COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2]    MUSLIMS DECEITFULLY ATTACK THE APOSTLE PAUL

[1]       SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [457B]

For I came to cause division, with a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 Indeed, a man’s enemies will be those of his own household. 37 Whoever has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and whoever has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me. 38 And whoever does not accept his torture stake and follow after me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his soul will lose it, and whoever loses his soul for my sake will find it.  Matthew 10:35 – 39, [New World Translation Revised; NWTR]

Jesus (Yeshua) showed that members of one family could be divided with respect being obedient to Almighty God (YHWH) and him as shown by what was recorded with respect what he stated at Luke 12:52, [authorized King James Bible; AV]  “The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.”  And this reality was foretold at Micah 7:6 – 7, [AV] “For the son dishonoureth the father, the daughter riseth up against her mother, the daughter in law against her mother in law; a man’s enemies are the men of his own house.”

Jesus (Yeshua) showed that members of one family could be divided with respect being obedient to Almighty God (YHWH) and him as shown by what was recorded with respect what he stated at Luke 12:52, [authorized King James Bible; AV]  “The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.”  But he stated at Matthew 19:29, [AV] “And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.”  This was in keeping with Matthew 16:24 – 25, [AV] “Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.  25  For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.”  Finally he made it clear that anyone doing the will of his Father would be acceptable at Mark 3:34 -35, [AV] “And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!  35  For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.”

[2]       MUSLIMS DECEITFULLY ATTACK THE APOSTLE PAUL

INTRODUCTION:

Many Muslims deceitfully attack the Apostle Paul with misleading and untrue accusations.   They make such claims such as accusing him of being a self-proclaimer instead of proclaiming Jesus (Yeshua) Christ.   In doing so they overlook and/or are ignorant that Jesus (Yeshua) Christ was the one who personally selected the Apostle Paul as he saw much good in him even though at the time of his selection he was actually persecuting Christ genuine (true) footstep followers.   Now let's look at the Biblical account of his personal selection by the resurrected Jesus (Yeshua) Christ at Acts 9:1-22, "And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,  2  And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.  3  And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:  4  And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?  5  And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.  6  And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.  7  And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.  8  And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.  9  And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.  10 ¶  And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.  11  And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth,  12  And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.  13  Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:  14  And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.
15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:  16  For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.  17  And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.  18  And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.  19  And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.  20  And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.  21  But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests?  22  But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).   

Of course, immediately after is dramatic conversion by none other than Jesus (Yeshua), himself, many of the disciples and apostles still doubted his conversion as testified to at Acts 9:26-27, "And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple.  27  But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus." (AV).   Therefore, there can be no doubt that he was personally selected by Jesus (Yeshua) to be a proclaimer of the good news or gospel with respect to Jesus (Yeshua) and the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, Kingdom.

Now let's view some of the deceitful and misleading things some Muslims say about the Apostle Paul.

MISLEADING AND DECEITFUL THINGS SAID ABOUT THE APOSTLE PAUL BY SOME MUSLIMS:

Let's look at some of the misleading and deceitful things some Muslims are saying wrongly about the Apostle Paul in their own words.

COMMENT 1, which we shall examine.
<<" Galatians 1:6 ''I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a DIFFERENT GOSPEL...'' You said there was no other gospel, who is the deceiver now?. As i said before that there was another gospel and when Paul heard and saw it he got very angry. Im still of the opinion that the other gospel was the real gospel of Christ and Pauls gospel was not so inspiring because the Galatians started to reject Pauls gospel and accepted the DIFFERENT GOSPEL." [source - A Sunni Muslim]>>.

First, Let's look at Galatians 1:6 in context and see how wrong this Sunni Muslim is, Galatians 1:1-9, "Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)  2  And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:  3  Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,  4  Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:  5  To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.  6 ¶  I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:  7  Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.  8  But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.  9  As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." (AV), clearly the Apostle Paul was speaking of false gospels at Galatians 1:6 that some were starting to listen to instead of the gospel of Christ, i.e., some were perverting the gospel of Christ per Galatians 1:7.

Now let's get a better understanding of the above Bible scriptures by looking at a dictionary definition of 'gospel' is several dictionaries:

[1] The American Heritage(r) Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000. Defines gospel as follows:

NOUN:
1. often Gospel The proclamation of the redemption preached by Jesus and the Apostles, which is the central content of Christian revelation. 2a. Gospel Bible One of the first four New Testament books, describing the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and recording his teaching. b. A similar narrative. 3. often Gospel A lection from any of the first four New Testament books included as part of a religious service. 4. A teaching or doctrine of a religious teacher. 5. Music Gospel music. 6. Something, such as an idea or principle, accepted as unquestionably true: My parents' rules were gospel.

ADJECTIVE:
1. Of or in accordance with the Gospel; evangelical. 2. Of or relating to gospel music.

ETYMOLOGY:
Middle English, from Old English gdspel (ultimately translation of Greek euangelion) : gd, good; see good + spel, news.

[2]  Easton Bible Dictionary, a religious dictionary, gives two definitions for gospel.

Gospel - a word of Anglo-Saxon origin, and meaning "God's spell", i.e., word of God, or rather, according to others, "good spell", i.e., good news. It is the rendering of the Greek evangelion, i.e., "good message." It denotes (1) "the welcome intelligence of salvation to man as preached by our Lord and his followers. (2.) It was afterwards transitively applied to each of the four histories of our Lord's life, published by those who are therefore called 'Evangelists', writers of the history of the gospel (the evangelion). (3.) The term is often used to express collectively the gospel doctrines; and 'preaching the gospel' is often used to include not only the proclaiming of the good tidings, but the teaching men how to avail themselves of the offer of salvation, the declaring of all the truths, precepts, promises, and threatenings of Christianity." It is termed "the gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20:24), "the gospel of the kingdom" (Matt. 4:23), "the gospel of Christ" (Rom. 1:16), "the gospel of peace (Eph. 6:15), "the glorious gospel," "the everlasting gospel," "the gospel of salvation" (Eph. 1:13).

