Difficult texts

[Daniel_Marsh]

What texts would be difficult for an:

Catholic
Protestant
Free Will
OSAS
Pentecostal
Chairsmatic
Cessionalists
Pre-tribist
Post tribist
Mid tribist
almillianlist
Pretest
Seventh Day Adventist
Homean Arian
Arian
Jesus Only
Soul Sleep

My interrest this year is to study difficult texts and mistranslations in scripture. Any suggestions of texts or books?

 

[Lazerlike42]

Daniel Marsh:

What texts would be difficult for an:

Catholic
Protestant
Free Will
OSAS
Pentecostal
Chairsmatic
Cessionalists
Pre-tribist
Post tribist
Mid tribist
almillianlist
Pretest
Seventh Day Adventist
Homean Arian
Arian
Jesus Only
Soul Sleep

My interrest this year is to study difficult texts and mistranslations in scripture. Any suggestions of texts or books?

I would of course say that no verse would be difficult for a Catholic if he or she knew her faith because all the verses would be very harmonious with it. That does not mean, however, that a Catholic is going to understand every verse off the bat. Most of us are still going to have some verses that cause us trouble until we dig into it!

I would also say that its hard to generalize “protestant” becuase there are so many conflicting protestant beliefs. That being said, there are some ideas that are common (Sola Scriptura for instance), so I would offer verses that fall into these common areas.

So then, let me try to provide a list.

Catholic - Romans 4:5. (It’s not really that tough, but I honestly thought about it and had a really hard time thinking of anything I thought was tough)

Protestant - 2 Thessolonians 2:15, 2 Peter 3:16, 2 Peter 1:20, Romans 2:6-10, 1 Corinthians 11:26-29

Free Will - Romans 9:18

OSAS - Philippians 2:12, 1 Corinthians 9:27, James 5:19-20, Revelation 3:16, Matthew 7:21

Pentecostal/Charismatic - 1 Corinthians 12:28-30, 1 Corinthians 14:8, 1 Corinthians 13:6, 1 Corinthians 14:18-191 Corinthians 14:22-23

The various tribs are more ideas that are created by combining and exegeting various verses, and they must be criticized in the same way. Since the Bible does not really teach anything about a rapture, it is difficult to pick out one particular verse to point to.

Arianism - John 20:28, John 1:1, John 10:3, John 14:9, Revelation 1:17+ Isaiah 44:6, Romans 9:5, Colossians 2:9, Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1

Jesus only - Matthew 6:9

Thats all I can do for now, hopefully its a good start. Ill do more later if others dont add.

 

[BayCityRickL]

Any text can be difficult, just depends on how you look at it.

Karl Keating’s “Catholicism and Fundamentalism” lists a lot of scripture verses that Catholics and non-Catholics take differently.

As Keating points out already in Chapter One, people have the mistaken notions that Catholics don’t take the Bible literally and that Fundamentalists do. His book is an elaboration on that theme.

Scott Hahn’s “Scripture Matters” is a collection of essays about scripture and Catholic interpretation. You can infer that the verses he quotes would be interpreted differently by different groups.

Jaroslav Pelikan (non-Catholic) dealt with this very subject in his 2005 book titled something like “Whose Bible is it?” He goes to great lengths to explain how Jews, Christians, and Muslims claim ownership of the scriptures. It’s been a while, but I seem to recall he covers essential issues of interpretation by these three religions.

Fr. Jean Corbon’s “Path to Freedom” (a recommended read by Scott Hahn’s St. Paul Center) is a spiritual exegesis of scripture, and while not dwelling on apologetics, certainly throws down the gauntlet for Catholic viewpoints on scripture.

Perhaps to tantalize you about this book, Corbon describes the initial chapters of Genesis as being a poem, a song, and a drama. That’s quite an interesting way of looking at the creation account. Creation is an enormous theme in this short theology book.

