ROMANS, CHAPTER 8

[ukok102nak]

lol methinks thou mayest not well know that of which thou doth speak on this matter; thy familiarity doth lack.
wherein the difficulty lay, not in ukok's chosen scroll, nay within the wit of the man himself, who being as any an heart set apart hath in himself that separation whence cometh from Nimrod's city & structure by which all in this common beasthood we share were thus puzzled.
takest thou salt then, and not over thy shoulder doest hurl, but upon thy meal sprinklest thou, unto savor!
God love the man, this fraternal comrade; a soul alike unto us, so unlike!

[HR][/HR]
. . & one of the things modern translations do is correct some of the errors in actual translation present in the KJV.

[HR][/HR]
((also by the way "transliteration" = not translating, just writing the same word down with a different spelling. for example "baptize" is a transliterated word -- the Greek is "baptizo" and it means literally "to immerse" but has significance beyond that in many cases. almost all English translations share exactly the same transliteration -- thou personally i think it is good to actually translate this word, because "immersion" into Him is a concept maybe sometimes overlooked by our familiarity with that transliterated word, so we lose the meaning of it))

indeed
but hes not here for he went to :smoke: and to the other

. ... and
we remember they call you all brethrens fellows brothers sisters
but what they said before
it is written and it will stay forever in their hearts and their souls

... . and so are we

:ty:

godbless us all always

 

[John146]

you mean like the kjv?

because that's what the kjv is -- do you forget? -- it's a translation.
it's not "the preserved word" -- Jesus did not speak in Victorian English. Moses did not write in Victorian English. Daniel & Isaiah did not prophesy in Victorian English.

the "preserved word of God" is preserved in the language that the word was given.

well hey -- case in point -- the kjv is not 100% accurate; it copied a copying mistake in Romans 8:1

there are a lot of errors in the kjv.
the "Red Sea" does not exist in the middle east; that's "the Reed Sea."
there's no such thing as a cockatrice or unicorn -- should be a type of snake, and an aurochs.
1 John 3:6 should read that whoever abides in Him "does not continue in sin" -- not that they "sinneth not."

and a whole host of other little problems. other translations have their own translation problems. every time you translate, you lose nuance. but God give s His spirit, and He gives understanding. none of the errors in the kjv, niv, esv, nasb, etc. are so grave that the gospel is lost. they are all little things - some with theological inconsistencies of various scale, some more mundane. but with the spirit who guides us into all knowledge of Him, we don't need perfect word for word translation - sometimes Jesus does not quote word-for-word, nor do the disciples - why?
but this is where the word of God is truly preserved: in the hearts of those who are sealed by the same Spirit who is the Author of the book. if every copy was destroyed on earth, the Spirit could raise someone up to write it all down again.

So your answer is No?

 

[John146]

. . and English is third, while we are presently watching both Europe & America descend into gross immorality . .

hmm.
looks like the kjv ain't exactly in its heyday anymore.
yet the scripture as given in the languages that God intended them to be given in, remains preserved.
and it's to those old scrolls -- not to the kjv -- that wise men go to in order to make translations for believers who speak Chinese and Spanish, so that they can read and hide the word in their hearts.

case closed.

That's exactly what you get when you mess with God's word. Our immorality has been in decline ever since we became Bible correctors instead of Bible believers. Corrupt Bibles lead to a corrupt society. Multiple versions leads to people not cherishing the word but becoming their own final authority. "Well I like the way the NIV reads."

 

[miknik5]

That's exactly what you get when you mess with God's word. Our immorality has been in decline ever since we became Bible correctors instead of Bible believers. Corrupt Bibles lead to a corrupt society. Multiple versions leads to people not cherishing the word but becoming their own final authority. "Well I like the way the NIV reads."

Which is why THE SPIRIT of TRUTH is sufficient to lead us to ALL TRUTH...regardless of what version, what work is read...for the SPIRIT will bring to mind both THE TRUTH or the lack of TRUTH in all things.

