Mary to get lost (not in those words). But I do remember Him telling Joseph and Mary to take a hike.

I'm not sure which passage you are referring to. The passage which comes to mind, his step father was not mentioned being with them. ". . . While he yet talked to the people, behold, [his] mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. . . . But he answered . . . , Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!" -- Matthew 12:46-49. His mother for example, was a disciple. It is likely Joseph had since passed away - but we are not told this. Now if you have another passage you were thinking of?

And also calling Peter, satan.

Peter did not yet understand the gospel, ". . . began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, . . . Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. . . . and said unto Peter, . . . for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men." -- Matthew 16:21 - 23.

My point is, not to emphasis one point more than another, because precept should be upon precept, line upon line, right?

Well, to the unbelievers, ". . . But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, [and] there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken." -- Isaiah 28:13.

But, as Paul says, not letting the letter kill, either.

Paul was referring to the vain keeping of Law. ". . . But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which [vail] is done away in Christ." -- 2 Corinthians 3:(6 . . . )-14.

Then you get certain people who try to attack the Holy Spirit. As we know, there is only one sin that will not be forgiven in this life.

The writer Mark gives this explanation, ". . . the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, . . . by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils. . . . Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit." -- Mark 3:22 - 29.

(435,437) Which versions of these texts do you use?

Generally I use the translation as found in our KJV. For example most, but not all, copies of the Hebrew text for Psalm 22:16 have what is translated as ". . . like a lion, . . ." where as the KJV, NKJV, NASB and NIV, I believe, correctly have ". . . they pierced . . . ." In the NT, for example, Revelation 15:3, the KJV has, ". . . thou King of saints," should, I believe, read, "thou King of the nations." It should be noted that the KJV (TR) is mostly in agreement with f35 manuscript family. The KJV, NKJV differs only in a few places where the modern versions differ in many places. The NKJV foot notes, M, NU show this to be true.

(436) I take it you know that the NKJV is not based on the KJV or the TR?

That is not true. The NKJV follows the TR, and notes where the TR does not follow M the Majority text or NU, the Nestle-Aland or United Bible society Greek texts.

(438,439) So you use those catholic texts, to understand their errors?

Ah, no. You used the correct text to understand what is correct. The other translations are of interest only where they agree with the correct text or they support the majority text against some of the very few errors attached to the TR.

(43a) So, it's safe to say that you're not a Preterist? Emphasis on safe.

Yes. I am a premallennial post-trib futurist. (After reading John F. Walvoord's book, "The Rapture Question." He is pre-trib, BTW.)

(43b) What do you reckon are some good Latin, Greek and Hebrew manuscripts? (The best).

I would not recommend any one manuscript, but the family of readings, in the case of the NT, f35. And the Hebrew readings where the NT cites the reading a certain way. Which would differ from what we have in our OT. For example, Acts 7:14, ". . . threescore and fifteen souls." The in Exodus 1:5, the common Hebrew reads 70. The Dead Sea Scrolls, also being the older copy of the Hebrew, and the Greek LXX in Exodus 1:5 reads 75.

I would recommend for reference, Nestle-Aland for its notes on the known variant reading of most all the Greek manuscripts. (It was my Nestle Greek NT, which foot notes convinced me the KJV NT was better.) Otherwise use the NKJV, NU and M foot notes in English. The Latin Vulgate with apparatus for the Latin. For the Hebrew check this out: http://www.academic-bible.com/en/hom.../hebrew-bible/ (My copy is in a box some where. Off the top of my head, I do not remember which one I have. Most of my books are not yet unpacked from my move.)

(43c) What about the part where God asks Moses if he is doubting His outstretched hand? (I don't think the word Right is used, but I think that it might be assumed.)

Five times it is recorded in Exodus, Exodus 7:19; Exodus 10:12; Exodus 10:21; Exodus 14:16 and Exodus 14:26. I do not see that it is relevant, even if we happen to correctly assume that it was the right hand. Again nowhere does the holy scripture call Jesus God's right hand.

- Do you know where to get a good public domain KJV-style Concordance (not lexicon/dictionary), something that cross-references verses?

I have used the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance for this purpose for the past 46 years. check this out: https://archive.org/details/exhaustiveconcor1890stro

(43e) Fan of the 1611 then?

I have three hard copy reprints of the 1611 KJV edition. Again, I do not believe in inerrant translation. I believe God's word is inerrant. The KJV happens to be, I believe, over all, a more reliable translation of the Bible. The Bible being God's inerrant written word. For those who do not understand 1769 English, use the NKJV.