Why did God forgive our sins?

Hi caldron68, I don't have an interpertation.I gave you the Greek words from the Texus Receptus.I gave the meaning of the Greek words from the Greek Lexicons.If you don't trust me look it up for yourself or accept what someone else has told you. By your assertion only.You did not refute any of the sources I gave you sir.I could care less about your ramblings and your thoughts.Just a few verses above the ones you have changed to suit your on selfish desires and needs is:Where Jesus is talking to those same disciples and he admonishes them concerning a subject that I think I should probably take His advice on as you have got to the point you have no intention of debating in good faith.Jesus tells them: God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi oni,How did you do? Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black to me.You guys sure flaunt your I know more than you attitude if I post in a science forum. I wonder why? Maybe it is because you feel your educational background is a little or lot more solid that that Bible thumper.Well when it come to that Bible thumper and the Bible With the schooling I had and the 46 year of studying it 4 to 10 hours a day
using Hebrew and Greek I think maybe I have a little edge. I will let you in on a little secret. Jesus said: According to the words of Jesus I can not afford to be wrong. If I am wrong I fry for eternity just like those who never tried.There is only one way and I better find the right way.Now if you meant by your remark a holier than thou attitude you really don't know anything about how a born again child of the King views those who have not been born again.A true born again child of God feels "but for the grace of God there go I".I am no different nor better than you or anyone else. I just happen to be saved by the marvelous grace of God.I do not deserve it but God offered a full pardon by His unmerited favor (grace) I only had to receive it.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hey Onifre.Yes, I agree with you, we basically are just asked to accept all this stuff, because they say it is true. When asked for evidence for this, they quote scripture, when asked for evidence that scripture is indeed true, they either assert it is or quote some more scripture. I'm seriously thinking of just leaving this thread alone, since there's obviously no good discussion to be had, all they do is simply plug their ears and go "I can't hear you!". Ah well, I'm giving it a bit longer I think.As for this bit: We discussed this before, and since I'm from The Netherlands, I think I can smuggle some plants in (we're allowed to grow 5 plants ourselves here). The only challenge for you is not to smoke it all before we can grow our own.

---

I hunt for the truth

Bull shit! Any time you read a book of antiquity (in which you cannot talk to its original author/s), you interpret in your mind your own understanding of that text. Even if you analyze the text in its original language that is still an English interpretation of the original Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic text. You may agree with other peoples interpretation of that scripture, however, it still is an interpretation of it. In fact in Bible college whole courses called Hermeneutics are taught in the attempt to analyze the theories of interpretation of religious text. By analyzing the historical, societal and cultural context as well as the backgrounds of the author(s) you can attempt to get as close to the original meaning of the text as possible. However, we can never be absolutely sure of this original meaning with any type of objective certainty. Let's take a look at this shall we? Any time we analyze religious scripture we should look at the verse in context of the passage in which it was pulled from. Who was Jesus talking to? And what was its context? Well, this passage is part of Jesus famous "Sermon on the Mount" at the beginning of his public ministry in which he lays out much of his moral philosophy and teachings to a large crowd of Jews (and maybe some Samaritans and Gentiles) as well as describing the future spiritual kingdom that is coming into fruition.With this understanding lets now look at the text itself. Jesus states A more literal translation, Young's Literal Translation states: If you analyze the Greek these words translate very much word for word to the above (yes I know there is some meaning that is lost between translations but not much in this passage).So know what is Jesus trying to tell us here? What is this "gate" he is talking about? What is the "road"? What is his meaning of "life" in this passage? And what is his meaning of "destruction"? This is where interpretation of biblical scripture comes into the picture. Having been a Christian for nearly 30 years nearly everyone Christian I have met has interpreted this to mean the following. The gate is Jesus Christ himself, that is the choice to accept him as your savior or not (salvation of damnation) (see also John 14:6 “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me"). The road (either to life or to destruction) is the path of your life which leads to one of two eternal destinies, living with God for eternity in heaven or spending eternity in hell. This is also supported by other scripture such as John 10:7, 9, 11: I have studies a bit of Koine Greek as a Christian but by no means am a Greek scholar. However let's take a look at that shall we?The original Greek (from the Stephanus Textus Receptus (1550, with accents) is this: ‘ ‘ · — ‘ ‘ ‘‘ ' which litteraly translated into English as follows (you can see it here as well):‘ - enter in
- through
- the
‘ - narrow or strait
- gate
- because or for
- broad or wide
- the
- gate
- and
- broad or spacious
- the
- road or way
- the
‘ - that leads
- to
- the
- ruin or loss (physical, spiritual or eternal) -- damnable(-nation), destruction, die, perdition, perish, pernicious ways, waste
- and
- abundant or common
‘ - are
- that
‘ - enter
- through
- it (literaly itself)Hmm, seems pretty clear to me!Furthermore, if this "destruction" is not hell than what is it? Many non-believers will live nice cushy lives in this life and never go through this "destruction" spoken about by Jesus. Thus we can logically infer (and backed up by the context of the rest of the Biblical scripture) that what he is referring to is some type of judgement and condition occurring after death. Further, his description of people choosing the "right" way as choosing the way of life indicates some sort of eternal destiny that is not destructive. Therefore, I really don't see how you can around this interpretation of this Biblical scripture.Now whether this is the correct interpretation of these scriptures, you will have to collaborate with your fellow Christians on this forum and determine but from attending litterally tens of dozens of churchs (Southern and Independent Baptist, Methodist, Church of Christ, Christian Church, Episopalian, etc) as well as attending Bible college and being the son, grandson and nephew of ordained ministers, I can unequivocally tell you that you are wrong in stating that Caldron is incorrect to interpret the scripture this way. It seems that you are diametrically opposed to 99% of the protestant Christian interpretation of this scripture. Just curious what sect of Christianity do you represent? Why should I trust what someone tells me? Anyone can read the Bible for themselves and look up the original Greek and interpret for themselves what Jesus is saying.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

