Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 109 (8803 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-20-2017 10:23 AM
357 online now:
Coragyps, Diomedes, DrJones*, dwise1, halibut, jar, Percy (Admin), RAZD, Tangle (9 members, 348 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Upcoming Birthdays: DC85
Post Volume:
Total: 822,689 Year: 27,295/21,208 Month: 1,208/1,714 Week: 51/365 Day: 7/44 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
678
9
1011Next
Author Topic:   What is the Meaning of John 3:16?
jar
Member
Posts: 29609
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 121 of 156 (653130)
02-18-2012 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by Phat
02-18-2012 11:36 AM


Rabbit holes may beinteresting but they have nothing to do with the topic.
The author of that passage has the Jesus character say those things.

That tells us nothing about whether the author was inspired or who or what might have inspired the author.

"Inspiration is 99% perspiration" is an old, old saying.

But inspiration is irrelevant to the topic. The issue is "What does John 3 say when viewed in context?"

People tend to stop reading it seems when it gets to the part about beliefs, but if they should continue reading they would see that the condemnation is not hell, but rather behavior, doing.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Phat, posted 02-18-2012 11:36 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 122 of 156 (653143)
02-18-2012 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by Phat
02-18-2012 11:36 AM


Re: Resurrected Thread on John 3
Jesus says to Nick, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." So we have a source of birth. A spiritual birth. Note that Jesus doesnt just say spirit as in "we've got spirit yes we do, we've got spirit how bout you?"

It's okay to only read what you want to read, but don't expect to ever have a clue in hell what the text is saying if you do.

If we read on, we see exactly what it means to be 'born of water and of the Spirit' (emphasis added):

quote:
John 3:1821 (NRSV):

Those who believe in him are not condemned; but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgement, that the light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil. For all who do evil hate the light and do not come to the light, so that their deeds may not be exposed. But those who do what is true come to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that their deeds have been done in God.'


Does this mean that in order to get inspiration I need to work at it?

What does the text say?


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Phat, posted 02-18-2012 11:36 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Phat, posted 02-16-2013 9:22 AM Jon has not yet responded
 Message 128 by kofh2u, posted 02-16-2013 8:27 PM Jon has not yet responded
 Message 130 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-19-2013 4:09 PM Jon has responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 97 days)
Posts: 553
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 123 of 156 (653660)
02-23-2012 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Jon
02-17-2012 4:21 PM


Re: IN THE LIGHT
-

Jon writes:

.. What the hell for? ... actually makes sense to you ?

-

Friend, what's it that afflicts you ?

There are clues and evidences that belief is of the dragon, the father of the lies--beliefs and specialist on camouflages. For all animals know by instinct that believing is the purpose of every camouflage.

When dogs know that their gate is closed they try to make others believe that it isn't. That's why a ferocious dog would run until he either breaks the chain or his neck just to make the other dogs believe that there's no chain nor fence holding him. For a chained dog has the instinct that the only defense plan left is the believing plan, that is to act as if there was no chain nor gate.

-

Laconic field Having a fides quae creditur a belief that is credited by the man and potentates from down a believed merit to salvation for becoming creditor of spiritual credit not willing to see that after a great debt was pardoned the accounts became cleared up to have no debt nor credit any longer

-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Jon, posted 02-17-2012 4:21 PM Jon has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by Panda, posted 02-23-2012 12:43 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

    
Panda
Member (Idle past 1302 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 124 of 156 (653662)
02-23-2012 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by celestialGyoud
02-23-2012 12:37 PM


Re: IN THE LIGHT
CD7 writes:

There are clues and evidences that belief is of the dragon, the father of the lies--beliefs and specialist on camouflages. For all animals know by instict that believing is the purpose of every camouflage.

...snip...

And if you do not give ears to the writings of Mosheh about the fact that man was made not to experiment death, how will you stay alive to hear My words?


And this is why I use GoogleTranslate and not BabelFish.
BabelFish may have been first, but GoogleTranslate seriously kicks it's butt.

If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-23-2012 12:37 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 97 days)
Posts: 553
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 125 of 156 (690601)
02-14-2013 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Jon
02-17-2012 4:21 PM


Reversed Writings Vs Vulgate [ gates of hell ]
-

Jon,

What if the explanation for the question in the OP
is in the Reversed Writings,

quote:


I -- the word יהוה -- Am come into this world like a candle, in order that those who do not see might see, and those who are firm believers in that they're seeing might keep on choosing to be blind. - Then some believers did ask this question:

Are we blind too?

