WELCOME TO THE OFFICIAL WEB SITE OF THE HOLY BIBLE

[sparrow]

Did you know this?  From a Catholic website;  "Protestants claim an ownership of our book and claim to be responsible for its translation into the tongue of the people, but this is an error, two errors; the Bible is ours, and Catholics were translating it into the language of the people before Wycliff, Tyndale, Coverdale, et al. were born.."   There, take that!  And get your hands off their Bible  :laughing7:.

Catholicism truly astounds me.

It's just... there is SO much..and it's all so blatant...I... I just...:msealed:
..have no words. 

Know what I mean?  :mshock:

[sven]

i appreciate the vulgate:

in hoc enim laboramus et maledicimur quia speravimus in
Deum vivum qui est salvator omnium hominum maxime fidelium

the living God who is savior of all humans, mostly/especially of believers


I think changing verses in this manner can effect the opposite if it's too obvious, there is a German bible, which doesn't translate savior but  'sustainer' - this seems suspect.

[WhiteWings]

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially that is of those that believe.
1 Timothy 2:4  Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

The verses now contradict. Unless all is limited in some way. Lets see if I can prove all to mean 100% of humanity.

John 3:35   The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.
=> God hands over His whole creation to Jesus.
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 task of Jesus is to give eternal life to everything He received from God.
Matthew 1:21  And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
=> The task of Jesus is to give eternal life to all things (=mankind)
=> His people are not just the Jews, believers or elect because Father gave Him everything. his=100% of creation.
John 6:37  All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
=> Jesus declares He will accomplish his mission.
=> Did Father overestimate His Son?
If yes the powers of Jesus are limited and God made a judgement error. Who calls UR hersey.....?

Shouldn't the blue words start with caps? (out of repect)

[WhiteWings]

Bonus spam.

Isaiah 46:10   .... and I (=God) will do all my pleasure:
Isaiah 53:10  .... and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his (=Jesus) hand.
Ezekiel 33:11  I (=God) have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live:....
Pleasure of God shall be done. That means what doesn't pleasure shall not be done.
God has no pleasure in death (of the sinner)


Mmm, I'm getting a little upset those peeps twist the word. Little spark in me?  :Pray:

[WhiteWings]

I think changing verses in this manner can effect the opposite if it's too obvious, there is a German bible, which doesn't translate savior but  'sustainer' - this seems suspect.

Depends.
If it means "Jesus sustains life" then it looks fine to me...

[sven]

yes, but it's obvious that they want to weak these words, the New World Translation also corrupted this verse:

For to this end we are working hard and exerting ourselves, because we have rested our hope on a living God, who is a Savior of all sorts of men, especially of faithful ones.

can I read the bible mentioned in this topic, online?

[WhiteWings]

More....

John 12:47 I'm (=Jesus) not his judge: I did not come to be judge of the world but to give salvation to the world.
=> Exactly like the task given to Him by Father. Judging is used as something negative here. But the judging is not done because that's not the task Jesus got. Meaning He' saviour of all

John 17:4  I have given you glory on the earth, having done all the work which you gave me to do.
=> Jesus was sent to salvation to all the world and he completed that task

I'll stop now. It seems to be faster to just quote the whole Bible. :thumbsup:

[legoman]

Bonus spam.

Isaiah 46:10   .... and I (=God) will do all my pleasure:
Isaiah 53:10  .... and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his (=Jesus) hand.
Ezekiel 33:11  I (=God) have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live:....
Pleasure of God shall be done. That means what doesn't pleasure shall not be done.
God has no pleasure in death (of the sinner)


Mmm, I'm getting a little upset those peeps twist the word. Little spark in me?  :Pray:

You are also assuming that God is 100% sovereign, which surprisingly, many people don't believe.

Try asking Churchianity this question:  Does God get everything he wants?  And then watch all the excuses come out about how God can't get everything he wants because then all would be saved.  Or conversely, God doesn't want all to be saved, therefore he does get everything he wants! :BangHead:

[WhiteWings]

yes, but it's obvious that they want to weak these words, the New World Translation also corrupted this verse:

For to this end we are working hard and exerting ourselves, because we have rested our hope on a living God, who is a Savior of all sorts of men, especially of faithful ones.

Sorts: fat/thin. all colors. all levels of faith. all nations. etc

can I read the bible mentioned in this topic, online?

