Yes, it is possible to reconcile all of the New Testament Scriptures

[OzSpen]

No... it means to the Age.

Logabe

Logabe,

The Greek of 2 John 2 in this prepositional phrase, is eis ton aiwna (I use w to transliterate omega because of the problem using an ellipse with o on this forum). Aiwna is the accusative singular of aiwn. What's the meaning of aiwn? Arndt & Gingrich's Greek lexicon gives the meaning in 2 John 2 as 'of time to come which, if it has no end, is also known as eternity (so commonly in Gk. lit.)' (Arndt & Gingrich 1957:26).

Therefore, based on NT Greek etymology, the translation of 2 John 2 as 'with us forever' (NIV, ESV, NKJV, NRSV) is accurate.To translate it as 'to the Age' needs further explanation for interpretation.

Oz

Works consulted
[SIZE=11pt]Arndt, W F & Gingrich, F W 1957. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature.[1]#_ftn1[/SIZE] Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (limited edition licensed to Zondervan Publishing House).


[SIZE=10pt][1][/SIZE] This is ‘a translation and adaptation of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-Deutsches Wörtbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der übrigen urchristlichen Literatur’, 4th rev and aug ed, 1952 (Arndt & Gingrich 1957:iii).

 

[Zachary]

Rarely dealt with ... are the Scriptures I present.
Instead, people in opposition quote their favorites.
This is no way to resolve the two points of view,
which must be accomplished ...
if we are to make any sense of things!

 

[ATP]

Rarely dealt with ... are the Scriptures I present.
Instead, people in opposition quote their favorites.
This is no way to resolve the two points of view,
which must be accomplished ...
if we are to make any sense of things!

Well, stop taking scriptures out of context then. Maybe dinner will taste better.

 

[logabe]

Logabe,

The Greek of 2 John 2 in this prepositional phrase, is eis ton aiwna (I use w to transliterate omega because of the problem using an ellipse with o on this forum). Aiwna is the accusative singular of aiwn. What's the meaning of aiwn? Arndt & Gingrich's Greek lexicon gives the meaning in 2 John 2 as 'of time to come which, if it has no end, is also known as eternity (so commonly in Gk. lit.)' (Arndt & Gingrich 1957:26).

Therefore, based on NT Greek etymology, the translation of 2 John 2 as 'with us forever' (NIV, ESV, NKJV, NRSV) is accurate.To translate it as 'to the Age' needs further explanation for interpretation.

Oz

Works consulted
[SIZE=11pt]Arndt, W F & Gingrich, F W 1957. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature.[1]#_ftn1[/SIZE] Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (limited edition licensed to Zondervan Publishing House).


[SIZE=10pt][1][/SIZE] This is ‘a translation and adaptation of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-Deutsches Wörtbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der übrigen urchristlichen Literatur’, 4th rev and aug ed, 1952 (Arndt & Gingrich 1957:iii).

In Numbers 25:13, God says, He will give Phinehas and his descendants an everlasting priesthood because
he was jealous for his God and he made atonement for the sons of Israel.

13 And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an
everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made
an atonement for the children of Israel.

We know that the priesthood ended about 300 years later due to the corruption of the sons of Eli, so did God
break His Promise with Phinehas or did the Hebrew word (olam) mean everlasting. I don't think so, because
olam means, an indefinite, unknown period of time. It was a time that was hidden from the general public.

We could also look @ the Old Covenant that was supposedly an everlasting covenant in Leviticus 24:8 where
it says,

8 Every sabbath he shall set it in order before the Lord continually, being
taken from the children of Israel by an everlasting covenant.

That word is olam also, and we know that the Old Covenant ended and was replaced in Jesus Christ. Heb. 8:13
says,

13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that
which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

No one will dispute that Truth will reign into eternity, but indefinite isn't the same as infinite. Indefinite might refer
to infinite, but as you said, only if the context demands it.

What a God! What a Plan!

Logabe

 

[OzSpen]

In Numbers 25:13, God says, He will give Phinehas and his descendants an everlasting priesthood because
he was jealous for his God and he made atonement for the sons of Israel.

