I found this in an old account of mine. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< In these days of increasing sophistication in our language, and jargon which overflows into almost every area of our lives, we feel sure that by the year 2000, a new millennium version of the Bible will be produced, incorporating much of this modern language. Perhaps it will be called the NMV--New Millennium Version. The 23rd Psalm would never be the same again. It may sound something like this:

The Lord and I are in a shepherd/sheep situation, and I am in a position of negative need.

He prostrates me in a green-belt grazing area, and conducts me directionally parallel to a non-torrential aqueous liquid.

He restores to original satisfaction levels my psychological make-up.

Notwithstanding the fact that I make ambulatory progress through the non-illuminated inter-hill mortality slot..terror sensations shall not be observed within me due to the proximity of the omnipotence.

Your pastoral walking aid and quadrupled pickup unit introduce me into a pleasurific mood state.

You design and produce a nutrient-bearing furniture type structure in the context of non-cooperative elements, and my beverage utensil experiences a volume crisis.

You enact ahead related folk ritual utilizing vegetable extracts.

Surely it must be an ongoing non-deductible fact that your inter-relational, emphatical and non-vengeful capacities will pursue me as their target focus for the duration of this non-death period.

And I will possess tenant rights in the housing unit of the Lord on a permanently open-ended time basis.

Whew, after that, let's get the real thing:

Psalm 23:1-6 (NIV) A psalm of David.

The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not be in want. He makes me lie down in green pastures, he leads me beside quiet waters, he restores my soul. He guides me in paths of righteousness for his name's sake. Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me.

You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies. You anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows. Surely goodness and love will follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever.

And, let's also get it from the beautiful language in The Message:

Psalm 23:1-6 A David psalm

God, my shepherd! I don't need a thing. You have bedded me down in lush meadows, you find me quiet pools to drink from. True to your word, you let me catch my breath and send me in the right direction.

Even when the way goes through Death Valley, I'm not afraid when you walk at my side. Your trusty shepherd's crook makes me feel secure.

You serve me a six-course dinner right in front of my enemies. You revive my drooping head; my cup brims with blessing.

Your beauty and love chase after me every day of my life. I'm back home in the house of God for the rest of my life.

[forwarded by Mark Rayburn]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mikey's Thot for the Day: He who hesitates is probably right.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< -- nib ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nelta Brock http://members.xoom.com/atlen/ 1stCen-Christianity-subscribe@egroups.com

-- Anonymous, October 10, 2000

Answers

John.....

Welcome to the "Rude Bozo Club".....I've been there for years. John, you hit the nail right on the head in your e-mail to me. Alan came on a board thinking that it was just another board of "ignorant" Christians. What he found....was more than he could handle. Good job John!! I believe the Bible calls that "contending (brawling) for the faith"?? (Jude 3)

Link....I really could care less about your disappointment level. If you paid close attention.....Alan even picked and choosed the O.T. he felt was inspired (i.e., the Pentateuch being more inspired that the prophets).

As Jesus said.....there comes a time when you "brush the dirt from your sandals." John and I did the best we could in the beginning to present a rational defense of our position.

Alan's problem is....his only interest in Jesus is to....disprove Jesus.

The Parable of the Sower and the Seeds makes it abudantly clear that the success of the gospel depends on the condition of the soil....not the messenger. The soil in Alan's heart......is rock hard.

I personally get sick and tired of everyone blameing the messenger....because "you were too rude....to harsh....blah..blah....blah!!"

For your information Link.....there were "silent watchers" on this forum who were very bothered by what Alan said....and yet....extremely comforted by the no-nonsense, direct, and confident presentation of the defense of the N.T.

Those are the ones I'm concerned about.....not some yahoo with no better thing to do than jump on forums and try to disrupt people's faith.

-- Anonymous, October 15, 2000

As a Preacher Alan....I take Paul's advice to the young preacher Timothy very seriously.....allow me to quote (I don't know if this is part of the N.T. you consider inspired or not...in fact...don't care)....

".....command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer nor to devote themselves to myths and endless geneologies" (Alan...do you know the story in the Midrash that says that the geneologies and endless discussion of the Rabbi's on the names...Azel to Azel...would take 400 camels to carry??...that's what Paul is talking about when he says "endless geneologies). Continuing now with Paul....

