The Original Geek

[Yeshua1]

That is like saying, if one says 2 + 2 = 5, it would be because in their scholarly opinion, based on factors like math and science, it is a viable option. Right, got ya.

No, just saying that MANY times, more then you would think, there are legitimate ways to translate a certain passage/verse, as at time more than one will also be valid!

that is when grammar/contex/sructure/philisophy comes into play!

 

[Van]

No, you are trying to clothe absurdity in razzamatazz, only agenda driven Calvinists would translate "apo" as before or in. No matter how much lipstick you smear on that pig, it remains a pig.

There are certainly passages and verses where translators hold differing views, all consistent with the grammar and range of word meanings, such as born or fathered in 1 John, but translating "apo" as before or in is not one of them. It is an agenda driven change to make the verse consistent with Ephesians 1:4. Deliberately bad in the first place, and then promulgated by this Geek program in the second.

 

[Yeshua1]

No, you are trying to clothe absurdity in razzamatazz, only agenda driven Calvinists would translate "apo" as before or in. No matter how much lipstick you smear on that pig, it remains a pig.

There are certainly passages and verses where translators hold differing views, all consistent with the grammar and range of word meanings, such as born or fathered in 1 John, but translating "apo" as before or in is not one of them. It is an agenda driven change to make the verse consistent with Ephesians 1:4. Deliberately bad in the first place, and then promulgated by this Geek program in the second.

So when the Nasb/Nkjv/Kjn all have certain passages/verses that 'support" calvinism, they were agenda driven also, just not as much as Niv/Esv/Nlt to you were?

 

[Van]

Good Golly Miss Molly. So when you post complete fiction, it means every Calvinist disregards truth?

No uncorrupted verse or passage in scripture supports the TULI of the Tulip. None, zip, nada. They are all mistaken views of scripture as has been demonstrated over and over.

1) Unregenerate men receive the gospel with joy, something the T says cannot happen.

2) People are chosen through faith in the truth, a conditional election for salvation.

3) Christ became the propitiation or means of salvation for the whole world.

4) Men who were entering heaven we blocked by false teachers.

Every point of the TULI has no support but rather are shown to be mistaken views in scripture.

I provided three or four specific verses in each of the ESV, NIV and NLT which show agenda driven eisegesis, including translating a word that means from or since as before.

 

[Rippon]

They are all mistaken views of scripture as has been demonstrated over and over.

I will have to tell you something confidential Van...psst --in your countless anti-Calvinistic tirades you haven't demonstrated anything but bluster.

1) Unregenerate men receive the gospel with joy, something the T says cannot happen.

When the Holy Spirit opens their eyes.

2) People are chosen through faith in the truth, a conditional election for salvation.

The elect were chosen before the foundation of the world --as just about any English translation affirms. But in their lifetime they are given eternal life.

3) Christ became the propitiation or means of salvation for the whole world.

Propitiation does not = means of salvation.

4) Men who were entering heaven we blocked by false teachers.

Huh? You'll have to translate the above for me.

Every point of the TULI has no support but rather are shown to be mistaken views in scripture.

Keep banging your drum there Van. Have you ever taken the time to read the Canons of Dort? Your many post suggests that you haven't. Time for you to step back from your campaign --read,study and meditate.

I provided three or four specific verses in each of the ESV, NIV and NLT which show agenda driven eisegesis,[sic] including translating a word that means from or since as before.

When I have time in the future I will give you examples of Calvinism in a few of your favorite non-Cal versions,(according to you).

 

[Rippon]

No, just saying that MANY times, more then you would think, there are legitimate ways to translate a certain passage/verse, and at times more than one will also be valid!

That is when grammar/context and structure comes into play!

(With slight editing) I agree with the above. Any objective person would.

 

[Van]

Psst, Rippon's argument is based on personal incredulity.

If unregenerate men can receive the gospel with joy, they have some spiritual ability, thus the T of the tulip is fiction.

No version of an English translation, except perhaps the NIV, ESV or NLT indicates any individual existed before God created them, starting of day 6 of creation. Thus the Election of Ephesians 1:4 is corporate, i.e. chosen in Him. Not chosen to be put in Him. When the Redeemer was chosen, those subsequently redeemed were chosen corporately as the target group of God's redemption plan.

Propitiation refers to Christ becoming the means of our salvation. Please do not deny the Master who bought you.

Men (humans) were entering (going into) heaven (the Kingdom of His Son) when they were blocked (stopped, prevented) from entering. If this is too difficult for you to grasp, perhaps you need some rest. Thus the grace needed to be entering was not irresistible, the I of the TULIP.

 

[Van]

The three or four corrupted verses are right there to look at folks, the Original Geek program promulgates corrupted text. So the Calvinists are trying to derail the thread, to make it about Calvinism, rather than the specific translation corruptions. That's what they do.

 

[Rippon]

the Calvinists are trying to derail the thread, to make it about Calvinism, rather than the specific translation corruptions. That's what they do.

