Talk:Biased Bible translations

User: Aschlafly,

You wrote: "Half of the Gospels -- the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of John -- were written without asserting a fulfillment of Scriptures."

This is completely untrue. For example, John 13: 18 in the ESV version says, "I am not speaking of all of you; I know whom I have chosen. But the Scripture will be fulfilled, 'He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.'" This is a fulfillment of Psalm 41:9.

And there are other examples in the Book of John as well such as these: Some of the Old Testament prophesies concerning Christ's death fulfilled in John's Gospel.

Also, please see: Mark's portrayal of Jesus an example of fulfilling the Old Testament Scriptures.

The early church fathers and church tradition asserted that all of Jesus' disciples were Jews. Why? Because they were all Jews. See: Were all the twelve Apostles Jews?.

Also, "It is also important to note that before the Jewish Revolt of AD 66-70, during those first 30 years or so of Christianity, it was still considered to be somewhat part of, or connected to Judaism. After all, Jesus and all his disciples were Jewish. The Church was “born,” in Jerusalem, during Pentecost in AD 33."[1]

And also, "To begin with undisputed matters: Jesus was a Jew; the disciples were Jews; Paul was a Jew; and most of the New Testament writers were Jews. In other words, the Jesus movement in the first century was initiated by Jews. The major Jesus-movement figures in the New Testament themselves testify that they were Jews and had not opposed Jewish traditions. For instance, Peter hesitated (multiple times!) to take unlawful foods which are banned in Torah and regarded having fellowship with the Gentile as prohibited by Jewish laws (Acts 10:14, 28). Also, Paul, seen in retrospect as one of the founders of Christianity, claims that he is a Jew, still believing in the same God (Phil 3:5; 2 Cor 11:22). Moreover, Paul circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:3), and when Paul came back to Jerusalem, in Acts 21, he committed himself to Jewish purification."[2] Peter and Paul are two key pillars of the early church. Conservative (talk) 07:22, January 1, 2024 (EST)

Andy,

Watch this clip and it will explain what you are dealing with. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 11:18, January 1, 2024 (EST)

Reply

The above argument for Christianity as almost entirely an extension of the Old Testament and a Fulfillment of Scriptures is made well. But it overlooks the reality that the Gospel of Mark and Gospel of John have very few references to Scriptures, and when they do it was possibly a later addition by those in the early church who felt so strongly about this (as some did).

This is not merely an obscure issue of historical debate. Samaritans rejected all of the Old Testament except for the Pentateuch. The vast majority of the world then and now are not believers in the Old Testament, and billions (such as Muslims) even reject it in several fundamental ways.

The historical revisionism that all the Apostles were somehow Jewish is an example of the excesses of the Christianity-as-Judaism view. It is implausible that 12 random people in Palestine then (or now) were all Jewish, and much historical evidence indicates otherwise. John was sharply critical of the ethnicity that people insist he was a member of, for example. Philip was clearly Greek, both in name and in bringing other Greeks to Jesus (see John 12:20-21 ). The Apostles were ethnically diverse and the world today should hear that as part of effective evangelism.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:38, January 1, 2024 (EST)

Returning to the Samaritans and Andy's statement, "Samaritans rejected all of the Old Testament except for the Pentateuch." This is true, and we will return to the woman at the well and hopefully clear some things up;

The Samaritan woman said, "I know that messiah is coming" Wait. Where in the Pentateuch is there a prophecy of messiah? Jesus said, "Salvation is of the Jews", referencing the promises made to David and the House of Judah, which the Samaritans rejected. Yet where in the books of Moses is there prophecy of messiah?

Ex 33:12 (which is the verse omitted below between, "The Lord spake to Moses face to face" and "If I have found grace in thy sight...") says,

• thou sayest unto me, Bring up this people: and thou hast not let me know whom thou wilt send with me.

IOWs, God originally said he was going to send two messengers before the people. Originally the second messenger was thought to be Aaron, but Aaron led the rebellion in the wilderness against God. So in verse 12 we have Moses interceding for the people and calling on God to stay true to his word to send a second someone with Moses.

Exodus chapt 33 is vital to understanding the whole of scripture. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 02:35, January 4, 2024 (EST)

Peter didn't like eating with unwashen gentiles, but there's no record he protested eating with gentiles at the Last Supper. Why? cause all 12 were Jews.

