Lest they turn and be forgiven...

[Crosssword]

I find it sorrowful, but I don't understand it. The Bible also tells us that God is not willing to any should perish, but that all should repent.

"To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables; so that they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand; lest they turn again, and be forgiven" (Mark 4:11-12).

(Isa 6:9) Go and tell the people “Be ever hearing, but never understanding; be ever seeing, but never perceiving.”
(Isa 6:10) Make the heart of this people calloused; make their ears dull and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.

edit: I removed my thoughts on "self love" they applied to me personally, but I know there are those who just do not have the kind of heart that I do. God's ways are meant to keep us well in both life and death, of course, and the deadly sins are all unhealthy to us.

 

[Crosssword]

God has his reasons, I suppose. He is deeply loving, but he also demands respect, repentance, and obedience. These things are of more worth then even pondering what his Apostles may have known, but we don't.

 

[Grafted_in]

Hopefully more of the word will help clarify things. Firstly I would like to state that the King James Version is the inspired word of God correctly translated into English. Any other translation I am aware of is either a poor translation or translated from manuscripts wrongfully perceived as "better" just because they are older. If you're gonna study the word of God, which every Christian should, then you need to get the authorized version.

As for that passage in Isaiah, we need to consider more of the surrounding verses.

Isa 1:1
"The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah."
It is important to understand when, to whom, and why each book was written. God revealed Himself to Isaiah that Isaiah would speak for God among an evil, unrighteous people.

Isa 3:25-4:2
"Thy men shall fall by the sword, and thy mighty in the war. And her gates shall lament and mourn; and she being desolate shall sit upon the ground. And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach. In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel."
So God has revealed through His prophet Isaiah that during that time of war and desolation not all shall perish, some will repent and turn from wickedness and follow the Lord..."only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach".

I believe you may not rightly understand what "lest" means. Basically it means a or else b , it does not mean a so that b. Lest means, if what was just said is not true then this will be true. For example, in Gen 3:3 the woman (Eve) being questioned by the serpent says "But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die." God did not mean "you all should not eat of it, neither should you all touch it, so that you all will die." God meant "You all should not eat of it, neither should you all touch it, or else you all will die." meaning "If you eat it or touch it you will die." In John 5 Jesus healed a certain man who had an infirmity 38 years. Jesus healed him and the man walked away through the crowd, and afterward the man saw Jesus again. Jesus said in verse 14 "Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." Now that didn't mean "sin no more, so that a worse thing than being terribly sick for 38 years will happen to you" it means "sin no more, or else (if you do willingly sin) a worse thing will come unto thee" Do you understand?

Passages that appear confusing are no longer such when you truly grasp the definition of a word. Let's re-read those sections from Mark and Isaiah. "Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them." Jesus told his twelve apostles that unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God is a mystery to the flesh, to our sinful nature, but the apostles were given (did not earn) the knowledge of the kingdom. But unto them that are without, meaning everybody else, all these things are done in parables. Seeing and hearing of the kingdom of God they will not perceive or understand, but (or else) through the parables at any time they should be converted and their sins should be forgiven them. This explains the Isaiah passage much better also. "And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed." God said go and tell this people, You do hear but you don't understand, You do see but you don't perceive. God said make their hearts fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes: but if their hearts will not be fat and their ears not heavy and their eyes remain open they will understand with their heart and be converted and healed. God, being God, demands and is worthy of all honor and glory and respectful fear. God says, My children have turned from me to evil and unrighteousness: Go and tell them "though you have heard the laws I gave to Moses you don't understand them, although you have seen examples of righteous living you just don't get it. Your offerings and you observing certain days are disgusting to me, I want your heart not you just blindly following tradition while living evilly; but if you heed my messages you will understand with your hearts." This lines directly up with the following verses that state "in the midst of all this bad stuff I, God, will allow to happen to you a tenth will turn back towards me - the rest will be destroyed because they loved their evil deeds more than the light."