Christian Bible where Jabcat quoted from: No
ISV: http://isv.org/downloads/index.htm  -> Version 1.50
ISV: http://isv.org/previews/index.htm -> Incomplete beta version 1.51
V=Version. T=Translation

[WhiteWings]

Bonus spam.

Isaiah 46:10   .... and I (=God) will do all my pleasure:
Isaiah 53:10  .... and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his (=Jesus) hand.
Ezekiel 33:11  I (=God) have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live:....
Pleasure of God shall be done. That means what doesn't pleasure shall not be done.
God has no pleasure in death (of the sinner)


Mmm, I'm getting a little upset those peeps twist the word. Little spark in me?  :Pray:

You are also assuming that God is 100% sovereign, which surprisingly, many people don't believe.

Try asking Churchianity this question:  Does God get everything he wants?  And then watch all the excuses come out about how God can't get everything he wants because then all would be saved.  Or conversely, God doesn't want all to be saved, therefore he does get everything he wants! :BangHead:

Then possibly things backfire (pun intended) on the ET. God wants 95% of humanity in hell. But likely He's not powerful enough to do so. Or is that a hertical interpretation? :angel4:

[Doc]

Someone said something along this line earlier, but I seriously think these ISV people need their own Damascus road experience; you know, where God puts the smackdown on these guys and says "WHY ARE YOU PERSECUTING ME?"

[reFORMer]

YOU BECOME LIKE THE GOD YOU SERVE!!!  Under the statute known as de heretico comburendo they burned Christians at the stake in England from the beginning of the 1400's for 200 years and England was the latecomer, it was even longer in the rest of Europe.  The Roman Catholics of the Inquisition said to them that they only, "Consign to temporal flames that you may be saved from eternal flames."  To know the Ave Maria, the "Our Father," or "The 10 Commandments" in English was sufficient proof of heresy.  To possess parts of the Bible in English was to be a heretic.  This did sometimes mean execution.  At the stake, they would put the English Bible portions under the chin of the "heretic" and light them aflame.  These are well documented in various records that survive, some published and cited in books I recently read by Clara H. Stuart dealing with the life of John Wycliffe and after, to about the middle of the 1500's.

Death could be the result of even association with such people as believed that after consecration the bread and wine remained, or that each predestined man is a priest and able to administer the sacraments without episcopal ordination, or that priests who live evilly hold the keys of hell rather than of heaven and that no Christian is obliged to take count of the censures of such men.  Those holding these ideas were deemed worthy of death and those that showed kindness to them could be executed.  These are just sample mentions of the crimes for which the Roman Church authorities tortured and killed people.

I also could get into the original 8 volumes of Foxe's Book of Martyrs, The Acts and Monuments, 6,000 pages witten in 1563 on CD's included with other wonderful material (available at www.avpublications.com ) under the title In Awe of Thy Word.  Too much to go into here.  Just one example:  the merchant who could not read.  He had framed on his wall an illuminated 10 commandments he was proud of.  Too bad it was with the protestant numbering rather than the Roman.  He and his family was executed.

[reFORMer]

(An additional comment to tack onto what I just posted on Roman Church history:)

I read Roman Catholic scholars and have friends in that religion.  Things are not what they once were.  I believe the Protestants of today commit some of the same religious crimes against God and His people that those in the Roman Church are guilty of today.  It isn't easy to clarify for some how to be friends with who seems the enemy, or that "Christian" leaders are sometimes the enemy.

Too many Christians don't even know the major tenants of the Reformation of the 1500's.  Because of this there is added difficulty in advancing beyond what has been, to mature as God intends for this generation of believers.  While some are running to the latest "anointed preacher" my heart breaks that the Church is not on the program.  It isn't even missed.  People are audiences for the professional elite on stage.  Their idea of "going to church," a phrase not in the Bible, is only as enablers of the "ministry" of some great man.  That ministry of the members of the body of Christ one to another under the direct leading of the Holy Spirit without human headship and their continuing in fellowship, bearing one another's burdens is considered heretical to many leaders in Institutional Christianity and the Charismatic mega-churches of our day.  Yet more powerful than the human family and of greater consequence, the true foundation of human society, is the Eclessia as God builds it.

