I came across this verse in one of the newsletters that Gary sends out via email, and I was wondering if someone could clarify it for me. What does it mean by "sin which does not lead to death" and vice versa? Also, does this have any relationship to UR. By the way, I'm not sure what translation this is from (see below):
16If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that. 17All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death. (1 Jno 5:16,17)
I think all sins can be forgiven but the one sin that Jesus said blasphemy against the holy ghost shall not be forgiven. If blasphemy is pretending to be God or Jesus, then I assume blasphemy against the spirit is pretending to be the holy ghost.
Under the law of Moses for Israel there were certain sins for which the penalty was to be taken outside the city and be stoned to death by the leaders and elders of the city. Other wrong things were punished by 40 stripes minus 1. If someone stole something they were to pay 2 fold in return, unless it was something used to make a living. Then the penalty was 4 fold.
Quote from: thinktank on June 21, 2010, 10:27:22 PM
I think all sins can be forgiven but the one sin that Jesus said blasphemy against the holy ghost shall not be forgiven. If blasphemy is pretending to be God or Jesus, then I assume blasphemy against the spirit is pretending to be the holy ghost.
I'm not sure where you are drawing a connection to the unforgivable sin because it says that all sin is punishable by death. Also, it says they won't be forgiven in this age or the age to come...not forever.
Another thought occured to me and that is that the sin unto death, sin leading into death are fornication sins.
Whos temple ye are, and if you defile Gods temple will he not destroy it?
All sins are outside the body but he that fornicates, sins against God.
There are verses similar to that
Quote from: reFORMer on June 21, 2010, 10:28:56 PM
Under the law of Moses for Israel there were certain sins for which the penalty was to be taken outside the city and be stoned to death by the leaders and elders of the city. Other wrong things were punished by 40 stripes minus 1. If someone stole something they were to pay 2 fold in return, unless it was something used to make a living. Then the penalty was 4 fold.
But this is from the new testament. Also, why shouldn't you pray for someone just bc they are going to die?
One option to consider, TM Main Page, Bible Threatenings Explained; having to do with legal issues/the law;
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/BibleThreateningsExplained.html#10
"The sin unto death" has often been supposed to be the "unpardonable sin," so called, as though any sin could be unpardonable by a God whose mercy is without limit and without end. The apostle was merely alluding to the various offences under the Jewish law, some of which were unto death, or capital offences, while others were less heinous. The latter were to be interceded for, but the former were to be regarded as beyond intercession. On this passage Bishop Horne correctly says:
"The Talmudical writers have distinguished the capital punishments of the Jews into lesser deaths and such as were more grievous; but there is no warrant in the Scriptures for these distinctions, neither are these writers agreed among themselves what particular punishments are to be referred to these two heads. A capital crime generally was termed a sin of death (deut. xvi:6); or a sin worthy of death (Deut. xxi:22), which mode of expression is adopted, or rather imitated, by the apostle John, who distinguishes between a sin unto death, and a sin not unto death (I John v:16). Criminals, or those who were deemed worthy of capital punishment, were called sons or men of death (I Sam. xv:32; xxxi:16; II Sam. xix:28, marginal reading), just as he who had incurred the punishment of scourging was designated a son of stripes (Deut.xxv:16; I Kings xiv:6). A similar phraseology was adopted by Jesus Christ, when he said to the Jews: "Ye shall die in your sins" (John viii:21-24). Eleven different sorts of capital punishment are mentioned in the sacred writings."
Quote from: IceMan84 on June 21, 2010, 10:48:58 PM
Quote from: reFORMer on June 21, 2010, 10:28:56 PM
Under the law of Moses for Israel there were certain sins for which the penalty was to be taken outside the city and be stoned to death by the leaders and elders of the city. Other wrong things were punished by 40 stripes minus 1. If someone stole something they were to pay 2 fold in return, unless it was something used to make a living. Then the penalty was 4 fold.
But this is from the new testament. Also, why shouldn't you pray for someone just bc they are going to die?
I think it could possibly mean that the sin unto death are those who have the spirit of the antichrist, those that deny Jesus Christ come in the flesh. Notice most of the epistle talks about this truth, now if you turn to the second epistle, you will find the same message, this time John say do not wish him God speed, for if you do you will become partaker of his evil deeds. So I think John is saying don't pray or perhaps he means don't bless those who deny Jesus Christ has come in the flesh.
Quote from: jabcat on June 21, 2010, 10:53:59 PM
One option to consider, TM Main Page, Bible Threatenings Explained; having to do with legal issues/the law;
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/BibleThreateningsExplained.html#10
"The sin unto death" has often been supposed to be the "unpardonable sin," so called, as though any sin could be unpardonable by a God whose mercy is without limit and without end. The apostle was merely alluding to the various offences under the Jewish law, some of which were unto death, or capital offences, while others were less heinous. The latter were to be interceded for, but the former were to be regarded as beyond intercession. On this passage Bishop Horne correctly says:
"The Talmudical writers have distinguished the capital punishments of the Jews into lesser deaths and such as were more grievous; but there is no warrant in the Scriptures for these distinctions, neither are these writers agreed among themselves what particular punishments are to be referred to these two heads. A capital crime generally was termed a sin of death (deut. xvi:6); or a sin worthy of death (Deut. xxi:22), which mode of expression is adopted, or rather imitated, by the apostle John, who distinguishes between a sin unto death, and a sin not unto death (I John v:16). Criminals, or those who were deemed worthy of capital punishment, were called sons or men of death (I Sam. xv:32; xxxi:16; II Sam. xix:28, marginal reading), just as he who had incurred the punishment of scourging was designated a son of stripes (Deut.xxv:16; I Kings xiv:6). A similar phraseology was adopted by Jesus Christ, when he said to the Jews: "Ye shall die in your sins" (John viii:21-24). Eleven different sorts of capital punishment are mentioned in the sacred writings."
