The Bible And Me

KingJ said:
There is a lot more you have not considered. As I proposed, join the thread where we are already discussing the inerrancy of scripture. This (no offence) just shows me you are still naive on the facts. You really are holding onto assumptions and formulating an opinion off them. There are many facts you are excluding. I don't think you even grasped the few points I touched on.
Click to expand...

I am not certainly naïve! I seek several sources to a topic, sight and judge these; and then come to a temporary conclusion. One calls this a scientific mode of operation.
 
inerrancy applies to Scripture, but certainly not to the Bible ..
except the Mesoretic Texts created by the Jews in 850ad .. which isn't Scripture either ..
 
inerrancy applies to Scripture, but certainly not to the Bible ..
except the Mesoretic Texts created by the Jews in 850ad .. which isn't Scripture either ..
 
RiverJordan said:
Unless it turns out that homosexuality is biologically based. And I've yet to meet a gay person who's said, "I was born straight, but decided to be gay".
Click to expand...

Man is assessed bisexually from nature. Whether somebody lives bisexually, heterosexually or homosexually later; depend on different factors. It is never a "free choice", however. I had e.g. a half-brother who was transsexual. He had never chosen it. It already choose it to be hatdred and condemned by God, a church and the family?
I know a woman who is lesbian. She lives with her wife in an official residence of her church(she is a parish priest) together. We talked about the Bible and homosexuality once. A very interesting book of a Roman Catholic clergyman gave me to read it (David Berger). He proved to hand of the Bible that the attitude of the RCC towards the homosexuality is wrong. Here his book:

http://www.amazon.de/Der-heilige-Schein-schwuler-katholischen/dp/3550088558
David Berger also wrote a book about Thomas v, Aquin.
 
RiverJordan said:
ixoye,

Show me any "love" towards gays in any of your posts.
Click to expand...


The concept LOVE is often used differently. If a man rapes a child, he does it "out of love". If a father beats his gay child almost to death, he does it "out of love". If a sister breaks off the contact to the family of one's own because these does not claim to be Christians, she does it "out of love".
Do you recognize the "mode operandi" here?
This is not love because love is unconditional. I love my daughter because she is my daughter. Not because she is heterosexual or has a terrific profession. I call unconditional love "true love"; I call "wrong love" a love with conditions.
 
ixoye_8 said:
inerrancy applies to Scripture, but certainly not to the Bible ..
except the Mesoretic Texts created by the Jews in 850ad .. which isn't Scripture either ..
Click to expand...

The problem with ancient texts is; that, today, we often do not know how you thought a little earlier. Some translations are not correct, others are correct. And this can already happen at simple names. Does the name JUNIA tell you anything? Until the 12th century Junia was regarded as a woman. After this as a man. Why? Because Junia was an apostle who was mentioned in the Bible (Romans 16:7). And a woman was not allowed to be an apostle. Only today's biblical scientists have unraveled everything. Junia was a woman and she was an apostle. She, however, was not part of the TWELVE APOSTLE. Because there were two apostle staff. Once the twelve apostles whom all of us know; and then another group which women also belonged.
 
Jane Blond said:
The problem with ancient texts is; that, today, we often do not know how you thought a little earlier. Some translations are not correct, others are correct. And this can already happen at simple names. Does the name JUNIA tell you anything? Until the 12th century Junia was regarded as a woman. After this as a man. Why? Because Junia was an apostle who was mentioned in the Bible (Romans 16:7). And a woman was not allowed to be an apostle. Only today's biblical scientists have unraveled everything. Junia was a woman and she was an apostle. She, however, was not part of the TWELVE APOSTLE. Because there were two apostle staff. Once the twelve apostles whom all of us know; and then another group which women also belonged.
Click to expand...

tells me nothing .. because Junia is not in scripture ..
it says Junias ..