The Apostles were not Jesus' only disciples, there was the 72 (Luke chapt 10) and the 500 (1 Cor 15:6), many who likely were non-Jewish. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 15:44, January 1, 2024 (EST)

We have thousands of ancient copies of the New Testament. "There are approximately 5,800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. In addition, there are 10,000 Latin manuscripts, and 9,300 manuscripts in other languages."[3]

Also, "I had quoted many times and for many years that the majority of the New Testament can be reconstructed from the available church father quotes. I began to feel guilty that I had never confirmed this, until about two or three years ago, I actually did the research. I discovered that somewhere around 60-70% of the New Testament is quoted in the first four centuries. I was glad to learn that I had not been exaggerating."[4]

The claim that the Old Testament quotes in the Mark/John gospels were added later by people in the early church is not a credible claim. Conservative (talk) 15:55, January 1, 2024 (EST)

Two points:

• by ethnic diversity, do mean a member of the tribe of Benjamin or Levi?
• Is a Greek proselyte who practices Judaism non-Jewish? RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 16:07, January 1, 2024 (EST)

Samaritans, Benjaminite's, and Levites are Israelites, i.e. non-gentile. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 16:09, January 1, 2024 (EST)

IOWs, there were two promise made, the first to Abraham (Of thee I will make a great nation, and to inherit the land), secondly to David (or the House of Judah) that the messiah or deliverer would come. When the remnant returned from the Babylonian captivity, it was motley crew and mixture of several tribes, they adopted the claims to the House of Judah and called themselves "Jews". Now here's a problem: originally the Levites were the priestly tribe, but the "Jews" or "Judeans", or however you want to describe them, adopted the role of the priestly tribe of Levites (there probably were some Levites among the original remnant). These became the Pharisees. But they were not the original Levites assigned as guardians of the temple in the Pentateuch. They called themselves Jews and assumed the priestly office. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 16:20, January 1, 2024 (EST)

More than half the world rejects, and even strongly opposes, the Old Testament. The Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of John do not depend on, and barely even mention, the Old Testament. Effective evangelism to the world is hindered by making these Gospels dependent on the Old Testament.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:11, January 1, 2024 (EST)

User: Aschlafly, you wrote: "More than half the world rejects, and even strongly opposes, the Old Testament."

You give no evidence for this assertion, but even if it is true, this is an ad populum logical fallacy. Furthermore, the Bible is by far the best-selling book of all time (between 5-7 billion copies sold) and it contains both the Old Testament and New Testament (And sometimes the Apocrypha). Publishers print what the public wants. Conservative (talk) 17:20, January 1, 2024 (EST)

P.S. The Bible predicted the regathering of the Jews and a Jewish nation being formed (See: Is Modern Israel Fulfilling Prophecy?). The Jews are God's chosen people. And Jesus was a Jew and all 12 apostles were Jewish. Conservative (talk) 17:29, January 1, 2024 (EST)

The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

We're back to a discussion on the difference between law and grace (which several editors have struggled with).

He hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 17:38, January 1, 2024 (EST)

Throughout scripture, you have a contrast of the natural man vs. the spiritual man (Ye must be spiritually born). Natural vs spiritual, Cain and Abel, Isaac and Ishamel, Jacob and Esau, Saul and David, etc. The natural man wants rules, do's and don'ts, to make himself acceptable to God. But the flesh warreth against the spirit. The spiritual man realizes that he himself cannot please God, that only God can cover man's sin (as Adam & Eve tried to hide their sin with fig leaves, but God provided them with coats of skin, or Abraham telling Isaac, "God will provide himself a lamb".) RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 18:00, January 1, 2024 (EST)

When John the Baptist said "Behold, the Lamb of God" in John 1:29, it was a fulfillment of the prophecy of Abraham, "God will provide himself a lamb" at Gen 22:8; (See for yourself: No lamb had been provided up to that time; Abraham caught "a ram in the thicket", Gen 22:13). RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 18:23, January 1, 2024 (EST)

2 billion Muslims reject the Old Testament teaching about the sacrifice of Isaac, and instead say it was of Ishmael. Also, John wanted evangelism to Samaritans while they rejected most of the Old Testament.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:15, January 1, 2024 (EST)

And they reject the New Testament teaching on grace. But the choice God offers man, law or grace, appears throughout the Old Testament, and man repeatedly chooses law over grace. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 20:18, January 1, 2024 (EST)