Gospels - The central fact of Christian preaching was the intelligence that the Saviour had come into the world (Matt. 4:23; Rom. 10:15); and the first Christian preachers who called their account of the person and mission of Christ by the term evangelion_ (= good message) were called _evangelistai (= evangelists) (Eph. 4:11; Acts 21:8).
There are four historical accounts of the person and work of Christ: "the first by Matthew, announcing the Redeemer as the promised King of the kingdom of God; the second by Mark, declaring him 'a prophet, mighty in deed and word'; the third by Luke, of whom it might be said that he represents Christ in the special character of the Saviour of sinners (Luke 7:36; 15:18); the fourth by John, who represents Christ as the Son of God, in whom deity and humanity become one. The ancient Church gave to Matthew the symbol of the lion, to Mark that of a man, to Luke that of the ox, and to John that of the eagle: these were the four faces of the cherubim" (Ezek. 1:10).
Date. The Gospels were all composed during the latter part of the first century, and there is distinct historical evidence to show that they were used and accepted as authentic before the end of the second century.
Mutual relation. "If the extent of all the coincidences be represented by 100, their proportionate distribution will be: Matthew, Mark, and Luke, 53; Matthew and Luke, 21; Matthew and Mark, 20; Mark and Luke, 6. Looking only at the general result, it may be said that of the contents of the synoptic Gospels [i.e., the first three Gospels] about two-fifths are common to the three, and that the parts peculiar to one or other of them are little more than one-third of the whole."
Origin. Did the evangelists copy from one another? The opinion is well founded that the Gospels were published by the apostles orally before they were committed to writing, and that each had an independent origin

[3] World English Bible Glossary, gives the following definition for gospel,

Gospel means "good news" or "glad tidings," specifically the Good News of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection for our salvation, healing, and provision; and the hope of eternal life that Jesus made available to us by God's grace.

So as we can see, 'gospel,' has the meaning of "good news" or "glad tidings;" therefore, the Apostle Paul was clearly simply warning all to only accept the 'good news' that originated with Jesus (Yeshua) Christ as shown by Galatians 1:7-9, and definitely NOT a proclaimer of gospel as the Sunni Muslim was deceitfully implying.   Let's consider the dictionary definition of 'proclaimer.'

PROCLA'IMER, n. One who publishes by authority; one that announces or makes publicly known.[source - Webster's 1828 Dictionary]

COMMENT 2, which we shall examine.
<<" And yes Paul did get very angry when he found out people where dumping his gospel for a different gospel which many x christians call the ''Genuine Gospel of Christ'''[source - A Sunni Muslim]>>.

First, as we previously saw looking at Galatians 1:6 in context, Paul was warning all to only accept the genuine "good News" or gospel that emanated from Jesus (Yeshua) Christ, and NOT some other gospel that emanated from a source controlled by Satan the Devil per 2 Corinthians 4:4, "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (AV).   Galatians 1:7-9, "Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.  8  But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.  9  As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." (AV) where he makes very clear that he is not proclaiming another gospel other than the gospel or 'good news' that emanated from Jesus (Yeshua) Christ, but CLEARLY warning others NOT to accept any other gospel except that which originated with Christ.   But as usual, there are deceitful individuals who will take a scripture, in this case Galatians 1:6 out of context and misleadingly try to make it seem that it is saying just the opposite from what its original writer/speaker intended.

That is why the Apostle Paul wrote the following about the Bereans, Acts 17:10-11, "And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.  11  These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." (AV).   Basically the Apostle Paul was congratulating the Bereans on their diligence in carefully searching the scriptures daily to see that what he told them was the truth in keeping with John 8:32, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (AV).

COMMENT 3, which we shall examine.
<<" You are not dealing with the facts that Paul told Timothy to hold onto the translation which includes the extra books of the Catholics and Paul said they are all inspired. Please show us solid evidence that Paul told Timothy to hold onto the original Old Testament, im looking forward to your evidence

I see that you are trying to protect your faith by being deceitful as Paul the self acclaimed deceiver has instructed you to do so. I appeal to the christians that are not deceitful to research for them selves of the scripture Timothy knew from childhood, which is a translation. Iris, I can understand you cannot accept that Paul was wrong to say what he said to Timothy. You will not find ''mans words'' in the Glorious Quran, Ameen."[ Source - a Sunni Muslim]>>.

Just another deceitful and misleading item by this Sunni Muslim.   Notice, he calls Paul a self acclaimed deceiver and tries to call the Apocrypha books inspired canon which they are not.   Let's first consider what the Apocrypha is.

[1] Easton Bible Dictionary, a religious dictionary, gives the following definition for Apocrypha.

Apocrypha - hidden, spurious, the name given to certain ancient books which found a place in the LXX. and Latin Vulgate versions of the Old Testament, and were appended to all the great translations made from them in the sixteenth century, but which have no claim to be regarded as in any sense parts of the inspired Word.

(1.) They are not once quoted by the New Testament writers, who frequently quote from the LXX. Our Lord and his apostles confirmed by their authority the ordinary Jewish canon, which was the same in all respects as we now have it.

(2.) These books were written not in Hebrew but in Greek, and during the "period of silence," from the time of Malachi, after which oracles and direct revelations from God ceased till the Christian era.

(3.) The contents of the books themselves show that they were no part of Scripture. The Old Testament Apocrypha consists of fourteen books, the chief of which are the Books of the Maccabees (q.v.), the Books of Esdras, the Book of Wisdom, the Book of Baruch, the Book of Esther, Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Judith, etc.
The New Testament Apocrypha consists of a very extensive literature, which bears distinct evidences of its non-apostolic origin, and is utterly unworthy of regard.

[2] Smith's Bible Dictionary, a religious dictionary, gives the following definition for Apocrypha.

<<" Old Testament Apocrypha ._The collection of books to which this term is popularly applied includes the following (the order given is that in which they stand in the English version); I. 1 Esdras; II. 2 Esdras; III. Tobit; IV. Judith; V. The rest of the chapters of the book of Esther, which are found neither in the Hebrew nor in the Chaldee; VI. The Wisdom of Solomon; VII. The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus; VII. Baruch; IX. The Song of the Three Holy Children, X. The History of Susanna; XI. The History of the destruction of Bel and the Dragon; XII. The Prayer of Manasses king of Judah; XIII. 1 Maccabee; XIV. 2 Maccabees. The primary meaning of apocrypha , "hidden, secret," seems, toward the close of the second century to have been associated with the signification "spurious," and ultimately to have settled down into the latter. The separate books of this collection are treated of in distinct articles.">>

[3] Irivng Hexham's Concise Dictionary of Religion, a religious dictionary, gives the following definition for Apocrypha. 

<<" APOCRYPHA: in Greek this means "hidden things" and is a term applied to both JEWISH and CHRISTIAN writings which were excluded from the official CANON of SCRIPTURE".>>.

As can be seen from all of these definitions, the Apocrypha are spurious writings NOT by the claimed writers, NOT in harmony with the inspired scriptures, etc.   

In fact with respect to the Septuagint, LXX, there were different versions, some contained some of the Apocrypha and others did not, but all contained all of the inspired books of the Bible.   One encyclopedia said this,
<<" Septuagint: A page from Codex vaticanus, the basis of Sir Lancelot Brenton's English translation.
The Septuagint (or simply "LXX") is the name commonly given in the West to the ancient, Koine Greek version of the Old Testament translated in stages between the 3rd to 1st century BC in Alexandria. It is the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek. The name means "seventy" and derives from a tradition that seventy-two Jewish scholars (LXX being the nearest round number) translated the Pentateuch (or Torah) from Hebrew into Greek for one of the Ptolemaic kings. As the work of translation went on gradually, and new books were added to the collection, the compass of the Greek Bible came to be somewhat indefinite. The Pentateuch always maintained its pre-eminence as the basis of the canon; but the prophetic collection changed its aspect by having various hagiographa incorporated into it. Some of the newer works, those called anagignoskomena in Greek, are not included in the Hebrew canon. Among these books are Maccabees and the Wisdom of Ben Sira. Also, the LXX version of some works, like Daniel and Esther, are longer than the Hebrew.[1] Several of the later books apparently were composed in Greek." [source - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia] >>.

