we are ALL PREDESTINED

[BNR32FAN]

I understand why the King James translated that verse the way that they did and I don't think it's wrong. No translation is perfect; but I agree with you that King James is the best (and certainly the most recognized) of English translation. The reason I believe this, is because of what Greek text that King James was translated from.

I don't know if you know any history behind the King James translation; but it's rather interesting. Here is a documentary about Bible translations and where they came from. Some of this I didn't know and some of it; I knew from research of other subjects.

Most of KJV Bible was taken from the Geneva bible that was translated by William Tyndale. It’s many mistranslated errors are the result of reformed theology being injected into the scriptures.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Why, because even though one of the 2 means eternal life...the quality of life in this life.....that may be likely a facet of the Life eternal......or vise versa...I have to figure out where I can find scrip like that since I do not know Greek.

Do you know what a concordance is and how to use one? They are extremely helpful!

So here is the question.....what saves you now....in this course of life.....and what saves you after physical death...or alive at his coming?....is it eternal life or life eternal...
Another words...is it Christ in you.....or you in Christ......?

Christ in you causes you to be in Christ.

Are you a scholar?

If you mean scholar as in someone who has a college degree in theological studies? No, my BA is in psychology and trauma studies.

If you mean scholar as in someone who's a research junkie who does a lot of studying? I would qualify there.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I started a post one day of what does it mean to be In Christ......and passage that comes to me as of now is the communion....what does it mean to eat his flesh and drink his blood or you shall not have no part with me?
If any man be in Christ He is a new creation .

It may be too possible that Christ is all one needs for their eternal destiny....
Maybe that's what it means to barely escape the flames of fire....idk
Because there are those who may have boldness to stand...yet some when He comes may not have boldness at all...what shall happen?
I have a feeling that somewhere....maybe in the greek....there are terms like Both "eternal life and life eternal in the bible.....
As there are holy ghost and holy spirit , kingdom of God and kingdom of heavens,
JESUS Christ and Christ Jesus....the and Thou.... in and of.......Jacob and Israel
Abram and abraham....etc

Why, because even though one of the 2 means eternal life...the quality of life in this life.....that may be likely a facet of the Life eternal......or vise versa...I have to figure out where I can find scrip like that since I do not know Greek.

Since eternal life scripturally means to know the only true God and Jesus whom He has sent....[dont quote me]
And to know someone is part of the close relationship ....of doing what the other wants. Yes to share in ones life would mean to remain Into/in Them....[i like that]

You can use a strong’s Concordance app or website or lexicon. They are very helpful indeed.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Most of KJV Bible was taken from the Geneva bible that was translated by William Tyndale. It’s many mistranslated errors are the result of reformed theology being injected into the scriptures.

First question to you? Do you believe God preserves His word?

Going back in time all the way to the codexes the early church had. Back to 2nd, 3rd, 4th centuries all the way through to the reformation. What codexes had the church had; including both the Roman Catholic Church and the subsequent protestant denominations? What are the oldest ones that not only the RCC and the protestants have in common, but also the Eastern Orthodox.

The question isn't really about the Hebrew text. That is the Masoretic text and that was codified back when the Old Testament was completed. The Masoretic text has remained rather amazingly and meticulously unchanged for 2500 years now. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls proved that. They were the same texts as the Masoretic text codexes from the 4th and 5th century AD. The only variations was "formatting" (how the codexes were laid out on the scroll) and some variation in the spellings of names of places. The place name variation though, seem to coincides with changing spelling of places as the centuries passed. So that makes historical sense.

Now the New Testament? What are the oldest codexes we have? They are the Antioch texts. These were some of texts the monk Jerome used (comparing them with other New Testament texts written in Coptic and Arabic) about 400 AD. He began translating in 382 AD. Jerome also had the Masoretic Text, the Greek Septuagint (which was the Greek translation of the Old Testament) as well as previous Latin versions of the Scripture. Out of all of these, Jerome compiled what would become the Latin Vulgate.

Out of those codexes and translations came the various language translations of the Reformation, including German and French translations. The French translations came first. The German translations came next. Out of the German translations (in part) came the Tyndale and Bishop's Bibles. Now if the first German translations (which the Tyndale and Bishop's Bibles relied heavily on) used the ancient Greek and Hebrew, or just the Latin Vulgate - I don't know?