"These promote controversies rather than God's work--which is by faith. The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sound faith. Some have wandered away from these and turned to meaningless talk. They want to be teachers of the Law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they SO CONFIDENTLY AFFIRM. We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that law is not made for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels."

So you see Alan....not only do you carry on in endless, fruitless, discussions......you also carry on discussions about something that is not even applicable to those who live under the COVENANT of grace...i.e., the O.T. law which served no other purpose than to point out the sinfulness of man....see also Romans 3-4.

By the way....the above quote is from 1 Tim. 1.

-- Anonymous, October 20, 2000

Except when it fits into your theological reconstruction...right Al??

-- Anonymous, October 24, 2000

That is the first or second time I have heard or read soemthing fromthe translation _The Message_. I don't like it as a traslation. I suppose it is a parahrase. Why not just stick with what the Bible says instead of adding one's own commentary in the text.

A version like the Amplified could have the potential ot be a good translation if the words in brackets actually added to our knowledge of the Greek words, instead of adding someone's theological commentary.

-- Anonymous, October 12, 2000

That is the first or second time I have heard or read soemthing fromthe translation _The Message_. I don't like it as a traslation. I suppose it is a parahrase. Why not just stick with what the Bible says instead of adding one's own commentary in the text.

A version like the Amplified could have the potential ot be a good translation if the words in brackets actually added to our knowledge of the Greek words, instead of adding someone's theological commentary.

I find that the so called _Living Bible_ strips the Bible of a lot of its meaning. I like the NKJV. It is very clear, tries to stick with the text, and is readable. The NIV is easy to read, but it interprets the translators meaning into the text a lot, and the language is so loose that part of the message is sometimes lost in the easy-to-read wording.

-- Anonymous, October 12, 2000

The differences in the text of the NKJV and the NIV go far beyond the problems of translation; the Greek texts that these two versions are translated from are quite different. The NKJV is translated from the Byzantine family of texts, which is a newer, inferior text-type. It didn't appear until around the fourth century. The NIV is translated from the Alexandrian text-type, of which the Codex Aleph, or Sinaiticus, is a prime example. Of course, the Alexandrian has its own problems...the Codex Sinaiticus has over 14,600 "corrections".
This has to do with the NT more than the Tanach; the Tanach is translated from the Masoritic text. But even so, the translators are not faithful to the Hebrew text, changing the meaning of the Hebrew to suit their theological whims. Examples: Ps. 2:12..."Kiss the Son, lest He be Angry" in the NKJV. The Greek text certainly does not say that...."Yearn for purity, lest He grow wrathful...". the Hebrew word "Bar" means "purity", not "son". Or Psalm 22:16.."16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have enclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet". The Hebrew plainly says, "like a lion on my hands and my feet"..not "pierced".
The problems with the New Testment, however, are massive. The amount of differences between these two text-types should give everyone pause...the very existance of two very different texts shows that there was a good deal of monkey-business in the writing of the NT...

-- Anonymous, October 12, 2000

What brought up Cecil's tirade in the middle of this discussion? Oh, well . . . I was going to comment on the observation above about The Message. I threw away good money buying this paraphrase. It is the worst I've seen yet. I'm not a version freak: I have about 30 of them in several different languages and find them all useful. But Eugene Peterson's work doesn't even deserve the designation of paraphrase, notwithstanding the wide evangelical recomendations nor the acceptance it has conquered. If you want a paraphrase, J. B. Phillips's work is still a great read, though as in this type of version, close attention is called for. Don't waste your money or strain your eyes on The Message. It ain't worth it.

Randal Matheny
FORTHRIGHT Magazine

-- Anonymous, October 13, 2000

I had never heard the *MESSAGE* refered to before. What I liked was the way some today must use their big words to describe something simple. The part about the MESSAGE just happened to be on the bottom of the post sent to me.

Nelta

-- Anonymous, October 13, 2000

Alan,

I like the translation style of the NKJV. I was going to mention the NASB.