Of the Apocrypha books, the encyclopedia said several of these books were apparently composed in Greek; whereas, all of the inspired books of the Old Testament were composed in ancient Hebrew.   This being a feature that immediately identifies them as spurious.

Paul NEVER said any of the Apocrypha were inspired as this Sunni Muslim deceitfully says.    In fact, as we previously say in Galatians 1:1-9, the Apostle Paul warned against perverted gospels, i.e., spurious ones such as the books of the Apocrypha.    However, this Sunni Muslim deceiver is trying to twist the meaning of 2 Timothy 3:16, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" (AV).   He is trying to falsely imply that the Apocrypha is part of what the Apostle Paul was referring to which of course is very unreasonable and illogical to the extreme and especially so if 2 Timothy 3:16 is looked at in context, 2 timothy 3:12-17, "Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.  13  But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.  14  But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;  15  And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.  16  All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:  17  That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." (AV).   He, the Sunni Muslim, is one of those covered by 2 Timothy 3:13.

Now in other comments by this same Sunni Muslim he has inferred that Timothy had and learned from a copy of the LXX containing the Apocrypha as he only knew Koine Greek which is of course untrue.   His father was a Greek, but his mother was a Jew who spoke Hebrew.   His mother, not his father, was the one who taught him, and this fact was recognized by the Apostle Paul at 2 Timothy 1:1-5, "Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus,  2  To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.  3  I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day;  4  Greatly desiring to see thee, being mindful of thy tears, that I may be filled with joy;  5  When I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am persuaded that in thee also." (AV).

Undoubtedly his mother Eunice would have regularly taken him to the Synagogue where he would have listened to Rabbis reading the sacred inspired scripture per the canon of Ezra or Jerusalem canon so the inspired scripture the Apostle Paul was referring to in 2 Timothy 3:16 would have been only the inspired scripture and NOT the spurious Apocrypha.

In addition, scripture in those days was NOT written/printed in books as it is today, but was hand written on scrolls which made copies very expensive.   Therefore, it is highly unlikely that young Timothy had a personal copy of of the scriptures, let alone a copy of the LXX containing spurious Apocrypha.

Timothy undoubtedly knew exactly which writings the Apostle Paul was speaking of .   For example, I often use the Catholic New American Bible (NAB) which contains some Apocrypha books, but I well know which books are the Holy Scriptures as did Timothy, and which are spurious Apocrypha.   In other words, this Sunni Muslim is implying that Timothy was both stupid and gullible, a fact NOT in anyway supported by scripture as quite the contrary is supported by scripture.

CONCLUSION;

Members of Islam get irrationally insane over silly cartoons, a speech in a university where the Pope quoted from something a Byzantine Emperor said which they mistook as the Pope trying to insult them - which he was not trying to do, and other minor and silly nonsense.   However, they feel it is okay to tell untruths and deceitful things about the Apostle Paul - what a double standard they have as shown in this article.

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT   WWW.JW.ORG

COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2]    SOME MAKE A BIG DEAL OUT OF A MISTAKE IN A TRANSLATIONAL CONSTRUCT:

[1]       SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [459B]

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.  Genesis 3:16,  [authorized King James Bible; AV]

Indeed, the Bible clearly shows women as having great child birth pains with one account being given at 1 Chronicles 4:9, [AV] “And Jabez was more honourable than his brethren: and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow.”  And, one women is shown as having actually died from the great pains of child birth at Genesis 35:16 - 18, [AV] “And they journeyed from Bethel; and there was but a little way to come to Ephrath: and Rachel travailed, and she had hard labour.  17  And it came to pass, when she was in hard labour, that the midwife said unto her, Fear not; thou shalt have this son also.  18  And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing, (for she died) that she called his name Benoni: but his father called him Benjamin.”   

[2]       SOME MAKE A BIG DEAL OUT OF A MISTAKE IN A TRANSLATIONAL CONSTRUCT:

INTRODUCTION:

There are men being led by the Devil per 2 Corinthians 4:4, "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (Authorized King James Bible; AV) who make a big deal out of seemingly contradictions in a Bible translation such as the Authorized King James Bible such as the following,

Acts 9:7, "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man." (Authorized King James Bible; AV)

And,

Acts 22:7, "And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?" (Authorized King James Bible; AV)

Who do not bother to consider that translators are faced with a very difficult task of trying to capture what the original writer was saying in his own language.   Some do a better job than others in capturing in another language what the thoughts of the original writer, writing in his own language, was really saying.   This task is even more difficult when the original language Koine Greek is no longer a spoken language and one is translating and/or trying to translate into another language of an entirely different language group such as English.   Yet these false prophets and false accusers try and mislead and deceive as warned against at Matthew 24:24, "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." (AV).

Let's look at an actual example of this deceitful practice.

ACTUAL EXAMPLE OF A DECEITFUL CHARGE OF CONTRADICTION:

Here is an actual example of this deceptive and deceitful practice of charging falsely contradiction; whereas, in reality it is nothing but a trivial faulty translational construct which many occur in the Authorized King James Bible for two distinct reasons, as follows:

[1] The original translators did NOT have access to many ancient manuscripts for cross comparison and the knowledge of ancient Koine Greek was way below what it is today.

[2] The actual translators strived to do a good job but were handicapped due to their insufficient knowledge of the ancient language so could NOT always accurate capture the thoughts of the original writer writing in his own language.

Now with that in mind, let's look at the misleader's actual post:
<<"Let me deal with the first part of your article[*1] about paul seeing jesus on path to damascus you said, Acts 9:7 ''And the men which journeyed with (paul) stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.'' I find this very difficult to believe infact i have a verse which contradicts the mentioned above. Acts 22:9 ''And they that were with me (paul) saw indeed the light and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.'' But then again what can you expect from a uninspired man. The next part i would like to deal with is the Galatians, you said, that there was no other gospel, let me show you that there was another gospel. GALATIANS 1:6 ''...I AM SO ASTONISHED THAT YOU ARE SO QUICKLY DESERTING THE ONE WHO CALLED YOU BY THE GRACE OF CHRIST AND ARE TURNING TO A DIFFERENT GOSPEL...''. I know many former christians which believe the ''DIFFERENT GOSPEL'' was the genuine gospel of christ. The ''DIFFERENT GOSPEL'' carried alot of weight because people started turning away from the one Paul preached.">>.
[*1 = Muslims Deceitfully Attack the Apostle Paul by Iris the Preacher, 2006, and can be now viewed at,
http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=recognize&thread=1163880097]

Note, he also takes an unwarranted attack on the Apostle Paul, a man personally selected by the resurrected Jesus (Yeshua) Christ to carry on his work of proclaiming the gospel of Jesus (Yeshua) as clearly shown in the Ninth Chapter and Twenty Second Chapter of the Book of Acts, how far can one go with false accusations?