The writing of the King James though used every codex that they had to date; starting with the Antioch Text, the coptic and Arabic, as well as I think at that point they also had Syriac texts to reference, (which I believe came out of the crusades?) the Septuagint, the Masoretic Text and the Latin Vulgate. They used the comparisons they compiled from all of these different translations, to test their own translations against. What they could not determine from the Masoretic and Antioch text as to how it related theologically, they opted to translate as literally as possible; yet so it made sense in English.

Subsequent translations that came about in the east, post Jerome's time are known as the Alexandrian texts. They generally date to the 4th, 5th, 6th centuries. Most of these codexes are pretty much later copies of the Antioch texts and again are consistent, with the occasional variant spelling of the names of places.

Some of them though have "add ons" that are not in the Antioch text and appear to be lore of the Eastern Church. Most of these variant texts though weren't found until starting in the 20th century usually by archeologists.

If you believe God preserves His word, you would expect to see evidence that certain codexes would survive through the course of church history. And that's exactly what we do see.

That is why these texts are called "The Received Texts" because they were passed down though church history. They are also called "The Majority Text" as opposed to "The Critical Texts"; which are those that have variant passages added or missing. Again though, these "critical texts" have mostly been found in the 20th century.

Right now, I'm working on watching a documentary on this subject. It's like 2 hours long though; so I want to watch it before I post it, so I know what's in it.

 

[nolidad]

OK. I explained to you (in rather extensive detail) why I don't believe He actually went into the house.

But - if you wish to end here. That's fine.

Yes you did and the Word of God says He went into the house. If you cannot accept what a clear passage of Gods Word says- it is pointless to discuss with you!

Either you are wrong or the word of God is wrong- I go with you!!!!!!!

 

[BNR32FAN]

First question to you? Do you believe God preserves His word?

There are many gnostic writings that are claimed to be the word of God. None of those writers were struck down before they published their writings. So I do believe God will allow false gospels to be written. Now I wouldn’t go so far as to say the KJV is a false gospel but it does have many errors.

 

[corinth77777]

Most of KJV Bible was taken from the Geneva bible that was translated by William Tyndale. It’s many mistranslated errors are the result of reformed theology being injected into the scriptures.

What errors? And what is reform theology...
I have found my best help fro kjv

 

[The Righterzpen]

Yes you did and the Word of God says He went into the house. If you cannot accept what a clear passage of Gods Word says- it is pointless to discuss with you!

Either you are wrong or the word of God is wrong- I go with you!!!!!!!

Unless of course you unwilling to concede that the word "into" can also be translated simply as "to". And if that's the case; than your issue really would be with the word of God.

2532 [e]
Καὶ
And
Conj

1096 [e]
ἐγένετο
it came to pass
V-AIM-3S

1722 [e]
ἐν
on
Prep

3588 [e]
τῷ
the
Art-DNS

2064 [e]
ἐλθεῖν
going
V-ANA

846 [e]
αὐτὸν
of Him
PPro-AM3S

1519 [e]
εἰς
into .................... can also be translated simply as "to".
Prep

3624 [e]
οἶκόν
a house
N-AMS

Strong's #1519

Word Origin
a prim. preposition

Definition
to or into (indicating the point reached or entered, of place, time, fig. purpose, result)

NASB Translation
about (1), against (18), among (10), become* (5), before (2), before* (1), benefit (1), bestowed (1), beyond (1), beyond* (2), bring about (1), bring* (1), continually* (1), eliminated* (2), end (2), even (1), ever* (2), forever* (1), forward* (3), leading (2), leads (1), mine* (1), never* (1), next* (1), onto (2), over (1), perpetually* (1), reference (2), regard (3), relation (1), respect (2), result (3), resulted (2), resulting (10), sake (1), so (34), throughout (3), toward (23), until (4), view (3), why* (4).

 

[The Righterzpen]

There are many gnostic writings that are claimed to be the word of God. None of those writers were struck down before they published their writings. So I do believe God will allow false gospels to be written. Now I wouldn’t go so far as to say the KJV is a false gospel but it does have many errors.

