Oklahoma orders first shipment of Bibles for use in public school classrooms

[Rockerduck]

REV

Revised English version? Based on what other version?

 

[Wrangler]

Revised English version? Based on what other version?

I'm not aware of too many versions that are based on other versions. Perhaps that's what they did in centuries past?

Nowadays, the original source material is available, along with a much better understanding of not only ancient language but the 21st century American that is best to translate TO. This translation method is explained in great detail in modern translations. Try reading it to convince yourself of the superior scholarship to work centuries ago.

 

[Rockerduck]

I'm not aware of too many versions that are based on other versions. Perhaps that's what they did in centuries past?

Nowadays, the original source material is available, along with a much better understanding of not only ancient language but the 21st century American that is best to translate TO. This translation method is explained in great detail in modern translations. Try reading it to convince yourself of the superior scholarship to work centuries ago.

Tyndale, Matthews, Bishops bibles, then the very popular, Geneva bible. These bibles were used to make the KJV bible. The KJV corrected many errors in 1611. Then again and again until the 1769 KJV that we use today. So, the RSV (revised standard version) came out and ASV (American Standard) came out. All modern translations are based on the RSV and ASV, then brought up to date using only, the codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, which are corrupt.

 

[Wrangler]

All modern translations are based on the RSV and ASV

This is patently untrue, as I've already explained, even though often repeated.

 

[Rockerduck]

This is patently untrue, as I've already explained, even though often repeated.

how so?

 

[Wrangler]

how so?

Re-read post #22.

 

[Rockerduck]

Re-read post #22.

I've studied them all and found errors including gender language. Also language changed to allow women pastors. Also Fornication removed from the NIV. Cultural changes are showing up more and more trying not to offend.

 

[Wrangler]

I've studied them all

Including the REV?

errors including gender language. Also language changed to allow women pastors. Also Fornication removed from the NIV. Cultural changes are showing up more and more trying not to offend.

I've seen that too, although I'm less inclined to call gender language an error. Cultural changes inevitably show up in translations because culture and language are inherently evolving.

Regarding fornication being removed; do you mean the word or the idea?

 

[Rockerduck]

Including the REV?

I've seen that too, although I'm less inclined to call gender language an error. Cultural changes inevitably show up in translations because culture and language are inherently evolving.

Regarding fornication being removed; do you mean the word or the idea?

The REV falls into the category of translated from the Westcott and Hort corrupt Greek they produced and uses the Codex's that are corrupted too. 2. The word and lessening the idea of fornication.

 

[Wrangler]

The REV falls into the category of translated from the Westcott and Hort corrupt Greek they produced and uses the Codex's that are corrupted too.

How did you come to this conclusion? Supposing one knows better than the translators what is the better source materials seems suspicious to me.

 

[Rockerduck]

How did you come to this conclusion? Supposing one knows better than the translators what is the better source materials seems suspicious to me.

Who are scholars? Are they filled with holy Spirit. Nope, many scholars are atheists, and also are faculty staff at schools. I sit with doctorate pastors and evangelists in studies. All modern bibles are for profit, so there is a monetary reason to change wording to be less offensive. The REV was a revision of the NET. You can't learn the Holy Spirit, and you can't teach common sense. I use the KJV and LSB. There are no missing verses and no gender changes, and have Holy Spirit filled scholars.

 

[DuckieLady]

I went to my oldest daughter's graduation (in a public school) where the first thing that happened before the graduation was a pastor preaching. I have never seen that before and was really impressed.

I get that someone could potentially be an atheist teacher and speak against the Bible but I really feel like trust God and see what happens.

 

[Matthias]

I’m a Jewish monotheist, a retired pastor and a retired adjunct college theology professor. Would anyone on the forum object to me teaching a high school AP course on the Bible to your children and/or to other peoples children?

 

[Wrangler]

Who are scholars?

Experts in language translation. What credentials do you have?

 

[Aunty Jane]

I’m a Jewish monotheist, a retired pastor and a retired adjunct college theology professor. Would anyone on the forum object to me teaching a high school AP course on the Bible to your children and/or to other peoples children?

Wouldn’t it be the same as a Catholic teacher instructing a Protestant school class or a Protestant teacher instructing a Catholic school class in Bible education? Would that then mean that the whole criteria for even getting the position comes with requirements for adhering to a particular religion?
Didn’t that all just go out the window ages ago?

Religious instruction is the role of parents, as it was in Bible times.….
From the Jewish Tanakh….