But the holy ghost is a spirit, how can you assign man made laws to prevent sinning against the spirit of God. Maybe it's possible with the son for he was physical as Jesus of Nazareth, but even then do you think the Pharises cared about Jesus? they made every effort to trip him up and condem him under the law
Blasphemy against the son shall be forgiven, but he that blasphemes against the holy ghost shall not be forgiven, not in this life or the world to come
Quote from: jabcat on June 21, 2010, 10:53:59 PM
One option to consider, TM Main Page, Bible Threatenings Explained; having to do with legal issues/the law;
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/BibleThreateningsExplained.html#10
"The sin unto death" has often been supposed to be the "unpardonable sin," so called, as though any sin could be unpardonable by a God whose mercy is without limit and without end. The apostle was merely alluding to the various offences under the Jewish law, some of which were unto death, or capital offences, while others were less heinous. The latter were to be interceded for, but the former were to be regarded as beyond intercession. On this passage Bishop Horne correctly says:
"The Talmudical writers have distinguished the capital punishments of the Jews into lesser deaths and such as were more grievous; but there is no warrant in the Scriptures for these distinctions, neither are these writers agreed among themselves what particular punishments are to be referred to these two heads. A capital crime generally was termed a sin of death (deut. xvi:6); or a sin worthy of death (Deut. xxi:22), which mode of expression is adopted, or rather imitated, by the apostle John, who distinguishes between a sin unto death, and a sin not unto death (I John v:16). Criminals, or those who were deemed worthy of capital punishment, were called sons or men of death (I Sam. xv:32; xxxi:16; II Sam. xix:28, marginal reading), just as he who had incurred the punishment of scourging was designated a son of stripes (Deut.xxv:16; I Kings xiv:6). A similar phraseology was adopted by Jesus Christ, when he said to the Jews: "Ye shall die in your sins" (John viii:21-24). Eleven different sorts of capital punishment are mentioned in the sacred writings."
Thanks, that link is very helpful
thinktank, I believe the correct translation is 'age to come', as in the next age. Some even say that's referencing this current age, because Jesus was talking pre-cross at the time.
You're welcome iceman, glad it helped.
From the same link on TM Homepage;
THE BLASPHEMY OF THE HOLY GHOST
The passages that relate to this subject are in Matt. xii:31,32:"Wherefore I say unto you, all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor the world to come." Mark iii:28-30: "all sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme; but he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation; because they said, he hath an unclean spirit." Luke xii:10: "And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven."
What is this sin? It consisted in ascribing the power by which Jesus wrought his wonderful works to Satan. He was accused of being aided by Beelzebub, of having an unclean spirit, and of working his miracles by the power of an evil spirit. From this it follows that but very few persons are exposed to the doom here threatened, inasmuch as very few have ever committed this sin.
But if we take this language literally, we must hold that all other sinners, of every character and kind, will be saved, because just as positively as the Scripture declares that these blasphemeies shall never be forgiven, it declares that all others literally and absolutely shall be forgiven. "Verily I say unto you all sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme." The sin against the Holy Ghost is the only sin that shall not be pardoned. All other sinners. thieves, liars, murderers, all except that very small number that accused Jesus of receiveing diabolical help, shall be forgiven. Does not this show that the terms of the passage are not to be taken literally? Does it not appear that men must either believe that all kinds of sinners, and all of them, except this small number, must be pardoned, or else that the rest of the language is not to be taken literally? It is asserted just as positively that all others shall be, as that these few shall not be forgiven.
If the "shall" and "shall not" are to be understood literally, then the number of the damned is entirely limited to the very few who actually saw Christ's miracles, and ascribed them to Beelzebub. No one since, and no one hereafter can be damned, for all other sin but that shall be forgiven. This saves all mankind except those few persons who said, "he [Christ] hath an unclean spirit." This reduces hell to a mere mote in the universe, and excludes all now living, or who hereafter shall live, from any exposure to it.
What does that language mean? Campbell says this is "a noted Hebraism;" that is, a term of speech common among the Jews, to teach that one event is more likely to occur than another, and not that either shall or shall not occur.
Dr. Newcome says: "It is a common figure of speech in the oriental languages, to say of two things that the one shall be and the other shall not be, when the meaning is that the one shall happen sooner, or more easily, than the other."
Grotius and Bishop Newton are to the same purport. For illustration, when Jesus says, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away," he does not mean that heaven and earth shall actually pass away, but they will sooner fail than his words. It is a strong method of asserting that his words shall be fulfilled. This is common in the Bible.
Prov. viii:10: "Receive my instruction, and not silver; and knowledge rather than choice gold." Matt. vi::19,20: "Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal." Luke xiv:12,13:"Then said he also to him that bade him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbors; lest they also bid thee again, and a recompense be made thee. But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind." John vi:27: "Labor not for the meat that perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you; for him hath God the father sealed."
The plain meaning is, all other sins are more easily forgiven than this. The words "never," "neither in this world nor the world to come," do not change the sense, but only strengthen and intensify the Savior's meaning that this is of all sins the worst.
The popular impression that 'the world to come" here means the life after death is an error.
Dr. Clarke well observes: "Though I follow the common translation, yet I am fully satisfied the meaning of the words is, neither in this dispensation, viz., the Jewish, nor in that which is to come. Olam ha-bo, the world to come, is a constant phrase for the times of the Messiah, in the Jewish writers."
Wakefield, Rosenmuller and Hammond also give the same opinion. And it should be added that the word "never" is no part of the original Greek. That is, not under either dispensation, or age (aion--mistranslated "world"), will this inexcusable sin be less than the greatest of transgressions.
Bishop Pearce declares: "This is a strong way of expressing how difficult a thing it was for such a sinner to obtain pardon. The Greek word aion seems to signifyage here, as it often does in the New Testament (see Matt. xiii:40; xxiv 3; Col. i:26; Eph. iii:5,21) and according to its most proper signification. If this be so, then 'this age' means the Jewish one, and 'the age to come' (see Hebrews vi:5 and Eph. ii:7) means that under the Christian dispensation. The end of the world took place during the time of the apostles. 'Now once in the end of the world hath he [Christ] appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.'--Heb. ix:26. 'Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples; and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.' I Cor. x:11."