So if you do believe God preserves His word; than which Greek text should we be using? The Majority text (The Received Text) or the Critical Texts?

In actuality, the Greek isn't the issue here, seeing how all the passages in question are in Hebrew. So, shall we go look at other translations of the Masoretic text?

First, these are all the passage references in the King James I'd given earlier.

Following this, let's look at the NIV.

Exodus 4:21
And the Lord said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.

Exodus 7:3
And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt.

Exodus 7:13
And he hardened Pharaoh's heart, that he hearkened not unto them; as the Lord had said.

Exodus 7:14
And the Lord said unto Moses, Pharaoh's heart is hardened, he refuseth to let the people go.

Exodus 7:22
And the magicians of Egypt did so with their enchantments: and Pharaoh's heart was hardened, neither did he hearken unto them; as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:15
But when Pharaoh saw that there was respite, he hardened his heart, and hearkened not unto them; as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:19
Then the magicians said unto Pharaoh, This is the finger of God: and Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he hearkened not unto them; as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:32
And Pharaoh hardened his heart at this time also, neither would he let the people go.

Exodus 9:7
And Pharaoh sent, and, behold, there was not one of the cattle of the Israelites dead. And the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people go.

Exodus 9:12
And the Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh, and he hearkened not unto them; as the Lord had spoken unto Moses.

Exodus 9:34
And when Pharaoh saw that the rain and the hail and the thunders were ceased, he sinned yet more, and hardened his heart, he and his servants.

Exodus 9:35
And the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, neither would he let the children of Israel go; as the Lordhad spoken by Moses.

Exodus 10:1
And the Lord said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him:

Exodus 10:20
But the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go.

Exodus 10:27
But the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he would not let them go.

Exodus 11:10
And Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh: and the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go out of his land.

Exodus 14:4
And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, that he shall follow after them; and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the Egyptians may know that I am the Lord. And they did so.

Exodus 14:8
And the Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and he pursued after the children of Israel: and the children of Israel went out with an high hand.

Exodus 14:17
And I, behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall follow them: and I will get me honour upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen.

God = 11
Pharaoh = 3
Not specified = 5

Exodus 4:21
The Lord said to Moses, “When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go.

Exodus 7:3
But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in Egypt,

Exodus 7:13
13 Yet Pharaoh’s heart became hard and he would not listen to them, just as the Lord had said.

Exodus 7:14
14 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Pharaoh’s heart is unyielding; he refuses to let the people go.

Exodus 7:22
But the Egyptian magicians did the same things by their secret arts, and Pharaoh’s heart became hard; he would not listen to Moses and Aaron, just as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:15
But when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron, just as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:19
9 the magicians said to Pharaoh, “This is the finger of God.” But Pharaoh’s heart was hard and he would not listen, just as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:32
But this time also Pharaoh hardened his heart and would not let the people go.

Exodus 9:7
7 Pharaoh investigated and found that not even one of the animals of the Israelites had died. Yet his heart was unyielding and he would not let the people go.

Exodus 9:12
But the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart and he would not listen to Moses and Aaron, just as the Lord had said to Moses.

Exodus 9:34
When Pharaoh saw that the rain and hail and thunder had stopped, he sinned again: He and his officials hardened their hearts.

Exodus 9:35

Exodus 10:1
[ The Plague of Locusts ] Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his officials so that I may perform these signs of mine among them

Exodus 10:20
But the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he would not let the Israelites go.

Exodus 10:27
But the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he was not willing to let them go.

Exodus 11:10
Moses and Aaron performed all these wonders before Pharaoh, but the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he would not let the Israelites go out of his country.

Exodus 14:4
And I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and he will pursue them. But I will gain glory for myself through Pharaoh and all his army, and the Egyptians will know that I am the Lord.” So the Israelites did this.

Exodus 14:8
The Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, so that he pursued the Israelites, who were marching out boldly.

Exodus 14:17
I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians so that they will go in after them. And I will gain glory through Pharaoh and all his army, through his chariots and his horsemen.

God = 10
Pharaoh = 3
Unspecified = 5

So, as you can see; with the exception of one, the NIV did not translate these verses any differently than ye 'ol King Jimmy.