GOD'S VOICE/SPIRIT will not contradict HIS written WORD and HIS written WORD will not contradict HIS VOICE/SPIRIT...

 

[John146]

Which is why THE SPIRIT of TRUTH is sufficient to lead us to ALL TRUTH...regardless of what version, what work is read...for the SPIRIT will bring to mind both THE TRUTH or the lack of TRUTH in all things.

GOD'S VOICE/SPIRIT will not contradict HIS written WORD and HIS written WORD will not contradict HIS VOICE/SPIRIT...

Will the Spirit bring to mind all the missing verses and false doctrine if you're reading out of a corrupt Bible?

 

[miknik5]

Will the Spirit bring to mind all the missing verses and false doctrine if you're reading out of a corrupt Bible?

Oh? Is there such a thing?

And as I already said, THE SPIRIT will both reveal THE TRUTH and the lack of truth in ALL things...

 

[miknik5]

Another thing, John146....I believe you might have overlooked this TRUTH...that the SPIRIT will only speak what HE hears...

That means if it is not given, it is not given.

It does not mean that the WORD of TRUTH is in error, but only that the man reading the WORD of TRUTH is kept from understanding what GOD is saying by HIS WORD.

Nothing in THE WORD of GOD is false doctrine, sir...

And when you refer to BIBLE, I mean what has been identified by all CHRIST BELIEVING followers to be THE HOLY SCRIPTURE...

Not these additives of men...not the watchtower edition...or any man-made addition to THE WORD of GOD as it stands...and in any version one who is led by HIS SPIRIT, chooses to read...

 

[working4christ2]

OK, we agree on that, BUT just exactly what does such entail?

 

[valiant]

Which is why THE SPIRIT of TRUTH is sufficient to lead us to ALL TRUTH...regardless of what version, what work is read...for the SPIRIT will bring to mind both THE TRUTH or the lack of TRUTH in all things.

GOD'S VOICE/SPIRIT will not contradict HIS written WORD and HIS written WORD will not contradict HIS VOICE/SPIRIT...

The Spirit was given to lead the APOSTLES into ALL TRUTH. We are not led into all truth. We have partial truth. This chat is proof of that,

 

[posthuman]

That's exactly what you get when you mess with God's word. Our immorality has been in decline ever since we became Bible correctors instead of Bible believers. Corrupt Bibles lead to a corrupt society. Multiple versions leads to people not cherishing the word but becoming their own final authority. "Well I like the way the NIV reads."

this is a pretty laughable position, dude.

English is not the most commonly spoken language in the world because the English Revised version came out in 1885?

updating language so it's comprehensible and fixing obvious errors in translation? that's the cause of immorality among anglo-saxons?

dude, have you read the Bible?

 

[miknik5]

The Spirit was given to lead the APOSTLES into ALL TRUTH. We are not led into all truth. We have partial truth. This chat is proof of that,

ummm...I am the WAY, the TRUTH, and the LIFE?

Isn't THAT TRUTH sufficient?
And isn't it THAT TRUTH that sanctifies us and saves?

Or, is there some "other truths" that need to be discussed?

 

[miknik5]

this is a pretty laughable position, dude.

English is not the most commonly spoken language in the world because the English Revised version came out in 1885?

updating language so it's comprehensible and fixing obvious errors in translation? that's the cause of immorality among anglo-saxons?

dude, have you read the Bible?

When GOD confused the languages and scattered...HE had all intention of gathering and "unconfusing the language" so that those who are gathered up IN CHRIST do speak and can discern "the language"...

 

[miknik5]

OK, we agree on that, BUT just exactly what does such entail?

Are you talking to me? It entails knowing and discerning the SPIRIT of TRUTH from the spirit of lies that are already in the world...

 

[miknik5]

“Sanctification” vs “Conformation”

Considering the significance in the meaning of the above terms, I believe it would good to note the difference between them. Sanctification is a single work and is synonymous with holiness, which is to identify someone or something that belongs to God, which He has set apart for His pleasure. Conformation is an ongoing work of the forming of someone or something.

