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.
Good grief no! But that is what Universalist "scholars" do when they make bold statements that words don't mean what most scholars have translated them to mean. My point is why do we disregard virtually ALL of the modern Bible translations just because Universalists dont like what they say?
"I understand it is hard to grasp for many, but for 1000 years there was no Bible available at all for the common people who had to rely on a corrupt clergy, however even the worst translations contain the universalist verses and show that "for ever" is not always endless. It's only for a few years now where all people have access to all translations and even the source texts in their original languages."
Blindly relying on a bunch of biased versions cloned by the pro ECT advocates boys club is worth as much as a piece of toilet paper. If atheists shelled out to have printed 100 versions saying "God is dead" would you accept that because the 100 outnumber what other versions say?
Since the translators all believed in endless punishment, what else would you expect, except that they all would mis-translate certain "hell" passages the same way? Obviously.
Dozens of English translations don't agree with those cloned by the endless tortures boys club.
Likewise the early church father Greek scholar universalists would have rejected your cloned excuses for translations. Better to call them paraphrases, interpretations or theologically driven opinions of what the originally inspired ancient language texts say.
Even your cloned theologically driven interpretative "versions" support universalism, which makes them self-contradictory, e.g.:
Lamentations 3:22 and 3:31-33, The steadfast love of the Lord NEVER ceases, his mercies NEVER come to an end. . . .
Lam.3:31 For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:
32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the SONS OF MEN.…
Considering, then, that the Greek word aionios has a range of meanings, biased men should not have rendered the word in Mt.25:46 by their theological opinions as "everlasting". Thus they did not translate the word, but interpreted it. OTOH the versions with age-lasting, eonian & the like gave faithful translations & left the interpreting up to the readers as to what specific meaning within the "range of meanings" the word holds in any specific context.
What biased scholars who agreed with the Douay & KJV traditions of the dark ages "church" (of Inquisitions, Crusades, burning opposers to death with fire & their writings) have done is change the words of Scriptures to their own opinions, which is shameful.
"Add not to His words, lest He reason with thee, And thou hast been found false."(Prov.30:6)
"After all, not only Walvoord, Buis, and Inge, but all intelligent students acknowledge that olam and aiõn sometimes refer to limited duration. Here is my point: The supposed special reference or usage of a word is not the province of the translator but of the interpreter. Since these authors themselves plainly indicate that the usage of a word is a matter of interpretation, it follows (1) that it is not a matter of translation, and (2) that it is wrong for any translation effectually to decide that which must necessarily remain a matter of interpretation concerning these words in question. Therefore, olam and aiõn should never be translated by the thought of “endlessness,” but only by that of indefinite duration (as in the anglicized transliteration “eon” which appears in the Concordant Version)."
Actually it are only a few words that are mistranslated, only in almost all instances. But all Bibles contain the universalist verses, so those who want to see, can see. Bible translations usually have a denominational background and thus are biased, this should surprise nobody. I'd wonder how a Bible translation, let's say from a Chinese scholar (Philology) with no Christian or theological background would look like.
That everlasting/for ever/eternal is not (always) meant to be endless is apparent even in the KJV.
Actually it is only a few words that are mistranslated, only in almost all instances. But all Bibles contain the universalist verses, so those who want to see, can see. Bible translations usually have a denominational background and thus are biased, this should surprise nobody. I'd wonder how a Bible translation, let's say from a Chinese scholar (Philology) with no Christian or theological background would look like.
That everlasting/for ever/eternal is not (always) meant to be endless is apparent even in the KJV.
I was surprised to see they (Victor Hafichuk and Paul Cohen) quoted an article by Gary Amirault:
“Now let’s discover how long the ‘eternity’ REALLY is in many leading ‘selling’ English translations:
Sodom’s fiery judgment is ‘eternal’ (Jude 7) – until… God ‘will restore the fortunes of Sodom’ (Eze. 16:53-55).
Israel’s ‘affliction is incurable’ (Jeremiah 30:12) – until… the Lord ‘will restore health’ and heal her wounds (Jeremiah 30:17).
The sin of Samaria ‘is incurable’ (Micah 1:9) – until… Lord ‘will restore the fortunes of Samaria.’ (Ez. 16:53).
