Wednesday, February 06, 2013

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION'S DRONE WAR ON AMERICAN CITIZENS

Drones!   The unmanned vehicles which spy, strike, and kill!  Disturbing but not surprising news came from the White House today.  Their "rules" for ordering drone strikes to kill Americans were much looser than even the ACLU suspected.  Read all about it on this critical Yahoo! news story.

http://tinyurl.com/bxzprfb

How long until President Obama's new "rule" is extended to include the inside perimeters of the USA itself?  I shudder to think!

Stay tuned!

CONSTANCE
Comments:
WIRED Magazine has it right this time. President Obama's policy is "a drone strike on the law" -- not to mention the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

May the Lord help us all!

Constance
 
ONE incident that involved what happened to be an American citizen (who having taken up arms against the US had thereby compromised or renounced his American citizenship anyway, if I recall legal issues of mercenarism discussed in Soldier of Fortune magazine in the 1980s)and incidentally included his American citizen visiting and irrelevant son as collateral damage, no other cases are ever referred to, is always taken as drones against American citizens.

Now, I agree, armed drones could morph into war on Americans who were protesting govt. activity or whatever. This is not good, but it is inherent to the technology to be feasible.

Imminent threat concept here is nothing like the legal concept of self defense where imminent is a few seconds. Many who defend themselves and end up in jail don't realize this. Of course, the rules for governments and military and what constitutes "imminent" are totally different.

HOWEVER.

WHAT ABOUT THE USE OF DISTANCE KILL, RARELY ACCURATE BALLISTICS AND WMDS AGAINST ANYONE?

Mark Twain once commented that in his day, war had changed from valiant warriors to cowards hiding behind cover and shooting at each other from a safer distance.

Now this is taken for granted. American losses of 5,000 over several years, vs. enemy and mostly noncombatant of 100,000 or more, are treated as great, and our soldiers as brave etc.

The drone attacks have routinely taken out bystanders.

Ever hear of "collateral damage?"

that's innocent bystanders when it is a drive by shooting here.

In American law, there is the concept of depraved indifference to human life, which is what generates "collateral damage." accidental deaths and injuries in the process of attacking some particular target in a densely populated location, like a restaurant.

But in WW II when bomber pilots had qualms they were assured that since the civilians weren't the deliberate targets, it was morally okay. Actually, it is morally shaky. It is the same mentality called depraved indifference to human life when it plays out local and illegal.

now I am not saying that governments don't have authority beyond that of individuals. But the value system is a little too sloppy.



 
"the Methodist theologian Thomas Oden. Oden had been a student of the extremely liberal German biblical scholar Rudolph Bultmann, and so was very much a part of the skeptical intellectual environment that I found so unattractive. However, at some point in the 70's he began to apply the skeptical criteria of liberal scholarship back upon liberal scholarship, and ended up affirming that the "Ecumenical Consensus" of the first millennium of Christian history was "normative"."
http://fatherjohn.blogspot.com/
 
I don't think we should ask any American, who leaves our country to join Al-Qaeda or some other terrorist group to plot terrorist acts against our country, their Miranda Rights first. No way! That would be insane. Remember the war on terror? It's still an on-going thing. What, if Americans join the ranks of our enemies, who are at war with us, they are entitled to protection? That's insane. Sorry, they are treated like enemy combatants.
 
look see www.Borntowatch.com
 
Dangerous times indeed.

Dog chipping will be required by law in UK by 2016.

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nightly-news/50719596/#50719596
 
I'm sorry, but it appears entirely possible to me that the weapons of mass destruction warned of by the Prophet Daniel could very well be drone technology aided by the Internet of Things which all say we are about to get and "won't we just all love it!"

Constance
 
I'm sorry, but it appears entirely possible to me that the weapons of mass destruction warned of by the Prophet Daniel could very well be drone technology aided by the Internet of Things which all say we are about to get and "won't we just all love it!"

Constance
 
Drones... And the false prophet can call fire down from the sky to kill his enemies...
 
"Soon,they will pass a law, which will outlaw the meaning of blasphemy."

www.thewarningsecondcoming.com

Only time will tell, but many are concerned with the efforts around the world to enact some form of Shariah law. If the U.N. ever signs onto this concept, there's concern it will it automatically become just another one of our laws.
 
JS tweet about Brookings Institute writing on drones. Sorry, on iphone- Not so good for posting links.
 
