Not By Works

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

longtrekker

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
393
188
43
And anyone who believes in God’s Son has eternal life. Anyone who doesn’t obey the Son will never experience eternal life but remains under God’s angry judgment.” - John 3:36
"Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on them." John 3:36 NIV

There is a major difference between the two verses that makes all the difference. I have read several translations of the verse and they essentially conform to the NIV i.e. "reject" or "believe not"...I am intrigued as to what translation u got your verse from..?

.
 
Sep 6, 2014
5,215
2,436
113
biblehub.com
"Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on them." John 3:36 NIV

There is a major difference between the two verses that makes all the difference. I have read several translations of the verse and they essentially conform to the NIV i.e. "reject" or "believe not"...I am intrigued as to what translation u got your verse from..?

.
Looks like the NLT.

Here's a comparison between the King James and New Living Translation versions.....

Matthew 7:15-23 (KJV)
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Matthew 7:15-23 (NLT)
“Beware of false prophets who come disguised as harmless sheep but are really vicious wolves. 16You can identify them by their fruit, that is, by the way they act. Can you pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17A good tree produces good fruit, and a bad tree produces bad fruit. 18A good tree can’t produce bad fruit, and a bad tree can’t produce good fruit. 19So every tree that does not produce good fruit is chopped down and thrown into the fire. 20Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions.

21“Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter. 22On judgment day many will say to me, ‘Lord! Lord! We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.’ 23But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’

o_O :eek:
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,255
2,405
113
I learned another valuable lesson in life: Its not about how you fall its about how you get up!

I learned another another (double another so you know the LEARNING is real out here) lesson in life: the WAR is never over this side of heaven. Even if im fighting pneumonia when im 85 on my deathbed, the WAR is still going on, im fighting that pneumonia TILL I CANT NO MORE. Thats what we do know.

Lucky for me doctor DCON fixed my pain up nicely, BLESSINGS to him and his NO DOUBT! I remember how my grandpa went to the dentist, he went, had a cavity, NEVER got them filled, always just said YANK IT OUT! Thats a warrior right there, TRAILBLAZER hahaha.

Anyhow, im feeling much less depressed right now. I stopped praying to die in my sleep. So thats good!

All this to ask a question: How do you guys stay positive? Are you always positive? 90% of the time positive, 80%?
 

VCO

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2013
9,025
2,895
113
><>🕇<><


son of Heli
Luke 3:23
3:23 son of Heli. Joseph was clearly the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16), so this verse should be understood to mean “son-in-law of Heli.” Thus the genealogy of Christ in Luke is actually the genealogy of Mary, while Matthew gives that of Joseph. Actually the word “son” is not in the original, so it would be legitimate to supply either “son” or “son-in-law” in this context. Since Matthew and Luke clearly record much common material, it is certain that neither one could unknowingly incorporate such a flagrant apparent mistake as the wrong genealogy in his record. As it is, however, the two genealogies show that both parents were descendants of David—Joseph through Solomon (Matthew 1:7-15), thus inheriting the legal right to the throne of David, and Mary through Nathan (Luke 3:23-31), her line thus carrying the seed of David, since Solomon’s line had been refused the throne because of Jechoniah’s sin (see note on Jeremiah 22:24-30 and 33:15-17).
https://www.icr.org/books/defenders/6063


><>🕇<><


Bible verses about Joseph, the Son of Heli
(From Forerunner Commentary)