You most certainly do have an interpretation and it is counter to every other interpretation out there, including what is written in the NLT.Your assertion is that Jesus is telling the disciples how to live their lives and that the scripture (Matt 7:13-14) has nothing to do with the paths to salvation and destruction. Well, you Sir are dead wrong, so why should I trust you? You have given me no reason to trust you. Remember, trust is earned and you have not earned it. Not by my assertion. I gave you proof positive data that is current through 2008, which is much more accurate than the single data points that you have provided for the years 1999 and 2003. I did refute your numbers and that refutation stands. You're just not man enough to admit it. I have not rambled and I have certainly not constructed my own interpretation of the Bible like you have.And yes you do care about my thoughts because you know I am right and you lost this argument fair and square and you know it. I did not change anything about those verses. I pulled those verses from reliable, well documented sources, which are referenced by the Blue Letter Bible. You Sir are the one that has willfully re-interpreted scripture to suit your own selfish needs.You could prove to me that you are correct in your interpretation. I left the door wide open for that. But you won't, you know you're wrong and you can find no similar interpretation of Matt 7:13-14. Oh please. Who is not arguing in good faith? Certainly not me. I have simply provided you with scripture that backs up my statement, and the meaning of that scripture is verified through literally hundreds of Christian sources. I've also provide you with a refutation of your 88 abortions per minute claim. So who is not arguing in good faith?Your data is invalid as to your abortion rate claim and you refuse to admit it.Your interpretation of Matt 7:13-14 does not hold against every other interpretation of that scripture. Well, here's one for you.THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS.Cheers,
--CaldronEdited by caldron68, : No reason given.