Now let's look at the translational construct situation.

TRANSLATIONAL CONSTRUCTS - THE REALITY:

This transnational construct trivial difference in the Authorized King James Bible between Acts 9:7 and 22:9 is well known, let's look at some data on it:

<<"... the most well-known alleged contradiction came up - that of Acts 9:7 and Acts 22:9. In October of 1986, I received a letter from Mr. Barker. He sent me a four page document entitled "Did Paul's Men Hear A Voice?" In it he gave a great deal of information on the usage of the genitive and accusative cases relevant to the word akouo (to hear) and its direct objects, primarily phone (sound, voice) since these are the important terms in discussing Acts 9:7/22:9. Though not dealing with all of the issues involved (in my opinion), Mr. Barker did a fine job in stating his belief that the two passages are contradictory. To close our presentation of "Letters to an Anti-Theist," we will examine this "contradiction."

It is quite easy to see the supposed contradiction at this point. The King James Version reads:
9:7 - "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
22:9 - "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me."
Clearly the question is - did the men hear the voice or not?  [b] To answer that question, we must, obviously, deal with the text as written by Luke in its original languages.  This is an excellent example of a situation where the original words must be allowed to be heard in the argument, for we could be charging Luke with a simple mistake that he did not make. Also, we need to notice that modern versions translate the passage differently. For example, the New International Version reads as follows:
9:7 - "The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone.
22:9 - "My companions saw the light, but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me."
Note that in the NIV the contradiction no longer exists; in the first passage the men hear a sound; in the second they do not understand the voice of the one speaking to Saul. Mr. Barker and other critics would assert that the NIV has translated in accordance with interpretation and convenience rather than according to language and usage. But is this so? Lets examine these passages and see.

First, before going into the text itself, we must address the issue of "what is a contradiction?" The law of contradiction, stated briefly, would be that you cannot have A and non-A simultaneously. You cannot have a chair in a room and outside the room at the same time. That would be a contradiction. But, is this what we have in this case in Acts?

The answer can only be no, we do not have a contradiction here. First, let's transliterate the passages so that their differences can be seen:
9:7 - akouontes men tes phones
22:9 - ten de phonen ouk ekousan phones legouses moi
It would be good to list the differences between the passages:

1. In 9:7 akouo is found as a nominative plural participle; in 22:9 it is a plural aorist verb.
2. In 9:7 phone is a singular genitive noun; in 22:9 it is a singular accusative noun.
3. In 9:7 akouo precedes its object; in 22:9 it follows its object.
4. In 9:7 the phrase is not modified; in 22:9 it is modified by "of the one speaking to me."
5. In 9:7 Luke is narrating an event in Greek; in 22:9 Paul is speaking to a crowd in Hebrew (or Aramaic).

Clearly the critic is placed in an impossible position of forcing the argument here, for the differences between the two passages are quite significant. Hence, the argument must proceed on the grounds of contradictory meanings only, for the grammar of the two passages will not support a clear "A vs. non-A" proposition.
We then must answer the question, are the differences between these passages significant enough to warrant the NIV's translation? Do we have a solid basis upon which to assert that what Paul meant was that the men heard a sound but did not understand what the voice was saving? I believe we do, and I am not alone on this. Following are some of the comments made by some eminent Greek scholars about these passages:
Thus in Acts 9:7, "hearing the voice," the noun "voice' is in the partitive genitive case [i.e., hearing (something) of], whereas in 22:9, "they heard not the voice," the construction is with the accusative. This removes the idea of any contradiction. The former indicates a hearing of the sound, the latter indicates the meaning or message of the voice (this they did not hear). "The former denotes the sensational perception, the latter (the accusative case) the thing perceived." (Cremer). In John 5:25, 28, the genitive case is used, indicating a "sensational perception" that the Lord's voice is sounding; in 3:8, of hearing the wind, the accusative is used, stressing "the thing perceived." (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words by W.E. Vine, pages 204-205).
Instead of this being a flat contradiction of what Luke says in 9:7 it is natural to take it as being likewise (as with the "light" and "no one') a distinction between the "sound' (original sense of phone as in John 3:8) and the separate words spoken. It so happens that akouo is used either with the accusative (extent of the hearing) or the genitive (the specifying). It is possible that such a distinction here coincides with the two senses of phone. They heard the sound (9:7), but did not understand the words (22:9). However, this distinction in case with akouo, though possible and even probable here, is by no means a necessary one for in John 3:8 where phonen undoubtedly means "sound" the accusative occurs as Luke uses ekousa phonen about Saul in Acts 9:4. Besides in Acts 22:7 Paul uses ekousa phones about himself, but ekousa phonen about himself in 26:14, interchangeably. (Word Pictures in the New Testament by Dr. A.T. Robertson, volume III, pages 117- 118).
The fact that the maintenance of an old and well-known distinction between the acc. and the gen. with akouo saves the author of Acts 9:7 and 22:9 from a patent self-contradiction, should by itself be enough to make us recognize it for Luke, and for other writers until it is proved wrong. (A Grammar of New Testament Creek by James Hope Moulton, vol I., page 66. Robertson quotes this approvingly in A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in Light of Historical Research on pages 448-449).
The partitive gen. occurs in NT with verbs of perception, especially with a personal object. For akouo, the class(ical) rule is that the person whose words are heard is in the gen. ...but the thing (or person) about which one hears is in the accus., and akouo c. accus. may mean to understand...We have to ask whether the class, distinction between gen. and accus. has significance for exegesis in NT. There may be something in the difference between the gen. in Ac. 9:7 (the men with Paul heard the sound ) and the accus. in Ac 22:9 (they did not understand the voice). (A Grammar of New Testament Greek vol. III by Nigel Turner, pg. 233).

Basically, these writers are referring to the possibility that the difference in the case of the term akouo would in this instance (9:7, 22:9) point to a difference in meaning. However, as Mr. Barker points out in his letter to me, and as Dr. A. T. Robertson said above many years earlier, this distinction cannot be written in stone. Why then do we feel that we are correct in asserting this difference as the the "answer" to this supposed contradiction? Context. Though none of the above authors went deeply into the subject, an examination of the context of the passages in question here make it very clear that Luke meant a difference to be understood in what he was writing.