 

[The Righterzpen]

What errors? And what is reform theology...
I have found my best help fro kjv

Here's a more complete documentary about the differing Greek texts. (it's long, but it's through.)

Keeping in mind no translation is perfect; but the King James was translated out of the codexes that have been used by the majority of the church throughout church history. Even though the language is not current; and I have found things in the King James that could have been translated more accurately.

Despite this; King Jimmy is still the best English translation we have and primarily because it was translated using the Majority Text.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Most of KJV Bible was taken from the Geneva bible that was translated by William Tyndale. It’s many mistranslated errors are the result of reformed theology being injected into the scriptures.

This is flat out not true.

 

[nolidad]

Unless of course you unwilling to concede that the word "into" can also be translated simply as "to". And if that's the case; than your issue really would be with the word of God.

2532 [e]
Καὶ
And
Conj

1096 [e]
ἐγένετο
it came to pass
V-AIM-3S

1722 [e]
ἐν
on
Prep

3588 [e]
τῷ
the
Art-DNS

2064 [e]
ἐλθεῖν
going
V-ANA

846 [e]
αὐτὸν
of Him
PPro-AM3S

1519 [e]
εἰς
into .................... can also be translated simply as "to".
Prep

3624 [e]
οἶκόν
a house
N-AMS

Strong's #1519

Word Origin
a prim. preposition

Definition
to or into (indicating the point reached or entered, of place, time, fig. purpose, result)

NASB Translation
about (1), against (18), among (10), become* (5), before (2), before* (1), benefit (1), bestowed (1), beyond (1), beyond* (2), bring about (1), bring* (1), continually* (1), eliminated* (2), end (2), even (1), ever* (2), forever* (1), forward* (3), leading (2), leads (1), mine* (1), never* (1), next* (1), onto (2), over (1), perpetually* (1), reference (2), regard (3), relation (1), respect (2), result (3), resulted (2), resulting (10), sake (1), so (34), throughout (3), toward (23), until (4), view (3), why* (4).

Yes you do look for alternative renderings to support your opinions, I understand this. but He went to the house ot eat bread! He commented how pharisees chose the important places in the house and spoke to the pharisees. So you have to have Jesus as a peeping Tom and peering into the house and eating supper with the pharisees outside of the house. It is just non-sensical, but you are free to believe what you wish- just don't blame it on the word of God.

30 English translations and all interlinears I looked at all say Jesus went in--what do you know that they don't???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

[The Righterzpen]

Yes you do look for alternative renderings to support your opinions, I understand this. but He went to the house ot eat bread! He commented how pharisees chose the important places in the house and spoke to the pharisees. So you have to have Jesus as a peeping Tom and peering into the house and eating supper with the pharisees outside of the house. It is just non-sensical, but you are free to believe what you wish- just don't blame it on the word of God.

30 English translations and all interlinears I looked at all say Jesus went in--what do you know that they don't???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I'd explained to you already why I came to that conclusion. Why are you so hostile and condescending?

 

[nolidad]

I'd explained to you already why I came to that conclusion. Why are you so hostile and condescending?

B ecause you are promoting an agenda of some sorts by all the evidence you give. Every translation said he went in to eat but you say not.

Jesus said to hate- butr you have to go into a long drawn out explanation of what kind of hate. You take the simple to make it complex and then take the complex and try to make it simple. I believe it is because of the past you are burdened with. I may be wrong, but as a board certified Christian Counselor- you have given lots of tells!

 

[The Righterzpen]

B ecause you are promoting an agenda of some sorts by all the evidence you give. Every translation said he went in to eat but you say not.

Jesus said to hate- butr you have to go into a long drawn out explanation of what kind of hate. You take the simple to make it complex and then take the complex and try to make it simple. I believe it is because of the past you are burdened with. I may be wrong, but as a board certified Christian Counselor- you have given lots of tells!

So I give you Scriptural evidence in my explanations that you can't refute. I showed you that word "hate" has moral application to it. It's not a cultural interpretation based on preference. I showed you that in a lexicon; using the resources that you yourself use.

I showed you these words are translated this way, or that way, or this other way in other places in the Bible. Scripture says we are suppose to interpret it by using itself "Who shall we teach doctrine; line upon line, precept upon precept..." And that's the only thing I've done; but you say I have an agenda????