Here are some other good verses that are helpful in this regard...

1 Cor 10:
"Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted."

2 Timothy 2:15
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

We, as God's creations, often completely ignore Him and follow sin and therefore Satan, which inevitably leads to a bad day on the Judgment and a lot more bad days for eternity as you burn with your master Satan in a lake of fire. We are saved by the grace of God through Jesus Christ, don't misunderstand me. We are NOT saved by works. Howbeit you gotta follow one or the other, and if you haven't trusted Jesus and followed the Almighty Lord then you are following Satan. That is the truly sorrowful part. That, and the fact that many Christians don't proclaim the Gospel. If people don't hear about it they aren't gonna come to the cross. THAT is sorrowful, and something that's hard to understand.

 

[Mister_Al]

As far as I've been able to tell ALL Bible translations (except for the paraphrased ones) are the inspired word of God translated into English. Personally, I read and study the Bible using the Amplified and The New International Version translations.

However, I'm willing to listen to any factual evidence you may have that proves that the King James version is the "superior" Bible translation that is above all others.

Blessings,

Alan

 

[Grafted_in]

Remember, kind sir, that I have not condemned any other version as a "work of Satan" or any other such claims, I have said that the King James version is the best English version. If I am permitted to quote myself I said

"Any other translation I am aware of is either a poor translation or translated from manuscripts wrongfully perceived as "better" just because they are older."

I could provide the textual genealogy of each translation or the qualifications of each version's translators (definitely worth exploring, if you have not done so already) but that quickly becomes wearisome. I would like to pursue another avenue. I would like to illustrate my point using this passage in Isaiah as an example.

Isaiah 6:9-10
And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed. KJV

He said, “Go and tell this people: “‘Be ever hearing, but never understanding; be ever seeing, but never perceiving.’ Make the heart of this people calloused; make their ears dull and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” NIV (1984)

And He said, Go and tell this people, Hear and hear continually, but understand not; and see and see continually, but do not apprehend with your mind. Make the heart of this people fat; and make their ears heavy and shut their eyes, lest they see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their hearts and turn again and be healed. AMP (1987)

I retrieved the AMP text from Bible Gateway, I do not own a copy personally. From a casual reading we both can see all three closely match. What matters is not the similarities, but the differences. Let's look at "Hear ye indeed, but understand not" “‘Be ever hearing, but never understanding" and "Hear and hear continually, but understand not" If we updated the King James text in modern English it reads, "Indeed you all hear, but you don't understand". Is "Indeed you all hear" equivalent to "Be ever hearing" or "Hear and hear continually"? Hmmm....I'll move on. Towards the end we read "and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed" "understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed" "and understand with their hearts and turn again and be healed". Now we have to honestly look and wonder, Did God say convert, turn, or turn again? Conversion is a change of heart towards God after the understanding of God opens our eyes and ears and hearts. Turn, while similar, is a much weaker word. Conversion will cause turning, but turning is not conversion. Turning simply describes an action, conversion describes the innermost thoughts of the heart. Even so, let us suppose turning is an acceptable modern substitute (because somehow convert is too archaic and outdated). Did God say turn, or turn again? Which is it? Are they all translated from the inspired word of God? I believe not, but for this discussion I'll bite and agree they are. Which is it? Turn, or turn again, or convert? They cannot ALL be correctly translated because they are three different meanings.

Let me give one more example and I will close.