It’s no coincidence that these are my recently read books. All these books are worth the read.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hi Rick and 42, I stumbled on this page ( see quote ), while doing a google search. Can you guess what “church” they represent?

Difficult Texts in the New Testament
Texts

Matthew 3:10-12
Matthew 5:17
Matthew 5:19
Matthew 10:28
Matthew 15:11
Matthew 16:18
Matthew 16:28
Matthew 18:18
Matthew 22:31, 32
Matthew 25:46
Matthew 28:1
Mark 4:11, 12
Mark 9:43, 44
Luke 9:60
Luke 15:22
Luke 16:16
Luke 16:22, 23
Luke 17:34-36
Luke 23:43
John 1:17
John 2:3-6
John 3:13
John 5:24
John 7:39
John 8:51
John 9:31
John 10:28
John 11:26
John 20:23
Acts 9:7
Acts 10:13
Acts 12:15
Romans 5:13
Romans 7:4
Romans 10:4
Romans 11:26
Romans 14:14
Romans 14:21
1 Corinthians 3:13-15
1 Corinthians 5:5
1 Corinthians 7:14
1 Corinthians 11:29, 30
1 Corinthians 14:34, 35
1 Corinthians 15:29
2 Corinthians 3:7, 8
2 Corinthians 4:16
2 Corinthians 5:6-8
2 Corinthians 12:2, 3
Galatians 2:19
Galatians 3:19
Galatians 3:23-25
Galatians 4:8-10
Galatians 4:22-24
Ephesians 2:15
Philippians 1:23
Colossians 2:14-17
1 Thessalonians 3:13
1 Thessalonians 4:14
2 Thessalonians 2:6
2 Thessalonians 2:15
1 Timothy 2:11-15
1 Timothy 4:1-4
1 Timothy 5:23
Titus 1:15
Hebrews 8:7, 8
Hebrews 10:8, 9
Hebrews 12:22-24
1 Peter 3:18-20
1 Peter 4:6
2 Peter 2:4
2 Peter 3:8
1 John 3:9
1 John 5:12
1 John 5:16
Revelation 1:5
Revelation 3:14
Revelation 6:9-11
Revelation 14:10, 11

nisbett.com/difficult/new.htm

Here’s a hint their ot diffuilculties page only lists two texts and here is their commentary on those.

Genesis 35:18
“And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing, (for she died) that she called his name Benoni: but his father called him Benjamin.”

---

Since it is not possible for souls to exist outside of bodies, how do we explain this apparent contradiction? The word “soul” is translated from the Hebrew word “nephesh” which has been translated 118 times in the Old Testament as “life.” The same word is used in Genesis 1:30 in reference to animals. it is never used in one single instance to denote an immortal or undying part of man.

nisbett.com/difficult/ot-gen-35-18.htm

and,

Genesis 9:3
“Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.”

---

Before the Flood, God gave no permission for man to eat the flesh of animals. The original diet laid down in genesis 1:29 and 3:18 consisted of nuts, fruits grains and vegetables. This order of things prevailed until after the Flood. Then, because vegetation had been destroyed by the Flood, God allowed the use of flesh food for the first time. It was for this purpose that the clean animals had been taken into the ark by [sevens pairs] and the unclean by twos (Genesis 7:1, 2).

Even though Genesis 9:3 seems to be an unrestricted permit to eat any kind of animal, please note that it was not without limits. God said, “Even as the green herb have I given you all things.” In the same way that God had given vegetation, so now He gave flesh. But all vegetation was not good to eat. There were weeds and poisonous plants that could not be eaten. In the same way, God proceeded soon afterward (Leviticus chapter 11) to show that certain animals were not good for food and should definitely not be eaten.

It is also interesting to note that this instruction was given to Noah immediately after leaving the ark. Since it takes two (both male and female) to propagate a species and only two of each unclean animal were saved in the ark, it is certain that God did not give license to eat the unclean animals. If He had, the unclean species would have been exterminated, and none would exist today.

nisbett.com/difficult/ot-gen-09-03.htm

 

[Lazerlike42]

Seems to be the Seventh Day Adventists lol

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

I am thinking the same thing. It could also, be a Seventh day church of God too.

