My Theory on Interstellar

 

My Theory on Interstellar:
* In the "original" (alternate) timeline, Michael Caine eventually ends up recuiting Matthew McConaughey's character for the mission, without any intervention from future Matthew inside the Tesseract.

* In that timeline, whatever happens, they successfully complete Plan B.

* Those future Plan B human beings from the DNA, end up deciding they want to change the past to improve the outcome, and to save all the human beings who didn't survive on earth, due to the failure of Plan A.

* Therefore, these future Plan B human beings create the Tesseract so that Matthew McConaughey can successfully save the humans who are on earth.

* They also make things easier and work out more smoothly for Matthew McConaughey by having him give his past self "clues," such as the coordinates to the secret NASA base.

What do you think?

God loves Gays and Lesbians

God's View of Gays and Lesbians

Why should anyone care what I have to say on this topic? I am not a priest. I am not a pastor, nor am I a deacon, televangelist, a mega-church preacher, or a rabbi. Heck, I didn't even go to college. My sexual orientation is also heterosexual, not homosexual. I am just a humble servant of God, and I am absolutely not inspired or infallible. So, your first thoughts may be, 'Why on earth should I listen to this guy speaking on the topic of homosexuality and the Bible?'

To be blunt, you shouldn't listen to me, except when I make appeal to common sense, logic, reason, science, and Scripture which you agree with in your heart and in your mind. After all, you don't need to be a rocket scientist or have a college degree in order to know what is right and wrong, and to have good morals and ethics. In fact, you don't even need to be religious to be a good, moral person.

I just want to appeal to your inner morals, ethics, and sense of justice. If you consider what I have to say, and you don't agree, you're free to reject it. That's the beauty of God's gift of free will, and the Founding Fathers' providential Bill of Rights for all Americans.

What I am going to say may offend or stumble many of my fellow Christians, but that is not my intention or goal. My aim here is solely to promote the use of common sense, reasoning, and logic, along with glorifying the teachings and commands of our Lord Jesus Christ found in the Holy Word of God.

Gay and Lesbian Equality in the Bible

First off, the Scriptures are clear that God doesn't view homosexuals any differently than any other human beings on earth--

"there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:22-23, ESV)

"what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality" (Galatians 2:6, ESV)

"Show no partiality as you hold the faith ... But if you show partiality, you are committing sin" (James 2:1, 9, ESV)

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16, ESV)

Note: None of those verses say "Except for gays and lesbians."

How did Jesus view Gays and Lesbians? 

We have zero written records of anything Jesus said specifically regarding gays or lesbians, unless you count what He said about eunuchs (which was positive, at Matthew 19:12). But, we have many records of Jesus teaching how much God loves all people, with no clauses excluding homosexuals. Here is just one example:

Luke 6:31-42 (ESV):

"And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount.

"But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.
 
"Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; [...] Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?..."


Jesus sternly commands us Christians to never judge or condemn others, and to never hypocritically speak about someone else's sin without addressing our own sins first. Then He gave the toughest commandment in the entire Bible: "Love your enemies, and do good to them." Usually gays and lesbians should not even be viewed as our "enemies," but here, Jesus says that you must love even those people who are your enemies and who hate you. Well, it's not rocket science to see that we must also love gays and lesbians, who are not even our enemies.


Even if you (or your church) strongly view homosexuals as "evil," notice Luke 6:35-36 where Jesus commands us to love those who are evil, just God loves them too.

Now let's look at another story from the life of Jesus:

John 8:3-11 (ESV): 

The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, "Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?" ... Jesus ... stood up and said to them, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her." ... But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus stood up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more."


This is one of the most powerful moral lessons in the entire Bible. What we learn here is that, even if homosexuality is a sin, and even if you think you've "caught them in the act," Jesus declares that the only people who have a right to condemn them are people who have never committed a sin. There has only been One Person who never sinned, and that was Jesus. 

Then, very powerfully, Christ says that He, the sinless One, chooses not to condemn sinners either, even though He has the right to!


As Paul so bluntly put it: "Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls," and "What have I to do with judging outsiders? ... God judges those outside." (Romans 14:4; 1 Corinthians 5:12-13) 

James, the brother of Jesus, also added "There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?" (James 4:12)

So, if you're focusing on bashing gays or speaking against homosexuality, isn't it time to do some soul-searching after reading the Scriptures above?