Luke 3:23-38

How do we know that the Luke 3 lineage is Mary's? We do not know it for certain, but that conclusion is the most reasonable. One factor is, again, the purpose of this particular gospel. Luke wrote primarily to Gentiles, and he stresses Jesus' humanity throughout his book. The evangelist thus gives our Savior's natural, biological family tree to show He shares humanness with the common man. He is not just the Jews' Messiah, but He is also the Gentiles' Messiah! So Luke's genealogy goes all the way back to Adam, rather than stopping at Abraham as Matthew's does.
Another factor is that Luke had to deal with a virgin birth. What a unique situation for a genealogist! Luke had to determine, therefore, what points would matter to a Gentile. Would he be concerned with Jesus' Davidic ancestry? Not initially. Would he care that Jesus is a Jew and an Israelite? Maybe. Would he desire to know if Jesus was a man like he was? Certainly! Thus, Luke would record a line of descent that showed His universality to every man, and this would go through Mary, Jesus' link to humanity.
Some raise objections to this on the basis of verse 23, particularly because it says, "Joseph, the son of Heli." Notice, though, that Luke does not use the word "begot" as Matthew does. In fact, he uses no word at all, just a marker to denote possession. So the phrase literally says, "Joseph, of Heli."
Some say, then, that this connotes a levirate marriage because Matthew says Joseph's father was Jacob. Levirate marriage, however, was fairly rare, so this is an unlikely stretch. Others argue that this is Jesus' "priestly" lineage, but this is even less probable, since it shows Judah, not Levi, as an ancestor (see Hebrews 7:14).
Bullinger, in his Companion Bible, gives a more likely explanation: "Joseph was begotten by Jacob, and was his natural son (Matt. 1:16). He could be the legal son of Heli, therefore, only by marriage with Heli's daughter (Mary), and be reckoned so according to law." At that time, Jewish law traced inheritance and descent through the male, not the female line. Thus, Luke 3:23 would be clearer if translated as, "Joseph, the son-in-law of Heli," or "Joseph, the legal son of Heli."
No matter which we choose, it traces Heli's line from that point on back to Nathan, the son of David. There is no stigma or disqualification in Solomon's name being absent from the list. In messianic terms, David's name is the vital one.

Richard T. Ritenbaugh - Berean
https://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Topical.show/RTD/cgg/ID/6201/Joseph-Son-Heli.htm

><>🕇<><

JOSEPH, WHEN HE MARRIED MARY, BECAME THE SON OF HELI ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF MOSES AND COULD LEGALLY BE INCLUDED IN THE GENEALOGY.

Luke is being very precise. Jesus was thought to be the son of Joseph, who was of Heli. Notice that Luke never said that Joseph was the son of Heli in the Greek. This reduces the alleged contradiction to nothing and shows that Luke’s genealogy is Mary’s—with Joseph’s name listed due to inheritance laws—and Matthew’s genealogy is Joseph’s.

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-timeline/genealogy/whats-in-a-fathers-name/




><>🕇<><


Women in Ancient Israel. The Court of the Women in the Temple (Bible History Online)

"The rabbis taught that women were not to be saluted, or spoken to in the street, and they were not to be instructed in the law or receive an inheritance."



><>🕇<><


Thus Joseph's name appears on Mary's geneology list because Joseph was the legal heir to the Property of Heli, because of his marriage to Mary. Joseph, then had the legal right to call himself Son of Heli, because of that inheritance law. While it does not say specifically that Jesus did inherit the property from Joseph, it seems to imply it. Either Joseph NAMED HIM, or Joseph died without naming a male heir, leaving the automatic inheritance going to the eldest son, Jesus. Jesus in turn by saying while He was dying on the cross, Woman behold thy son, and to John, behold thy mother, was passing that birthright inheritance on to John, and it says that from that hour on, John took Mary to his home. Having been given the birthright inheritance by Jesus, to the property of Joseph. Joseph had the right to sell the property to support Mary. Confusing? NO, just a different culture than we have in America. Was it in Genesis or elsewhere in the Bible? No, that comes from studying Rabbinic Law as it relates to Bible times. Most of what I learned about that, came from ZOLA LEVITT's teachings.

I was stationed in Turkey up overlooking the Black Sea when I was in the Air Force in 1969 - Feb, - 1970. I saw a LOT of Cultural Differences, and we got a lengthy orientation lecture, to head off any potential accidental offensive blunders. One thing I filed in my memory quick, was not to enter any house with a bottle on the roof. That was a sign to let people know that the father was wanting an unmarried man to come marry his daughter. Did not need a shotgun wedding.

 

Whispered

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2019
2,189
1,042
113
www.christiancourier.com
Blah blah blah....you have nothing but false fluff....LET US make man in OUR image...you must be too dense to grasp US AND OUR!!
The Word for God in the Hebrew is Elohim.
The passage in the Book of Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

The "we" in that passage is not reference to Trinity, as we know because verse 27 right after verse 26 refers to God, in the singular possessive pronoun, "his".

What is being used in textual form in verse 26 as pertains to the plural pronoun, "our" , is known in Bible studies as the "majestic plural".
You'll hear in interviews with royality, the queen of England as example, wherein they do not speak as a singular person but using the majestic plural language; our kingdom, we welcome president Trump...., and like that.

And of course this would be the case in scripture since God is the King of Heaven, Sovereign over all creation and created.
 