[jabcat]

Good comments all   :thumbsup:.  I've been unable to connect to TM from work...happens every once in awhile.  Anyway, I've been thinking tonight about where I see WW in particular has been going with this; basically, that even if I Tim 4:10 were to translate more along the lines of "all kinds of men", "that is", etc. (which I doubt);  there's still hundreds of verses scattered througout the whole of scriptures that either directly addresses, or alludes to God's ultimate reconciliation of all.  I remembered the 600 here  http://haroldlovelace.com/lovelacelist.php ....  thankfully, as we know but may sometimes need to remember, it doesn't hinge on one verse.  People can twist a verse here and there, but God has given more than sufficient witness in His Word, in His Spirit, and in His character...God IS Love.

[WhiteWings]

Jabcat,

I don't see it as 600 verses that support UR and 1 that doesn't support UR so mathematically seen UR wins.
I say: 601 anti-UR or 601 pro-UR. If not God made a mistake when inspiring the Bible. That would mean He's not almighty.....

I have to think something from a crappy book by an architect that wrote about .... can't even remember.
He did made one good point I always try to apply.
He looks at scripture like a house.
Foundation: The really stong and clear verses.
The walls: Good verses that can be misunderstood (like the one being discussed.
Decoration: The no real use verses. Or at least very flexible meanings.

You don't build an house around decorations.
Neither do you stuff a foundation under a wall instead of building a wall on foundations.


From the site quoted by Jabcat
(http://haroldlovelace.com/list1.jpg)

[Paul Hazelwood]

The verses now contradict. Unless all is limited in some way. Lets see if I can prove all to mean 100% of humanity.

This is one of the issues any one faces.   There are instances where ALL means a certain group, thats just a fact.   So, you cannot hinge  UR on the word all.   We can also make an issue of context to say that ALL means only those who are IN Christ, so to be IN Christ you must have accepted Christ.

So as the arguments escalate then we get into "Every knee shall bow"  and  of course then that is contextualized to say that yeah, every knee bows because of that realization but because they never served God while alive it's too late.

Then we get into Gods righeousness,  and of course a God can do whatever he wants, so if God makes it righteous that most of humanity remains in their lost state then who's gonna do anything about it.   Our arguments down here don't change God.

on and on and on

Then we get to UR where there is still disagreement, lake of fire now, later, both  even our disputes over Age bearing,  literal spiritual,  free will, no free will.

Whos convincing who,  are we thrashing this around to convince ourself, or are we really in deep love with God so that none of that can even matter any more.

Recently I believe I have felt a glimpse of what real love is, perhaps it is emotion, perhaps not,  but what I know is that this feeling has no boundries of doctrine,  when I felt this it did not matter what the person I felt this over believed or what they thought, whether they agreed with me or not,  none of it mattered.

I won't trade that for any book or interpretation of it.   It was divine, it was pure,  I don't care what book it's found in.

[WhiteWings]

This is one of the issues any one faces.   There are instances where ALL means a certain group, thats just a fact.   So, you cannot hinge  UR on the word all.   We can also make an issue of context to say that ALL means only those who are IN Christ, so to be IN Christ you must have accepted Christ.

That's why I choose not to post a 'boring' list with 'all-verses' but instead searched from proof another angle.

So as the arguments escalate then we get into "Every knee shall bow"  and  of course then that is contextualized to say that yeah, every knee bows because of that realization but because they never served God while alive it's too late.

The underlying Greek word seem to be always used for genuine worship. Not for forced kneeling. But agreed people will try to prove that context shows that this one verse should be translated differently.
But I believe I/we don't need that verse at all to prove UR. To speak with that architect works it's a wall-verse.

Then we get into Gods righeousness,  and of course a God can do whatever he wants, so if God makes it righteous that most of humanity remains in their lost state then who's gonna do anything about it.   Our arguments down here don't change God.

That's a fact and a good fact because as I quoted God made clear He has no intention to harm (permanently)

Then we get to UR where there is still disagreement, lake of fire now, later, both  even our disputes over Age bearing,  literal spiritual,  free will, no free will.

I have my idea's about them too. But to speak with the architect again: decoration-verses
The foundation (and walls) for all (?) people on this board are same.

Whos convincing who,  are we thrashing this around to convince ourself, or are we really in deep love with God so that none of that can even matter any more.

I would say both. But the ratio of the mixture varies. Doesn't the Bible say: Seek the truth.
For me personally that's different from just saying "God is good/great/love/...."
Surely that are words God likes but it's not searching. It's an aborted search.

Recently I believe I have felt a glimpse of what real love is,
I won't trade that for any book or interpretation of it.

Now you after years of study (I just assume that) you finally experienced what you where looking for; is that the end of the search for you or do you now even want to know more of the One that gave you that experience?

