Lamsa Bible ,The Lamsa Bible (LB) is supposed to be a translation of the Syriac Pershitta (SP). The SP is fourth century, Aramaic translation of the Hebrew (OT) and Greek (NT) Scriptures. So, at best, what you are getting with the LB is a translation of a translation. As such, it would not be as accurate as a direct translation from the original languages.
Yes, Jesus probably did speak Aramaic, at least most of the time. He probably also spoke Greek and possibly even Latin. But God chose to have the original manuscripts of the NT written in Greek. So it is those words that are considered "God-breathed."
Again, the SP took the Greek text and translated it into Aramaic. In doing so, there is no guarantee whatsoever that it arrived at the words Jesus actually spoke. Anytime a language is translated into another language, then translated back again, something is "lost." And then to translate it into a third language (in this case English) only exaggerates the problem. Gary Zeolla
As we are reading these sites, what is clearly written is
Kung CHURCH OF CHRIST daw ang nakalagay dapat daw ay:
“εκκλησιαν του χριστου” o “EKKLĒSIAN TOU KRISTOU”
Sapagkat ang nakalagay nga naman sa Bibliang Greek na ito ay:
“εκκλησιαν του θεου” o “EKKLĒSIAN TOU THEOU”
Ang hindi alam ng marami, sa wikang Griego ang Gawa 20:28, ay mayroon pang isang version, na ganito naman ang nakalagay:
Acts 20:28 “προσέχετε ἑαυτοῖς καὶ παντὶ τῷ ποιμνίῳ, ἐν ᾧ ὑμᾶς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ἔθετο ἐπισκόπους, ποιμαίνειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ κυρίου, ἣν περιεποιήσατο διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἰδίου.” (Tischendorf Greek New Testament)
Dito sa Bibliang ito imbes na “IGLESIA NG DIYOS” na sa Greek nga ay:
“εκκλησιαν του θεου” o “EKKLĒSIAN TOU THEOU”
Ang nakalagay dito ay:
“ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ κυρίου” o “EKKLĒSIAN TOU KURIOU”
O sa English “CHURCH OF THE LORD” na siya namang pinagbatayan ng Bibliang ito:
The point of argument here is this, we shall neither assume,presume or invent beyond what is written as the bible has said,Dt4:2Pr30:4;1Co4:6
If The Lamsa is the Scripture, shouldn't it be used all the time.And yet as I watch the Iglesia ni Kristo programs they always returning to the Hebrew, Greek and some Aramaic.
Some of the words in the bible are Aramaic,like Abba. So maybe the word "church of Christ"is Aramaic? Is there any evidence about this? Because the INC uses this verse to prove themselves and not the entire Lamsa Version.A new doctrine is again seen. Seeking and choosing the verse that benefits them but not by the authority of God(Bible)
We are right to conclude that the Iglesia Ni Kristo Ni Mr.Felix Y. Manalo is worshipping the Unknown God(as mentioned before)and most importantly they are not part of his church.
There is a verse that says whether in pretense or in truth Christ is preached, but even this verse is not applicable to them
We shall see further how assumptions, inventions, presumptions are easily destroyed by the word of God
About Lamsa1
About Lamsa2
About Lamsa3
About Lamsa4
Lamsa Bible Preface
About Lamsa5
About Lamsa6
About Lamsa7
About Lamsa8
About INC Lamsa
StudyIglesia
CD2000 ANSWER:
The Bible did not fall from
heaven as a book. And this Bible we have today DID NOT COME from
other churches, not even the Iglesia ni Cristo. Whether they like
it or not, the BIBLE was made possible through the AUTHORITY of the
CHURCH. And this CHURCH is NOT the Iglesia ni Cristo of Manalo but the
CHURCH founded by CHRIST-- the ONLY-- ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH of
CHRIST.
In 382
AD, the CHURCH (not the Iglesia ni Cristo) through the leadership of
Pope
Damasus, a saintly pope.
Catholic BIBLE SCHOLARS convened
and DECIDED which BOOKS should be part of the present Bible we have today. But
the FINAL CANON
of the SCRIPTURES was FINALIZED only during the COUNCIL of
TRENT in the 16th Century (Read also SCRIPTURE TRANSLATIONS!)
Ang kapal naman ng mga mukha nila
kung bababuyin lang nila ang Aklat na HINDI SA KANILA!
Therefore, there is NO WAY that
the INC of Felix Manalo could publish it's own "Bible" just like the Jehovah's Witnesses founded by Charles T. Russel who
deliberately CORRUPTED the SCRIPTURES!
If they do, they would CHANGE words such as "church of GOD" to "church of Christ" to suit their teachings.
Biblically speaking their paid MINISTERS are intellectually INCOMPETENT and so they've GOT NO RIGHT to do so. Whether they like it or not, history of the BIBLE PRODUCTION, the CHURCH has played an active role ever since.
The Bible Societies DO NOT even recognize their own paid ministers to have that SINCERITY, HONESTY and COMPETENCY to be called "Scholars" in that respect. They do not have that LOVE of the SCRIPTURES but rather, they look at the Bible as their SERVANT!
If they do, they would CHANGE words such as "church of GOD" to "church of Christ" to suit their teachings.
Biblically speaking their paid MINISTERS are intellectually INCOMPETENT and so they've GOT NO RIGHT to do so. Whether they like it or not, history of the BIBLE PRODUCTION, the CHURCH has played an active role ever since.
The Bible Societies DO NOT even recognize their own paid ministers to have that SINCERITY, HONESTY and COMPETENCY to be called "Scholars" in that respect. They do not have that LOVE of the SCRIPTURES but rather, they look at the Bible as their SERVANT!
In truth, the INC of Manalo are
HELPLESS. They are STILL HEAVILY RELYING on CATHOLIC and PROTESTANT
versions of the Bible whom Manalo and his successors CONSIDER apostates!
YES, they LITERALLY RELY on
BIBLES from APOSTATES!!!! That is one among the many HYPOCRISIES in the Iglesia
ni Cristo of Manalo.
So, now that you know why they can't publish their own Bibles, you better have to think twice why believe it's the 'true" church when they've got nothing in history to prove that!
MV:Church of the living God,1Ti3:15
Torah1Yr:Ge1:1,2
So, now that you know why they can't publish their own Bibles, you better have to think twice why believe it's the 'true" church when they've got nothing in history to prove that!
MV:Church of the living God,1Ti3:15
Torah1Yr:Ge1:1,2
This is War
No comments:
Post a Comment