Exactly! They want the exact word. Makes you wonder how these people function in regular day to day activities like reading the newspaper, etc.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
This is the exact same method the cultists employ. Just yesterday at CARM I posted to a Christadelphian that Paul said that Christ pre-existed in the form of God. Christadelphians deny both Christ's divinity and His pre-existence. The Christadelphian said, "Point to me where Paul used the word "pre-existed."
I replied saying,
Well, if you are looking for a word that is equivalent to our English word "pre-existed," then you couldn't prove that God preexisted. Don't be silly. You know that God pre-existed because the scripture says that He was (huparxwn). You know very well that Paul said that Jesus was (huparxwn) in the form of God. Therefore, Christ pre-existed in the form of God.
I have been trying to get FG2 to see the folly of his methods but he will not listen.
I said this:
So, one is impressed with the 46 English translators regarding one verse (Acts 13:48), yet not at all impressed with those SAME translators on another verse (Heb 2:9) which clearly state that Jesus died for everyone.
What's to interpret? i am in full agreement with all 46 translators. Jesus died for everyone.
Here's a reminder of how the 46 translators rendered "pas":
EVERYONE - 25
Common English Bible
Contemporary English Version
Easy-To-Read Version
ESV
ESV Anglicized
Expanded Bible
Gods Word
Good News Translation
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Lexham English Bible
Mounce Reverse Interlinear NT
Names of God Bible
NASB
New Century Version
NET
NIRV
NIV
NKJV
NLT
NRSV
NRSV anglicized
NRSV anglicized Catholic
NRSV Catholic
The Voice
World English Bible
EVERY ONE - 3
RSV
RSV Catholic
Youngs Literal Translation
EVERY MAN - 6
21st Century KJV
ASV
JB Phillips NT
Jubilee Bible 2000
KJV
Authorized KJV
EVERY INDIVIDUAL PERSON - 1
Amplified Bible
ALL HUMANITY - 1
Complete Jewish Bible
EVERY THING - 2
Darby Translation
Douay-Rheims1899 American Ed
ALL MEN - 2
1599 Geneva
Wycliffe
ON BEHALF OF ALL - 2
Knox Bible
Orthodox Jewish Bible
EVERY PERSONS PLACE - 1
The Message
ALL OF US - 1
New Life Version
EVERY PERSON - 1
Worldwide English NT
How in the world anyone would think these 46 translators would think that Jesus only died for some is really baffling.
If there ever was a verse that speaks to the scope of who Christ died for, Heb 2:9 is the one. What an opportunity to make it crystal clear.
54% of translations used "everyone", hardly a word that supports RT.
And none of the rest could remotely be used to support RT.
The Complete Jewish Bible renders "pas" as "all of humanity". How does that support RT? NOT.
Dodging my point once again.There's a difference between translating and interpreting.
Does not the word "all" require interpretation in 1 Corinthians 15:22?What's to interpret? I am in full agreement with all 46 translators. Jesus died for everyone.
Dodging my point once again.
And tell that to the 46 translators.
One must bury his head in the sand to say that he is not interpreting the word "all" in Hebrews 2:9. The word "all" ALWAYS requires interpretation. 1 Corinthians 15:22 is a perfect example.I disagree with your interpretation.
No. The meaning is quite obvious and clear.Does not the word "all" require interpretation in 1 Corinthians 15:22?
You agree with these?I'm not dodging. I don't disagree with the translations. I disagree with your interpretation.
You agree with these?
ALL HUMANITY - 1
Complete Jewish Bible
EVERY PERSON - 1
Worldwide English NT
EVERY INDIVIDUAL PERSON - 1
Amplified Bible
EVERYONE - 25
Common English Bible
Contemporary English Version
Easy-To-Read Version
ESV
ESV Anglicized
Expanded Bible
Gods Word
Good News Translation
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Lexham English Bible
Mounce Reverse Interlinear NT
Names of God Bible
NASB
New Century Version
NET
NIRV
NIV
NKJV
NLT
NRSV
NRSV anglicized
NRSV anglicized Catholic
NRSV Catholic
The Voice
World English Bible
One must commit eisegesis in order to warp these words to mean "only the elect".
But you admitted that you agree with all 46 translations. Now you're backpedaling a lot. The Complete Jewish Bible translators understood the writer to mean "all of humanity". And you said you agreed with the translators.I agree that all means all. Any extra words go from a translation to an interpretation.
But you admitted that you agree with all 46 translations. Now you're backpedaling a lot. The Complete Jewish Bible translators understood the writer to mean "all of humanity". And you said you agreed with the translators.
So, just not actually telling the truth, huh.
Backpedaled. Got it.Misspoke, that's all. I've corrected myself.
Backpedaled. Got it.
You said that "all" in Hebrews 2:9 needs no interpretation. Now you deny that "all" in 1 Cor. 15:22 needs no interpretation. Yet you interpreted the "all" in clause 2 differently from the "all" in clause 1. You INTERPRETED.No. The meaning is quite obvious and clear.
The first "all" refers to all of humanity. The second "all" refers to all believers, which is indicated by the phrase "in Christ".
I did. You first said you agreed with all the translations from Biblegateway, and when I pointed out a number of them, you flip flopped on your initial statement.If that's how you choose to look at it, I can't help it. I would rather you just took me at my word.
Who wouldn't think they refer to different groups?You said that "all" in Hebrews 2:9 needs no interpretation. Now you deny that "all" in 1 Cor. 15:22 needs no interpretation. Yet you interpreted the "all" in clause 2 differently from the "all" in clause 1. You INTERPRETED.
I don't know. Several days ago, maybe?Do you think people here were born yesterday?
OK, some here may need a rest. That's ok. The sentence itself clearly indicates different groups. It doesn't take "interpretation".One of the translations I provided for 1 Cor. 15:22 says "everyone" in both clauses. Yet you interpret "everyone" in the first clause as "every human being," but not in the second clause. You INTERPRETED. I rest my case.
Yes, easily disproved. v.9 follows v.8 and is in THAT context, not in the context of the next paragraph starting in v.10.Based upon the Protestant "Line upon line" principle of interpretation I interpret the "all" in Hebrews 2:9 as "the many sons of glory" of verse 10. You cannot disprove my interpretation.
I will be happy to hand over a napkin with which to wipe off all that egg on the face.Thank you for your assisting me in disproving you.
The Universalists don't think they are different groups. 1 Corinthians 15:22 is one of their proof texts. I can't believe you had to ask. The Calvinists don't think they are different groups.Who wouldn't think they refer to different groups?
No, it does NOT indicate different groups. Universalists don't think so. And Calvinists don't think so. Universalists say that "all" refers to every human being in both clauses. Calvinists say it is about the people of God in both clauses.OK, some here may need a rest. That's ok. The sentence itself clearly indicates different groups. It doesn't take "interpretation".
Huh? I don't follow you. Verse 8 speaks about all His enemies being put under His feet. Verse 10 indicates the PURPOSE of His death which was to bring the "many sons" to glory. Purpose = extent.Yes, easily disproved. v.9 follows v.8 and is in THAT context, not in the context of the next paragraph starting in v.10.
I did. You first said you agreed with all the translations from Biblegateway, and when I pointed out a number of them, you flip flopped on your initial statement.
If one wishes others to take them at their word, it's necessary to be honest and consistent in their word.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?