Disprove Calvinist Soteriology

rich rio

Active Member
Jun 12, 2017
39
1
40
New bren
✟15,749.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
(Romans 16:16)




We understand that it was the original autographs or writings of the apostles and prophets which were inspired (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 1 Cor. 14:37). However, for centuries men have been translating the original Scriptures (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) into their native vernacular. Each time a translation is produced there is the hope that it will be the perfect one. It never is! Why? Because translations, unlike the original autographs, are not inspired. Translations are the productions of fallible men, and “to err is human.” Thus, every Bible translation has its strengths and weaknesses. Those who translate ought to translate, not mistranslate, omit, add to, rewrite, paraphrase, and offer personal commentary.

We are not opposed to a new version per se. But the need for a new version has been grossly exaggerated, and many of those which have been produced are truly perversions rather than versions. They are for the propagation of denominational and theological error under the guise of a Bible. Such deception and lack of integrity ought never to be dignified by faithful brethren. Some degree of subjective interpretation is woven into the fabric of any Bible version. Admittedly, though, some translations are better than others. Some "translations" couldn't be farther from accurate translations. There are the so-called paraphrases which include The Living Bible and Good News for Modern Man. Very little reliability can be found here, since men have put into their own words what THEY think the text says.

Then, there are translations such as the NIV, which in many instances are reliable, but have a publisher’s bias which must be recognized. The NIV was translated by a group of Greek scholars who are Calvinistic and premillennial in theology. Thus, one can find elements of Calvinism in it. For instance, Romans 8 in the NIV reflects the Calvinistic tenet that man has a "sin nature." Yet, Romans 8 does not use such words in the Greek text. The translators became interpreters and commentators in this case.

Loved ones, our humble lips cannot clearly express to you the danger of promoting the use of the NIV and ESV. The devil is sooooo smart. For approximately six thousands years he has put up with men reading the Bible. He has done his best to get man away from the Bible by giving them other books (Qur’an, Book of Mormon, etc.). However, this tactic has worked for him only in a limited way (he has a few million Mormons and maybe a billion or so Muslims). He now has become so smart that he has devised a way to give man a Bible to read that is NOT really a Bible.



The devil has given man a Bible that is NOT a Bible because it takes man, sin, and God out of the Bible (NIV/ESV). Below are a few errors (FALSE TEACHINGS) from the NIV and ESV that brethren have fought against for years (see Ephesians 5:19 in the NIV – “sing and make music” instead of “sing and make melody”). But before you go to them, just do a quick verse by verse comparison of two chapters from the NIV/ESV. The NIV/ESV is attractive to many because of its readability; however, please notice what these versions say compared to what the KJV says. Notice how they take God, man, and sin right out of the Bible. Use Ecclesiastes chapters 5 and 6 for the comparison. Notice especially 5:8 (the "high official" vs the "highest"), 9, 12 ("full stomach" vs "abundance,") 14 and 6:3, 4 (“it” vs “he” – man), 9 ("appetite"- play on verse 7 vs "desire," also "wind" vs "spirit") 10, 11.



The NIV is very much a paraphrase in many places. It is impossible to take the NIV and translate from its English back into the original languages. Friends, please imagine what the world is going to be like 100 years from now because our children have been brought up using a Bible which is NOT a Bible (NIV/ESV). Ohooo, that scares me (us) to the bone…



The NIV & ESV Downgrade the Deity of Christ

They say the spotless Son of God had to be purified! "...their purification" (Luke 2:22). The KJV says, "...her purification." 1 Timothy 3:16 omits "God," and replaces it with "he." Acts 8:37 is omitted even though 95 % of the evidence demands it. The ESV renders the present participle, hyparchon (“being” KJV; “existing” ASV), in Philippians 2:6, as a past tense form – “was in the form of God” – which could leave the impression that Jesus was not deity while in the flesh. The Lord always existed, and continued to exist, as deity, even though incarnate (Fee, 1995, p. 203; Vine, 1991, pp. 279-80). R.C.H. Lenski noted that Jesus never existed apart from the nature of deity (p. 774). There is no reason not to give the participle its full, present tense flavor. Philippians 2:7 (NIV & ESV), Jesus "made himself nothing." The KJV, "But made himself of no reputation." If something is nothing, then it does not exist. Jesus is made to be a non-entity. How could a self existent being cease to exist? This is an absurdity and is evidence of poor scholarship. 1 Peter 2:8 (NIV) says, "A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that causes men to fall." The NIV teaches that Jesus causes men to stumble, and makes men fall. Jesus is the stone, but He does not cause or make men stumble; it is man's own disobedience. Here, the translators are guilty of paraphrasing, not translating. The KJV reads, "...which stumble at the word, being disobedient..."



