|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Aug 16, 2020 13:06:11 GMT
Actually if you want something literal you should go to the Hebrew original for the Old testament or the Greek original for the New Testament, since the Bible was not written in English. Try that now. The internet can help. Did you see yet? None of those scriptures uses the word for "truth." The actual literal meaning of the word "צָרַף" (tsaraph) is "refined" in the sense of removing impurities from metal. The verse compares it to a "מגנּה מגן" (magen) meaning "shield" in the sense of protection from enemies. The Hebrew word for "truth" is "אֱמֶת" (emet). Now try "that which was to be demonstrated" or in Latin quod erat demonstrandum often rendered "QED." I can understand how some people want and expect to have it all spelled out in simple to understand English. I can understand how some simpletons have a meaning for the word truth that dispenses with hidden meanings and artistic language. I can understand how simpletons think any words of any high value must be "true." The facts are however that although the words in the Bible have a high value they are not accessible to large numbers of people and therefore are not the source for people of God's truth. The source of God's truth for his people is the Holy Spirit imbued "prophet" (Old Testament) or Holy Spirit imbued person of whatever employment (New Testament). God never promised to send a book (either testament) to be the final arbiter of truth. However in both testaments he (or his son) did promise to send Holy Spirit imbued representatives. Old Testament -- Deuteronomy 18:18. New Testament -- John 16:13, John 14:17 Which part of the Bible is untrue, or cannot be seen as the final arbiter then, Arlon? If one cannot tell, then it all falls suspect. Perhaps even you can understand that parables are not "true" in the sense of names, times and places. That doesn't mean they don't have value or lessons somewhat like the fiction in half the library.
|
|