Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles
Title: This is why it is so important you read the word of God, in the original Hebrew and Greek, yourself and not take what others say it says.
Source:
ChristianPatriot.com
URL Source: [None]
Published: May 14, 2015
Author: Pastor Bob Celeste for ACP
Post Date: 2015-05-14 09:05:01 by BobCeleste
Keywords: ACP
Views: 69438
Comments: 248
This is why it is so important you read the word of God, in the original Hebrew and Greek, yourself and not take what others say it says. This is how Malachi 3:9 is represented in various interpretations. Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. (KJV) With a curse ye are cursed! And Me ye are deceiving--this nation--all of it. (YLT) Ye are cursed with the curse; for ye rob me, even this whole nation. (ASV) You are cursed with a curse, For you have robbed Me, Even this whole nation. (NKJV) You are cursed with a curse, for you are robbing me; the whole nation of you. (RSV) You are cursed with the curse; for you rob me, even this whole nation. (WEB) Notice how everyone of the above translations say "Ye or you are cursed with the curse" But that is not what the original Hebrew says. Here is what the original Hebrew says: Ye are cursed {'arar} with a curse {m@erah}: for ye have robbed {qaba`} me, even this whole nation {gowy}. Let's look at the Hebrew words 'arar and m@erah. 'arar is a primitive root; to execrate:--X bitterly curse m@erah is an execration:--curse. The original does not say You are cursed, it says cursed with a curse, meaning it could either be you are cursed with a curse or you cursed with a curse, in one it is God doing the cursing in the other it is it is God being cursed. God's word is to important to trust others with it, your salvation is to important, you need to take it into your own hands not rely upon the word or interpretation of others.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: BobCeleste (#0)
Ummm. Meaning I shouldn't rely on your interpretation. Got it.
Absolutely correct. Do you think for even one minute saying to God, when He ask you why He should let you into His heaven, "well Bob said" is going to get you a free pass? He will say to you, "Why didn't you read my Word yourself?" For you see, misterwhite, I really don't care if you go to heaven or hell, but God does.
Good reply Bob!
Si vis pacem, para bellum
You can see posted here, "pastor" bob ... that people really don't give a damn about what you care for either. The American public has lost trust in "faux pastors."
And I will respond, "Because I didn't think that 'Ye are cursing cursed words with a cursed curse' was all that important to the way I live my life". And I would ask Him to be clearer next time.
ping
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
I would then like to ask God why He deliberately confounded men by creating multiple languages at Babel so that we could not perfectly communicate with each other, especially in the communication of His words......but probably would lack the cojones to do that.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
It seems to me that 95% of all sermons preached on Malachi are when a preacher and church board are trying to gin up donations. Otherwise, it gets ignored entirely. Just a general observation.
Good reply Bob! Thank you my Brother.
And I would ask Him to be clearer next time. Good luck.
And He will probably say: "Explained that in Genesis."
That is why you must study on your own.
Yes, it was to deliberately confound man. So why so if as you cliam the ONLY way to understand God's word is to totally understand Hebrew as spoken and written thousands and thousands of years ago. I, like 99.999% of the planet's population can't do that even if we had the time and wherewithal to do so. A bit of a conflicy here, no? Especially since you admit that we shouldn't trust you or anyone else to translate for us.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Of course God would direct you to Pentecost. Again, you operate with the notion that God is not sovereign over His own Words and Commands. Luke 21:33-Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. Isaiah 40:8-The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever. Isaiah 46:10-Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure'; would then like to ask God why He deliberately confounded men by creating multiple languages at Babel Seems Pentecost brought the Good News from God to every tongue: Acts 2: When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance. 5 Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men from every nation under heaven. 6 And when this sound occurred, the crowd came together, and were bewildered because each one of them was hearing them speak in his own language. 7 They were amazed and astonished, saying, “Why, are not all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 And how is it that we each hear them in our own language to which we were born? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the districts of Libya around Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11 Cretans and Arabs—we hear them in our own tongues speaking of the mighty deeds of God.” 12 And they all continued in amazement and great perplexity, saying to one another, “What does this mean?” "This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come."---Jesus Christ
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
As I stated and provided information in my previous post...God provided His Gospel in all languages by the Power of the Holy Spirit.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Show me where I said "the ONLY way to understand God's word is to totally understand Hebrew"
What part of the title of your post, ""This is why it is so important you read the word of God, in the original Hebrew and Greek, yourself and not take what others say it says. " and your posted commet "God's word is to{o} important to trust others with it, your salvation is to{o} important, you need to take it into your own hands not rely upon the word or interpretation of others." don't I understand?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Wrongo, dear Ram. Man has provided those translations not God. Or are you claiming that all the different versions of the NT are each themself authentic originals of God's words and the differences are what is intended by God?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Not to everyone, only to the 12 who then had to spread the News. Tell me again please how many Gospels and writtings in the accepted versions of the NT were writting by the 12. I do not dispute that the Goods News is meant for everyone of every tongue but rather maintain that the construct of languages make perfect fidelity of the translated message by men impossible.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
What part of the title of your post, ""This is why it is so important you read the word of God, in the original Hebrew and Greek, yourself and not take what others say it says. " and your posted comment "God's word is to{o} important to trust others with it, your salvation is to{o} important, you need to take it into your own hands not rely upon the word or interpretation of others." don't I understand? So where is the word only? As a matter of fact where does it say "the ONLY way to understand God's word is to totally understand Hebrew" Put words in your own mouth, not mine. By the way thanks for the spelling lesson. Always had trouble with those to(o)'s professor once told me not to worry about spelling, he said that was why God created secretaries.
The Roman Catholic Church tried very hard to keep the understanding of the Scriptures from the people. They fought to keep the Holy Bible in Latin which the common, uneducated folks couldn't read. The Reformers brought the Holy Scriptures to people in translations that the common people could read. Of course, the RCC leaders were happy to tell the commoners what the Scriptures really meant. The corruption in the priestly caste was rampant then as now.
Wasn't meant to be. "God's word is to{o} important to trust others with it, your salvation is to {o} important, you need to take it into your own hands not rely upon the word or interpretation of others." If this doesn't mean that only you, the individual, must read the Bible in its original language to be able to truly understand it nothing does. But, by all means, please explain what you meant by this statement and who other than myself shall I trust to read and understand the Bible in its original languages. Clearly by your own admission, not you.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
And you point is?
Excellent posts, SOSO. You believe much the same way as I do (based on the content of your posts) ... that all we sense around us indeed is a mystery when we attempt to explain creation. If you could describe your beliefs, you are somewhat a deist, aren't you?
I have an abiding belief in God and Jesus Christ. I was raised as a Roman Catholic but did not indenpently embrace the fundamental teachings and message of the relgion until I had four years of theology as part of my undergraduate engineering degree. While I am not, nor have been, what would be called a devout Catholic I embrace much of what I learned in undergraduate school. Throughout my life I have always tested my beliefs against my personal experiences,the reported experiences of others, and, equally the agruments for the beliefs made by others. I long ago came to the deeply rooted belief that one's mind can only take one so far until one starts to rationalize his positon and eschew logic and subordinate one's intellectual integrity to his religious beliefs. Enter Faith. It is only through Faith that one can reconcile the limitations of one's human intellect with one's beliefs on creation. Also, I never bought the notoin of Sola Scirptura, i.e. - Christian doctrine that the Bible is the supreme authority in all matters of doctrine and practice, as scripture without faith and faith without acts does not get one's Get Into Heaven card punched. Hope this answers your question.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Take that argument up with Rev. Bob, it's his thread that says you are wrong.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Nonsense! Show me one verse in the Bible where God says you have to be able to read Greek and Hebrew to be saved.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
We have to rely on translations to have the Holy Scriptures available to us.
Which ONE is right?
To many people it really doesn't matter. those people who are Christians know the difference in the false and the real. Christ said that His sheep know His voice.
Christ promised all nations would hear the Gospel. He provided the means on Pentecost. Since then to this day and until His second coming the Gospel continues in every tongue--language. 1 Corinthians 15: 15 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. 6 After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. 7 After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. 8 Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all, yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11 Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed. 12 Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. 14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. 15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. 17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable. 20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming. 24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. 27 For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. 28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all. "For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Not accurate. Where do you see only the 12 receiving the gift of speaking in other languages? God is sovereign in salvation. His Gospel message is for all peoples. I showed you the scriptures addressing these matters. "The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”---Jesus Christ
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
To me the question matters as I posed the question to you. It must be an awesome event to be able to evade the question about which Bible is the correct version as you receive some sort of mystical guidance from sources high above the clouds, correct?
No, Bob is pointing out we should be proficient in deriving our doctrines from the original languages. My point was that God never expected all believers to comprehend Greek and Hebrew. Most who claim that they can are either theologians who spent years mastering the language or people reading a lexicon put together by theologians and claiming they know the original languages. As evidenced in the NT, followers of Christ ranged from the simple fishermen and shepherd to the educated tax collector as in Matthew and accomplished Pharisee theologian as in Paul. Different gifts are given to each Christian filled with the Holy Spirit. Paul discusses this in length in his epistles and we see it in action in Acts. Different members of the same Body of Christ. Some are gifted as teachers, some are servants of the church, some are overseers (bishops or elders), some are gifted to reprove, rebuke, encourage, some gifted in languages, some to heal, some are gifted evangelists, some with the gift of love which is the greatest of all. Many more. All are parts of the same body. Some are legs and arms, some eyes and ears, all serve God's purpose and will. All of the above came to know Christ by hearing the Word of the Gospel in their own language as God promised. Thus it was written, thus it is so Jasper.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
There are over 5,000 existing Greek NT manuscripts. ALL Bibles out there today are translated from those manuscripts. Some better than others. The KJV, NKJV, NASB, and YLT (some others) are literal word for word translations from the NT Greek manuscripts. Some versions are passage by passage literal equivalent translations. Some are paraphrased versions. If someone is looking for accuracy in translating from one language to the other, then the literal word for word translations are best. If someone is just starting to read the Bible for understanding then the literal equivalent is good. Yet none of the above matters unless you will blow the dust off the Bible and actually read it and study it and pray.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Good reply. Which one carries the authoritative, "word of God?"
I believe that someone has answered your question. Do you need my blessing on the translations?
Feel free to jump in and provide your interpretation of the correct version. Whaddaya think of that Vulgate? Man, that version is one awesome work, isn't it?
Bucky, I don't believe your question indicates you really want an answer. You simply want to argue against the Holy Bible. Why should anyone spend time feeding your hostility toward the Scriptures?
Which one?
Let's go beyond the Scriptures. I think you are hostile toward God which is behind your comments.
If the Holy Bible is the authoritative Word of God, we can't go beyond it. So, why are you baiting me?
Your comment is not conductive to civil discussion.
Did you mean conducive?
Exactly. That is why He offers everyone Faith. But you understand this. "Different gifts are given to each Christian filled with the Holy Spirit. "
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
I believe that someone has answered your question. Do you need my blessing on the translations? Hardly.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Your comment is not conductive to civil discussion. Thank you. Then strike the comment and I will try in the future to word my comments in a way that will be more palatable to you during my composting.
Bucky, that is exactly what I thought about you. However, are you saying we cannot go past the Scriptures to God? Is the Bible God? Careful, the word, Heresy still has meaning.
Which one? I would like a straight forward answer to his question. Do you have one?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
I have my preferences. I'm waiting to see what you and Bucky have for your favorites, or do either of you have any?
i am convinced one can find Christ in any of the New Testament Bibles IF one is sincerely searching.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
Hear, O Israel, and be careful to obey* so that it may go well with you and that you may increase greatly* in a land flowing with milk and honey,* just as the LORD, the God of your fathers, promised* you. You're a Jew but don't listen?
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
That is why you must study on your own. It really does defy logic to suggest that the eternal fate of a soul would hinge on what academic knowledge one accumulates in a physical brain. Physical brain knowledge consists of a series of synaptic nerves storing information in an electro-chemical format. The rigidity of doctrine really just doesn't work very compatibly with one's spiritual existence. For example, when praying to Jesus, is it important to pronounce his name correctly? This is important because in Spanish, the name "Jesus" is pronounced "Hey-soos", because J's are pronounced like H's, "e" like long "a", and "u" like the long u. So are Spanish speakers who ask "Hey-soos" into their lives not saved because "Jesus" is not "Hey-soos"?. Of course, does anyone today have any clue how Jesus's name was originally pronounced. If we pray to Jesus, but have not only the wrong pronunciation, but the wrong facial image in mind, are we still saved? I hope you get my point: How do we know we are spiritually praying to the correct entity? Assuming the answer is something in the order of: God knows who we mean and reaches back to us and all's well, then doesn't it necessarily mean: And if we don't need a perfect understanding of God, doesn't that means it's okay to be wrong about things? And why would God really even care about what factual knowledge we have? Wouldn't he care a lot more about how we loved others? Some of my thoughts, if you don't mind them. I don't see any spiritual value in dogmatic head knowledge, because I don't see how it's possible for God to care either. Under the Newton model, things just make a LOT more sense. My 2c.
Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account* for you, most excellent* Theophilus,* so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.*
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
[23] Yet a time is coming and has now come* when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit* and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. [24] God is spirit,* and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.” NOT SPIRIT AND OPINION.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
Take that argument up with Rev. Bob, it's his thread that says you are wrong. You know SOS, if you would read before you comment you would not be thought of as a complete arse.
Gary, go back and read what I posted, not what others say, think for yourself for once. You are becoming a bore. How other than by studying it in the Hebrew can you possibly know what Mal 3:9 really reads? Perhaps if you would spend more time in God's word and less in other peoples commentary you would be of interest.
Why?