[Paul Hazelwood]

Yes, I want to know more,  but  if I never "find" more then I am not going to feel like I've missed something.


I've found that you can find some truth in all writings, buddist, even things atheists say contain truth.  The bible contains truth, but not all truth, and believing something as much as someone can believe whole heartedly doesn't make something true.

It seems to be arriving at a point where love superceeds what we can say a book says about it.  We feel it, we know it, it cannot be questioned, debated or refuted and we cannot teach it to anyone.   It is something that the divine gives us when it is that time for it to be.


If the bible contains the only truth then what makes that more viable than any other compiled document?    There in lies the trouble,  lets get out the websites, the books, the opinions, the documents and the case then is made, compiled, tweaked and explained to fit the belief.   There is no inherant proof for any of it.

So, whats left?   Whats left if all physcial evidence disappeared, what is left?   

Selfless love, thats it, thats all thats left,  the hardest most excruciating lesson anyone can learn.

[Doc]

Yes, I want to know more,  but  if I never "find" more then I am not going to feel like I've missed something.


I've found that you can find some truth in all writings, buddist, even things atheists say contain truth.  The bible contains truth, but not all truth, and believing something as much as someone can believe whole heartedly doesn't make something true.

It seems to be arriving at a point where love superceeds what we can say a book says about it.  We feel it, we know it, it cannot be questioned, debated or refuted and we cannot teach it to anyone.   It is something that the divine gives us when it is that time for it to be.


If the bible contains the only truth then what makes that more viable than any other compiled document?    There in lies the trouble,  lets get out the websites, the books, the opinions, the documents and the case then is made, compiled, tweaked and explained to fit the belief.   There is no inherant proof for any of it.

So, whats left?   Whats left if all physcial evidence disappeared, what is left?   

Selfless love, thats it, thats all thats left,  the hardest most excruciating lesson anyone can learn.

Good points Paul. I sometimes find myself pointing out to people (including reminding myself at times), that Jesus said: "I AM the Way THE TRUTH, and the Life...."

Jesus is the Truth, not a book or collection of books, not a religion, etc. All we see in the written word is signposts that point to the Truth.

[sven]

has anybody claimed yet, these 'all' are not all? (I think maybe Christadelphians might believe so), it's obvious in my view that sometimes 'all' really mean all.

John 5:28,29

Wonder not at this, for an hour is coming in which all who are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall go forth; those that have practised good, to resurrection of life, and those that have done evil, to resurrection of judgment.

Daniel 12:2

And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame, to everlasting contempt.

[WhiteWings]

has anybody claimed yet, these 'all' are not all?

All ETs (are forced to) claim that. (and do so)
If verses indicate all are saved there can't be an eternal hell.
So the defenition of all gets minimized to:
- elect
- believers
- some of every nation
- some of every social position
- some of every race
- some of ....

It's said in this and other threads UR doesn't hinge of one word (all, aion, will, etc) but ET has to redefine several to make their believe fit.

ETs will agree John is about all.
They also agree 'many' in Daniel means all dead.
But because Daniel also wrote that some go into everlasting contempt (=eternal hell) the verses where Jesus is claiming to save all need to be limited. After all Jesus can't save all because Daniel says many goto hell.
So because ETs translated anion as eternal they are also forced to minimize all in several key verses.

[jabcat]

Jabcat,

I don't see it as 600 verses that support UR and 1 that doesn't support UR so mathematically seen UR wins.
I say: 601 anti-UR or 601 pro-UR. If not God made a mistake when inspiring the Bible. That would mean He's not almighty.....

Hey WW....I don't think I was saying or seeing what it seems you thought I meant...because IMO, even IF the verse in question is not directly UR, that doesn't mean it's still not compatible with UR.  You pointed it out yourself earlier.  Even if that verse were saying something different than most UR folks believe it does, it still doesn't say everyone won't eventually be reconciled.  The point I was trying to make is, there's 600 more that can be seen as alluding to or directly teaching UR...that there's a strong body of evidence throughout scripture, not just in 1 or 2 critical verses.
-----
On another note, as far as scripture itself....IMO, Jesus was God's logos and rhema become flesh.  He didn't come as a substitue or replacement for scripture/God's Word, or to diminish it or do away with it.  He was God's Word with flesh on it.  Paul said every word is inspired/God breathed.  It's a total package, incorporated within Jesus.  It pleased God that all He was dwelled within His Son. 