Ammon is to become a ‘wasteland forever’ and ‘rise no more’ (Zephaniah 2:9, Jeremiah 25:27) – until… the Lord will ‘restore the fortunes of the Ammonites’ (Jeremiah 49:6).
An Ammonite or Moabite is forbidden to enter the Lord’s congregation ‘forever’ – until… the tenth generation (Deuteronomy 23:3).
Habakkuk tells us of mountains that were ‘everlasting’, that is – until… they ‘were shattered’ (Habakkuk 3 3:6).
The Aaronic Priesthood was to be an ‘everlasting’ priesthood (Exodus 40:15), that is – until… it was superceded by the Melchizedek Priesthood (Hebrews 7:14-18).
Many translations of the Bible inform us that God would dwell in Solomon’s Temple ‘forever’ (1 Kings 8:13), that is – until… the Temple was destroyed.
The Law of Moses was to be an ‘everlasting covenant’ (Leviticus 24:8), yet we read in the New Covenant the first was ‘done away’ and ‘abolished’ (2 Corinthians 3:11,13), and God ‘made the first old’ (Hebrews 8:13).
The fire for Israel’s sin offering (of a ram without blemish) is never to be put out. It shall be a ‘perpetual’ – until… Christ, the Lamb of God, dies for our sins. We now have a better covenant established on better promises (Leviticus 6:12-13, Hebrews 8:6-13).
God’s waves of wrath roll over Jonah ‘forever’ – until… the Lord delivers him from the large fish’s belly on the third day (Jonah 2:6,10; 1:17).
Egypt and Elam will ‘rise no more’ (Jeremiah 25:27) – until… the Lord will ‘restore the fortunes of Egypt’ (Ezekiel 29:14) and ‘restore the fortunes of Elam’ (Jeremiah 49:39).
‘Moab is destroyed’ (Jeremiah 48:4, 42) – until… the Lord ‘will restore the fortunes of Moab’ (Jeremiah 48:47).
Israel’s judgment lasts ‘forever’ – until… the Spirit is poured out and God restores it (Isaiah 32:13-15).
The King James Bible, as well as many others, tells us that a bondslave was to serve his master ‘forever’ (Exodus 21:6), that is – until… his death.”
He continues:
“Here then is absolute proof from the Scriptures themselves that an aion is an AGE or a PARTICULAR PERIOD OR INTERVAL:
• There was time BEFORE the aions (1 Corinthians 2:7, ‘BEFORE the eons’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• God MADE the aions (Hebrews 1:2, ‘MAKES the eons’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• There were aions in the PAST (Colossians 1:26, ‘hid FROM eons’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• This PRESENT age is called an aion (Galatians 1:4, ‘the PRESENT wicked eon’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• This PRESENT age will come to an END (Matthew 24:3, ‘The END [or conclusion] of the eon’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• There is coming another aion AFTER this present aion (Luke 18:30, ‘the eon TO COME’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• There are, in fact, coming multiples or FUTURE AIONS (Ephesians 2:7, ‘the ONCOMING AIONS’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• Some aions are even contrasted with OTHER AIONS (Ephesians 3:21, ‘the eon OF the eons’). Therefore, NOT ETERNAL.
• All aions will come to all their ENDS (1 Corinthians 10:11, ‘the CONSUMMATIONS [plural] of the eons [plural].’) Therefore, obviously not possible to be eternal!!
Now there is Scriptural proof. We don’t need Webster’s Dictionary and we don’t need Strong’s Lexicon. The Scriptural usage of the words ‘aion’ ‘aions’ and ‘aionios’ prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Greek ‘aions’ are NOT English ‘eternities.’
[It has been said that] the Hebrew ‘olams’ NEVER, EVER mean ‘age.’ That statement is NOT Scripturally true. Numbers 25:13 speaks of the priesthood of Aaron, and we read this: ‘And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an EVERLASTING [Heb. ‘olam’] priesthood….’ We now know for a Scriptural FACT that this priesthood was NOT ‘everlasting,’ but rather lasted for an ‘age’–a long period of time having a beginning and an ending.
We see in the book of Hebrews that this very priesthood NO LONGER EXISTS! The temple is gone and the tribe of Levi is gone. And so, it was an ‘age-abiding’ or ‘eonian’ priesthood, not an ‘everlasting’ one.”