The NIV & ESV Contradict the Bible

Mark 1:1 (KJV), "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God." Mark 1:1 (NIV), "The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God." The KJV involves the gospel Jesus preached and the NIV is what one believes about Jesus. Mark 1:2 (KJV), "As it is written in the prophets." Mark 1:2 (NIV & ESV), "It is written in Isaiah the prophet." They say Isaiah and then quote Malachi 3:1. Hebrews 11:17, Abraham sacrificed "his one and only son" (NIV); “only son” (ESV). The Bible says Abraham had TWO sons (Galatians 4:22). "For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman." These versions refer to Jesus as God's "one and only Son" or "only Son” (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). But 1 John 3:2 (KJV), "Beloved, now are we the sons of God..."



These versions teach that a non-Christian cannot understand the Gospel, thus contradicting Romans 1:16. 1 Corinthians 2:14 (NIV), "The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot (is not able to - ESV) understand them, because they are spiritually discerned." They teach that Christ did not come to abolish the law. Matthew 5:17, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfill" (KJV). They say, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." But Christ did abolish the law. “By abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations” (Eph. 2:15 – NIV). Thus, these versions contradict themselves as well as the Bible. Hebrews 10:9 (KJV), "Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.”


The NIV & ESV Teach Premillennialism

Matthew 19:28 (NIV), "at the renewing of all things," “in the new world” (ESV), rather than "in the regeneration" (KJV). This accommodates the literal 1000 years reign as does Acts 3:21 (which says) "restore everything" (NIV), and “restoring all the things” (ESV). The KJV reads, "Times of restitution." However, both passages refer to the Christian age. Ephesians 1:10 (NIV), "to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment." This teaches a future state rather than one fulfilled in Christ. KJV, "That in the dispensation of the fullness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him." Galatians 4:4 (KJV) settles it, "But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.”



The NIV & ESV Teach Salvation by “Faith Only”

Romans 10:10 (KJV), "For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." They say, "For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved." THIS IS FALSE, for it teaches CALVINISM - that is - a sinner is saved before he puts Christ on in baptism. Salvation is found only in Christ (2 Tim 2:10). God teaches that one gets into Christ at the point of water baptism (SEE Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3-4; 1 Pet. 3:21). The NIV includes one in Christ WHEN he hears the word (Eph. 1:13). In 1 Peter 3:21 (NIV), a saving baptism is merely a "pledge of a good conscience toward God," rather than an appeal to God. Romans 1:17 (KJV), "For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith..." Romans 1:17 (NIV), "a righteousness that is by faith from first to last..." In Romans 3:27 the NIV takes "the law of faith" right out of the text and replaces it with just the word "faith."



The NIV obliterates the subjunctive mood. In John 3:16 it makes the text say exactly opposite what the original text says. It changes the word "should" to "shall" (Once saved Always saved). "Should be saved" gives hope but does not give a guarantee. "Should" reflects the subjunctive mood of the original text but "shall" puts the translation into the indicative mood which indicates a statement of fact. If this condition were true only in a case or two, it might not make so much difference, but the NIV has eliminated the subjunctive mood throughout the New Testament.


The NIV & ESV Teach that Miraculous Gifts Continue

In 1 Corinthians 2:12, the NIV and ESV have the Holy Spirit enabling us to "UNDERSTAND what God has freely given us." They equate "seizures" or “epilepsy” with demon possession in Matthew 17:15. Here the translators did not translate but interpreted by saying the boy was an epileptic. The KJV reads, "Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed..." Demon possession is not epilepsy. First Corinthians 13:8-10 (NIV) has miraculous gifts ceasing when PERFECTION comes...rather than "that which is perfect" (KJV). In Ephesians 4:13 (NIV), we are waiting for unity IN the faith rather than unity OF the faith (KJV) before miracles will cease.