If hearing and seeing the word are not enough for you to see then you are blind twice. And if you admit that you do not see anything when you work up a belief then you would start seeing, but because you say: 'Believing, we see!', that is where your blindness increases.

-

א The heaven as you expected ends here. This heaven is unexpected; the separate Word that the eyes did not see is seen and touched not by what comes upon the mind.

ב And who ever will not be born again is a darkness and is not able to see the kingdom that I AM יהוה

How can anyone be born again when he is old? Will he reincarnate going into his mother's womb a second time?

גThat which is born of the flesh is flesh. That is why its necessary for one to be born of the light. A person becomes born again when living beyond the time expected for one to live; when retaining the word of immortality hidden from the book of Mosheh: For יהוה formed man to be [ physically ] imperishable.

ד The light [ life energy ] emanates of itself. In him who becomes born again the light is greater than time, thought and realm.

הYou do not marvel when a person does not have ears to retain truth from hearing and seeing whether the word is consistent or not. And that person becomes a profitable route for men of unclean spirit; advantages are taken from a circumstance of gloom and uncertainty by those who have a need of giving credit so that they might say that, believing, they are creditors of merit and salvation.

ו All that requires a belief being worked up is doubtful. And he that believes takes council from himself; he retains no truth from seeing consistency in the word for there is no truth in him.

ז You do not see the wind but you do not have to believe the wind is blowing because the waves of it come to your ears and you hear the voice of its intensity. And the wind goes where it can freely flow; without man saying how it must blow. Thats how a first-fruit of the word יהוה is brought forth to the light.

How can these things be without the man believing?

ח Being a judge in Yisrael don't you inquire to know and ascertain instead of believing? One speaks what one knows and testifies to what one has eye-witnessed, and yet, in the role of a judge, you do not accept a testimony if you have to believe instead of ascertain.

טIf 'believing' isnt what you do when a witness is being told trivial current things, then does the Justice that remains for ever not require much less belief if I tell you about things of highest value? No man ascends into heaven unless he has retained in him the one who descends from heaven: The word that I AM יהוה that glitters in heaven.

י And as Mosheh lifted up the serpent suspended to a bronze staff in the wilderness so that anyone who saw it lived, for the same reason a lamb was lifted up, so that everyone who saw the light should remain in the light.

ך For the world so loved the god
to the point of giving a first-born son in sacrifice
so that everyone who believed in that love should believe also in the god.

ל On this a lamb is sent; not that the people need someone to die in their place but that they may see that the lamb's life is taken by the light יהוה that glistens My name.

מ Who ever sees the light is not lost any more but anyone that does not see it is still lost; for he does not see that the death has no partake in it. The death does not take the lambs life away; its delivered into the hands of the light that I AM יהוה

נ You are saved because you do not fight; you do not try to hijack a lamb believing on whether the lamb intercedes for you or not. And this is the perdition of those that believe:

ס The light has come into the world and shines with lightning through the density of clouds, clearing up every uncertainty that in darkness they did not comprehend but they loved the obscurity of beliefs and faiths rather than seeing the light.



-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : No reason given.

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Jon, posted 02-17-2012 4:21 PM Jon has not yet responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 10041
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 126 of 156 (690808)
02-16-2013 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by Jon
02-18-2012 2:46 PM


Re: Resurrected Thread on John 3
Jon writes:

What does the text say?

*looks*.... it says

quote:
But those who do what is true come to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that their deeds have been done in God.'

Perhaps good works allow us to be drawn towards the light.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Jon, posted 02-18-2012 2:46 PM Jon has not yet responded

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1409 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 127 of 156 (690844)
02-16-2013 8:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
03-14-2005 6:10 AM


I am "The Truth," a concept or ideal...

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

If Christ is synonymous with the ideal we call Truth, then the passage is simple and actually, correct whether one accepts this as the writers intend meaning.

Assuming for those billions of people who want to believe that every verse is rational and valid, then, this is the ONLY meaning possible for since it is undeniable that Truth has unfolded in the wake of the ever changing next frame of Reality, and that Truth is the savior for mankind which can use it in order to Adapt to the Environment of Reality as it unfolds and hence avoid Extinction.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 03-14-2005 6:10 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

    
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1409 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 128 of 156 (690846)
02-16-2013 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Jon
02-18-2012 2:46 PM


Re: Resurrected Thread on John 3

Those who believe in him are not condemned; but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgement, that the light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil. For all who do evil hate the light and do not come to the light, so that their deeds may not be exposed. But those who do what is true come to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that their deeds have been done in God.'

