Sarah Sanders: God 'wanted Donald Trump to become president'

[prometeus]

Its strange that everyone gave Trump almost no chance to win. Then he did. Its a God thing.

No, it is a multitude of morally bankrupt low intellect imbeciles voting for a piece of crap.

 

[Media_Truth]

He would have them follow our laws. Render unto Cesar that is Cesar's. I never said Trump was a saint. Far from it. Trump is an imperfect man. But the things I have seen from the Democrat party concerning late term abortion is down right evil. They were cheering the passing of a late term abortion bill in New York. And when Trump said he wanted to pass a bill restricting late term abortions during the SOTU address the Dems sat on their hands. I think as this country rejects God He will withdraw his protections and we will see more calamity. Its called the full cup principle. God didn't protect Israel when they strayed from Him. We are no different.

All candidates place their hand on the bible, and pledge to uphold the laws of the land. Last I checked the right to an abortion was the law of the land. So Republicans start their dishonesty before they even take office! I'm a Christian, and I don't vote based on the abortion issue. It's too contentious and emotional, and even if you get Roe vs Wade repealed, it will simply cause each state to come up with it's own laws. Take away the abortion issue, and the Democrats win every other Christian issue - hands down.

 

[SLC]

You'd be surprised what I know about the Bible. Want an example? In the King James Version, at the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus gives his followers what's called the Lord's Prayer. That translation says, "Give us this day our daily bread," but the Greek word that's translated as 'daily' was actually better translated as 'supersubstantial'. That word apparently didn't make sense to the monk or whomever wrote that piece (remember, there were committees formed and charged with the task of submitting translations of sections) so he simply wrote 'daily'. Thing is, the word 'supersubstantial' was so important that it was created for that use, it didn't exist in Greek before then.
So what did Jesus really mean by that line? Did the prayer, the supplication to God, matter so little that when Jesus wanted people to ask for 'supersubstantial' bread they might as well say 'daily'?


edit- Epiousios: Our Father . . . Give Us This Day Our Daily Supersubstantial Bread - Living Faith - Home & Family - News - Catholic Online

Where did you hear that? From a Catholic source? The Aramaic word he used was semeron and we do know what it means. Its used 40 times in the Bible

σήμερον sḗmeron, say'-mer-on; neuter (as adverb) of a presumed compound of the article G3588 (t changed to s) and G2250; on the (i.e. this) day (or night current or just passed); generally, now (i.e. at present, hitherto):—this (to-)day.

Strong has done an exhaustive study of words use in the Bible and how they were also used in contemporary writings in Biblical times. I can find no evidence what you are saying is correct. Perhaps you should study a little deeper into the subject.

 

[Mongidig]

God created AOC, Elizabeth Warren, Virginia, etc. Maybe he does want Trump to win.

 

[SLC]

Your blinders revealed. If you want to call Trump the upright moral candidate of the last election, I have nothing to say to you, other than stay away from FOX News.

When did you ever see me call Trump up right or moral? :lol: I have said he is immoral. I don't care about Trump's affairs I do care about his policies. I believe he will help protect the unborn and religious freedoms. I believe he will do a better job of it that Hellary would have done.

 

[SLC]

All candidates place their hand on the bible, and pledge to uphold the laws of the land. Last I checked the right to an abortion was the law of the land. So Republicans start their dishonesty before they even take office! I'm a Christian, and I don't vote based on the abortion issue. It's too contentious and emotional, and even if you get Roe vs Wade repealed, it will simply cause each state to come up with it's own laws. Take away the abortion issue, and the Democrats win every other Christian issue - hands down.

I'm not a Catholic but I believe in their right to believe . The Obama administration tried to force the Catholics to provide birth control. I I personally do not believe birth control s wrong but I believe in their right to believe as they do and to feel birth control is wrong. I believe its wrong for the government to try to force them to provide something that is against their beliefs. The Hillary Administration would have been the Obama administration 2.0. If protecting LIFE isn't high on your list then perhaps you need to read the 10 commandments again. I don't elect president for their personal morals I elect them for their polices. I liked Carter's morals but disliked his policies.