The key element in this investigation is pointed out by R. J. Knowling (Expositor's Greek Testament vol. 2 ed. by W. Robertson Nicoll pages 231 -233) and by John Aberly (New Testament Commentary edited by H. C. Alleman page 414). In Acts 22:9 Paul is speaking to a crowd in Jerusalem. According to Acts 21:40 Paul addressed the crowd in Hebrew (NIV says Aramaic - exactly which dialect it was is not very relevant). He mentions to his Hebrew listeners that when Jesus called him, he called him in their own language - Hebrew. How do we know this? In both Acts 9:4 and in Acts 22:7 Saul is not spelled in its normal form, but is spelled in its Hebrew (or Aramaic) form Saoul. What does this tell us? It tells us that the "voice" spoke in Hebrew. Therefore, Acts 22:9 would he referring to the fact that the men who accompanied Paul did not understand what was said for they could not understand Hebrew! The text supports this very strongly, for Paul modifies his saying "they did not hear (understand) the voice" by adding the vital phrase, "of the one speaking to me (to lalountos moi)." The emphasis is on the speaking of the voice, which would indicate comprehension and understanding. Now, given the above scholar's quotations, and the context of the passages, can anyone seriously deny that there is a perfectly plausible explanation for this supposed contradiction? I think not." [source - The Hall of Shame by by James White of Alpha & Omega Ministeries]>>.

So we can see that this false accuser of the Apostle Paul is only blowing hot air as there is no real contradiction, but simply a trivial error in the translational construct.

CONCLUSION:

This supposed contradiction was not a contradiction in reality, but a simple and trivial failure by the translator to fully capture the thoughts of the original writer writing in his own language, a simple error in a translational construct.

Interestingly, all supposed contradictions are of the same and/or similar nature; the inability of the translator to fully capture the thoughts of the original writer, writing in his own language, or failure to comprehend some ancient culture thing or item such as "pim" whose meaning was not known until a very recent archaeological study, for details, see, THE BIBLE'S HISTORICITY AND CORRECTNESS TESTIFIED TO BY A "PIM", by Iris-the-Preacher, 2005, now can be read at,
http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?board=history&action=display&thread=1163273452

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT   WWW.JW.ORG[/b]

COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2]   THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SACRIFICE OF ABRAHAM

[1]       SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [461B]

A friend loveth at all times, and a brother is born for adversity.   Proverbs 17:17,  [authorized King James Bible; AV]

This important point is made in one way or another throughout the Bible such as at Proverbs 18:24, [AV] “A man that hath friends must shew himself friendly: and there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother.”  And this genuine love was shown between David and Jonathan, the son of King Saul at 1 Samuel 18:3 - 4, [AV] “Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.  4  And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle.”  And between Ruth and Naomi at Ruth 1:16 - 18, [AV] “And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God:  17  Where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried: the LORD do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me.  18  When she saw that she was stedfastly minded to go with her, then she left speaking unto her.” 


[2]       THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SACRIFICE OF ABRAHAM

INTRODUCTION:

Let's look at what an encyclopedia says to give you a feel for the situation, <<" The Binding of Isaac (Hebrew: ???????? ???????, Akedát Yitzhák) in Genesis 22, is a story from the Hebrew Bible in which God asks Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac on Mount Moriah. To many readers the tale is one of the most challenging, complex, mystifying, and perhaps ethically troublesome episodes in the entire Bible. The story is referred to as the Akedah (????) or Akedat Yitzchak (????? ????) in Hebrew (the binding of Isaac) and as the Dhabih in Arabic.
Abraham agrees to God's command without argument, even though God gives him no reason for the sacrifice (called an Olah in Hebrew -- for the significance of sacrifices, especially in Biblical times, see the korbanot). The text of the story says that God wishes to test Abraham, which indicates that he does not intend for Abraham to actually sacrifice his son. Indeed, after Isaac is bound to an altar, an angel stops Abraham at the last minute, at which point Abraham discovers a ram caught in some nearby bushes. Abraham then sacrifices the ram in Isaac's stead.
According to Josephus, Isaac is twenty-five years old at the time of the sacrifice, while the Talmudic sages teach that Isaac is thirty-seven. In either case, Isaac is a fully grown man, strong enough to prevent the elderly Abraham (who is 125 or 137 years old) from tying him up had he wanted to resist.
In 2 Chronicles 3:1, the Bible seems to identify the location of this event as the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, though Genesis only states that it occurred on a mountain somewhere in "the region of Moriah," and not necessarily on the hill of that name. This space is currently occupied by the Dome of the Rock. Some have speculated that the binding may have occurred at Golgotha, i.e., Calvary, the hill on which Jesus was crucified, which is also a hill in the same general vicinity." [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on 11/21/2006]

GOD (YHWH) MADE A COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM FOR THE PROMISED 'SEED' TO COME THROUGH HIS SON ISAAC:

First, let's consider the fact Abraham was of the line of Shem, and in an earlier prophecy Noah had spoken of Jehovah as "Shem's God" per Genesis 9:26-27, "And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.  27  God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).  This indicated God's favor on Shem.  In Abraham's time the "seed" of promise was foretold to come through Abraham at Genesis 15:5, "And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be." (AV) .

So we can see the promised 'seed' was foretold to come through Abraham.   This seed was to come through the only son of Abraham by his wife Sarah, and was to be a vital link in the line of descent leading up to Christ as shown by Luke 3:34, "Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor," (AV).   The birth of this only son of Abraham's wife Sarah was under the most unusual circumstances.   How so? Both his father and his mother were very old, his mother long before having stopped menstruating as testified to at Genesis 18:9-14, "And they said unto him, Where is Sarah thy wife? And he said, Behold, in the tent.  10  And he said, I will certainly return unto thee according to the time of life; and, lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. And Sarah heard it in the tent door, which was behind him.  11  Now Abraham and Sarah were old and well stricken in age; and it ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women.  12  Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?  13  And the LORD said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old?  14  Is any thing too hard for the LORD? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son." (AV).   Therefore, as can be seen from the scriptures, that when the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, told him this, both he nor his wife, Sarah, had a hard time believing it.   In fact Abraham said at Genesis 17:17, "Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear?" (AV).

Now this son of Abraham and his wife Sarah was to be the one whom the promised 'seed' and the everlasting covenant would come as testified to in Genesis 17:, "And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.  20  And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.  21  But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.  22  And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham." (AV). 

Now some may ask just what is a covenant, and for an understanding of that we shall look at a Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, <<"An agreement between two or more persons to do or refrain from doing some act; a compact; a contract. The Hebrew word berith', whose etymology is uncertain, appears over 280 times in the Hebrew Scriptures; more than 80 of these occurrences are in the five books of Moses. That its basic meaning is "covenant," comparable to our modern legal word "contract," is seen from cuneiform tablets found in 1927 at Qatna, an ancient non-Israelite city SE of Hamath. "The contents of the two tablets [of 15 found] are simple. Tablet A contains a list of names . . . Tablet B is a ration list . . . List A is thus a compact in which the men in question . . . agree to enter someone's service or to carry out certain obligations. List B, written by the same scribe, then illustrates the nature of the compact; the men were to receive specified rations in return for their services. . . . the Israelite concept of berit, 'covenant,' was a central theme in Yahwist theology. Here we have the first published extra-biblical occurrence of the word from early times-not later than the first third of the fourteenth century B.C." [source - Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, February 1951, p. 22.]>>.

