Integrity in everyday life and how society looks at prejudism today

[bluehorizonx10]

Today in Sunday School our quarterly had the lesson out of Job of integrity and how Job always had integrity in every facet of his life. We've been in this book for a few weeks now. I'll quote what my quarterly said because I can't think of any better way to say it.

Our society today has supposedly taken a stand against prejudice by making it illegal to favor one person over another in matters of employment or access to public places. Preference or discrimination cannot be shown because of race, sex, religion, or lifestyle.

This prevailing attitude, however, goes to the extent of refusing to recognize that there is anything right or wrong based on an absolute standard. Thus our society retains one prejudice: there is a deep-seated antagonism today against Bible-believing Christians because we insist that there is One who is supreme in authority and who has established absolute standards of right and wrong.

Job was free of prejudice, but he definitely held on to God's standard of right and wrong.

God knew Job was a perfect man.

Job 2:3 And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause.

Of course you can go back and read the first two chapters to see how this conversation came about between the Lord and the devil. But God, Himself said that Job was perfect. Job had a hatred of partiality which essentially is prejudism. Job declared his honesty. Job hated covetousness. Job was a man of genuine faith in God. He kept that faith in all adversity.

As James wrote, "Faith, if it hath not works, is dead" The genuineness is always best attested to by the integrity of our lives.

Job was a man who we all should learn by and pattern our life after. I never really thought about it, but we always say Jesus was the only perfect man who lived on earth. But Job, by God's own words, was also perfect while he lived here on earth. God's definition of perfect was keeping our integrity(sound moral principle, upright, honest, and sincere) and eschewing(to avoid or abstain from) evil. That sounds like a worthy goal to me for all of us to strive for in our lives.

[Java]

Excellent!

[Earl Purple]

I've never fully studied Job.

Job was a righteous gentile and lived around the time of Moses.

According to some, he was on Pharoah's council when they decided what to do with Moses. The other two present were Bilam and Jethro. Bilam said they should kill him and Jethro ran out in disagreement. Job remained silent.

Job was punished for his silence, but not as much as Bilam. Jethro was rewarded for his dissent.

[tiger_rascal]

I enjoyed the book of Job.

Thanks for sharing Gail. :)

[pinky]

In the translation of the Bible that I read, God does not refer to Job as being perfect, but rather says that "there is no one as good and faithful as Job."

[bluehorizonx10]

That was the King James version. That's really the only one I use and truly believe in.

And in my Bible and belief it wasn't really certain at what time Job was living although most likely it was during Moses' time. Job wasn't punished at all by God. He allowed the devil to test Job to see his faithfulness to God.

Job 2:4 And Satan answered the Lord, and said, Skin for skin, yea all that a man hath will he give for his life.

But thank you Earl for the added insight into his life.

[oldernow]

Job 2:3 (NIV)Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil. And he still maintains his integrity, though you incited me against him to ruin him without any reason."


Job 2:3 (New American Standard)
2:3The LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered My servant Job? For there is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man fearing God and turning away from evil. And he still holds fast his integrity, although you incited Me against him to ruinhim without cause."

Job 2:3 (New Revised Standard)And the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil? He still holds fast his integrity, although you moved me against him, to destroy him without cause."

Job 2:3(New Kings James Version)Then the Lord said to Satan, "Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil? And still he holds fast to his integrity, although you incited Me against him, to destroy him without cause."

Just a few popular versions that all say basically the same thing.

[tiger_rascal]

...keeping our integrity(sound moral principle, upright, honest, and sincere) and eschewing(to avoid or abstain from) evil.

Does that not sound like a worthy goal for any human to achieve, with or without God?

[bluehorizonx10]

Is "prejudism" a word anyway?

Not by Mr. Webster, but it's my word. Do you like my version? :biggrin:

Yes, I think it's a very worthy goal for any human being Chad.


Patty, I have to disagree on this one. Neither of those versions say he's a perfect and upright man. That's why I only read the KJV. Any little word change is a change in meaning, as far as I'm concerned. But everyone is entitled to their opinion. And I certainly find no fault in other's beliefs or opinions. I only posted it because I thought it a very good lesson for anyone and everyone. :)

[bluehorizonx10]

For example, I believe the invasion of Iraq was "evil". I believe the disparaging of homosexuals is evil.