Test me on transposing the word Truth for the Christ in every passage and you will see that Word is the one message from Jesus that sums the NT and is the "key" to every passage:

Those who believe in "him," (The Truth), are not condemned (ultimately to an extinct species); but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in (The Truth), the name of the only Son of God, (the Force behind the ever unfolding next frame of Reality).

And this is the judgement, that the light has come into the world, (The Truth), and people loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil, (as was exemplified by the Truth found personified in Rev Martin Luther King, 2000 years later, when White southern Americans insisted that separate was Equal).

For all who do evil hate the light (of The Truth), and do not come to the light (of The Truth), so that their deeds may not be exposed.

But those who do what is true come to the light (of The Truth), so that it may be clearly seen that their deeds have been done in God, (the future unfolding which responds to their actions).'


This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Jon, posted 02-18-2012 2:46 PM Jon has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-18-2013 4:02 PM kofh2u has not yet responded

    
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 97 days)
Posts: 553
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


(1)
Message 129 of 156 (690976)
02-18-2013 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by kofh2u
02-16-2013 8:27 PM


Reversed Writings Vs Vulgate [ gates of hell ]
quote:
For all who do evil hate the light (of The Truth), and do not come to the light (of The Truth), so that their deeds may not be exposed.

But those who do what is true come to the light (of The Truth), so that it may be clearly seen that their deeds have been done in [the] god, (the future unfolding which responds to their actions).'


That's what Versio Vulgata is saying. However, those gates of hell are demoniac because belief has nothing to do with knowledge of the truth.

What if the explanation is in the following reversed writings,

quote:

ע For all who work up a belief hates the *light, and do not come to the light, so that their false need of believe may not be exposed.

* [ the knowledge of the truth dispenses with the need of believe ]

פ But those who search to know the truth come to the light so that it may be clearly seen whether the word is consistent or not, for they are wrought in the light.



Reversed Writings Paraphrased,

quote:

You do not have the word that I AM, neither does the truth enter in you. Because the truth can not be known through believing. You quote the scriptures because in them you think you have eternal life by your belief, and their writings testify about Me: the word one has to know in order for one to not experiment death. You search to give credit but I do not receive credit from men. And from you I have the knowledge that you have no truth in you.

When a writing comes with the name that I AM יהוה then you do not listen to the words in it. If another version comes with a mans name then it will have your approval since it is promising the eternal life in exchange for believing. How is it possible for you to have emunah--fidelity when taking assureness from yourselves instead of desiring only the assureness that comes from the word that I AM?

Put out of your minds the thought that I would be like one that would denounce you and yet silences himself before what he sees, and consents for not making himself heard.

For there is a word that denounces you, and it is the writing of Mosheh on which you put your hopes. If you had heard the words in the book of Mosheh, in regards to what one ought not to do so that a person may live and not experiment death then you would hear Me. Because that is the immortality which requires no belief at all; the immortality that is not after the death of the body but quickens and vivifies the entire body.

And if you do not give ears to the writings of Mosheh about the fact that man was made not to experiment death then why would My words enter in you since you are firm believers in that you were made to die?

Theres no point in you believing that My words could enter in you. For when you work up a belief, you have a desire to do the works of the dragon, the father of the beliefs, since it is not possible for one to deceive anyone without making believe nor is it possible for one to be deceived without believing.

The dragon was made to be a predator and specialist on camouflages to make believe. When he tells a lie he acts according to his own nature of camouflaging; not letting one know what the truth is, for he was not made for the truth to be seen in him.

( * Legion [ Heb. Ravb; to be many ] has many different truths inside, and not one of them is true since the truth is only one. Men do not kill except for a reason, but for Legion it is plainly natural to kill just to destroy. )

And thats why you desire to kill and condemn without a reason. Because belief is of the dragon; and you want to carry out the works of the father of the beliefs. Your desire to kill and condemn others to death is expressed by your judgemental speech. When you say that you are saved and have merit to salvation for your belief, at the same time you are saying that those who do not believe are already condemned; thats the sentence written in the *doors of hell that you read.

Because the salvation you look in those doors for, those who believe will fall upon!