Ἰουνιᾶς Iounias
Junias was not an Apostle, never was
 
Last edited:
Jane Blond said:
The concept LOVE is often used differently.
Do you recognize the "mode operandi" here?
This is not love because love is unconditional. I love my daughter because she is my daughter. Not because she is heterosexual or has a terrific profession. I call unconditional love "true love"; I call "wrong love" a love with conditions.
Click to expand...

there is no such thing as unconditional love ..
read John 3:16 and John 3:36 ..
 
ixoye_8 said:
tells me nothing .. because Junia is not in scripture ..
it says Junias ..


Ἰουνιᾶς Iounias
Junias was not an Apostle, never was
Click to expand...

It is called JUNIA!
To this I saw a series in the TV about 200 years Christianity years ago. A fragment of a biblical document was shown from the 1st century in episode 2 where the name JUNIA was clear to read. To this still these sources:

"The church father Chrysostom (died A.D. 407) referred to this person as a woman (Homily on Romans 31.7; NPNF 1, 11:555) but the church father Origen (died A.D. 252) referred to Junias as a man (MPG 14: 1289), and the early church historian Epiphanius (died A.D. 403) explicitly uses a masculine pronoun of Junias and seems to have specific information about him when he says that "Junias, of whom Paul makes mention, became bishop of Apameia of Syria" (Index disciplulorum 125.19- 20).
Click to expand...
http://carm.org/junia-apostle

http://www.godswordtowomen.org/rissjunia.htm

http://www.churchofgoddfw.com/monthly/junia.shtml

From it I quote:

John Chrysostrom, 4th century, (337-497) wrote, "Oh! How great is the devotion of this woman, that she should be even counted worthy of the appellation of apostle! (Homily on the Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle to the Romans XXXI).
Jerome (340-419) wrote that Junia was a female. (Liver Interpretationis Hebraicorum Nominum 72, 15.) Also Hatto of Vercelli (924-961), Theophylack (1050-1108), and Peter Abelard (1079-1142
Click to expand...

So, it is clear, that SHE was an APOSTLE!
 
Rom 16:7 Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

hostis episēmos en apostolos
who (are) famous with (the) Apostles ..

using your logic, then Andronicus would also be an Apostle, because it is about both of them ..

what Paul is trying to do, is just give them kudos just like everyone else in the chapter ..
 
ixoye_8 said:
Rom 16:7 Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

hostis episēmos en apostolos
who (are) famous with (the) Apostles ..

using your logic, then Andronicus would also be an Apostle, because it is about both of them ..
what Paul is trying to do, is just give them kudos just like everyone else in the chapter ..
Click to expand...

Mat 27:16 At that time they were holding a notorious G1978 prisoner, called Barabbas.

episēmos is only used in one other place in the NT, and is translated as "notorious" ..
it means "famous" or "of reknown" ..
Paul is only giving the TWO OF THEM kudos ..
 
Last edited:
ixoye_8 said:
Rom 16:7 Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

hostis episēmos en apostolos
who (are) famous with (the) Apostles ..

using your logic, then Andronicus would also be an Apostle, because it is about both of them ..

what Paul is trying to do, is just give them kudos just like everyone else in the chapter ..
Click to expand...

You do not know your own Bible!

Junia in ancient Greek NT manuscripts
Whether the scribe of an uncial manuscript meant to write Iounían or Iouniān would be immaterial. The letters would be capitalized and unaccented: IONIAN. The gender of this person must be found elsewhere.
Minuscule manuscripts began to appear after the seventh century. In fact, uncial manuscripts were recopied in minuscule, forcing the use of accents. These manuscripts had Iounían, making Junia feminine. According to Eldon Epp, no Greek minuscule manuscripts used the masculine Iouniān.16
The UBS Greek New Testament notes at least 20 minuscule NT manuscripts that use the feminine Iounían. Among them, the oldest are 081 (from 1044) and 104 (from 1087). The latest is 2200 from the fourteenth century.17
More than once, in NT manuscripts and writings about this chapter, the name in verse 7 is given as Julia, who appears later in Romans 16:15. This can be seen in P46, an uncial manuscript from about the year 200.18 In any case, Julia is a feminine name.
Richard Bauckham surmises that Junia of Romans 16:7 is Ioanna of Luke 8:3 and 24:10. Her Roman name would be easier to pronounce, and her relation with Jesus would certainly put her as a Christian before Paul. Andronicus was either a second husband or a Roman name taken by Chuza.19
Click to expand...
https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/2013/07/junia-the-apostle