Now in some translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures the word di·a·the'ke is variously rendered "covenant," "will," "testament" (testamentum, Vg). However, M'Clintock and Strong's Cyclopaedia (1891) says, under "Covenant": <<"There seems, however, to be no necessity for the introduction of a new word [other than "covenant"] conveying a new idea. The Sept[uagint] having rendered [berith'] (which never means will or testament, but always covenant or agreement) by [di·a·the'ke] consistently throughout the O.T., the N.T. writers, in adopting that word, may naturally be supposed to intend to convey to their readers, most of them familiar with the Greek O.T., the same idea. Moreover, in the majority of cases, the same thing which has been called a 'covenant' (berith') in the O.T. is referred to in the N.T. (e.g. 2Cor. iii, 14; Heb. vii, ix; Rev. xi, 19); while in the same context the same word and thing in the Greek are in the English [in KJ] sometimes represented by 'covenant,' and sometimes by 'testament' (Heb. vii, 22; viii, 8-13; ix, 15)."-See also NW appendix, pp. 1584, 1585.">>.

So we can see that a covenant is a contract for something to be received and or done.   A covenant always involves two or more parties.   Covenants can be unilateral - where one side has the sole responsibility to carry out the terms, or bilateral - where both sides have the responsibility to carry out its terms.

Therefore, the promise made by the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, with Abraham is a covenant or contract.   However, when the the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, makes a covenant, it is certain to be carried out; it can be relied on with confidence for its fulfillment as testified to at Hebrews 6:18, "That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:" (AV).   In this case the covenant and promised 'seed' was to be through Abraham's son, Isaac - he had another son, but it was NOT through his wife Sarah.

This son of Abraham, Isaac, was indeed born and the account at Genesis 21:1-9 says, "And the LORD visited Sarah as he had said, and the LORD did unto Sarah as he had spoken.  2  For Sarah conceived, and bare Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him.  3  And Abraham called the name of his son that was born unto him, whom Sarah bare to him, Isaac.  4  And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac being eight days old, as God had commanded him.  5  And Abraham was an hundred years old, when his son Isaac was born unto him.  6  And Sarah said, God hath made me to laugh, so that all that hear will laugh with me.  7  And she said, Who would have said unto Abraham, that Sarah should have given children suck? for I have born him a son in his old age.  8  And the child grew, and was weaned: and Abraham made a great feast the same day that Isaac was weaned." (AV)

WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF GOD (YHWH) ASKING ABRAHAM TO SACRIFICE ISAAC?

First, let's consider that all sacrifices commanded under the Law covenant all pointed forward to Jesus Christ and his sacrifice or to benefits that flow from that sacrifice per Hebrews 8:3-5, "For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
4  For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:  5  Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount." (AV); and Hebrews 9:9, "Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;" (AV); and Hebrews 10:5-10, "Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:  6  In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.  7 ¶  Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.  8  Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;  9  Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.  10  By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." (AV). 

Now, the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, tested Abraham's faith by requesting that he offer up his son Isaac through whom the promised 'seed' was to come as recorded at Genesis 22:1-2, "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.  2  And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of." (AV).

Now Abraham must have wondered when asked by the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, to sacrifice his son, Isaac, through whom the promised seed was to come, but he new a covenant with the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, would NOT fail.   Abraham well knew that anything with the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, was possible, and that the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, could raise his son, Isaac, from the dead so the covenant could be fulfilled.

However, the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, did not let Abraham kill his son, Isaac, as a sacrifice, but on seeing his unquestionable faith provided an animal in place of Isaac as the sacrifice as recorded at Genesis 22:3-19, "And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him.  4  Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off.  5  And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ass; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you.  6  And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together.  7  And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?  8  And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.  9  And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood.
10  And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.  11 ¶  And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.  12  And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.  13  And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.  14  And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen.  15 ¶  And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time,  16  And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:  17  That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;  18  And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.  19  So Abraham returned unto his young men, and they rose up and went together to Beersheba; and Abraham dwelt at Beersheba." (AV).

This dramatic episode proved the faith and obedience not only of Abraham but also of his son Isaac. Jewish tradition, recorded by Flavious Josephus, says that Isaac was 25 years old at the time.   Flavious Josephus may not be completely correct on this, but at least he was old enough and strong enough to carry a lot of firewood up a mountain; therefore he could easily have resisted his approximately 125 year old father when the time came to bind him if he had choosen to be rebellious against the commandment of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is. [reference - Jewish Antiquities by Flavious Josephus], but instead, Isaac submissively let his father proceed to offer him as a sacrifice in harmony with the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael's, will.

For this remarkable demonstration of faith, the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, repeated the covenant and enlarged on it; which covenant was transferred by the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, to Isaac after the death of his father as recorded at Genesis 26:1-5, "And there was a famine in the land, beside the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines unto Gerar.  2  And the LORD appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of:  3  Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father;  4  And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;  5  Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws." (AV); and highlighted at Romans 9:7, "Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called." (AV); and also at James 2:21, "Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?" (AV).

CONCLUSION:

Not only did this test of Abraham's faith show he firmly believed in the promise of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, for the promised 'seed' to come through the line of Abraham's son, Isaac, but it even resulted in an enlargement of the promised covenant that was to come through the line of Isaac.

More important, a great prophetic picture was there enacted, portraying how Christ Jesus, the Greater Isaac, would in due time willingly lay down his human life as the Lamb of God for mankind's salvation per John 1:29 and 36, "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." (AV) and "And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!' (AV); and John 3:16, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).

TO LEARN MORE, READ THE BROCHURE AT,  HTTPS://WWW.JW.ORG/EN/LIBRARY/BOOKS/ENJOY-LIFE-FOREVER-BROCHURE/

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT   WWW.JW.ORG

COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2]    EXPLANATION OF MARK 7:24-29:

[1]       SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [463B]

And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;   2 Peter 2:5,  [authorized King James Bible; AV]

Almighty God (YHWH) wants both the angels and humans He created to be obedient as shown by 2 Peter 2:4, [AV] “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;”  Yes, we must also believe that is is the Creator to win His approval as testified to at Hebrews 11:6 – 7, [AV] “But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.  7  By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.”  And this wicked systems will soon be destroyed as shown by 2 Peter 3:5 – 7, [AV] “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:  6  Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:  7  But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men”.   