Gilpin observes, "Nobody can suppose, considering the whole tenor of Christianity, that there can be any sin which, on repentance, may not be forgiven. This, therefore, seems only a strong way of expressing the difficuolty of such repentance, and the impossibility of forgiveness without it. Such an expression occurs Matt. xix:24: 'It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter heaven;' that is, it is very difficult. That the Pharisees were not beyond the reach of forgiveness, on their repentance, seems to be plain from verse 41, where the repentance of Nineveh is held out to them for an example."
Clarke says: "Any penitent may find mercy through Christ Jesus; for through him any kind of sin may be forgiven to man, except the sin against the Holy Ghost, which I have proved no man can now commit."--Clarke on I. John v:16. And again: "No man who believes the divine mission of Jesus Christ, ever can commit this sin."
These are all "Orthodox" commentators, whose opinions were certainly not formed by prejudice in favor of our views of the passages in question. They agree with what seems the meaning of the Savior, that this sin is of all others most inexcusable. But that any sin is literally unpardonable, by a God and Father of infinite love and mercy, is nowhere expressed or implied in the Bible.
Mark's language "hath never forgiveness" should read "has not forgiveness to the age," but is liable to aionian judgment; that is, to an indefinite penalty. See the word aionios, explained in subsequent pages of this book.
Quote from: jabcat on June 22, 2010, 01:13:06 AM
From the same link on TM Homepage;
THE BLASPHEMY OF THE HOLY GHOST
The passages that relate to this subject are in Matt. xii:31,32:"Wherefore I say unto you, all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor the world to come." Mark iii:28-30: "all sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme; but he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation; because they said, he hath an unclean spirit." Luke xii:10: "And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven."
What is this sin? It consisted in ascribing the power by which Jesus wrought his wonderful works to Satan. He was accused of being aided by Beelzebub, of having an unclean spirit, and of working his miracles by the power of an evil spirit. From this it follows that but very few persons are exposed to the doom here threatened, inasmuch as very few have ever committed this sin.
Thank you, you took the words out of my mouth and expressed them better than what I would have done, but I did find a problem with my original saying, which I deleted, for I didn't want to scare anyone, I will tell you jabcat, by pm if you want to hear it?
Quote from: IceMan84 on June 21, 2010, 10:13:13 PM
I came across this verse in one of the newsletters that Gary sends out via email, and I was wondering if someone could clarify it for me. What does it mean by "sin which does not lead to death" and vice versa? Also, does this have any relationship to UR. By the way, I'm not sure what translation this is from (see below):
16If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that. 17All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death. (1 Jno 5:16,17)
Ananias and Sapphira's sin was a sin unto death.
Quote from: Tony N on June 22, 2010, 04:05:52 AM
Quote from: IceMan84 on June 21, 2010, 10:13:13 PM
I came across this verse in one of the newsletters that Gary sends out via email, and I was wondering if someone could clarify it for me. What does it mean by "sin which does not lead to death" and vice versa? Also, does this have any relationship to UR. By the way, I'm not sure what translation this is from (see below):
16If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that. 17All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death. (1 Jno 5:16,17)
Ananias and Sapphira's sin was a sin unto death.
I have a hard time with this scriptute. So do you think God literally struck these people dead for lying? People still lie about money all the time yet they don't fall over dead.
Quote from: IceMan84 on June 22, 2010, 04:39:49 AM
Quote from: Tony N on June 22, 2010, 04:05:52 AM
Quote from: IceMan84 on June 21, 2010, 10:13:13 PM
I came across this verse in one of the newsletters that Gary sends out via email, and I was wondering if someone could clarify it for me. What does it mean by "sin which does not lead to death" and vice versa? Also, does this have any relationship to UR. By the way, I'm not sure what translation this is from (see below):
16If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin which does not lead to death, he will ask, and He will give him life for those who commit sin not leading to death. There is sin leading to death. I do not say that he should pray about that. 17All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death. (1 Jno 5:16,17)
Ananias and Sapphira's sin was a sin unto death.
I have a hard time with this scriptute. So do you think God literally struck these people dead for lying? People still lie about money all the time yet they don't fall over dead.
That was during the era when the kingdom powers were in full force. Today they are not. Look also at the Corinthians. This was during the era when the kingdom powers were still in full force:
1Co 11:29-32 For he who is eating and drinking unworthily is eating and drinking judgment to himself, not discriminating the body of the Lord." (30) Therefore
many among you are infirm and ailing, and a considerable number are reposing." (31) For if we adjudicated ourselves, we would not be judged." (32) Yet, being judged, we are being disciplined by the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world."
Some sinned unto death (reposing).
Now, with the kingdom of Israel set aside and undiluted grace is for the nations we are not under such severe judgments. At least I don't think so. But I still think "the grace of God trains/hits/disciplines us"
Tit 2:11-12 For the saving grace of God made its advent to all humanity, (12)
training us that, disowning irreverence and worldly desires, we should be living sanely and justly and devoutly in the current eon,
The "training us" is the same as "hitting us."
I guess I just struggle with what appears to be inconsistency in terms of punishment. There are stories of people who commit horrible acts such as murder, yet god keeps giving them more chances. Then you have accounts such as this where people are killed for lying, which is something every human is guilty of. One other thing...I noticed that it does not specifically say that god killed them. Is it possible that they could have died of natural causes, such as a heart attack, or perhaps taken their own life?
I think its because that church was flooded with Gods power and because they lied to the holy ghost, the holyness overwhelmed them and killed them, similar to how the ark of the covenant, if approached unworthily would kill, because of the holyness of God.
Quote from: IceMan84 on June 22, 2010, 04:48:05 PM
I guess I just struggle with what appears to be inconsistency in terms of punishment. There are stories of people who commit horrible acts such as murder, yet god keeps giving them more chances. Then you have accounts such as this where people are killed for lying, which is something every human is guilty of. One other thing...I noticed that it does not specifically say that god killed them. Is it possible that they could have died of natural causes, such as a heart attack, or perhaps taken their own life?