The NIV & ESV Add Doubt and Deception in the Footnotes

Mark 16:9-20, the NIV states, "The most reliable early Manuscripts omit Mark 16:9-20." This is very misleading. Mark 1:1, they say, "Some early MSS omit the Son of God." Luke 22:43-44, they say, "Some early MSS Omit verses 43-44."



Acts 2:38, the NIV Study Bible says, “Not that baptism effects forgiveness. Rather, forgiveness comes through that which is symbolized by baptism.” Acts 22:16, the NIV Study Bible says, “Baptism is the outward sign of an inward grace. The reality and symbol are closely associated in the New Testament.”



The NIV Teaches the church was Built on Peter

Matthew 16:18 (NIV), "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church." Then the footnote says, "Peter means rock." But Jesus says Peter is a pebble, and the great confession Peter made concerning the Deity of Christ (vs. 16) is the “ROCK” foundation upon which the church is built (1 Cor. 3:11). The NIV translators did what the Catholics have wanted to do for years but did not have the nerve to do.


The NIV Teaches Total Hereditary Sin (Original or Inherited sin)

Psalm 51:5 (KJV), "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." Psalm 51:5 (NIV) says, "Surely I have been a sinner from birth, Sinful from the time my mother conceived me." However, the NIV is incorrect because this contradicts other clear Bible statements. Ezekiel 18:20 (KJV), "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father; neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son..." Matthew 18:3 (KJV), "Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." 1 John 3:4 (KJV), "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." The KJV teaches that a man is born into a sinful world, not born sinful. This Calvinistic idea is carried over into the New Testament by rendering "flesh" (KJV) as "sinful nature" (Rom. 7, 8, 9; Gal. 5 - NIV). Human nature is not sinful because we were made in the image of God and after His likeness (Gen. 1:26-27). Men "go astray," they are not "born astray."



The NIV suggests that if an unbeliever leaves his Christian mate, the Christian “is not bound” to the relationship any longer (1 Cor. 7:15). This is at variance with Matthew 19:9.


In the preface to the NIV the church of Christ is listed as a "denomination."

The ESV removes the fact that God Hates Divorce
Malachi 2:16 (KJV), God "...hateth putting away." ESV - "For the man who hates and divorces, says the Lord, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the Lord of hosts." This is inexcusable. The idea expressed in the ESV is not that GOD HATES DIVORCE, but that the man who HATES AND DIVORCES is guilty of violence.

The ESV places a Time Element in 1 Thessalonians 2:16
"By hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved - so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them at last." The words "at last" express a time element. While the Greek word can express time fulfillment, the primary word is QUANTITATIVE. The KJV captures the force, expressing God's wrath coming upon them to the "UTTERMOST."


The ESV says a man shall not SUFFER for the Sins of his father
Ezekiel 18:20 (ESV), "The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, or the father suffer for the iniquity of the son...." The KJV express the idea that the son shall not BEAR the INIQUITY of the father. An individual shall not BEAR the iniquity (or guilt) of his father, but he VERY WELL MAY SUFFER for his father's sins. There is a difference. Didn't David's son suffer death due to David's sins? (2 Sam.11:27-12:15). Didn't Christ suffer for our sins? (1 Pet. 2:21).

The ESV translates inappropriate contenteia (fornication - KJV) as “sexual immorality” (Matt. 19:9; etc.) This is too general. Lust is a form of “sexual immorality,” but evil thoughts are not a justification for terminating a marriage.

The ESV renders the original words aner as “husband” and gune as “wife” (1 Cor. 11:3ff). This is inconsistent with the immediate context, and at variance with other contexts dealing with the same gender theme (1 Corinthians 14:34-35; 1 Timothy 2:8ff.). The headship of “man” (in general) over “woman” is in view, rather than the husband wife relationship.

CONCLUSION: It is impossible for God to lie (Titus 1:2; Heb. 6:18). Thus, all the removals of man, sin, and Deity, plus the omissions, additions, contradictions, poor translating, and paraphrasing in the NIV and ESV are from the devil. Those who love the Word of God should use them for their own study and comparison purposes (if desired); however, we do not believe the use of these versions should be promoted in the church.



