The Abrahamic covenant

[Ekklesia]

(05-19-2011 02:33 PM)YYZ Skinhead Wrote:  Israel broke at least one covenant with God, but does the one He made with Abraham still apply?

[Psalm 105: 8-10] answers your question:
"He remembers his covenant forever, the word that he commanded, for a thousand generations, the covenant that he made with Abraham, his sworn promise to Isaac, which he confirmed to Jacob as a statute, to Israel as an everlasting covenant ..."

[Hosea 2:19] Repeats the promise in future tense (and shows Israel to be His eternal bride; for God's word is good):
"And I will betroth you to me forever. I will betroth you to me in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love and in mercy."

The answer to your question, YYZ Skinhead, is clear - it is "Yes".

Notice, that the New Covenant was promised to the House of Judah and the House of Israel [Jer 31:31][Heb 8:8], and to whom Jesus was sent [Matt 15:24], and to whom he sent his disciples [Matt 10:6].

[Ekklesia]

(Duplicate post, please forgive. Unable to delete, admin please delete for me - thanks)

[corecrash]

(05-20-2011 10:40 AM)Rose of Shushan Wrote:  

Quote:Thank you. I have other versions and I am aware of translations. I agree with the translations you posted. But don't you see that it shows that when Ad-nai is accepted and and the Ruach HaKodesh is in a believers life, He (the Father) gives us wisdom and the scriptures open up? I

It adds words in the verse that aren't there, though.The words "says the Torah" just arent there.If that doesn't bother you then its fine but it would bother me and I am pointing it out for those who think that the CJB is an accurate translation.

I'm new here, but I've been reading and am fascinated with all that I've read so far.

I'm not really one of those people that adheres to certain translations saying one is better than the other but I wanted to inject my 2 cents worth here.

There are lots of translations that paraphrase and I've heard throughout the years since I became a christian that one group is going to hell for reading the NIV or the other group is this or that.

There are words that are inserted in the KJV and all the others. Heck, look at the The Message translation. It has lots of insertions.

But, I look at it this way. Is the overall meaning changed? I think daughterofmosthigh has the meaning correct, regardless if she had to get that from multiple translations or just one.

God told us not to change the Word of God but I don't think we are to be like the Pharisee's and take it the nth degree as to say we cannot make a single change as that would invalidate any and all english translations, latin, etc. Think of it this way. I've read in these forums that some folks in certain movements think the translators from Greek to English made mistakes but they shouldn't' be worried because those men were smart and knew what they were doing. I agree with that statement, but likewise, it can be said of all translators. Most of them have good intentions and know what they are doing.

Now if the root meaning is changed, then I think we have a problem.

[Vic]

(06-25-2012 09:28 AM)corecrash Wrote:  

(05-20-2011 10:40 AM)Rose of Shushan Wrote:  

Quote:Thank you. I have other versions and I am aware of translations. I agree with the translations you posted. But don't you see that it shows that when Ad-nai is accepted and and the Ruach HaKodesh is in a believers life, He (the Father) gives us wisdom and the scriptures open up? I

It adds words in the verse that aren't there, though.The words "says the Torah" just arent there.If that doesn't bother you then its fine but it would bother me and I am pointing it out for those who think that the CJB is an accurate translation.

I'm new here, but I've been reading and am fascinated with all that I've read so far.

I'm not really one of those people that adheres to certain translations saying one is better than the other but I wanted to inject my 2 cents worth here.

There are lots of translations that paraphrase and I've heard throughout the years since I became a christian that one group is going to hell for reading the NIV or the other group is this or that.

There are words that are inserted in the KJV and all the others. Heck, look at the The Message translation. It has lots of insertions.

But, I look at it this way. Is the overall meaning changed? I think daughterofmosthigh has the meaning correct, regardless if she had to get that from multiple translations or just one.

God told us not to change the Word of God but I don't think we are to be like the Pharisee's and take it the nth degree as to say we cannot make a single change as that would invalidate any and all english translations, latin, etc. Think of it this way. I've read in these forums that some folks in certain movements think the translators from Greek to English made mistakes but they shouldn't' be worried because those men were smart and knew what they were doing. I agree with that statement, but likewise, it can be said of all translators. Most of them have good intentions and know what they are doing.

Now if the root meaning is changed, then I think we have a problem.

Hi corecrash,

First, welcome to the forum. Please take the time to introduce yourself here > Introduce Yourself! ALL NEWBIES * Please Do MAKE THIS YOUR FIRST POST! DID YOU READ THE FORUM RULES? http://www.seekgod.ca/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=17

Second, please do make sure you have read the forum rules in their entirety. http://www.seekgod.ca/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=2

Third, you are doing a lot of posting, which I appreciate, but would ask you to slow down a bit and perhaps take a little more time reading as you posting thoughts into threads that are actually found in other related threads to your various posts. Thank you.

I think your suppositions about translations are missing various facts to back up your statements. As Rose was pointing out, the words being used were not in the originals and it fully >changed< the intended meaning. THere is a difference when translating into another language to make a sentence make sense from one language to the next. There is a difference if one omits or changes the original information in that translation and hence changes the message conveyed, the root is changed and that can be shown many times, as was the point Rose was making.

There is a section about Bible versions if you wish to go indepth about that topic. Suffice it to say in this thread that there is a difference in a paraphrase, version or translation, and so on.

It would be inaccurate to suggest that all translators have good intentions and/or know what they are doing. Many have agendas contrary to Christ. And there are different source documents being used for various translations which means they can be and are different, and convey a very different message many times.

[susanblange]

God started his cult 5000 years ago with Abraham. The seed in which all of the earth would be blessed is the Messiah. The one great nation is Israel, and later the USA (Joseph/Ephraim) Abraham believed and it was counted to him for righteousness, God also taught Abraham trust and obeisance by the sacrifice of Isaac. It is more important to believe than to be of a certain ethnicity, the righteous come in all races, creeds, and colors.

[Rose of Shushan]

Quote:The one great nation is Israel, and later the USA (Joseph/Ephraim)

[susanblange]

My house shall be called a house of prayer for all people which includes all gentiles. The Messiah is coming to unite the righteous against the wicked. The meek will inherit the earth and will come back from heaven with the Lord at his second coming on the Mount of Olives. Zechariah 14:4-5. In that day there shall be one Lord and his name one. When the earth witnesses this all other religions will be forsaken and the Lord will reign forever and ever.