 

[Ruthie]

For Oneness Pentacostals (Jesus only), Mt 28:19-20.

19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age." (RSV)

Ask, with charity, why they baptize in the name of Jesus, when He told us so clearly what to do?

Works for me…

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Good one Ruthie

With Jesus Only

I bring up

Centenary Translation of the New Testament

John 1: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was face to face with God, and the Word was God

by Helen Montgomery

 

[Salmon]

Daniel Marsh:

My interrest this year is to study difficult texts and mistranslations in scripture. Any suggestions of texts or books?

Hello, Daniel.
I pray all is well with you.

Are you familiar with:

The Catholic Verses: 95 Bible Passages That Confound Protestants
by Dave Armstrong

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/1928832733/ref=dp_image_0/102-9053387-8583306?_encoding=UTF8&n=283155&s=books

You may wish to read the reviews of the book at:

Reviews at Amazon.com

May God continue to bless you.

Peace in Christ…Salmon

 

[Lapsed]

This is more in line with general Bible challenges, but one apparent contradiction I have never been able to satisfactorally account for is the two accounts of Paul’s vision of Christ in the Acts of the Apostles:

Act 9:7 And the Lord said to him: Arise and go into the city; and there it shall be told thee what thou must do. Now the men who went in company with him stood amazed, hearing indeed a voice but seeing no man.

Act 22:9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light: but they heard not the voice of him that spoke with me.

Did or did not Paul’s companions hear the voice?

 

[asteroid]

Ruthie:

For Oneness Pentacostals (Jesus only), Mt 28:19-20.

19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age." (RSV)

Ask, with charity, why they baptize in the name of Jesus, when He told us so clearly what to do?

Works for me…

Don’t such people point to the words “THE NAME”? There is only one name, so the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all one person.

Then they would point to the verses in Acts where people are baptised in the name of Jesus and thus claim that Jesus is pretty much synonymous with F, S & HS. (Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5)

Oneness Pentecostals find no problem with that verse. With their interpretation they remove the existing problems very well.

Of course, there are good answers to both these things. The first is countered by a lesson in good grammar. The second by a lesson in authority vs formulae.

 

[asteroid]

Salmon:

Hello, Daniel.
I pray all is well with you.

Are you familiar with:

The Catholic Verses: 95 Bible Passages That Confound Protestants
by Dave Armstrong

amazon.com/gp/product/images/1928832733/ref=dp_image_0/102-9053387-8583306?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=283155&s=books

You may wish to read the reviews of the book at:

Reviews at Amazon.com

May God continue to bless you.

Peace in Christ…Salmon

I must read that sometime. I’ve got the pdf versions of a couple of his books and they are very good.

Loved the review at Amazon that didn’t like the book much:

Armstrong hits his mark about half the time. He misses on the Eucharist (come on - do even Catholics believe in transubstantiation anymore? I mean the REAL Catholics, not you Johnny Come Lately converts?), and penance, just to name two.

Errr, yes, the real catholics do believe it! But of course the faith hasn’t always been taught well.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hi Salmon, do you have the list? or is the table of contents or index for the book online?

 

[Lazerlike42]

I read the book. Unfortunately I gave it to a friend so I don’t have it right now.

That being said, the 95 verses are the verses that we use around here all the time. They aren’t necessarily these giant stumpers that no Protestant can answer, though they are tough. They are the best 95 verses that Catholics tend to use anyways, like 2 Thess. 2:15 and Romans 2:5-6 and whatnot.

 

[Salmon]

Daniel Marsh:

Hi Salmon, do you have the list? or is the table of contents or index for the book online?

Daniel,
check your private messages inbox.

Peace in Christ…Salmon