Philippians 2:5-7

Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: KJV

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. NIV

Let this same attitude and purpose and [humble] mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus: [Let Him be your example in humility:] Who, although being essentially one with God and in the form of God [possessing the fullness of the attributes which make God God], did not think this equality with God was a thing to be eagerly grasped or retained, But stripped Himself [of all privileges and rightful dignity], so as to assume the guise of a servant (slave), in that He became like men and was born a human being. AMP

Right off the bat we see differences. "Let this mind be in you" "Your attitude should be" "Let this same attitude and purpose and [humble] mind be in you" It would appear the Amplified version believes adding to the word is acceptable. I would rather read the opinions of men in a commentary, not intermingled within my sacred text. Let's dissect this a little more. Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:. Jesus Christ, being in the form of God, didn't thing it was robbery to be equal with God: But made himself (that's Jesus again) of no reputation, and took upon him (Jesus took upon himself) the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men. The NIV says "Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing" and the AMP says "Who, although being essentially one with God and in the form of God [possessing the fullness of the attributes which make God God], did not think this equality with God was a thing to be eagerly grasped or retained, But stripped Himself [of all privileges and rightful dignity]"...now I'm a little confused. My Holy Bible says that Jesus didn't think it was robbery to be equal with God because He is in the form of God. The NIV says that Jesus who was in very nature God did not consider equality with God something to be grasped. The AMP says Jesus was essentially one with God (sounds like Mormon trash to me) and in (not being) the form of God did not think equality with God was a thing to be eagerly grasped or retained. To grasp means to grab ahold of, to retain something means you already have it and won't let it go. Which is it? Either way, according to AMP, Jesus did not think this equality was a thing to be grasping or retaining. The NIV says Jesus didn't consider equality with God something to be grasped, the AMP says Jesus who was essentially God and in the form of God did not think this equality with God was a think to be eagerly grasped or retained. The NIV says Jesus made himself nothing, the AMP says Jesus striped Himself (I can hear the queers cheering now). And then King James, that archaic outdated much harassed translation, says "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation"

We've now discussed 5 verses and seen several differences. Are they all good translations? Are they all conveying the true words of God into English the way God intended? One of them has to be right. I've read several translations and a lot of passages from several others, the KJV is the book for me. If you want information concerning the translators or histories of various versions I can point you in the right direction, but I didn't want to initially bombard you with a bunch of facts. I simply used what we were discussing and shown the differences. Are they ALL correct? Let me know if you want the extra biblical info, or if you have any other questions.

 

[Celtic D]

A Bible is only any good if it is read, and if that is a version such as The Message, better that read than a KJV lying gathering dust!!!

 

[Jpark]

It means God's love, perhaps greater love, and presence (Psalm 51:11), the most blessed promise of His reality, is conditional.

John 14:22-23 Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, "Lord, what then has happened that You are going to disclose Yourself to us and not to the world?" Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.

God wants people to come to Him through faith and obedience. If He just revealed Himself to everyone, which He will do, everyone would certainly believe, but not by faith or obedience or by deeds proving themselves worthy, but only by God's mercy.

Which why it is said, "Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed."

Which brings to mind Matt. 5:8:

"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God."

In other words, while God does want people to know Him (abide in Him) (and this is what we should strive for (Phil. 3:8)), He takes greater pleasure in those who have mere faith and no substance (i.e. experience, revelation) for their beliefs.

Of course, God can undo what He has done, this "spell" He has cast, the fallen angel who does His will (2 Cor. 4:4), and intervene (2 Tim. 2:25) through us.

So then, unbelief is (exists) because God wants to use those who believe to intervene in a unbeliever's life.

 

[Crosssword]

KJV is generally right, but there are some trouble verses like Luke 17:34 "two men in one bed." Which should correctly be translated as "two in one bed."

If Jesus told the general public the same as his apostles then many would turn and repent, not from a loving heart, but from a place of mental understanding.

Jesus won't refuse those who diligently seek him and want to know him. God delights when a sinner repents in humility and turns to Jesus.

Let’s start by reviewing the basics of our relationship with the Lord. What does it take to be saved? I think the best answer to that question is the one the Lord gave in John 6:28-29.

Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”
Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”


Here was a perfect opportunity to list all the things we have to do to meet God’s requirements. Jesus could have rattled off the 10 commandments. He could have repeated the Sermon on the Mount. He could have listed any number of admonitions and restrictions necessary to achieve and maintain God’s expectations of us. But what did He say? “Believe in the one He has sent.” Period. It was a repeat of John 3:16, confirming that belief in the Son is the one and only requirement for salvation.