The verse about Christ's hands being pierced at the crucifiction, translated as having to do with lions... it seems like I've read somewhere that either the LXX or some other early work rendered the translation as having to do with being pierced.

The vowel pointing of the Mazoretic texts took place when, about the 300's AD. You shouldn't rule out the idea of some 'monkey business' going on in the pointing of the text. Counter Christian hermenutics have been going on for a long time. In the first century, the Greek word for Messiah would have been the word from which we get Christ. But in the next centuries, the Jews who did not believe in Yeshua HaMeshiach were using another Greek word for Messiah.

The whole issue reminds me of a quote I once heard someone say they got from Rashi, that because the Christians believed that the Servant in Isaiah 53 is Jesus, that they believed it referred to Israel.

-- Anonymous, October 13, 2000

I'm sure some are glad to see him go, but I am posting this so that you can get an idea how people react to the general 'demeanor' they find when they stumble on this site, thinking it is generic 'Christian'.

Subj: Re: CoC Forum Date: 10/12/00 9:08:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: puck_ac@yahoo.com (Cecil Alan) To: Hive827@cs.com

So, I have stumbled into a CoC forum. My mistake. I was wondering why so many in there were such rude bozos. I'll not post anymore....waste of my time. Thanks anyway....

-- Anonymous, October 14, 2000

Hi Connie and all,

I looked all up and down this thread and couldn't find anything fron the fellow who decided to leave the list. Am I missing something? I haven't read EVERYTHING on this forum and am disappointed someone thought people were bitter. What a terrible thing for someone to think about those of us who claim to be God's children.

What thread did all this happen on?

Nelta

-- Anonymous, October 14, 2000

Nelta;

Alan was of the cult of Bnai Noah and was trying to use this forum to shake peoples faith and preach his heresy. Several of us stood solid in our defense of the faith. For this we were called "rude bozos."

-- Anonymous, October 15, 2000

Was Alan a Jew or a Gentile? Bnai Noach looks like it means 'sons of Noah' to me. Some Jews believe encourage Gentiles to be 'righteous Gentiles' and try to get them to believe Jewish teachings. Jews believe that Gentiles are supposed to live up to seven principles of the covenant with Noah. There does seem to be some similar thinking about what is required of Gentiles in Acts 15.

I was a bit disappointed about the way people responded to Alan Cecil. What I mean is that people didn't prove from the Old Testament scriptures that Jesus is the Christ. I am not an expert at doing this, but Apollos could.

People were saying things like if he should only use the NT if he believed in it, and weren't related to where he stood in his beliefs much and building bridges to lead him to Christ very much. I think we showed a lack of depth in our evangelistic approach. he was apparently interested in Jesus. For a non-Messianic Jew to be interested in Jesus is a good sign.

-- Anonymous, October 15, 2000

Danny,

Paul also wrote 'we persuade men.' It is obvious from the Bible that it is important there be people who can make a good, persuasive defense of the faith. Paul wanted elders to have a deep knowledge of the truth to be able to refute gainsayers with sound doctrine. Paul taught the Gospel from the Old Testament, and genuine seekers could search the scriptures to see that the things he taught were in there. Alan challenged us with questions about where certain teachings about Jesus were to be found in the Tanach (the OT?) I wish we'd made a better defense of the faith from the OT. I wish that all of us, myself included, had made a better defense of the Gospel from the Old Testament scriptures. The Gospel, according to Paul, was made known unto all nations by the writings of the prophets. Preaching the Gospel from Old Testament prophecy was a very powerful method in early church history, and it seems to be lacking these days.

This has been on my mind recently. I am considering trying to put together a team of local Bible students to study Jesus in the Old Testament set up meetings to discuss relevant scriptures and take them to record with a man who has television programming in the predominantly Muslim villages around here. In some villages, this man's tv/vcr unit is the only TV in town. Some Muslims come to the meeting. Muslims claim some of the same prophets Christians and Jews believe in.

I was also disappointed by some of the lack of depth of reasoning, frankly. If we studied more, we might have been able to go on the offensive showing Jesus as the Messiah throughout the Old Testament, rather than just doing damage control.

Not everyone believes the word right away. Paul kicked agains the pricks for a while. some missionaries say that most Muslims who become Christians, on average, do so after five years of a missionary working with them.

