Jeremiah 29:11

[Trotter]

Natters,

Not if that is what they hear shouted at them every Sunday.

Faulty interpretation begets faulty interpretation.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

[TC]

That is why we neeed to be like the Bereans who searched the scriptures daily to see it what they were told was true. Laziness on our part is no excuse.

 

[Trotter]

Amen, TC!

 

[RaptureReady]

You guys have an arguement for every verse don't ya. You just cannot admit that one of your versions is wrong.

The two say different, therefore one is wrong. I choose the KJB over the NIV. You choose the NIV over the KJB, your choice. Question though, what happens when you are not prosperous, are you going to get mad at God?

God bless,
RR

 

[robycop3]

For those who are wondering what this thread is really about, here is jeremiah 29: 11 in its proper context, first in the KJV:

10 For thus saith the LORD, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place.
11 For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end.
12 Then shall ye call upon me, and ye shall go and pray unto me, and I will hearken unto you.

Now, from the NIV:
10 This is what the LORD says: "When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my gracious promise to bring you back to this place. 11 For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD , "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. 12 Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you.

In the first part of the chapter, God says not to believe the false prophets who say their sojourn in babylon will be short. God plainly says it will be seventy years...and then, He will return them to their own land.

We know that for awhile the Jews prospered when Cyrus allowed them to return to their land, while they had such men as Zerubabbel, Nehemiah, and Joshua(the high priest) as their leaders. But then they began to add things to their worship laws, creating Pharisees, adding rules made by these Pharisees, etc. During this time, the Jews were ruled by other nations, first the Persians, then the Greeks, then the Romans. Their greatest prosperity came after the Babylonian exile, when the Persian kings granted them a large measure of autonomy, and, being part of the persian empire, they were not menaced by any other nation...and they were serving God with their whole hearts.

Clearly, the entire 29th chapter of Jeremiah was dealing with the Jews' exile to Babylon and immediately afterwards.

 

[TC]

Originally posted by RaptureReady:
You guys have an arguement for every verse don't ya. You just cannot admit that one of your versions is wrong.

The two say different, therefore one is wrong. I choose the KJB over the NIV. You choose the NIV over the KJB, your choice. Question though, what happens when you are not prosperous, are you going to get mad at God?

God bless,
RR

I already answered. The meaning of the Hebrew words in the underlying source texts means that the NIV is just as right as the KJV here. Also, in context I cannot claim any such promise from this passage. It was written to Israel for after the Babylonian captivity. Besides, as I have shown, prosperity can be other things than simply money - such as having success in a venture. Example, if you are a mature, growing Christian, then you are prosperous in your Christian walk. Unless you, unlike Paul, are not running the race so as to win the prize.

 

[williemakeit]

Originally posted by TC:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />IMHO, it would not be considered laziness. I believe one of the tenets of using a modern version is that a dictionary is not needed due to the ease of understanding the modern language.

Not in my book. I use a dictionary all the time.

Regarding context, I hear too many sermons where preachers/pastors bring a specific verse out of anywhere in the Bible, and apply its truth to circumstances and situations of today. In context, David slew Goliath, end of story. How many sermons have you heard on that one?

Just because someone else does it, does not mean it is ok. If you see a bunch of people jumping off of a bridge, do you follow them and jump too? Or do you find out why first? </font>[/QUOTE]I am at a lost as how to respond to your argument. My initial point was that the average person will see the verses as saying two completely different things. In turn, you ascribe an attribute of laziness to that average person because they do not use a dictionary. If I read anything containing the words that are found in the two versions, I do not have to go to a dictionary to look it up. Of course, if you are referring to the reader having to go to the original Hebrew or Greek text in order to determine the correct meaning, then you have basically defeated the purpose of any translation, regardless of version (KJV, NIV, NASB, etc.). I have never considered myself as having problems with the English language (except maybe for the original 1611 usage), so I do not bother to refer to the dictionary that often. Of course, I occasionally have to look up words, so I do keep a few around the house.

Using the same response that I use to give my Mother--"No, I would not jump off the cliff, too."

 

[TC]

The Bible commands us to use our brains and commends those that search the scriptures daily. Last time I checked, the Greek and Hebrew texts were still scripture. The English Bibles we have are translation of those source text, so why would we not want to go back to those source text to see if our translations are accurate and true? As I pointed out, the NIV rendering at this verse is an exceptable translation as is the KJV. If that means that you need to look at a Greek or Hebrew dictionary (lexicon), then do it. If you do not have one (or an interlinear Bible - one that has both Greek or Hebrew and English) you can look at www.studylight.org They have many good resources for you to use online for free.

 

[Plain ol' Ralph]

Originally posted by TC:
Definition from Strong's Concordence.

1. completeness, soundness, welfare, peace
a. completeness (in number)
b. safety, soundness (in body)
c. welfare, health, prosperity
d. peace, quiet, tranquillity, contentment
f. peace, friendship
1. of human relationships
2. with God especially in covenant relationship
g. peace (from war)
h. peace (as adjective)


The NIV doesn't destroy anything. It is a perfectly acceptable translation of the underlying Hebrew.

Nope.now you're introducing man's opinion as delegating that which is acceptable and not. But then again, that completely describes the entire debate, huh? Men against God? Yep, everytime.

The reading in the KJBN clearly describes the "properity" of the LORD, the niv uses what is surmised as "updating" the Scripture, but that is whewre the confusion comes in, modern defintions don't give the understanding that the word "peace" does when compared to "prosper", so the point is ELOQUENT at least, not confusing like the niv and all the other modern versions are.