Could a pro-choice advocate call themselves "pro-life" with a straight face?

http://str.typepad.com/weblog/2013/02/new-pro-choice-tactic-equivocates-on-life.html
 
easy, the argument is the perfectly valid seeming one of squaring off the mother's life against that of the child, EXCEPT THEY REDEFINE LIFE to mean not survival but life situation.
Totally different issue entirely.

There are times when it is a choice of life survival against life survival, used to be more common in past centuries and sometimes in some places today. And in some tribal places, you have a famine, you can barely nurse the child you have, you realize you are pregnant, and that is going to stop the milk flow, so your baby will starve to death, so you have to abort as fast as possible. But these are rare situations throughout the entire human population.

An ectopic pregnancy, you have a month or two at most and BOTH mother and child die when the fallopian tube ruptures.

But this is not what the pro abortionists are talking about. They are talking life situation not life survival.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7X1bOPjqBzs
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKgfxUw_vXY

part 1 of the Gwynneth Todd program
 
The Department of Homeland Security has been asking the LAPD if they would like to use drones in the search for ex-officer Christopher Dorner. This is according to people who are monitoring the police communications in the manhunt.

It is my speculation that Dorner had another car waiting at the location of his burned out truck, possibly modified in the way of the Washington DC snipers of 2002. He may have a hole in the trunk out of which he will attempt to shoot the officers described in his manifesto.

I further speculate that Dorner might target the police chief and politicians. If he does target politicians, the federal government will respond with a heavy hand. Likely, federal officials will replace local police chiefs so that in future domestic conflicts drones and other military/federal assets will be easier to coordinate between local departments and the DHS/Military.
 
Planned Parenthood is planning on aborting “Pro-Choice” in favor of some as yet to be determined term. Let's take a very close look at the following statement in Slate in which they are trying to equalize the moral claims of the unborn’s literal life with the pregnant mother’s life situation:

“It may be that a change in language frees those who believe in an absolute right to abortion to a more honest wrestling with the issue. Let’s imagine a scenario in which we admit that abortions may involve an obliteration of something that could legitimately be called life but that they are done to protect something that could also be called life. Planned Parenthood is, after all, in the business of protecting women’s lives, their futures, their ability to pursue education, to establish security, to have homes filled with future children, and their freedom to decide how best to use their short time on earth.

What about the life situation of the “something that could legitimately be called life”?

One could interpret the italicized portion as totally contradicting the first part of the statement, with its comparison/contrasting of the unborn fetus’ “life” to the mother’s “life”, if the unborn fetus is a female. [Would this mean it’s only OK to abort males as opposed to females?]

More importantly, this italicized portion, on its face, can be construed as both/and, i.e. referring to the pregnant mother AND the unborn fetus. So, given this statement in toto, until gender is determined one cannot proceed with an abortion “to protect something that could also be called life” in the interest of “protecting women’s lives, their futures” (both pregnant mother and fetus) and the potential for “homes filled with future children” (of both pregnant mother and fetus). And from what little I know, it seems gender cannot be determined until at least 15-16 weeks, which is well outside the first trimester.

In fact, one could further argue that aborting the fetus (if it's a female) would be an infringement on the unborn fetus' (future) “absolute right to abortion”, for how could we know whether or not she would have an unplanned pregnancy and, hence, wish to then abort so as to change her own life situation? Oh, but then we’re back to the fact that she cannot infringe upon the (future) “absolute right to abortion” of her unborn fetus. And ‘round it goes....
 
the square off against the mother's life vs. the child's life has to be rephrased, to the mother's PHYSICAL LIFE in imminent or soon danger vs. the child's PHYSICAL SURVIVAL. Or some phrasing that can't be romanticized and poeticized into meaning something other than actual physical life vs. actual physical death. I have heard "survive" used to refer to just getting along okay (and keeping your drugs flowing).
 
http://green-agenda.com/
 
The drones are now being used to target US Citizens on US soil, namely in the case of Christopher Dorner.
 
considering how dangerous and crazy he is, and self admitted in writing to be guilty as hell, who cares?
 
Dorner


Drone (r missing)


Kind of like the 20 dollar bill and 9/11?
 
The Pope has just announced his resignation.

According to prophecy of St. Malachy, next pope is the last one, and with him will be great persecution of the church.
 
