Use of a fabled project's speed (LXX in 72 days) as humour to show their MUCH greater work is ,in context," if that be true which is reported of them," a doubt of the tale, as doubting Jerome, too. "Neither did we run over the worke with that posting haste that the Septuagint did,
if that be true which is reported of them,
that they finished it in 72. dayes; neither were we barred or hindered from going over it againe, having once done it, like S. Jerome, if that be true which himselfe reporteth, that he could no sooner write any thing, but presently it was caught from him, and published, and he could not have leave to mend it: "
They go on to say they worked much longer than 72 days.
and " ... they may seeme to have defined this or that, rather because they would say something, the because they were sure of that which they said, as S. Jerome somewhere saith of the Septuagint."
Jerome quoted on Septuagint fable to make a case about word choices, is not USING the fabled LXX.
I don't type as fast as Barry Allen, that doesn't mean I think the FLASH exists.
Lurker, I have no problem with your comment which is really an attack on Eisegesis. I have always attacked that vigorously.
Oh, lxx not rx, I apologize for mangling my own comment and not giving you due credit on the idea of y'all and you, or Elizabethan "you and thou," It's probably the only valid point one can make Tyndale use of it, which KJV translators copied, q.v., "Thou". I also seem to be in error in that the KJV was more rigorous in using thou and you than Shakespeare, according to that article from Wikipedia.
If you want to make some quick comparisons of Bible verses, check out, NASB just one example,
Lockman Foundation wrote: NASB Nor shall you make an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. ESV And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. .... KJV Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. NKJV Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black.
See the above site for more examples and Bible versions.
Christopher000 wrote: Vietnam is one of the lady boy, sodomite capitals which makes it popular for the dark side of tourism. Yuck. Anyway, I'm not too ssurprized how they're being met with open arms and ecstatic shouts of support and joy. What does surprize me though is how these same gender "husbands and wives" are allowed to adopt all of these poor children, most of who won't even have a chance. I've heard many storys of sodomite men abusing their adopted children and think it's an all around recipe for disaster (men and women).
Thats news to me
Im so glad I have SermonAudio, otherwise I wouldn't know where to book my next sodomite tourist vacation
Mankind is like God -- Spiritually Unofficial brief (continued) ¬∂ This sermon can be almost split down the middle. The first part an introduction, and the second part looking specifically at men and women. God created everything, and He's sovereign over everyone. God's invitation to everyone is to turn to Him and be saved. ¬∂ Isaiah 45:23 I have sworn by myself, the word has gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and will not return, that to me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall take an oath. 24 They will say of me, ‚ÄėThere is righteousness and strength only in Yahweh.'" Even to him shall men come; and all those who were incensed against him shall be disappointed. 1 Corinthians 2:14 Now the natural man doesn't receive the things of God's Spirit, for they are foolishness to him, and he can't know them, because they are spiritually discerned ¬∂ Science truly supports God, but a person has to have faith to know the truth. Genesis and Revelation have to be interpreted literally, People aren't believers if they try to dismantle the Bible. ¬∂ Genesis 1:27 God created man in his own image. In God's image he created him; male and female he created them. ¬∂ Man=mankind, not humankind. God didn't write a gender-neutral Bible. Man was given priority. Men and women are to reproduce and subdue the earth.
Jim Lincoln wrote: having that manual free of gobbledygook.
Well, Jimmy MVO, even the original autographs would yield gobbledygook if a faulty hermeneutic was forced on them. Seems the Jews, who were entrusted with the oracles of God, had a problem with that.
The bible, any version, must be interpreted infallibly (because it is infallible before the cover is opened and man forces his presuppositions on it) before the mind of the Author can be known and only He who wrote the bible can do that............ scripture interprets scripture.
Without Christianity what you get is confusion, corruption and sin.
"Vietnam is one of the least religious countries in the world. According to official statistics from the government, as of 2014 there are 24 million people identified with one of the recognised organised religions, out of a population of 90 million. Of these, 11 million are Buddhists (12.2%), 6.2 million are Catholics (6.8%), 4.4 million are Caodaists (4.8%), 1.4 million are Protestants (1.6%), 1.3 million are Hoahaoists (1.4%), and there are 75,000 Muslims, 7,000 Bahais, 1,500 Hindus and other smaller groups ( 1%). Traditional folk religions (worship of gods, goddesses and ancestors) have experienced a rebirth since the 1980s." (Wiki)
lxx not rex wrote: Nope- accurate early modern English-intentionally so . Perhaps the first thing that many people identify as an archaism in the KJV is the use of ‚Äúthee‚Äôs‚ÄĚ and ‚Äúthou‚Äôs.‚ÄĚ
Not necessarily, the "est" endings which are worthless is one of the archaic things that people identify as archaic. "Thee, Thine, ye, and thou," can have a practical use. As I pointed out by you.
This person commenting on Shakespeare who was more interested in using Elizabethan in it's proper format than the KJV translators, or so I've read somewhere. Anyway, as that musical said brush up on your Shakespheare.
Shakespeare plays have the added benefit of being acted out, so you can follow the action that is on stage and somewhat tell what is going on. Perhaps the play brochure will also explain some things. However, when you have to learn another how to read a manual, in this case God's manual, which can be done more accurately done in in contemporary English, then knowing your thee's, thine's etc. are of minor benefit when it comes to the other benefits of having that manual free of gobbledygook.
Michael Hranek wrote: I stand by my post and testify against the United States that despite a tiny remnant who do Fear God and Keep His Commandments this country that ought to love God, hates God, ...
Fine observation. We look for a city, and as pilgrims in a foreign land, our citizenship is in heaven . Thinking in terms of allegiance to earthly kingdoms, might not totally square with biblical perspective.
"all died in faith... and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth ... For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country, And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned... wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he has prepared for them a city." Hebr 11
Focus developes when considering the two different words, 'patris' (country) referring to one's native country, against 'polis' (city) pointing to a new setting.
interesting description of Sodom here, her perversions came from pride, laziness, and lack of mercy towards the least of these....
"Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy." Ezekiel 16:49
Wow! Thank you for preaching Biblically on a subject most pastors won't touch with a 10 foot pole. The Lord has brought me to repentance on this matter, also. I pray for and thank God for this ministry! May the Lord continue to mightily and greatly use you and bless you.
Great Sermon! Isaiah 4:1
I wouldn't be surprised if that would be because eventually science/technology may put together some kind of robotic/android type women that men would prefer; against the typical selfish, spoiled, 'liberated', self-centered, narcissistic, irresponsible, immodest harlots that that today's culture has trained them to be.