ELDERS, beware! Your job is to watch over yourselves and the flock. YOU and many of your preachers and teachers are promoting and using these versions when teaching the flock. God is not pleased! What we should look for are Bible translations which attempt to make word for word translations. Elders who are faithful in their work of feeding and protecting the flock should request that only reliable translations (K.J.V.) be used in sermons, classes, and public Scripture readings. This does not always make for ease of readability, but it does, as a general rule, provide the reader with a reliable translation.
 
Upvote 0

jimmyjimmy

Pardoned Rebel
Site Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
11,556
5,728
USA
✟234,973.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
As I ponder this subject and the difficulty many have in coming to terms with God's sovereignty in election, I see the example of the OP as one of the largest obstacals in people's understanding the Calvinist position. Here's the content of the OP: "I need everything you've got to disprove Calvinist beliefs on eternal salvation. I'm looking for Bible verses more than arguments."

The OP was out to do drive-by theology. He wanted a few quick verses (no thoughtful arguments) to use to, "Disprove Calvinist Soteriology". Many use the Bible in this manner, as a topical reference book. They wish to find out all the Bible teaches about money, so they do a word search: "money". The same for marriage or alcohol. . .

This technique does have some value, but I suggest if all you did was read the results of the word search on money, you would have only a small glimpse of God's mind on the matter.

Theology is work. It requires time, patience, humility and prayer, and the most worthwhile doctrines of the Bible are the ones in which some mining is necessary. Intellectual rigor, as in other pursuits of knowledge, is rewarded greatly.

A humble inquirer into this subject would learn much from some very wise and intelligent Reformed posters here, but they seem harder to find than Sasquatch.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Winner
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,197
25,222
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,729,929.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
As I ponder this subject and the difficulty many have in coming to terms with God's sovereignty in election, I see the example of the OP as one of the largest obstacals in people's understanding the Calvinist position. Here's the content of the OP: "I need everything you've got to disprove Calvinist beliefs on eternal salvation. I'm looking for Bible verses more than arguments."

The OP was out to do drive-by theology. He wanted a few quick verses (no thoughtful arguments) to use to, "Disprove Calvinist Soteriology". Many use the Bible in this manner, as a topical reference book. They wish to find out all the Bible teaches about money, so they do a word search: "money". The same for marriage or alcohol. . .

This technique does have some value, but I suggest if all you did was read the results of the word search on money, you would have only a small glimpse of God's mind on the matter.

Theology is work. It requires time, patience, humility and prayer, and the most worthwhile doctrines of the Bible are the ones in which some mining is necessary. Intellectual rigor, as in other pursuits of knowledge, is rewarded greatly.

A humble inquirer into this subject would learn much from some very wise and intelligent Reformed posters here, but they seem harder to find than Sasquatch.
This is off topic for this thread. It has nothing to do with the OP.
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,197
25,222
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,729,929.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
(Romans 16:16)




We understand that it was the original autographs or writings of the apostles and prophets which were inspired (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 1 Cor. 14:37). However, for centuries men have been translating the original Scriptures (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) into their native vernacular. Each time a translation is produced there is the hope that it will be the perfect one. It never is! Why? Because translations, unlike the original autographs, are not inspired. Translations are the productions of fallible men, and “to err is human.” Thus, every Bible translation has its strengths and weaknesses. Those who translate ought to translate, not mistranslate, omit, add to, rewrite, paraphrase, and offer personal commentary.

We are not opposed to a new version per se. But the need for a new version has been grossly exaggerated, and many of those which have been produced are truly perversions rather than versions. They are for the propagation of denominational and theological error under the guise of a Bible. Such deception and lack of integrity ought never to be dignified by faithful brethren. Some degree of subjective interpretation is woven into the fabric of any Bible version. Admittedly, though, some translations are better than others. Some "translations" couldn't be farther from accurate translations. There are the so-called paraphrases which include The Living Bible and Good News for Modern Man. Very little reliability can be found here, since men have put into their own words what THEY think the text says.

Then, there are translations such as the NIV, which in many instances are reliable, but have a publisher’s bias which must be recognized. The NIV was translated by a group of Greek scholars who are Calvinistic and premillennial in theology. Thus, one can find elements of Calvinism in it. For instance, Romans 8 in the NIV reflects the Calvinistic tenet that man has a "sin nature." Yet, Romans 8 does not use such words in the Greek text. The translators became interpreters and commentators in this case.