I hope you are not advocating that seekers of the truth in the Bible throw up their hands, deemed it all hopeless, and ignore it all going on with our Godless lives. That won't do.Besides, didn't you hear that the Holy Spirit would lead the disciples into all the truth. No believer need dispair.Now let's look at Matthew 5:1: When Jesus saw the crowds, He went up further into the mountain. Those who really wanted to hear had to follow Him up higher. It is significant I think.The following "sermon" should be regarded as teachings to those who had already made the discision to be His disciples. They are not the crowd generally. He went up from the crowd and the ones who followed Him up had to come up from the general crowd. So I submit that we should regard this "sermon" as directed to those serious to be His disciples. In today's terms we could say those who are already Christians by regeneration.Having said that, the Holy Spirit is not that rigid that something said here could not be used by God to touch the heart of anyone who has an ear to hear. There is no reason to make a rule that non-believers should not read any portion of the Bible.But I think the so called "sermon on the mount" is intended not for the general crowd but for His disciples. It was not a large crowd. The crowd was at the foot of the mountain. The disciples who were really interested came up with Him to a higher place to hear His teaching.Now the context of Matthew is that we should repent to God FOR the kingdom. The kingdom is a realm in which God can excercises His authority and enact His reign. This call to repent for the kingdom is first proclaimed by John the Baptist and then repeated by Jesus Himself.Repenting for the kingdom is a little more specific than the call to repent in order to be saved from hell. It is to repent for not living under the reign of God. Yes man needs to repent in order not to be judged in eternal perdition. But at any point AFTER a man is saved it may be necessary to repent for not living under God's reign and God's rule.So a disciple, even a long time disciple, one who is eternally saved, may need to repent for the kingdom. He or she may need to repent for not daily living under the authority of God who has saved them. I think you should get the best results from the Gospel of Matthew if you view it in this regard.I would also note that this gospel of Matthew is the first in the list to read. It is like the welcome mat of the whole New Testament, the sign on the door. We need to repent for not living daily under the reign of God. All of us need to repent. We need to repent for the kingdom.And specifically the disciples need to know the basic constitution of the kingdom of the heavens as outlined starting in Matthew chapter 5:1 through 7:29.Let's see how we can emphasize this more in your examples of exegetical probleems. These are fair questions. It helps to consult disciples with experience. YOu should never underestimate the help you could get from disciples with more experience. Lexicons and word studies are good. Experience is needful also.The narrow gate relates to higher demand of the kingdom of the heavens than the demand of the old covenant. It is narrower to be concerned not only with outward practice but inward motive. The teaching of Christ in chapters 5-7 deal with the most inward motives and not just the outward appearance. This is more narrow.To not commit adultery might be difficult but broad. To not look at a woman to lust after her in your imagination so as to commit psychological adultery is more narrow.Jesus is emphasizing that His kingdom of the heavens is more narrow in that it touches the innermost motive of the heart rather than just the outward action.Self love, self glory, the worldly vanity, the old man, the Adamic nature cannot pass through. There is left no room for self pity, self glory, self exaltation. It is a narrow way that excludes play acting and hypocrisy.Only that which corresponds to God's will can enter the gate and walk the way. It is not that the disciples walk the way and THEN enter the gate. It is that they enter the gate first and then walk the way. That is the way of living under the reign of God, living for the kingdom of the heavens. That is the kingdom whose SOURCE is from heaven and not from the earth. He is the King reigning in the life of the disciples from the heavens.To enter in through the gate is to begin walking on the life long way.More could be said. But let me move on. The road is the life long way of living under the authority of the King. He reigns in the lives of the disciples from the heavens. It is a life therefore of the kingdom whose origin and source is from heaven - the kingdom of the heavens.To be ruled by the heavenly king leads to a life of the highest standard of righteous behavior on the earth. Not just the outward action is right. The innermost motive, the inmost intention must be refined into purity. Only Christ can wrought this kind of life in a person.Life here refers to the ever-blessed condition of the kingdom. It is a realm and sphere of God's life dispensed into the disciples. It comes in and it grows. It saturates and regulates. It blends with a person's personality. It becomes life to them, the ZOE divine life of God dispensed into His disciples.In this age it is a hidden life but a real life. In the age to come it will be a manifested life in glory. If we live in its reality today we will enjoy its open manifested glory when Christ returns. Now many times only God will see. But if the disciples are faithful all will see this inward life blossom out into a glorious sphere of glorified human beings.Much needs to be said about this. The concept that you must understand is that Christ's kingdom works from the inside out. The kernel, the core of a man's being must be secured. Then it works its way out from the nucleus of his being. The reward of the kingdom is the manifestation of this glorious life in an outward way for all the world to see, when Jesus comes back.That glorious expression of the divine life will be a reward in addition to eternal redemption. To receive eternal life is a gift. To enter into the manifestation of the kingdom of the heavens is a reward based on faithfulness to LIVE the life that has been planted within.I would point out though that even without knowing so much what Jesus is saying a seeking person could get the general idea. He should live unto Jesus. It is a narrow way, a contricted way. It is not an easy broad way upon which many will walk.There is no excuse for someone to come before Christ on that day with a life still steeped in sin, to say "Well Jesus. I simply could not understand what the narrow way was. I didn't know whether you meant eternal life or heaven or what. So I just forgot about such confusing teachings and continued to live my sinful life. Sorry Lord. You should have been a little more clear, THEN I would have been more careful."I don't think that will fly. I think a better reply would be "Lord Jesus, I certainly was not sure WHAT on earth you meant there. However, it kind of gave me a sober sense that there are consequences for living a sloppy Christian life. So even though I wasn't sure how to interpret that passage it caused me to seek you deligently. It forced me to draw closer to you, just in case. So I prayed more and sought to please you more in my reactions and actions.