You need to give it a rest guy. You brought up your typical anti-Calvinistic drivel way back on post #10. You have been playing the same tune throughout this thread with your oft-repeated solo of "Calvinistic corruptions" in the so-called Calvinistic versions. Get honest and face up to what you have been doing as your sole occupation on the BB from day one.

 

[Yeshua1]

The three or four corrupted verses are right there to look at folks, the Original Geek program promulgates corrupted text. So the Calvinists are trying to derail the thread, to make it about Calvinism, rather than the specific translation corruptions. That's what they do.

So you have arminians and non cals that were pat of the scholars on BOTH the Niv/Nasb translation team decidied to side with their calvinist bethren in case of Niv/esv. yet decide to nut support them in case of nasb?

 

[Yeshua1]

You need to give it a rest guy. You brought up your typical anti-Calvinistic drivel way back on post #10. You have been playing the same tune throughout this thread with your oft-repeated solo of "Calvinistic corruptions" in the so-called Calvinistic versions. Get honest and face up to what you have been doing as your sole occupation on the BB from day one.

van is clasiic case of one who mindset is SO focused on one thing, reads and sees all things thru that, even IF not proven to be true by the actual facts!

 

[Van]

You need to give it a rest guy. You brought up your typical anti-Calvinistic drivel way back on post #10. You have been playing the same tune throughout this thread with your oft-repeated solo of "Calvinistic corruptions" in the so-called Calvinistic versions. Get honest and face up to what you have been doing as your sole occupation on the BB from day one.

Folks, this is typical of Calvinist posters posting complete fiction over and over. Did I bring up Calvinism in post #10, or did Yeshua1 in post #9?

Rippon asks me to "get honest and face up" but I am addressing the program and saying it needs to be fixed because it promulgates deliberately bad agenda driven translations. I provides specific references to specific verses in three versions, and showed how some of them were incorporated in the program of the OP.

 

[Yeshua1]

Folks, this is typical of Calvinist posters posting complete fiction over and over. Did I bring up Calvinism in post #10, or did Yeshua1 in post #9?

Rippon asks me to "get honest and face up" but I am addressing the program and saying it needs to be fixed because it promulgates deliberately bad agenda driven translations. I provides specific references to specific verses in three versions, and showed how some of them were incorporated in the program of the OP.

So agsin, non calvinist translators, on both Niv/Nasb teams, allowed calvinists to have way in Niv, but not in Nasb?

 

[Van]

The program presented in the OP was examined and found to be wanting, as it promulgates corruptions of the inspired word of God. I provided specific references to specific verses in three versions, and showed how some of them were incorporated in the program of the OP. So is anyone willing to discuss the agenda driven corruptions and defend the program needing fixing? Nope.

 

[Van]

I selected James chapter two, and looked at James 2:5. Every possible choice for translation included "to be" which is not in the Greek but added by some but not all translators. For example the KJV does not have the insertion, and others i.e. NASB, puts the insertion in italics.

I then looked at 2 Thessalonians 2:13 and found another corruption, salvation being turned into a verb so that through faith can be attached to being saved rather than being chosen. Nullifying the truth we are elected conditionally.

Next, I looked at Revelation 13:8 and found "apo" which means from or since being translated as "before." Three strikes and the "Adaptive" bible is out, having already been adapted to present the corruptions of Calvinism.

 

[Yeshua1]

I selected James chapter two, and looked at James 2:5. Every possible choice for translation included "to be" which is not in the Greek but added by some but not all translators. For example the KJV does not have the insertion, and others i.e. NASB, puts the insertion in italics.

I then looked at 2 Thessalonians 2:13 and found another corruption, salvation being turned into a verb so that through faith can be attached to being saved rather than being chosen. Nullifying the truth we are elected conditionally.

Next, I looked at Revelation 13:8 and found "apo" which means from or since being translated as "before." Three strikes and the "Adaptive" bible is out, having already been adapted to present the corruptions of Calvinism.

So you are saying the translators chose to corrupt the Bible in the Niv, but not in the Nasb, even though many of them were working on both versions?

Does that make any sense?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I then looked at 2 Thessalonians 2:13 and found another corruption, salvation being turned into a verb ...

You've got to be kidding me!! It wasn't "turned into" a verb. The word soteria in the Greek, translated "salvation" in the NASB, can't possibly by a verb. It is always a noun. If you're going to discuss this stuff, you need to know what you're talking about. This post reveals that you obviously do not.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Yeup, in Greek, verbs and nouns have obvious differences. Unlike English, you can't "google something" in Greek.

You've got to be kidding me!! It wasn't "turned into" a verb. The word soteria in the Greek, translated "salvation" in the NASB, can't possibly by a verb. It is always a noun. If you're going to discuss this stuff, you need to know what you're talking about. This post reveals that you obviously do not.

 

[Van]

Hi TND, my point exactly, thus a translation corruption to translate "for salvation" as "to be saved." Note salvation is turned into saved, a noun turned into a verb.