nuclearboy:

Above post directed at Donnie, not James Bond

[breathes down]

afraid don first cash me

nuclearboy:


^ Shey you sef see the "sharp" move, Ehn?

Nahin ooo

Panadolsharp lo nja yen  

I had done my studies before I put that there. . . and I did not think you will ignore that.

Ok , before you use your king James to condemn me to hell
Here is the NIV rendering:

Luke 23:43-
Jesus answered him, 'I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise'.

I guess I can safely move the coma now?


Jesus answered him, 'I tell you the truth today, you will be with me in paradise'.

Remember that  no Greek MSS had punctuation of any kind until the 9th century and then it was only a dot in the middle of the line separating each word. All punctuation, therefore, rests upon human authority.  This is a statement of fact. 

The Greek reads, "Verily to thee I say, Today with Me thou shalt be in paradise."
Which again can be rendered as: "Verily to thee I say Today, with Me thou shalt be in paradise."

donnie:


I had done my studies before I put that there. . . and I did not think you will ignore that.

Ok , before you use your king James to condemn me to hell

Here is the NIV rendering:

Luke 23:43-
Jesus answered him, 'I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise'.

I guess I can safely move the coma now?

Jesus answered him, 'I tell you the truth today, you will be with me in paradise'.

Remember that  no Greek MSS had punctuation of any kind until the 9th century and then it was only a dot in the middle of the line separating each word. All punctuation, therefore, rests upon human authority.  This is a statement of fact. 

The Greek reads, "Verily to thee I say, Today with Me thou shalt be in paradise."

Again, that can be rendered as:

"Verily to thee I say Today, with Me thou shalt be in paradise."

@^^^

Safely what?

I'll safely move with caution if I were you

NIV?! Tut-tut-tut-tut-tut!!

Bet you didnt study NIV itself though 

Eerie, with a grain of salt mate 

Same kettle of fish as with Wiki! 

lets be specific - which Greek Bible? By the way, NIV sucks and its translations are not trustworthy

nuclearboy:

lets be specific - which Greek Bible? By the way, NIV sucks and its translations are not trustworthy

kai! I just dey realise dis NIV thingy o

@donnie,

Still awaiting your response on the "Jesus went to hell" story. Just book, chapter and verse will do.

The "move the comma" trick does not wash (some American WoF guy tried it with me several years ago) and is usually only to be found in WoF circles; even the NIV does not do it. let the WoF chaps find a worthwhile Bible translation/version that does it. Also, how many serious scholars of the original Bible languages adhere to the trick?

By the way, try this on the Luke 23:43

http://bible.cc/luke/23-43.htm

petres_007:

kai! I just dey realise dis NIV thingy o  

@donnie,

Still awaiting your response on the "Jesus went to hell" story. Just book, chapter and verse will do.

Eph 4: 8
When He ascended on high, he led captives in His train and gave gifts to men.




Ephes. 4:9
   (What does 'he ascended' mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions?




Matthew 27:50-53
   Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. [51] And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; [52] And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, [53] And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

From where did these come? Where were these captives locked up?

@Donnie

Please don't let yourself become a tool in the hands of people with hidden agendas. Your question is already answered by the passage - they came from "graves". They were captives of the graves. Did you ever read "o death, where is your sting? O grave where is your victory?" These Formerly victorious graves opened giving them up? Or would you say David was in Hell? After he wrote "Thou shalt not suffer Thy Holy One to see corruption"? Is it not the grave that brings corruption even today? Or is it hell? can't you see the contradictions in your belief system?

Also, go back to Nuella's assertions that these saints were in "Abraham's Bosom" which she also said meant "Paradise". Based on that which you agree to, is Paradise Hell?

Careful study and a bit of patience will show you that your teachers make these things up as they go along just to please people

Enigma:

By the way, try this on the Luke 23:43

http://bible.cc/luke/23-43.htm

Thanks for the link, it works with everyone of those translations that I had the time to try, except (maybe) the KJV because of is archaic English.

BTW guys, this is not a WOF thing, they are ok with the KJV- only that for them, paradise was in hades (the good side though- Abraham's bosom Lk. 16:22).

