"To deny Calvinism is to deny the Gospel" - Charles H. Spurgeon
"Arminianism is nothing more than transcendent atheism" - John Owen
"Calvinism proclaims a God who saves; Arminianism speaks of a God who enables man to save himself." - J.I.Packer
A simple reading of the Bible proclaims the doctrines of grace and if that is not enough (and it is for me) I can list hundreds even thousands of great theologians from the past, that were way smarter than all of us put together on these forums, that believed the doctrines of grace as described in Calvinism.
Fifty-four godly men translated the King James version of the Bible. Lancelot Andrews spoke Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic and at least fifteen other languages. Of the fifty-four translators, four were college presidents, six were bishops, five were deans, thirty held PhD�s, thirty-nine held Masters degrees, there were forty-one university professors, thirteen were masters of the Hebrew language, and ten had mastered Greek. Every man involved in the King James Bible translation believed in the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, all believed in the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and all were men of prayer. Many were not only Biblical scholars and master linguists, but also God-called, Spirit-filled preachers.
The King James translation team was arguably the most scholarly men ever assembled for any similar endeavor.
Walter the fact you think you have found something in the Greek these men didn't see or know cracks me up big time!:dunce:
PhillipJohn your uneducated rants expose you for what you are and the Christian in me keeps me from using a list of words on you that come to mind when describing the uneducated. :goofball:
For me I'll stick to the Holy Spirit and the dead guys for clarity of understanding on theology from the scriptures.
Rather than follow the exodus away from these forums I have "chosen" to ignore the 2 men I have called out because it is a waste of time, unless I am looking for a good laugh then I'll read some of PJ's short off the wall comments that make little to no sense or applies to the thread he comments in.
The Bible is like a prisoner of war, you torcher it enough it will say what you want it to say.
Thank you very much for this very lovely posting. I cannot see myself so positive as you draw the picture of me, for I also called others words on here, so I feel a bit ashamed about your posting as well, but in a positive way...
Sometimes I also think I'm wasting time here, but I can't help but come back and debate (so far about free will etc). Maybe there is the hope to find agreement finally. Or it is pride to think I can turn them over to my position... this is for others to judge...
So thank you, and have a wonderful day down there in the Nederlands.
@manofgod:
Yes, I think there is not one really correct to the point translation of the bible. There isn't even an original we can get hold on. It's all about interpretation. We need no perfect bible as we are guided by the Holy Spirit in reading it. If we are not guided in the Spirit, we come up with stuff like racism, nationalism, all backed up with bible passages. The Deutsche Christen in the Nazi time here in Europe even twisted the bible so far as to have Hitler as a new Messiah for the German people.
There are mistakes in the KJV, or at least some meanings of words have changed according to modern day American English (KJV is British and old, and at least for me British is a whole different language from American, I hardly have problems understanding yo guys, but in Britain...)
As I said, Walter can still be wrong in his translation and the KJV right, I don't know the case and cannot make up my mind on it. But if the KJV was the last word and not wrong at all, why would one even study ancient Greek any more? Proof all and keep the good, this is what Paul wrote, and I think it's a good idea to question certain translations from time to time.
Yes that is correct. There are errors in the KJV, many errors in the Grammar and it affects doctrinal positions. If a person is being truly honest with the scriptures, they would look at them without personal bias, but often, including TRANSLATORS who were mere mortal men and not deity, can and do interject personal bias into the translations. It is only the "originals" and their copies in the original languages that are inspired. Anyone who treats and or things the English versions are somehow inspired lacks understanding and discernment.
Here's a simple test. Look at John 3:16 and translate it. Look at the Greek and see what it really says. It is significantly different in the Greek text and was improperly translated.
(KJV) 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.
The implication here is that whoever believes in Him should not perish. One would think that this is an example of how to be saved. But when you examine the Greek we see something different that is being conveyed. Young's literal translation says it better of all the English version.
(YLT) for God did so love the world, that His Son--the only begotten--He gave, that every one who is believing[continuing to believe] in him may not perish, but may have life age-during. [brackets mine]
What the Greek conveys is this.
For God loved the world so much that He gave His only begotten Son, so that those continuing to believe may not perish but may have everlasting life.
The verse is not about obtaining salvation by believing in Christ but it is addressed to Christians and about their CONTINUING to believe in Christ. In other words it is addressing perseverance. Yet it is one of the most quoted passages and yet it was translated incorrectly. Young's Literal Translation is the only English version I have seen that has it correct.
You are right about the translation. That is a present participle there, pisteuwn (w be greek omega).
This puts the focus on the daration, not the certain act, like rather the action of believing than rather the beginning point of believing or the act of believing as a whole.
But still I am not sure if I would make such a big difference by interpreting the verse, as you do.
I think there is no one who would say that one had to believe once and be saved, whether he keeps believing or not. I am not sure if anybody would read the KJV that way, so I'm not sure if this is a concern of debate. In German we do not even have the possibility to make those differences you can make in Greek and English. We have no aspect to verbs, they only express time: past, present, future. Your system with perfect and progressive tenses is more elaborated, I guess that's the French influence to English...
I'd translate the verse more like this:
everyone believing in Him ...
Taking a second look I think, one could maybe even translate: every believer, for the participle can also refer to a person doing the thing refered to in the verb, liek the believing can also refer to a person or group of persons doing the act of believing in English...
What are the KEY WORDS in this verses? Whether in Engish, the Greek, Latin, Hebrew, German, French, or Spanish, or whatever languages.
Point put for us the important KEY WORDS that makes this passage come alive, and mean what it says , and says what it mean that is directed to the readers.
For God so loved the world, that he gave His Only Begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everleasting life.
That is most incorrect. The English translations, all but Young's, has it incorrect. The tense of the verbs changes whom is being addressed.
The verse is not about obtaining salvation as most interpret but about someone who is already a believer.
For God loved the world so much, THAT He gave His only begotten Son, *** SO THAT.... those BELIEVING [ those continuing to believe] MAY not perish but MAY have everlasting life.
Notice the reason..... SO THAT... those BELIEVING, these are people who are already Christians. Those "Believing" means continuing to believe. What the implication for those who continue to believe? They..." MAY"... not perish but... " MAY"... have everlasting life. The word "MAY" does not convey a certainty but only a possibility.