Now, here is what I posted: This is why it is so important you read the word of God, in the original Hebrew and Greek, yourself and not take what others say it says. This is how Malachi 3:9 is represented in various interpretations. Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. (KJV) With a curse ye are cursed! And Me ye are deceiving--this nation--all of it. (YLT) Ye are cursed with the curse; for ye rob me, even this whole nation. (ASV) You are cursed with a curse, For you have robbed Me, Even this whole nation. (NKJV) You are cursed with a curse, for you are robbing me; the whole nation of you. (RSV) You are cursed with the curse; for you rob me, even this whole nation. (WEB) Notice how everyone of the above translations say "Ye or you are cursed with the curse" But that is not what the original Hebrew says. Here is what the original Hebrew says: Ye are cursed {'arar} with a curse {m@erah}: for ye have robbed {qaba`} me, even this whole nation {gowy}. Let's look at the Hebrew words 'arar and m@erah. 'arar is a primitive root; to execrate:--X bitterly curse m@erah is an execration:--curse. The original does not say You are cursed, it says cursed with a curse, meaning it could either be you are cursed with a curse or you cursed with a curse, in one it is God doing the cursing in the other it is it is God being cursed. God's word is to important to trust others with it, your salvation is to important, you need to take it into your own hands not rely upon the word or interpretation of others. If you have some special insight, so be it, but as for me I will continue to study what God said, not what others say He said. I am not smart enough to know what God meant, so I have to go with what He actually said. My mistake is thinking that others care as much as I do.
Many don't have the time, resources, or ability to learn Ancient Greek or Hebrew. Many in the Middle Ages had the same problem with Latin.
God speaks directly in the Holy Scriptures and God spoke through prophets and apostles. You will find God's Divine attributes and power in the lines of Scriptures. But you have to pick it up and read it or listen to it. For, "The words of the Lord are pure words; As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times." (Psalm 12:6) And, Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar. (Proverbs 30:5-6) So the answer to your question is, in just about any version you will find the Divine attributes and actions of God. I first read the Bible in one of those paraphrase version Bibles which would give brother Gary and Bob fits:) However, as I matured in my walk with Christ I wanted to learn more and the literal word for word translations became important to examine. They are the closest in the English language to the original texts. Further in answering your questions are the words of Christ when He said: "For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” (John 18:37)
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
"Different gifts are given to each Christian filled with the Holy Spirit. " As I noted one of the gifts is that of teachers. The teachers of the NT era wrote in Koine Greek as that was the 'lingua franca' of the period.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Sure find the time to watch television and play on the computer. Priorities. Don't you ever get curious? Especially when yu find a word in italics.
Well many don't have the gift of languages. It is a gift and God shows us in the NT that only some had the gift. As only some had the gift of teaching, or being an elder, or being a loving and humble servant. There's a long list of gifts and not everyone is an 'eye' or an 'arm' or a leg. But we know the Head is Christ, Praise be to God!
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Yep and the above is probably the most important point in this thread. How many centuries did sola ecclesia keep the written Scriptures from the lay person because they were not in the local or common language? Long time. One had to become a monk, priest or bishop to actually examine the scriptures. Let's not go back to that...
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Why? Don't you have your opinion firmed up yet? But since you appear to be weak kneed of sorts I will accomodate you. I have only been schooled on one version and that is sufficient for me. The other versions appear to be interesting but almost irrelevant to my faith. Question for you though (which you probably won't answer): had I been schooled on a different version of the Scriptures would my belief in and understanding of God and what He expects from me be different? For example, suppose I didn't believe in transubstanitation to name just one difference in the teachings of the various Christian religious sects?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Which ones spoke and wrote in English? German? French? Italian? Russian? Chinese? Japanese? Oh....wait...none of those languages existed at the time of the teachers to whom you refer. But if they did for example speak English, would that have been Olde English or American English? And which particualr dialect?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
No, I understand fully how people who have been "schooled" in their formative years on one version of the Bible. There are cults like the RCC Church who brainwash their captive peons whose only function is to support the leaders of the cult. The history of such cults is replete with acts of violence to keep the "faithful" captive. There is no salvation outside the church. if you don't blindly follow the dictates of the church, they will give you the boot and consign you to Hell.There are cults that tell you you must do good works or you are not saved, etc. etc. etc. Am I not answering your questions? Take a deep breath and relax. Your only purpose is to mock and show your "superiority." I'm not falling for your nonsense. I have said how Christians know the difference between true and false translations. I have already said another poster has answered that question. I fully agree with that poster's comments. Be happy with that response.
You need to start posting something that shows logic and desire to know rather than posting argumentative and illogical thinking.
FYI, as I previously stated I had 4 years of Theology as part of my undergraduate degree. Don't let your flamming prejudices and hatreds always dictate what comes out of your mouth. "Am I not answering your questions?" No, you are not, Weasel. " Your only purpose is to mock and show your "superiority." Spoken like the true intellectual coward and bankrupt that you are. Adios, Spunky.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
You need to start posting something that shows logic and desire to know rather than posting argumentative and illogical thinking. I am tired of casting pearls before swine such as you. You are truly deaf, dumb and blind in your little cocoon that you call you reality.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
People rarely have any problems with Christianity over the various flavors of doctrine. What people usually do is use that as an excuse to ignore or flout entirely the moral code of scripture. Then they blame scripture for refusing to obey the fundamental and universal tenets found in all scripture. On the essentials, no credible version of scripture fails to outline fundamental Christian morals and duties. It isn't the fault of any church or bible version if people decide to use that as an excuse for ignoring or disobeying every fundamental tenet of scripture found repeatedly in every version. I flagged a few others because this is actually a rather common argument that we have repeatedly in various flavors. If you disagree, name the versions of scripture that allow theft, murder or other moral offenses. Naturally, they are all in agreement on fundamental moral issues.
This is substantially true. It falls apart at the fringes. "It isn't the fault of any church or bible version if people decide to use that as an excuse for ignoring or disobeying every fundamental tenet of scripture found repeatedly in every version." Much less true as there are self-proclaimed Christian churches that truly bastradize the essence of Christianity. For example, those Christain churches that preach and teach anti-Catholicism (and they know who they are, don't they Don?) In just about all cases of the outliers it is their insistence that theirs is the one and only true version and interpretation of God's Words that puts them on the fringe. Unfortunately they are stronger in number than one would think is justified.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Printing press was not invented yet.
In the length of time it has taken to discuss this thread, without anyone actually discussing Mal 3:9 and the missing word, anyone could have done a little work online and found the Hebrew and again online found the definitions. Not many years ago I got a call from a man I went to boot camp with back in June of 62. He runs a huge porn site, he told me "No one cares about what God said, people care about @(%)". Seems he may be right. All this discussion about what I said and not one comment or any discussion on Mal 3:9. How sad.
You probably thought I was being facetious when I said that the only time you hear about Malachi is when the preacher or church board is after donations, especially tithes. I was entirely serious. No one ever seems to mention Malachi otherwise, particularly preach an entire sermon on it.
But if they did for example speak English, would that have been Olde English or American English? And which particualr dialect? "For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
But if they did for example speak English, would that have been Olde English or American English? And which particualr dialect? Languages may change or develop, however the manuscripts remain the same. We say slacks or pants, but older English said britches. They are still bipedal material that covers the legs. Thus God covered Adam and Eve. Did he have pants? Does it matter? It matters that God communicated they were covered.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Well I agree. And will add that when it comes to the message of the Gospel the same applies.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Yes that is true. However even scrolls and codex "books" at assemblies although available in most Christian traditions were not in the tongue of the people. Not as much in the East as was seen in the West. The West chose the language of the intelligentsia, Latin thus creating two distinct classes of church members. This was not so in the NT. Pentecost shows that the Gospel is for all nations and tongues.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
You speak of doctrinal differences. Doctrines of transubstantion came much later than the NT church. I believe it was not until the 2nd Lateran council in which that doctrine was confirmed. And with much controversy. The East did not embrace this doctrine until almost 200 years later and they are not dogmatic about it. It is when a certain church pronounces anathemas on those who do not agree with them where issues come up. That is what Trent did.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
What does Malachi 3:9 have to do with the curse of sin and death destroyed by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ?
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Oh yes, it was. The services in Jesus time were in Hebrew, OT Bible was in Greek, lower class people used Aramaic, middle and upper class spoke Greek, Hebrew was studied by the priests and scribes. The reason was that higher learning was for the few - it required time, resources and talent. Making translation for the illiterate or semi-literate vulgar folk (later "Vulgate") did not make much sense, especially that making books was very expensive. In the church the Holy Books were read aloud (or repeated from memory) during the service followed by an explanation.
Bob, the Hebrew word that is traditionally translated as "cursed" in English and other languages doesn't actually mean "cursed" in the sense of some pronounced incantation at all. It is much more graphic than that. The literal translation of the word whose Hebrew consonants are ARWR (aror or arar), is "spat upon". "Cursed" in English implies the speaking of imprecatory words, but the Hebrew "aror" means spat upon, as in hawking a loogie. For example, from Genesis, the LITERAL Hebrew of Genesis 3:14 (when God "curses" the serpent), is: "and he-will-exist [YHWH] of powers [Elohiym] will say to the serpent, given that you did this, spat upon are you from all the beasts and from all the life the field, upon the belly you will walk and powder you will eat all the days your life". So, Malachi (which, by the way, means "messenger", which is to say "angel") never says "You are cursed with a curse". What it says, literally, is "You are spat upon with spit...". Which carries precisely the degree of degradation and loathing that anybody in any culture has when contemplating that image. Hhhhhhhhhhh - PTOOOEY - right on ye, ye vile worms. Pretty graphic language, this "ARWR".
Thank you. Then strike the comment and I will try in the future to word my comments in a way that will be more palatable to you during my composting. LOL
I was entirely serious. No one ever seems to mention Malachi otherwise, particularly preach an entire sermon on it. Visit ChristianPatriot.com put Malachi in the search engine. Not all, but some are up and available to the general public. Most are restricted to preachers and Bible students.
that's not what the thread is all about, it is about why one should study the ancient languages.
So, Malachi (which, by the way, means "messenger", which is to say "angel") never says "You are cursed with a curse". What it says, literally, is "You are spat upon with spit...". Mal 3:9a Ye are cursed ('arar) with a curse (m@erah) From the original post: the Hebrew words 'arar and m@erah. 'arar Strong's 779 is a primitive root; to execrate:--X bitterly curse m@erah Strongs 3994 is an execration:--curse. I'm curious as to where you are getting your definitions. The other problem I have with your explanation is that there are two words, not one, translated as curse, not one. Mal 3:9a Ye are cursed ('arar) with a curse (m@erah)
I'm a pretty good source, actually, because I don't have a traditional religious agenda. I don't like any of the traditions, because of all of the evil that their men have done. I don't trust their translations, because I have had a peak at the tendentiousness of it. I don't accept the Protestant tradition that the Bible is IT, and I don't accept the Catholic tradition that the Church is IT. I think that God is IT, and I want to know what the Church has said about what God wants. I also want to see how the Church has contradicted itself in these pronouncements. It concerns me less when I find the men of the Church contradicting what God said. Judas was an Apostle, after all, and Peter ran away and denied Christ. But the allegedly infallible doctrines themselves, where they evolve and change or conflict with each other: that's important. I want to see, also, what the Bible says, and I want to see how people change the canon between different denominations, and whether it makes a difference (it does as between Catholic and Protestant, and between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox, but it doesn't between Catholic and Eastern Orthodox). I want literal translations that are mechanical and concordant, so I can see the Hebrew and Greek verb tenses - they matter a great deal. I want the same word used consistently in the text to translate its homologue, because that's what time left us: THAT word. When different English is used to translate the same word, the judgment of the translator is intruding. I want my translator to make ONE judgment about the meaning of a word - to TELL me that judgment and the alternatives - and then I want my translator BOUND to use that exact word, every single time the Hebrew or Greek word appears. Such translations do exist, though they are rare. With concordant translation and proper verb tenses, I want to see if the Bible conflicts with itself. It does. And I want to see if there is any way WITHIN the text to discern how to assign greater and lesser authority to conflicting pieces. There is. Jesus actually gave the rule, and it makes perfect logical sense too, when you think about it: "Man does not live by bread alone, but but every word that proceeds forth out of the mouth of deity." Well, that narrows it down, doesn't it? Scripture is inspired by God, but the parts that God actually spoke directly, which are always indicated in the text, are the words to live by, in the event of a conflict. That makes sense. It also clears a lot of freight. So, what I end up with is a corpus of words, perhaps only about 7 or 8% of the text, a third of that when duplicates are removed, that are the binding words of God. Those are the highest authority in Scripture. I can look at the "disputed books" to see if there are words of God in THOSE. There are, in some of them, so I need to see if there is any difference in message if a disputed book is included or excluded. (The answer is: not really.) Then I can compare the words that proceeded forth out of the mouth of God, according to Scripture, to each of the traditions of each denomination, to see where they vary. And then I can come to my own judgment as to what to think. Me? I come down on the side of words spoken directly by God, as interpreted by my own conscience. Because I'm interested in the truth, not in defending any tradition at all, I tend to be a very good, impartial source for understanding the Bible. You can trust me because I'm just trying to show what it actually says, for my OWN benefit - and I'm willing to share my findings with others. That makes me an exceptional source of information - precisely because I am unimpressed with ALL of the denominational claims.
m'erah is a derivative of ARWR. There's one word here, and a derivate.
There's one word here, and a derivate. Yes, m'erah is a derivative of ARWR, but they are not one word. I remain curious as to what dictionary you are using? Where are you getting your definitions from?
