It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ecclesiastes (1) Vanity of vanities

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 07:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Lazarus Short

Jesus said in Luke 16 that there were two places people go after death. One was Called Torments and the other is Abrahams bosom

Luke 16:22-24And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
Jesus told the thief next to him on the cross he would be with him in paradise that is another name for Abraham's bosom.

Luke 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
but after the ascension of Christ paradise was said to be where God was, which is heaven.

2Cor 12:4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
Rev 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.
This paradise is called the third heaven or the abode of God. When Jesus went into heaven he led captivity captive, that is he took those in the compartment of Sheol called Abraham's bosom into heaven with him.

Ps 68:18 Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, [for] the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell [among them].
Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.


So what we learn when we put it all together is this: there are two long homes a man goes when he dies, one has torments and the other is paradise. If you go to the Greek or Hebrew to change the English then you are just trying to ease your own mind but it doesn't change God's Truth.



"Torments" is clearly a condition, not a place. "Hell" in this passage should be rendered as "hades," which is the best Greek equivalent for "sheol." You're over-reaching. The two-compartment hades comes from pagan Greek belief, not from the Scriptures, btw.

The Hebrew Scriptures predated the English language by many centuries, as did the Greek. To any rational person they get precedence, but you insist on taking King James English at face value, though it was a short chapter in the history of the English language. Over-reaching again.




posted on Sep, 9 2020 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Lazarus Short

Yeah a burning condition of body and soul.

Anything but believe God's word as it says, where it says, and how it says.

Change may help a chameleon hide but not a man. You cannot hide from God.



posted on Sep, 9 2020 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I'm going to say just one thing about Jesus the Christ, the repentant thief and Paradise:


Crucified, Jesus tells the thief who perceives His Lordship, “Verily I say unto thee, to day shalt thou be with me in paradise.” (23:43). I know that it is almost universally taught that Jesus and the thief were both in paradise THAT DAY, but is it so? This is a little off topic, but as I have said before, I do have my Biblical pet peeves. So, what do we know, given what we have learned up to this point?

Jesus and the thief would be together in paradise, at some point in time.

Jesus and the thief both died that day.

Being dead, the thief was in sheol, and still is, as Jesus said, “…no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven…” (John 3:13).

Having taken on our sins, Jesus received the wages of sin (death) “in spades” – yes, He was also dead, very dead, in sheol.

Jesus was helled in the tomb, and undertaken in the bowels of the earth, but He was not in the Hell of Dante, Milton, Baxter or Edwards. The wages of sin are death, just as God says, not a ticket to Hell.

Jesus was “helled” for three days and nights, but He was not held, for He rose from the dead, just as we know that the gift of God is eternal Life.

He told Mary on the morning of His resurrection that He had not yet risen to His Father, so His having been to paradise at that time is doubtful.

The original Greek did not have commas, so the placement of the comma depends on what did or did not happen on that day. “Verily I say unto thee to day,…” is every bit as valid as “Verily I say unto thee, to day…”. However, the former comma placement fits better with what I have pointed out above. It really looks like Jesus and the thief did not make the scene in paradise that day, so the verse should be punctuated so: “Verily I say unto thee to day, shalt thou be with me in paradise.” It still makes sense grammatically, and is much more consistent with the context. Those who argue that “I say unto thee to day” is not a phrase common to the time and place, and therefore the comma should go as the KJV has it, are arguing an irrelevant point.



posted on Sep, 10 2020 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Lazarus Short

go back and rad all the verse paradise no longer holds anyone in sheol it is open into heaven. "That day" was paradise in Sheol which is in the earth. However after the resurrection it has opened and one goes directly into heaven. And paradise according both Paul and John is in heaven today and only after the Ascension of Christ not before.

"“I say unto thee to day” but you knew exactly what it says, where it says it, with or without a grammar mark.

edit on 9/10/2020 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2020 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I think you either did not read or did not understand my last post. You are aware, aren't you, that the original Greek did not have any punctuation at all? No, nay, never, none. Your interpretation is based on imposing English punctuation onto Greek narrative prose. It makes as much sense as forcing pedestrians to do the foxtrot as they proceed.



posted on Sep, 10 2020 @ 05:32 PM
link   
If you don't believe in hell you don't believe the Bible or the words of Jesus. Simple. I can give you verse after verse but it makes no difference as you've apparently read the same scriptures and somehow concluded there is no hell?