Look at the bolded part of the verses below:
1Co 11:29-32 For he who is eating and drinking unworthily is eating and drinking judgment to himself, not discriminating the body of the Lord." (30) Therefore many among you are infirm and ailing, and a considerable number are reposing." (31) For if we adjudicated ourselves, we would not be judged." (32)
Yet, being judged, we are being disciplined by the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world."
Being disciplined by the Lord in relation to "a considerable number are reposing" does not sound like they committed suicide.
1Jn 5:16 If any man see his brother sinning a sin not unto death, [did not commit murder ?]
he shall ask, and God will give him life for them that sin not unto death. [God will forgive;it was asked of the man]
There is a sin unto death: [murder committed ?]
not concerning this do I say that he should make request.
1Jn 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
Now that, I do not understand.....
Rom 6:23 for the wages of the sin is death
Rom 3:23 for all did sin, and are come short of the glory of God--
Try this on . . .sin that leads to death . .to me is an inward choice in an individual who has known light but has totally given themselves over to darkness. This isn't a stumble, this is a life-style choice where they're no longer listening or caring what anyone else says . . .now once again, this can also lead you into "Define death" issue which, as I've always said, simply means a separation which in this case means God allows them to wander away from his presence, away from his covering and calling even.
In the end, we have two trainers or teachers. One is the Father, the other is the consequences we experience from our choices. The question is then, which teacher would you prefer? Love of the Father or separation from him? Either way, this death is not eternal, it's death while living in this realm of death. Twice dead.
Romans 1
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
Well, there cannot be a sin of no forgiveness or as some call it an unpardonable sin, why? Well if or should there be one, then these two, and many other verses are in error and without value.
1Ti 2:3 for this is right and acceptable before God our Saviour,
1Ti 2:4 who doth will all men to be saved, and to come to the full knowledge of the truth;
And 1Co 15:22 for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive,
Eby, Prinzing, Smith, and others have wonderful teachings on this very subject.
I'm not sure what the overall message is about the unpardonable sin, but I do know that God is saying something like this
"NO ONE -- MESSESS - WITH -- THE GHOST--"
"COMPRENDE"
:thumbsup:
Not what you said. No. :sigh:
[quote author=thinktank link=topic=8280.msg97716#msg97716 date=127715096
Blasphemy against the son shall be forgiven, but he that blasphemes against the holy ghost shall not be forgiven, not in this life or the world to come
[/quote]
You mean this?
I quote this from the bible, look I know I sound like Jesus sometimes :laughing7: but I didn't write the bible, with further research we can look into this further and find out the truth. There is another verse that speaks similarity that says is in "danger of damnation" that says to me that there is room for forgiveness if one seeks it from him that forgives. I do not wish to lighten this sin for I respect God so we cannot treat this sin as something casual and that is why I quote that verse, more study is needed about this topic and even our belief in universal salvation cannot blind us to the truths of this passage or we could be in danger of tripping up our fellows and what excuse will we give God? Um but I thought you'd save everyone?
"Did I not state in my word..........."
I will say the time, to whom and perspective.
Still, if you believe there is a sin, or err, that cannot or will not be forgiven, then I say you do nor accept the Word of God in the Bible to be true.
Either He WILL save all or.........He will not save all. Its your faith, your hope, your understanding. Peace and Love Through Jesus
Quote from: thinktank on July 02, 2010, 03:57:34 AMI quote this from the bible, look I know I sound like Jesus sometimes :laughing7:
Nah, I think Jesus sounded like a nice guy :LH:
Okay . . . the underlying argument here is, if we embrace grace, then how can there be someone do something that grace can't cover?
I happen to be of the notion that the cross paid for ALL sin . . .including blaspheme . . .so, "if" the cross is truly that powerful . . .then perhaps our INTERPRETATION" of that passage is still through the eyes of our reason and not through the eyes of the Father?
Mark 3:29
But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.
What if . . .this is not saying the one blaspheming against the Holy Ghost will never be forgiven, but instead, what if it's saying, the person who chooses to blaspheme against the Holy Ghost has no forgiveness in him, toward himself and others???
It's not about "being" forgiven, it's about having the ability to forgive. Does this fit better?
A more accurate translation helps relieve the attempt to explain an erroneous translation.
Mark 328-30, Concordant Literal Translation...
28 "Verily, I am saying to you that all shall be pardoned the sons of mankind, the penalties of the sins and the blasphemies, whatsoever they should be blaspheming,
29 yet whoever should be blaspheming against the holy spirit is having no pardon for the eon, but is liable to the eonian penalty for the sin" --
30 for they said, "An unclean spirit has he."
I would like to add, as I have before, the popular idea of any and all sin being infinite, hence, requiring infinite retribution, is beyond ridiculous. I am truly amazed at how ubiquitous this unscriptural idea is.
Also, there is not only unforgiven or forgiven sin. The other category is paying for your sin. Under the law certain retributions were required. When those were met, the sin was paid for. That made it over and done with.
ReFORMer, your last post seems to be contradicting itself in the last two statements you wrote out. The first seems to be against the idea that ALL sin has been dealt with and the last statement you wrote eludes to the sinner becoming clean through following the works of the law . . .which Christ fulfilled .. . which then sort of reverts back to the idea that all sin has been dealt with through the finished works of the cross . . .
Hi Nathan. I'm not James reFORMer, I'm James the Lesser :happygrin:, but here's what I got out of the post.
I thought he was addressing sins before the cross, in the age of Law, before the current "age of grace", as well as sins after the cross. 2 different ages, 2 different requirements. :2c: Maybe I'm wrong, but that's the best I can figure.
James/reF?
Quote from: jabcat on July 13, 2010, 07:41:06 AM
Hi Nathan. I'm not James reFORMer, I'm James the Lesser
Lesser = something that quenches (thrist)
KJVRev 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
He has returned! :bgdance:
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 13, 2010, 09:24:07 AM
Quote from: jabcat on July 13, 2010, 07:41:06 AM
Hi Nathan. I'm not James reFORMer, I'm James the Lesser
Lesser = something that quenches (thrist)
KJVRev 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
He has returned! :bgdance:
Trust me the world would be a much better place if he has already returned.