But surely oxymoron you believe there are many more things in this world that's evil besides war and disrespect of homosexuality.

[bekahbeans]

Originally posted by oxymoron
It sounds like a worthy goal. But it does not provide the answer as to what represents integrity and what represents evil.

For example, I believe the invasion of Iraq was "evil". I believe the disparaging of homosexuals is evil. Others disagree. So, we can both have the same goal and come to very different conclusions about the actions entailed. It is not a particularly useful statement.

wow...that really made me think. *runs off to ponder some more*

[butterfly]

Originally posted by bluehorizonx10
Any little word change is a change in meaning, as far as I'm concerned.

Forgive me Gail, but I thought you said that when the Bible is translated, God is in on it too, so that the Bible is never corrupted. So surely, all versions are equally the Word of God?

[tiger_rascal]

God is not behind all translations of the Bible, such as the IRC version, obviously.

[butterfly]

Oh OK. So how do we know which ones are dodgy and which ones aren't?

[bluehorizonx10]

Originally posted by butterfly
Forgive me Gail, but I thought you said that when the Bible is translated, God is in on it too, so that the Bible is never corrupted. So surely, all versions are equally the Word of God?

Butterfly I've always expressed my belief that when the original KJV of the Bible was translated that yes, in fact, God did have His hand on the writers. The new versions are only man's rewritten version of the original God's Word. Of course this is all my belief. I've had my son, who was a history major in college, explain to me in detail the history of the rulers at that time and of King James especially. But even after he learned all the facts as men state, he still said he knew in his heart as well, that God wrote that book to stand for all seasons for all His children to read. He didn't go with the world's view, but with his teachings from God. He has gone to many countries and many cultures now in his travels for work. But he still believes he's right where God wants him, believing in Jesus Christ as his Saviour. That's why there is such an evangelism, imo, of getting that Bible out to every country and all the people possible. If God wasn't in it why do you think there have been millions and millions of Bibles distributed and so very many souls brought to God? I have faith. That's where it all begins.

[oldernow]

This question has been debated ever since the first translation deviated from the King James language. The KJV was translated mostly from the Septuegent Greek which was not an original manuscript. That greek text is actually closer to the original.

The language of the KJV is archaic in many of it's translation and many of the words spoken then do not have the same meaning as today. For example, the Scripture tells us "xo be ye holy in all manner of conversation" 1 Peter 1:15. The Greek word translated by the KJV is "anastrophe" which literally means "behaviour". In the King James language of the day, the word conversation did not mean merely talking but did mean our whole moral behaviour. This is only one example of the archaic words of the KJV not having the same meaning in today's english.

This is why the NKJV, the NIV, NLT, CEV, NASB, etc. came out. Not to change the meaning of the passages but to clarify them and put them into today's language.

As far as certain verses not showing up like in the KJV, you will find that most translations have that verse in a footnote at the bottom of the page that generally states that this verse, partial verse, or verses do not appear in the most ancient of manuscripts.

In all actuallity, the NASB is considered by most scholars to be the most accurate translation as it is word for word from the most ancient of all the manuscripts.

Our knowledge and data about ancient lexicography, or word meaning. has greatly increased in the twentieth century. There are many more discoveries that shed light on the precise meaning of Hebrew and Greek words that our ability to translate the original documents accurately has been sharply increased. When that happens , it calls for a new translation. When you translate a document from one language to another, you run the risk of losing some of the original. Whenever you have a better grasp of the original, you want to reflect that in your next edition of your translation.
We have also discovered many more texts of the Greek New Testament, the Greek manuscripts from which the KJV was translated were not the best Greek manuscripts. We have had great progress in reconstructing the original manuscripts. The KJV that people read today is not the original KJV either.
I really dont want to criticize the KJV. The KjV has brought alot of people to God but so has other translations. If you wanted to fully understand all there is to this controversy you could do some research to get the full picture and see that it is not what some assume. I am just trying to point out that the Bible does not have to be KJV only. A book has to be able to be read by an individual in his native language in order to be able to understood. How can my Bible be wrong if I have learned the same essential doctrine of those who have read the KJV?