Loved ones, our humble lips cannot clearly express to you the danger of promoting the use of the NIV and ESV. The devil is sooooo smart. For approximately six thousands years he has put up with men reading the Bible. He has done his best to get man away from the Bible by giving them other books (Qur’an, Book of Mormon, etc.). However, this tactic has worked for him only in a limited way (he has a few million Mormons and maybe a billion or so Muslims). He now has become so smart that he has devised a way to give man a Bible to read that is NOT really a Bible.



The devil has given man a Bible that is NOT a Bible because it takes man, sin, and God out of the Bible (NIV/ESV). Below are a few errors (FALSE TEACHINGS) from the NIV and ESV that brethren have fought against for years (see Ephesians 5:19 in the NIV – “sing and make music” instead of “sing and make melody”). But before you go to them, just do a quick verse by verse comparison of two chapters from the NIV/ESV. The NIV/ESV is attractive to many because of its readability; however, please notice what these versions say compared to what the KJV says. Notice how they take God, man, and sin right out of the Bible. Use Ecclesiastes chapters 5 and 6 for the comparison. Notice especially 5:8 (the "high official" vs the "highest"), 9, 12 ("full stomach" vs "abundance,") 14 and 6:3, 4 (“it” vs “he” – man), 9 ("appetite"- play on verse 7 vs "desire," also "wind" vs "spirit") 10, 11.



The NIV is very much a paraphrase in many places. It is impossible to take the NIV and translate from its English back into the original languages. Friends, please imagine what the world is going to be like 100 years from now because our children have been brought up using a Bible which is NOT a Bible (NIV/ESV). Ohooo, that scares me (us) to the bone…



The NIV & ESV Downgrade the Deity of Christ

They say the spotless Son of God had to be purified! "...their purification" (Luke 2:22). The KJV says, "...her purification." 1 Timothy 3:16 omits "God," and replaces it with "he." Acts 8:37 is omitted even though 95 % of the evidence demands it. The ESV renders the present participle, hyparchon (“being” KJV; “existing” ASV), in Philippians 2:6, as a past tense form – “was in the form of God” – which could leave the impression that Jesus was not deity while in the flesh. The Lord always existed, and continued to exist, as deity, even though incarnate (Fee, 1995, p. 203; Vine, 1991, pp. 279-80). R.C.H. Lenski noted that Jesus never existed apart from the nature of deity (p. 774). There is no reason not to give the participle its full, present tense flavor. Philippians 2:7 (NIV & ESV), Jesus "made himself nothing." The KJV, "But made himself of no reputation." If something is nothing, then it does not exist. Jesus is made to be a non-entity. How could a self existent being cease to exist? This is an absurdity and is evidence of poor scholarship. 1 Peter 2:8 (NIV) says, "A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that causes men to fall." The NIV teaches that Jesus causes men to stumble, and makes men fall. Jesus is the stone, but He does not cause or make men stumble; it is man's own disobedience. Here, the translators are guilty of paraphrasing, not translating. The KJV reads, "...which stumble at the word, being disobedient..."



The NIV & ESV Contradict the Bible

Mark 1:1 (KJV), "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God." Mark 1:1 (NIV), "The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God." The KJV involves the gospel Jesus preached and the NIV is what one believes about Jesus. Mark 1:2 (KJV), "As it is written in the prophets." Mark 1:2 (NIV & ESV), "It is written in Isaiah the prophet." They say Isaiah and then quote Malachi 3:1. Hebrews 11:17, Abraham sacrificed "his one and only son" (NIV); “only son” (ESV). The Bible says Abraham had TWO sons (Galatians 4:22). "For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman." These versions refer to Jesus as God's "one and only Son" or "only Son” (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). But 1 John 3:2 (KJV), "Beloved, now are we the sons of God..."



These versions teach that a non-Christian cannot understand the Gospel, thus contradicting Romans 1:16. 1 Corinthians 2:14 (NIV), "The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot (is not able to - ESV) understand them, because they are spiritually discerned." They teach that Christ did not come to abolish the law. Matthew 5:17, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfill" (KJV). They say, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." But Christ did abolish the law. “By abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations” (Eph. 2:15 – NIV). Thus, these versions contradict themselves as well as the Bible. Hebrews 10:9 (KJV), "Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.”