The bible is anointed of God through His spirit , so the bible comes with the prerequisite that people have the Spirit of God to interpret , where some people may have the spirit of confusion interpret ......... Even God had four gospels put in the book as a proof that the story is true , and not a false testimony , where only one Gospel would come through one witness
Actually it are only a few words that are mistranslated, only in almost all instances. But all Bibles contain the universalist verses, so those who want to see, can see. Bible translations usually have a denominational background and thus are biased, this should surprise nobody. I'd wonder how a Bible translation, let's say from a Chinese scholar (Philology) with no Christian or theological background would look like.
That everlasting/for ever/eternal is not (always) meant to be endless is apparent even in the KJV.
The original texts of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and Christian Scriptures (New Testament) were written in Hebrew, Greek, and occasionally in Aramaic. Unfortunately, relatively few adults in North America can read any of these ancient languages. So most of us have to rely upon English translations.
"I understand it is hard to grasp for many, but for 1000 years there was no Bible available at all for the common people who had to rely on a corrupt clergy, however even the worst translations contain the universalist verses and show that "for ever" is not always endless. It's only for a few years now where all people have access to all translations and even the source texts in their original languages."
Blindly relying on a bunch of biased versions cloned by the pro ECT advocates boys club is worth as much as a piece of toilet paper. If atheists shelled out to have printed 100 versions saying "God is dead" would you accept that because the 100 outnumber what other versions say?
Since the translators all believed in endless punishment, what else would you expect, except that they all would mis-translate certain "hell" passages the same way? Obviously.
Dozens of English translations don't agree with those cloned by the endless tortures boys club.
Likewise the early church father Greek scholar universalists would have rejected your cloned excuses for translations. Better to call them paraphrases, interpretations or theologically driven opinions of what the originally inspired ancient language texts say.
Even your cloned theologically driven interpretative "versions" support universalism, which makes them self-contradictory, e.g.:
Lamentations 3:22 and 3:31-33, The steadfast love of the Lord NEVER ceases, his mercies NEVER come to an end. . . .
Lam.3:31 For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:
32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the SONS OF MEN.…
Considering, then, that the Greek word aionios has a range of meanings, biased men should not have rendered the word in Mt.25:46 by their theological opinions as "everlasting". Thus they did not translate the word, but interpreted it. OTOH the versions with age-lasting, eonian & the like gave faithful translations & left the interpreting up to the readers as to what specific meaning within the "range of meanings" the word holds in any specific context.
What biased scholars who agreed with the Douay & KJV traditions of the dark ages "church" (of Inquisitions, Crusades, burning opposers to death with fire & their writings) have done is change the words of Scriptures to their own opinions, which is shameful.
"Add not to His words, lest He reason with thee, And thou hast been found false."(Prov.30:6)
"After all, not only Walvoord, Buis, and Inge, but all intelligent students acknowledge that olam and aiõn sometimes refer to limited duration. Here is my point: The supposed special reference or usage of a word is not the province of the translator but of the interpreter. Since these authors themselves plainly indicate that the usage of a word is a matter of interpretation, it follows (1) that it is not a matter of translation, and (2) that it is wrong for any translation effectually to decide that which must necessarily remain a matter of interpretation concerning these words in question. Therefore, olam and aiõn should never be translated by the thought of “endlessness,” but only by that of indefinite duration (as in the anglicized transliteration “eon” which appears in the Concordant Version)."
All this rant seems to do is to attempt to impress its readers with its author's literate bias.
It does nothing to establish faith in Holy Writ and in fact seems to exhibit a serpentine design to erode it.
If it has a valid point, it's been lost in a blizzard of obtuse references and obfuscation.
CONTEXT
There are indeed a large number of translations - all equally able to afford the student an equitable understanding of Holy Writ.
Scholarly interpretations of Biblical passages all rely upon contextual examination. That is to say that interpretation of a particular passage must agree with the bulk of Biblical teachings and passages throughout the Old and New Covenants. Only canonical scriptures are to be included in such studies, although some scholars do indeed consider historical chronicles and non-canonical documents in their exegetical examinations. Postulations of interpretations apart from the context of the Bible always leads to heresy. Mr. Clement knows of what I speak.