Best wishes and God bless. Hopefully your conclusion is a non factor and I'll meet you by the river in our perfect Paradise!a reply to: Lazarus Short



posted on Sep, 10 2020 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Illumimasontruth

How shall I reply to those who take "hell" at face value?

Do you not see that Hell is not in line with God's character - God, Who rains blessings on the just and the unjust, Who confirms all in sin so that He may have mercy on ALL, Who admonishes us to be kind to our enemies - is this the same God Who some believe is so unkind to His enemies that He tosses them into Hell?

If say if God is consistent, and He is, He would have mentioned Hell in the Creation, the Law, warnings to many and the fates of many more. We see, over and over, only simple death, with "hell" not mentioned.

Are you not aware that there were unholy hands on the Bible, as it made its way from Hebrew and Aramaic, to Greek, Latin and eventually English?

Are you not aware of the pagan roots, both in theology and language, of the word "hell"?

Happily, it is a fail-safe. Believe in hell, if you must, but you will enter the Kingdom anyway. The Lake of Fire is the worst you can get, but it is Godfire, so it's all good.



posted on Sep, 10 2020 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Lazarus Short

I don't believe the Greek you speak of is accurate. 1) We have no ORIGINAL Greek documents, we have only copies and we have no way to verify the copies as being true to the ORIGINAL because we have no ORIGINAL Greek documents to compare them to, which is the only way to verify its correctness. So regardless of Greek punctuation or not we have No preserved Greek today. 2) I have Inspired

2Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
English Scriptures with all of God's words in it in my Bible. 3) God preserved His words into English as he promised to do

Ps 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
. So having a preserved and inspired scriptures I can trust my Bible to be more true and accurate than any unverifiable Greek you may be trying to defend and or quote.
edit on 9/10/2020 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2020 @ 06:48 PM
link   
A point we need to remember is that the best wisdom of man which is what Solomon was using, is Vanity.



posted on Sep, 11 2020 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

The Bible is the best-preserved document we have from antiquity. Hundreds of copies of its component books, or even fragments of those books, can be compared to each other, and most agree - so that we can arrive at a very accurate version of the original. For complete perfection, Ivan Panin demonstrated many years ago that the original text can be arrived at by mathematics - it's all in the coding. Do you not know of these things?

CJ, you are missing out on a LOT if you dismiss the Greek and Hebrew in which the books of the Bible were originally written. Your KJV surely gives you a glimpse of it in the marginal notes, yes?

You are also missing out on reading the Bible in clear, modern English. Besides becoming adept at reading Shakespeare and the like, I see no use for the 1611 English, except for professional scholars.



posted on Sep, 11 2020 @ 09:01 AM
link   
A point we need to remember is that the best wisdom of man which is what Solomon was using, is Vanity. -ChesterJohn

I recall that our righteousness is filthy rags compared to the righteousness of God.



posted on Sep, 11 2020 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Lazarus Short

I didn't say Solomon's wisdom was good I said it was Vanity. So man's wisdom is empty and nothing compared to God's.



posted on Sep, 11 2020 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lazarus Short
a reply to: ChesterJohn

The Bible is the best-preserved document we have from antiquity. Hundreds of copies of its component books, or even fragments of those books, can be compared to each other, and most agree - so that we can arrive at a very accurate version of the original. For complete perfection, Ivan Panin demonstrated many years ago that the original text can be arrived at by mathematics - it's all in the coding. Do you not know of these things?

CJ, you are missing out on a LOT if you dismiss the Greek and Hebrew in which the books of the Bible were originally written. Your KJV surely gives you a glimpse of it in the marginal notes, yes?

You are also missing out on reading the Bible in clear, modern English. Besides becoming adept at reading Shakespeare and the like, I see no use for the 1611 English, except for professional scholars.

did you notice what you said. Most of the COPIES agree that still does not make them accurate to the ORIGINAL.