The NIV & ESV Teach Premillennialism

Matthew 19:28 (NIV), "at the renewing of all things," “in the new world” (ESV), rather than "in the regeneration" (KJV). This accommodates the literal 1000 years reign as does Acts 3:21 (which says) "restore everything" (NIV), and “restoring all the things” (ESV). The KJV reads, "Times of restitution." However, both passages refer to the Christian age. Ephesians 1:10 (NIV), "to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment." This teaches a future state rather than one fulfilled in Christ. KJV, "That in the dispensation of the fullness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him." Galatians 4:4 (KJV) settles it, "But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.”



The NIV & ESV Teach Salvation by “Faith Only”

Romans 10:10 (KJV), "For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." They say, "For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved." THIS IS FALSE, for it teaches CALVINISM - that is - a sinner is saved before he puts Christ on in baptism. Salvation is found only in Christ (2 Tim 2:10). God teaches that one gets into Christ at the point of water baptism (SEE Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3-4; 1 Pet. 3:21). The NIV includes one in Christ WHEN he hears the word (Eph. 1:13). In 1 Peter 3:21 (NIV), a saving baptism is merely a "pledge of a good conscience toward God," rather than an appeal to God. Romans 1:17 (KJV), "For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith..." Romans 1:17 (NIV), "a righteousness that is by faith from first to last..." In Romans 3:27 the NIV takes "the law of faith" right out of the text and replaces it with just the word "faith."



The NIV obliterates the subjunctive mood. In John 3:16 it makes the text say exactly opposite what the original text says. It changes the word "should" to "shall" (Once saved Always saved). "Should be saved" gives hope but does not give a guarantee. "Should" reflects the subjunctive mood of the original text but "shall" puts the translation into the indicative mood which indicates a statement of fact. If this condition were true only in a case or two, it might not make so much difference, but the NIV has eliminated the subjunctive mood throughout the New Testament.


The NIV & ESV Teach that Miraculous Gifts Continue

In 1 Corinthians 2:12, the NIV and ESV have the Holy Spirit enabling us to "UNDERSTAND what God has freely given us." They equate "seizures" or “epilepsy” with demon possession in Matthew 17:15. Here the translators did not translate but interpreted by saying the boy was an epileptic. The KJV reads, "Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed..." Demon possession is not epilepsy. First Corinthians 13:8-10 (NIV) has miraculous gifts ceasing when PERFECTION comes...rather than "that which is perfect" (KJV). In Ephesians 4:13 (NIV), we are waiting for unity IN the faith rather than unity OF the faith (KJV) before miracles will cease.



The NIV & ESV Add Doubt and Deception in the Footnotes

Mark 16:9-20, the NIV states, "The most reliable early Manuscripts omit Mark 16:9-20." This is very misleading. Mark 1:1, they say, "Some early MSS omit the Son of God." Luke 22:43-44, they say, "Some early MSS Omit verses 43-44."



Acts 2:38, the NIV Study Bible says, “Not that baptism effects forgiveness. Rather, forgiveness comes through that which is symbolized by baptism.” Acts 22:16, the NIV Study Bible says, “Baptism is the outward sign of an inward grace. The reality and symbol are closely associated in the New Testament.”



The NIV Teaches the church was Built on Peter

Matthew 16:18 (NIV), "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church." Then the footnote says, "Peter means rock." But Jesus says Peter is a pebble, and the great confession Peter made concerning the Deity of Christ (vs. 16) is the “ROCK” foundation upon which the church is built (1 Cor. 3:11). The NIV translators did what the Catholics have wanted to do for years but did not have the nerve to do.


The NIV Teaches Total Hereditary Sin (Original or Inherited sin)

Psalm 51:5 (KJV), "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." Psalm 51:5 (NIV) says, "Surely I have been a sinner from birth, Sinful from the time my mother conceived me." However, the NIV is incorrect because this contradicts other clear Bible statements. Ezekiel 18:20 (KJV), "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father; neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son..." Matthew 18:3 (KJV), "Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." 1 John 3:4 (KJV), "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." The KJV teaches that a man is born into a sinful world, not born sinful. This Calvinistic idea is carried over into the New Testament by rendering "flesh" (KJV) as "sinful nature" (Rom. 7, 8, 9; Gal. 5 - NIV). Human nature is not sinful because we were made in the image of God and after His likeness (Gen. 1:26-27). Men "go astray," they are not "born astray."