Except me. I am particularly fond of Malachi, for two reasons. First, it wasn't proclaimed by a man. "Melek" is a messenger - an angel. This is God's angel speaking to the Jews, not some guy hiding his identity. Probably. That's important, because it makes the whole book highly authoritative - not just words "inspired by God", but words that proceed forth out of the mouth of God (via an angel). The second reason I like it is because it is HERE, from God's own mouth via his angel, that God proclaims the same doctrine against divorce that Jesus later preaches. The angel (melek) tells the Jews: "God hates divorce." Jesus later tells us all that divorce was a law that Moses wrote, but that it wasn't God's intent from the beginning. And Jesus says that remarriage after divorce is adultery. A fundamental difference between the Catholic Church and all other Christian denominations is that the other denominations all allow for divorce and remarriage, because of the hardness of hearts. But the Catholic Church forbids it absolutely. And THAT is, in fact, the law that came out of Jesus' mouth, corroborated by the words from God through the Angel. It is important that God's HATRED for divorce - HATRED - is expressed in the OLD Testament. So, Jesus is NOT changing the law to take away something that God gave through Moses. As Jesus said, Moses wrote the tradition, and divorce was a TRADITION. But God HATES it, and hated it under the law of Moses too. That's very, very important. For we are told by modern Christians of a political bent that God hates sodomy - that it is an abomination. That's true, on the text. But DIVORCE is ALSO hated by God - HATED. Jesus said that remarriage after divorce is ADULTERY. And in the short list given by Jesus twice on the last page of Scripture of what will get a man thrown into the Lake of Fire at final judgment, THEFT never appears - thieves don't necessarily go to Hell - but the sexually immoral and adulterers both do. I have noted that the Christians of our day like to harp on faggotry, which is legitimate. They harp somewhat less on fornication, perhaps because they don't want to alienate the "low church". But on divorce - something God hates - and remarriage - which Jesus calls adultery, and promises adulterers are hurled into the fire...well, there the Christians find compassion. Why? Because most people are heterosexual and married, and marriage is frequently a bitch, and having an escape hatch has been a desire of man since Moses. But God HATES divorce. HATES it. And tells men not to do it. In both testaments - an angel tells the Jews, and Jesus tells the world. I myself, personally, agree with Jesus. I think that divorce is an utter calamity for children, in particular. And I think that the temporal happiness of parents should be sacrificed for the happiness of children, and unhappy people should stay married, AND control their emotions and not commit other sins by lashing out - in short, they should fall back in love with the love of their youth, and that God gives them no out. There is no out: you must stay married. Marriage means that you will never have sex with anybody else against for the rest of one of your lives - the first to die - and it's indissoluble. And IF you dissolve it anyway: God HATES that. And if you remarry, you are an adulterer and you will be thrown into the flames of Hell and not enter the City of God. Jesus said that TWICE on the last page of the Scripture - TWICE. Adulterers are thrown into the fire. Divorce and remarriage is adultery. God hates divorce, and God throws adulterers into Hell. And all of those words came out of the mouth of God, straight and clear, and are not open to interpretation. And any Christian who says otherwise is deleting Scripture to pave the way to sin. He is lying and liars are ALSO on the short stern list of people who will be thrown into Hell at judgment. There is no escape: God hates divorce. Remarriage after divorce is adultery. Adulterers are thrown into Hell. And to say otherwise is to lie about God's word and liars are also all thrown into Hell. Therefore, Christians must take the position that divorce is prohibited, and remarriage after divorce is always barred. To do otherwise, and to preach anything else, is to lie and to lead men and women, and one's self, to hell. Thus speaks Malachi and Jesus. This is the law of God. It can never be changed. And whoever disagrees with it should shut up and change his mind, on pain of death, damnation and Hell. God has spoken finally, and repeatedly. Whoever thinks otherwise defies God. It is not an open question. The doctrine of divorce and remarriage is Satanic.
Well, we seem to have something in common here. I take them with a grain of salt.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Not true. Most Evangelical churches remove members for divorce.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
By who? God?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
By self proclaimed infallible men.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Divorce? Catholic don't need no stinkin' divorce. At least rich Catholics don't, they can get an annulment, maybe more than one. Just ask Ted Kennedy (or his Dad). Ted got one after 24 years of marriage and three kids. Hey, it's good to be King.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Keep coming to the light, Ram.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Yes the annulment is the rich Catholic divorce.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Well actually there would be Hebrew scrolls in Judea whereas in the diaspora the Greek would be more prevalent.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Is God fooled by annulment that is really divorce? If the Catholics, through annulment, only honor the prohibition against divorce and remarriage in the breach, they nevertheless honor it. What can be said for outright, flatly stated divorce and remarriage? Nothing. If the Church is doing it by subterfuge, it feels the need to commit to the subterfuge, BECAUSE God's prohibition is so very absolute. So, if the Catholics are doing it by subterfuge, they need to stop it. And of course everybody else needs to completely abandon what THEY do, because that's in-your-face defiance of God.
Most evangelical churches? Name three.
Let me ask again, what are you using for a dictionary? Where are you getting y9ur definitions from?
Tell it to the Pope.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Why do you want to know?
Mal 3:9 Witha-the-curseb you(pl) (are) cursed,c because/yetd-(it is)me you(pl) (are) robbing/defrauding,e the-nation,f all(-of)g-it. c. mas. pl. Niphal part. of ארר ¾rr (BDB p. 76), (Hol p. 28), (TWOT 168): ‘cursed’ [BDB; Coh, Keil, Mer; KJV, NASB, NRSV], ‘inflicted with a curse’ [Hol]. Many translations restructure the Hebrew phrase ‘you are cursed with the curse’: ‘to be under a curse’ [CEV, NIV, NLT], ‘to suffer under a curse’ [JPS], ‘to be greatly cursed’ [NICOT]. Some translations make ‘curse’ the subject, e.g., ‘a curse is on you’ [NJB, REB, TEV]. Most translations express an accomplished event or an enduring state, e.g., ‘you are cursed’. WBC, however, expresses a process: ‘you are being cursed’. d. -ו wY- waw connective (BDB p. 251), (Hol p. 84), (TWOT 519): ‘because’ [Mer; NIV, NJB, REB, TEV, WBC], ‘yet’ [Coh, Keil, Gla, NICOT; JPS], ‘for’ [KJV, NASB, NLT, NRSV]. The emphasis of the clause is on the pronoun ‘me’, attached to this connective [Gla]. James Pohlig, An Exegetical Summary of Malachi (Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1998), 158–160.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, 2 and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the LORD. Do not bring sin upon the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance. The Holy Bible: New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), Dt 24:1–4. So, you would have a woman in this situation go back to her first husband?
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
I'm curious of where you came up with spat or spitting?
Name three. In all five that I have been a part of in my various regional assignments. In one, an associate pastor, a Christian, decided he was no longer compatible with his Christian wife. He was dismissed as associate pastor and after the assembly assisted in the reconciliation process, he still wanted a divorce. He was put out of the assembly. The wife remained as she did not want the divorce. But that is what Christians do. What about an atheist who after being married 15 years, with kids, converts to be a Catholic. His atheist wife objects and does not like the change in him and divorces him. What about his situation? Will the Catholic church allow him to remarry? Is this grounds to issue an annulment? He married with the disobedient heart of an atheist, but by God's Grace later converted. The same light was not given the wife and she leaves him. What is the Catholic solution to this? A Pole, how would the Orthodox handle this issue?
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Faith in what? Faith has to have an. object.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
Bob, you really have no idea how much time I spend in the Word.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
Faith in what? Faith has to have an. object. What? Are you serious? What is the object of your faith? Gaia? Government? The Great Wheel? Stop being silly.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Well, well now. Two folks that measure their existance by how much time they spend reading scriptures to understand God's Words disagreeing about what scriptures say and mean. Thanks, guys, for making my point sooooooo much better than I can by your real life example and not recognizing it.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
No Gary I don't, but this I know, your post number 107 has made my point. To seriously discuss the word of God one has to get into the original languages. Thanks Gary,
How? In the "begat," "begat," "begat" words? I have read the Bible a few tymes. It is not an easy reading experience anymore than watching someone on an LSD trip going insane. Of course, your reference assumes the Bible is "the word of the Lord" which is, in my opinion, fabricated. So why does God cloak himself in secrecy? Why doesn't he/she just break out of the secrecy realm and revel the truths to each and every one of us? OK, I am going out and slaughter a lamb as a tithe to God. Is that what you are recommending? Today's or modern versions of the "Holy Bible' are about committees agreeing the content of the Holy Bible is what they say it is. Don't you find that the committees that agree with their own work find it difficult to understand criticism? I suppose, I am out of the loop based upon your opinion.
Sending His only begotten Son to save sinners through death by crucifixion and raising Him from the dead three days later is not enough for you? This is not revelation enough for you?
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
If in fact you read the Bible you would know Jesus is the Lamb of God. He satisfied every tithe, peace offering and sin offering. He is the real deal.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
In general a true and serious effort should be made to keep marriage together. But if it is not possible, a second marriage is allowed or even third. No fourth, sorry.
Faith is an action, or a readiness to act, based on the confidence one has in the object of their belief. Mine is Jesus Christ.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
Thanks Gary, Bob, take another look at my post. The "Exegetical Summary of Malachi" listed in my post 107 has as its source links to the major lexicons for each word in Mal. 3:9. It's the very best resource available for scholars working in the original Biblical languages.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
it's called blindness, and it's your choice.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
And that confidence comes from a relationship, from knowing, the 'object', aka individual, unique being, etc.
I gave a difficult situation. What about an atheist who was married then divorced and years later converts to the Orthodox church? Is that person allowed to remarry another Orthodox?
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Yes, of course.
Seems to me, that the Bible is exactly that.... A series of writings by people claiming God said certain things. You certainly are one of great faith, but it appears your faith isn't so much in God, but in the Bible itself.
The bible, my friend, is the word of God. It is the book, letter, He gave to us to get to know, understand and be better able to obey Him. I am convinced that in the Bible, we find exactly what God said, exactly how He said it and that He means every word in it. I am also convinced that if we, after much study, still do not understand all of what He has caused to be written, it does not mean that God doesn't know how to speak or how to write, it means that we (I) are not as smart as God. As His slave I am commanded to obey, not second guess, I am commanded to study what He said, not look to others to tell me what He meant to say.
The big question remains as to how one knows the object of his faith.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
Are you saying "God" is blind and its all my fault?
I guess you could say, I am not a believer.
You should tell Jesus that his people in Israel are killing Palestinians and taking their land. They just stole about 800 olive trees from Palestine by chopping them down and moving on to the land of Palestine farmers. While you are in discussion with Jesus ... let him know that he isn't doing much good by permitting the world to rot all around not only the unbelievers but also fine folks like you, the believers. I would like a full report of the discussion.
Personally, I see little supporting evidence for this claim. A theology where people are condemned for eternity for decisions they make in a single life is simply not necessary, and falls short of what makes God truely loving and majestic. Characteristics ascribed to God like anger and jealousy are more likely the result of projecting of human traits on God rather than being an accurate description of an all knowing, all powerful, all loving God. The Newton model gives us that. We have an infinitely patient God with zero condemnation and zero anger, complete free will and complete accountability. We have a very real and simple reason to understand our spiritual uniqueness above that of animals (our humanity is not our primary identity, contrary to what most major faiths including christianity simply assume). It's almost universally true that no parent would condemn a child for what doctrine they hold to, and yet we're to believe God would condemn the vast majority of his children over what theology they believe? Where is the logic in this? If God is all powerful and all wise, then why wouldn't he have created a different model from the beginning? Well, I believe he did. In comparing theological elements, the Newton model is objectively superior to the Christian model, and the theological models of every major religion. Not that such results are necessarily indicative of truth, but insofar as we are talking about an omnipotent, infinitely wise, and all loving God, it should most certainly be a consideration. The Bible is, in my view, a collection of ancient writings, selected for their consistency in projecting a certain belief system. Yes many people over time have held the Bible to be spiritually special, but the same is also true for the Koran. Much of what is written is good, but the assumption that it is "The Word of God" is just that -- an assumption -- allowing a faith holder an easy and convenient device to consider a source of truth. Still, just because we need and want such a thing does not mean the Bible is it. My 2c.
I not sure that confidence in the object of one's belief is an complete characterization of faith. It certainly is a component of faith just as is a strong, if not abiding, belief based on spiritual realization rather than tangible or scientific proof. In any event faith in the context of our dialogue is a gift from God. It is He that offers it to all and only He that bestows it upon the willing. Thank God, I have faith.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Up until about 2 years ago you claimed to be a christian. Rocky ground.
Yeah. The Bible was written by a pedophile. Oh no that was the Muslims. All muslims will burn in hell. Unless they repent.
Rocky ground. To me, being open minded is a positive quality, not a negative one, and that means always being willing to consider new ideas, honestly and as objectively as possible. Any belief system that requires subscribers to be close minded is not an honest belief system, in my view, and I find it unfortunate that some Christians (and others, for that matter) take that position under the guise of being "faithful". But faithfulness and closemindedness should not be mixed. Any faith that is true does not need people to be closeminded to make it work. It can tolerate honest questions and honest review, and no true God would be angered by such honest searching.
Regardless of the origin of the Koran and Bible, my (minor) point is that both books have a billion or so subscribers. Therefore, one should not / can not take the extended history and widespread recognition of them as fool-proof evidence of divine accuracy.
No! You have scales covering your eyes, which only God can remove. They are a product of your unbelief and hatred for God.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
Newton uses hypnosis for people to realize their spiritual life? So is it accurate to state that Newton or one of his hypnotists are required to reach this spiritual state? Or are there others who provide the same service? I have looked at some of the testimonials of Newton. It seems everyone had fascinating previous lives. Still looking for the testimony of someone who was a Calcutta street sweeper in the 19th century.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
He uses hypnosis to help people with emotional or psychological difficulties. It was in the course of this work that he encountered the people recalling past lives and, more interestingly, the between life states. This regression has helped a lot of people understand and cope significantly better with issues they face in their current lives. Hypnosis calms the physical mind enough to allow the soul-based memories to be recalled with much less interference. That's all. His books, along with those of Brian Weiss, contain plenty of accounts of past lives that are mundane on their face, but are written into the books because they are significant for other reasons. A child falling out of a carriage and crippled by the wheels, for example.
Gary - you are a drama queen. I have no hatred for God nor religion. But, I do not agree with your beliefs or system of beliefs. Apparently, you want me to identify with your belief system. I am only interested in your belief system, is all. Thanks for helping me to know you.