13 And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an
everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made
an atonement for the children of Israel.

We know that the priesthood ended about 300 years later due to the corruption of the sons of Eli, so did God
break His Promise with Phinehas or did the Hebrew word (olam) mean everlasting. I don't think so, because
olam means, an indefinite, unknown period of time. It was a time that was hidden from the general public.

We could also look @ the Old Covenant that was supposedly an everlasting covenant in Leviticus 24:8 where
it says,

8 Every sabbath he shall set it in order before the Lord continually, being
taken from the children of Israel by an everlasting covenant.

That word is olam also, and we know that the Old Covenant ended and was replaced in Jesus Christ. Heb. 8:13
says,

13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that
which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

No one will dispute that Truth will reign into eternity, but indefinite isn't the same as infinite. Indefinite might refer
to infinite, but as you said, only if the context demands it.

What a God! What a Plan!

Logabe

Logabe,

That's a red herring logical fallacy of a response.

You did not deal with the evidence I provided regarding 2 John 2. When you use a logical fallacy like this, it engages in fallacious reasoning and thus prevents our having a rational conversation.

Oz

 

[logabe]

Logabe,

That's a red herring logical fallacy of a response.

You did not deal with the evidence I provided regarding 2 John 2. When you use a logical fallacy like this, it engages in fallacious reasoning and thus prevents our having a rational conversation.

Oz

If you read the last two post, I think you will see that I read from the Bible and you read from
Zondervan Publishing House. But that's beside the point. I think a lot of Christians are stuck
in certain scriptures, because of the words ever, forever, forever and ever. I'm not trying to
confuse anyone, but I'm trying to encourage them to study the matter so they can understand
the scriptures better.

How can we believe God is going to cause all of His enemies to bow before Him if they are
going to hell for ever and ever? Isaiah 45:23-24 says,

23 “I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My
mouth in righteousness And will not turn back, That to Me every
knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance.
24 “They will say of Me, ‘Only in the Lord are righteousness and
strength. ’Men will come to Him, And all who were angry at Him
will be put to shame.

That's not possible if they are going to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire, so ever must mean
something other than eternity. What do you think?

Speaking of reconciliation, it would be impossible for God to reconcile the world if most of the
world was going to hell. Col. 1:16-20 says,

16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and
on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or
rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him
and for Him.
20 and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having
made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say,
whether things on earth or things in heaven.

My point is, we all believe that God created everything, but because of words like ever, we
can't believe that God can actually reconcile all things. Paul said it, but very few believe it,
because of their interpretation of several words in scripture.

God's Purpose and Plan is to reconcile everything He has created especially His enemies. If
we believe He can't, because man will never change, then we have just called God a liar. He
swore in Isa. that He would cause every knee to bow and every tongue to confess. Don't get
mad @ me. I didn't say it I just believe it.

Now that's the TRUTH!!!

What a God! What a Plan!

Logabe

 

[OzSpen]

If you read the last two post, I think you will see that I read from the Bible and you read from
Zondervan Publishing House. But that's beside the point. I think a lot of Christians are stuck
in certain scriptures, because of the words ever, forever, forever and ever. I'm not trying to
confuse anyone, but I'm trying to encourage them to study the matter so they can understand
the scriptures better.

How can we believe God is going to cause all of His enemies to bow before Him if they are
going to hell for ever and ever? Isaiah 45:23-24 says,

23 “I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My
mouth in righteousness And will not turn back, That to Me every
knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance.
24 “They will say of Me, ‘Only in the Lord are righteousness and
strength. ’Men will come to Him, And all who were angry at Him
will be put to shame.

That's not possible if they are going to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire, so ever must mean
something other than eternity. What do you think?

Speaking of reconciliation, it would be impossible for God to reconcile the world if most of the
world was going to hell. Col. 1:16-20 says,

16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and
on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or
rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him
and for Him.
20 and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having
made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say,
whether things on earth or things in heaven.

My point is, we all believe that God created everything, but because of words like ever, we
can't believe that God can actually reconcile all things. Paul said it, but very few believe it,
because of their interpretation of several words in scripture.