The NIV suggests that if an unbeliever leaves his Christian mate, the Christian “is not bound” to the relationship any longer (1 Cor. 7:15). This is at variance with Matthew 19:9.


In the preface to the NIV the church of Christ is listed as a "denomination."

The ESV removes the fact that God Hates Divorce
Malachi 2:16 (KJV), God "...hateth putting away." ESV - "For the man who hates and divorces, says the Lord, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the Lord of hosts." This is inexcusable. The idea expressed in the ESV is not that GOD HATES DIVORCE, but that the man who HATES AND DIVORCES is guilty of violence.

The ESV places a Time Element in 1 Thessalonians 2:16
"By hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved - so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them at last." The words "at last" express a time element. While the Greek word can express time fulfillment, the primary word is QUANTITATIVE. The KJV captures the force, expressing God's wrath coming upon them to the "UTTERMOST."


The ESV says a man shall not SUFFER for the Sins of his father
Ezekiel 18:20 (ESV), "The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, or the father suffer for the iniquity of the son...." The KJV express the idea that the son shall not BEAR the INIQUITY of the father. An individual shall not BEAR the iniquity (or guilt) of his father, but he VERY WELL MAY SUFFER for his father's sins. There is a difference. Didn't David's son suffer death due to David's sins? (2 Sam.11:27-12:15). Didn't Christ suffer for our sins? (1 Pet. 2:21).

The ESV translates inappropriate contenteia (fornication - KJV) as “sexual immorality” (Matt. 19:9; etc.) This is too general. Lust is a form of “sexual immorality,” but evil thoughts are not a justification for terminating a marriage.

The ESV renders the original words aner as “husband” and gune as “wife” (1 Cor. 11:3ff). This is inconsistent with the immediate context, and at variance with other contexts dealing with the same gender theme (1 Corinthians 14:34-35; 1 Timothy 2:8ff.). The headship of “man” (in general) over “woman” is in view, rather than the husband wife relationship.

CONCLUSION: It is impossible for God to lie (Titus 1:2; Heb. 6:18). Thus, all the removals of man, sin, and Deity, plus the omissions, additions, contradictions, poor translating, and paraphrasing in the NIV and ESV are from the devil. Those who love the Word of God should use them for their own study and comparison purposes (if desired); however, we do not believe the use of these versions should be promoted in the church.



ELDERS, beware! Your job is to watch over yourselves and the flock. YOU and many of your preachers and teachers are promoting and using these versions when teaching the flock. God is not pleased! What we should look for are Bible translations which attempt to make word for word translations. Elders who are faithful in their work of feeding and protecting the flock should request that only reliable translations (K.J.V.) be used in sermons, classes, and public Scripture readings. This does not always make for ease of readability, but it does, as a general rule, provide the reader with a reliable translation.
This is Off Topic to the thread.
 
Upvote 0

jimmyjimmy

Pardoned Rebel
Site Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
11,556
5,728
USA
✟234,973.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

jimmyjimmy

Pardoned Rebel
Site Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
11,556
5,728
USA
✟234,973.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Question for ALL the Calvinists out there. Do you believe that if a baby dies the baby goes to heaven?

Answer simply: Yes or no

If abortion sent a baby directly to Heaven, why is the Church opposed to it?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
13,948
3,542
✟324,175.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Calvinism or OSAS is a man made, unbiblical teaching that leads people into a lifestyle of unbelief and practicing the works of the flesh.

I think, in real life, most people who hold these relatively novel views don't end up in "a lifestyle of unbelief and practicing the works of the flesh" if only because we all intuitively know, regardless of our professed beliefs, that what we do matters, in one way or another. But taken to its extreme this theology can certainly open the door to Christianity as a license or excuse to remain as we are-in our sins; with the thought that since there's ‘no condemnation in Christ’, then, sinner or not, we may enter heaven (in opposition to what Scripture says BTW) so long as we've satisfied God's requirement to believe. And so Luther would say at one time that a person must simply cling firmly-desperately?- to faith if and when doubt enters, as if we could make ourselves believe –and as if that should be sufficient.