Remember his words in the gospel
Where I go you cannot go, for I go unto the father but I give you another, the conforter, he will lead you into all truth.
The water we drink is the comforter the holy ghost, but Jesus is in heaven with his father.
Hu? So Jabcat is not the lesser? :mshock:
I guess the question is, "lesser than what or who?". :laughing7: I let James (reFORMer) be the "greater", and I take "the lesser". But I don't think either one of us are these guys; :mblush:
St. James the Lesser
St. Paul tells us he was a witness of the Resurrection of Christ; he is also a "pillar" of the Church, whom St. Paul consulted about the Gospel. www.apostles.com
Saint James (James the Great)
Together with his brother Saint John, Saint James was among the first disciples called by Jesus (Matt. 4:21). These sons of Zebedee, called the Boanerges ("Sons of Thunder"), joined the brothers Peter and Andrew, also fishermen by trade, in a close inner circle around Jesus. James, Peter, and John were the only disciples present, for example, at the Transfiguration (Luke 9) and near Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. James was martyred under Herod Agrippa I (Acts 12). According to legend, his bones were taken to Spain, and his shrine at Santiago de Compostela was one of the most important pilgrimage centers in the Middle Ages. Feast day: Apr. 30 (Eastern); July 25 (Western).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saint James (James the Lesser or James the Less or James the Little)
General Information
Saint James the Lesser was the Apostle James, son of Alphaeus and disciple of Jesus (Mark 3:18). His mother, Mary, was one of the women at the crucifixion and at the tomb (Matt. 10:3; 27:56, Mark 15:40; 16:1; Acts 1:13). This James is sometimes identified with James the "brother of Jesus," although this and other identifications are unproven. Feast day: Oct. 9 (Eastern); May 3 (Western, since 1969).
Kind of interesting info though :bigGrin:
Quote from: jabcat on July 13, 2010, 09:21:24 PM
I guess the question is, "lesser than what or who?". :laughing7: I let James (reFORMer) be the "greater", and I take "the lesser". But I don't think either one of us are these guys; :mblush:
I must have completly misunderstood you... :winkgrin:
English:
quench thirst = Dutch: Dorst
lessenLessen --> Lesser=something that quenches thirst.
Something like water.
"I'm James the
Lesser" --> "I'm James the quencher-of-thirst" --> "I'm James the water"
BBEJoh 4:14 But whoever takes the water I give him will never be in need of drink again; for the water I give him will become in him a fountain of eternal life
:friendstu: :beerburp:
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 13, 2010, 09:42:08 PM
Quote from: jabcat on July 13, 2010, 09:21:24 PM
I guess the question is, "lesser than what or who?". :laughing7: I let James (reFORMer) be the "greater", and I take "the lesser". But I don't think either one of us are these guys; :mblush:
I must have completly misunderstood you... :winkgrin:
English: quench thirst = Dutch: Dorst lessen
Lessen --> Lesser=something that quenches thirst.
Something like water.
"I'm James the Lesser" --> "I'm James the quencher-of-thirst" --> "I'm James the water"
BBEJoh 4:14 But whoever takes the water I give him will never be in need of drink again; for the water I give him will become in him a fountain of eternal life
:friendstu: :beerburp:
I seriously thought about asking you if you were sure you weren't having a "Dutch language moment" :dsunny:. (As far as Dutch, I'd be totally lost. No Dukes of Hazzard in Dutch here for me to learn the language).
Quote from: thinktank on July 13, 2010, 08:08:24 PM
Jesus is in heaven with his father.
If the father is SPIRIT, then where or what is heaven?
And who is the Holy Spirit, or comforter?
Just looking for clarification, not a geographical location.
peacemaker
Quote from: thinktank on July 13, 2010, 08:08:24 PM
Trust me the world would be a much better place if he has already returned.
www.codex-sinaiticus.net/en/manuscript.aspx?book=55&chapter=4&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
1 John 4:
2 In this know you the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ
is come in the flesh is of God,
3 and
every spirit that confesses not Jesus is not of God; and this
is the spirit of antichrist, of which you have heard that it comes, and now is in the world already.
Quote from: peacemaker on July 14, 2010, 03:30:38 AM
Quote from: thinktank on July 13, 2010, 08:08:24 PM
Jesus is in heaven with his father.
If the father is SPIRIT, then where or what is heaven?
And who is the Holy Spirit, or comforter?
Just looking for clarification, not a geographical location.
peacemaker
Hello, I'm not sure what you mean but I'll say this.
The Father is ancient of days who sits upon the throne in heaven, no one has seen the father except the son. I would not confine the father to just one location though for he is God, but scripture points to a commanding figure who sits upon the throne in the book of revelation.
The holy spirit is the one who Jesus sent into the Earth, probably the most mysterious out them all, for he does the work of God, a lot of Christians think he's just the power of God, but I think he is one of the God's with his own personality, as a Christian he will be our companion for eternity and gives us eternal life.
Quote from: thinktank on July 14, 2010, 07:42:14 PMThe holy spirit is the one who Jesus sent into the Earth, probably the most mysterious out them all, for he does the work of God, a lot of Christians think he's just the power of God, but I think he is one of the God's with his own personality, as a Christian he will be our companion for eternity and gives us eternal life.
Then why is the HS never called "he" (in Greek)?
QuoteThe Father is ancient of days who sits upon the throne in heaven, no one has seen the father except the son. I would not confine the father to just one location though for he is God, but scripture points to a commanding figure who sits upon the throne in the book of revelation.
a] Why did the HS never see Father?
b] Is Father really in control?
John 3:35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given
all things into his hand.
John 17:2 As thou hast
given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
The way I read it Father is the highest authority
but since creation the Son did the actual ruling.
Until:
KJV1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 14, 2010, 08:09:56 PM
Quote from: thinktank on July 14, 2010, 07:42:14 PMThe holy spirit is the one who Jesus sent into the Earth, probably the most mysterious out them all, for he does the work of God, a lot of Christians think he's just the power of God, but I think he is one of the God's with his own personality, as a Christian he will be our companion for eternity and gives us eternal life.