From a theological dictionary:

http://www.bibelwissenschaft.de/wib...ostel/ch/70f27602b65d6c37aef78848048906a3/#h6

It is in German, so I try to translate it with a Little help from google:

Women as apostlesA significant difference between the Jewish concept of schaliach ( שָׁלִיחַ ) and the New Testament concept of ἀποστόλος ( Apostolos ) is that the legal term schaliach refers to that which represents the transmitter legally . Women had limited legal competence and could not act as witnesses ( cf. Sifre Deuteronomy 190 to 19:17 ) ( Rengstorf 1933 , 432-433 ) . In the New Testament , however, it can be proven that women play an important role in the mission played ( cf. Jn 4:1-42 ) . An example is the mention of a " Junia " in Romans 16.7 , which was known among the apostles (Rom 16.7 ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις , episēmoi en tois apostolois ) . The dative construction ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις ( en tois apostolois ) emphasizes the fact that Junia was among those who were called apostles ( cf. Bruce 2000 , 298 , 387-388 ) . The research was long disputed whether the ambiguous accusative Ιουιαν ( Iunian ) is derived from the female name " Junia " or the male name " Junia " . The male first name there is no evidence for antiquity and Brooten has shown that the majority of the Church Fathers regarded Junia as a woman ( Origen [ 185-253 ] [ junta or Julia ] , a text version ; Hieronymus [ 340/50-419 ] in Liber interpretationis hebraicorum nominum 72,15 ) . In contrast to the predominant tendencies of his time, especially the church leadership positions , representing a misogynistic position , speaks → John Chrysostom (4th century ) in his homilies for → Romans ( 16:7) very positively by Junia , an important woman under the apostles ( Rengstorf 1933 , 432) . It must therefore be assumed that Paul and the early church were oriented egalitarian , was assumed to be a long time . Another example is Thekla is , which is also called an apostle ( Jensen 1995 ; Ebner 2005; Esch- Wermeling 2008). This represents current ethical perspectives of the debate about gender equality and the realities of church leadership in question.
Click to expand...
Emphases in a fat notation of me.

In modern German Bibles are a footnote , which Shows, that Junia was female. And the Protestant Churches in Germany did also know, that Junia was a female apostle. From an Interview which Margot Käßmann have had in 2013 with the German Magazine "Der Spiegel":


Käßmann: It is appreciated exegetically generally meanwhile that Junia is an apostle. An »s« was appended later to make a Junias from Junia. This changes nothing, that to this this apostle was female.
Click to expand...
Mrs Käßmann was the president of the council of the Protestant churches. She gave up her office because she had drunkly driven a car. Many men who had much done worse remain further in the office.
Margot Käßmann

ixoye_8 said:
John Chrysostrom, like you, misinterpreted it ..
Click to expand...

There is more proof of Junia; and not a single sound proof of Junias.
As I already said: You do not know your own Bible "!
 
ixoye_8 said:
using that logic, then Andronicus would also be an Apostle, because it is about both of them ..
Click to expand...

Maybe he was an apostle.
But as I quoted before: They got TWO SORTS OF APOSTLES! The well known twelve, and then others. Other women from this Group also known.
 
lol .. I read ancient Greek and ancient Hebrew .. and I don't know the bible ???

but your right in a sense .. I read scripture and know scripture ..
 
Ἰουνιᾶς Iounias
is what the extant mss read ..
you yourself posted Iounian (making it fem) is first seen in the 7th century
 
ixoye_8 said:
lol .. I read ancient Greek and ancient Hebrew .. and I don't know the bible ???

but your right in a sense .. I read scripture and know scripture ..
Click to expand...

It does not suffice to read a book. One must also UNDERSTAND what stands written in this. And I have my first doubts with you so there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top