[ * versio vulgata, a mastercopy of bible that was made for those that believe ]

But this is why you do not believe me: because I tell you the truth, and knowledge of the truth cannot be known by belief. For which of you, desiring to put up a tower, does not sit down first and count the cost to be certain if he will have enough to make it complete rather than believe? For fear that if he makes a start and is not able to go on with it to the end, all who see it will be laughing at him, And saying, This person made a start at building, believing he--she would go on with it, and is not able to make it complete.

-


Final Conclusion,

The word trust shouldn't be used for the Most High because there is no possibility that the Most High is lying or will betray us. We often say, I trust you, to someone and mean that we acknowledge there is a possibility that the person is lying or will betray us but we believe they won't. There is no possibility that the Eternal will lie or cheat, so trust has no place in it.

There is no difference in that, if one says do you believe in the Word or Is the Word to be believed and credited as true?, because in both cases the credibility is being questioned since the word believe is proper to use for the things that may or may not be truth.

-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


Brief Summarized Signature
Real life vs too pessimistic archeological-surrealism

As certain as my pet kangoroo rat has always an ace in the sleeve, [ whether 'Die Hard', the kangoroo rat, bluffs or not ], it's only with a timeline that equates to 4,750 years without multiplying, per every 5,000 years interval, that it would be possible for Humanity to have taken 49,000 years to reach 1 million people. If the number of children would always be the same from the beginning to the end of every 4,750 years interval within the rows of 5,000 years from 55,000 years ago then there's still the option of stop thinking by the head of an archeo-surrealist, which equates to stop drifting on numbers as if man is a beast and as if everything that happened in life was a disgrace. That kind of chronological basis surpasses far beyond Hardy Har Har, a depressed, gloomy pessimistic hyena, always saying, 'Oh dear, oh my, I just know it's all going to go wrong'.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by kofh2u, posted 02-16-2013 8:27 PM kofh2u has not yet responded

    
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 97 days)
Posts: 553
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 130 of 156 (691046)
02-19-2013 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Jon
02-18-2012 2:46 PM


Reversed writings Vs Vulgate [ gates of hell ]
The text says that those who do not see the light are still lost. However, Versio Vulgata states its judgemental speech which is proper for believers and those that have chosen to be in darkness.

Because the presence of the light totally dispenses with the need of believe.

To the Law of the Testimony if they do not speak according to that word then the glittering white light [ as lightning through the clouds of heavens] shall be not for them.

To the law and the testimony Speaking like a witness Yes, yes or No, no Yes I heard or No I didnt rather than I believe that I heard I believe that I saw' to take the word as something unclear is taking the word as something that requires a strong belief being worked up by who ever has a need to give credit so that he might say that he is saved in exchange for his belief a word that is not seen nor read would be depending on being credited by spirits of men so that it could shine and be light like a word in the gloom that is not able to shine in darkness.

To trust or believe is giving credit in or to something which may or may not be truth. One shouldn't be using for the Most High a word that is proper to use for the things that may or may not be truth. Often when we say we trust someone, it often means that we always know there's a possibility that we'll be cheated or lied to but we trust this person not to do so anyway.

quote:

From those who take the road on their way to the conference about the Flood, Reverend Will won't make it in time if it keeps on raining by the east side. You perhaps will have to start the debate without him. The fact is that the Ark of Noah's story never happened. The whole subject that you read in the bible about Noah's Ark is a story that only works as Parable of the Miserability.

Is there anyone of you that being rich, powerful and owner of a variety of new ships, would ever say this to a best friend and his family: 'In order for me to give you a drop to the next unflooded city I can't let you enter in one of my ships, so you better start to build a boat.'

That is what many ministers, reverends and pastors do to anyone that treat them as alleged authorities anointed from above. They are rich, they ask for you to give them your resources, work and money and at the same time, they don't give anyone a drop to the next unflooded city. They travel in a big jet plane but they don't share the riches that were bought with the people's money.

They don't recognize that every person who gives money to a church does automatically have rights of equality over 50% of the respective amount in case of any eventuality; the person who gave the resource is found in lack of food, remedy, clothes and shelter. Whoever gives money to a congregation has the right of transparency specifically in matters of monetary numbers and transferences of currency that are made by the respective legal representative.

They don't really share water, electric light, comfort and shelter, with right of equality, with the people that support them.

If you had made the world; Why would you justify yourself and tell a man to write in a book that you have had regrets for having made the world because things didn't come up as you thought it woud be; and for that reason you would have decided to get rid of it, when you know that it would be so much easier to cause the wicked ones to disappear by erasing their memories from their brain ?