Then why is the HS never called "he" (in Greek)?
QuoteThe Father is ancient of days who sits upon the throne in heaven, no one has seen the father except the son. I would not confine the father to just one location though for he is God, but scripture points to a commanding figure who sits upon the throne in the book of revelation.
a] Why did the HS never see Father?
b] Is Father really in control?
John 3:35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.
John 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
The way I read it Father is the highest authority but since creation the Son did the actual ruling.
Until:
KJV1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
Haven't checked the greek, but the kjv says "he shall lead you into all truth,
Many Christians can hear the holy spirit talk to them and wisper prophecy.
a] Why did the HS never see Father?
No evidence that he didn't.
b] Is Father really in control?
John 3:35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given
all things into his hand.
John 17:2 As thou hast
given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
I agree, Jesus said my father is greater than all.
QuoteHaven't checked the greek, but the kjv says "he shall lead you into all truth,
HS is called 5 times "it" in that verse.
KJVJoh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
I think you will like
THIS (http://www.scripture4all.org/) free program.
The verse in that program looks like
THIS (http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh16.pdf)
Very literal translation.
Quote from: thinktank on July 14, 2010, 08:23:38 PMb] Is Father really in control?
John 3:35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.
John 17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
I agree, Jesus said my father is greater than all.
I didn't mean that.
If Father has given all control to Jesus then why is Father "the commanding figure" in Revelation?
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 14, 2010, 08:37:00 PM
QuoteHaven't checked the greek, but the kjv says "he shall lead you into all truth,
HS is called 5 times "it" in that verse.
KJVJoh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
I think you will like THIS (http://www.scripture4all.org/) free program.
The verse in that program looks like THIS (http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh16.pdf)
Very literal translation.
I'm not convinced, "it" sounds clumsy, I don't like disrespecting the holy ghost by calling him "it", I'd rather call him "he" and believe in John's epistle
There are three that testify in heaven, the father, son and holy ghost, and these three are one.
Batizing them in the name of the son and holy ghost was a regular practice.
QuoteI'm not convinced, "it" sounds clumsy, I don't like disrespecting the holy ghost by calling him "it", I'd rather call him "he"
Sorry to say TT but I think that's called "doctrine of man".
It sounds funny because you have been thaught otherwise.
Why disrespect if it's inspired that way?
It's also disrespect saying God did a lousy job with calling "it" clumsy.
Note#1: Honest mistakes are no disrespect IMO.
Note#2: I'm not 100% sure translations I like/trust really write "it"
Note to Jabcat: Check John 16:13 in CB
Quoteand believe in John's epistle
Inspired John wrote "it".
QuoteThere are three that testify in heaven, the father, son and holy ghost, and these three are one.
Batizing them in the name of the son and holy ghost was a regular practice.
And? That tells us nothing about he or it.
Just my thought....
So you think there are only 2 gods Father and son?
So what is the holy ghost to you, if he's not a person?
I try to think nothing and figure things out with an open mind.
Personally I don't care if HS is he, she, it or all at the same time.
It's just is that Greek writes "it".
Should I simply ignore that fact?
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 14, 2010, 10:15:52 PM
I try to think nothing and figure things out with an open mind.
Personally I don't care if HS is he, she, it or all at the same time.
It's just is that Greek writes "it".
Should I simply ignore that fact?
No, God bless, let the holy ghost lead us into truth.
:cloud9: AMEN to that.... :thumbsup: I don't care what sacred cow has to bite the dust to come into all truth, I say, fire up the BarB..... :winkgrin: :2thumbs:
Quote from: Beloved Servant on July 14, 2010, 04:50:27 AM
Quote from: thinktank on July 13, 2010, 08:08:24 PM
Trust me the world would be a much better place if he has already returned.
www.codex-sinaiticus.net/en/manuscript.aspx?book=55&chapter=4&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
1 John 4:
2 In this know you the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God,
3 and every spirit that confesses not Jesus is not of God; and this is the spirit of antichrist, of which you have heard that it comes, and now is in the world already.
What the Scripture is saying is plain.
That Jesus Christ is come;
present tense.
Not that He has come in the past or that He will again in the future. That is the spirit of antichrist!
CHRIST
IS COME. HERE AND NOW.
Quote from: thinktank on July 14, 2010, 07:42:14 PM
...but I think he is one of the God's with his own personality, ... as a Christian he will be our companion for eternity and gives us eternal life.
Truth is a Revelation, the SPIRIT IS ONE. Where it is not accepted, carnality reigns.
Trinitarian-ism is not a mystery, it is a contradiction that leads to separation.
peacemaker
Pensively (marked with sadness), the disciples were anticipating the coming of the SPIRIT.
"You KNOW him, beloved, for the SPIRIT dwells WITHIN you."
David,
I checked 25+ translations and about half uses "is" the others use "has".
I expect it's the famous aorist tense, (was is and keeps coming) but I don't have a translation that make this clear.
Well that's abit of alie.... I have a homemade online translation that show aorist tense. I don't really trust teh translation. Anyway according to that translation lots and lots of words are aorist. It has great consequences; for example it means that the whole book of Revelation is happening for nearly 2000 years.
:cloud9: Yes, it is, because it's happening within the temple, and we are His temple. John said, it was in the temple, yet everyone is looking outside themselves for things to happen.
Those things that happened to the Jews were for our example, us, the heirs of salvation. All those countries and peoples listed in Revelation no longer exist (or as they did, now), but the message they were used to convey along with Israel's battles with them, does.
They were written for our example and understanding of the interior dynamics of the soul vs. the Spirit and of the Word and the Spirit working in unison to bring about the Revelation of Jesus Christ, who is IN US. Blessings...
Amen Card and WW.
I feel like I've been fighting for 2000 years!
Awhile ago, I started to wonder if anyone besides the LORD Jesus is finished the race.
Hidden away, here on earth, waiting for the rest of the body of Christ to stand up.
Quote from: Beloved Servant on July 15, 2010, 03:22:29 PMAwhile ago, I started to wonder if anyone besides the LORD Jesus is finished the race.