Your view and my belief are at opposite ends of the spectrum. But look at it this way, If I'm wrong, what have I lost? But, if I'm right what have you lost?
Your whole lifetime barking up the wrong tree. You would have a whole lifetime of lost opportunities that would have connected you closer to the truth about your existence and relationships to other people. You would have spent your whole lifetime actively leading others done your path to nowhere instead of enriching their life. Need I go on? "But, if I'm right what have you lost?." Likely nothing. Just like you perhaps he will go to Heaven, perhaps not. God will make that call for all of us. Unless of course you already know that you are going to heaven? Well, do you?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Yes, Yes I do. I will, upon the micro second of my life, find myself embraced by the Lord Jesus as He welcomes me into His heaven. I have absolutely no doubts about that, none.
How one knows he is there is by revelation, only, initiated by him, always. On how one gets to know him, through a relationship, developing over time as effort is put into it. And confidence grows as the relationship deepens.
Would they be allowed to hold a position in the church?
I have always found the Bible ambiguous on the question of the resurrection of the dead. Whether instant resurrection or a final resurrection of all the dead, it doesn't speak plainly and uniformly to the issue. Theologians still argue it or, more wisely, just avoid the topic. Even Jesus was in the tomb for 3 days before resurrection.
I have absolutely no doubts about that, none. That is an interesting claim, that you already know God's judgment of you. Hell, you can phone in the rest of life here on earth.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Scripture admonishes us to be sure of our salvation, not to neglect spiritual duties or commit spiritual offenses. So Bob is on very solid ground scripturally.
Jesus is emphatic, you either love or hate Him.
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
So Bob is on very solid ground scripturally Amen!
And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
The Orthodox Church supports translating the bible into native languages from the Original Greek. See Cyrillic alphabet. http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith7068 Translations of the Bible are very necessary, but are not sufficient for formulating dogmas and doctrines of the Church, which requires reference to the original languages. The translations depend upon the genius and knowledge of the translator in the selection of the proper words and phrases to render meaning as close as possible to the text of the original language. It is well-known that a new translation is more or less a new interpretation.
You mean case of a previously divorced convert to be ordained to the priesthood? I an not sure, bishops deal with such matters.
*That* I would not say. There is a lot of overlap between the Newton model and Christianity. Namely, the overriding importance of love. Certainly, in terms of risk, I'm at a disadvantage. Maybe that means I have stronger faith than you? But seriously, fear is not a legitimate reason to believe.
In a way you might be right - in that they are metaphors in lieu of projections, metaphors that appeal to the common mental associations. God's "jealousy" means that you may not serve Him and other gods at the same time. You must be faithful or you will be cast out. A rejection of adultery does not mean lack of love, rather the opposite. BTW, God is loving, but He does not use His omnipotence to take away human freedom to err.
Or Vulgate for the vulgar Westerners ;)
Even Jesus was in the tomb for 3 days before resurrection. Actually, Paul does. An example: 1 Corinthians 15: 12 ¶ Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: 14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. 15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. 16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: 17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. That seems pretty plain to me, hope it helps you old friend.
Actually, Paul does. Actually, what I think I remember from theological readings of the eastern fathers is that the souls of the dead do not go either to heaven or hell but fall into a sleep state until Jesus' return when they are then judged. While this sounds like limbo - it is not. I have also read that the saints and martyrs get to bypass the trial phase and go direct to heaven after their deaths. Modern notions seem to think we go to heaven or hell right after we die - and that is at odds with the final judgement part.
I have absolutely no doubts about that, none. That is an interesting claim, that you already know God's judgment of you. Hell, you can phone in the rest of life here on earth. It is not a difficult claim to make, Read John 3:1-21 and you will come away asking just what you have to do to be Born Again. Christ Himself answers that question in Luke 23:39-43. I have both written extensively on this and experienced the pain of crucifixion. If you comply with John 3:3 by doing what the thief on the cross to Jesus right did, then you too will have no doubts of where you will spend eternity. And, if you think or have been told that you have to live a perfect life, then go back and read my post for the last 30 years, you will find there is nothing perfect about me. But believe this, there are only two places you can go after death, Heaven or the lake of fire, there aint no purgatory! You pick that destination while you are still alive, after you die it is to late. Put your salvation in no hands, read the word of God yourself and ignore commentary, read some exhortations if yu are having difficulty, but don't even do that till you have reached out to Christ thru the Spirit for help and understanding. You are going to spend eternity in one of those two places, your salvation is to important to be left up to others.
Sorry, but I cannot agree.
I agree.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Scripture supports both. And Origen had his doctrine of Purgatory as well. It isn't actually a central question of Christianity. Given the backdrop of eternity, does it matter whether you make it to heaven or hell (or Purgatory) now or ten thousand years from now? Against eternity, any time scale involving the human race has to be miniscule. The Christian should focus on his destination, not his arrival time.
I agree. Where, not when.
You said that we were at opposite ends of a spectrum. I can empathize with your likely opinion that anything not biblical is anti-biblical, but it's nonetheless true that in terms of a spectrum, since we could disagree more, then we are by definition not at different ends of a spectrum.
Perhaps I was hasty, tell me what you understand salvation to be.
Impressive display of an self-mirrored authoritarian demagogue. As always, you have not added a whit to the discussion.
I am afraid the opinion that the dead a asleep is not correct. Such well meaning opinion is spread among many Orthodox but look it up.
So Bob is on very solid ground scripturally. God for him. Wait.....wait.....is that God laughing?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Agreed, it's either up or down. "Put your salvation in no hands, read the word of God yourself and ignore commentary, read some exhortations if yu are having difficulty, but don't even do that till you have reached out to Christ thru the Spirit for help and understanding." My faith was secured a long time ago and remains unshaken. And yes, we are all sinners. And yes salavtion is a very personal thing. And yes sinners can go to Heaven. But only God knows what is in a man's heart and what deeds a man has or has not done. Only God will judge, even in the case of a death bed conversion of a thief on the cross. I would not presume to claim to know the God of mind. I am reasonably certain that there are a lot of very surprised Christians in Hell who thought they were going to Heaven, including ones that believed that they kept the faith and the word.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
From your words. You seem to indicate that hell is already open for business. Is that as correct interpretation of your words?
Hasn't it been for quite some time?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
I thought that happened after judgement day. After the dead are raised from their graves.
That is not my understanding. Remember Dante's Inferno, where Judas, among others, resides?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Perha ps this will clarify the Roman Catholic CHurch's teaching on the subject. "I. THE PARTICULAR JUDGMENT 1021 Death puts an end to human life as the time open to either accepting or rejecting the divine grace manifested in Christ.592 The New Testament speaks of judgment primarily in its aspect of the final encounter with Christ in his second coming, but also repeatedly affirms that each will be rewarded immediately after death in accordance with his works and faith. The parable of the poor man Lazarus and the words of Christ on the cross to the good thief, as well as other New Testament texts speak of a final destiny of the soul--a destiny which can be different for some and for others.593 1022 Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death, in a particular judgment that refers his life to Christ: either entrance into the blessedness of heaven-through a purification594 or immediately,595 -- or immediate and everlasting damnation.596 At the evening of life, we shall be judged on our love.597"
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
What, in Scripture, would have you believe that?
Try dying in a state of mortal sin. No man, save Christ, is perfect. Each of us commit mortal sins from time to time. Well....I guess I should say most of us as you apparantly have not and never will. The rest of us have to rely on repentance to remove the stain on our souls and get back into God's grace. This is far as I am going to engage with you on this subject.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
How about from scripture. Since it "repeatedly" affirms it. It should be easy to find the verses your quote is mentioning. Because I know that that isn't true I wont bother looking. Show me when you find it. You wont though.
This is far as I am going to engage with you on this subject. He asked a legitimate question. You dodged it.
I don't read the words "mortal sin" in the Bible. What differentiates "mortal Sin" from regular old "sin". What is the scriptural basis for using the word "mortal" in front of it? I've heard the phrase before maybe you can help me understand it.
John 5;17 tells us All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death. So just wondering why call some sin mortal sin. It seems extra biblical.
The thief on the cross for one example.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Yep. And I will dodge all such questions on this subject and most subjecta on what exactly Scripture says or doesn't say. Why do you think that there are so many sects of Christianity? Debating the differences between them has long ago stopped being informative or fun and has become useless. I will not engage much, if at all, inthis fool's game. Any questions?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Perhaps to you it does. Who am I to try to convince you otherwise?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Do you believe in that Christians should proselytize each other, e.g. - Methodist proselytizing Catholics, Baptists proselytizing Episcopalians? I don't do that to other Christians and I certainly don't appreciate someone trying to proselytize me. Any questions?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
I could probably write up a long essay of how I see things work, but that would likely (and understandably) exceed your interest and therefore would not be a productive use of time. But I'll try summarize. Your question implies that salvation is an element that is required, and that any faith system must account for it, because of the nature of sin being incompatible with God's perfection and so forth. But the need for salvation does not exist under the Newton model. Please hear me out as I explain. Let's look at the big picture. Christian theology is based on the idea that we are primarily human beings, flesh and blood, and the eternal soul is created as a byproduct of human conception. For that reason, once the body dies, the soul is then released to it's ultimate destination and can (understandably) never again be part of a new human life since any new human life would have it's own soul. God created man in his image, hand made from dust, as opposed to the animals which were spoken into existance, which is the reason man is considered the children of God and of special worth above the worth of animals. Jesus took human form in order to be able to understand our hardships firsthand, and therefore intercede on our behalf, dying on the cross once and for all for the atonement of sin. All in all, not an unreasonable theology. But by way of comparison, this is what the Newton model says. We are NOT primarily human. We are primarily souls. Souls are NOT created as a byproduct of human conception. Souls are instead, according to Newton, literally born of God in the spirit world. My next statement is not what Newton says, as he never makes any comparison of his findings to Christianity, but what I infer is, because we are not primarily human, the idea that Jesus would need to take human form for the benefit of atonement of souls breaks down. Souls are NOT human, and have no direct relation to human DNA. Our human nature is only incidental, so it's illogical (in my view) that a human sacrifice would/could attone for the salvation of souls that are not in any way human. This model makes more logical sense that the Judeo-Christian model for the following reasons: 1) The reason we are special and loved by God is because we are souls born of God in the spirit world, not because we are human beings born on earth. This makes us "Children of God" in a completely literal sense. 2) Earth no longer needs to be the center of the universe. If there is intelligent alien life elsewhere in the universe, there are no issues with the potential need for them to have their own Jesus dying as a member of that alien race for their own alien sins. The Bible says Jesus died once (as a human) for all time (correct me if I'm wrong), which would seem to leave any non-human, alien souls up a creek with no opportunity for their own salvation. Under the Newton model, alien life with souls (should any exist) poses no theological problem, so there is no need for earth to be considered particularly special -- which means the possible existence of trillions of other earth-like planets, even those teeming with life, poses no theological problem either. 3) There need be nothing special about human DNA. We are permanently loved, immortal, in spite of our temporarily inhabiting primate bodies. Under the Christian model, human DNA needs to be somehow special, being able to cause the spiritual entity (soul) to come into existence. But why does human conception create a soul, whereas chimp conception does not? Under the Newton model, there are no issues, even if we did evolve from apes. All in all, we have a portrait of a God and spirit world that is 100% based in love and positive reinforcement, not negative reinforcement (hell, purgatory, condemnation, though souls will sometimes put themselves though something akin to purgatory). We as souls have an enormous incentive to further our spiritual development and that is what life is about. We have a God with infinite patience, not patience that runs out when someone dies. It is, objectively, a more perfect world, a more perfect love, and more logically sound. The whole need for atonement of sin for salvation is, in comparison with the Newton model, frankly.... "crude" in a way because we just don't have the clean logic and many moral answers to life's mysteries and difficulties that Newton's portrait gives us. So to answer your question, there is no need for salvation. There is instead a desire to grow and develop spiritually, one life at a time, and that is the reason each and every one of us is here on earth, even with all it's hardships and tragedy. Thanks for reading.
Because it provides mock authority to walk around with your chest proudly puffed out instead of being faced with mere chronic obsession with mythology. We have one hundred eighty five posts of trivial boredom and irrelevance while important things are going on in the world.
Well for one. They just make stuff up like hell is already started. When that is in direct contradiction to what scripture clearly says. So you make an assertion Then you can't defend it. Then you say I won't talk about scripture. We're supposed to talk about it to understand it better.
That is a good example. I'll have to look more clearly at what was said. Wasn't it paradise that was said?
Well you are clearly a well read and smart individual. I just wondered why that word is used in front of sin when it isn't found in the Bible.
You seem to think this Newton guy has all the answers. No one else does but him. Just saying.
There are no aliens. SHow me otherwise if you can.
That occurred to me as well. Then I recalled his other post about Judas being in hell according to Dante's Inferno, a 14th-century religious poem, first of three in his trilogy of epic poems on Heaven, Hell and Purgatory (the others being named Purgatorio and Paradiso). You can reach conclusions like this if you freely mix medieval religious literature like the Inferno with the Bible. Mix and match fun! So maybe you don't need to wonder all that much. It's comparable to some Prot freely mixing ideas from scripture and Pilgrim's Progress, written in the 16th century. Like Dante's trilogy, both impacted the content of religion in their time but they never formed any formal body of theology. You can't really learn much from them about scriptural teachings that you could not learn better and more accurately from just reading scripture itself.