For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. There’s not much here that can be misunderstood. These are two of the Bible’s clearest statements on salvation.

Faith is important. There were many miracles in the Bible where Jesus said "your faith has healed you." And even a case where Jesus refused, but changed his mind when a canaanite woman humbled herself to the level of a dog.

Mercy is also important, because mercy is what God offers. It is a very serious thing to turn someone away whose looking for help, is in need, or not to forgive others.

 

[Mister_Al]

Just for the sake of making a point I will list the Scripture verse Hebrews 13:5 from the King James and The Amplified Bible versions below.

Hebrews 13:5 (King James Version)


5) Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.


Hebrews 13:5 (Amplified Bible)

5) Let your character or moral disposition be free from love of money [including greed, avarice, lust, and craving for earthly possessions] and be satisfied with your present [circumstances and with what you have]; for He [God] Himself has said, I will not in any way fail you nor give you up nor leave you without support. [I will] not, [I will] not, [I will] not in any degree leave you helpless nor forsake nor let [you] down (relax My hold on you)! [Assuredly not!]

It's true that both scriptures say the same thing, but I like the way the Amplified translation brings out the love God has for you in this verse.

Be Blessed,

Alan

 

[Johnnz]

Back to the original question.

Isaiah preached to a generation that would not trun back to God, and was later conquered. God warned the prophet that the people would reject his message, but he was to give it anyway. God wanted Israel to know He was still their God and would bless them if only they would commit to Him again. Isaiah expressed that possibility in his poetic rendering of Israel's hard hearted stance. Jesus quoted that verse to His disciples to teach them that He would suffer the same rejection, and they would too, later, but nevertheless the good news must be presented.

John
NZ

 

[Grafted_in]

Jesus won't refuse those who diligently seek him and want to know him. God delights when a sinner repents in humility and turns to Jesus....Faith is important. There were many miracles in the Bible where Jesus said "your faith has healed you."....Mercy is also important, because mercy is what God offers. It is a very serious thing to turn someone away whose looking for help, is in need, or not to forgive others.

One Hundred percent agreed.
I do not claim a person needs the KJV to be saved, that is complete nonsense. One needs faith. I claim that the KJV is the best translation to be used and that the other translations are inferior-whether accidentally or on purpose.

To Cedric, I thought about this deeply for quite some time. It hit me because I was teaching my little brother about Jesus and he didn't have a bible. I determined to buy him one, so I asks myself, "is it better to get him a different version that he will read instead of the real one?" and I struggled. And I prayed. And I struggled. And I prayed. And I considered. And I prayed. Then four things became extremely obvious to me.

1. Children are still required (so far as I know) to read Shakespeare, Chaucer and the like. We do not update those to make them "easier". Kids complain because it is unfamiliar but is in most cases comprehended, especially once the syntax is better understood.
2. People who aspire to be mechanics, engineers, scientists, biologists, doctors, lawyers, and every other profession available must learn new material. Oftentimes this includes new words and new meanings. Few complain then. Do we really NEED to change the word of God, our spiritual food, or do people just need to study it? Nobody suggests we change the United States Constitution so students can read it easier, we just tell them to read it and they rise to the occasion: yet many say the word of God is too difficult? Something sounds fishy.
3. Is the language of the KJV actually the barrier that prevents some from reading it? Every person whom God has put in their heart that the KJV is the best (I would say everyone who honestly seeks for an answer to the translation question) has very little trouble learning it. Once one navigates through a few of the Gospels, which combined are relatively few pages, the language is as easy to understand as modern English. Some people catch on after only 10 or 20 pages. Was it REALLY the syntax and a few new words that kept them from reading it?
4. The doctrinal differences between versions are too hard to ignore. Either the words of God are important, or just the general idea. Are the "little" doctrines important, or just the "big" ones? Nobody I am aware of argues the KJV to be wrong. The publishers say "we need an easier translation" and the next thing you know doctrine is changed. If the KJV is the most accurate and best translated version, why would any believer settle for a lesser different version just because "it's easier"?

