Yeah. I added more to my post if you wanna check it out.

I'm not saying denominations are bad, but they can lead to wrongful things.

I edited my post and I do know what you mean.

I think its not wronge to go to a denominational church. Even if you go to a church that has a denomination, you don't have to believe in exactly what the churches doctrine is. You shouldn't get caught up in ceramonies and traditions, like the catholics. I think some denominations are purer than others though.

On the threads real issue. The bible has been translated into many different languages. The original Document itself was written in Hebrew and Greek. There are arguements in the translations, and many different views on what the bible is exactly saying. I think there are different views on the bible because people try to twist it to serve thier own purposes, needs, and desires. I don't think there is anything wrong with going to a chruch with a denomination as long as you don't get caught up in it. Most christian groups do have the same views and doctrine except different denominations focus on different things. Like my church focus's on evangelism. They're are also issues like what music and worship the church has. Black southern Baptists wouldn't like coming up here and standing stiff as a board while they sing and worship.

But I will agree with David in that its usaully better to be nondenominational and serve god and look to the bible for answers.

I have to disagree with some of nondenominational churches teachings though. David and I have talked about it.

Well the way I understand things, if there is a church without a denomination, then it beleives what it believes. And there are no links to headquarters in a different town or somthing. Not all nondenominational people believing the same thing and having the same doctrine. Correct me if I'm wrong. Mabey you are talking about David's church in particular?

Yeah I was. But I also know someone else that goes to one here and they have told me a bit as well. They also had some ideas that I didn't find as right.

Actually the original bible was written in Aramaic, not Hebrew and Greek. It was later translated into Hebrew and Greek, then Latin, the German, etc. Which is why it has been found that there are mistranslations in the current bibles because of mistakes translating/interpreting from the languages of the past. For example, many words had multiple meanings... I remember Light Knight answered a question for me once about the whole "thou shalt not allow a witch to live" line and how I heard it orignally was "poisoner" not "witch"... and it turns out that the word had multiple meanings so it was up to the translator to put which meaning he wanted... and since people feared witches at the time the King James version was written... well, you can finish that one yourself.

We can't assume that. Usually context would tell them the answers. Not really possible to tell anymore.

You have to ask Light Knight how many meanings that the word had, but if you think about it logically either works.

Originally posted by Elara

---

You have to ask Light Knight how many meanings that the word had, but if you think about it logically either works.

---

Light Knight left the board for JW's reasons

I am assuming this was in the Old Testament? Also are you sure the original New Testament wasn't in Greek?

Really David? That sucks.

Not too sure about the New Testement, that might have been Hebrew or Greek, maybe even Latin. The Old Testement was Aramaic though, I know that one for a fact... of course Aramaic was the language spoken by Jesus and the Apostles so meh, not sure.

Greek would make a lot more sense for the New Testament. I will have to do some digging.

the new testament was mostly greek.... mostly.... the 4 gospels had some hebrew writers... but Paul and Luke definately wrote in greek....

so, mostly greek and partly hebrew....

and about denominations.... I don't think there actually should be any.... and there wouldn't be if there was still revelation from God to the church.... the entire problem is that people translate the Bible in whatever way pleases them.... and quite often a church is started because someone reads the bible differently....

Originally posted by geeogree

---

and quite often a church is started because someone reads the bible differently....

---

EXACTLY!

The New Testament was entirely Greek. The Old Testament was in Aramaic and Hebrew. I got these answers from a Bible Professor, so he should know. He isn't what you would expect out of a Bible professor. He talks a little along the lines of you Geeogree.

I'm taking that as a compliment...

and it's entirely possible that the whole new testament is greek... but I thought that at least a few books were written in Aramaic/Hebrew.... ie Peter's epistle to the Hebrews.... or Gospel of Matthew...

What I was trying to say is that he doesn't take everything clean cut much like you don't.

Well I had asked him about the New Testament part after the Old. I said so the New Testament was entirely Greek and he told me it was. You have to remember that Greek is supposedly one of the easiest languages. And that a lot of times they had scribes actually writing so Greek seems a lot more likely just by thinking about it that way to me. Greek was really big around this time as well.

ah.... fair enough...

so... denominations....

there definately shouldn't be any.... there is only one way to heaven... and that is through Jesus.... and it doesn't make a lot of sense to have different ways to the same man.... that's not to say that there is only one.... but I don't think the amount of variation that exists would still all lead back to the same place

Yeah, it often says the church is His Body. So that would conclude there is only one.

The strangest one I find (no offense) are Baptists. I mean they call themselves Baptists but don't believe Baptism is neccessary to be saved.