[2]      EXPLANATION OF MARK 7:24-29:

INTRODUCTION:

Before considering Mark 7:24-29, it is important to realize that the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, is no respecter of persons as he created all of mankind not just one particular group.   This point that he is no respecter of persons, a discriminator, was clearly made at Acts 10:34-35 by the Apostle Luke as follows, "Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:  35  But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).   

EXPLANATION OF MARK 7:24-29:

To understand this scripture, we first must know what his Father, the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, who sent Jesus (Yeshua), the Isa, to earth with a specific assignment stated at Matthew 15:24, "But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (AV); however, because of his great love and compassion for mankind, he was moved to assist her, nevertheless as recorded at Mark 7:24-29, "Mark 7:24-30, "And from thence he arose, and went into the borders of Tyre and Sidon, and entered into an house, and would have no man know it: but he could not be hid.  25  For a certain woman, whose young daughter had an unclean spirit, heard of him, and came and fell at his feet:  26  The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation; and she besought him that he would cast forth the devil out of her daughter.  27  But Jesus said unto her, Let the children first be filled: for it is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it unto the dogs.  28  And she answered and said unto him, Yes, Lord: yet the dogs under the table eat of the children's crumbs.  29  And he said unto her, For this saying go thy way; the devil is gone out of thy daughter.  And when she was come to her house, she found the devil gone out, and her daughter laid upon the bed." (AV).   

This was not the only time was persuaded to deviate from his specific assignment from his Father, the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, but another similar case is reported by the Apostle Matthew at Matthew 15:21-28, "Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.  22  And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.  23  But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.  24  But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.  25  Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.  26  But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.  27  And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.  28  Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour." (AV).

CONCLUSION:

The true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, is no respecter of persons, discriminator, but finds all doing his will and serving him in obedience acceptable regardless of what race
and/or nationality they are.

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT   WWW.JW.ORG

 
COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND  [2]   A CHECK ON THE WORD HELL


[1]       SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [464B]

And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us:  1 John 5:14, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

Yes, he hearth us as shown by 1 John 5:15, [AV] “And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him.”  Almighty God (YHWH) will hear us if per 1 John 3:21 - 22, [AV] “Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.  22  And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.”  Then, per Hebrews 4:16, [AV] “Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.”  Clearly as recorded at John 9:31, [AV] “  Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth.”   


[2]   A CHECK ON THE WORD HELL

INTRODUCTION:

Many have different concepts of what hell is, but let's consider what the original words commonly translated 'hell' meant in the specific ancient languages.

MEANINGS OF THE WORD 'HELL' IN ORIGINAL LANGUAGES:

First, <<"A word used in the King James Version (as well as in the Catholic Douay Version and most older translations) to translate the Hebrew she´ohl' and the Greek hai'des. In the King James Version the word "hell" is rendered from she´ohl' 31 times and from hai'des 10 times. This version is not consistent, however, since she´ohl' is also translated 31 times "grave" and 3 times "pit." In the Douay Version she´ohl' is rendered "hell" 64 times, "pit" once, and "death" once.
In 1885, with the publication of the complete English Revised Version, the original word she´ohl' was in many places transliterated into the English text of the Hebrew Scriptures, though, in most occurrences, "grave" and "pit" were used, and "hell" is found some 14 times. This was a point on which the American committee disagreed with the British revisers, and so, when producing the American Standard Version (1901) they transliterated she´ohl' in all 65 of its appearances. Both versions transliterated hai'des in the Christian Greek Scriptures in all ten of its occurrences, though the Greek word Ge'en·na (English, "Gehenna") is rendered "hell" throughout, as is true of many other modern translations.
Concerning this use of "hell" to translate these original words from the Hebrew and Greek, Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (1981, Vol. 2, p. 187) says: "HADES . . . It corresponds to 'Sheol' in the O.T. [Old Testament]. In the A.V. of the O.T. [Old Testament] and N.T. [New Testament], it has been unhappily rendered 'Hell.'"[source - , Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words ]>>.

Second, <<"Collier's Encyclopedia (1986, Vol. 12, p. 28) says concerning "Hell": "First it stands for the Hebrew Sheol of the Old Testament and the Greek Hades of the Septuagint and New Testament. Since Sheol in Old Testament times referred simply to the abode of the dead and suggested no moral distinctions, the word 'hell,' as understood today, is not a happy translation."
It is, in fact, because of the way that the word "hell" is understood today that it is such an unsatisfactory translation of these original Bible words." [source - Collier's Encyclopedia (1986, Vol. 12, p. 28)>>.

Third, <<"Webster's Third New International Dictionary, unabridged, under "Hell" says: "fr[om] . . . helan to conceal." The word "hell" thus originally conveyed no thought of heat or torment but simply of a 'covered over or concealed place.' In the old English dialect the expression "helling potatoes" meant, not to roast them, but simply to place the potatoes in the ground or in a cellar." [source - Webster's Third New International Dictionary]>>.

Fourth, <<"The meaning given today to the word "hell" is that portrayed in Dante's Divine Comedy and Milton's Paradise Lost, which meaning is completely foreign to the original definition of the word. The idea of a "hell" of fiery torment, however, dates back long before Dante or Milton." [references - Dante's Divine Comedy and Milton's Paradise Lost]>>.

Fifth, <<"The Grolier Universal Encyclopedia (1971, Vol. 9, p. 205) under "Hell" says: "Hindus and Buddhists regard hell as a place of spiritual cleansing and final restoration." [source - The Grolier Universal Encyclopedia}>>.

Sixth, <<"Islamic tradition considers it as a place of everlasting punishment." The idea of suffering after death is found among the pagan religious teachings of ancient peoples in Babylon and Egypt. Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs depicted the "nether world . . . as a place full of horrors, . . . presided over by gods and demons of great strength and fierceness." Although ancient Egyptian religious texts do not teach that the burning of any individual victim would go on forever, they do portray the "Other World" as featuring "pits of fire" for "the damned." [source references -The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, by Morris Jastrow, Jr., 1898, p. 581; The Book of the Dead, with introduction by E. Wallis Budge, 1960, pp. 135, 144, 149, 151, 153, 161, 200]>>.

Seventh, <<""Hellfire" has been a basic teaching in Christendom for many centuries. It is understandable why The Encyclopedia Americana (1956, Vol. XIV, p. 81) said: "Much confusion and misunderstanding has been caused through the early translators of the Bible persistently rendering the Hebrew Sheol and the Greek Hades and Gehenna by the word hell. The simple transliteration of these words by the translators of the revised editions of the Bible has not sufficed to appreciably clear up this confusion and misconception." Nevertheless, such transliteration and consistent rendering does enable the Bible student to make an accurate comparison of the texts in which these original words appear and, with open mind, thereby to arrive at a correct understanding of their true significance." [source - The Encyclopedia Americana (1956, Vol. XIV, p. 81)]>>.