The bottom line is that if somebody is going to read the Holy Bible, they are going to read the Holy Bible. I can agree with the sentiment that reading distorted watered down perverted truth is better than reading no truth at all, but that argument is assuming the language truly is the barrier. Is it? Is the language really what keeps one from reading the word of God? I would like to see an updated KJV; where holpen is helped, musick is music, alway is always, when even come is when the evening come...but there is none. That being the case, I would rather educate myself to ensure I am getting what God intended...Not what somebody watered down because they thought I was too stupid to hear, or what somebody else thought God said. I considered buying my brother a Message translation but when I began to read it there were too many errors, too much difference, too much left out, too much added in...I believe it is worthless trash.

The main reason I brought up my KJV stance is because the person who started this thread said they didn't understand. I believe and maintain it's because they were reading the NIV instead of the KJV. There is no confusion with the authorized version.

 

[Mister_Al]

I do agree with you that if somebody is going to read the Bible then they are going to read the Bible. But, I can't agree that the King James Version is the only "correct" translation of God's word and all other translations are inferior.

I've read a lot of different Bible translations and they all say the same thing to me (except the paraphrased versions). I study with the Amplified version, and if I just want to read then I'll use the NIV or American Standard versions. I also use different versions sometimes to cross reference a passage if I need some help understanding it. But, I can't say that one version is "the best" by any means, I can only say which version I prefer.

Be Blessed,

Alan

 

[Johnnz]

To see any translation as inspired is both silly and wrong. Any conclusions must come after establishing an adequate information base. This must include:
Expert knowledge of the original languages and their useage at the time of composition, surrounding cultural factors, the latest information from linguistic research on many specific issues, and excellent native language skills (in our case English).
Even with that there will still be differences of opinion due to some words or phrases having no exactly equivalent English meaning and therefore some level of informed judgement will be necessary.

Most often, those who would attest the 'inspiration' of the KJV hold few if any of those credentials.And I do not know of any reputable evangelical scholar who would hold to the inspiration of any version. In fact, many who do believe in an inspired scripture do so on the basis of some, not now known, 'original'. Thus no translation can go one better than that basis anyway.

John
NZ

 

[LWB]

Crossword, the way I understand such verses is to recognise a dramatic aspect to this experience of life.

God has created us to enjoy fellowship with Him, but He has done so in an artistically grand manner. This is clear when looking at the past, but not so clear when in the midst of the strife.

As an example, I bring to your attention the story of Joseph, and how he was sold into slavery. This led to the Israelites as a group becoming enslaved in Egypt. Then Moses faced Pharoah to secure their liberation, but God hardened Pharoah's heart.

Imagine the anti-climax to such an epic story, had Pharoah just let them go! Similarly, if everyone accepted the Gospel, where is the triumph against evil when Christ returns on the clouds? Where is the danger, suspense, and excitement?

Through human history, God is unfolding a most incredible story. You and me and everyone has a part to play. No matter how it goes for us as individuals, we have been given an incomprehensible privilege.

It might seem unfair to poor old Pharoah, but God works from a dimension of which we cannot conceive. Somehow God makes it right and fair. From the Godly perspective, I suspect that free will and predetermination don't conflict at all. Here we are trapped into seeing duality; a limitation of our viewpoint.

 

[Celtic D]

One Hundred percent agreed.
I do not claim a person needs the KJV to be saved, that is complete nonsense. One needs faith. I claim that the KJV is the best translation to be used and that the other translations are inferior-whether accidentally or on purpose.

To Cedric, I thought about this deeply for quite some time. It hit me because I was teaching my little brother about Jesus and he didn't have a bible. I determined to buy him one, so I asks myself, "is it better to get him a different version that he will read instead of the real one?" and I struggled. And I prayed. And I struggled. And I prayed. And I considered. And I prayed. Then four things became extremely obvious to me.