I am missing out of nothing seeing I have a Bible with ALL the words in it just as God wanted me to have them. You are missing out because you don't know if you Bible that is acctually true and accurate to the ORIGINAL.

I can and and so do you read and understand the KJV stop lying. You have shown over and over again you understand the KJV you are just making excuses.

edit on 9/11/2020 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2020 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Lazarus Short

I didn't say Solomon's wisdom was good I said it was Vanity. So man's wisdom is empty and nothing compared to God's.


Tell me, CJ, would that "man's wisdom" include your high opinion of the KJV?



posted on Sep, 11 2020 @ 05:41 PM
link   
ChesterJohn: "did you notice what you said. Most of the COPIES agree that still does not make them accurate to the ORIGINAL.

I am missing out of nothing seeing I have a Bible with ALL the words in it just as God wanted me to have them. You are missing out because you don't know if you Bible that is acctually true and accurate to the ORIGINAL.

I can and and so do you read and understand the KJV stop lying. You have shown over and over again you understand the KJV you are just making excuses."

Laz replies: Scholars derive the contents of the original document by comparing copy to copy to arrive at the best guess. Beyond that, as I said, the mathematical coding of the text allows us to derive the original, word for word and letter by letter. You are the one who refuses to understand or to ask me for further explanation. I KNOW that words have been added to the KJV, because "hell" is not a Hebrew or Greek word, and none of the four words from which it is translated in the KJV means anything like the Hell you seem to believe in. Two of them come from pagan Greek mythology, so where does that leave us? You retreat to the English KJV text and refuse to understand any more, and I move on to modern versions with (I think) better scholarship and documentary evidence.

BTW, I understand the KJV perfectly, and it does offer some advantages...BUT it teaches the horrible, and wrong, doctrine of Hell. Why do you accuse me over and over?



posted on Sep, 11 2020 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Lazarus Short

My only opinion of the KJV is this it is the preserved word of God in English as promised to every generation.


You believe men preserved the words through unverifiable documents based on the fact they agree with each other.

I believe God preserved his words as promised because he is powerful enough to do so because they are his words.

Man or God that is the decision we have to choose between. I will take God over all the men and all the unverifiable documents in the world.
edit on 9/11/2020 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2020 @ 07:39 PM
link   
I think we understand each other's positions by now. Go right ahead and keep putting mine in a bad light.



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 09:40 AM
link   
If I take God's word as it is written, in the context it is written and where it is written, then I don't have to do any interpretation, I don't have to go to Greek, Hebrew or any other dead language and try and figure out what it says. Because it clearly says what it says in English. If I can't trust my KJV Bible, which has all the words, phrases, verses and sections in it, that God wanted me to have by his power (not mans ability). Then all I have to do is Believe it.

Unbelief is mans biggest problem, and the man who brought his son to Jesus Disciples knew that and asked the Lord to help his unbelief.

Mr 9:24 And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.
Even Jesus said when the son of man cometh will he find faith in the earth.

Luke 18:8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?
Given the current state of many questioning God's words and reinterpreting them to fit a meaning that eases their hearts, it is obvious many do not have faith or belief in God's words.

If that is true them by understanding of God's word is just as valid as yours or anyone else.


edit on 9/12/2020 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Our understanding of the Biblical text has improved greatly since 1611. For instance, the KJV translators did not know the difference between classical Greek and Koine Greek. Plato and Aristotle wrote in classical Greek, but the New Testament was written in Koine Greek. It makes a difference. Your KJVO stance limits you.

Do you know what limits me? My father was a KJV loyalist, and I inherited his copies of Jay P. Green's "Unholy Hands on the Bible." I have left it unread, but I think it is time to rectify that.
edit on 12-9-2020 by Lazarus Short because: de dum de dum walla



posted on Sep, 12 2020 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Lazarus Short
I'll check that book out, thank you. I'm all for older texts and translations. It's the newer translations that really bother me. You already know why.

I can't imagine the task of trying to properly translate original scriptures. I think they did very well with older kjv translations. I have to rely on other tools to get the best context I possibly can.

I'm just finishing up a book titled Doctrine by Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears. Great reading!

Now off to search out Unholy Hands on the Bible.






top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join