The potential misunderstanding when confusing the two is in how they are related to salvation. The occurrence of receiving salvation is a single act which does not admit in degrees, i.e. no believer is more or less saved than any other believer, and it has no variations in quality or quantity. One is either regenerated or not, which answers to why “sanctified” is always in the past tense in Scripture. Believers “are sanctified” because God has sanctified them at rebirth.

Conformation (not to confuse with confirmation) is the progressive work of God concerning the walk and faith of the believer, which are primarily purposed to manifest Himself through the believer. The most significant error that can be made if confusing these two terms is when conceiving that salvation (redemption) is an incomplete work within the believer, as though there are other factors besides the Cross-work of Christ to effect salvation.

All who are saved are sanctified, and this will inevitably be revealed in their manner of life as God continues to “conform” them, which “are change into the same image from glory to glory” (2Cor 3:18), “to the image of His Son (Rom 8:29).

- NC​

​

I asked NetChaplain if I could post the above here.
I hope it might shed light on Sanctification as an immediate effect of hearing and believing the GOSPEL...and "conformation" (as being conformed to the IMAGE of THE SON) as an ongoing work of the Sanctifier in us...

 

[royalscot]

I have read hyper grace believers say that faith is believing in the new creation, and obedience is to the new creation.

​For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all impiety and unrighteousness of people, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what can be known about God is evident among them, for God made [it] clear to them. For from the creation of the world, his invisible [attributes], both his eternal power and deity, are discerned clearly, being understood in the things created, so that they are without excuse.

For [although they] knew God, they did not honor [him] as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their reasoning, and their senseless hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God with the likeness of an image of mortal human beings and birds and quadrupeds and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the desires of their hearts to immorality, [that] their bodies would be dishonored among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God with a lie, and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator, who is blessed for eternity. Amen. Romans 1:18-25​

[/QUO
if jews and muslems want to continue in there war . the only thing i have is the truth sets you free.

carbin copy . jew v muslim . sort of thing. what gosprl are they following lol

 

[fredoheaven]

No, I am not on a translation committee, but my Greek prof is on the ESV and NIV committees. As we translated, he made notes of things we uncovered, to take back to the committee. He also explained why certain decisions were made by both committees. And that ESV was not a fresh translation, but rather stuck to "traditional" translations, meaning it tends to follow the KJV.

Wescott and Hort are simply not the best Greek texts for the NT. Like I said, Nestle- Åland and UBS use ALL the manuscripts, and the list EVERY variation. And which variations are closest to the original, by following the mistakes down through the manuscripts as they are copied and re-copied.

The Byzantine or so-called Textus Receptus (TR) are in the majority there is no doubt. But they are much later than the best manuscripts. That is because the Byzantines spoke Greek, so they were able to get lots of copyists to copy the manuscripts. The four unintentional errors that copyists made are:

1. Errors of Sight - As the scribes looked back and forth from the text to what they were copying, they made mistakes. Sometimes they confused letters, or divided words wrongly (the oldest Greek manuscripts had no spaces between words.) They repeated words, accidentally skipped letters, words or section is (ie copied the same thing twice) or changed the order of letters in a word or words in a sentence. For example in Codex Vaticanus, in Gal. 1:11, a scribe accidentally wrote "to euaggeliov" (the gospel) three times in succession.

2. Errors of Hearing. When scribes copied manuscripts through dictation, errors of hearing were made. For example, vowels or diphthongs were misheard, as in Matt 2:6 in Codex Sinaiticus, where ek sou (from you) has been wrongly heard, and written as "eks ou" (from whom). We make similar mistakes in English, for instance, writing "night" when someone says "knight."

3. Errors of Writing. Sometimes scribes introduced errors into texts simply by writing the wrong thing. For example, in Codex Alexdrinus, at John 13:37, a scribe accidentally wrote "dunasai moi" rather than "dunamai soi."Rather than saying to Jesus, "whey can't I follow you now?" Peter now queries "why can't you follow me now?"