BREAKING NEWS . . .

POPE TO RESIGN AT END OF FEBRUARY!!!

Pope Benedict XVI will resign at the end of February, the Vatican Press Office tells Fox News.

The 85-year-old pontiff made the announcement Monday, saying he no longer had the strength to carry out his papal duties.

"After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry," the pope said according to a statement released by the Vatican.

He said he is aware of the "seriousness" of his resignation, but that he did so in "full freedom."

The last pope to resign was Pope Gregory XII, who stepped down in 1415 in a deal to end the Great Western Schism among competing papal claimants.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/02/11/pope-benedict-xvi-to-resign-at-end-february/print#ixzz2KarmEwis






 
From Drudge Report (02/11/13):

First pope since 1415 to resign as leader of Catholic Church...
UPDATES...
'Last few months has deteriorated'...
Advised by doctor not to take transatlantic trips...
Made decision in 'full freedom'...
'Evidence of Benedict XVI's deep humility'...
Text...
 
More details on Pope's SHOCK resignation...


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2276884/Pope-Benedict-shock-resignation-Pontiff-85-600-years-stand-longer-strength-carry-on.html#axzz2Kb3rWrSj
 
POPE BENEDICT'S RESIGNATION STATEMENT IN FULL

Dear Brothers,

I have convoked you to this Consistory, not only for the three canonizations, but also to communicate to you a decision of great importance for the life of the Church.

After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry.

I am well aware that this ministry, due to its essential spiritual nature, must be carried out not only with words and deeds, but no less with prayer and suffering.

However, in today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the bark of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me.

For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me by the Cardinals on 19 April 2005, in such a way, that as from 28 February 2013, at 20:00 hours, the See of Rome, the See of Saint Peter, will be vacant and a Conclave to elect the new Supreme Pontiff will have to be convoked by those whose competence it is.

Dear Brothers, I thank you most sincerely for all the love and work with which you have supported me in my ministry and I ask pardon for all my defects.

And now, let us entrust the Holy Church to the care of Our Supreme Pastor, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and implore his holy Mother Mary, so that she may assist the Cardinal Fathers with her maternal solicitude, in electing a new Supreme Pontiff.

With regard to myself, I wish to also devotedly serve the Holy Church of God in the future through a life dedicated to prayer.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2276884/Pope-Benedict-shock-resignation-Pontiff-85-600-years-stand-longer-strength-carry-on.html#ixzz2Kb9p13hV

 
Today, February 11, 2013 ~

Watch EWTN at 10:00 AM (Eastern); 9:00 AM (Central)....

Tune in for a LIVE roundtable discussion on Pope Benedict's announcement.
 
The prophecy of the Popes attributed to St Malachy was first heard of in the late 16th century and fitted all Popes from Malachy's time to the late 16th century like a glove, whereas you have to strain very hard to fit later ones. You have to be very naive not to think it was written with hindsight as a pious forgery in the late 16th century.
 
Just for the record, at the www.warningsecondcoming.com , messages have been posted since April 2012, talking about Pope Benedict XVI's upcoming departure,forewarning us of the next pope,changes the Church, and the coming One-world religion.

"The next Pope may be elected by members within the Catholic Church but he will be the False Prophet"


"I, your beloved Jesus, could never undermine My own Church."


"Many Popes have been prisoners in the Holy See surrounded by Masonic Groups"


"They intend to oust Pope Benedict XVI from the Seat of Peter using devious means"


"The time is near for the persecution of My Beloved Vicar, Pope Benedict XVI to reach its pinnacle."


"The antichrist will claim he is Me, Jesus Christ."


"The Crowning of Thorns during My Crucifixion is symbolic"


"A number of events regarding the Churches, which honor Me in the world, will begin to surface"

To those non-Catholic readers, I'm not asking you to believe or accept the following, but please just read them so you a familiar with the content. It will help you to understand the future decisions we Catholics will have to make, if we wish to remain faithful to Jesus Christ. Eventually, you yourselves will be in a similar position.
 
1. the post 1500s prophecies fit pretty well also. The Glory of the Olive, the current pope, would relate to the name Benedict, and St. Benedict's Order's symbol is an olive, for example.

2. the final pope is just listed as final, and might be any number of popes down the line, and the Judgement any amount of time after that.