Just saying. What I find notable about Newton's work is that it presents a model of life that provides *lots* of clean answers. The love works better, there's no conflict with science, no codemnation from God, full accountability, complete free will, life is completely fair no matter what circumstances we are born into, life, including hardships and tragedy has a very practical purpose serving us (instead of just the obtuse "God's glory"). With the Christian model, people can burn in hell forever even though they never even had a chance to hear the Gospel and/or died young. That is inherently unfair, but justified with the line of thought that it's God's right, as creator of all, to send us there even though a person never had a chance to be saved. Under Newton's model, this doesn't happen, leaving absolutely no space for even a claim that God is unfair, which like it or not, there is room for under Christianity. Everything falls into place. It's an arrangement that I would ask why God would not have set up in the first place, given that it has such objectively superior qualities. Does Newton know all the answers? He'd say no, but what answers he does have simply makes a lot more sense. It's the kind of thing that makes me think, if Newton's a fraud, he's a genius of a fraud. And net searches don't even turn up any substantive material claiming he's a fraud in spite of his books being decades old. I see Newton's work like a decryption key that decodes the mysteries of life much better than Christianity or any other faith or belief system does. The answers are too good for it to be written off.
The size of the universe is beyond comprehension. Even if it's one day shown there is no other life whatsoever in the Milky Way galaxy, there are more galaxies in the universe than people on earth, so there could still be an extremely high probability of life existing in other galaxies. But under Newton, whether alien life exists or not doesn't matter. With Christianity, it does. It frankly seems a repeat of the conflict between the church and Galileo. The church wanted earth to be the center of the universe, while Galileo claimed it was the sun. Now today, earth pretty much needs to be the epicenter of God's creation of life, and humans need to be God's only children. But under Newton's model, there is no need for us humans to hold that monopoly. And that just makes more sense.
I gave you a direct link to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. If you wish to debate the point please take it up with the Pope. I have no interest in engaging in defending the Church's teaching. You are totally free to believe what you do. I am not trying to change your mind. The debate about what Scriptures say or does not say, much less mean or does not mean, is 1,500 years old. Neither one of us has much to contribute to the resolution. Perhaps redleghunter and/or vicomte13 may be willing to engage in this discussion with you. They are much more studied on the Bible than I. I will watch with interest on how this resolves.....but betting that it will not.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Mon dieu, you are absolutely right. There is no Hell. It's a myth.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Read John's First Letter. He is the one who makes the distinction between sin and mortal sin, in the Bible. Also, Jesus speaks of greater and lesser commandments, and YHWH speaks of greater and lesser sins. The Bible is consistent in both Testaments that there are greater and lesser commandments and greater and lesser sins and crimes. John expresses the difference between regular sins and mortal sins. The only reason there's a debate on this, I suppose, is that some folks missed the repeated references in Scriptures to different degrees of commandment and of sin.
I forgot about this thread. Your message pulled me back. I don't have the patience to go back to the beginning and refresh. Please give me a synopsis - what are we talking about?
By mortal sin, I am guessing you mean, in opposition to what Jesus said in John 3:3, but where all who are Born Again are assured eternal salvation, what has that, Try dying in a state of mortal sin, have to do with our conversation?
Guess as you may, nothing I say will stop you or change your mind on things. Is it your contention that all one needs to do to assure entrance into Heaven is to be Born Again?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
And there is also a distinction between the salavation of the soul, whihc many believe occurs at death, and the resurrection of the body, which mant believe believe will occur at the Second Coming. Tough concepts to some, I know. But in the final analysis: потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
I don't know what you are reading to come up with this stuff but this I do know, it is not the Bible, the word of God. So, you go your way, I will stick with God's word and sometime, within the next twenty years I would think, I will find out who is correct, me or you.
Because it provides mock authority to walk around with your chest proudly puffed out instead of being faced with mere chronic obsession with mythology. We have one hundred eighty five posts of trivial boredom and irrelevance while important things are going on in the world. You and so many of your fellow deniers prove the lords point in Luke 18:8b.
This reminds of that great story about a renowned atheist heart surgeon who after opening a patient's chest said to the crowd of eager interns and med students closely packed around him several rows deep "OK, show me the soul." A less than timid voice from the back row responded "OK, show me the pain."
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
I for one believe the basics of Christianity are quite clear. There is no 'haze' as to what exactly the Gospel message is, for example. Jesus proclaimed it, His apostles proclaimed it often in the NT. Even the early church theologians clearly expressed this 'rule of faith' in the various creeds. So, as I see it the Gospel message is quite clear. Jesus Christ proclaimed the Gospel and the apostles preached and taught the Gospel. For an Evangelical in any age, the Gospel is the 'entry point' for all other things Christian. Everything else flows from the Gospel: from baptism, church community and theological positions. This was the simplicity of the message which fishermen by God's Grace were given the light to believe while the most 'religious' of the time were confounded and opposed it.
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Good one Jasper. That's a keeper:)
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom for those who were in distress. In the past he humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the future he will honor Galilee of the nations, by the Way of the Sea, beyond the Jordan..... For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Indeed. What is noteworthy is the Greatest of all Commands allows for the following of them all.
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Then tell me what you mean by mortal sin, or is it just a phrase, with no definition, to you?
Knock yourself out. If you have any questions pelase take them up with the Vatican. Now, please answer my question. Is it your contention that all one needs to do to be guaranteed entrance into Heaven is to be born again?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Jesus explained the Law as not just in physical violations but 'mental' and of the heart. Matthew 5: 21 Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. We see here that anger in the heart and mind is addressed with murder. Again in Matthew 5: 27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. So Jesus is telling those assembled, and us, God looks at the heart for the intents of men and women, not just what we physically do. Jesus Christ summarizes again in Matthew 15 the following: 17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? 18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: 20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man. So the solution is a changed heart. For any sane chemically balanced person can go through life and avoid physically murdering someone. Most men can avoid adultery. None of the above can avoid even the passing thought of anger for another or lust for another in their heart. We are all guilty of such. Again the solution is a changed heart. Which for the Christian, only God through His Grace can change: Romans 10: Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they may be saved. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. 5 For Moses writes about the righteousness which is of the law, “The man who does those things shall live by them.” 6 But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way, “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’” (that is, to bring Christ down from above) 7 or, “‘Who will descend into the abyss?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach): 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. 13 For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Again the solution is a changed heart. Easier said than done as no change of heart will eliminate the nature of lust in human men (and women). Though we may always be able to refrain from the action we will always have to deal with the thought. We need to be aware of this and recognize the thought for what it is and reject it.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
As were the healings of Christ in the NT, so are hearts changed by Him. That is the meaning of repentant heart. It is a miracle and unwarranted.
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Yes, your post lists many of the key points. There are a few more, though, that I think are important. In Revelation, at the end of it all, when all has been said and done, Jesus repeats many times that men will be judged by their DEEDS - by what they DID. He gives a short list, twice, of what will get a man the Lake of Fire at Judgment. Theft is not on it. Neither is covetousness. There is some variation of terms and multiplication of concepts that we can reduce to a simple term (Adultery + "porneis" + being a "dog" + "filthy" = sexual immorality, in the terms of the day) Slaying, Lying, Sexual Immorality, Idolatry, Sorcery (in particular, the selling of drugs to induce "magical" altered states) - those will earn you the fire. But what about the rest of sins? And what about THOSE VERY SINS, even. After all, Paul was a slayer of Christians, and St. Photini (the Samaritan woman at the well) was sexually immoral - are they damned to be thrown into the Lake of Fire after the resurrection and judgment, or is there a mechanism for forgiveness? Interestingly, and authoritatively, Jesus speaks of the mechanism for forgiveness by God: forgiveness of other men. He put it into the Lord's prayer: "Forgive us our debts in the measure ("as") we forgive those in debt to us". Jesus gives a very long parable of the unforgiving servant in which he speaks of the price of unforgiveness, and the reward for forgiveness: Matthew 18:32-33 "Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33 Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ 34 In anger his master handed him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed. This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.” Now, when combined with the story of the destination of the rich man who disregarded Lazarus and the promise to the (probably unbaptized) "good thief" of "Paradise" "this day", a texture of the afterlife is revealed - the rich man was in a dry and parched place, where there were flames, but he was not in the Lake of Fire. If I press down one road here, we could end up in quite a struggle. I'm not aiming to do that, however. Rather, I wanted to focus like a laser beam on what Jesus consistently said was the way to be forgiven sins, whatever sins: forgive other men their sins, crimes, bad acts and debts against you. Jesus establishes a principle of forgive-men-to-be-forgiven-by-God that very much fits his overall message. And that is rather different from what many preach. Jesus emphasized deeds, in his teaching and in the Revelation also. And he particularly emphasized forgiveness of others as the key to being forgiven sin. That was Jesus' perspective on it. Paul had a different perspective, one that focused on Jewish concepts of expiatory sacrifice. The two can be reconciled, in the sense that Jewish sacrifices were visible signs of forgiveness and redemption, and Jesus' personal sacrifice was the apotheosis of that model. And that's fine, symbolically, as far as it goes. But it does not, on its own, go far enough even if Paul says that it does. Paul is not God. Jesus is. And Jesus said to men that if they don't actually aid other men and forgive other men, he doesn't know them, and the father won't forgive them - whether they're baptized or not. Moreover, Jesus asks pointedly: What good does it do you to say you follow me if you don't do as I say? Jesus said we will be judged by our deeds, and that some deeds: lying and sexual immorality in particular, also idolatry and issues with unbelief, will result in a man being thrown into the Lake of Fire. And he offered only one path to be forgiven: you must forgive others their sin. And he said that calling him Lord, Lord is not enough. He doesn't know you unless you do what he say. So, if you're a baptized Christian who believes in Jesus, but you do not forgive other men their debts and sins, you will not be forgiven your sins either, and will be thrown into Gehenna after you die "until the last penny is paid", and then you may very well also be thrown into the Lake of Fire, too, for the second death. So, if you want to enter the City of God and pass final judgment you must, according to Jesus, be fathered again, of water and the Spirit, follow him, and forgive other men their debts and sins against you. And perhaps if you miss the water, you may be acceptable anyway (see: the "good thief"), but it doesn't do you any good to "believe in Jesus" if you don't forgive other men their debts and sins. For we're all sinners - liars and sexually immoral at least - and that means the fire unless we're forgiven, and the only way that Christ himself said we could be forgiven is by forgiving, and he said that it does a man no good at all - you are not saved - if you believe he is the Son of God but don't actually do what he said. You can break the law, and be forgiven, IF (and ONLY if) you forgive other men. If you're a baptized Christian who is an unforgiving prick, you are not saved and you are certainly going to Hell. Jesus Christ said so. Paul appears to say otherwise. Christ trumps Paul
In Revelation, at the end of it all, when all has been said and done, Jesus repeats many times that men will be judged by their DEEDS - by what they DID. He gives a short list, twice, of what will get a man the Lake of Fire at Judgment. Theft is not on it. Neither is covetousness. There is some variation of terms and multiplication of concepts that we can reduce to a simple term (Adultery + "porneis" + being a "dog" + "filthy" = sexual immorality, in the terms of the day) Slaying, Lying, Sexual Immorality, Idolatry, Sorcery (in particular, the selling of drugs to induce "magical" altered states) - those will earn you the fire. But what about the rest of sins? Which my point was to SOSO that the Greatest Commandment is the test of the heart. If one truly seeks the Heart of Christ by the Greatest Commandment, then the path is not the 'sinners bucket list' from Revelation. Matthew 22:36-40New King James Version (NKJV) 36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?” 37 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.” The above requires a change of heart. A change only God by His Grace can do. If you're a baptized Christian who is an unforgiving prick, you are not saved and you are certainly going to Hell. Jesus Christ said so. Paul appears to say otherwise. I don't see where Paul says otherwise. Paul preached repentance (Romans 10). That means turing away from our sinful lives. Paul also in 1 Corinthians 13 laid out quite nicely how love defines a Christian. A good tree bears good fruit: Luke 6: 43 “For a good tree does not bear bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. 44 For every tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they gather grapes from a bramble bush. 45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart brings forth evil. For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
A Christian lies, or gets divorced and remarried, or lusts after a woman or another man for that matter, or kills somebody. What happens to him when he dies?
What happens to him when he dies? What happened to Peter after he denied the Messiah three times he previously proclaimed as the Son of the Most High? By God's Grace Peter was preserved. He continued and persevered...by God's Grace. He did not follow the example of Judas and end his own life. Peter had a great moment of weakness, but God knows the heart and intents of all men. God's Grace knows no limitations. His Grace is not limited to a moment in time of just conversion. He promises to sanctify and glorify us. Each day, each moment we have a Great High Priest, Jesus Christ representing us at the Throne of the Father in Heaven. This includes leaving the other 99 sheep to go out and get the one that is lost. What did Jesus say of Who convicts the world (and us) of sin and righteousness? John 16: 5 “But now I go away to Him who sent Me, and none of you asks Me, ‘Where are You going?’ 6 But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your heart. 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. 8 And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 9 of sin, because they do not believe in Me; 10 of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; 11 of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. 12 “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you. I believe your answer is there.
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Well, I believe that the answer is that the Christian who does those things (the list of deadly sins in Revelation) fails to finish the race, to use Paul's words, and is thrown into the Lake of Fire by Jesus at final judgment. Whatever Christian commits the mortal sins and is unrepentent and does not forgive others is one of those who cried "Lord, Lord!", but Jesus will say "I never knew you, depart into the fire."
A Christian lies, or gets divorced and remarried, or lusts after a woman or another man for that matter, or kills somebody. What happens to him when he dies? What happened to Peter after he denied the Messiah three times he previously proclaimed as the Son of the Most High? Indeed, Peter felt badly after he heard the third crowing of the cock, i.e. - he repented of sorts. Had he not done so then or later his fate and his life very likely would have been different. Every man sins, even otherwise "good" scriptural Christians. Not every may repents, even otherwise "good" scriptural Christians. So I say again, I fully believe that Hell is full of very surprised "good" scriptural Christians who were ceretain that they were going to Heaven. Belief alone is not enough, one must endeavor to walk with Christ in his deeds. Thanks to God's love for us we can survive our falls, our lapses from grace but only if we wish to.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
It is not my contention, it is what Jesus said. Read John 3:1-21
Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.” Clearly Jesus is saying that being born again is a necessary condition. He did not say that it was a sufficient condition
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Further: 14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,[f] 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.” The word used is may not shall.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
What makes such a person a Christian? That's one issue. Another issue is does God finish what He started?
