Poll: What is in a Bible?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Ed Edwards, Jul 15, 2004.

?

Is the original Hebrew text of the O.T. a part of a Bible?

  1. Yes

    94.4%
  2. No, Invalidates the item as a Bible

    5.6%
  3. Other

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are the following in a bible?
    Say "yes" if it is alright that the following
    items are in a Bible.
    Answer "no" only if the inclusion of the
    item invalidates the Bible.
    Feel free to read the first post before
    voting.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    In a nearby Youth Forum is a discussion which
    said, among other things: " If you
    want to put that kind of stuff in a magazine,
    then so be it, but do not call it the bible.
    The bible is from God. That is not.
    If you say it is then you violate scripture."
    The statement is followed by a copy of
    Revelation 22:18-19.

    This poll is a list of things put into some books
    called "The Holy Bible". Mare "Yes" if you believe its addition to a book can be
    included in a Bible. Mark "no" if you feel
    its addition will make the book NOT a
    Bible. Mark "other" if you are
    ignorant (don't know), apathetic (don't care),
    or for any other reason you might have.
    You can read the results without voting first.

    [​IMG]
     
  3. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,430
    Likes Received:
    72
    The apocryphal writings were not originally written in Hebrew; the original language was Greek.

    If I'm not mistaken, the Council of Jamnia (or Yavneh) rejected them since they were not originally written in Hebrew.
     
  4. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unfortunately there is a big difference between an unqualified "NO" and "Other." :(
     
  5. Jim508

    Jim508
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    A tangential issue is what is in the printed book with the word "Bible" on the cover.

    I personally have no problem including notes, commentary, one-year reading guide, introductory matter, cross references, dictionaries, maps, and similar material in the printed book. It usually seems obvious what is being represented as the Word of God and what is not. Putting this material directly in with the text and numbering as verses would be a bit deceptive, though.

    That is why I would rather see the Apocrypha left out of a printed book with "Bible" on the cover, because the non-canonical text looks very similar to the canonical text: e.g. book, chapter, and verse divisions, "Biblical" language, no modern author claiming copyright, etc. Because of this it could easily mislead someone lacking knowlege of the Bible (a statement which sadly applies to much of "Christian" America these days).

    Of course if you view the Apocrypha as inspired, inerrant, incorruptible Word of God you will disagree.
     
  6. EaglewingIS4031

    EaglewingIS4031
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't have a problem including any helps such as concordances, maps, notes, testimonies etc. In a bible but it is evedent that these are divised of men and are not Holy Writ.

    Like wise I dont have a problem including the Apocriphal books if they are set apart from the Canon and it is clearly indicated that they are not Holy Writ.

    I have only read Bell and the Dragon, and 1st and 2nd Macabees these books can help a person understand the time between Testaments and there is Historical lessons that can be learned but there should be no doctrine or theology soley derived from these books.
     
  7. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are the comments of a fellow Christian (named) a part?
    Choose 1
    Yes 17% (2)
    No, Invalidates the item as a Bible 25% (3)
    Other 58% (7)

    So, 25% of the responer's think that
    if Some Schofield notes are appended to
    the KJV1769 text (as many Baptists were
    raised upon), this means they were NOT using
    a bonified HOLY BIBLE?
    Are we sure we want to say that?
    My KJV1769 has some notes about prophecy
    appended to the text (clearly marked) by
    Tim LaHaye. These make the KJV1769 text
    (clearly marked) invalid?

    Sometimes i get confused by my own polls :confused:
     
  8. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "The apocryphal writings were not originally written in Hebrew; the original language was Greek."
    ''
    It is very likely that some of the apocrypha were written in either Hebrew or Aramaic originally. after Jamnia the demand for the Hebrew versions of those texts declined dramatically.

    What disturbs me about this poll is that there are: {no, Invalidates the item as a Bible answers} being given to all of the questions.

    [ July 18, 2004, 05:57 AM: Message edited by: mioque ]
     
  9. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I guess that means we collectively
    believe that everything one puts in a Bible
    invalidates it as a Bible? Maybe I should
    have asked about "a copy of the autographs"??

    [​IMG]
     
  10. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,430
    Likes Received:
    72
    Perhaps you should have asked if including the word of God invalidates the item as a Bible! [​IMG]
     
  11. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very poor wording. There is no way to answer a simple "No" without including the part about invalidating the rest of it. The only other choice was "other" which is much, much too broad. Poor questions produce poor answers. :(
     
  12. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting, the largest minority
    is 36% who thing that the Translator notes
    are scripture.

    Personally I think the Translator notes
    are an integral part of
    inerrant Scripture. The milage of
    others may vary.

    [​IMG]
     
  13. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Any new members around wanting to vote?
     
  14. GODzThunder

    GODzThunder
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2003
    Messages:
    1,094
    Likes Received:
    0
    all praise the holy maps of the Bible, and great & mighty is the inspired concordance ;)
     
  15. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe the WHOLE BIBLE: Genesis to Maps! :D
     
  16. superdave

    superdave
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,055
    Likes Received:
    0
    How can they not be, they were, after all, included in the body text of the Holy Scriptures commissioned by King James. The Sword God forged in 1611

    oops, I forgot the ;) :D
     

Share This Page

Loading...