VCO

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2013
9,025
2,895
113
Looks like the NLT.

Here's a comparison between the King James and New Living Translation versions.....

Matthew 7:15-23 (KJV)
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Matthew 7:15-23 (NLT)
“Beware of false prophets who come disguised as harmless sheep but are really vicious wolves. 16You can identify them by their fruit, that is, by the way they act. Can you pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17A good tree produces good fruit, and a bad tree produces bad fruit. 18A good tree can’t produce bad fruit, and a bad tree can’t produce good fruit. 19So every tree that does not produce good fruit is chopped down and thrown into the fire. 20Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions.

21“Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter. 22On judgment day many will say to me, ‘Lord! Lord! We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.’ 23But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’

o_O :eek:


Don't you know they are BOTH Paraphrased Versions ? I suggest you use an actual TRANSLTATION from original language manuscipts.

I am fond of HCSB, but there are several ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS such as NASB, ESV, NRSV, or others that they had TRANSLATORS go back to Original Language Manuscripts, and then translate it into English. A lot of people do knot KNOW that the KJV was a Paraphrase from 6 older English Versions. Here is the proof:

From The Original 1611 KJV PREFACE


. . . the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place. { KNOWN ERRORS }
. . .

. . . Truly (good Christian Reader) wee never thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, . . . but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath bene our indeavour, that our marke. . . .
 

oldethennew

Senior Member
Feb 28, 2016
9,441
1,790
113
EPH. 4:5.
One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism,
6.
One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
JOHN 1:1.
In the beginning was The Word, and The Word was with God, and The Word WAS God.
2.
The Same was in the beginning with God.
3.
All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made.
PHI. 2:5.
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6.
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7.
But made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8.
And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
 
Sep 6, 2014
5,215
2,436
113
biblehub.com
Don't you know they are BOTH Paraphrased Versions ? I suggest you use an actual TRANSLTATION from original language manuscipts.

I am fond of HCSB, but there are several ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS such as NASB, ESV, NRSV, or others that they had TRANSLATORS go back to Original Language Manuscripts, and then translate it into English. A lot of people do knot KNOW that the KJV was a Paraphrase from 6 older English Versions. Here is the proof:

From The Original 1611 KJV PREFACE


. . . the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place. { KNOWN ERRORS }
. . .

. . . Truly (good Christian Reader) wee never thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, . . . but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath bene our indeavour, that our marke. . . .
Well, thanks for the input there Orv.

I am not a KJV only-ist, nor do I promote it as being the original, error free, and perfect version, so don't go there.

F.Y.I., the NASB has been said to be the "most accurate" Bible translation in English, just as the KJV has been said to be "very accurate".

That said, the KJV is "very accurate", and sufficient for the purpose of demonstrating how poorly the NLT was translated, not only in the Gospel of John, but also in the Gospel of Matthew.

See post #114,001 & #114,002
 

VCO

Senior Member
Oct 14, 2013
9,025
2,895
113
. . .


I am not a KJV only-ist, nor do I promote it as being the original, error free, and perfect version, so don't go there.

F.Y.I., the NASB has been said to be the "most accurate" Bible translation in English, just as the KJV has been said to be "very accurate".

That said, the KJV is "very accurate", and sufficient for the purpose of demonstrating how poorly the NLT was translated, not only in the Gospel of John, but also in the Gospel of Matthew.

. . .

KJV not so much:

1 John 5:7-8 (NASB)
7 For there are three that testify:
8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.


1 John 5:7 (KJV)
7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
 

Whispered

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2019
2,189
1,042
113
www.christiancourier.com
What is the Comma Johanneum?


This is an addition to Scripture that is so famous and hence so well known that it has even been given its own name. The Comma Johanneum is a comma (short clause) in 1 John 5:7-8 which is the “only” passage in the entire Bible that says all three are one without assumptions or unbiblical human logic. The King James Version reads as follows, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” 1 John 5:7-8

The scholarly consensus is that this passage is a Latin corruption that found its way into a Greek manuscript at an early date while absent from others. The words in red are found in the KJV, NKJV but are missing from the majority of translations. It is disconcerting to find there is no shortage of evidence that reveals this text was added. Thomas Nelson and Sons Catholic Commentary, 1951, page 1186 explains, “It is now generally held that this passage, called the Gomma Johanneum, is a gloss that crept into the text of the Old Latin and Vulgate at an early date, but found its way into the Greek text only in the 15th and 16th centuries.” Here is how 1 John 5:7-8 reads from the NIV and most other Bible translations. “For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.” Mouse over for a list of Bible translations for 1 John 5:7 and Adam Clarke's and other Commentaries.

