I have been studying God's word for 53 years.
You are merely arguing for a version, only perhaps two or three of which use the word "voice", but the meaning is the same. It was God walking in the garden, speaking, calling out to Adam and Eve as they hid in shame. One doesn't even need an M. Div. to understand that.
There is no need for us to be intimidated or to be fearful of the most widely used bible versions...nor is it a healthy thing for the Body of Christ to cast aspersions on them. It is contrary to unity.
Better a wise child than and old and foolish king ? I was simply giving my testomony not using it as any final authority .
You should have noticed by now I am neitehr intimidated or fearful of other versions.
Yet I am ge
reatly concerned how so many versions are leadign people astray to the effect that Gods people are simply doing what is right in thier own eyes . and saying or implying that because (they say) they understand the original langauge then they are the final authority .
Yet the scriptures say it is by the Spirit of truth that we knwo the spirit of error .He then is the final authority .The Lord in whom we trust , rather than our own understanding .
There are betetr men than me who have written books on the subject and lay out an argument for each version . Textually ,lingusitic and in any other matter related . Each man has to eb fully persuaded in his own mind on the matter. I cannot force you ro anybody .
I am not arguing for a VERSION I am arguing for the integrity of scripture and that men are changing what it says to what they understand or rather think it says .
The scripture does NOT say God was walking in the garden and speaking . I dont know exactly WHY it does not say that .
But what it does say is " the Voice of the Lord God walked " Strange as it might seem to mans thinking .That was what was inspired for men to put down.
I will not , cannot nor do change it simply because it seems a strange thing to say . I also gave if you remember what I understood from it .
For comparison another 'strange' thing God said and inspired men to record . "The seed of the woman " which comes a little later.
It is not women who have the seed but it is man . for God created man in his image out of the dust of the earth and he created women out of the body of the man .
The law of God is that ev ry seed will bring forth fruit after its own kind. We are therefore of all one KIND as we are also of all one blood. Thus we are MANkind and not another .
Yet God said "the seed of the woman"
God is a God of order and the word of God is given in order . and words beign what they are they can only be said one word at a time . The order of words and the development of an argument or doctrine then is laid out line upon line precept upon precept .
Wisdom dictated perhaps the phrase "the seed of the woman" but as women do not have the seed then what does it mean?
Simply that not only would this one child ("IT") be male ("HE") will be born of a woman and thus a man .
But he would not be of Adams seed .
So then I will not change scriptures 'strange' phrases that at face value seem none sensical and so in some peopels eyes must either be changed or not believed or both. But I will keep them and seek Gods mind on the matter as to what HE meant by it .
Rather than seek what men mean by it .
The truth is not democratic . and it is neither established , undermined or upheld by how many people 'vote' for it .
I care not then how many people disagree with me IF they are wrong . I would be concerned if I was and IF so proved then I will change my thinking on the matter .
But to ask me to change what the scriptures actually say to anothers interpretation of it is neither proving the case or justifying the change .
"Nor is it a healthy (?!) thing for the body of Christ to cast aspersions on them ,it is contrary to unity "
Unity founded upon error is to some extent A unity .
But it is not the "unity of the faith..." Nor is it a unity of the Spirit of truth nor is it healthy .
and while I do not count myself to be any one in authority . I do not count a 'majority ' if that is what it is; an authority either .
and while I will argue my case, which i have done exhaustively ,to bring up such an argument that i should not question the verasity of many versions as it will or is aaginst 'unity' is a false argument and actually adds to my argument rather than yours.
in Christ
gerald