Well there used to be hands that David cut off to pay Saul for his wife...but that was a mistranslation as well...
So even though it was preached 100 years ago we should stick to that as well? (Following your logic)
John MacArthur says you have nothing to do with being "born again"
- Thread starter K9Buck
- Start date
-
- Tags
- born again
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
So even though it was preached 100 years ago we should stick to that as well? (Following your logic)
So, in order for you to be morally upright in character...I think that YHWH must require you to sacrifice your life for all of humankind and take the penalty for all sin upon your own shoulders. Otherwise your character is a "ghastly human contrivance unworthy of credibility by the best human instincts of what is fair."
He didn't have to do that, Himself.
He chose to do it because He is indeed love to the highest degree.
In other words, for you to be able to claim moral uprightness...you must suffer in hell for all of eternity for each and every human being...the equivalent of billions of sentences to the lake of fire....or else you are some kind of moral monster.
It's a known mistranslation that David paid Saul in hands for his wife Michel. 1Samuel 18. (KJV vx any modern translation)
Today it's more known (but usually not taught because of PG13 issues) that it was actually Philistine foreskins that David paid Saul for his daughter Michel...and in fact he paid double.
My kjv does not have that in it...for as long as I have read the kjv, it has mentioned that David paid 200 foreskins as a dowry for Michal...nothing about hands. Except, it says that Saul sought to make David fall by the hands of the Philistines. That is a far cry from saying that David paid Saul in hands.
I'm interested in what the Hebrew word was that they translated as "hands" when it should have been translated "foreskins". What kind of misunderstanding might have led them to mistranslate it as "hands" when it should have been translated as "foreskins"?
Bad example...my bad.
I admit my errors...
But how about pastors preaching on Matthew 6 and the Lord's Prayer?
The last line of it had preachers thundering it from the pulpits for several centuries....
But
It's not congruent with what Jesus says later after his resurrection...and in truth it never belonged. ("All authority in Heaven and on Earth has been given unto me" vx for thine is the power and glory forever in case you were wondering)
Just because it's been preached for 500 years didn't make it so.
It's been changed now in all modern translations.
Last edited:
Fact is, it belongs in there.
It is just another proof that Jesus is the Father.
I'm afraid that modern translations have been watered-down and they also take away from God's word...so they are guilty of the sin that is spoken of in Revelation 22:18-19...along with all those who conclude that they were correct in their translations in their taking away from the word.
Ummm
You haven't stated any proofs for supporting your position. You have only made more unsubstantiated allegations.
That's equivalent to the same argument that a toddler makes.
So,
Again I'm going to ask you that if you didn't want an honest discussion and reasoned positions supported by some form of logic... why did you join in the conversation?
historyb
Well-Known Member
Jhn 3:1, There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
Jhn 3:2, The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
Jhn 3:3, Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
Jhn 3:4, Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
Jhn 3:5, Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Jhn 3:6, That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Jhn 3:7, Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
Jhn 3:8, The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
Jhn 3:9, Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?
Jhn 3:10, Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?
Jhn 3:11, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
Jhn 3:12, If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
Jhn 3:13, And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
Jhn 3:14, And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
Jhn 3:15, That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Jhn 3:16, For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Jhn 3:17, For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Jhn 3:18, He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Jhn 3:19, And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Jhn 3:20, For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Jhn 3:21, But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
No instance here of Jesus saying that Nicodemus is (already) born again.
Here, Jesus tells him (verse 7), Ye must be born again.
I have indeed stated a proof supporting my position.
Revelation 22:18-19 shows the truth that modern translations do take away from the word of God while the kjv does not add to it in keeping in certain statements.
For the punishment for adding is very visible and if the kjv translators had added to the word, their punishment would be visible: the plagues of the book of Revelation would be added to them, visibly.
But the punishment for taking away from the word is invisible and therefore the translators of modern version could take away from the word and their punishment would not be visible until the day of judgment. Their name is taken out of the book of life, invisibly.
Therefore it is very likely (even irrefutable) that the kjv translators did not add to the word of God in keeping certain statements in the translation. And that therefore the translators of modern versions did in fact take away from the word.
The Latin Vulgate did it for them. (No two copies of it were the same)
Now when examining the original language of this passage in John 3 there is no word for "transform" or "become" . It's not there.