3. the last pope is NOT the antichrist, I don't know where these jokers are getting this idea, but the Malachy prophecy says that
he will shepherd the flock during great persecution.

Obviously he is not the antichrist,
nor the false prophet, but persecuted by the antichrist. WHAT persecution of pope Benedict XVI will reach its pinnacle?

Frankly these speeches just don't have the same tone as Christ in the Gospels. something seems wrong.

4. there is nothing in these supposed revelations that isn't already known to researchers.
The "revelations" could be cobbled together by a faker aside from any issue of demonic pretending. All these speculations and facts like Masonic presence have been out there for decades.

These could also be cobbled together from the subconscious of a suggestible fantasy driven person who is loaded for bear with concepts that are not heretical just not necessarily perfectly accurate.

what does the crowning with thorns being symbolic mean? especially in this context? the Crown of Thorns was part of the mockery that the soldiers made to Jesus.

 
Listen, 1103am, you write as if those words are generally accepted by Catholics, but they are accepted only by a few Catholics and are certainly not Catholic church teaching. As a protestant who knows personally many Catholics whose salvation I do not doubt (as well as other Catholics - and protestants - of whose salvation I am much less confident), I look at such prophecies with bemusement. Exactly which Popes were practically prisoners of freemasons in the Vatican, for instance; and what is the evidence for that claim?

 
Anonymous 11:03 and all my friends here both Catholic and non-Catholic Christians.



This is a false prophet alert.



The Warning Second Coming site is one forum that peddles the errors of a European "visionary" who wishes to remain anonymous and goes by the pseudonym of "Maria Divine Mercy."


Acording to a report on Catholic Planet and other sources, these messages contain many substantial doctrinal errors, in addition to the heretical claim that this woman will write a book which will become a part of the Bible, and which will be equal to one of the Gospels.



Prior to her reception of claimed private revelation, this claimed visionary was a lapsed Catholic who had not received the Sacraments in years. She was a business woman, who was leaning toward being an agnostic and had not prayed in years. She is an Irish woman, who is said to be married with children. She suffers from a serious illness and is bedridden much of the time.

This woman has remained anonymous, as is common among the false visionaries. She has chosen for herself an exalted nickname - also a common feature of false private revelation. Many of the other false visionaries also call themselves by such special names. Again, it is a common feature of false private revelation.



Why does she remain anonymous? One probable reason is that her anonymity helps to protect her from a judgment against her by her local Bishop. Her claimed private revelation contains many grave heresies and doctrinal errors. If her name were known, she could be condemned by the Bishop, as many other false prophets have been condemned by their local Bishops. But while she is anonymous, we do not even know which Bishop to speak to about her false teachings.
 
Hi Susanna,

This site was mentioned here in the comments a few weeks ago by someone. A few of us rejected it then but you've called it out and sounded a very clear warning - thanks.

Sadly, there is a sizeable following on their Facebook page - https://www.facebook.com/JesusToMankind

~ K ~
 
Hi K,

You are most welcome. I am glad to have been able to help.

Whatever other errors there are in "Maria Divine Mercy's" so-called "prophecies" which pertain to the Roman Catholic Christian faith, just the heresy regarding "MDM's" claim about writing a book that would become a part of the Bible and equal to the Gospels alone ought to make my Catholic and non-Catholic Christian friends here and everywhere avoid this false prophet like the plague.

From what I have read about "Maria Divine Mercy," she is supposedly Irish, but is referred to as European......again probably to escape a negative judgement of her bishop along with the ecclesiastical equivalent of a "cease and desist" order.

"Maria Divine Mercy" also appears to have glommed onto the Garabandal prophecies which also do not have the official approval of the Catholic Church.

When all is said and done I agree with one blogger who quipped that "The Warning" needs a warning label of its own!
 
Anonymous 1:13PM

Your comments are very much appreciated!
 
"And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall NOT prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18)


 
Beware also of contemporary prophets who use English style of the King James era!

 
To Anonymous @ 3:18 AM:

So, you would prefer the more watered-down MODERN versions of the Bible, where arrogrant and prideful men (over the centuries) have gradually managed to not-so-subtly re-write God's word....and thus, CHANGE God's original meaning???

You can't have it both ways: the 'word' of God is just that....the WORD of God!!!

If it is changed in ANY WAY....it can no longer be considered to be the TRUE word of God!!!