The Argument Based on Liberty and Law

Almost all Christians strongly support the Constitutional liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, including freedom to worship any gods any way you desire. This actually allows the freedom to commit idolatry and blasphemy against the Christian God. But Christians support this because they recognize it also guarantees their own rights to worship as they please. It also respects the God-given free will each of us is born with.

But, if Christians strongly support the legal right to commit idolatry and blasphemy, why do so many Christians vehemently oppose the legal right to have freedom to marry someone of the same sex? It is the height of hypocrisy, and also is very illogical, to support the freedom of idolatry while opposing the freedom of gay marriage.

The Argument Based on Harming Your Neighbor

 The New Testament appears to teach that the only things which are actually sins in God's eyes are things which harm your neighbor. For example, Paul, James, and John all say that the only commandments are to love God, love others, and do no harm to your neighbor. (See Romans 13:8-10; James 2:8; 1 John 3:23)

Paul even goes so far as to declare that nothing is sinful in itself, but it becomes sinful if you hurt others by your actions:

Romans 14:20-22 (ESV):  "...Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble..."

Romans 14:13-14 (ESV):  "...I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean."

Titus 1:15 (ESV): "To the pure, all things are pure, ..."

1 Timothy 4:3-5 (ESV): "...For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer."



A couple very important, thought-provoking questions to ask yourself, are: How is gay marriage or homosexuality harming other people? If gay marriage or homosexuality is doing no harm to anyone else, then why do you focus on attacking it so often and so strongly?

Why do so many Christians condemn gays and lesbians?

Sodom and Gomorrah

A large number of Christians believe the Bible teaches that God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah for homosexuality. This is actually taught nowhere in the Bible. The actual sins of Sodom listed in the Scriptures are:

1. Attempted rape of angels (Genesis 19:5)
2. Pride (Ezekiel 16:49)
3. Excess of food without sharing (Ezekiel 16:49)
4. Living in prosperous ease without helping the poor (Ezekiel 16:49)
5. Haughtiness before God (Ezekiel 16:50)
6. Buying, selling, planting, and building while paying no attention to God (Luke 17:28-29)
7. Being ungodly (2 Peter 2:6)
8. Sexual immorality and lusting after strange flesh [angels?] (Jude 1:7)

So, as you can see, the sin of Sodom was not primarily (or perhaps, even at all) homosexuality. Jude 1:7 is the only verse which could be interpreted as referring to homosexuality, but more likely, it refers to the gang attempting to rape the angels in Genesis 19:5.

An entire false tradition has arisen among many Christians that God destroyed Sodom because of their homosexuality, when, as you can see, is not taught in the Bible. There may have been many homosexuals living in Sodom, but that is not the reason God destroyed the city.

(The sin of Sodom actually appears to have been much closer to the current behavior of the rich and powerful Republicans and Tea Party in the United States.)

Romans 1:21-28 (ESV):  

"...they did not honor him as God ... and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts ... because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, ... God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done."

A close look at the first chapter of Romans will reveal that the Apostle Paul is condemning the different practices and rituals connected to the pagan worship of idols, including the burning lust involved in temple sex and orgies. Paul isn't speaking of monogamous, loving, committed relationships between two gay men or two lesbian women. Since Paul is focusing on the sins of idolatry and lust here, I don't see how it is proper to try to use this chapter to condemn all homosexuality.

Christians don't say that all heterosexual sex is sinful just because Jesus condemned lustfully looking at women, so why should we say that all homosexual sex is sinful when Paul condemns "burning with passion/lust" in Romans 1. I believe that would be "going beyond what is written." (1 Corinthians 4:6)

In addition, even though Paul seemingly wrote that lesbianism was "contrary to nature," Paul said the same thing in 1 Corinthians 11:14-16 regarding women having short hair. So it's possible Paul used this term regarding things which were looked down upon by the local community. The Apostles often wrote about forsaking certain things because people in the immediate area condemned those things. (Acts 15:19-21; 1 Corinthians 9:22)

Leviticus 20:13 (ESV):

"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."

First off, as Christians, we can safely set aside the statements on homosexuality in the book of Leviticus or other Old Testament Laws of Moses, because (1) these were only given to the Jewish people, (2) they were only temporary, and (3) they have expired. (See Hebrews chapter 8) In addition, if we are going to follow Leviticus, then Paul and James, the brother of Jesus, both say that we must follow the entire Law of Moses. (Galatians 5:3; James 2:10)

Look at some of the commands in Leviticus before and after the homosexuality command:

Leviticus 19:19 (ESV): "You shall keep my statutes. ... You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material."