4. Errors of Judgement. Sometimes a scribe exercised poor judgement by incorporating marginal glosses (ancient footnotes) into the body of the text, or by incorporating similar unintentional corrupting influences. In the 14th century Codex 109, for example, an incompetent scribe has apparently copied continuous lines of text from a manuscript that listed the genealogy of Jesus (Luke 3:23-38) in two columns. The resulting genealogy has all the family relations scrambled, even listing God as the son of Aram.

The six intentional errors are only 5% and represent intentional activity on the part of the scribes:

1. Revising Grammar and Spelling. In an attempt to standardize grammar or spelling, scribes corrected what they perceived as orthographic or grammatical errors in the text they were copyin. For example, John originally put the nominative case after the preposition "apo" in Revelation 1:4. Later scribes have inserted a genitive form.

2. Harmonizing Similar Passage. Scribes had a tendency to harmonize parallel passages and introduce uniformity to stylized expressions. For example, details from the same incident in multiple gospels might be included when copying any one gospel. Even today, Greek students often unintentionally insert "Lord" or "Christ" when translating a passage with the name "Jesus." They are not intending to promote a "higher" Christology, they are simply conforming their speech to a stylized reference to the Saviour. Ancient scribes behaved in a similar way.

3. Eliminating Apparent Discrepancies and Difficulties. Scribes sometimes "fixed" what they perceived as a problem in the text. Origen perceived a geographical difficult at John 1:28, he changed "Bethany" to "Betharaba."

4. Conflating the text. Sometimes when a scribe knew of variant readings in the manuscript base from which he was copying, he woujld simply include both variants within his copy, conflating them. For example, in Acts 20:28, some early manuscripts read "the church of God,"while others read "the church of the Lord." Later manuscripts conflate these reading as "the church of the Lord and God."

5. Adapting Different Liturgical Tradiitons. In a few isolated places, it is possible that church liturgy (ie stylized prayers or praises) influenced some text additions or wording changes. For example in Matt 6:13 "For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever, Amen." Sorry to say that the Catholics got that one right.

6. Making Theoloigcal or Doctrinal Changes. Some scribes made theoloigcal or doctinical changes, either omitting something they saw as wrong, or making clarifying additions. For example, in Matt 24:36, some manuscripts omit the references to the Son's ignorance of the day of his return - a passage that is obviously difficult to understand.

As for the KJV, it relied heavily on Erasmus translation. He only had 7 manuscripts, most of poor quality. Today, we have more than 5800 ancient manuscripts or partial manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. They Byzantine is recognized by scholars as a later conflation of text traditions and not as reliable as eclectic scholarly additions produced by text critics. Although there is a tiny minority of scholars who insist that only one "family" of ancient manuscripts preserves the text, they are aligned mostly with the KJV Only movement. Thus they start with the KJV and then find manuscripts to support the KJV, instead, of critically examine all the manuscripts from all 4 families (Alexandrian, Caesarean, Western and Byzantine.)*

I'm not saying someone can't get saved reading the KJV or grow as a Christian. Just that there are so many mistakes because the translation committee had to rely on much later manuscripts which were rife with copyist errors, as I posted above.

There is much more, but this post is already too long.


*Kostenberger, Merkle and Plummer. Going Deeper with New Testament Greek: An Intermediate Study f the Grammar and Syntax of the New Testament, vv 25; 30-31

Thank you for the lengthy lectures but from a Bible believer standpoint, the post maybe simplified as a mere ”conjecture” or “assumptions” or “GUESSWORK”.

It’s an educated guess a view which was hold by W-H. W-H were pro Catholic, admiring the corrupt manuscripts calling the TR as villainous. This is an exact replica how Gnostic Heretic Origen corrupted the manuscripts. The “oldest and best” manuscript were not even used and propagated by the Bible believers and either they were kept in the Vatican Library or in the wastebasket in the St. Catherine Monastery.