 

[SLC]

God created AOC, Elizabeth Warren, Virginia, etc. Maybe he does want Trump to win.

And Howard Schultz

 

[Grand Mal]

Where did you hear that? From a Catholic source? The Aramaic word he used was semeron and we do know what it means. Its used 40 times in the Bible

σήμερον sḗmeron, say'-mer-on; neuter (as adverb) of a presumed compound of the article G3588 (t changed to s) and G2250; on the (i.e. this) day (or night current or just passed); generally, now (i.e. at present, hitherto):—this (to-)day.

Strong has done an exhaustive study of words use in the Bible and how they were also used in contemporary writings in Biblical times. I can find no evidence what you are saying is correct. Perhaps you should study a little deeper into the subject.

I'll bring you links if you'll read them.
Odd thing about the Gospels translations- though Christ probably spoke Aramaic they had to be translated from Greek into Aramaic. The oldest written Gospels are in Greek.

 

[danarhea]

An evil soul producing holy witness
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart.
O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!”

~William Shakespeare

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Actually you do not know what I believe about God at all.I know what I believe would require study. And I would guess you have not spent much time educating yourself about what the Bible actually says. That requires time and effort actually studying the Bible comparing the scriptures to each other. It requires looking at the meaning of the words in Hebrew and Aramaic. I can tell from your comments that you have not taken the time and effort to do that. I liken your position to someone believe in physics because they don't understand physics and never bothered to study it.

No I didn't have to explain Larry Craig because I had already explained Barney Frank to him.

What is your view of the translation of "thoebe" with reference to homosexuality and with reference to eating rabbit?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I'll bring you links if you'll read them.
Odd thing about the Gospels translations- though Christ probably spoke Aramaic they had to be translated from Greek into Aramaic. The oldest written Gospels are in Greek.

If I follow here, what you are saying is that "the oldest authentic" text (being in Greek) was translated backwards into the "original" text (being Aramaic) and then the "original" text was used as the basis for the "more modern" (being Latin) text which was then again translated into the "modern" (being English) text. In addition to that, the backwards translation was incorrectly done.

I don't know if that is the case, but I do know that translating something three times (via separate translators) is an almost sure way of "getting it wrong".

 

[Grand Mal]

If I follow here, what you are saying is that "the oldest authentic" text (being in Greek) was translated backwards into the "original" text (being Aramaic) and then the "original" text was used as the basis for the "more modern" (being Latin) text which was then again translated into the "modern" (being English) text. In addition to that, the backwards translation was incorrectly done.

I don't know if that is the case, but I do know that translating something three times (via separate translators) is an almost sure way of "getting it wrong".

That's pretty much how it happened.
It was actually against the law to translate the Bible out of Latin. Can't allow the great unwashed masses to sidestep the priestly intervention between man and God. Someone (Wylie? Tyndale?) was executed for that.
The Bible has been translated many time. Many. The King James Version was written by several committees over ten years or so. Groups were charged with translating sections, several for each, and the best was chosen.
Some fundamentalists like to pretend that the Bible is the direct word of God, like the Koran.

 

[SLC]

I'll bring you links if you'll read them.
Odd thing about the Gospels translations- though Christ probably spoke Aramaic they had to be translated from Greek into Aramaic. The oldest written Gospels are in Greek.

Bring them

 

[SLC]

What is your view of the translation of "thoebe" with reference to homosexuality and with reference to eating rabbit?

I view it as not germane to this thread.

 

[SLC]

Where did you hear that? From a Catholic source? The Aramaic word he used was semeron and we do know what it means. Its used 40 times in the Bible

σήμερον sḗmeron, say'-mer-on; neuter (as adverb) of a presumed compound of the article G3588 (t changed to s) and G2250; on the (i.e. this) day (or night current or just passed); generally, now (i.e. at present, hitherto):—this (to-)day.

Strong has done an exhaustive study of words use in the Bible and how they were also used in contemporary writings in Biblical times. I can find no evidence what you are saying is correct. Perhaps you should study a little deeper into the subject.

I just realized I misspoke in this post. Never watch TV while posting. :lol: Christ spoke in Aramaic but the NT was written in Greek. The word I gave was Greek and is has been used in Greek writing from the same time period to mean what I posted. I believe Homer used it also. I would not be surprised if. The Roman Church translated it to meet their purposes though.

 

[Grand Mal]

Bring them

Lost interest, moved on.

Maybe I'll start a thread about Biblcal translation in the appropriate forum later.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

That's pretty much how it happened.
It was actually against the law to translate the Bible out of Latin. Can't allow the great unwashed masses to sidestep the priestly intervention between man and God. Someone (Wylie? Tyndale?) was executed for that.
The Bible has been translated many time. Many. The King James Version was written by several committees over ten years or so. Groups were charged with translating sections, several for each, and the best was chosen.

Interesting aside regarding the KJV is the dispute over how much of it was "politically dictated" in order to bolster the "divine right to rule / independence from The Pope" claims of the English crown and the "validity" of the Church of England (which supported the "divine right to rule / independence from The Pope" of the English crown). I don't take any position on whether those who claim that there was one hell of a lot of pressure (or those who claim that there was no pressure) to produce a document that supported the temporal claims of the English crown were "supported by God" are correct - but I don't rule out the possibility (either way).

[ASIDE - Mind you, if I HAD to bet, I'd put my lunch money down on "The political and temporal powers DID put pressure, on the people who produced the KJV to supply the political and temporal powers with "spiritual proof" that the political and temporal powers were SUPPOSED TO be in charge of the governance of England and that The Pope WAS NOT supposed to be in charge of the governance of England." - want to bet against that proposition?]

Some fundamentalists like to pretend that the Bible is the direct word of God, like the Koran.

Setting aside whether EITHER is "the direct word of God" (which they couldn't be because NO ONE is claiming that God personally wrote either one), the Qu'ran has a better claim since it is (as far as we know) an actual, contemporaneous, recording of the exact words of the "conduit" that God used to transmit God's Word AND is unchanged in a single aspect from the day it was first written down AND the people who wrote down the words that constitute the Qu'ran were actually able to have the "conduit" check their recordings for accuracy - The Bible can make no such claim. IOW, the Qu'ran has a better "root of title" than does The Bible BUT we don't know if the actual origin of either claim is valid.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I view it as not germane to this thread.

Since the "literalness" of The Bible IS "germane to this thread", please try again.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I just realized I misspoke in this post. Never watch TV while posting. :lol: Christ spoke in Aramaic but the NT was written in Greek. The word I gave was Greek and is has been used in Greek writing from the same time period to mean what I posted. I believe Homer used it also. I would not be surprised if. The Roman Church translated it to meet their purposes though.

"Bob suddenly realized that he had brought a feather pillow to a sledgehammer fight." sounds sort of appropriate here.

 

[Grand Mal]

Interesting aside regarding the KJV is the dispute over how much of it was "politically dictated" in order to bolster the "divine right to rule / independence from The Pope" claims of the English crown and the "validity" of the Church of England (which supported the "divine right to rule / independence from The Pope" of the English crown). I don't take any position on whether those who claim that there was one hell of a lot of pressure (or those who claim that there was no pressure) to produce a document that supported the temporal claims of the English crown were "supported by God" are correct - but I don't rule out the possibility (either way).

[ASIDE - Mind you, if I HAD to bet, I'd put my lunch money down on "The political and temporal powers DID put pressure, on the people who produced the KJV to supply the political and temporal powers with "spiritual proof" that the political and temporal powers were SUPPOSED TO be in charge of the governance of England and that The Pope WAS NOT supposed to be in charge of the governance of England." - want to bet against that proposition?]



Setting aside whether EITHER is "the direct word of God" (which they couldn't be because NO ONE is claiming that God personally wrote either one), the Qu'ran has a better claim since it is (as far as we know) an actual, contemporaneous, recording of the exact words of the "conduit" that God used to transmit God's Word AND is unchanged in a single aspect from the day it was first written down AND the people who wrote down the words that constitute the Qu'ran were actually able to have the "conduit" check their recordings for accuracy - The Bible can make no such claim. IOW, the Qu'ran has a better "root of title" than does The Bible BUT we don't know if the actual origin of either claim is valid.

No doubt much of the motivation for the KJV was political. It was interesting times. James the First of England and Sixth of Scotland was a Stewart, a Jacobite, baptised Catholic under his mother Mary Queen of Scots and later became Protestant, earning him the contempt of the Highland and Island clans. He was an unusual Stewart though- a thoughtful, moral man with little of the bragging and hedonism that many of the men in his line showed.
The KJV is thought by many (me included) to be a shining achievement in English literature, whatever you think of the Bible and Christianity generally.
I can't say anything about the divine inspiration of either the Koran or (parts of) the Bible so I'll take the word of others for it. I do think that the word 'God' in the Bible refers to more than one entity and it's pretty sure that little of it (beyond a couple of momentary revelations) could be called 'divinely inspired' in the same sense that the Koran was whispered into Mohammed's ear by Allah.

Interesting times, getting back to James. For one thing, he was one of very few Kings of Scots to die peacefully, remarkable given the events of his life.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The KJV is thought by many (me included) to be a shining achievement in English literature, whatever you think of the Bible and Christianity generally.

It IS a beautifully written book - especially since it was the work of a committee.

I can't say anything about the divine inspiration of either the Koran or (parts of) the Bible so I'll take the word of others for it.

I take not position either way, but given the historical record, the Muslims DO have a better claim to have a sound "root of title" than the "Christians" do.

Which, doesn't mean that neither, or only one, or both, are, indeed, the "Word of God".

I do think that the word 'God' in the Bible refers to more than one entity ...

I have asked some of my "polytheist" friends about whether or not their is only one God, and there reasonably uniform opinion is that that is highly likely but we'll never know because all we are able to comprehend are "aspects of God" and that each of those "aspects" is, in and of itself, the whole of God (which we are so incapable of comprehending that we can't even imagine) so we should restrict ourselves to what we can comprehend.

For some reason that seems to have a bit of "The Holy Trinity" echo to it.

... and it's pretty sure that little of it (beyond a couple of momentary revelations) could be called 'divinely inspired' in the same sense that the Koran was whispered into Mohammed's ear by Allah.

Agreed.

Interesting times, getting back to James. For one thing, he was one of very few Kings of Scots to die peacefully, remarkable given the events of his life.

Something for which the Scots have never forgiven him.

 

[SLC]

"Bob suddenly realized that he had brought a feather pillow to a sledgehammer fight." sounds sort of appropriate here.

You are so full of it. I'd suggest you never get a shot. You may explode. :lol:

 

[SLC]

Since the "literalness" of The Bible IS "germane to this thread", please try again.

The subject matter isn't germane IMHO

 

[SLC]

Lost interest, moved on.

Maybe I'll start a thread about Biblcal translation in the appropriate forum later.

Thought so :roll:

 

[SLC]

No doubt much of the motivation for the KJV was political. It was interesting times. James the First of England and Sixth of Scotland was a Stewart, a Jacobite, baptised Catholic under his mother Mary Queen of Scots and later became Protestant, earning him the contempt of the Highland and Island clans. He was an unusual Stewart though- a thoughtful, moral man with little of the bragging and hedonism that many of the men in his line showed.
The KJV is thought by many (me included) to be a shining achievement in English literature, whatever you think of the Bible and Christianity generally.
I can't say anything about the divine inspiration of either the Koran or (parts of) the Bible so I'll take the word of others for it. I do think that the word 'God' in the Bible refers to more than one entity and it's pretty sure that little of it (beyond a couple of momentary revelations) could be called 'divinely inspired' in the same sense that the Koran was whispered into Mohammed's ear by Allah.

Interesting times, getting back to James. For one thing, he was one of very few Kings of Scots to die peacefully, remarkable given the events of his life.

Interesting view of God. 1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Mar 12:32 ¶ And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he

:1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.