Leviticus 19:27 (ESV): "You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard."

Leviticus 20:18 (ESV): "If a man lies with a woman during her menstrual period and uncovers her nakedness, he has made naked her fountain, and she has uncovered the fountain of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from among their people."

So if Christians must condemn homosexuality based on Leviticus, Christian men must also have beards and you must never sleep next to your wife during her period. In addition, Christians would never be able to wear modern clothing made of different materials.

A lot of Christians make a big deal about the fact that Leviticus refers to homosexual intercourse as an "abomination." However, the Law of Moses also says eating pork, rabbit, or lobster is an "abomination" too. (Deuteronomy chapter 14) If you're going to follow the homosexuality commands of the Mosaic Law, then you should follow the rules against eating pork and lobster. Otherwise, you are being a hypocrite.

The book of Leviticus, in the very same chapter as the command against gay sex, explains why all these commands were given:

"And you shall not walk in the customs of the nation that I am driving out before you, for they did all these things, and therefore I detested them. ... I am the LORD your God, who has separated you from the peoples. You shall therefore separate the clean beast from the unclean, and the unclean bird from the clean. You shall not make yourselves detestable by beast or by bird or by anything with which the ground crawls, which I have set apart for you to hold unclean. You shall be holy to me, for I the LORD am holy and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be mine." (Leviticus 20:23-26, ESV)

These commandments were primarily given by Yahweh to show a distinction, a separation in the eyes of the world, of God's chosen nation, to make them different and unique compared to all other nations on earth at that time. God was also banning things which the pagan nations associated with worshiping idols, such as orgies, temple sex, and prostitution. The Law of Moses was never intended to be permanent requirements for all people at all times, as Paul writes so eloquently in Galatians:

"So then, the law was our [the Jews'] guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:24-28, ESV)

But what about 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10?

 Context is king. We must examine the surrounding passage instead of basing our doctrines on isolated verses.

1 Corinthians 6:8-12 (ESV): 

"But you yourselves wrong and defraud—even your own brothers! Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. 'All things are lawful for me,' but not all things are helpful. 'All things are lawful for me,' but I will not be dominated by anything."

First off, there is some dispute among scholars and experts on the meaning of the Greek word [arsenokoitai] rendered in the ESV as "men who practice homosexuality." The King James Version rendered it as "abusers of themselves with mankind." The word literally translated is "man-beds."

Some interpret this word to refer to male prostitutes involved in pagan temple worship, or to pimps, pedophiles, or rapists. The context is very clear that it refers to something that is harming your fellow Christians, and is listed together with thieves, greedy, and swindlers. Obviously there is more involved here than merely a private monogamous loving relationship between two gay men.

For further research on this Greek word, I refer you to ReligiousTolerance.org, Our Spirit, and this article.

For the sake of argument, lets say this Greek word does refer to all homosexuality. Immediately after Paul listed these sins, he then declares, in 1 Corinthians 6:12, that "all things are lawful" for Christians, but not all things are beneficial. He is declaring that none of these things are sin, UNLESS they are not beneficial or are harmful. So that is the key thing to consider: Does this action harm my neighbor or myself? Is this action beneficial to my neighbor or to myself?

 1 Timothy 1:10 (ESV): 

"the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,"

Again, the context shows that this is referring to some action which is harmful to others, in the same category as slave-traders, liars, and perjurers. It would make more sense for this to be male prostitution in temple worship or pedophilia, not monogamous homosexual relationships. Please see what I wrote above regarding the Greek word which is rendered "homosexuality" in many modern Bibles.