God's Purpose and Plan is to reconcile everything He has created especially His enemies. If
we believe He can't, because man will never change, then we have just called God a liar. He
swore in Isa. that He would cause every knee to bow and every tongue to confess. Don't get
mad @ me. I didn't say it I just believe it.

Now that's the TRUTH!!!

What a God! What a Plan!

Logabe

Logabe,

Your accusations against me are false. I am committed to the exegesis of the inerrant Scriptures. I showed you how your view deviated from Scripture and this is how you come back to me. You create a straw man by accusing me of reading from Zondervan Publishing House instead of the Bible. My copy of the NIV, from which I read, is published by Zondervan Bible Publishers. To read my NIV Bible means I read a Zondervan publication.

I don't think you are interested in a reasonable conversation when you engage in false accusations against me and use logical fallacies.

Bye,
Oz

 

[H. Richard]

If salvation is based on sinful man being able to not sin then salvation is based on what man can do about his/her sin nature. Since men live in different social neighborhoods then some will be able to do what some others can not.

The question is; is this fair????

Most do not realize that God has made a plan of salvation that is totally fair for everyone. God, Jesus, paid for all of the sins of the world, past, present, and future. Salvation no longer depends on man being able to not sin. It is based on the fact that Jesus' shed blood paid for all sins. The only thing that condemns a person under grace is to not believe Jesus' shed blood has paid for all the sins of the world. These will wake up in hell knowing that their pardon was paid for by Jesus' shed blood and they refused to believe it.

Rom 4:5-8
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,
6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin."
NKJV

Salvation is not by the works of mankind but is a work already accomplished by Jesus on the cross.

 

[Zachary]

Rom 4:5-8
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,
6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin."
NKJV

I was wondering ... must one be righteous in God's eyes to be saved?

 

[H. Richard]

In God's eyes those that have faith in what God has done on the cross are righteous. As the scriptures quoted tell us all who believe, have faith in, trust in, confidence in, the work of Jesus on the cross are called righteous by God. Their faith is accounted as righteousness in God's eyes.

 

[Zachary]

In God's eyes those that have faith in what God has done on the cross are righteous. As the scriptures quoted tell us all who believe, have faith in, trust in, confidence in, the work of Jesus on the cross are called righteous by God. Their faith is accounted as righteousness in God's eyes.

I believe our righteous standing is conditional ... like everything else.
Why else would the Lord give dozens of dire warnings in the NT?

“… let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous” (1 John 3:7)

“… whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God” (1 John 3:10)

“… you know that everyone who practices righteousness is born of Him.” (1 John 2:29)

“… whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.” (Acts 10:35)

“… (slaves) of obedience leading to righteousness?” (Rom 6:16)

“… so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.” (Rom 6:19)

“… let the one who is righteous, still practice righteousness” (Rev 22:11)

“… the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy
in the Holy Spirit. For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God” (Rom 14:17-18)

“For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge
[SIZE=10pt]of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome,
the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. For it would have been better for them [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them” (2 Peter 2:20-21)[/SIZE]

 

[FHII]

I agree H. Richard!

 

[Zachary]

I agree H. Richard!

With no comment on the passages I quoted?
Do you have no interest in reconciling all of the NT verses re: salvation?
Or are you always going to love your favs, and reject the rest?
I see this as a mild form of insanity.

 

[FHII]

Well Zachary, I was commenting on what H. Richard said. If and when I feel like comnenting on what you said, you'll get it.

As for your comments, I just had a discussion with Wormwood about dire warnings, so I'm not afraid to address it. But if you want me to discuss what you wrote there are better ways to go about it.

 

[H. Richard]

I believe our righteous standing is conditional ... like everything else.
Why else would the Lord give dozens of dire warnings in the NT?