In any case the doctrine of OSAS- or the teaching of election misunderstood- easily tends towards conflicted thinking IMO-and confusion about the gospel. With ‘no condemnation in Christ’, do we enter heaven regardless of our behavior, and regardless of our state of being-the state of our hearts vis a vis true justice or righteousness? Does faith cover it all so completely that as long as we assesses that we believe correctly or sufficiently, then we’re saved? Kind of like having faith in our faith? Do we still need to love God and neighbor or would that just be related to the law, which condemns? Or is love merely a side-effect, so to speak, anyway?

In my understanding love is what defines man’s justice and grace is what enables us to love as we should, and grace is only obtainable to the extent that we turn to God and establish a relationship with Him: a communion, reversing within ourselves Adam’s choice for humanity, which was a choice to distance man from God’s wisdom and authority, to effectively distance man from God. Jesus came to reconcile us with the Father when the time was ripe so that this relationship could resume, as was always meant to be the case, and He can then do a work of transforming us into His image. This communion is the basis of the New Covenant and it begins, as our response to grace, with faith. So to be ‘under grace’ means that this union is in place, and so then we’re that much more capable and desirous of fulfilling the law, driven by the right Source, for the right reason.

Salvation is not only about forgiveness of unrighteousness, but also about the need and power to actually be righteous rather than merely “imputedly” so. In this way justice is restored to God’s universe as we become the beings He created us to be even as this is a patient labor of love for Him. Man was never created to sin after all. And otherwise nothing really changes; we’re not different from the rest of the world for all practical purposes and salvation is rendered nothing more or less in the end than a decision by God to stock heaven with some people and hell with the rest-literally :).

So this is the road we’re expected to be on, that we’re obliged to be on, the road towards holiness that leads to heaven (Heb 12:14), rather than the road towards heaven regardless of our holiness, or heaven rewarded for a redefined so-called imputed holiness. And this whole process takes place via an ongoing loving, obedient communion with God, ‘apart from Whom we can do nothing’, but ‘with Whom all things are possible’. And in the end, He's the final judge of how well we fulfilled our obligation, with His help.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

rich rio

Active Member
Jun 12, 2017
39
1
40
New bren
✟15,749.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Question for ALL the Calvinists out there. Do you believe that if a baby dies the baby goes to heaven?

Answer simply: Yes or no


Did I ask ? Do aborted baby's go to heaven when they die?
No I didnt ask that.
God is against abortion. God says dont kill in the ten commandments. Im against what God is against.
Did my first post question have the word abortion in it? No it didnt.
Anyway that's another topic conversation in its self.
I asked who believes that baby's that die goes to heaven.?
I should have asked who believes that baby's that dies not talking about aborted baby's go to heaven when they die. Please answer Yes or No
Abortion is another topic conversation.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
13,948
3,542
✟324,175.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
No. It's not.
Mind explaining why not? By your logic if taking a life guaranteed heaven for the victim, then murder should be allowed in those cases. The Church is opposed to abortion first of all because the taking of innocent life is intrinsically evil, against the 5th or 6th commandment depending on who's counting, and contrary to the profound dignity all humans possess in light of being made in the image and likeness of God, even if we rarely live up to it once of age. Anyway, as it is, I don't think the Church has the definitive answer as to what happens to babies when they die.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,197
25,222
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,729,929.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
So you do believe baby's that die go to heaven? Weather there aborted or what ever thing you could think of. I just asked a question.

Are you to not understand to answer ether yes or no.
I'll answer if you can explain how this has to do with Calvinism.
 
Upvote 0

rich rio

Active Member
Jun 12, 2017
39
1
40
New bren
✟15,749.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If you answer the question first I will explain.

Simple: YES You believe if a baby dies it DOES go to heaven. Aborted or dies any other way.

Or a simple: NO You believe if a baby die it DOES NOT go to heaven. Aborted or dies any other way.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,197
25,222
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,729,929.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
If you answer the question first I will explain.

Simple: YES You believe if a baby dies it DOES go to heaven. Aborted or dies any other way.

Or a simple: NO You believe if a baby die it DOES NOT go to heaven. Aborted or dies any other way.
I think they do, but it's based more on what I think of the character of God than anything biblical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fhansen
Upvote 0