Erasmus did not include the infamous Comma Johanneum of 1 John 5:7-8 in either his 1516 or 1519 editions of his Greek New Testament but made its way into his third edition in 1522 because of pressure from the Catholic Church. After his first edition appeared in 1516, there arose such a furor over the absence of the Comma that Erasmus needed to defend himself. He argued that he did not put in the Comma Trinitarian formula because he found no Greek manuscripts that included it. Once one was produced called the Codex 61, that was written by one Roy or Froy at Oxford in c. 1520, he reluctantly agreed to include it in his subsequent editions. Erasmus probably altered the text because of politico-theologico-economic concerns. He did not want his reputation ruined, nor his Novum Instrumentum to go unsold. Thus it passed into the Stephanus Greek New Testament in 1551 (first New Testament in verses), which came to be called the Textus Receptus, and became the basis for the Geneva Bible New Testament in 1557 and the Authorized King James Version in 1611. To the left is an image of the Codex 61 with the added words underlined in red.

There is no doubt that the latter part of 1 John 5:7 and the first part of 1 John 5:8 never existed in the original and inspired words of God. The textual Scholar Bart Ehrman described this forgery as follows, “…this represents the most obvious instance of a theologically motivated corruption in the entire manuscript tradition of the New Testament. The English King James Bible translated in 1611 AD retains this Trinitarian forgery but none of our modern translations have it except the NKJV. And since this text was not from God, then who was it really from? See also was 1 John 5:7 Added to the Bible.

For Adventists: “I saw that God had especially guarded the Bible; yet when copies of it were few, learned men had in some instances changed the words, thinking that they were making it more plain, when in reality they were mystifying that which was plain, by causing it to lean to their established views, which were governed by tradition.” — (E.G. White, EW, 220.2)

And to offset the accusations before they come to print, no, I am not SDA either.
 

EleventhHour

Well-known member
Nov 11, 2019
500
622
93
I learned another valuable lesson in life: Its not about how you fall its about how you get up!

I learned another another (double another so you know the LEARNING is real out here) lesson in life: the WAR is never over this side of heaven. Even if im fighting pneumonia when im 85 on my deathbed, the WAR is still going on, im fighting that pneumonia TILL I CANT NO MORE. Thats what we do know.

Lucky for me doctor DCON fixed my pain up nicely, BLESSINGS to him and his NO DOUBT! I remember how my grandpa went to the dentist, he went, had a cavity, NEVER got them filled, always just said YANK IT OUT! Thats a warrior right there, TRAILBLAZER hahaha.

Anyhow, im feeling much less depressed right now. I stopped praying to die in my sleep. So thats good!

All this to ask a question: How do you guys stay positive? Are you always positive? 90% of the time positive, 80%?

Trying to stay positive is like trying to shoot a moving target,

Much better to focus on Christ Jesus and take a stand where He takes His stand, because He stands FIRM! :)
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,255
2,405
113
We cant even become warriors if we dont go thru PAIN. Pleasure and comfort dont do NOTHING to make us grow. Prosperity is the biggest killer of growth, adversity is the workshop for warriors. Its in our DNA to avoid pain and its natural, but should we always take the easy way out? No! Should we learn to embrace it and go through it? YES!
 

dcontroversal

Senior Member
Dec 12, 2013
42,405
15,227
113
I learned another valuable lesson in life: Its not about how you fall its about how you get up!

I learned another another (double another so you know the LEARNING is real out here) lesson in life: the WAR is never over this side of heaven. Even if im fighting pneumonia when im 85 on my deathbed, the WAR is still going on, im fighting that pneumonia TILL I CANT NO MORE. Thats what we do know.

Lucky for me doctor DCON fixed my pain up nicely, BLESSINGS to him and his NO DOUBT! I remember how my grandpa went to the dentist, he went, had a cavity, NEVER got them filled, always just said YANK IT OUT! Thats a warrior right there, TRAILBLAZER hahaha.

Anyhow, im feeling much less depressed right now. I stopped praying to die in my sleep. So thats good!

All this to ask a question: How do you guys stay positive? Are you always positive? 90% of the time positive, 80%?
Everyone has moments of despair....even Jesus --> Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me........!