Things are not as they seem to be. See the story of Isaac's sacrifice for example. It only works as a Parable of the Hipocrisy. Because, If a person already knows the thoughts and knows the end from the beginning then why would that person make a Hipocrite statement and tell Abraham this: 'I had to test your loyalty; to know if you would love me above all things ..' The bible was left to you for different reasons. One of them is that some contents are solely parables that were made specifically to intrigue you so that you might start thinking by your own head.
At that moment, those who were at the Conference said:

- If these things were kept hidden in order for us to start thinking by ourselves then why do we need a reverend in the first place?

- Hmmmm ..... I don't know why.


Having a fides quae creditur a belief that is credited by the man and potentates from down whoever believes and garantees that one is having merit to salvation for becoming creditor of spiritual credit not seeing that the accounts can be cleared up to have no debts nor credits any longer.

The type of assureness one gets from believing is a salt without the intensity of what the real salt is, and sooner or later will be casted out. Certainty [ from the word ] is like salt, if it is not already complete in it, [ or; if it still requires belief ] of what use is it? It is no good for the land nor for the place of waste; no one has a use for it.

All things that do not pertain to the to the books of the Prophets as originally written such as the word baptism originated from the Roman terms Vattsimus ( battesimu; augury ) and Vaticynius ( consecration made by a vates through augury or prediction ); and images of doctrines of faiths and things that belong to the mixed translation and terminology that was left in the bible for the exclusive use of the State of Vatican and the Roman ordinations.

quote:
There is only one woman ( church; city; congregation ) that calls herself by the title Mother which is also written on her forehead. Therefore the great Babylon is not about too many women but one Mother church; city or congregation.

On her forehead the title Mother of beliefs and spiritual fornications [type of love dedicated to images of saints] does not reveal who it is unless there is a woman--church which calls herself by the spiritual title Mother, and offers in her rites and masses for the nations a gilded cup of wine, full of the belief that the wine she has drunk is transubstantiated into holy blood.
A Babylonical; great or big in size.

Vaticanus hill is one of the seven hills upon which the city of Rome was built; - A woman sitting upon a scarlet force. Symbolism of the flag of the Vatican's army -- the Swiss cross on a red field ultimately derives from a similar banner of the Roman Empire.

Book of Revelations clears up that the scarlet beast itself is the eighth nation, and is of the seven, for being Rome which in the past was the Roman empire. That is the beast that was and is not. Therefore, literally, there is an eighth nation, State of Vatican which is of the seven for being of Rome. The scarlet beast or scarlet force that was (a Roman empire) and is not, lives in form of reverenced ordination.

On the day a person comes out of Babylon then (s)he begins to revert the substitutions that had been made to the translations, knowing that these words: Lord, god, elohim, IESVS, JE-SUS ( IHORSE; Sameq, Vav, Sameq, which is worth three sequential sixes; 60, 6, 60 ), Christus, cross, crucify, baptism and fides; faith ( Roman doctrine fides quae creditur ), had been placed as substitute words for Yhwh, EL ( ELYON ); Yhwhshua ( The Word that I AM ), Anointed, tree, suspend, Unction, Emunah; fidelitate; fidelity.


-

Brief Summarized Signature This Laconic unusual inscription might change the ritualistical monotonous way that the signatures have been summarized in these days.

As the official master of nonceremonious solemnity Id like to thank you, beforehand, for your possible acceptance of the highly recommended anti-religion procedures of not taking as true what so ever it is believed that the truth is supposed to be, since the term take as (alike; as if it was) means that a comparison is made to a truth that is not known by believing , as well as renouncing the fides quae creditur ( faiths that are credited by spirits of men, believers and potentates from down ). Also I would like to thank for your patience and perseverance on reading and I hope these explanations will not sound too ceremonious to you.

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Jon, posted 02-18-2012 2:46 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Jon, posted 02-19-2013 10:46 PM celestialGyoud has responded

    
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 131 of 156 (691070)
02-19-2013 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by celestialGyoud
02-19-2013 4:09 PM


Re: Reversed writings Vs Vulgate [ gates of hell ]
English, of course, is the preferred language of this forum, and the language you will have to use if you expect a response from me.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-19-2013 4:09 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-20-2013 4:23 PM Jon has not yet responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 97 days)
Posts: 553
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 132 of 156 (691142)
02-20-2013 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by Jon
02-19-2013 10:46 PM


Opere della legge (working of law) Vs Working of Fidelity
-

You know that every language is constantly mutating.