Your UBS critical Greek Text Prof’s, Kurt Aland, Matthew Black, Carlo Maritni, Bruze Metzger and Allen Wilgren followed theW-H and the Nestle-Aland originally published in 1908 by Eberhard Nestle which was published the 26[SUP]th[/SUP] editions in 1983.

Editorializing the words of God is such a very bad idea. By rejecting any Bible as the Final Authority, one is standing on the shifting sand of humanism and relativity. In actuality, YOU become the Final Authority. The rehashed W_H was proven in errors on many occasions more than 100 years ago by men like Dean Burgon, Prebandary Scrivener, Hoskier, and Miller. Later a challenge by the Trinitarian Bible Society(TBS), William Pickering, Bruggen, Sturz and scores of many Bible believing men and women including Peter Ruckman(decease), Herb Evans etc.

Here is a short idea to the readers

Codex B Vaticanus – found in exceleent condition in the Vatican Library in 1481. It omitted Genesis 1:1-46:28, parts of 1 Samuel, 1 Kings, Nehemiah, Psalms 105:26-137:6; Matthew 16:2 2, 3 John, John 7:53-8:12, the Pauline Pastoral Epistles, Hebrews 9:14-13:25,and the book of Revelation.

Codex Aleph, Sinaiticus- found in a trash pile in St. Catherine’s Monastery near Mt. Sinai in 1844 by Tsichedorf, who finally obtain the manuscript in 1859. Omitted Genesis 23:19-24:26, Numbers 5:27-7:20 1 Chronicles 9:27-19:17, Exodus, Joshua, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, Judges, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Mark 16:19-20, John 7:53-8:12. Added the Sheperd of Hermas and Epistle of Banabus to the New Testament Text.

According to Dean Burgon who personally inspected the two Old but not belter says, “The impurity of the text exhibited by Codices B and Aleph is not a matter of opinion but a matter of fact.” See REVISION REVISED p. 315

So, by replacing the role of the Holy Spirit by an “educated guess” the redactors wish is his commands.

Proverbs 24:21 My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: and meddle not withthem that are given to change:

 

[fredoheaven]

In other words, you have nothing to rely upon for truth. I believe God when He said He would preserve His pure words for all generations. I believe we have the pure words of God in English in the KJB. Every word is true. Every word is the exact word I need in English. It's actually better than the original because I speak English.

Seems this is about the idea of an “advanced revelation” by Peter Ruckman. Interestingly, Nestle which is identical to the UBS except for minor punctuation differences unknowingly adhere to the idea. Here’s to give a concrete example:

In 1 John 2:23 the AV translators put the half verse in italics (1611) going by NO GREEK MANUSCRIPTS, however, the Nestle PRINTED the Greek Text (1979) that matches the Italics in the KJV. Nestle printed it more than 2 centuries (1898) after the AV supplied him the words in English: not Greek.

Blessings

 

[p_rehbein]

Originally Posted by NetChaplain
“Sanctification” vs “Conformation”

Considering the significance in the meaning of the above terms, I believe it would good to note the difference between them. Sanctification is a single work and is synonymous with holiness, which is to identify someone or something that belongs to God, which He has set apart for His pleasure. Conformation is an ongoing work of the forming of someone or something.

The potential misunderstanding when confusing the two is in how they are related to salvation. The occurrence of receiving salvation is a single act which does not admit in degrees, i.e. no believer is more or less saved than any other believer, and it has no variations in quality or quantity. One is either regenerated or not, which answers to why “sanctified” is always in the past tense in Scripture. Believers “are sanctified” because God has sanctified them at rebirth.

Conformation (not to confuse with confirmation) is the progressive work of God concerning the walk and faith of the believer, which are primarily purposed to manifest Himself through the believer. The most significant error that can be made if confusing these two terms is when conceiving that salvation (redemption) is an incomplete work within the believer, as though there are other factors besides the Cross-work of Christ to effect salvation.