4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God; the Lord is one.		דשְׁמַ֖ע יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל יְהֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ יְהֹוָ֥ה | אֶחָֽד:
5 And you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your means.		הוְאָ֣הַבְתָּ֔ אֵ֖ת יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֑יךָ בְּכָל־לְבָֽבְךָ֥ וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁךָ֖ וּבְכָל־מְאֹדֶֽךָ:
6 And these words, which I command you this day, shall be upon your heart.		ווְהָי֞וּ הַדְּבָרִ֣ים הָאֵ֗לֶּה אֲשֶׁ֨ר אָֽנֹכִ֧י מְצַוְּךָ֛ הַיּ֖וֹם עַל־לְבָבֶֽךָ:
7 And you shall teach them to your sons and speak of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk on the way, and when you lie down and when you rise up.

(Deut 6: 4-7)
The parents were instructed by their religious instructors at the synagogue, and it was reinforced at home and in practical situations. Jesus was Jewish and taught Jewish Scripture. In those times and in the early Christian era, it was a given that parents were Christians and would raise their children accordingly. Church on Sunday was the norm for the whole family.
Those days are long gone….so bringing Bible education into schools will simply cause a huge backlash as parents reject any religious instruction connected to their child’s education.

In the modern age it has been all too easy to hand responsibility for a child’s education on to someone else. But religious education was no one else’s responsibility really. Parents are held accountable for their child’s behavior, regardless of their religious persuasion.
Bible education in today’s world is not seen as something parents have to do themselves, let alone pass it on to their children.
Bringing the Bible into schools as a political instrument to inculcate patriotic and nationalistic sentiments in young children is essentially brainwashing. The union of church and state is an unholy alliance and no “do gooders” will ‘make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear’.

This just seems like a recipe for disaster….the world has gone too far the other way to bring it back into line with the Bible. Imagine the science class teaching evolution and the Bible class teaching a literal 6 day creation….? Seriously….Will democracy need to turn into dictatorship? Will people accept it? I can’t see how.
The modern generation has learned to live without the restrictions of the Bible.

 

[Matthias]

Wouldn’t it be the same as a Catholic teacher instructing a Protestant school class or a Protestant teacher instructing a Catholic school class in Bible education? Would that then mean that the whole criteria for even getting the position comes with requirements for adhering to a particular religion?
Didn’t that all just go out the window ages ago?

Religious instruction is the role of parents, as it was in Bible times.….
From the Jewish Tanakh….

4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God; the Lord is one.		דשְׁמַ֖ע יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל יְהֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ יְהֹוָ֥ה | אֶחָֽד:
5 And you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your means.		הוְאָ֣הַבְתָּ֔ אֵ֖ת יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֑יךָ בְּכָל־לְבָֽבְךָ֥ וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁךָ֖ וּבְכָל־מְאֹדֶֽךָ:
6 And these words, which I command you this day, shall be upon your heart.		ווְהָי֞וּ הַדְּבָרִ֣ים הָאֵ֗לֶּה אֲשֶׁ֨ר אָֽנֹכִ֧י מְצַוְּךָ֛ הַיּ֖וֹם עַל־לְבָבֶֽךָ:
7 And you shall teach them to your sons and speak of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk on the way, and when you lie down and when you rise up.

(Deut 6: 4-7)
The parents were instructed by their religious instructors at the synagogue, and it was reinforced at home and in practical situations. Jesus was Jewish and taught Jewish Scripture. In those times and in the early Christian era, it was a given that parents were Christians and would raise their children accordingly. Church on Sunday was the norm for the whole family.
Those days are long gone….so bringing Bible education into schools will simply cause a huge backlash as parents reject any religious instruction connected to their child’s education.

In the modern age it has been all too easy to hand responsibility for a child’s education on to someone else. But it was no one else’s responsibility really. Parents are held accountable for their child’s behavior, regardless of their religious persuasion.
Bible education in today’s world is not seen as something parents have to do themselves, let alone pass it on to their children.
Bringing the Bible into schools as a political instrument to inculcate patriotic and nationalistic sentiments in young children is essentially brainwashing. The union of church and state is an unholy alliance and no “do gooders” will ‘make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear’.

This just seems like a recipe for disaster….the world has gone too far the other way to bring it back into line with the Bible. Imagine the science class teaching evolution and the Bible class teaching a literal 6 day creation….? Seriously….Will democracy need to turn into dictatorship? Will people accept it? I can’t see how.
The modern generation has learned to live without the restrictions of the Bible.