OFFICIAL HERESY
It is true that the attitude of the Catholic church has always been, as it is to this day, that the layperson ought not read the Bible. Interpretations are best left to the priesthood, according to Catholic doctrine. The unofficial statement is; "the Bible is not your playground".(1)
While Catholic priests restrict their congregations from studying the Bible and from providing the necessary tools to proper interpretation, they do not seem to be averse to 'playing in other playgrounds'. I think my meaning is obvious here.
FAMINE OF THE WORD OF GOD
"The days are coming," declares the Sovereign LORD, "when I will send a famine through the land-- not a famine of food or a thirst for water, but a famine of hearing the words of the LORD." - Amos 8:11
In the days of the prophet Amos, God decreed a famine of the Word upon the kingdom of Israel. His word would not pass the lips of prophets or priests for a considerable length of time because of the wickedness of the people. They had refused to listen to or acknowledge God's direction and purpose.
Since there was no longer anything to talk about, God stopped talking.
A famine of the Word of God has been decreed for America.
This time, however, it's church leadership not God who've made declarations that have literally gutted the Holy Bible of spiritual and moral context. They have reduced Holy Scripture to the level of common literature and supermarket tabloid. They have literally attempted to gag God's mouth.
In the past few decades, several major Christian denominations have gathered at their individual national conventions and;
- either passed resolutions that reinterpreted "THE Word of God" to "A Word of God" (2), thus reducing the Bible to a level equal to any other secular or religious work of literature,
- or so confused their spiritual and moral foundations as to be totally unrecognizable with regard to Biblical standards of faith and observance.
By altering a single English word or long accepted tradition, the status of God's revelation to man has been secularized and denuded of spiritual impact and meaning.
"They will act religious, but they will reject the power that could make them godly. Stay away from people like that!" - 2 Timothy 3:5
Be advised that the best confidence artist is one who appears in sheep's clothing, a shepherd's robes, as a scholar, a celebrity or popular politician. Follow such persons as you choose, but be aware that their purpose is deceit and their reward fleeting.
The Word of God stands forever.
that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
(*) as I was informed by a former Catholic nun.
The same is true for Islam's holy book The Qur'an. In a personal private conversation with four Muslims I asked questions about the meaning of certain verses in the Qur'an. I was advised by all of them that I shouldn't read the Qur'an "because it's too confusing."
Does ANYBODY read their own holy book? I have serious reservations about this all around......
(2) The phrase is an exact quote of the language used.
Last edited by Choir Loft; 08-30-2018 at 07:34 AM..
All this rant seems to do is to attempt to impress its readers with its author's literate bias.
It does nothing to establish faith in Holy Writ and in fact seems to exhibit a serpentine design to erode it.
Translation: IOW you had nothing to say that could refute the arguments of the OP.
Assuming you understood them.
So, instead, you can only sling mud & false accusations in accord with the false doctrine the OP exposes. It seems that the lie of that doctrine is upheld by further lies, just as liars add more lies to a lie in order to support their original lie. The false doctrines of endless punishment & tortures are built upon a web of lies like a house of cards.
Translation: IOW you had nothing to say that could refute the arguments of the OP.
Assuming you understood them.
So, instead, you can only sling mud & false accusations in accord with the false doctrine the OP exposes. It seems that the lie of that doctrine is upheld by further lies, just as liars add more lies to a lie in order to support their original lie. The false doctrines of endless punishment & tortures are built upon a web of lies like a house of cards.
A Reluctant Fundamentalist doesn’t want to hear the truth.
I was surprised to see they (Victor Hafichuk and Paul Cohen) quoted an article by Gary Amirault:
“Now let’s discover how long the ‘eternity’ REALLY is in many leading ‘selling’ English translations:
Sodom’s fiery judgment is ‘eternal’ (Jude 7) – until… God ‘will restore the fortunes of Sodom’ (Eze. 16:53-55).
Israel’s ‘affliction is incurable’ (Jeremiah 30:12) – until… the Lord ‘will restore health’ and heal her wounds (Jeremiah 30:17).
The sin of Samaria ‘is incurable’ (Micah 1:9) – until… Lord ‘will restore the fortunes of Samaria.’ (Ez. 16:53).
Ammon is to become a ‘wasteland forever’ and ‘rise no more’ (Zephaniah 2:9, Jeremiah 25:27) – until… the Lord will ‘restore the fortunes of the Ammonites’ (Jeremiah 49:6).