Yet you have no argument to refute any of my conclusions. You just say: "The Scripture says X and I believe the Scripture over you!"

30 English translations and all interlinears I looked at all say Jesus went in

(And you're not even being intellectually honest; this statement isn't true either.)

So now because you have no way of refuting this by using Scripture; you assert that my understanding of the Scripture is because of a mental health issue?

Wow dude! Just wow!

(Well, Ya know Lord - they said You were crazy too - so...)

And if you really are a board certified Christian Counselor - (which I honestly doubt) than you're not a very good one. You exhibit none of the training as a counselor I had in college and I've only got a Bachelors. In order to be board certified, you'd at least have to have a Masters.

P.S. do you know you could get a reprimand from the moderators on this forum for saying what you accused of the alleged state of my mental health? As a "counselor" you'd have learned by the time you took your boards, that you can't "pass out" "professional" allegations like that.

 

[nolidad]

So I give you Scriptural evidence in my explanations that you can't refute. I showed you that word "hate" has moral application to it. It's not a cultural interpretation based on preference. I showed you that in a lexicon; using the resources that you yourself use.

I showed you these words are translated this way, or that way, or this other way in other places in the Bible. Scripture says we are suppose to interpret it by using itself "Who shall we teach doctrine; line upon line, precept upon precept..." And that's the only thing I've done; but you say I have an agenda????

Yet you have no argument to refute any of my conclusions. You just say: "The Scripture says X and I believe the Scripture over you!"



(And you're not even being intellectually honest; this statement isn't true either.)

So now because you have no way of refuting this by using Scripture; you assert that my understanding of the Scripture is because of a mental health issue?

Wow dude! Just wow!

(Well, Ya know Lord - they said You were crazy too - so...)

And if you really are a board certified Christian Counselor - (which I honestly doubt) than you're not a very good one. You exhibit none of the training as a counselor I had in college and I've only got a Bachelors. In order to be board certified, you'd at least have to have a Masters.

P.S. do you know you could get a reprimand from the moderators on this forum for saying what you accused of the alleged state of my mental health? As a "counselor" you'd have learned by the time you took your boards, that you can't "pass out" "professional" allegations like that.

All you showed everyone is alternate meanings that are never used by any of the translators!

And no teh Scriptures do not say X. The Scriptures say what they said. What you wish to promote does not have standing. Jesus told us to morally love our parents. Paul did as well. Peter did as well. YOu need to learn that when lexicons render alternate translations- the alternate comes into play only when the normal usage cannot be used! the context of Luke 14 proves you wrong.

And I do not care whether you doubt I am a counselor or not. I am board certified. I have my certification from AACC and have been thanked for helping lots of people! I accept their accolades!

I refuted you using the norm,al standard usage of the words used- W#@hat you need to do is give biblical reasons why we should use alternate renderings (which means why the standard definition is not valid). All you have done is blather with philosophical nonsense.

 

[The Righterzpen]

All you showed everyone is alternate meanings that are never used by any of the translators!

This isn't true. I proved that other sources used the same words I did.

The Scriptures say what they said. What you wish to promote does not have standing.

And what ideas are those?

Jesus told us to morally love our parents. Paul did as well. Peter did as well.

And that's what I did. Based on maintaining a moral standard; there were family members I cut ties with. And that is exactly what that passage is about.

YOu need to learn that when lexicons render alternate translations- the alternate comes into play only when the normal usage cannot be used!

LOL - says who?

I am board certified.

In what state? LOL

I have my certification from AACC

LOL - right here (with just a 5 minute peek at their website) AACC doesn't certify anyone. Right on the website it says you don't even have to have any formal training to be a member of AACC!

Mental health professionals who are certified to do counseling are certified by their state boards and in order to take the boards you have to have a Master's degree. I probably have more college under my belt in the mental health field than you do.

I refuted you using the norm,al standard usage of the words used

And I gave you Biblical reason why the alternate rendering could be used.

W#@hat you need to do is give biblical reasons why we should use alternate renderings (which means why the standard definition is not valid).

Acts 17:2
And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

Acts 17:11
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

All you have done is blather with philosophical nonsense.