-

Express more using less words, that is the laconic (summarized) editing system.

Even the 'ye holy buybull' translation you use is in constant mutation. Eg:

quote:


Original order of manuscript: 1st. By the words of Yhwhshua - 2nd. let us leave the ritualistical rudiments [ first principles ], 3rd. not laying again a foundation of penance from dead works, - and 4th. let us go on unto perfection of fidelitate [ Heb. Emunah ] toward Yhwh, - of the instruction of washings, and of laying up of gathered hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal justice.

Order of the puzzle according to Versio vulgata:Wherefore 2nd. leaving the first principles [ ritualistical rudiments ] - of - 1st. the words of Yhwhshua, - 4th. let us go on unto perfection; - 3rd. not laying again a foundation of penance from dead works, - and - of fidelitate [Heb. emunah] toward Yhwh, of the instruction of washings, and of laying up of gathered hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal justice.

American Standard had been keeping the word 'perfection' where others did get rid of it. Douay-Rheims did not keep the word 'perfection', but has been keeping 'penance' .


Another sample of mutation and mistranslation that was initiated for the Version Vulgata (latin) translation,

quote:


Opere della legge Versus Opere della Fidelitate

The title translates: Working of the law Versus Working of Fidelity,

meaning by which means or manner you do something rather than that which is done. In Ancient Roman language 'opere' (working) is different from 'opera' (work). The word Opere is used to express the manner through which something is done, whether by the working or force of law (when the law is that works and operates in you) or by fidelity only.

Section of Galatians in Roman language avendo pur nondimeno riconosciuto che l'uomo non giustificato per le opere della legge ma lo soltanto per mezzo della fidelitate. Knowing that [ when doing any good work ] a man is not declared righteous by doing it through the working of the law but by the working of fidelity to Yahweh only.

The use of the term per mezzo della fidelitate (through the means or manner of fidelity) indicates that the form of action, by which a man is justified ( declared righteous ) is without constraint: proceeding from natural feeling as a spontaneous gift, without external force; when a person does a good work because of his or her fidelity only. When an action is done for no external influence then he working of the law does not operate since its not the force of law that is working in that person whenever something is done.

However, the term opere della legge ( the working of the law ) which expresses a form of action had been gradually translated into works of the law, changing the meaning of the original manuscripts. The message in the words of the original fragments: opere della legge (the working of the law) remains the same and consists in clearing up by which means or manner something is done.

No one will be declared righteous for doing the good works through the working [ or; operation ] of law. There is no justification when the force of law is that operates motivating any action; or when things are done because of a state of subjection and obedience rather than by spontaneous operation of fidelity to Yhwh only. In the mixed versions, wherever the term work(s) appears, the original text says opere, the working of the law, that is when imposition of law is that operates, as the side opposite to the manner and means of good works done by Emunah ( through operation of fidelity alone ).

In the term 'opere della legge' ( La Nuova Diodati ) operation or opere means the method of working; mode of action; manner of functioning or operating. The term operation of law is not about telling the readers what good works must be brought into effect or not. The message consists that the operation of emunah ( fidelity ) totally dispenses with the need of any type of human ministration, meddler or interposer between you and Yhwh. In the term operation of law the message is not referring to the instruction of the Law but to the means of imposition of law, which implies ministration and supervision of human interposer.
All things are possible to him that does them for Fidelity to יהוה
Versio vulgata is possible to him that has fides ( faith that is credited by the man )

If you have אמנהEmunah--Fidelity toיהוה as a grain of mustard seed, you can say to this sycamore-tree, Be uprooted and planted in the sea and instantly it will obey you.
אמנהFidelity comes by hearing, and hearing the words of I AM יהוה only.

Fidelity is evidence of things that appear not: that from the invisible word that is heard, visible things might be made, for fidelity is by hearing the eternal words only. If one has a fidelity [ that endures; remains ] like a mustard seed then (s)he walks not by sight, doing the good works not through a system that is in the sight [or supervision] of spiritual interposers, ministers, reverends, pastors, mercenaries of religion and doctrines. The Word אמנהEmunah is present in the New Testament in Hebrew rather than fides.