 
Is this to warn / prepare us?


White House to issue cybersecurity order on Wednesday (February 13th)

The White House is poised to release an executive order aimed at thwarting cyberattacks against critical infrastructure on Wednesday, two people familiar with the matter told The Hill.

The highly anticipated directive from President Obama is expected to be released at a briefing Wednesday morning at the U.S. Department of Commerce, where senior administration officials will provide an update about cybersecurity policy.

http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/282269-white-house-poised-to-release-cybersecurity-executive-order-on-wednesday

 
Dear Anon@8.39am,

Please don't put words into my mouth. I was talking about people claiming to be prophets who speak today using language such as "thee" and "thou". It makes me instantly suspicious that they are using words associated with authority to try to claim an authority for their words that they don't actually have.

As for the King James Bible - great translation, but it's only a translation of the Hebrew and Greek originals and there are some minor errors. Also we now know a lot more about the Textus Receptus from which the King James NT translation was made. (Like you I don't go with the Westcott-Hort Greek NT.) Furthermore, translations go out of date as usage changes: what do you think "Suffer little children" means to most people who need to hear the gospel today?

 
To Anonymous @ 8:58 AM:

We should all be less concerned with 'thee' and 'thou' (after all, that IS the way Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and His apostles SPOKE back then!!!)....and much more concerned with the modern, watered-down versions that pass for Scripture in today's Bible!!!


 
I would write about the Pope's "resignation", pressured or otherwise, but I'm still speechless and sorting it out. Somehow, it sadly reminds me of Malachi Martin's THE WINDSWEPT HOUSE novel.

Constance
 
I was watching EWTN this morning in an effort to better understand what was happening vis a vis the Vatican. I am watching Fr. Pacwa deliver his noon homily. I have certainly had my extremely serious issues with him. I have chronicled them on this website. BUT this homily being given right now is EXCELLENT and SERIOUS. I hope it is indicative of where he is right now.

Constance
 
Our Lord Jesus Christ and The Apostles did not speak any variety of English, Elizabethan or otherwise, since it did not even exist. English is a multihybrid language resulting from convergence of several cultures. the Celtic languages in existence in Roman times were not even Old English then.

Yes modern translations are often dicey. Paraphrase translations are a non starter.

New King James is best and the design on the cover, though misused by some occultists who favor anything Celtic, is an ancient symbol of The Holy Trinity.

The word or message of God is the same whether you translate it as Do not murder or thou shalt not kill.
message content the same.

If I tell you "travel to the town named (whatever name)" or "go to the next town over to the east" (which is that town) it is the same information content. Means the same thing.

Though some modern translations undermine important doctrines in some verses, the same doctrines are still supported in other verses in the same translation. If you read the entire Bible in several sittings, not a bit then a bit through the year, and use a Strong's Concordance to help you understand, you will do better than
if you depend on a few key verses here and there to understand. At least read entire Gospels or Epistles at one sitting. After all, when Paul's letters were sent to a church to be read to everyone, the ENTIRE letter was read out loud to everyone, right?
 

Dear Constance,

We Catholics are in a state of shock as well over Pope Benedict's resignation - besides being saddened by the news.

The Catholic World Report gives an excellent overview of the reasons behind Pope Benedict's resignation. I was a charter subscriber to the Catholic World Report and remained one until Ignatius Press ceased publishing the Catholic World Report's printed magazine and began offering it online for free. Here is the link.


THE CATHOLIC WORLD REPORT
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/


By the way, lightning hit St. Peter's Dome on the same day as the Pope's resignation. It has been all over the news. There are those who are saying that it was a sign from God. It may well be. But if it is, I don't think Pope Benedict is the one who has anything to worry about!!!


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2276884/Pope-Benedict-XVI-resigns-First-Pontiff-600-years-stand-longer-strength-carry-on.html
 



Dear Constance,

Your reference to Windswept House is astute.

Here is an article from the Huffington Post in which the Pope's brother shares further insights into the reasons for the Pope's resignation.

Pope's Brother Speaks: Georg Ratzinger Claims Vatileaks Scandal Weighed On Aging Pontiff (VIDEO)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/12/popes-brother-speaks-georg-ratzinger-vatileaks-scandal_n_2669964.html?ir=Religion
__________________________________


Immediately after he resigns, the Pope will reside temporarily at Castel Gandolfo.