1. Children are still required (so far as I know) to read Shakespeare, Chaucer and the like. We do not update those to make them "easier". Kids complain because it is unfamiliar but is in most cases comprehended, especially once the syntax is better understood.
2. People who aspire to be mechanics, engineers, scientists, biologists, doctors, lawyers, and every other profession available must learn new material. Oftentimes this includes new words and new meanings. Few complain then. Do we really NEED to change the word of God, our spiritual food, or do people just need to study it? Nobody suggests we change the United States Constitution so students can read it easier, we just tell them to read it and they rise to the occasion: yet many say the word of God is too difficult? Something sounds fishy.
3. Is the language of the KJV actually the barrier that prevents some from reading it? Every person whom God has put in their heart that the KJV is the best (I would say everyone who honestly seeks for an answer to the translation question) has very little trouble learning it. Once one navigates through a few of the Gospels, which combined are relatively few pages, the language is as easy to understand as modern English. Some people catch on after only 10 or 20 pages. Was it REALLY the syntax and a few new words that kept them from reading it?
4. The doctrinal differences between versions are too hard to ignore. Either the words of God are important, or just the general idea. Are the "little" doctrines important, or just the "big" ones? Nobody I am aware of argues the KJV to be wrong. The publishers say "we need an easier translation" and the next thing you know doctrine is changed. If the KJV is the most accurate and best translated version, why would any believer settle for a lesser different version just because "it's easier"?

The bottom line is that if somebody is going to read the Holy Bible, they are going to read the Holy Bible. I can agree with the sentiment that reading distorted watered down perverted truth is better than reading no truth at all, but that argument is assuming the language truly is the barrier. Is it? Is the language really what keeps one from reading the word of God? I would like to see an updated KJV; where holpen is helped, musick is music, alway is always, when even come is when the evening come...but there is none. That being the case, I would rather educate myself to ensure I am getting what God intended...Not what somebody watered down because they thought I was too stupid to hear, or what somebody else thought God said. I considered buying my brother a Message translation but when I began to read it there were too many errors, too much difference, too much left out, too much added in...I believe it is worthless trash.

The main reason I brought up my KJV stance is because the person who started this thread said they didn't understand. I believe and maintain it's because they were reading the NIV instead of the KJV. There is no confusion with the authorized version.

the King James Version is no more the"Real Version" than any other version, and the name is Celtic, I am female!

I am one of your Scientists, I seek God and I will not touch the KJV!!!! My scientific text books are written in modern English, not King James English, and likewise that is how I like my Bible, the truths contained within equally as valid as any KJV!!!

 

[Crosssword]

Crossword, the way I understand such verses is to recognise a dramatic aspect to this experience of life.

God has created us to enjoy fellowship with Him, but He has done so in an artistically grand manner. This is clear when looking at the past, but not so clear when in the midst of the strife.

As an example, I bring to your attention the story of Joseph, and how he was sold into slavery. This led to the Israelites as a group becoming enslaved in Egypt. Then Moses faced Pharoah to secure their liberation, but God hardened Pharoah's heart.

Imagine the anti-climax to such an epic story, had Pharoah just let them go! Similarly, if everyone accepted the Gospel, where is the triumph against evil when Christ returns on the clouds? Where is the danger, suspense, and excitement?

Through human history, God is unfolding a most incredible story. You and me and everyone has a part to play. No matter how it goes for us as individuals, we have been given an incomprehensible privilege.

It might seem unfair to poor old Pharoah, but God works from a dimension of which we cannot conceive. Somehow God makes it right and fair. From the Godly perspective, I suspect that free will and predetermination don't conflict at all. Here we are trapped into seeing duality; a limitation of our viewpoint.

So God is more concerned with art then saving souls from eternal torment?