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Is God sovereign in salvation?
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Keep reading. You are getting there.
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Whatever the Churches of Ephesus and Thyatira and the others given specific messages to repent, return to their former works or former love, or risk bright spewed out of the mouth, etc. Whatever it took to be a part of the church, they were, and we're so identified by God too: baptized, having come to God -indeed, the Real Church, as duly identified by God. But behaving badly, not doing the proper works, doing bad works, and vexing God thereby. We might call the opening three chapters of Revelaion "churched Christians behaving badly". And since God said to them he was going to judge them on their works - on what they DID - he warned then in advance to fly right and attend to the deeds they were appointed.
Are you confused about this?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
The very letters from Christ to those 7 churches was an act of Grace. They were also a strong rebuke to the shepherds of some of the churches. Look at the NT passages from Christ and the apostles addressing church discipline. Seems some of these churches allowed non believers to cohabitate. God corrects His sheep. Chastisement, reproof and correction is love. A love any parent understands but a child does not appreciate until they mature. David learned such when he was guilty of adultery and murder. The Law required him and Bathsheba to be put to death. However David repented with tears and was forgiven. He and Bathsheba still endured chastisement. Hebrews 12 New King James Version (NKJV) 12 Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, 2 looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. 3 For consider Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself, lest you become weary and discouraged in your souls. 4 You have not yet resisted to bloodshed, striving against sin. 5 And you have forgotten the exhortation which speaks to you as to sons: “My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord, Nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him; 6 For whom the Lord loves He chastens, And scourges every son whom He receives.” 7 If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? 8 But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons. 9 Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live? 10 For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed best to them, but He for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness. 11 Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. 1 Corinthians 11 New King James Version (NKJV) 31 For if we would judge ourselves, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged, we are chastened by the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world. “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Not at all. God is the author of Salvation. I think He has a say in who is or is not His "called out ones."
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Oh, come on Bob. You can be more honest than that! hehe.... It comes from Michael Newton. I suspect what you mean to say is that you don't care where it came from. You are convinced the Bible is the Word of God and you are not open to other possibilities. That's fine by me though. I just can't fathom how and why God would make academic knowledge a prerequisite for qualifying for eternal life, which is what your position really sounds like to me. The Bible talks about knowing Jesus. But to me, if you know someone, you don't have to consult a book to know what they would and would not do. You know it intuitively. When you do, please come back and let us know. :^)
Clearly Jesus is saying that being born again is a necessary condition. He did not say that it was a sufficient condition Ah, but He did. Now read Luke 23:39-43.
14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,[f] 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.” The word used is may not shall. Here is the original text, with the Greek. John 3:14 And {kai} as {kathos} Moses {Moseus} lifted up {hupsoo} the serpent {ophis} in {en} the wilderness {eremos}, even so {houto} must {dei} the Son {huios} of man {anthropos} be lifted up {hupsoo}: John 3:15 That {hina me} whosoever {pas} believeth {pisteuo} in {eis} him {autos} should {apollumi} not {hina me} perish {apollumi}, but {alla} have {echo} eternal {aionios} life {zoe}. Please note, the word may is not in the original, it is not in the KJV. Let us continue for a moment, “but {alla} have {echo} eternal” alla echo. The complete definition of alla, which is pronounced al-lah' is, in the KJV, Strong’s 235 it is the neuter plural of 243; properly, other things, i.e. (adverbially) contrariwise (in many relations):--and, but (even), howbeit, indeed, nay, nevertheless, no, notwithstanding, save, therefore, yea, yet. echo is pronounced, ekh'-o, kind of like the chain saw it is Strong’s 2192 in the KJV echo is a primary verb; meaning to hold (used in very various applications, literally or figuratively, direct or remote; such as possession; ability, contiuity, relation, or condition):--be (able, X hold, possessed with), accompany, + begin to amend, can(+ -not), X conceive, count, diseased, do + eat, + enjoy, + fear, following, have, hold, keep, + lack, + go to law, lie, + must needs, + of necessity, + need, next, + recover, + reign, + rest, + return, X sick, take for, + tremble, + uncircumcised, use. So, while the word “may” may be implied, it is not there. So, it is not may have eternal life, but have eternal life. Much like the words are and even in Malachi 3:9 Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. By the way, what does "потому что Бог хочет это тот путь" mean?
2. So, you go your way, I will stick with God's word and sometime, within the next twenty years I would think, I will find out who is correct, me or you. When you do, please come back and let us know. Pinguinite, you are 100% correct in saying that. For I am 100% convinced that the Bible is the word of God and I am not open to any other possibility, for if the Bible, as I believe it t be, is the word of God there are no other possibilities. I have placed my eternity on my belief that the Bible is God's book to us, theat in it He said exactly what He wanted to say, exactly as He wanted to say it and where there are parts I don't understand, it doesn't mean God did not know how to say it, it means I am not as smart as God. I might also add, I am not nearly as forgiving as God, nor am I as loving as God, nor do I care enough about others as God does, for I would never sacrifice one of my sons for any other. Oh how I wish coming back were possible, but Jesus covers that in LUke 16, verses 27-31 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: 28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. 29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. So even if I did come back from the dead, which if you were able to know all that happened in Albuquerque, you might think I had, you would still not believe.
There is no conflict in the Bible with science. Show me if you can. I think people making up stuff about past lives is not science.
Well, if Newton is right, you will be able to. :^) Best to you, Bob.
Any one person giving an account of a past life can be written off. I agree with that. But data analysis is science, and when thousands of people from all walks of life and religions give very consistent accounts of reincarnation and the spirit world, then studying those accounts seeking some explanation for the consistency is a science, I say.
And to you my friend.
Nope, not again.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Thank you for the info. But I will take you counsel and not trust you to interpret Scripture for me.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Does God permit divorce for adultery?
Not according to Scripture and my church's teachings. According to both God does not condone either divorce or adultry. What is your point?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Has God ever divorced His People?
Do you have a point?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Jesus gives no more approval for divorce than did Moses. The Old Testament ideal has not been changed. The permissions for divorce in the Old Testament economy were designed to meet the unique, practical problems of an imperfect, sinful people. God never condoned divorce, because what He joins together is not to be separated by man (Matt. 19:6). Adultery, another reality that God never intended, is the only thing that can break the bond of marriage. In fact, under the Old Testament law, adultery would necessarily dissolve a marriage, because the guilty party was put to death (Lev. 20:10). And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined* in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. Psalm 12:6
So, the answer is yes for both questions. SOSO, did you catch this?
.
So what's your point? Matthew 19 has always said what it says. Did you not understand what that was? BTW, Matthwew 19 also says: "28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." To which twelve people was He referring?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Does God permit divorce if one spouse commits murder?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
"not rely upon the word or interpretation of others."
#2. To: misterwhite (#1)
Ummm. Meaning I shouldn't rely on your interpretation.
#3. To: BobCeleste (#2)
" misterwhite, I really don't care if you go to heaven or hell, but God does. "
#4. To: BobCeleste, Stoner, misterwhite, Deckard (#3)
" misterwhite, I really don't care if you go to heaven or hell, but God does. "
#5. To: BobCeleste (#2)
"He will say to you, "Why didn't you read my Word yourself?"
#6. To: BobCeleste (#0)
(Edited)
#7. To: GarySpFC (#0)
#8. To: BobCeleste, GarySpFc, redleghunter (#2)
He will say to you, "Why didn't you read my Word yourself?"
#9. To: BobCeleste (#0)
#10. To: Stoner (#3)
" misterwhite, I really don't care if you go to heaven or hell, but God does."
#11. To: misterwhite (#5)
And I will respond, "Because I didn't think that 'Ye are cursing cursed words with a cursed curse' was all that important to the way I live my life".
#12. To: SOSO (#8)
I would then like to ask God why He deliberately confounded men by creating multiple languages at Babel
#13. To: TooConservative (#9)
It seems to me that 95% of all sermons preached on Malachi are when a preacher and church board are trying to gin up donations. Otherwise, it gets ignored entirely.
#14. To: BobCeleste, GaryDpFc, redleghunter, All (#12)
And He will probably say: "Explained that in Genesis."
#15. To: SOSO, BobCeleste, GarySpFc (#8)
I would then like to ask God why He deliberately confounded men by creating multiple languages at Babel so that we could not perfectly communicate with each other, especially in the communication of His words......but probably would lack the cojones to do that.
#16. To: SOSO, BobCeleste, GaryDpFc (#14)
Yes, it was to deliberately confound man. So why so if as you cliam the ONLY way to understand God's word is to totally understand Hebrew as spoken and written thousands and thousands of years ago. I, like 99.999% of the planet's population can't do that even if we had the time and wherewithal to do so. A bit of a conflicy here, no? Especially since you admit that we shouldn't trust you or anyone else to translate for us.
#17. To: SOSO (#14)
So why so if as you cliam the ONLY way to understand God's word is to totally understand Hebrew
#18. To: BobCeleste (#17)
Show me where I said "the ONLY way to understand God's word is to totally understand Hebrew"
#19. To: redleghunter (#16)
...God provided His Gospel in all languages by the Power of the Holy Spirit.
#20. To: redleghunter (#15)
Seems Pentecost brought the Good News from God to every tongue:
#21. To: SOSO (#18)
#22. To: BobCeleste (#0)
#23. To: BobCeleste (#21)
By the way thanks for the spelling lesson.
#24. To: Don (#22)
#25. To: SOSO (#14)
#26. To: buckeroo (#25)
If you could describe your beliefs, you are somewhat a deist, aren't you?
#27. To: redleghunter, BobCeleste, GarySpFc (#16)
As I stated and provided information in my previous post...God provided His Gospel in all languages by the Power of the Holy Spirit.
#28. To: BobCeleste (#0)
God's word is to important to trust others with it, your salvation is to important, you need to take it into your own hands not rely upon the word or interpretation of others.
#29. To: BobCeleste (#24)
#30. To: Don (#29)
We have to rely on translations to have the Holy Scriptures available to us.
#31. To: buckeroo (#30)
#32. To: SOSO (#19)
#33. To: SOSO (#20)
Not to everyone, only to the 12 who then had to spread the News.
#34. To: Don (#31)
To [sic] many people it really doesn't matter.
those people who are Christians know the difference in the false and the real. Christ said that His sheep know His voice.
#35. To: SOSO, GarySpFc, BobCeleste (#27)
Take that argument up with Rev. Bob, it's his thread that says you are wrong.
#36. To: buckeroo, Don, GarySpFc, SOSO (#34)
#37. To: redleghunter (#36)
There are over 5,000 existing Greek NT manuscripts. ALL Bibles out there today are translated from those manuscripts. Some better than others.
#38. To: buckeroo (#34)
#39. To: Don (#38)
#40. To: buckeroo (#37)
#41. To: Don (#40)
You simply want to argue against the Holy Bible.
#42. To: buckeroo (#41)
#43. To: Don (#42)
#44. To: Gatlin (#4)
that people really don't give a damn about what you care for either
#45. To: Moderator X (#44)
#46. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc, BobCeleste (#35)
My point was that God never expected all believers to comprehend Greek and Hebrew.
#47. To: Don, buckeroo (#38)
#48. To: Moderator X (#44)
that people really don't give a damn about what you care for either
#49. To: buckeroo (#43)
(Edited)
#50. To: buckeroo, Don (#41)
You simply want to argue against the Holy Bible.
#51. To: SOSO (#50)
#52. To: buckeroo (#34)
(Edited)
It must be an awesome event to be able to evade the question about which Bible is the correct version as you receive some sort of mystical guidance from sources high above the clouds, correct?
#53. To: buckeroo (#43)
#54. To: BobCeleste (#13)
We do not need to have perfect understanding of God to be saved?
#55. To: Pinguinite (#54)
#56. To: Pinguinite, Soso, Redleghunter (#54)
#57. To: SOSO (#27)
As I stated and provided information in my previous post...God provided His Gospel in all languages by the Power of the Holy Spirit.
#58. To: GarySpFC (#28)
#59. To: Don (#29)
We have to rely on translations to have the Holy Scriptures available to us.
#60. To: Pinguinite (#54)
#61. To: BobCeleste (#59)
#62. To: buckeroo, GarySpFc, BobCeleste (#37)
Which one carries the authoritative, "word of God?"
#63. To: SOSO, GarySpFc, BobCeleste, liberator (#46)
Exactly. That is why He offers everyone Faith. But you understand this.
#64. To: Don (#61)
(Edited)
Many don't have the time, resources, or ability to learn Ancient Greek or Hebrew.
#65. To: Don, GarySpFc (#61)
Many don't have the time, resources, or ability to learn Ancient Greek or Hebrew. Many in the Middle Ages had the same problem with Latin.
#66. To: Don, BobCeleste, GarySpFc, liberator, TooConservative (#61)
Many in the Middle Ages had the same problem with Latin.
#67. To: Don (#51)
I'm waiting to see what you and Bucky have for your favorites, or do either of you have any?
#68. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc, BobCeleste, liberator (#63)
As I noted one of the gifts is that of teachers. The teachers of the NT era wrote in Koine Greek as that was the 'lingua franca' of the period.
#69. To: SOSO (#67)
#70. To: SOSO (#68)
#71. To: Don (#69)
No, I understand fully how people who have been "schooled" in their formative years on one version of the Bible. There are cults like the RCC Church who brainwash their captive peons whose only function is to support the leaders of the cult.
#72. To: Don (#70)
#73. To: SOSO, Don, BobCeleste, Vicomte13, Pericles, redleghunter, A Pole (#67)
Question for you though (which you probably won't answer): had I been schooled on a different version of the Scriptures would my belief in and understanding of God and what He expects from me be different? For example, suppose I didn't believe in transubstanitation to name just one difference in the teachings of the various Christian religious sects?
#74. To: TooConservative, Don, BobCeleste, Vicomte13, Pericles, redleghunter, A Pole (#73)
On the essentials, no credible version of scripture fails to outline fundamental Christian morals and duties.