Hidden away, here on earth, waiting for the rest of the body of Christ to stand up.
That's exactly what i meant when I wrote
QuoteIt has great consequences; for example it means that the whole book of Revelation is happening for nearly 2000 years.
IMO it means a lot of (confusing) things. for the last 2000 years people have been ressurected. Cast in LoF. Entered eternal life. The trumpets etc happend over and over :dontknow:
But I want to say I again that I have no translation with aorist rense in it so all the above is based on pure assumptions I can't check!To make it even more complex.. Think about what it means if Genesis writes about the aorist-coming of Jesus...
Or Jesus been slain from the foundation of the world. (That's actually hidden in the very first Hebrew word of Genesis)
:cloud9: I know what it would mean. It means He's in His creation and has been all along. He hid Himself in the last place man would look; in man. :grin: Blessings....
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 15, 2010, 08:45:44 AM
David,
I checked 25+ translations and about half uses "is" the others use "has".
I expect it's the famous aorist tense, (was is and keeps coming) but I don't have a translation that make this clear.
Well that's abit of alie.... I have a homemade online translation that show aorist tense. I don't really trust teh translation. Anyway according to that translation lots and lots of words are aorist. It has great consequences; for example it means that the whole book of Revelation is happening for nearly 2000 years.
It is easy to figure it out by just looking at the other scriptures. Jesus said, where I go you
cannot come, I go to prepare a place for you, in my
Fathers house are many mansions (The fathers house in not upon the Earth but in heaven)
Jesus is saying that he is in heaven, and none of his disciples could go and see him, but I will not leave you comfortless I will send you
another, notice he doesn't say I will send myself again.
If he's in heaven as stated then John is talking about those who deny Jesus
has come not
is come, otherwise the words about Jesus sending another comforter are also wrong, also the words about Jesus in heaven also wrong, if that is true then the bible is becoming weaker and that is not good for the faith.
:cloud9: You know, they've since taken it out in later printings, but I have an older Strong's that lists "mansions" as also having a meaning of "nests"......think feast of Tabernacles with their booths, which are like upside "nests". :happygrin: Blessings....
Quote from: peacemaker on July 15, 2010, 07:35:19 AM
Quote from: thinktank on July 14, 2010, 07:42:14 PM
...but I think he is one of the God's with his own personality, ... as a Christian he will be our companion for eternity and gives us eternal life.
Truth is a Revelation, the SPIRIT IS ONE. Where it is not accepted, carnality reigns.
Trinitarian-ism is not a mystery, it is a contradiction that leads to separation.
peacemaker
The 3 Gods are one, which we call God. They are not like us humans who fight over who is the best etc. They exist in perfect harmony for they are God. There is a reason why Jesus calls God his Father and there is a reason why God the Father calls his son, Son, who else is known as the only begotten son of the living God?. They have a relationship that can only be described in Earthly language as the relationship between Father and Son, both equal in many ways, but the Father has the final mark of authority on matters, the holy ghost is also mentioned as Gods spirit and even groans for us and makes intercession for us. What kind of power groans? To me the holy ghost is also a God and makes up what we call God.
Quote from: thinktank on July 15, 2010, 08:32:56 PM
What kind of power groans?
"Sighing deeply in Spirit for those held in captivity."peacemaker
:cloud9: He groaned within Himself......it's the power of love, of a birthing as a woman with child travailing for it to be born. Blessings...
Quote from: Cardinal on July 16, 2010, 08:01:02 AM
:cloud9: He groaned within Himself......it's the power of love, of a birthing as a woman with child travailing for it to be born. Blessings...
:thumbsup:
God is love
Holy Ghost, loves??
Quote from: Beloved Servant on July 15, 2010, 12:27:48 AM
Quote from: Beloved Servant on July 14, 2010, 04:50:27 AM
Quote from: thinktank on July 13, 2010, 08:08:24 PM
Trust me the world would be a much better place if he has already returned.
www.codex-sinaiticus.net/en/manuscript.aspx?book=55&chapter=4&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
1 John 4:
2 In this know you the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God,
3 and every spirit that confesses not Jesus is not of God; and this is the spirit of antichrist, of which you have heard that it comes, and now is in the world already.
What the Scripture is saying is plain.
That Jesus Christ is come; present tense.
Not that He has come in the past or that He will again in the future. That is the spirit of antichrist!
CHRIST IS COME. HERE AND NOW.
« Reply #13 on: July 02, 2010, 03:03:32 PM »
Reply with quoteQuote
beloved servant
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
Was it fun in the clouds? :cloud9: Why did you choose to come back?
I do not understand your post.
Is that another sarcastic remark like the vulgar poem you made up about Willie that the mods deleted?
If so, the joke went right over my head.
Quote from: thinktank on July 16, 2010, 09:07:09 PM
Quote from: Beloved Servant on July 15, 2010, 12:27:48 AM
Quote from: Beloved Servant on July 14, 2010, 04:50:27 AM
Quote from: thinktank on July 13, 2010, 08:08:24 PM
Trust me the world would be a much better place if he has already returned.
www.codex-sinaiticus.net/en/manuscript.aspx?book=55&chapter=4&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
1 John 4:
2 In this know you the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God,
3 and every spirit that confesses not Jesus is not of God; and this is the spirit of antichrist, of which you have heard that it comes, and now is in the world already.
What the Scripture is saying is plain.
That Jesus Christ is come; present tense.
Not that He has come in the past or that He will again in the future. That is the spirit of antichrist!
CHRIST IS COME. HERE AND NOW.
« Reply #13 on: July 02, 2010, 03:03:32 PM »
Reply with quoteQuote
beloved servant
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
Was it fun in the clouds? :cloud9: Why did you choose to come back?
I too, do not understand your post, but I, my friend am in the clouds now and am learning much and I only desire a much higher relationship in the clouds.
Peace and Love Through Jesus
Thinktank,
My reply #13 that you quoted me from is on a completely different thread.
What do you "think" you're doing here?
No wonder that I did not understand your post.
Practiced deception.
Quote from: Beloved Servant on July 16, 2010, 09:15:42 PM
I do not understand your post.