[reFORMer]

Paul H.,

Rather than copy the whole thing, I'll just refer to your post #40 here:  I understand your position.  Some of what you mention contested by others is not the result of their diligent search, though they may have worked some to learn certain responses.  I have found that much of the controversy can definitively be settled to one's satisfaction by continued examination of the Scripture.  You just have to persist in it and continue using whatever other studies that can be brought to bear on the text of the Word itself.  After time it clarifies.  There are only a few crucial passages directly involved.  Not all arguments have the same value.

The way you settle it (in post #40) points to what has to work out in anybody desiring the Truth, something that must arise within one's own self.  Yet whether it is a sensation of love for another is easily debated.  Love for all humanity when all humanity isn't here before me is rather lame too.  The self revelation of God is always love and yet, as a rainbow, His light can be seen in various emphasis.  When what is called the "fruit" (sing., not, "fruits") or, "harvest of the Spirit" is listed (cf., Ga 5:22-23) "love" is first and foremost, and may be taken as the title or name of all the segments of it that follow.  The mystery of quickening to newness of life by the Holy Spirit in union with our spirit brings its own reasons like is said generally of love:  "Love has its reasons that reason cannot know."  Yet, so much understanding and explanation flows from such intimacy that to leave it as if we were only bewildered would misrepresent it.

One glittering motive work of the presence of the Holy Spirit is traced through the faith in His written revelation.  In perceiving Scripture's glory with a corresponding hunger the pursuit of God is inflamed.  As the Proverb says, "As the mouth tests food, so the ear tries words."  This is no crass subservience to dogmatic assertion.  Here and there the inner illumination at certain points in the midst of dully reading a passage becomes so brilliant and consuming it is a wonder that it is endured is the confession of myriads of followers of the lamb of God.  He said that if we would follow Him we would have the light of life.

Consider how the written revelation of God has favorably affected generations of mankind.  Everywhere believers have gone, not only chapels and hospitals, but up go the schools and colleges.  This was the good foundation laid in our own USA.  We are in direct descent from the people of God of old.  Scattered about the world by as many as 70% of their number, yet tied to Israel's land, very important among their differences from all other cultures was their ability to read.  Inculcated by God, the value of their knowledge from sharing written information throughout the world caused the Roman Empire to make exceptions to accommodate them.  The N.T. is half letters.  Spread about the Empire and quickly cultivating new hearts, these are what ground the Roman way to powder that the warm autumn wind blew away and in it's place, though fallen, Christendom kept a peace of a thousand years.

Your hypothetical removal of any physical evidence such as Scripture in post #42 that leaves us wading about in varying degrees of truth and error, a swamp of uncertainty, except for some thought that I know I have loved?  I do hope, for both our sake, that we are blessed by friends to lift us up when we have fallen.  I know I have bouts with what people like Lord Byron called "melancholia."  Surely God has inspired us to a better hope for a better day.  Paul considered it a workable aspiration: to be summoned into a higher dimension in Christ.

Too often people find a comfortable ignorance because they don't want to pay the price of leaving some "O so dear" sin.  We underestimate sin's deceptiveness and sin's enslavement.  I know I should diet and exercise and then I say I don't know what the will of God is or how to get well; then, I hope His grace will be sufficient.  The way to pray is like you've just been poisoned and God's got the antidote.


your brother, James Rohde

[WhiteWings]

On another note, as far as scripture itself....IMO, Jesus was God's logos and rhema become flesh.  He didn't come as a substitue or replacement for scripture/God's Word, or to diminish it or do away with it.  He was God's Word with flesh on it, for 33 years.  Paul said every word is inspired/God breathed.  It's a total package, incorporated within Jesus.  It pleased God that all He was dwelled within His Son.  Now that He's returned to Spirit doesn't mean we no longer have any Word...IMO, it's a grave error for us to then diminish, or even put forth the impression that we are diminishing God's Word...either with, or without flesh on it. 

I'm not sure I fully understand what you wrote. Are you saying an attack on meaning of verses is an attack on Jesus is a direct attack on God?
If so I agree.

Altough I don't agree with many views I do believe most of who that promote those views have no intention to in any way corrupt Gods word.
Just a case of not understanding. For me it would be like claiming that any student that doesn't passed classes with magna cum laude lied to his prof. during exams/tests.

[jabcat]

No, I'm not saying that, and I've modified my post some.  Thanks.