#75. To: redleghunter (#66)
How many centuries did sola ecclesia keep the written Scriptures from the lay person because they were not in the local or common language? Long time.
#76. To: SOSO, TooConservative, Don, BobCeleste, Vicomte13, Pericles, redleghunter, A Pole (#74)
#77. To: BobCeleste (#76)
All this discussion about what I said and not one comment or any discussion on Mal 3:9.
#78. To: SOSO (#68)
Which ones spoke and wrote in English? German? French? Italian? Russian? Chinese? Japanese? Oh....wait...none of those languages existed at the time of the teachers to whom you refer.
#79. To: SOSO (#68)
Which ones spoke and wrote in English? German? French? Italian? Russian? Chinese? Japanese? Oh....wait...none of those languages existed at the time of the teachers to whom you refer.
#80. To: TooConservative (#73)
If you disagree, name the versions of scripture that allow theft, murder or other moral offenses. Naturally, they are all in agreement on fundamental moral issues.
#81. To: A Pole (#75)
#82. To: SOSO, Don, TooConservative (#74)
Much less true as there are self-proclaimed Christian churches that truly bastradize the essence of Christianity. For example, those Christain churches that preach and teach anti-Catholicism (and they know who they are, don't they Don?)
#83. To: BobCeleste (#76)
All this discussion about what I said and not one comment or any discussion on Mal 3:9.
#84. To: redleghunter (#81)
The West chose the language of the intelligentsia, Latin thus creating two distinct classes of church members. This was not so in the NT.
#85. To: BobCeleste (#60)
#86. To: Gatlin (#48)
Your comment is not conductive to civil discussion.
#87. To: TooConservative (#77)
You probably thought I was being facetious when I said that the only time you hear about Malachi is when the preacher or church board is after donations, especially tithes.
#88. To: redleghunter (#83)
What does Malachi 3:9 have to do with the curse of sin and death destroyed by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ?
#89. To: Vicomte13 (#85)
he literal translation of the word whose Hebrew consonants are ARWR (aror or arar), is "spat upon".
#90. To: SOSO (#23)
who other than myself shall I trust to read and understand the Bible in its original languages.
#91. To: BobCeleste (#89)
#92. To: Vicomte13 (#91)
(Edited)
m'erah is a derivative of ARWR.
#93. To: TooConservative (#77)
(Edited)
No one ever seems to mention Malachi otherwise, particularly preach an entire sermon on it.
#94. To: Vicomte13, redleghunter, GarySpFc, Don, TooConservative (#90)
I don't trust their translations, because I have had a peak at the tendentiousness of it.
#95. To: Vicomte13 (#93)
A fundamental difference between the Catholic Church and all other Christian denominations is that the other denominations all allow for divorce and remarriage, because of the hardness of hearts.
#96. To: redleghunter, Don, TooConservative, vicomte13, GarySpFc, Bob Celeste (#82)
I believe it was not until the 2nd Lateran council in which that doctrine was confirmed.
#97. To: SOSO (#96)
#98. To: Vicomte13, rtedleghunter, TooConservative, Don, GarySpFc, Bob Celeste (#93)
A fundamental difference between the Catholic Church and all other Christian denominations is that the other denominations all allow for divorce and remarriage, because of the hardness of hearts. But the Catholic Church forbids it absolutely. And THAT is, in fact, the law that came out of Jesus' mouth, corroborated by the words from God through the Angel.
#99. To: redleghunter (#97)
By self proclaimed infallible men.
#100. To: SOSO (#98)
#101. To: A Pole (#84)
#102. To: SOSO (#98)
#103. To: redleghunter (#95)
#104. To: Vicomte13 (#91)
#105. To: Vicomte13 (#102)
So, if the Catholics are doing it by subterfuge, they need to stop it.
#106. To: BobCeleste (#104)
#107. To: BobCeleste, Vicomte13 (#89)
LEXICON—a. -בּ bY- (BDB p. 88), (Hol p. 32), (TWOT 193): ‘with’ [Coh, Keil, Mer, Gla, NICOT, WBC; KJV, NASB, NRSV]. These translate literally the idiomatic Hebrew phase ‘with the curse you are cursed’. Most other commentators and versions employ more idiomatic expressions, given in (c) below. The proclitic bY- denotes here instrument [BDB, Hol].
b. מארה mY¾râ (BDB p. 76), (Hol p. 181), (TWOT 168a): ‘curse’ [all lexica, commentators, and versions], ‘malediction’ [Hol].
e. mas. pl. Qal part. of קבע qb¿ (BDB p. 867), (Hol p. 311), (TWOT 1981) or of עקב ¾qḇ (BDB p. 784), (Hol p. 281), (TWOT 1676): ‘to rob’ [Coh, Mer, Gla, NICOT, WBC; NASB, NIV, NRSV], ‘to defraud’ [JPS], ‘to cheat’ [Hol; NJB, NLT, TEV], ‘to assail insidiously’ [BDB]. Some translations employ modalities: ‘to try to cheat’ [NJB], ‘to go on defrauding’ [JPS], ‘to continue to rob’ [Gla]. All translations employ the English present or present progressive tenses except NLT, which employs the present perfect: ‘has been cheating’. BDB and Hol consider the sense of qbv to be uncertain: it is perhaps ‘to rob’, if indeed qbv is an authentic word and not just the reversal of עקב ¾qḇ ‘to cheat’.
f. גּוי gôy (BDB p. 156), (Hol p. 57), (TWOT 326e): ‘nation’ [all lexica, commentators, and versions]. Some translations employ the English demonstrative adjective ‘this’ instead of translating literally the Hebrew definite article: [Coh, Mer, WBC; KJV, NJB]; others employ ‘your’ or the phrase ‘nation of you’ [CEV, JPS, NIV, NLT, NRSV, REB]. Gôy normally refers to the peoples and ethnic groups around Israel, with emphasis upon their paganness.
g. constr. of כּל kMl (BDB p. 481), (Hol p. 156), (TWOT 985a). This noun is translated as an adjective: ‘whole’ [BDB; Coh, Keil, NICOT; CEV, JPS, KJV, NASB, NIV, NJB, NLT, NRSV, TEV], ‘all’ [WBC], ‘entire’ [Mer, Gla; REB]. The noun KOl denotes a totality of something [BDB, Hol].
QUESTION—How should בּמּארה bammY¾râ ‘with-the-curse’ be interpreted?
1. It should be interpreted instrumentally, but the identity of the curse is not certain [Mer].
2. It should be interpreted instrumentally, and the curse referred to is specified in Mal. 3:10–12: it called down bad harvests upon the Jews [Coh, Keil, Gla]. This is parallel to Mal. 2:2, which speaks of a ban on the crops [Gla].
3. In the surface str ucture of the verse’s syntax, the word functions instrumentally, but there is no specific curse in mind; rather, the expression ‘the curse’ evokes, in fact, all attributes of curses in general. Thus, bammY¾râ ‘with-the-curse’ has adverbial force and denotes ‘greatly cursed’ [NICOT].
QUESTION—How should the waw connective in ואתי wY¾Mṯ1 ‘because/yet-(it is) me’ be interpreted?
1. It should be interpreted as an adversative and translated as or similar to ‘but’ or ‘yet’ [Coh, Keil, Gla, NICOT; JPS].
2. It should be interpreted as signaling causation and translated as ‘because’ [Mer, WBC; NIV, NJB, REB, TEV]. KJV, NLT, and NRSV translate ‘for’, which appears here to be similar to ‘because’.
QUESTION—What is the use of the Niphal participle נארים n¾r1m ‘being- cursed’?
The participle here expresses an action begun in the past but with continuing effect in the present [NICOT].
QUESTION—How should הגּוי כּלּו haggôy kullô ‘the-nation all(-of)-it’ be interpreted?
Here כּל kMl is used substantively: ‘all of it (i.e., all of the nation)’. Although there are in the OT certain specialized applications of the appellation gôy to Israel, this term is generally reserved for the pagan nations [Gla]. Here, however, the reference to Israel as gôy (as in Deut. 32:28, Isa. 1:4, and Judg. 2:20) suggests that God in his anger is comparing Israel to a pagan people [NICOT] and is thus rejecting her behavior [Gla].
#108. To: Vicomte13 (#93)
There is no out: you must stay married. Marriage means that you will never have sex with anybody else against for the rest of one of your lives - the first to die - and it's indissoluble. And IF you dissolve it anyway: God HATES that. And if you remarry, you are an adulterer and you will be thrown into the flames of Hell and not enter the City of God. Jesus said that TWICE on the last page of the Scripture - TWICE. Adulterers are thrown into the fire.
#109. To: Vicomte13 (#106)
Why do you want to know?
#110. To: Vicomte13, A Pole, TooConservative (#103)
Most evangelical churches?
#111. To: SOSO (#46)
#112. To: BobCeleste (#58)
How other than by studying it in the Hebrew can you possibly know what Mal 3:9 really reads? Perhaps if you would spend more time in God's word and less in other peoples commentary you would be of interest.
#113. To: GarySpFC (#111)
#114. To: GarySpFC, BobCeleste, redleghunter, GarySpFc, TooConservative (#112)
#115. To: GarySpFC (#112)
Bob, you really have no idea how much time I spend in the Word.
Bob
#116. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc, BobCeleste (#62)
God speaks directly in the Holy Scriptures and God spoke through prophets and apostles. You will find God's Divine attributes and power in the lines of Scriptures.
But you have to pick it up and read it or listen to it.
For, "The words of the Lord are pure words; As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times." (Psalm 12:6)
And, Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar. (Proverbs 30:5-6)
So the answer to your question is, in just about any version you will find the Divine attributes and actions of God.
I first read the Bible in one of those paraphrase version Bibles which would give brother Gary and Bob fits:) However, as I matured in my walk with Christ I wanted to learn more and the literal word for word translations became important to examine. They are the closest in the English language to the original texts.
Further in answering your questions are the words of Christ when He said:
"For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” (John 18:37)
#117. To: buckeroo (#116)
So why does God cloak himself in secrecy? Why doesn't he/she just break out of the secrecy realm and revel the truths to each and every one of us?
#118. To: buckeroo (#116)
OK, I am going out and slaughter a lamb as a tithe to God. Is that what you are recommending?
#119. To: redleghunter (#110)
A Pole, how would the Orthodox handle this issue?
#120. To: SOSO (#113)
What? Are you serious? What is the object of your faith? Gaia? Government? The Great Wheel? Stop being silly.
#121. To: BobCeleste (#115)
No Gary I don't, but this I know, your post number 107 has made my point. To seriously discuss the word of God one has to get into the original languages.
Bob
#122. To: buckeroo (#116)
So why does God cloak himself in secrecy? Why doesn't he/she just break out of the secrecy realm and revel the truths to each and every one of us?
#123. To: GarySpFC (#120)
#124. To: A Pole (#119)
#125. To: redleghunter (#124)
What about an atheist who was married then divorced and years later converts to the Orthodox church? Is that person allowed to remarry another Orthodox?
#126. To: BobCeleste (#60)
but as for me I will continue to study what God said, not what others say He said. I am not smart enough to know what God meant, so I have to go with what He actually said. My mistake is thinking that others care as much as I do.
#127. To: Pinguinite (#126)
You certainly are one of great faith, but it appears your faith isn't so much in God, but in the Bible itself.
#128. To: Biff Tannen (#123)
And that confidence comes from a relationship, from knowing, the 'object', aka individual, unique being, etc.
#129. To: GarySpFC (#122)
(Edited)
buckeroo: So why does God cloak himself in secrecy? Why doesn't he/she just break out of the secrecy realm and revel the truths to each and every one of us?
GarySpFC: it's called blindness, and it's your choice.
#130. To: redleghunter (#117)
Sending His only begotten Son to save sinners through death by crucifixion and raising Him from the dead three days later is not enough for you? This is not revelation enough for you?
#131. To: redleghunter (#118)
If in fact you read the Bible you would know Jesus is the Lamb of God. He satisfied every tithe, peace offering and sin offering. He is the real deal.
#132. To: BobCeleste (#127)
The bible, my friend, is the word of God. It is the book, letter, He gave to us to get to know, understand and be better able to obey Him.
#133. To: GarySpFC (#120)
......based on the confidence one has in the object of their belief
#134. To: Pinguinite (#132)
Personally, I see little supporting evidence for this claim.
#135. To: Pinguinite (#132)
ver time have held the Bible to be spiritually special, but the same is also true for the Koran.
#136. To: A K A Stone (#134)
Up until about 2 years ago you claimed to be a christian.
#137. To: A K A Stone (#135)
Yeah. The Bible was written by a pedophile. Oh no that was the Muslims.
#138. To: buckeroo (#129)
Are you saying "God" is blind and its all my fault?
#139. To: Pinguinite, BobCeleste, GarySpFc, TooConservative (#132)
Newton
#140. To: redleghunter (#139)
Newton uses hypnosis for people to realize their spiritual life?
So is it accurate to state that Newton or one of his hypnotists are required to reach this spiritual state? Or are there others who provide the same service?
I have looked at some of the testimonials of Newton. It seems everyone had fascinating previous lives. Still looking for the testimony of someone who was a Calcutta street sweeper in the 19th century.
#141. To: GarySpFC (#138)
No! You have scales covering your eyes, which only God can remove. They are a product of your unbelief and hatred for God.
#142. To: Pinguinite (#132)
#143. To: BobCeleste, Pinguinite (#142)
Your view and my belief are at opposite ends of the spectrum. But look at it this way, If I'm wrong, what have I lost?
#144. To: SOSO (#143)
Unless of course you already know that you are going to heaven? Well, do you?
#145. To: GarySpFC (#128)
#146. To: A Pole (#125)
#147. To: BobCeleste (#144)
Yes, Yes I do. I will, upon the micro second of my life, find myself embraced by the Lord Jesus as He welcomes me into His heaven.