Later, the Pope is reportedly going to be living in the Vatican monastery established by his predecessor Pope John Paul II in 1994 and devoting the rest of his life to prayer.

Pope to live in Vatican monastery established by Blessed John Paul

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1300594.htm
________________________________


Pope Benedict XVI will reportedly not be taking part in the conclave that will elect the new Pope.
 
"The Lord's Prayer" is considered to be the perfect prayer.

We would not DARE to 'update' or change these words!!!

They remain the same....

hallowed be THY name,
THY kingdom come,
THY will be done,
___________________________________

Re: the use of thee/thou/thy

http://baptistbecause.com/Tracts/theethou.htm

 
"Re: the use of thee/thou/thy"

If these words be so much the better then why dost thou not continue to use them in thine everyday life?

""The Lord's Prayer" is considered to be the perfect prayer. We would not DARE to 'update' or change these words!!!"

I would not dare to change the Greek, which would constitute the blasphemy of changing scripture. I have no problem in updating the English translation. It is already hard enough getting word of Christ to people in our culture without demanding that the badly educated learn the English of 400 years ago as well. This has nothing to do with spiritual compromise; after all the gospels were written in koine Greek which is rough street Greek, not the high classical Greek of Plato and Aristotle.

Our Father in heaven, may your name be hallowed; may your kingdom come; and may your will be done on earth, as it is done in heaven. Give us today our daily bread; and forgive our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us. Do not lead us into ordeals, and rescue us from evil.
 
To Anonymous @ 7:07 PM
Re: "the use of thee/thou/thy"
If these words be so much the better then why dost thou not continue to use them in thine everyday life?

___________________________________


This debate / discussion is not about 'everyday life'b- it is about the Bible (the WORD of God) as it was originally written.


 
The Word of God was originally written in Greek and Hebrew. You are therefore NOT reading the words of God, by your KJBOnly probable standards, if you are reading in English of any kind. The KJV translators originally in the first version out made reference to possible errors, and considered the Septuagint valuable.
 
The Our Father Prayer

Our Father who art in Heaven,
Hallowed be thy name;
Thy kingdom come
Thy will be done
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread;
And forgive us our trespasses
As we forgive those who trespass against us;
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.





 
Anon 3:18 - Thanks for the warning. I've not been aware of this style of preaching. Are you able to give any examples or links please so I can familiarise myself with this.

~ K ~
 
Christine,

You wrote, Yes modern translations are often dicey….

Would you care to provide source/s for your very bold assertion?

________________________________________________

All,

The English language was not even in existence in the first century, as it wasn’t around until early Medieval times; therefore, “thee”, “thou”, etc. are NOT the words of Jesus as recorded by the Gospel writer. Unfortunately, this is the typical rhetoric spun by the KJV-only crowd.

For those with the mistaken notion that all newer versions – excepting KJV (and NKJV) – diminish Christ’s deity in some way/s, what do you make of John 1:18?

KJV: 18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

NASB: 18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

I suggest those with prejudices either way, whether to the KJV/NKJV OR the newer versions, should research both sides of the argument. Towards that end, here’s an excellent article which shows how fallacious many of the arguments put forth by KJVO adherents actually are:

http://www.kjvonly.org/other/demystify.htm
 
The Lord's Prayer, also known as the Our Father, was composed by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.
 
The Lord's Prayer, also known as the Our Father, was composed by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.

In what language? Let me answer it for you: Koine Greek - and well before English was even a language.
 
It is generally agreed that Jesus and his disciples primarily spoke Aramaic, the common language of Palestine in the first century AD, most likely a Galilean dialect distinguishable from that of Jerusalem.[1] Most of the apostles from the Galilee region also spoke Aramaic and the towns of Nazareth and Capernaum in Galilee, where Jesus lived, were primarily Aramaic-speaking communities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_of_Jesus


 
The original languages of the Bible are three: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.


 
Anon 9:56, 9:59,

As soon as I stepped into the shower I realized my error. I'll blame it on my fever.

Nevertheless, while true, the important part is that the NT manuscripts are predominately written in Koine Greek.
 
Actually, the fact that Jesus spoke to his disciples mostly in Aramaic raises yet another issue: Should we recite The Lord's Prayer in Aramaic, or should we recite in Koine Greek as Matthew recorded it? Answer, you speak it in your own language.