​

Even though I wasn't too sure of the right exegetical meaning of that passage Lord Jesus, I am thankful that you said it. It enfluenced me to take you seriously. And that couldn't be bad."Maybe I'll talk about "destruction" in the next post.Prayerfully meditate on this a little bit, please. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Then you agree. The passages refer to the narrow path through to salvation (that few will take) and the wide road to destruction (that many will take).Cheers,
--Caldron

Hi caldron68, Since you perfer up to the minute estimated stats rather than cold hard facts which I gave you source for, try this one.This website gives quite a bit of up to the second information concerning births deaths and abortions along with a lot of other things.The first 2437 minutes of 2009 there were an average of 87 abortions per minute.You can either refute the information there or you can ignore all sources as you have previously.I offer no comments.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Thank you for the exchange. Thank you for this; it seems to follow very reasonably. Your spirit often recognizes greatly admired insights. Eve was deceived into performing this way also; nevertheless, her Father was exceedingly kind to her.Do we first Trust DA's word, or that which jaywill has told us DA spoke? Truly, one should always underestimate the 'help' one can expect from 'disciples with more experience'. To not underestimate the 'second hand word o' god' is only to cast doubt on the Father of Life; He has chosen the lowly to shame the wise. Lexicons & concordances are nifty.Speculating outside of the parameters of the text produces theology. Theology is basically what the serpent offered Eve; a clever work over of the Father's Words. The present opinion values actual scripture more than it's predisposed counterpart. Is it better to listen to the Word of your Father who loves you, or is it better to listen to another? Experience will come with time; just bring a sincere heart and mind.One LoveEdited by Bailey, : grammarEdited by Bailey, : spelling

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, I'm just a fool playing with ideas.
My only intention is to tickle your thinker. Trust nothing I say. Learn for yourself.
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

Jaywill,You are so eager to preach and proselytize that you don't even understand the context of the argument occuring between Cauldron68 and ICANT. Cauldron's argument is basically that God is a sadistic creep because the # of people in heaven will be a mere fraction of those sent to eternal torment in hell. ICANT than critiqued the Matthew 7:13-14 scripture Cauldron used to help support his claim.I was not trying to conduct some online Christian Bible study session but was only providing my own analysis of this scripture to back up Cauldon's claim. As a result everything you are talking about is really irrelevant in this discussion and only serves to pull this discussion even further off-topic.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

The problem that you have is that you do not believe the teachings of Mohammed. To those that do you follow a false faith.From the Koran - 5.72. "They do blaspheme who say: "Allah is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help" Now I am no Muslim. But the point is that if I were we could both endlessly quote different holy books in order to demonstrate to each other that the other is following a false path and that faith in our own preferred religion is the only true path to salvation and the only way to avoid that pit of fire.So on what basis should an objective participant uncorrupted by cultural inclinations seek one path or the other so as to avoid the whole eternal lake of fire thing?Faith as an instrument of separation between those who should be saved and those who should face eternal damnation is just not a very good or efficient method. God really should reconsider his heaven recruitment strategy if he genuinely does want to get people through those pearly gates.

Hi Da,This post makes the most sense of any post you have directed to me. This is interpretation.Here you decided means hell which your primary meaning defines as ruin or loss. This is not interpretation.Here you are giving the Greek words and the definition of them.Do you see the difference? I agree and you did a good job.Thanks for the confirmation by the definition you provided that I gave the correct definition of .Now I have a question for you.Matthew used in 23:33 "Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?"The word translated hell here is . - Hell is the place of the future punishment call "Gehenna" or "Gehenna of fire".If he meant destruction in hell in 7:13, why did he use which means ruin or loss instead of which means hell? You can get all of that from this: Verse 1 says Jesus went up into a mountain and his disciples came unto him.Nothing about anybody else, just that His disciples came to Him.Verse 2 says He opened his mouth and taught them,Now I will do a little interpeting without reading anything into the text.On second thought I will let the text speak for itself.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

That is true. No. I don't care to have any proselytes.But I do thrill to know that someday someone might meet Jesus Christ because of something I said.Guilty as charged.