All who are saved are sanctified, and this will inevitably be revealed in their manner of life as God continues to “conform” them, which “are change into the same image from glory to glory” (2Cor 3:18), “to the image of His Son (Rom 8:29).

- NC








I asked NetChaplain if I could post the above here.
I hope it might shed light on Sanctification as an immediate effect of hearing and believing the GOSPEL...and "conformation" (as being conformed to the IMAGE of THE SON) as an ongoing work of the Sanctifier in us...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only problem is this isn't quite right. All who are saved are saved. Sanctification is not included in salvation, for it comes through the receiving of the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit when a lot of what he mentions takes place. Such as set apart, made holy, receiving spiritual gifts and such, and this does not always happen at the time of salvation, It can, but it does not always. Reading Scripture will show this to be true.

I disagree somewhat with his interpretation of "confirmation", but not enough to argue about it.

 

[God4me]

Originally Posted by NetChaplain
“Sanctification” vs “Conformation”

Considering the significance in the meaning of the above terms, I believe it would good to note the difference between them. Sanctification is a single work and is synonymous with holiness, which is to identify someone or something that belongs to God, which He has set apart for His pleasure. Conformation is an ongoing work of the forming of someone or something.

The potential misunderstanding when confusing the two is in how they are related to salvation. The occurrence of receiving salvation is a single act which does not admit in degrees, i.e. no believer is more or less saved than any other believer, and it has no variations in quality or quantity. One is either regenerated or not, which answers to why “sanctified” is always in the past tense in Scripture. Believers “are sanctified” because God has sanctified them at rebirth.

Conformation (not to confuse with confirmation) is the progressive work of God concerning the walk and faith of the believer, which are primarily purposed to manifest Himself through the believer. The most significant error that can be made if confusing these two terms is when conceiving that salvation (redemption) is an incomplete work within the believer, as though there are other factors besides the Cross-work of Christ to effect salvation.

All who are saved are sanctified, and this will inevitably be revealed in their manner of life as God continues to “conform” them, which “are change into the same image from glory to glory” (2Cor 3:18), “to the image of His Son (Rom 8:29).

- NC








I asked NetChaplain if I could post the above here.
I hope it might shed light on Sanctification as an immediate effect of hearing and believing the GOSPEL...and "conformation" (as being conformed to the IMAGE of THE SON) as an ongoing work of the Sanctifier in us...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only problem is this isn't quite right. All who are saved are saved. Sanctification is not included in salvation, for it comes through the receiving of the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit when a lot of what he mentions takes place. Such as set apart, made holy, receiving spiritual gifts and such, and this does not always happen at the time of salvation, It can, but it does not always. Reading Scripture will show this to be true.

I disagree somewhat with his interpretation of "confirmation", but not enough to argue about it.

You are right, The Netchaplain has got it wrong.

 

[Johnlove]

The Spirit was given to lead the APOSTLES into ALL TRUTH. We are not led into all truth. We have partial truth. This chat is proof of that,

If the Church was being led by the Holy Spirit then it would be taught the full truth. But the Holy Spirit stopped leading the Church when it stopped keeping God’s Word.

It the Holy Spirit was still teaching the Church then Christians would no longer be committing sin.

(Romans 8:1-4) “The reason, therefore, why those who are in Christ Jesus are not condemned, is that the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death. God has done what the Law, because of our unspiritual nature, was unable to do. God dealt with sin by sending his own Son in a body as physical as any sinful body, and in that body God condemned sin he did this in order the Law’s just demands might be satisfied in us, who behave not as our unspiritual nature but as the spirit dictates.”

(1 John 3:5-6) “Now you know that he appeared in order to abolish sin, and that in him there is no sin; anyone who lives in God does not sin, and anyone who sins has never seen him or known him.”

(1 John 2: 27) “But you have not lost the anointing that he gave you, and you do not need anyone to teach you; the anointing he gave teaches you everything: you are anointed with truth, not with a lie, and as it has taught you, so you must stay in him.”