In the case of Pharoah we are talking about the highest level of both occultist and king. For most it is hard to believe that both Moses and the magicians turned their staffs into snakes and such. Such would be considered an abomination before the Lord these days, although the Bible tells in the new testament that Moses was a master of the Egyptian mysteries. In this case, especially, God wanted to make a show of his power that would be remembered forever.

I don't see much of God in a war torn world full of death and misery. Evil is never something that "should" exist. What most people don't get, I think, is that God is at war with the fallen angels that have been corrupting the human genome since Egypt, no since before the flood.

Something is a miss, and I think that something is karma. Revelation 20:5 "And the rest of the dead lived not again until after the 1000 years."

Now we know that Jesus Christ is the only way anyone can be saved and gain eternal life. So what about?

1) Those who lived before Christ's time. Were they saved by the law alone even though they were imperfect? If so, why do we even need Christ?

2) Babies and children who die very young. Do they get a free hall pass to heaven just because they are innocent? Do they go to hell because they aren't saved?

3) Good people who haven't heard about the Gospel. It makes more sense for them to spend time on the other side, then come back here.

So the ironic thing is that some form of reincarnation actually does support Christianity more then hinder it. What does hinder it, is knowledge of this.

More then anything else I'm convinced, that human beings need to have the most fearful images of hell, and good reason to fear God. Which really makes it's validity into a moot point, and explains why it wouldn't be taught.

Now the thing about Karma is that you may have wronged someone you don't even know in this life. So it goes on and on for a very long time. What if Jesus is the only way to save someone from their sins?

Let us consider the way God judges us:

Those who live by the sword, must die by the sword
Those why deny Jesus before men, Jesus will deny before the angels
In the way you measure, it will be measured you
Judge not lest ye be judged, for in the way you judge you will be judged
If you don't forgive others, you cannot expect God to forgive you.

What do these all examples tell us? That God's law is an eye for an eye, but man's law needs to be turn the other cheek. If that's how it is, then God's judgment may very well be an automatic process, or perhaps just the burdens of our own Karma. That we reap what we sow and it follows us to heaven or sheol and back.

When you wrong someone, an imbalance is immediately created. Justice demands that every wrong be made right. However, God's mercy is even greater. Consider Jacob's ladder where he saw souls coming and going from heaven.

Jesus promises his believers, there shall be no marriage in heaven, for they shall be as the angels. His holy ways are completely beyond the drama that is the human world, a drama which I believe we are all responsible for making together. A drama in which the influences of God and of fallen angels all play a part, and that God knows the future, but does not negate our responsibilities. I will sooner believe this then the denial of freewill.

Further study for those interested http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen03.html

 

[Johnnz]

One of your issues was addressed by Paul.
Rom 2:12-16 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

John
NZ

 

[Grafted_in]

the King James Version is no more the"Real Version" than any other version, and the name is Celtic, I am female!

I am one of your Scientists, I seek God and I will not touch the KJV!!!! My scientific text books are written in modern English, not King James English, and likewise that is how I like my Bible, the truths contained within equally as valid as any KJV!!!

I sincerely apologize for mixing up your pseudonym, dear. It was far passed my bedtime when I last responded. I will remember in the future, Celtic.

I do not wish to incite trouble as a new member to these Christian Forums, and I do not think the powers that be would appreciate us hijacking this thread. If you wish to discuss the differences among translations (there are many and they are great) I will gladly participate, but only at your decision. I will not attempt to force anyone to switch versions. You are perfectly free to read whichever version you choose: but I believe all the evidence, both internal and external, points to the superiority of the King James translation. I believe all arguments for any other version are weak and divisive and sidestep troubling concerns.

I labored to provide a biblical answer to the initial post and stated my opinions on translation as it seemed relevant info to the thread starter. I answered your objection to the language barrier, something I feel is an overplayed argument and distracts from the doctrinal issues between different translations. If you wish to examine this matter in depth we can start a new thread, although I imagine many already exist. If not, please use whichever version you prefer to help explain the scriptures to Crossword, which is the purpose of this thread.