Yet if you really were a board certified mental health counselor, you would know and support exactly what I was talking about!

 

[nolidad]

This isn't true. I proved that other sources used the same words I did.

1 of over 12 interlinears is not a case!

And what ideas are those?

I am not sure, but it is not biblical truth.

LOL - says who?

Most greek scholars who know the language and bother to write about this stuff! Once agtain you cannot show one bible that renders it to in the sense that he only stayed outside. Especially in light of
vses 3-5--was He shouting into the house??

Then vses 7-15 keying on verse 15:

15 And when one of them that sat at meat with him heard these things, he said unto him, Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God.

Was this dude sitting outside eating with Jesus???? C'mon stop defending an unbiblical position. But I am done. My tolerance to try to get you to see a simple thing that I know of no one thinks like yiou (at least that has written ) has reached its end.

If you cannot accept a simple passage like this, I fear when you get to passages that actually take work to understand what is going on!

May God open you to HIs truth and not some agenda!

OUT!

 

[The Righterzpen]

1 of over 12 interlinears is not a case!

You know what an interlinear Bible is; don't you? 12 interlinear Bibles are all going to have the same Greek word. That Greek word can have 12 different English translations. If you can translate that same Greek word half the time as "into" and the other half of the time as "to"; then how do you know which one it is?

I am not sure, but it is not biblical truth.

LOL - you can't determine an unknown as un-Biblical. That's illogical reasoning.

Most greek scholars who know the language and bother to write about this stuff!

And yet most Greek scholars (as I've shown) translate this word as either "into" or "to".

Once agtain you cannot show one bible that renders it to in the sense that he only stayed outside. Especially in light of
vses 3-5--was He shouting into the house??

Look closely at the language. (Although I already explained why I came to this conclusion.) The "conversation" you are alleging they are having is not set up in the typical way conversation is set up in the New Testament, when two parties are having a face to face conversation. Those conversations are recorded as "Peter asked...." / "Jesus answered......." They aren't. "When one of them heard these things....." / "Then Jesus relayed (a message)...." The context of the language used does not give the reader the impression that this is a face to face conversation.

15 And when one of them that sat at meat with him heard these things, he said unto him, Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God.

It's not a "He said" / "He responded" type of conversation. The conversation is: "You (Jesus) talk about inviting the poor. So I say "Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God" And we all know that's us pharisees because look (Jesus) you're still standing outside."

This was a relayed message; which was a stab at Him of their asserting that He had a lowly position.

Now compare this response to the first parable Jesus spoke concerning the wedding feast. Who by custom (since you state you are so well versed in Jewish traditions) was the guest of honor at a wedding? (The bridegroom! The dude who was getting married!) Yet here was the Bridegroom standing and observing all these greedy s.o.b's trying to usurp His place of honor as the Bridegroom of the nation. And what is the message of the parable He gives them; (that they will spend their eternity outside of the Kingdom)!

Was this dude sitting outside eating with Jesus???? C'mon stop defending an unbiblical position.

Does it really make sense to you; (given the cultural context you claim to know so much about) that Jesus would enter into this vipers' pit and basically sit down at the feet of Satan? And this vipers' pit of people controlled by Satan who want to kill Him on top of it all? Does that make sense to you? It doesn't make sense to me.

But I am done. My tolerance to try to get you to see a simple thing that I know of no one thinks like yiou (at least that has written ) has reached its end.

Or have you lost your tolerance because you simply can't admit that maybe this passage is not saying what you think it is?

If you cannot accept a simple passage like this, I fear when you get to passages that actually take work to understand what is going on!

I don't know; this one seems to have stumped you pretty bad? My interpretation of the sequence of events given the context of who's involved; makes more sense than yours does.

May God open you to HIs truth and not some agenda!

Again; what is that agenda? And if you can't identify the agenda; how is it you are so sure that I'm the one who's "closed to truth"?

 

[nolidad]

You know what an interlinear Bible is; don't you? 12 interlinear Bibles are all going to have the same Greek word. That Greek word can have 12 different English translations. If you can translate that same Greek word half the time as "into" and the other half of the time as "to"; then how do you know which one it is?

Well in Luke 14- 30 translations all translated into.

Believe what you want. But I am done with this foolishness!