God repeatedly says, 'you can have one or the other, law or grace', grace and forgivingness, or law and punishment. (He does this because of our free will). Man repeatedly chooses law. Why? Because of pride. Because man thinks he can make himself just and perfect without God, or without God's help. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 20:26, January 1, 2024 (EST)

User: Aschlafly, despite the historical evidence, 2 billion Muslims reject that Jesus was crucified and deny His resurrection. They also reject the deity of Christ. And your irrelevant, red herring argumentation has nothing to do on whether Jesus' disciples were Jewish. It's just a distraction meant to divert from the issue we were discussing. Conservative (talk) 20:46, January 1, 2024 (EST)

Muslims reject Christianity when presented as a fulfillment of Judaism, which is not how the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of John present it. If John were Jewish and supported the Fulfillment of Scriptures approach, then would have written his Gospel that way. He didn't, and wrote more of the opposite.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:27, January 1, 2024 (EST)

I gave you this resource which contains 10+ verses from the Gospel of John having to do with this matter: Some of the Old Testament prophesies concerning Christ's death fulfilled in John's Gospel

You are engaging in the fallacy of exclusion. It's illogical and utterly unconvincing. Conservative (talk) 22:33, January 1, 2024 (EST)

And your complaint that Muslims reject Jesus due to the Jewish origins of Christianity is committing the appeal to consequences logical fallacy. And it's a red herring that has nothing to do with whether or not Jesus's 12 disciples were Jewish. Conservative (talk) 22:39, January 1, 2024 (EST)

The argument of Fulfillment of Scriptures is excellent evangelism to those who already believe in the Scriptures. That's not Muslims, Samaritans, and 80% of the world. Accordingly, the Gospel of John -- which was written for the whole world -- does not take your approach. Your first link about claiming 10 Old Testament references is strained, as no such citations are in the Gospel of John. One of the ten alleged references is to the Apocrypha.

As to logic, Jesus as God did not have to fulfill anything. He's God. He can change his mind. He can write on a fresh slate. He can be God for the Samaritans, who rejected the Book of Isaiah as holy Scriptures.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:22, January 2, 2024 (EST)

I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. Salvation by grace was available before the foundations of the earth were laid, let alone before Jesus was born, died, buried, and resurrected. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 00:31, January 2, 2024 (EST)

User: Aschlafly, you wrote: "One of the ten alleged references is to the Apocrypha."

There are not 10 alleged references given at this resource: Some of the Old Testament prophesies concerning Christ's death fulfilled in John's Gospel. There are 12 references - one of which is part of the Apocrypha. Conservative (talk) 01:15, January 2, 2024 (EST)

I just looked at the resource I gave more closely. If you look at the reference of "No bones broken – John 19:33-37" there are two Old Testament verses given relating to that at: Some of the Old Testament prophesies concerning Christ's death fulfilled in John's Gospel. So there are actually 13 Old Testament references given - one of which is part of the Apocrypha. The bottom line is that John references the Old Testament several times in this particular issue which is not surprising given that he was Jewish.

The church fathers believed that John and the rest of the 12 apostles were Jewish. The church fathers were closer to the time of Jesus than you. I have history and the Bible on my side. You have wishful thinking concerning some novel hypothesis that you whipped up out of thin air. Conservative (talk) 01:32, January 2, 2024 (EST)

The teaching that only persons born after Jesus' resurrection can experience God's grace and salvation is an errant teaching:

• Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord: - Heb. 12:14

• The Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speath to his friend; - Ex 33:11

• Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; - Heb 12:15

• Now therefore, I pray thee, if I have found grace in thy sight, shew me now thy way, that I may know thee, that I may find grace in thy sight - Ex 33:13

(Moses, the giver of the law, was under grace, not law.)

Addendum

• I am the way, the truth, and the life - Jn 14:6

There are numerous other examples of people who were declared just and righteous before Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection.

In the final analysis, fulfillment of prophecy is nothing more than evidence. In itself, it does not save or make righteous before God. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 01:46, January 2, 2024 (EST)

User: Aschlafly: In addition, "John apparently remained in Jerusalem as the leader of the church there (Acts 15:6; Galatians 2:9). His subsequent history is unrecorded. He was not there, however, at the time of Paul’s last visit (Acts 21:15-40). He appears to have retired to Ephesus, but at what time is unknown."[5]

Also, concerning the John the Apostle: "He is linked with Peter in several important episodes reported in Acts. He was a prominent member of the Jerusalem church when Paul visited it later. Nothing further is known about him until, according to church tradition (related chiefly through Irenaeus but with many corroborating witnesses) he was bishop at Ephesus. This literary evidence is supported by the remains of churches bearing his name at Ephesus. There he was remembered as a vigorous champion of orthodoxy, which fits the description of the first epistle. He is reported to have brought back to Christ an errant convert at the risk of his own life. His exile in Patmos during the last decade of the 1st cent. coincides with the persecution of Domitian. A conflict between church and state reflected in the Book of Revelation also seems consistent with this pictu re of John’s latter days. The character and temperament of the Apostle John as seen in these sources is one who maintained high Christology in stressing Jesus as the Son of God. He was thoroughly familiar with the OT and with Jewish culture in general, as seen in the synoptic gospels and Acts. His spiritual insight and maturity led to his inclusion in the inner circle on several occasions. This is consistent with the picture in the fourth gospel as one for whom Jesus had a special affection."[6]

If John the Apostle was Jewish, it makes perfect sense that remained in Jerusalem as a leader and/or prominent member of the church there for a time. Conservative (talk) 01:53, January 2, 2024 (EST)

The resource at The Old Testament in Relation to St. John's Gospel gives 20+ citations of the Gospel of John citing the Old Testament. I rest my case. Conservative (talk) 02:00, January 2, 2024 (EST)

This is a prayer I pray everyday:

• if I have found grace in thy sight, shew me now thy way - Ex 33:13

• I am the way - Jn 14:6

RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 02:02, January 2, 2024 (EST)

REPLY: that's a very nice, concise prayer, Rob.

As to the above link asserting 20+ citations in the Gospel of John to the Old Testament, many of those citations are to erroneous reliance on Scriptures by non-believers. See, e.g., John 7:42 . Almost none of those citations is similar to what Old Testament scholars would cite. Several of the citations are not citations at all; others are stretching something to fit. Notably absent are any Old Testament citations for central themes in the Gospel of John: eternal life, the Paschal Lamb, and Jesus as the "Word" or "Truth". Alas, we need an entry about the Paschal Lamb (a Samaritan concept)!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:35, January 3, 2024 (EST)

Andy, so you see John 14:6 is a fulfillment of prophecy. Just cause it's not prefaced with "Thus says the scripture bla bla bla" doesn't mean it's not an OT reference. "Search the scriptures. In them ye think ye have eternal life, and they speak of me." RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 01:53, January 4, 2024 (EST)

The Apostle John was a leader and/or prominent member of the Jerusalem church which was a very Jewish church in terms of its ethnic makeup. Why would the apostles and the church agree to place a Samaritan in such a position?

I am very suspicious of Johnny come lately "special insights" of a 2,000 year old church that other Christians missed. And your John the Apostle was a Samaritan conjecture falls within that realm. And the fact that you are ignoring the multiple times that Gospel of John cites the Old Testament doubly confirms my suspicion that your "special insight" is incorrect. Conservative (talk) 01:07, January 4, 2024 (EST)

John was ostracized by the subset of Apostles based in Jerusalem. There was an undeniable rivalry between Peter and John. I've heard of many churches named "Saints Peter and Paul," but not one named "Saints Peter and John." Peter and Paul were better known to the early church leaders than the ostracized John was. Of course, if John was a Samaritan then he would not have been accepted or given credit by any of the Jewish Christians.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 02:30, January 4, 2024 (EST)

I see what you're saying, and I'll even concede it's plausible (in the absence of other evidence). But I suggest the "rivalry" was more of a generational thing. There was indeed doctrinal "rivalries" between Peter & Paul (where Paul rebuked him to his face) and Peter conceded that Paul was right. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 03:03, January 4, 2024 (EST)

Spamming the discussion

The Apostle Paul was the hardest working disciple and he wrote a majority of the New Testament. What we have is Christian meritocracy at work in terms of naming churches after Paul. I cite: "Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them - though it was not I but the grace of God that is with me." - Apostle Paul, the hardest working apostle of Jesus Christ, 1 Corinthians 15: 8-10 (NRSV)

There are three major branches of Christianity: Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox. The Catholic Church elevates Peter to an inordinate degree as part of its theology of raising up Peter. I disagree with this, but I realize it's probably not going to change. I hope it does change down the pike as part of a Catholic/Orthodox reunification negotiation (I am referring to the Great Schism of 1054).

John the Apostle died of natural causes at Ephesus sometime after AD 98. God appears to have given him extra protection as the rest of the apostles were martyred. I am not going to argue with God's sovereign plan of retaining some apostolic leadership for as long as possible (Especially for the apostle whom Jesus loved who wrote 4 books of the Bible), but perhaps a church is less likely to name a church after a non-martyr.

There is no historical record of John the Apostle being ostracized by the church. It's just another "special insight" of yours that lacks historicity. User: Aschafly, while you are a unique creation of God and fearfully and wonderfully made, you're not extraordinarily special in comparison to 2,000 years of Christians in Christendom who lacked your "special insight" about John! And I hope you feel less special now that Harvard graduates have been taken down a peg! Princeton is next! Conservative (talk) 07:01, January 4, 2024 (EST)

You can't have a discussion with User:Conservative without him getting personal. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 11:18, January 4, 2024 (EST)

The Apostle Paul said knowledge puffs up. It common for college graduates to get puffed up and I am guessing the temptation is stronger for Ivy League graduates whose students commonly come from the upper-income brackets. But we have to resist this. I do think that Andy does not some awareness of Professor values though as he created that essay. But are college graduates that special? A 2011 American study found that forty-five percent of students achieved no significant improvement in their critical thinking, reasoning or writing skills during their first two years of college. After four years, 36 percent displayed no significant increases in these so-called "higher order" thinking skills. [7]

Sadly, wokeness has shifted Harvard and the other Ivy League schools even more left. These schools were often founded by Christians so it's sad.

Andy is not offering up any evidence for his "special insight" about John the Apostle which goes against what the church fathers indicated. And the Gospel of John cites the Old Testament multiple times. And I pointed out the Jerusalem church was filled with ethnic Jews and John the Apostle was a leader or prominent member there. So I conclude that Andy feels "too special" because it would be reasonable to go where the evidence leads. Conservative (talk) 11:33, January 4, 2024 (EST)

As always, User:Conservative responds with spam. In this case, 1,435 bytes of spam. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 11:36, January 4, 2024 (EST)

Anyways, my Harvard/Princeton comment was a good-natured joke/jab. Andy knows that I have a sense of humor. Conservative (talk) 11:38, January 4, 2024 (EST)

Spamming a discussion serves the purpose of wearing neutral readers down who don't have the patience to read through the spam to see who's on target who's off base. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 11:41, January 4, 2024 (EST)

But User:Conservative is right: Knowledge puffs up. That's why he spams the discussion with off-topic material to show off his knowledge. None of it has to do with the Samaritans and why some say John may have been a Samaritan. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 11:43, January 4, 2024 (EST)

Final comment: Paul was not Jewish. He was a Benjaminite. RobS^{Zelensky didn't kill himself} 11:56, January 4, 2024 (EST)

The final nail in the coffin that John the Apostle John was allegedly a Samaritan:

Luke 9:51–56: "When the days drew near for him to be taken up, he set his face to go to Jerusalem. And he sent messengers ahead of him. On their way they entered a village of the Samaritans to make ready for him; but they did not receive him, because his face was set toward Jerusalem. When his disciples James and John saw it, they said, “Lord, do you want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” But he turned and rebuked them. Then they went on to another village."

"You know cross-examination is like prospecting. You see something that looks promising, you work a vein for all it's worth." - Perry Mason

The vein of evidence that John the Apostle was Jewish is an embarrassment of gold, diamonds, and other riches. As much as I hate to do it, I declare victory counselor! Conservative (talk) 12:41, January 4, 2024 (EST)

I appreciate the discussion. I didn't know that Paul was a Benjaminite (thanks Rob).

The above passage from the Gospel of Luke does not imply that John wasn't a Samaritan. People are often tough on "their own," particularly when embarrassed as described. Lot's wife wasn't sympathetic towards Sodom either, despite being from there (and perhaps because she saw misconduct there).

The very different viewpoint towards Samaritans in the Gospel of Matthew compared with the Gospel of John is striking, but liberal denial hides it in order to promote the fiction of only one ethnicity by the Apostles. Why do liberals do this? One reason is because it alienates from Christianity the 80% of the world that rejects the Old Testament, when the (ostracized) John intended for his Gospel to reach them without unnecessarily needing to convert first to the Old Testament (which is impossible for many).--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:48, January 4, 2024 (EST)

P.S. In correction of a commonly repeated error above, Paul did not write more than any other New Testament author. The Greek Luke did. And Paul wrote only slightly more than John did.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:39, January 5, 2024 (EST)