U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-28-2012, 04:18 PM
 
10,191 posts, read 10,564,878 times
Reputation: 3020

Advertisements

You learn something new every day. Turns out John never wrote the famous story of the adulterous woman whom Jesus saved from the crowds. It was "hinted at" about the fifth century in certain copies and not made part of commentaries on the texts until the tenth century. Bible forensics experts note the vastly different writing style between the passage John: 7:53-8:11 and the rest of John. The evidence for this is too vast. Anyone can research it.

My point is that if we cannot trust what I personally considered to be the "purest" gospel of the four, then what CAN we trust? For example, this calls into question a key text from John's gospel that Calvinists rely on to support their doctrine of limited atonement: John 17:6 6 “I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word." Calvinists love this verse because to them it proves that God from time immemorial had selected certain people for salvation and others for damnation. As this text only appears in John and we have nothing to compare it with until centuries later how can we know it also wasn't added later by some copyist with an agenda, namely to discredit universal salvation?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-28-2012, 04:34 PM
 
Location: Florida -
8,254 posts, read 10,028,932 times
Reputation: 15130
So, let's see ... Instead of looking to God's Word, the Bible for your answers, you are depending on modern 'forensics experts' to tell you what is right and wrong. Given this mindset, how do you know you can trust 'universal salvation'?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2012, 04:36 PM
 
6,824 posts, read 4,878,805 times
Reputation: 3724
As with everything, there are two sides to the story. People should be aware of the gnostic deletion of Scripture by Wescott and Hort to fit their ideology. The details of this are easily searched for those interested via google search.

Textus Receptus is the most accurate collection of manuscript evidence supported by carbon dating of various manuscripts dated back prior to 70AD. It is the primary source for compilation of the Authorized (not new) King James Version Bible New Testament. It contains John 7.

The Calvanistic concept of "limited atonement" is not scriptural. Jesus Christ died for the sins of the World, but this can only be appropriated on our behalf through coming to God through Jesus Christ receiving his free gift of Salvation through faith. Without Jesus Christ the Justice of the Law falls upon our own person as opposed to being judged on that cross ~2000 years ago.

Foreknowledge looks back to predestination which looks forward toward "election". Those "elect" are not special on their account but special on Jesus Christ's account. Mankind has free choice. The elect are predestined as God inhabits eternity knowing the end from the beginning and knows who is going to choose to respond to the gospel in the end.

All confusion regarding election erodes when one understands Time is a physical dimension created with Space and Matter within the physical universe. God's throne is in the "3rd Heaven" outside the finite universe inhabiting eternity seeing a thousand years as one day.

Universal Reconciliation is an aggressive and subversive doctrine within Christianity which supports the United Nations ideology of universal religion. If all the world are saved through Jesus Christ, than it makes a political move to unite all Religions into one - claiming they all worship the same God in different ways possible even by "Christian" "leadership".

In reality it will be rejecting Jesus Christ as the Only way to God thus rejecting our Creator on a Global Scale.

There is only one place to hide, and that is Jesus Christ, from the Wrath that is about to fall upon this entire creation for rejecting it's Creator-Redeemer. Fear not who can kill the body but fear him who can cast the body and soul into Hell as Jesus Christ himself says.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2012, 05:49 PM
 
1,784 posts, read 2,882,901 times
Reputation: 1242
I think the OP is conflating universal salvation and unlimited atonement. NOT the same thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2012, 06:20 PM
 
Location: East Coast
30,266 posts, read 20,012,643 times
Reputation: 2109
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
You learn something new every day. Turns out John never wrote the famous story of the adulterous woman whom Jesus saved from the crowds. It was "hinted at" about the fifth century in certain copies and not made part of commentaries on the texts until the tenth century. Bible forensics experts note the vastly different writing style between the passage John: 7:53-8:11 and the rest of John. The evidence for this is too vast. Anyone can research it.

My point is that if we cannot trust what I personally considered to be the "purest" gospel of the four, then what CAN we trust? For example, this calls into question a key text from John's gospel that Calvinists rely on to support their doctrine of limited atonement: John 17:6 6 I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word." Calvinists love this verse because to them it proves that God from time immemorial had selected certain people for salvation and others for damnation. As this text only appears in John and we have nothing to compare it with until centuries later how can we know it also wasn't added later by some copyist with an agenda, namely to discredit universal salvation?
Thrill when you come to your senses and judge and discern things in the right frame of mind(righteously) . You know that you know, that what happened in that situation with the woman caught in adultery,as the fragrance of the love and spirit of God all over it. In my mind you have got to be out of your mind to think like a Calvinist( i had leanings towards it in the past)again when you come to your senses you know this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2012, 06:53 PM
 
Location: Deepest Darkest NZ
685 posts, read 508,756 times
Reputation: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikelee81 View Post
As with everything, there are two sides to the story. People should be aware of the gnostic deletion of Scripture by Wescott and Hort to fit their ideology. The details of this are easily searched for those interested via google search.

Textus Receptus is the most accurate collection of manuscript evidence supported by carbon dating of various manuscripts dated back prior to 70AD. It is the primary source for compilation of the Authorized (not new) King James Version Bible New Testament. It contains John 7.

The Calvanistic concept of "limited atonement" is not scriptural. Jesus Christ died for the sins of the World, but this can only be appropriated on our behalf through coming to God through Jesus Christ receiving his free gift of Salvation through faith. Without Jesus Christ the Justice of the Law falls upon our own person as opposed to being judged on that cross ~2000 years ago.