Fidelitate Ancient Roman Language. Fidelit Italian. Fidelitas Medieval Latin. The size of the seed determines how long it will remain on the earth without being consumed by the birds. It will be consumed. Emunah ( fidelity ) is the word directly related to the mustard seed's duration [ permanence ] since there is no bird bill that can grab the smallest seed. Even so fidelity is evidence of things not seen; walking not by sight, one does the good works spontaneously and unexpectedly, no subjection under the human ministrations of law.
Now that no man is justified by the [imposition of] law in the sight of the ELYON [Most High], is evident: for, the just shall live because of his fidelitate [ Emunah].

Now that no man gets righteousness by the [operation of] law in the eyes of the Most High, is clear; because the righteous shall live because of his fidelity [Heb. Emunah]. Be careful that you don't do your good works before [ the supervision of ] men, to be seen [ supervised ] by them. When the good works are done by fidelity alone, they are done spontaneously; Not by subjection to restraint or control. By emunah all good works are not an action denoting submission under imposition of law.



-

-


This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Jon, posted 02-19-2013 10:46 PM Jon has not yet responded

    
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 97 days)
Posts: 553
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 133 of 156 (692182)
02-28-2013 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by Phat
02-18-2012 11:36 AM


How to become born again
-

(as it was brought up to Jon),

Versio Vulgata says,

Except a man be born of water [ flesh ] and of the Spirit [ Light ], he cannot enter into the kingdom

-

Reversed Writings clears up,

How can anyone be born again when he is old? Will he reincarnate going into his mother's womb a second time?

? That which is born of the flesh is flesh. That is why its necessary for one to be born of the light. A person becomes born again when living beyond the time expected for one to live; when retaining the word of immortality hidden from the book of Mosheh: For ???? formed man to be [ physically ] imperishable.

-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Phat, posted 02-18-2012 11:36 AM Phat has not yet responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 10041
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 134 of 156 (822274)
10-22-2017 1:13 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by jar
03-16-2005 2:50 PM


Topic Resurrection...lets start slow.
I have tried before to get this topic back on track and will try yet again...one more time. You were starting to explain a lot of things about John 3 and I will summerize it here:
jar writes:

Here all we're trying to do is figure out what John 3 (and some other day we'll try get to the possible relevance of John itself). We're starting with John 3:16 since I believe it is so totally and consistently misunderstood, misused and misapplied. I gave one hint in Message 7 that may help explain what I believe is one of the biggest problems.(...)First, John 3:16 always gets quoted out of context. I hope to work towards looking at the line in context but first it might be worthwhile to try to decide exactly what the line itself says.
John sent Bill to buy beer for everyone that liked him.

John sent Bill to buy beer for everyone that liked John.

John sent Bill to buy beer for everyone that liked Bill.

...remember this is only the first step, bringing up the question. I don't believe it can be resolved until we move on to look at John 3:16 within context. And I also believe that must be done in an orderly, step my step method or we will end up running in circles.

For those reasons, I'm not looking to resolve the question right now, only to establish that there are at least two ways the single line can be interpreted when seen isolated, out of context. Unless we can get that established I see little hope of progress.

John 3 is pretty short and we'll be returning again and again to it so here it is in its entirety.

1: There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
2: The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
3: Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4: Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5: Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6: That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7: Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8: The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
9: Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?
10: Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?
11: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
12: If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
13: And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
14: And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17: For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18: He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19: And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20: For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21: But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
22: After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
23: And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.
24: For John was not yet cast into prison.
25: Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples and the Jews about purifying.
26: And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.
27: John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven.
28: Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him.
29: He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.
30: He must increase, but I must decrease.
31: He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all.
32: And what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth; and no man receiveth his testimony.
33: He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true.
34: For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.
35: The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.
36: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

I would like to ask all of you to look closely at John 3:15-18in relation to what comes before.

Are there any difference in construction between those four lines and what leads up to them?

It seems to me that John 3:1-14 is a pretty straightforward recitation of Jesus teachings. He's speaking to Nicodemus, one of the Pharisees. Nic had some questions and as Jesus often did, he answers Nic's questions with a series of examples. In the conversation, Jesus is clearly talking about man's relationship with GOD.

The passage ends logically at the end of line 14.

Then the whole construction changes, the speaker changes, and we move from a discussion between Jesus and Nicodemus to an outside commentator.

OK, I followed the discussion up to this point. Back then, I was offended that you were questioning the gospel of John, but I now see that it was a logical conversation and wish to continue where we left off.
jar writes:

So, if John 3:15 is a continuation of line 14 and Jesus is speaking in the first person, does the word "him" in John 3:15 refer to Jesus or someone else? If it is still in first person, why wouldn't Jesus say "... believe in me ..." instead of "... believe in him ...?