Is that another sarcastic remark like the vulgar poem you made up about Willie that the mods deleted?
If so, the joke went right over my head.
Ha I knew you didn't like it. Vulgar is a bit strong, of a word, it's only a body part, have you read the old testament? the vulgarity happening is plain to see. God sanctifies and blesses all the body, but if it has made you feel bad then I am sorry.
Don't apologize to me.
And, I am being polite using the term vulgar to describe your post about WillieH.
Is disgraceful more to the point?
Quote from: Beloved Servant on July 16, 2010, 09:48:52 PM
Thinktank,
My reply #13 that you quoted me from is on a completely different thread.
What do you "think" you're doing here?
No wonder that I did not understand your post.
Practiced deception.
Well as you can imagine I don't enjoy being hinted that I have the spirit of the antichrist, particularly after all the great posts here, which I hope have blessed many, as I have enjoyed being here interacting with fellow belivers in Jesus.
Yes, you are a credit to your religion.
Quote from: Beloved Servant on July 16, 2010, 10:06:44 PM
Don't apologize to me.
And, I am being polite using the term vulgar to describe your post about WillieH.
Is disgraceful more to the point?
You need to lossen up a bit, The joy of the lord is my strength.
Quote from: Beloved Servant on July 16, 2010, 10:15:11 PM
Yes, you are a credit to your religion.
Thank you I like all people enjoy appreciation, but the credit belongs to the lord Jesus Christ.
:sigh: Guys, please take a timeout from each other.....I don't want to have to lock this thread. Blessings...
Quote from: thinktank on July 16, 2010, 10:10:18 PM
Well as you can imagine I don't enjoy being hinted that I have the spirit of the antichrist, particularly after all the great posts here, which I hope have blessed many, as I have enjoyed being here interacting with fellow believers in Jesus.
Though very enthusiastic, an amateur performance of Ortho-intoxication.
And I heard another voice from heaven saying:
"Come out of her, so that you will not share in her sins."Now, this is "the" real article.
"Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they
are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world." peacemaker
Quote from: thinktank on June 21, 2010, 11:09:20 PMMaybe it's possible with the son for he was physical as Jesus of Nazareth
Spiritually too imo.
Nazareth never existed. It's not a town but a title.
(We had a thread about this until it got removed a few weeks ago.)
Are you sure it's removed? Several things were brought back to the "surface" per your suggestion, including the Member's Lounge - right away after you said something. Was it there, or somewhere else? I don't know of anything like that that's actually been removed, just a couple of things consolidated maybe. Unless it's something else? :dontknow:
jabcat...
The "something else" is a policy of someone somewhere in the heavenlies, or so it has seemed to me.
Quote from: jabcat on December 19, 2010, 05:35:45 AM
Are you sure it's removed? Several things were brought back to the "surface" per your suggestion, including the Member's Lounge - right away after you said something.
If that's true I need some very thick glasses. I can't find members lounge. Or for example the 1984 thread that was in it.
I don't know for sure it was in Members lounge but I would say I'm at least 95% sure of it.
Just search for "nazareth never existed" and see what you find. Or perhaps better search for "Nazareth" in the mod only sections. Like holding tank or something like that :winkgrin:
(imo the soul was cut out of the forum by removing Members Lounge :2c:)
I don't understand why you're not seeing it. The very day you brought it up I moved it back to Member's Section. I see it last on the list of boards in Member's Section - and I see that Cardinal posted in "1984" on December 16. :dontknow:
So I'm not seeing the "heart cut out of the boards" that you must see from your perspective. I took this right off the main page, Card posting Dec. 16 in the "1984" thread.
http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/members_lounge/welcome_1984_7025.msg112893.html#msg112893
I logged out of my jabcat account (where I can see Member's Lounge and where Cardinal posted on the 16th) and logged in as jabdog. I can see the Member's Section as jabdog, but not the Member's Lounge board. I only have 2 posts as jabdog, but with all your posts, I don't know why you can't see it. Again, I restored it right away, the same day you mentioned it, which I thought you would like; but if you can't see it...
Anyone else please see Member's Lounge besides Cardinal and I, or can you not? Thanks.
Can you post a direct link to one of the threads/posts in that section?
That way I can be 100% sure I somehow don't overlook that section.
its 3 posts up
An Error Has Occurred!
The topic or board you are looking for appears to be either missing or off limits to you.
.
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 19, 2010, 10:46:43 AM
An Error Has Occurred!
The topic or board you are looking for appears to be either missing or off limits to you.
Ditto.
I thought you had removed the members section.
There may be something with the settings then. I'll look at those, because as I said, I see it and Card apparently sees it (as she posted in it), so settings/permissions is all I can think of that may be the issue. Thanks for info.
Is it visible now?
You could alter the number of posts of your Jabdog account to see what the various groups see.
2
102 -Est
502 - 500 Club
1002 - Bronze
2002 - Silver
3002 - Gold
Quote from: jabcat on December 19, 2010, 08:36:32 PM
Is it visible now?
An Error Has Occurred!
The topic or board you are looking for appears to be either missing or off limits to you.
Usually there are global settings that are overridden (sp?) by the local/group settings.....
Yep, that's what I tried to do. I'll look again, something's still stopping the settings from changing it appears.
I think Karen installed some adversary code :icon_king:
Are all user groups blocked?
PS don't give up! I'm sure you get it fixed withing 48 hours.
(assuming you don't need sleep....)
how about now?
Time to grab your pillow James :thumbsup:
I see "Members Lounge" below "Word Studies", it wasn't there the last time I was on the board.
CHB
OK, good, seems like I finally found the right settings. I guess only mods could see it before today, even though it had been "restored" to the boards - there were apparently some missing permissions settings.
Quote from: jabcat on December 20, 2010, 10:13:02 AM
OK, good, seems like I finally found the right settings. I guess only mods could see it before today, even though it had been "restored" to the boards - there were apparently some missing permissions settings.
Ah! Full restoration. :Sparkletooth:
:laughing7:
"Full Restoration" is what we're here for; that, and "The Finishing Work!"