NOW LET'S LOOK AT THE WORD 'GEHENNA' OFTEN TRANSLATED AS 'HELL':

<<"(Ge·hen'na) [Gr. form of the Heb. Geh Hin·nom', "Valley of Hinnom"].
This name appears 12 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures, and whereas many translators take the liberty to render it by the word "hell," a number of modern translations transliterate the word from the Greek ge'en·na.-Mt 5:22, Ro, Mo, ED, NW, BC (Spanish), NC (Spanish), also the footnotes of Da and RS.
The deep, narrow Valley of Hinnom, later known by this Greek name, lay to the S and SW of ancient Jerusalem and is the modern-day Wadi er-Rababi (Ge Ben Hinnom). (Jos 15:8; 18:16; Jer 19:2, 6; see HINNOM, VALLEY OF.) Judean Kings Ahaz and Manasseh engaged in idolatrous worship there, which included the making of human sacrifices by fire to Baal. (2Ch 28:1, 3; 33:1, 6; Jer 7:31, 32; 32:35) Later, to prevent such activities there in the future, faithful King Josiah had the place of idolatrous worship polluted, particularly the section called Topheth.-2Ki 23:10.


No Symbol of Everlasting Torment. Jesus Christ associated fire with Gehenna (Mt 5:22; 18:9; Mr 9:47, 48), as did the disciple James, the only Biblical writer besides Matthew, Mark, and Luke to use the word. (Jas 3:6) Some commentators endeavor to link such fiery characteristic of Gehenna with the burning of human sacrifices that was carried on prior to Josiah's reign and, on this basis, hold that Gehenna was used by Jesus as a symbol of everlasting torment. However, since Jehovah God expressed repugnance for such practice, saying that it was "a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart" (Jer 7:31; 32:35), it seems most unlikely that God's Son, in discussing divine judgment, would make such idolatrous practice the basis for the symbolic meaning of Gehenna. It may be noted that God prophetically decreed that the Valley of Hinnom would serve as a place for mass disposal of dead bodies rather than for the torture of live victims. (Jer 7:32, 33; 19:2, 6, 7, 10, 11) Thus, at Jeremiah 31:40 the reference to "the low plain of the carcasses and of the fatty ashes" is generally accepted as designating the Valley of Hinnom, and a gate known as "the Gate of the Ash-heaps" evidently opened out onto the eastern extremity of the valley at its juncture with the ravine of the Kidron. (Ne 3:13, 14) It seems obvious that such "carcasses" and "fatty ashes" are not related to the human sacrifices made there under Ahaz and Manasseh, since any bodies so offered would doubtless be viewed by the idolaters as "sacred" and would not be left lying in the valley.

Therefore, the Biblical evidence concerning Gehenna generally parallels the traditional view presented by rabbinic and other sources. That view is that the Valley of Hinnom was used as a place for the disposal of waste matter from the city of  Jerusalem. (At Mt 5:30 Ph renders ge'en·na as "rubbish heap.") Concerning "Gehinnom," the Jewish commentator David Kimhi (1160-1235?), in his comment on Psalm 27:13, gives the following historical information: "And it is a place in the land adjoining Jerusalem, and it is a loathsome place, and they throw there unclean things and carcasses. Also there was a continual fire there to burn the unclean things and the bones of the carcasses. Hence, the judgment of the wicked ones is called parabolically Gehinnom."

Symbolic of Complete Destruction. It is evident that Jesus used Gehenna as representative of utter destruction resulting from adverse judgment by God, hence with no resurrection to life as a soul being possible. (Mt 10:28; Lu 12:4, 5) The scribes and Pharisees as a wicked class were denounced as 'subjects for Gehenna.' (Mt 23:13-15, 33) To avoid such destruction, Jesus' followers were to get rid of anything causing spiritual stumbling, the 'cutting off of a hand or foot' and the 'tearing out of an eye' figuratively representing their deadening of these body members with reference to sin.-Mt 18:9; Mr 9:43-47; Col 3:5; compare Mt 5:27-30.
Jesus also apparently alluded to Isaiah 66:24 in describing Gehenna as a place "where their maggot does not die and the fire is not put out." (Mr 9:47, 48) That the symbolic picture here is not one of torture but, rather, of complete destruction is evident from the fact that the Isaiah text dealt, not with persons who were alive, but with "the carcasses of the men that were transgressing" against God. If, as the available evidence indicates, the Valley of Hinnom was a place for the disposal of garbage and carcasses, fire, perhaps increased in intensity by the addition of sulfur (compare Isa 30:33), would be the only suitable means to eliminate such refuse. Where the fire did not reach, worms, or maggots, would breed, consuming anything not destroyed by the fire. On this basis, Jesus' words would mean that the destructive effect of God's adverse judgment would not cease until complete destruction was attained.

Figurative Use. The disciple James' use of the word "Gehenna" shows that an unruly tongue is itself a world of unrighteousness and that one's whole round of living can be affected by fiery words that defile the speaker's body. The tongue of such a one, "full of death-dealing poison" and so giving evidence of a bad heart condition, can cause the user to be sentenced by God to go to the symbolic Gehenna.-Jas 3:6, 8; compare Mt 12:37; Ps 5:9; 140:3; Ro 3:13.
The Biblical use of Gehenna as a symbol corresponds to that of "the lake of fire" in the book of Revelation.-Re 20:14, 15; " [source - Insight on the Scriptures, Vol. 1]>>.

CONCLUSION:

We must consider what the original writer, scribe used by the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, to put the thoughts of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, creator of all there is, into the words of man intended when considering words found in the Bible.  Why?  Because they, not translations and/or mistranslation, are inspired.  The fact that the Bible is NOT the product of one committee or strongman. It has over 40 individual writers who wrote under divine inspiration/guidance putting the thoughts of God (YHWH) into the words of men much as transcribing secretaries today taking transcription and then later typing it out. In other words one real author, God (YHWH), and many scribes each of whom wrote in his own style over a period of approximately 1,600 years. All of what people call or consider inconsistencies are really not such, but most often just a problem of translation and/or understanding, i.e., lack of understanding of what the original writer writing in his own language and culture meant/said in his original writing. What is remarkable, is the writers over such a period of time all wrote in harmony when even most posters on threads on this forum can not even stay on track or subject over a period of a few days and/or weeks at most with the original subject of the thread. This fact of harmony over a period so great as to almost stagger the imagination shows that it had one guiding force or author who divinely inspired its writers as humans of their own volition can not keep on track over short periods of time.

TO LEARN MORE, READ THE BROCHURE AT,  HTTPS://WWW.JW.ORG/EN/LIBRARY/BOOKS/ENJOY-LIFE-FOREVER-BROCHURE/

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE NEW COVENANT, GO TO:  https://religioustruthsbyi.createaforum.com/general-discussion/the-new-covenant/


LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT   WWW.JW.ORG