Nicodemus is being told ground shaking information to be sure.
Greek is a very different language...but the translation is not trying to show an imperitive but an emphatic.
And "Born from Above" also fits anthropological evidence (Jewish customs) and textual themes. It also makes the passage make more sense in relation to the rest of what Jesus is telling Nicodemus. (It made Nicodemus a train wreck) and fits better with John's style of writing in the rest of the Gospel account.
Nicodemus is getting a drink from a fire-hose for sure here. And a bit of foreshadowing that Jesus knew everything that was going to happen...there is no time that Jesus ever appears to not know his fate and future.
There's literally a ton of evidence that Jesus knew every Messianic prophecy (He is The Word from John 1 made flesh) Jesus knew that he was going to be "rejected". Jesus knew that only 2 witnesses on the Sanhedrin were going to believe...Jesus knew that this was one of them...
Nicodemus believed in Jesus.
Came during social hour.
Nicodemus understood everything Jesus said...he just didn't want to. It wasn't "good news". It was a horrifying bit of prophecy. But in it was also hope for Nicodemus as was the label Jesus had placed on him...the "Earthly Label" of "Born from Above". Nicodemus' world was about to be shattered. No one wants to go through that kind of stuff. But that was what Jesus was there for.
And even in verse 7 again there is no greek word for "become/transform" in the sentence. Nicodemus had no need to change... only keep being himself in the trying times ahead.
Jesus' character shows itself as everyone who recognized him was instantly given some kind of earthly gift that only God could give. Blind see, deaf hear, mute speak, lame walk and etc... even the dead raised.
Nicodemus got something very precious and valuable...the chance to help God and have a legacy for all time.
In verse 7, as I look at it in English, it tells me that Nicodemus needed to be born again according to Jesus.
'nuff said!
'nuff said!
ChristisGod
Well-Known Member
And so your whole argument is " 'cause I like it that way"?
WOW...
Nothing else other than preference...no basis in fact, no basis in history, no basis in anthropology or even textual evidence...
Just a preference for a mistranslated bit that is incongruent with all other scriptures.
You have my sincerest apologies because I thought that you were going to bring some sort of evidence that would support your opinion. I had no idea that you were totally unequipped to hold a reasonable and well laid out conversation explaining the reason why you hold to your viewpoint.
I'll remember this for future conversations.
I have indeed stated a proof supporting my position.
Revelation 22:18-19 shows the truth that modern translations do take away from the word of God while the kjv does not add to it in keeping in certain statements.
This scripture declares what happens to those changing the exact wording of the prophecy of Revelation.
The reason being is that prophecy is very complicated writing. It's necessary for every word to be exact for reasons that you probably aren't going to like or have ever considered.
Again you really haven't offered one substantial reason why the exegesis I provided (which is more theologically congruent) is incorrect.
No contextual proof
No historical proofs
No anthropological proof
No writings from church fathers or elsewhere.
Nothing of substance except a leaning on the Latin Vulgate (what was used to create the KJV) which has been proven to be substantially unreliable by every scholar on the subject matter... including those who made the KJV.
Revelation 22:18-19 shows the truth that modern translations do take away from the word of God while the kjv does not add to it in keeping in certain statements.
This scripture declares what happens to those changing the exact wording of the prophecy of Revelation.
The reason being is that prophecy is very complicated writing. It's necessary for every word to be exact for reasons that you probably aren't going to like or have ever considered.
Again you really haven't offered one substantial reason why the exegesis I provided (which is more theologically congruent) is incorrect.
No contextual proof
No historical proofs
No anthropological proof
No writings from church fathers or elsewhere.
Nothing of substance except a leaning on the Latin Vulgate (what was used to create the KJV) which has been proven to be substantially unreliable by every scholar on the subject matter... including those who made the KJV.
I consider that the kjv is inspired and inerrant; is not therefore unreliable.
Psa 12:6, The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
The kjv was #7 in a series of translations that developed from the original Greek text. This is a historical fact.
Last edited:
Also, the admonition at the end of the book of Revelation applies to the whole of the book that Revelation is at the end of; the Holy Bible.
This is how things developed over time and how we have a closed canon of holy scripture.
This is how things developed over time and how we have a closed canon of holy scripture.
Similar threads