[bluehorizonx10]

It may not be wrong for you, but for me I'll stick with my trusty KJV. :wink: Thanks for all that background Patty. It's really very interesting. :)

[pinky]

But since the King James version was translated into English, what do we do about those people who don't speak English as their first language, or at all?

Any translation into another language will invariably alter some phrasing, which could alter interpretations.

[Java]

Unfortunately English happens to be one of the worst languages for anything to be translated into... A single word in English can have so many different meanings according to the context in which it is being used, and understanding these contexts can often elude readers who are not already of full understanding of the context meant to be represented, and this alone creates a huge and formidable challenge right at the starting gate!

My prayer - Lord, please have mercy on all of those who's first language is English!

[tiger_rascal]

That was my initial thought Java.

If Im not mistaken, the Bible is still being meticulously translated into as many languages as possible.

Its my prayer that God will not allow any of His followers to be misled and all translations are as accurate to the original as possible. I have faith.

[pinky]

That's my hope, too, Chad.

My point was that I don't think the KJV is the only one people should accept. If another translation brings the Word closer to you, and you closer to the Word, then that's the translation I would recommend.

[oldernow]

I agree Pinky..

[butterfly]

Maybe there's a case for teaching ancient Hebrew in schools.

It's been great posting here, but the dark shadow of dotmusic reaches far into the deepest corners of my life, and I must leave. Thank you for not judging me. I have asked forgiveness from Him many times for the wrong I've done in the past, and I believe I am forgiven.

I have faith that one day we'll meet again in Heaven. Goodbye and good luck in the rest of your lives.

Sorry for going OT, but I thought it would be better not to post a new thread. Love to you all.

Vicky. xxxxxxxxxxx

[pinky]

Vicky, I'm sorry if you feel you have to leave, for whatever reason.

I wish you peace.

[tiger_rascal]

Originally posted by oxymoron
Who determines which translations God is bbehind and which He isn't?

I nominate Condaleeza Rice.

A little bit of common sense and faith. Common sense that the words match up to what you have previously read, for me that would be the KJV, and faith that the people who translate them are using the original Hebrew text.

[tiger_rascal]

Comparisons dont hurt either.

When I decided I wanted to read the Bible I got some Christians opinions on which version I should read. I got advice from people who would know and have already looked into all that.

[oldernow]

I have repeated this many times how at a young age I could not comprehend the King James Bible, it was from the Todays English version Bible that I learned about God. I have many different Bibles and not one of them teach a different doctrine than the other, the same message is in every one of them.

If anyone is truly concerned about the version they are reading you could read about the history of the King James version and why there is such a fuss. In my opinion it is far better to look at the different versions and learn the history behind them before making judgements to which one is better. I believe that everyone has there own preference and one must remember that only God can open ones eyes and mind when reading the bible.

[oxymoron]

In my opinion it is far better to look at the different versions and learn the history behind them before making judgements to which one is better.


I totally agree with this statement. Especially, as it emphasizes the role of human judgement in understanding the bible.

We can not know God's word. We can only know our own understanding of that word. An approach that looks at differing versions, even differing ideas about God, will lead to the best educated judgements. Those who have considered all paths are more likely to have a greater understanding and appreciation for the path they are on.

[05Ivory]

The 10 commandments came from the hands of God. So not all the Bible is written by man.

It would make sense to me that a creator would give direction to what it created. So the idea of the Bible being true isn't too hard to believe.

As imperfect humans it is possible that we could have translated a line here or a line there wrong. But the parts of the Bible that God wants us to know, he wouldn't allow to be seriously messed up. He would find a way for his word to get across to us.

[DoubleEdgeSword]

Is it just me, or is this thread seriously out of whack? I can't seem to get to page 3. Instead, it is a repeat of page 2.

[05Ivory]

Is it just me, or is this thread seriously out of whack? I can't seem to get to page 3. Instead, it is a repeat of page 2.

It's out of whack.