Foreknowledge looks back to predestination which looks forward toward "election". Those "elect" are not special on their account but special on Jesus Christ's account. Mankind has free choice. The elect are predestined as God inhabits eternity knowing the end from the beginning and knows who is going to choose to respond to the gospel in the end.

All confusion regarding election erodes when one understands Time is a physical dimension created with Space and Matter within the physical universe. God's throne is in the "3rd Heaven" outside the finite universe inhabiting eternity seeing a thousand years as one day.

Universal Reconciliation is an aggressive and subversive doctrine within Christianity which supports the United Nations ideology of universal religion. If all the world are saved through Jesus Christ, than it makes a political move to unite all Religions into one - claiming they all worship the same God in different ways possible even by "Christian" "leadership".

In reality it will be rejecting Jesus Christ as the Only way to God thus rejecting our Creator on a Global Scale.

There is only one place to hide, and that is Jesus Christ, from the Wrath that is about to fall upon this entire creation for rejecting it's Creator-Redeemer. Fear not who can kill the body but fear him who can cast the body and soul into Hell as Jesus Christ himself says.
Prove that Westcott & Hort were gnostics please.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2012, 06:56 PM
 
Location: Gulf Coast Texas
26,259 posts, read 14,135,452 times
Reputation: 10125
To the OP...

OK - skip that part and read/follow the rest if it's a problem for you and don't make it a stumbling block to others who believe it's Scripture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2012, 06:57 PM
 
Location: Texas
1,770 posts, read 1,959,051 times
Reputation: 613
.


Anyone who now maintains that woman committed adultery, is committing a false witness.

Under God's Law the penalty for false witness to a capital crime is execution.

The woman's accusers, who were trying to manipulate Jesus to break God's Law, ran away.

Since there were not two or more to bear witness of her alleged crime, under God's Law, Jesus could not condemn her.


.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2012, 06:58 PM
 
Location: Deepest Darkest NZ
685 posts, read 508,756 times
Reputation: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
You learn something new every day. Turns out John never wrote the famous story of the adulterous woman whom Jesus saved from the crowds. It was "hinted at" about the fifth century in certain copies and not made part of commentaries on the texts until the tenth century. Bible forensics experts note the vastly different writing style between the passage John: 7:53-8:11 and the rest of John. The evidence for this is too vast. Anyone can research it.

My point is that if we cannot trust what I personally considered to be the "purest" gospel of the four, then what CAN we trust? For example, this calls into question a key text from John's gospel that Calvinists rely on to support their doctrine of limited atonement: John 17:6 6 I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word." Calvinists love this verse because to them it proves that God from time immemorial had selected certain people for salvation and others for damnation. As this text only appears in John and we have nothing to compare it with until centuries later how can we know it also wasn't added later by some copyist with an agenda, namely to discredit universal salvation?
The pericope adulterae in John's Gospel [. . .]is not found in any place in any of the earliest surviving Greek Gospel manuscripts; neither in the two 3rd century papyrus witnesses to John - P66 and P75; nor in the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, although all four of these manuscripts may acknowledge the existence of the passage via diacritical marks at the spot.

The first surviving Greek manuscript to contain the pericope is the Latin/Greek diglot Codex Bezae of the late 4th or early 5th century. It is also the earliest surviving Latin manuscript to contain it; 17 of the 23 Old Latin manuscripts of John 7-8 contain at least part of the Pericope. Papias (circa AD 125) refers to a story of Jesus and a woman "accused of many sins" as being found in the Gospel of the Hebrews, which may well refer to this passage; there is a very certain quotation of the pericope adulterae in the 3rd Century Syriac Didascalia Apostolorum; though without indicating John's Gospel.

The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles Book II.24 refers to the passage And when the elders had set another woman who had sinned before Him, and had left the sentence to Him, and were gone out, our Lord, the Searcher of the hearts, inquiring of her whether the elders had condemned her, and being answered No, He said unto her: Go thy way therefore, for neither do I condemn thee. Book II is generally dated to the late third century (Von Drey, Krabbe, Bunsen, Funk).Codex Fuldensis, which is positively dated to AD 546 contains the adulterae pericope. The Second Epistle of Pope Callistus section 6 contains a quote that may be from John 8:11 - "Let him see to it that he sin no more, that the sentence of the Gospel may abide in him: Go, and sin no more." However the epistle quotes from eighth century writings and is not thought to be genuine. [. . .]

Source
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2012, 07:10 PM
 
Location: Lower east side of Toronto
10,589 posts, read 10,336,786 times
Reputation: 9271
Quote:
Originally Posted by jghorton View Post
So, let's see ... Instead of looking to God's Word, the Bible for your answers, you are depending on modern 'forensics experts' to tell you what is right and wrong. Given this mindset, how do you know you can trust 'universal salvation'?
Being a layman and not a forensic expert...you can use common sense and logic to figure out if something is amiss..for instance over the centuries books have been added and taken away- and some ignored- the gnostic gospels were tossed out (salvation through knowledge)....and little things like Paul writing to Timothy - ending a letter with "by the way it's getting cold - if you can bring me my coat" - he sounds dishonest and maybe should have made the letter shorter like "Bring me my coat"...

ONLY the words emitted directly from the mouth of Christ as best as we can find them- are what is relevant- the rest if filler and not the direct word of God- The direct word came out of Christ- no one else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top