I’m not even allowed to post in the forums here marked “Christians Only”. No problem. I’m sure they would be fine with me teaching their children about the Bible in a public high school AP class.

 

[Wrangler]

Bringing the Bible into schools as a political instrument to inculcate patriotic and nationalistic sentiments in young children is essentially brainwashing.

Wrong. Human beings need a world view. There is hardly a better world view than Christian nationalism, when that nation was founded on Biblical principles, including individual liberty.

The importance of this movement is to make history come alive. Understanding the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the US in the context of the Christian world view in which the Founding Father's wrote these documents is most important for the next generation to understand American Exceptionalism. We live in the Shining City on a Hill, the last best chance for mankind to be free and we should know our ancient and proud heritage, how rare and historically unique it is.

John Adams said there will not be another set of circumstances for liberty to take root anew like in the New World for 1,000 years.

the world has gone too far the other way to bring it back into line with the Bible.

Good think God did not think we went too far.

Yes, there is a risk that penduluum may go too far. The risk of not standing for Christian Nationalism is far greater. Let it be said of this generation in a thousand years, that we stood on the side of Liberty and paid the price and took the risks to maintain it for posterity. Amen and Amen!

 

[Rockerduck]

Students had prayer in schools and learned the bible in every grade through college until 1967. Prayer was removed, not much fight about it at the time. After all, children went to church and Sunday school back then. Alot of teachers were Christian and teaching was a ministry back them. Children were brought up with manners and God fearing, even if the parents or children weren't Christian, society was. Woodstock happen in 1969, it was peaceful. One generation later, gangs were shooting each other and gang violence. Next generation, school shootings, next generation, mass shootings. Can we go back, maybe not, but I'd sure like to try. When the gang violence started, local gov't let pastors into the schools to talk to the students, this quelled the violence for awhile. But gov't stepped in again and said no. So here we are.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Wrong. Human beings need a world view. There is hardly a better world view than Christian nationalism, when that nation was founded on Biblical principles, including individual liberty.

The importance of this movement is to make history come alive. Understanding the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the US in the context of the Christian world view in which the Founding Father's wrote these documents is most important for the next generation to understand American Exceptionalism. We live in the Shining City on a Hill, the last best chance for mankind to be free and we should know our ancient and proud heritage, how rare and historically unique it is.

John Adams said there will not be another set of circumstances for liberty to take root anew like in the New World for 1,000 years.


Good think God did not think we went too far.

Yes, there is a risk that penduluum may go too far. The risk of not standing for Christian Nationalism is far greater. Let it be said of this generation in a thousand years, that we stood on the side of Liberty and paid the price and took the risks to maintain it for posterity. Amen and Amen!

It’s not a “world view” that you are accepting though, is it? It’s the American view masquerading as a “world view”. What other nation has such a decidedly biased attitude towards their own nation’s superiority?

Please tell me how your whole attitude is better than Islam ? They too believe exactly what you do, except from a different religious perspective. “Kill your enemies”….”kill those who despise your religion”…this is their duty, yet you essentially espouse the same thing. Patriotism had nothing to do with anything Jesus taught in the Bible. He taught that neutrality was the best way to deal with political threats…distance yourself, like he did.

Rom 12:17-21….
”Return evil for evil to no one. Take into consideration what is fine from the viewpoint of all men. 18 If possible, as far as it depends on you, be peaceable with all men. 19 Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but yield place to the wrath; for it is written: “‘Vengeance is mine; I will repay,’ says Jehovah.” 20 But “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by doing this you will heap fiery coals on his head.” 21 Do not let yourself be conquered by the evil, but keep conquering the evil with the good.”

You have to swallow a lot of patriotic indoctrination to ignore that declaration….the true “Christian” view.
Killing your enemies is not something Jesus ever told his disciples to do…..”love your enemies“ is what he taught. (Matt 5:43-44) Too difficult? Not for a genuine Christian.

So what happens in a conflict that puts a fellow Christian on the opposing side?

1 John 4:20-21…
” If anyone says, “I love God,” and yet is hating his brother, he is a liar. For the one who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. 21 And we have this commandment from him, that whoever loves God must also love his brother.”

But you can’t accept the Bible’s clear directives because of your nationalistic indoctrination….who has your loyalty? It’s rather obvious whose interests you serve….

 

[Jay Ross]

There is a gold standard, the KJV.

That is your opinion. All translations have contextual errors. The KJV is not free from having any errors within its text and many of the commentaries and teaching 'aids' expand those errors to the detriment of the readers.