Btw, for a non-Messianic Jew to think of Jesus as a good Rabbi, and to consider the idea that He might have been some sort of Moshiach or Suffering Servant is a step in the right direction. A lot of them don't go this far, especially the conservative type, which Alan seems to be.

The idea that the Torah is especially the basis for Judaism, taking precedent over the prophets is not something that Alan alone believes. This is a common Jewish belief among certain Jews. The idea that Gentiles are B'nai Noach is found among Jews through the world.

-- Anonymous, October 15, 2000

Btw,

I wanted to add another 'P.S.' to that last message. There were some very good arguments on the thread made about Jesus being the Messiah. My last message was probably too negative. I just wished we had shown more expertise in the area.

-- Anonymous, October 15, 2000

Link,

To answer your question Was Alan a Jew or Gentile? with Alans own words:

Danny:No, I don't make the Rules. G-d makes the Rules. 613 of them, in fact...but for us non-Jews, only Seven. No idolatry, no blasphemy, no murder, no theft, no illicit sex, no blood (cruelty to animals), and to set up courts of justice in every society. That's it. We have no commandment to keep the Sabbath, nor to tithe, nor to offer sacrifices...Just a simple moral code.

I want to thank Danny, John, E. Lee, and any others that consistently, clearly, and concisely refuted Alans arguments and exposed them for what they really areLIES.

-- Anonymous, October 16, 2000

My goodness, my ears were burning.
Now, I hate to bust your bubble, people, but it wasnt your brilliant logic nor forceful arguments that made me hang it up in here...far from it. Rather, it was your lack of knowledge that exasperated me. With few exceptions, you showed yourselves to be quite ignorant of the Torah, rabbinic commentary, and certainly of the New Testament. You act like you have your little private club here, and any views that disagree with your own narrow theology are dismissed as "liberal" or "heretical" or whatever. You have shown yourselves ignorant not only of Jesus' own religion, which was Judaism, but of modern theology itself. As Emerson once said, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds".

-- Anonymous, October 17, 2000

Oops..forgot to close the HTML link agian...heh...that's what happens when you rush through something....

-- Anonymous, October 17, 2000

Hello Alan,

I've not been keeping up with the forum and have missed your thinking on matters. I am very interesting in your beliefs. We know that Jesus lived under the old law and at His death the old law was nailed to the cross. Is this what you believe?

Looking forward to a discussion with you.

Thanks,

Nelta Brock

-- Anonymous, October 17, 2000

Hi Nelta.
What I believe is that Jesus lived under G-d's Law. G- d's Law is eternal and unmutable, as is G-d. It never changes. What I believe, based on the Bible, is that the Law that Jesus kept was and is for the Jews (Israel) only. The Jews have always taught that there are two parts to the Law; the main part (which Jesus kept) is for Israel, and the other part, a simple moral code, is for the non- Jews, or the Gentiles. This goes along with what Jesus and Paul both taught, although it disagrees with what is taught about them. That is where I differ from those in this forum: I agree with what Jesus taught, not what the church teaches about him....

-- Anonymous, October 20, 2000

Leviticus 26: 40 "`But if they will confess their sins and the sins of their fathers-- their treachery against me and their hostility toward me,
41 which made me hostile toward them so that I sent them into the land of their enemies--then when their uncircumcised hearts are humbled and they pay for their sin,
42 I will remember my covenant with Jacob and my covenant with Isaac and my covenant with Abraham, and I will remember the land

Deuteronomy 30: 11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach.
12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?"
13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, "Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?"
14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.

Psalm 1: 1 Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers.
2 But his delight is in the Torah of the L-RD, and on His Torah he meditates day and night.

Proverbs 28: 9 If anyone turns a deaf ear to the law, even his prayers are detestable.

Sorry Danny, but I take G-d's Word over either you or Paul...

-- Anonymous, October 21, 2000

I am not into theology, nor reconstruction. You keep trying to pigeon- hole me into Christian compartments. My point of view is the same as Jesus, or any other observant rabbi. Why is this so difficult to accept?

-- Anonymous, October 25, 2000