If we are suddenly switching modes, then is John 3:15 actually a continuation, or is it, as I believe I can show, a later inserted redaction?(...) It could well be that verse 12 is the last example of Jesus speaking. But it seems to me that somewhere in there we move from Jesus speaking to the redactor.

Regardless of exactly where it occurs, it seems pretty clear that John 3:16 is NOT Jesus speaking but editorial comment.

Do you see any other way to interpret it?

And you then went on to say the following:

jar writes:

I base this on several things. One is the major change in narative style. Second, there is a major change in content and emphasis. Third, the section between John 3:13 and John 3:16 simply does not fit within the context of what came before. Fourth, as we proceed through the next few lines we find the redactor backpedaling to try to make stuff fit.

All of John is Reactionary as opposed to Revolutionary. Of all the Gospels, it is the only one that pushes for an exclusionary Christianity. And this verse is, IMHO, where Reaction begins. Here is where Christianity is changed from being inclusionary to exclusionary, even though, as we will see, they had to work hard to make it fit.(...)Just to try to make my position clear, I absolutely see John (the whole Gospel) as a Reactionary book that was intended to "Correct" and "Redirect" was seen as major shortcomings in the other three Gospels.

John itself is IMHO a complete redaction of Christianity as a whole. I personally have a very low opinion of John as inspired Christian Scripture.

I have a question or two. What does it mean when you say that John is/was Reactionary as opposed to Revolutionary? Who were the redactors and what "side" were they on? Finally, does this have any similar motive that Saul of Tarsus had when he decided to switch sides? I'm still confused as to why there was an alleged battle over the meaning of the message of Jesus
and why there were at least two competing religions involved?(Judaism and Pauls new marketing as well as the redactors motives)


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by jar, posted 03-16-2005 2:50 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by jar, posted 10-22-2017 7:39 AM Phat has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29609
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 135 of 156 (822283)
10-22-2017 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by Phat
10-22-2017 1:13 AM


Re: Topic Resurrection...lets start slow.
Phat writes:

What does it mean when you say that John is/was Reactionary as opposed to Revolutionary?

The two concepts, reactionary and revolutionary are almost exact opposites. The latter is a new idea and change while the former stands in opposition to the revolution.

John was written a long long time after Jesus died. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are identified as a similar set in that they all contain the same basic information and the same basic point of view.

The Gospel of John though stands in direct contrast in style and content to the other three accepted Gospels.

Remember, the four Gospels were not the only existing gospels at the time, there were more both known and inferred that were common at the time.

Phat writes:

Who were the redactors and what "side" were they on?

We have as little idea of who the redactors were as we do of who the authors were. We can conclude there were redactors though based on the evidence. The example of John 3:16 explained above is one example, the fact that the two flood myths are included just mushed together is another and the "Long ending" of the Gospel of Mark perhaps the best example. The redactors were later people who added something to the Bible stories and there are many, many, many examples going all the way back to the Books of Moses where there are descriptions of what happened after Moses died.

What side they were on just makes no sense. There were many, many sides just as there were many, many redactors. For example consider the two flood myths. They actual stories differ in details as well as in grammar and tone. They use different terms to reference God. Since it's likely the flood myths were developed concurrently with the two City/States of Judah and Israel and those two differed in their versions of Judaism it's very likely that the differences reflect the dogma of Judah and of Israel and that for political reasons each sides story got included during the redaction.

Phat writes:

Finally, does this have any similar motive that Saul of Tarsus had when he decided to switch sides?

Huh?

Motive?

If you mean are the author and redactor of the Gospel of John trying to create something to show how they think the "Jesus followers movement" (remember they are all still Jews and not a separate religion) should be formed, organized and chartered then "Yes" the motives were the same.

Phat writes:

I'm still confused as to why there was an alleged battle over the meaning of the message of Jesus
and why there were at least two competing religions involved?(Judaism and Pauls new marketing as well as the redactors motives)

Then good. Confusion is probably the correct position. We don't know why the things that happened happened but the common causes are most likely the real causes; power and control. That continues right down to today with different chapters of Club Christian trying to define the meaning of the message of Jesus.

Have you ever noticed posters here claiming that someone is "Not a real Christian"?


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Phat, posted 10-22-2017 1:13 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Phat, posted 10-22-2017 8:49 AM jar has responded

  
Prev1
...
678
9
1011Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017