#148. To: BobCeleste (#144)
Unless of course you already know that you are going to heaven? Well, do you? Yes, Yes I do. I will, upon the micro second of my life, find myself embraced by the Lord Jesus as He welcomes me into His heaven.
#149. To: SOSO (#148)
#150. To: buckeroo (#141)
I have no hatred for God nor religion. But, I do not agree with your beliefs or system of beliefs. Apparently, you want me to identify with your belief system. I am only interested in your belief system, is all.
#151. To: TooConservative (#149)
Scripture admonishes us to be sure of our salvation, not to neglect spiritual duties or commit spiritual offenses.
#152. To: redleghunter (#35)
(Edited)
My point was that God never expected all believers to comprehend Greek and Hebrew. Most who claim that they can are either theologians who spent years mastering the language or people reading a lexicon put together by theologians and claiming they know the original languages.
#153. To: Biff Tannen (#146)
Would they be allowed to hold a position in the church?
#154. To: BobCeleste (#142)
Your view and my belief are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
But look at it this way, If I'm wrong, what have I lost? But, if I'm right what have you lost?
#155. To: Pinguinite (#132)
Characteristics ascribed to God like anger and jealousy are more likely the result of projecting of human traits on God rather than being an accurate description of an all knowing, all powerful, all loving God.
#156. To: Pericles (#152)
The Orthodox Church supports translating the bible into native languages from the Original Greek. See Cyrillic alphabet.
#157. To: TooConservative (#147)
I have always found the Bible ambiguous on the question of the resurrection of the dead. Whether instant resurrection or a final resurrection of all the dead, it doesn't speak plainly and uniformly to the issue. Theologians still argue it or, more wisely, just avoid the topic.
#158. To: BobCeleste, TooConservative (#157)
I have always found the Bible ambiguous on the question of the resurrection of the dead. Whether instant resurrection or a final resurrection of all the dead, it doesn't speak plainly and uniformly to the issue. Theologians still argue it or, more wisely, just avoid the topic. Even Jesus was in the tomb for 3 days before resurrection.
#159. To: SOSO (#148)
Unless of course you already know that you are going to heaven? Well, do you? Yes, Yes I do. I will, upon the micro second of my life, find myself embraced by the Lord Jesus as He welcomes me into His heaven.
#160. To: Pinguinite (#154)
There is a lot of overlap between the Newton model and Christianity. Namely, the overriding importance of love.
#161. To: Pericles (#152)
Translations of the Bible are very necessary, but are not sufficient for formulating dogmas and doctrines of the Church, which requires reference to the original languages.
#162. To: Pericles, BobCeleste (#158)
Actually, what I think I remember from theological readings of the eastern fathers is that the souls of the dead do not go either to heaven or hell but fall into a sleep state until Jesus' return when they are then judged. While this sounds like limbo - it is not. I have also read that the saints and martyrs get to bypass the trial phase and go direct to heaven after their deaths.
#163. To: TooConservative (#162)
The Christian should focus on his destination, not his arrival time.
#164. To: BobCeleste (#160)
Sorry, but I cannot agree.
#165. To: Pinguinite (#164)
#166. To: GarySpFC (#150)
Jesus is emphatic, you either love or hate Him.
#167. To: Pericles (#158)
#168. To: TooConservative (#149)
Scripture admonishes us to be sure of our salvation, not to neglect spiritual duties or commit spiritual offenses.
#169. To: BobCeleste, TooConservative (#159)
But believe this, there are only two places you can go after death, Heaven or the lake of fire, there aint no purgatory! You pick that destination while you are still alive, after you die it is to late.
#170. To: SOSO (#169)
. I am reasonably certain that there are a lot of very surprised Christians in Hell who thought they were going to Heaven, including ones that believed that they kept the faith and the word.
#171. To: A K A Stone (#170)
You seem to indicate that hell is already open for business. Is that as correct interpretation of your words?
#172. To: SOSO (#171)
Hasn't it been for quite some time?
#173. To: A K A Stone (#172)
I thought that happened after judgement day. After the dead are raised from their graves.
#174. To: A K A Stone (#172)
#175. To: SOSO (#169)
I am reasonably certain that there are a lot of very surprised Christians in Hell who thought they were going to Heaven, including ones that believed that they kept the faith and the word.
#176. To: BobCeleste (#175)
What, in Scripture, would have you believe that?
#177. To: SOSO (#174)
Repeatedly affirms that each will be rewarded immediately after death in accordance with his works and faith.
#178. To: SOSO (#176)
Try dying in a state of mortal sin. No man, save Christ, is perfect. Each of us commit mortal sins from time to time. Well....I guess I should say most of us as you apparantly have not and never will. The rest of us have to rely on repentance to remove the stain on our souls and get back into God's grace.
#179. To: SOSO (#176)
mortal sin
#180. To: SOSO (#176)
#181. To: A K A Stone (#177)
#182. To: A K A Stone (#178)
He asked a legitimate question. You dodged it.
#183. To: A K A Stone (#180)
So just wondering why call some sin mortal sin. It seems extra biblical.
#184. To: A K A Stone (#178)
#185. To: BobCeleste (#165)
Perhaps I was hasty, tell me what you understand salvation to be.
#186. To: BobCeleste (#0)
(Edited)
This is why it is so important you read the word of God, in the original Hebrew and Greek...
#187. To: SOSO (#182)
Yep. And I will dodge all such questions on this subject and most subjecta on what exactly Scripture says or doesn't say. Why do you think that there are so many sects of Christianity?
#188. To: SOSO (#181)
The thief on the cross for one example.
#189. To: SOSO (#183)
Perhaps to you it does. Who am I to try to convince you otherwise?
#190. To: Pinguinite (#185)
not exist under the Newton model
#191. To: Pinguinite (#185)
which would seem to leave any non-human, alien souls up a creek with no opportunity for their own salvation.
#192. To: A K A Stone, SOSO (#180)
So just wondering why call some sin mortal sin. It seems extra biblical.
#193. To: A K A Stone (#190)
You seem to think this Newton guy has all the answers. No one else does but him.
#194. To: A K A Stone (#191)
There are no aliens. SHow me otherwise if you can.
#195. To: A K A Stone, redleghunter, vicomte13 (#187)
We're supposed to talk about it to understand it better.
#196. To: TooConservative, A K A Stone (#192)
You can reach conclusions like this if you freely mix medieval religious literature like the Inferno with the Bible. Mix and match fun!
#197. To: TooConservative (#192)
#198. To: SOSO (#195)
Perhaps redleghunter and/or vicomte13 may be willing to engage in this discussion with you. They are much more studied on the Bible than I. I will watch with interest on how this resolves.....but betting that it will not.
#199. To: SOSO (#176)
Try dying in a state of mortal sin.
#200. To: BobCeleste (#199)
By mortal sin, I am guessing you mean, in opposition to what Jesus said in John 3:3, but where all who are Born Again are assured eternal salvation, what has that, Try dying in a state of mortal sin, have to do with our conversation?
#201. To: Vicomte13, TooConservative, A K A Stone, Bob Celeste (#197)
Read John's First Letter. He is the one who makes the distinction between sin and mortal sin, in the Bible.
#202. To: Pinguinite (#185)
So to answer your question, there is no need for salvation.
#203. To: rlk (#186)
this is why it is so important you read the word of God, in the original ...
#204. To: Pinguinite, BobCeleste, All (#185)
Souls are NOT human, and have no direct relation to human DNA.
#205. To: SOSO, A K A Stone, GarySpFc (#195)
I gave you a direct link to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. If you wish to debate the point please take it up with the Pope. I have no interest in engaging in defending the Church's teaching. You are totally free to believe what you do. I am not trying to change your mind. The debate about what Scriptures say or does not say, much less mean or does not mean, is 1,500 years old. Neither one of us has much to contribute to the resolution.
#206. To: SOSO (#204)
This reminds of that great story about a renowned atheist heart surgeon who after opening a patient's chest said to the crowd of eager interns and med students closely packed around him several rows deep "OK, show me the soul." A less than timid voice from the back row responded "OK, show me the pain."
#207. To: Vicomte13 (#197)
Isaiah 9 New International Version (NIV)
#208. To: Vicomte13 (#197)
Also, Jesus speaks of greater and lesser commandments,
#209. To: SOSO (#200)
#210. To: BobCeleste (#209)
#211. To: SOSO, BobCeleste, A K A Stone, TooConservative, GarySpFc (#176)
Try dying in a state of mortal sin. No man, save Christ, is perfect.
#212. To: redleghunter (#211)
None of the above can avoid even the passing thought of anger for another or lust for another in their heart. We are all guilty of such.
#213. To: SOSO (#212)
Easier said than done as no change of heart will eliminate the nature of lust in human men (and women). Though we may always be able to refrain from the action we will always have to deal with the thought. We need to be aware of this and recognize the thought for what it is and reject it.
#214. To: redleghunter (#211)
#215. To: Vicomte13 (#214)
There are a few more, though, that I think are important.
#216. To: redleghunter (#215)
#217. To: Vicomte13, SOSO, GarySpFc, A K A Stone (#216)
A Christian lies, or gets divorced and remarried, or lusts after a woman or another man for that matter, or kills somebody.
#218. To: redleghunter (#217)
(Edited)
I believe your answer is there.
#219. To: redleghunter, Vicomte13, GarySpFc, A K A Stone, Bob Celeste (#217)
#220. To: SOSO (#210)
Now, please answer my question. Is it your contention that all one needs to do to be guaranteed entrance into Heaven is to be born again?
#221. To: BobCeleste (#220)
It is not my contention, it is what Jesus said. Read John 3:1-21
#222. To: BobCeleste (#220)
#223. To: Vicomte13 (#218)
(Edited)
Whatever Christian commits the mortal sins and is unrepentent and does not forgive others is one of those who cried "Lord, Lord!", but Jesus will say "I never knew you, depart into the fire."
#224. To: SOSO (#219)
#225. To: SOSO (#222)
#226. To: redleghunter (#223)
#227. To: redleghunter (#224)
Is God sovereign in salvation?
#228. To: Vicomte13, GarySpFc, BobCeleste, SOSO (#226)
Whatever the Churches of Ephesus and Thyatira and the others given specific messages to repent, return to their former works or former love, or risk bright spewed out of the mouth, etc. Whatever it took to be a part of the church, they were, and we're so identified by God too: baptized, having come to God -indeed, the Real Church, as duly identified by God. But behaving badly, not doing the proper works, doing bad works, and vexing God thereby. We might call the opening three chapters of Revelaion "churched Christians behaving badly". And since God said to them he was going to judge them on their works - on what they DID - he warned then in advance to fly right and attend to the deeds they were appointed.
#229. To: SOSO (#227)
Are you confused about this?
#230. To: BobCeleste (#202)
I don't know what you are reading to come up with this stuff but this I do know, it is not the Bible, the word of God.
So, you go your way, I will stick with God's word and sometime, within the next twenty years I would think, I will find out who is correct, me or you.
#231. To: SOSO (#221)
Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.”
#232. To: SOSO (#222)
Further:
#233. To: Pinguinite (#230)
1. You are convinced the Bible is the Word of God and you are not open to other possibilities.
#234. To: Pinguinite (#193)
The love works better, there's no conflict with science
#235. To: BobCeleste (#233)
Oh how I wish coming back were possible, but Jesus covers that in LUke 16, verses 27-31
#236. To: A K A Stone (#234)
I think people making up stuff about past lives is not science.
#237. To: Pinguinite (#235)
#238. To: BobCeleste (#231)
Now read Luke 23:39-43.
#239. To: BobCeleste (#232)
#240. To: SOSO (#98)
#241. To: Don (#240)
Does God permit divorce for adultery?
#242. To: SOSO (#241)
#243. To: Don (#242)
Has God ever divorced His People?
#244. To: Don, ALL (#240)
Does God permit divorce for adultery?
Because Jesus specifically mentions divorce being permissible on the ground of adultery (Matt. 5:32; 19:9), and because He also specifically says that He did not come to contradict or annul the least part of the law (5:18–19), it seems evident that sometime during Israel’s history divorce was allowed to take the place of execution as legitimate penalty for adultery. No Old Testament passage specifically authorizes divorce, but that does not mean God did not give specific revelation about it. Based on His own recognition and regulation of divorce, and His divorce of Israel and Judah (Jer. 3:8), we can assume that divine instructions for divorce had been given orally or by written revelation not preserved in Scripture. God divorced Israel and Judah for spiritual adultery rather than put them to death. Also Joseph, a righteous man, was prepared to divorce Mary rather than stone her for her presumed adultery (Matt. 1:19).
Why did God allow divorce to replace the death penalty? The answer may be that Israel had so completely immersed herself in immorality that there was not sufficient desire for righteousness left in the people to carry out executions for that offense. Ultimately, God in His mercy chose Himself not to enforce the death penalty. That is consistent with the divine nature revealed in Jesus, who challenged the Pharisees who were about to stone a woman for adultery and then forgave her Himself (John 8:7). Apart from the death penalty, divorce became the divine alternative, tolerated only because of the hardness of the human heart, as Jesus states in Matthew 19:8.
Divorce was never commanded, even for adultery. Otherwise God would have given His notice of divorce to Israel and Judah long before He did. A legitimate bill of divorce was allowable for adultery, but it was never commanded or required. It was a last resort-to be used only when unrepentant immorality had exhausted the patience of the innocent spouse, and the guilty one would not be restored. If God permitted divorce rather than death as a merciful concession to man’s sinfulness, why would He not also permit remarriage, since remarriage would be perfectly allowable under the original law of death for the adulterer? After all, the purpose of divorce was to show mercy to the guilty party, not to sentence the innocent party to a life of loneliness and misery.
#245. To: GarySpFC (#244)
(Edited)
#246. To: GarySpFC (#244)
(Edited)
#247. To: Don (#245)
So, the answer is yes for both questions. SOSO, did you catch this?
#248. To: GarySpFC, Don, ALL (#244)
Does God permit divorce for adultery?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]