I gladly chose the former.What you fail to disclose ICANT, is this statement on Peter Russell's World Clock: Further more when I mouse over the question mark on the clock it states this: Now lets look and see where these past stats & estimates come from shall we?Clicking on the Data Sources and Suggestions hyperlink at the bottom of the clock shows me this: Going to Wikipedia I look for a current rate of abortions. Wikipedia states the following: This is derived from the following article (which from extensive searching on the Internet seems to contain the most up to date worldwide abortion figures): Sedgh G, Henshaw S, Singh S, hman E, Shah IH. Induced abortion: rates and trends worldwide. Lancet 2007; 370: 1338-45.So basically this data is 5 years old. It seems that the global abortion rate is slowly creeping down as both developed and developing countries institute better birth control methods i.e. contraceptives, reproductive health & education increases and family planning is encouraged. This is substantiated by the statement from the above study by the Guttmacher Institute (a nonprofit organization focused on sexual and reproductive health research, policy analysis and public education): As a result, since there has not been a worldwide analysis of all induced abortions in the past 5 years we cannot accurately determine the current rate of induced abortion around the globe. I would venture to guess that this global rate of induce abortions will continue to decrease as less developed countries become more educated, their health systems get better, and use of contraceptives are encouraged (as long as the Catholic Church keeps their anti-contraceptive opinions to themselves-they are doing vastly more harm than good). BTW, I am not an advocate of using abortion as a form of birth control (I only see the need for this in extreme cases of incest, rape and risk to the life of the mother) however I do not think it should be illegalized due to the severe health ramifications it would cause in both developing and developed countries.Regardless, I think this is a ludicrous and almost laughable (do to its stupidity) point to make anyways. So it is ok for God to damn billions of people to hell as long as millions of unborn fetuses are in heaven with God.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Hi ICANT, Really well. Should hear back soon, I'll keep you posted. Thanks. I know there are those who have taken an arrogant stance with their knowledge of certain sciences; I hope I have not been one of those who have. I have always tried to explain the limited amount I've studied without setting myself above anyone. I have been corrected on many accounts and take it as experience talking to non-experience, so I listen. I do check it out for myself, that which I can grasp, but do still listen and not try to know more than those who study certain fields for a long time.I would not challenge your knowledge of theology because I have not studied Christian theology for 46 years. Nor do I care to do so. I have a general understanding of it, more so of Christian history, not so much Biblical history, which differs by the way.However, I did not mean "I know more than you attitude" as in academically. I meant it as in "I know more than you as to what God was trying to convey". This to me proves impossible since no one can verify with God, so we are left with giving humans the authority to decide what is meant. I'm always weary when I hear anyone say "I think what God meant to say was...".In this matter I think we can both equally decide for ourselves. Your interpretation is no better than mine as to what was meant by certain actions. It is still a humans interpretation. If a person can read an interpret it to be good, then he can equally interpret it to be bad. Even if my interpretation is that the book was written by men and holds no factul weight based off of other evidence that I deem important to the matter, my opinion counts. Just as much as the one who deems it to be the actual word of God. We used the same method to establish worth.My whole point was to establish an equality between saying "God is evil" and "God is good". Either neither is correct, or both opinions are right to the individual person because they are both human opinions.That is all. Not that I'm right and you're wrong, just that we can both view it with our own eyes and arrive at our own interpretations because nothing short of asking God himself will be a confirmation of anything. I'll let you in on a secret of my own: I don't believe Jesus said this.I believe, and I maybe wrong here but, this seems like the Gospel of John. John says Jesus says "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. ". More so, I believe this Gospel was written some years after Jesus died, and more so, after John died too, right? So others took part in the writting as well, right? Not only that but NONE of the original texts from the NT are available, right? Even the oldest they have is still not the original, right?So my question is, do you place faith in Jesus or EVERYONE else that is involved in telling the story of him, his death and then producing the scriptures? I would imagine it's the same way a Muslim feels when he sees an infidel. "You have not chosen the right path and you will suffer for it"...sounds about right?However, the question is, who are these people who feel they have the right to make such a judgement...?By what measure do they feel they are on the right path...?Who confirmed it for them and guarantees them they are right...?(Don't say God because you've never seen him or spoken to him to get any kind of verification.)If you answer "I feel I am right", then OK. I have no problem with that. But just remember YOU feel that you are right, others may feel different, each equally as acceptable as your feelings. Ok...

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky