[Marxism] Christianity Today and the passages of the Lord

Calvin Broadbent calvinbroadbent at hotmail.com
Thu Dec 16 08:17:34 MST 2004


I thought your post on differing translations of the Bible was very 
interesting, Jurriaan. Which translation, if any, did you consider more 
faithful to the original meaning of the passage? Or would you say that one 
of the translations is as philologically valid as the other? Could one 
relate the meaning of the original (?) text to the central ideas of the 
prevalent theological system of the time, in so far as they can be 
determined (perhaps in terms of their general humanism, authoritarianism, 
literalism or whatever)? Muslims, please correct me if I'm wrong, seem to 
boast that the Koran is totally free of any retranslations, and is thereby 
truer to the Word of God than other such weighty tomes. Yet surely there is 
a long history of exegetical disputes in the Muslim theological law courts 

all the best.


>The comrades from Christianity Today have a reassuring message for all of 
>us in the latest issue:

>"Because the Bible is God's Word and God cannot lie (Isaiah 55:10-11; John 
>17:17; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 4:12), it's totally trustworthy, free from any 
>error. God's Word is described as "the word of truth" (2 Corinthians 6:7; 
>Colossians 1:5; 2 Timothy 2:15; James 1:18). Inerrancy isn't a theory about 
>the Bible; it's the teaching of the Bible itself. What most people claim as 
>errors in the Bible aren't errors but difficulties. People think they've 
>stumbled upon apparent inconsistencies when they haven't taken the time to 
>find out all the facts, or made an in-depth study of the passage. Many 
>Bible questions have been answered as new discoveries have been made in 
>fields such as language, history, archeology, and other sciences. 
>Regardless of the kind of difficulty found, not a single irreconcilable 
>error can be found in the Bible's pages."


It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today! 

More information about the Marxism mailing list