In conclusion, even if all homosexual sex were a sin in God's eyes, homosexuals can freely receive the same forgiveness and mercy from Jesus that all of us other sinners receive:

"I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 2:1-2, ESV)

My view on Eternal Security / Perseverance of the Saints

My view on Eternal Security / Perseverance of the Saints

1: God draws people to Jesus through the Gospel and Scriptures (John 6:44-47; Romans 10:14-17) All people are drawn at some point in their lives. (John 12:31-32)

2: The Holy Spirit enlightens and convicts those who are drawn (Hebrews 6:4-5; John 16:8-9)

3: Jesus grants each person a certain time limit to choose to repent or to reject Him. (Revelation 2:21)

4: If a drawn and enlightened person rejects Jesus and refuses to repent, they are doomed. There is no possibility of salvation left. (Hebrews 6:6; Hebrews 10:26-27; Revelation 2:21-23; Matthew 23:37-38)

5: Anyone who rejects Jesus after being enlightened, never truly was a Christian to begin with. (1 John 2:19)

6: If a drawn and enlightened person accepts Jesus and repents, they are then born again and saved. (John 3:3; Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9)

7: A person who has been truly born again cannot lose their salvation. (John 5:24; John 6:37; John 10:28)

Why I Reject Calvinism

These are the reasons I reject Calvinism's TULIP doctrines:

T-- "Total Depravity": I reject Total Depravity because I believe it to be unscriptural, after reading Romans 2:13-16; Acts 10:2-4; Acts 10:34-35; Acts 17:27-29.

U-- "Unconditional Election": I reject Unconditional Election because I believe it to be unscriptural, after reading John 12:31-32; 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9.

L-- "Limited Atonement": I reject Limited Atonement because I believe it to be unscriptural, after reading 1 John 2:2; Hebrews 2:9; 1 Timothy 2:6.

I-- "Irresistible Grace": I reject Irresistible Grace because I believe it to be unscriptural, after reading Acts 7:51; Matthew 23:37; Romans 2:4-5; Ezekiel chapter 18.

I do accept the "P"-- Perseverance of the Saints. I do believe this is Biblical. 

I also reject Calvinism's claim that God ordains or takes pleasure in evil, after reading James 1:13 and Ezekiel 33:11.

"Majestic and Beautiful" -- My Review of the New MEV Bible Translation

While reading the new "Modern English Version" (MEV) Bible and writing this review of it, two words kept coming into my mind -- "Majestic" and "Beautiful."

I own several English Bible versions, and I always love delving into new translations and versions, to see if they give me a new, deeper insight into God's inspired Holy Scriptures. Sometimes though, I've gotten a little cynical about whether we actually need 20+ different English translations, and what the benefit actually is on a few of the ones out there.

I thought I was aware of (and owned) every English translation which had been made, however, about 5 weeks ago, I was shopping in my local Walmart, and as I walked past the book aisle, I noticed some Bibles on the shelf. First I saw the usual NIV and NKJV editions, but then my eye caught sight of a different one. My first thought was "What in the world is this 'MEV' Bible, and why do we need another new version?"

Well, a week went by, and then I could no longer resist, I had to go back to Walmart and purchase this "MEV" Bible and find out just what it had to offer, and if it was different or better than any of the other dozens of English Bibles I possessed.

Textual Base of the New Testament

The first thing I noticed was that this was a translation of the Textus Receptus ("Received Text"), the traditional Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, from which the 1611 King James Version and 1982 New King James Version were translated. Almost every other modern major Bible translation is rendered from the Critical Text, also known as the "Alexandrian Text" or the "Eclectic Text" (other names for it include: "Westcott & Hort Text" and "United Bible Societies' Text.") My personal view, based on my research into the topic, is that the Critical Text is more accurate than the Textus Receptus, however, I do prefer and enjoy having the additional verses and words from the Textus Receptus available in my Bible, instead of having them completely deleted out of the text. (For further reading on this topic, visit these Wikipedia pages: Textus Receptus and Alexandrian Text-type.)

Normally I prefer my main Bible to be based on the Critical Text, but the MEV is so good in the other areas (which I will describe below), that I actually want to make the MEV the main Bible I use now, even over the ESV, NASB, and NIV.

 

The Beauty of the Poetry and Traditional Words

I am simply mesmerized and astonished at both the beauty and majestic reverence I see and feel when I read the Psalms and the book of Job in the MEV Bible. It retains (and even improves!) the beautiful wording found in the old King James Version. This is probably because the translators used the King James Version as the English base text while they were making their new translation from the Hebrew and Greek. One of their goals was to make sure the beautiful English wording stayed in this new translation, even while making it much clearer for the modern English reader.

I was happy to see that the MEV kept the reference to God's "son" at Psalm 2:12 (and at Proverbs 30:4), which some new translations have removed.

I also liked how the MEV is one of the very rare modern Bibles to retain the name "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12.

I am impressed that this version does not try to hide the fact that God "changes His mind" at Jonah 3:10 like some Bibles do.

As far as I can tell, the MEV doesn't seem to have too much of a theological bias in its translation choices. In other words, it's not overly Calvinistic or Armenian, and it's not overly Trinitarian or non-Trinitarian.

The MEV has chosen to keep many of the traditional words from the King James Version, including "propitiation," "sanctification," "justification," "grace," and "saints," which I appreciate, although, a small "Bible-Words-Dictionary" in the back of the Bible would probably be very helpful to a lot of new Bible readers.

 

Harmonizing the Old Testament with the Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament

I enjoyed seeing the MEV's Psalms conform to the way the New Testament writers quoted those verses from the Septuagint. For example, Psalm 16:10 having the word "corruption" instead of "the pit" (Compare Acts 2:25-28) and the translation, "Your throne, O God" in Psalm 45:6 (Compare Hebrews 1:8). This is showing great reverence and respect for the Apostles and the other inspired writers of the New Testament.

Capitalizing the Pronouns that Refer to God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit

 

In my opinion, it shows a lot of respect and reverent honor to capitalize the pronouns referring to God the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Not only that, but it also makes many verses much clearer, being able to easily see if God is being spoken of/to or if someone else is.

This isn't a dealbreaker for me in choosing a Bible, but it certainly is an added benefit.

Clarity of the Text while Still Not Speaking Down To Us

 

I absolutely love the way verses are worded. It gives you the impression that the scholars and translators working on the MEV worked extra hard to provide clarity, yet, at the same time, to keep the elevated phrasing found in the King James Version, and not to over-simplify or "dumb-down" the Scriptures in such a way where it feels they are speaking down to you. 

Some Bible versions out there almost seem like they think they need to re-word everything into a kindergarten reading level. Thankfully the MEV does not do this. While reading Job, I was very happy to see a few challenging words that I had to google the definitions of.

Just wait until you read Romans in the MEV-- wow! I was blown away by the incredible way it was worded. It just pops out at you, and grips you, and you don't want to put it down.

 

The Helpful Headings

This is a very helpful feature found in most modern Bible translations. Bolded headings either summarizing what follows or telling you who the speaker is in the following passage. I am very glad to see these headings in the MEV, which were lacking in the KJV.

Two good examples of extremely helpful headings are in Song of Solomon and Job, letting the reader know who is speaking in each passage, which can, at times, be very hard to discern.

Additional Features

I was impressed by the cross-reference system found in the middle column on each page of the MEV. Very helpful in studying all the passages related to a certain topic.

I enjoy the words of Christ being in red, although I know some Christians do not. I like it because it puts the utmost emphasis where it belongs-- the teachings of Jesus. (See Hebrews 1:1-2; 2:1-4)

The mini-concordance in the back of the Bible is helpful, but not very many passages are included for each word. I would love to see a larger concordance for the MEV.

The colorful maps in the back were actually quite impressive.

Some words which have been supplied by the translators that were not in the Hebrew or Greek manuscripts, are in italics in the MEV. I commend and applaud translation team for choosing to notify readers when they've added words in to finish the thought in English, just as the original King James Version did.

 

In summary

If I could only choose one Bible translation to have, then I would choose the MEV ("Modern English Version"). It truly is that good. 

One final thing worth noting and applauding, is that Passio started this Bible translation project for our troops, so that they would have a new, clear, modern Bible to read as they defend our nation.

My Suggestions and Hopes for the MEV

I highly recommend that Passio (the organization behind the MEV), in future editions of the MEV, add a page or two at the beginning or end of the Bible, explaining more about the history of the Textus Receptus, and why you chose it over the Alexandrian Text.

I also suggest adding footnotes to each verse or phrase which is present in the Textus Receptus, but that is not found in the Alexandrian Text, just to keep the reader informed.

Consider adding footnotes to certain verses where there are big disagreements among scholars in the way it should be translated, such as Jude 1:4-5, John 1:18, and 1 Timothy 3:16.

I would love to see the MEV Translation available in a Chronological Bible, a Study Bible, and in the "Names of God" Bible, which uses the Divine Name, "Yahweh" or "Jehovah."

I would also be extremely happy to see a separate MEV edition with the Old Testament based on the Septuagint Greek instead of the Hebrew. There currently isn't very many good or easily accessible modern Septuagint translations available at the average bookstore.