Welcome! Start here!
See what the blog “Bible Differences” can provide and how it may be of use to you. I focus mainly on the New Testament, but occasionally look at something from the Old Testament.
A list of Scriptures already studied can be found at “Scriptures“.
A verse that troubled me since my childhood days was 1 Corinthians 13:3.
To me the problem was this: Directly preceding this statement, Paul mentions quite a few achievements that could be deemed reachable and really plausible, contributing to the overall growth of Christianity. To speak with tongues, and prophesy, and have faith, and care for the less privileged would all contribute to the growth of the congregation, and its esteem in the world. Even giving up one’s body, meaning one’s life, rather than disown one’s faith during persecution, is plausible. But why the stipulation that it should be by the burning of one’s body? I could make no sense out of this, whether with love, or without. In my mind I could not fathom a person stepping forward and announcing: “here I am, you may give me up to the flames!” For what reason? To achieve what? It just made no sense to me.
On the other hand, if this had to do with being threatened with persecution and possible execution for one’s faith, could you have any say in the method? “Okay, so I am to be executed. In my case, you give me up to the flames!” Does one have any say in the way one would be executed if condemned to death due to one’s faith? Or were people executed that way reckoned of a higher esteem than those beheaded or crucified? Why did Paul add this stipulation? Continue reading
According to the King James Version, Paul gives the direct advice to Timothy to withdraw from difficult people. (1Tim. 6:5) Modern versions do not include this order. What would be the reason?
1Tim. 6:3 – 5 “If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings. Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.” Continue reading
The statement “through his blood” in Colossians 1:14, is not found in most modern versions of the Bible. What would be the reason that such a Biblical truth could be removed?
(KJVR) “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:“
(NIV) “…in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.”
Let us first look at the manuscripts to our disposal. The oldest Greek manuscript we have containing the words “through his blood”, is Ms. 1912 dating ±950 A.D. and then again in Ms. 35 of ±1050. After that most minuscule manuscripts do have these words. Continue reading
I re-blog this post from Phillip Lang’s blog “Reading Acts”. ( http://readingacts.wordpress.com/)
May you be blessed as much as I had been reading it.
The Gospel of John and the “Other Disciples” – Andrew
December 2, 2014 in Gospels | Tags: Andrew, Apostle Andrew
Phillip writes as follows:
We know far less about Andrew than Peter, James and John, although he is often listed along with these three in the gospels. Andrew and Peter were brothers, as were James and John, working in the same fishing village in Galilee when they are called to be followers of Jesus. But all four seem to have been looking for the coming of the Messiah, as we see from reading John 1.
When John the Baptist was still baptizing in the Jordan, Andrew is following him. They encounter the Lord and John the Baptist announce that Jesus is the Messiah. In John’s gospel, this is the third day, usually significant in the Bible! The witness of John starts a “chain reaction” as Jesus is followed by Andrew and another disciple of John the Baptist (1:35-39). Continue reading
In Acts 23:1 – 10 Luke tells of the incident where Paul had been brought before the Jewish high council. In verse eight Luke mentions three matters that the Pharisees and Sadducees disagreed with one another. First he mentions the resurrection, then the existence of angels and spirits. Paul calls up the first one, stating that he is being on trial because of his hope in the resurrection. This caused division in the council.
But in the manuscripts we now find two versions. The one group of manuscripts mention only these three aspects Luke referred to. The other group of manuscripts adds another, viz. “…let us not fight against God.” Continue reading
Sometimes there are differences that present as possibly challenging a crucial Biblical truth. Did God create all nations out of one blood, or one man? We should study every difference thoroughly to get to the bottom of the cause for that difference.
KJV: “And He has made all nations of men of one blood to dwell on all the face of the earth, ordaining fore-appointed seasons and boundaries of their dwelling.”
(NIV) “From one man he made every nation of men,that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.”
(RSV) “And he made from one every nation of men to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their habitation.”
How can that be? There is a huge difference between “one blood” and “one man”. Continue reading