True prosperity is knowing peace, but a modern defintion of prosperity negates the peace of God, which is what is being evidenced by Scripture, but the niv gives a false witness there , even by modern standards, huh?

Chalk another one up for the Word of God/ AV 1611!!

 

[Phillip]

Originally posted by TC:
I already answered. The meaning of the Hebrew words in the underlying source texts means that the NIV is just as right as the KJV here. Also, in context I cannot claim any such promise from this passage. It was written to Israel for after the Babylonian captivity. Besides, as I have shown, prosperity can be other things than simply money - such as having success in a venture. Example, if you are a mature, growing Christian, then you are prosperous in your Christian walk. Unless you, unlike Paul, are not running the race so as to win the prize.

TC, You have hit the nail on the head.


The problem appears to be people who are trying to take their "own" definition of English terms and force them to fit what they think the NIV is saying.

"Prosperity to a Christian is NOT the same prosperity to a non-Christian." It has a totally different definition. If I were to talk to a non-Christian about "success" and "prosperity", I would no doubt hear terms of "money", "business" and "power".

If I talk to a Christian, he/she will be looking towards "success as a Christian", "prosperity as a Christian". If you think about it, "eternal life" is about as "prosperious and sucessful" as you can get.

Maybe some people have spent too much time watching television evangelists and should spend more time with their Bibles and possibly a dictionary.

 

[Plain ol' Ralph]

Originally posted by TC:
The Bible commands us to use our brains and commends those that search the scriptures daily. Last time I checked, the Greek and Hebrew texts were still scripture. The English Bibles we have are translation of those source text, so why would we not want to go back to those source text to see if our translations are accurate and true? As I pointed out, the NIV rendering at this verse is an exceptable translation as is the KJV. If that means that you need to look at a Greek or Hebrew dictionary (lexicon), then do it. If you do not have one (or an interlinear Bible - one that has both Greek or Hebrew and English) you can look at www.studylight.org They have many good resources for you to use online for free.

So your carnality is brought to the surface? Yes, it is.

I understand "peace" to be opposed to "prosperity", by modern standards that is, so that simply blows the niv's rendering to SMITHEREENS!

But then , as you have espoused, monetary gain is "peace"? NOT!

"What shall it profit a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose his own soul"?

Uh, I think you hit your "finger" instead of the "nail"

 

[Plain ol' Ralph]

Uh, I believe the entire arguewment on the behalf of the modernists is to give the casual reader something he doesn't have to go to a dictionary to understand, but then those same ones recommend going to a Hebrew or Greek lexicon to understand the Scripture?

 

[AVL1984]

POR says: Nope.now you're introducing man's opinion as delegating that which is acceptable and not. But then again, that completely describes the entire debate, huh? Men against God? Yep, everytime.

AVL: POR, promoting the false doctrine of one version onlyism is man against God, as it is only man's opinion. No scriptures back the false doctrine up.

 

[TC]

oops, double post.

 

[TC]

Originally posted by Plain ol' Ralph:
So your carnality is brought to the surface? Yes, it is.

I understand "peace" to be opposed to "prosperity", by modern standards that is, so that simply blows the niv's rendering to SMITHEREENS!

But then , as you have espoused, monetary gain is "peace"? NOT!

"What shall it profit a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose his own soul"?

Uh, I think you hit your "finger" instead of the "nail"

Now, your carnality is showing. I have not espoused what you say. If you had read and understood my posts, then you would have seen that I did not link prosperity with money. It is you who is focused on money.

 

[TC]

Originally posted by Plain ol' Ralph:
Uh, I believe the entire arguewment on the behalf of the modernists is to give the casual reader something he doesn't have to go to a dictionary to understand, but then those same ones recommend going to a Hebrew or Greek lexicon to understand the Scripture?

Funny, I alway thought you KJVO's advocated studying to show yourself approved to God. And now, you make fun of someone studying instead of simply taking your word for it.

 

[Ransom]

RaptureReady said

When that question is posed to me, I tell them that God does not hate you, as a matter of fact, God has thoughts of peace toward you, not evil.

Why do you misappropriate this verse, addressed to the Israelites in exile, and apply it to some random shmoe who thinks God hates him?

Read in context, Jeremiah 29 is anything but positive. Its hearers would have understood it as a prison sentence, as they were being told they would live out the rest of their lives in exile.

 

[williemakeit]

Originally posted by Ransom:
RaptureReady said

When that question is posed to me, I tell them that God does not hate you, as a matter of fact, God has thoughts of peace toward you, not evil.

Why do you misappropriate this verse, addressed to the Israelites in exile, and apply it to some random shmoe who thinks God hates him?

Read in context, Jeremiah 29 is anything but positive. Its hearers would have understood it as a prison sentence, as they were being told they would live out the rest of their lives in exile.

You know how those KJVOs are. They are never able to rightly divide the Word of God as us more learned Bible scholars. Next thing you know, they will be offerning burnt sacrafices at the altars of their church. What are we more dignified Christians to do?

 

[Ransom]

If KJV-onlyists cannot manage simple, contextual reading of the Scriptures, why should they be trusted with the more complicated task of textual criticism that they have taken upon themselves?

You don't invite someone to teach college if he dropped out of high school!

 

[HankD]

When that question is posed to me, I tell them that God does not hate you, as a matter of fact, God has thoughts of peace toward you, not evil.

Maybe not.

Jeremiah 20:7 O LORD, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived: thou art stronger than I, and hast prevailed: I am in derision daily, every one mocketh me.

HankD