“… let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous” (1 John 3:7)

“… whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God” (1 John 3:10)

“… you know that everyone who practices righteousness is born of Him.” (1 John 2:29)

“… whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.” (Acts 10:35)

“… (slaves) of obedience leading to righteousness?” (Rom 6:16)

“… so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.” (Rom 6:19)

“… let the one who is righteous, still practice righteousness” (Rev 22:11)

“… the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy
in the Holy Spirit. For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God” (Rom 14:17-18)

“For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge
[SIZE=10pt]of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome,
the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. For it would have been better for them [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them” (2 Peter 2:20-21)[/SIZE]

If a person is obedient then they will listen to the gospel of grace Jesus sent Paul to proclaim. But the unbelievers, those that refuse to believe Jesus' shed blood has paid for all the sins of the world, will only listen to the teachings of men who say they are preaching grace when in reality they mix works with grace.. Why do they do it?? Isn't it so that they can proclaim they are more righteous and sin less than others? These want a religion that establishes classes of people from the sinful up to those who claim they no longer sin. And, of course, they are among those who no longer sin.

Those that believe salvation is based on what they do will not except the scriptures quoted below.

Rom 4:5-8
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,
6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin."
NKJV

 

[H. Richard]

With no comment on the passages I quoted?
Do you have no interest in reconciling all of the NT verses re: salvation?
Or are you always going to love your favs, and reject the rest?
I see this as a mild form of insanity.

The only way to reconcile the NT verses is to realize that God has a plan for the nation of Israel. That plan was shown in the OT. and partly fulfilled In the 4 gospels as Jesus came to complete that plan. But it required the Jews to acknowledge who Jesus is, their Messiah and King. The Jews, as a nation, refused.

The gospel of grace was """hidden in God""" and sent out to the world through Paul. Until people understand that Paul's gospel was not the same as the plan for the nation of Israel they will always blend all that was said to the Jews in with the gospel of grace and that is why they can not reconcile the scriptures..

 

[Zachary]

Rom 4:5-8
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,
6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin."
NKJV

Okay, try reconciling your passage with Rom 6:16-23 ...
where Paul warns these believers 3 times in the 8 verses that
sin results in (eternal) death.
Please, not physical ... I've heard that nonsense too much already!

 

[Zachary]

The only way to reconcile the NT verses is to realize that God has a plan for the nation of Israel. That plan was shown in the OT. and partly fulfilled In the 4 gospels as Jesus came to complete that plan. But it required the Jews to acknowledge who Jesus is, their Messiah and King. The Jews, as a nation, refused.

The gospel of grace was """hidden in God""" and sent out to the world through Paul. Until people understand that Paul's gospel was not the same as the plan for the nation of Israel they will always blend all that was said to the Jews in with the gospel of grace and that is why they can not reconcile the scriptures..

Okay, a few years ago, I came to the realization that
Paul's gospel was basically the same as Jesus' gospel.
However, there is a huge difference in that ...

In the gospels, Jesus was preaching to ALL unsaved people.
And He really was preaching to everyone in the future.

Paul was preaching mostly to saved church people.
To Ephesus and Colossae, he actually was preaching to "faithful" saints.
Was he joking, or was he serious?
Because he was heavy-duty into edification, wishful thinking, etc.
and often not always into reality.
E.G. In Romans 6, he says they are slaves of righteousness,
then he warns them to stop sinning and tells them
to present their members as slaves of righteousness!

Anyone going into churches today, preaching to the "faithful" members?
They'd be preaching to 10% of those in the pews!
They're not faithful simply because they've been lied to that ...
God's grace will carry them through on a free ride to heaven!

 

[logabe]

Okay, try reconciling your passage with Rom 6:16-23 ...
where Paul warns these believers 3 times in the 8 verses that
sin results in (eternal) death.
Please, not physical ... I've heard that nonsense too much already!

Eternal death... where do you get eternal death out of these scriptures? I'm pretty sure it says,
the wages of sin is death, not eternal death. That's impossible.

Have you not read 1st Corinthians 15:26?

26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death.

Paul says in the very end, there will be no death. Isn't that what God died for?

What a God? What a Plan!

Logabe

 

[StanJ]

Okay, try reconciling your passage with Rom 6:16-23 ...
where Paul warns these believers 3 times in the 8 verses that
sin results in (eternal) death.

Paul, IN context, is talking about a lifestyle, NOT individual sin. He is writing TO believers, not ABOUT believers. BIG difference.