Koine Greek was the common language ("Koine" literally means "common"), and was spoken so that the majority could understand it. Hence, a strong case can be made to update the KJV solely on the basis of its antiquated language. That's notwithstanding the textual errors found in the so-called textus receptus, the Greek text from which the KJV was translated.
 
sorry to hear you have a fever, Craig, I pray Jesus help you. Thank you for your input, I forgot about Aramaic. But that means we have an Apostolic precedent for translating God's words from Aramaic to Greek! Ergo to any other language.

KJV only sometimes cite a statement by a church in the early to mid 1800s I forget the exact date, that they supported KJV as proof KJV only predates the dicey individuals who founded it.

HOWEVER. It was at that time the ONLY translation into English that would have been acceptable to protestants as not RC, and acceptable as not the work of other heretics or of one man only without the help of an educated committee.

Therefore this is no proof at all.
 
How did this discussion / debate get so off track?

This ia not about language; it's about translation / interpretation of Scripture!!!


 
it started because someone threw a KJV only troll hat in the ring and we jumped on it.
 
Christine,

Fever, when not extreme, is actually a good thing as it's a sign the body is warding off infection.

You mentioned earlier that "New King James is best". Do you realize that the NKJV is essentially the KJV in more up to date English, yet replicating the same textual errors?

_______________________________

All,

Let me make this plain. There are no perfect English translations; all have strengths and weaknesses, i.e., some are closer translations from what is presumed to be the original Greek NT manuscripts. While there are universally recognized (by anyone in the field of NT textual criticism) textual problems in the N/KJV, none render it as contrary to any basic/essential Christian doctrine.

Nonetheless, I prefer a translation that is closer to what is the presumed Greek text; and, this means I prefer versions such as the NASB, NIV, NET, etc. This doesn't mean I agree with all the variants chosen in the newer versions.

I only ask that those who've not looked at both sides of the N/KJV vs. newer English translations debate should read data on both positions before forming an opinion rather than accepting one that may have been handed down by a particular denomination.

That, my friends, is what it means to be Berean (not limited to this, of course), IMO.
 
How many versions of the Bible are there???

http://www.swapmeetdave.com/Bible/BibleType.htm

There should be only ONE!!!

The TRUTH doesn't have 'versions'; therefore, God's WORD shouldn't have versions.

FYI: I am not a troll, Christina. I haven't posted in awhile, because I (along with others who have been around here much longer than you!) get tired of one person completely dominating this blog.


 
"How many versions of the Bible are there???... There should be only ONE!!! The TRUTH doesn't have 'versions'; therefore, God's WORD shouldn't have versions."

Couldn't agree more. But that one is in Hebrew and koine Greek; and in the case of the NT at least there are dozens of tiny differences between ancient scraps of early manuscripts, eg missing or added conjunctions, almost none of which makes any difference to meaning. In the OT we find "Yahuweh" in the Dead Sea scroll of Isaiah has been replaced by Elohim or Adonai in the Masoretic text. So I'm sorry but we don't have the exact "autograph" originals. Moreover translation is not an exact science, and even if it were then translations need to change as the target language changes - and English has changed since King James' time. The idea that scripture is not to be read in everyday language is a serious barrier to evangelisation. It was written in everyday language, for God's sake (and I mean that literally).

NB The liberal scholars who say Jesus spoke Aramaic forget about the fact that there had been a back-to-Hebrew movement after the Maccabean wars. That was the origin of the Pharisess in fact, who started well but turned out badly by Jesus' time. for a mountain of evidence that Hebrew was Jesus' first language, see the short book "Understanding the dificult words of Jesus" by Bivin and Blizzard. The authors are scholars and leaders of the first school of Jewish believers in Jesus based in the Holy Land for 2000 years.

 
The Lords's Prayer/Our Father is a cut down version of a longer prayer that is still known in Hebrew. Evidently Jesus got rid of the unnecessary bits.
 
what is that longer prayer?
 
I believe God protected HIS WORD and necessary translations included. Translations must be discerned by internal consistency. The HOLY SPIRIT NEVER CONTRADICTS HIMSELF! Example: Somebody comes along and claims they have the 14th Fragment of Peter which "conclusively proves reincarnation." That is compared to Paul's IT IS APPOINTED ONCE TO MAN TO DIE AND THEN THE JUDGMENT."



Constance
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]