An Ammonite or Moabite is forbidden to enter the Lord’s congregation ‘forever’ – until… the tenth generation (Deuteronomy 23:3).
Habakkuk tells us of mountains that were ‘everlasting’, that is – until… they ‘were shattered’ (Habakkuk 3 3:6).
The Aaronic Priesthood was to be an ‘everlasting’ priesthood (Exodus 40:15), that is – until… it was superceded by the Melchizedek Priesthood (Hebrews 7:14-18).
Many translations of the Bible inform us that God would dwell in Solomon’s Temple ‘forever’ (1 Kings 8:13), that is – until… the Temple was destroyed.
The Law of Moses was to be an ‘everlasting covenant’ (Leviticus 24:8), yet we read in the New Covenant the first was ‘done away’ and ‘abolished’ (2 Corinthians 3:11,13), and God ‘made the first old’ (Hebrews 8:13).
The fire for Israel’s sin offering (of a ram without blemish) is never to be put out. It shall be a ‘perpetual’ – until… Christ, the Lamb of God, dies for our sins. We now have a better covenant established on better promises (Leviticus 6:12-13, Hebrews 8:6-13).
God’s waves of wrath roll over Jonah ‘forever’ – until… the Lord delivers him from the large fish’s belly on the third day (Jonah 2:6,10; 1:17).
Egypt and Elam will ‘rise no more’ (Jeremiah 25:27) – until… the Lord will ‘restore the fortunes of Egypt’ (Ezekiel 29:14) and ‘restore the fortunes of Elam’ (Jeremiah 49:39).
‘Moab is destroyed’ (Jeremiah 48:4, 42) – until… the Lord ‘will restore the fortunes of Moab’ (Jeremiah 48:47).
Israel’s judgment lasts ‘forever’ – until… the Spirit is poured out and God restores it (Isaiah 32:13-15).
The King James Bible, as well as many others, tells us that a bondslave was to serve his master ‘forever’ (Exodus 21:6), that is – until… his death.”
He continues:
“Here then is absolute proof from the Scriptures themselves that an aion is an AGE or a PARTICULAR PERIOD OR INTERVAL:
• There was time BEFORE the aions (1 Corinthians 2:7, ‘BEFORE the eons’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• God MADE the aions (Hebrews 1:2, ‘MAKES the eons’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• There were aions in the PAST (Colossians 1:26, ‘hid FROM eons’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• This PRESENT age is called an aion (Galatians 1:4, ‘the PRESENT wicked eon’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• This PRESENT age will come to an END (Matthew 24:3, ‘The END [or conclusion] of the eon’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• There is coming another aion AFTER this present aion (Luke 18:30, ‘the eon TO COME’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• There are, in fact, coming multiples or FUTURE AIONS (Ephesians 2:7, ‘the ONCOMING AIONS’). Therefore, NOT eternal.
• Some aions are even contrasted with OTHER AIONS (Ephesians 3:21, ‘the eon OF the eons’). Therefore, NOT ETERNAL.
• All aions will come to all their ENDS (1 Corinthians 10:11, ‘the CONSUMMATIONS [plural] of the eons [plural].’) Therefore, obviously not possible to be eternal!!
Now there is Scriptural proof. We don’t need Webster’s Dictionary and we don’t need Strong’s Lexicon. The Scriptural usage of the words ‘aion’ ‘aions’ and ‘aionios’ prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Greek ‘aions’ are NOT English ‘eternities.’
[It has been said that] the Hebrew ‘olams’ NEVER, EVER mean ‘age.’ That statement is NOT Scripturally true. Numbers 25:13 speaks of the priesthood of Aaron, and we read this: ‘And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an EVERLASTING [Heb. ‘olam’] priesthood….’ We now know for a Scriptural FACT that this priesthood was NOT ‘everlasting,’ but rather lasted for an ‘age’–a long period of time having a beginning and an ending.
We see in the book of Hebrews that this very priesthood NO LONGER EXISTS! The temple is gone and the tribe of Levi is gone. And so, it was an ‘age-abiding’ or ‘eonian’ priesthood, not an ‘everlasting’ one.”
satan has been trying to tear down God's Word since the Garden of Eden. But, the penalty for sin was death then and it's still the penalty yet today. Don't let satan fool you too because the penalty will be be more than you can bear.
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.
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.