So I agree that Jesus went to hell even though I may not call Abraham's  bosom (in hades/hell) paradise.

Now, I may not have the time to respond to every post as we enter the new week.

Please be nice, shun nastiness as this is a new year and besides. . . it's my thread remember?  

Meanwhile, as I can't resist this any longer, let us examine the implication of the 'Jesus was born again' argument made on this thread.

1. Jesus was a born again man

Joagbaje:

Jesus was the first man to be born again . He is the first fruit among many brethren. No man had the grace of born again until his resurrection.

Joagbaje:

They were not born again until Jesus rose from the dead. He was the first to be born again.

2. And this is what the same poster says it means to be "born again"

Joagbaje:

To be born again is thesame as receiving eternal life of God in our spirit . This eternal life is a life we recieve instantly we got born again.

Joagbaje:

Being born again is to have a new nature and life in the human spirit. From the  time of Adam man had become dead in his spirit.

3. Therefore, according to this sacrilegious reasoning:

Since Jesus was a born again man it means

a. Jesus was dead in his spirit until he became born again

b. Jesus had a new nature and life in the human spirit when/after he became born again

c. Jesus only received eternal life after he was born again; this particular Jesus is not a "proper" eternal Jesus.

Very very clever thinking indeed ---- NOT!

Enigma:


Meanwhile, as I can't resist this any longer, let us examine the implication of the 'Jesus was born again' argument made on this thread.

1. Jesus was a born again man


2. And this is what the same poster says it means to be "born again"


3. Therefore, according to this sacrilegious reasoning:

Since Jesus was a born again man it means

a. Jesus was dead in his spirit until he became born again

b. Jesus had a new nature and life in the human spirit when/after he became born again

c. Jesus only received eternal life after he was born again; this particular Jesus is not a "proper" eternal Jesus.

Very very clever thinking indeed ---- NOT!

@Enigma

I'll hold your hand, lead you a bit, then let go, step aside and leave you to follow through all by yourself:

^6b. . . she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat

⁷And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they [were] unclothed; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons

¹⁰And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I [was] naked; and I hid myself. - Gen 3:6-7;10 KJV

and

And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? - Matthew 27:46 KJV

1) What transpired in both verses?

2) What caused the incident or situation that transpired in #1 above?

2b) Does Isaiah 53:5, Romans 4:25 and Hebrews 9:28 help?

3) What is the corollation between Jesus and Christ? Understanding the crucial distinction helps 

^^^ Thanks for "holding my hand" etc etc but I dont think I need it. With regard to the two passages that you quote, do provide your own interpretation if you wish. I don't see how either suggests that Jesus was born again or needed to be born again; or even that he was dead in his spirit for all of his 33 years until he became "born again". (Edited)

I mean this thing is just ridiculous.

OK so Jesus was born like any other man ---- of a man's seed?

Why was he born of a virgin?

So, even though He was conceived of the Holy Spirit, he was still dead in his spirit until he became "born again"?

So even when/after the Holy Spirit descended om Him in bodily form at His baptism, he was still dead in His spirit --- until He became "born again"?

So even at the transfiguration, He was still dead in His spirit?

So the Jesus who went on the cross was a man "dead in His spirit"?

So the Spirit that he committed into the hands of God was a dead spirit?

Enigma:


^^^ Thanks for "holding my hand" etc etc but I dont think I need it.

With regard to the two passages that you quote, do provide your own interpretation if you wish.

I don't see how either suggests that Jesus was born again or needed to be born again;

or even that he was dead in his spirit for all of his 33 years until he became "born again". (Edited)

@Enigma

I know you'll soon suss it out later which is why I skirted all over the place with those references (i.e. those two verses and the other three)

You didnt follow up with my question on the corollation between Jesus and Christ though?

No biggie, I'll throw in another mix then . . .

What is frankincense and myrrh used for?

Remember the woman that rubbed Jesus with oil using her hair?

PS: Ha! Omo you no go jab tomorrow?

^^^ As with my previous answer ----- if you have an explanation of the difference between Jesus and Christ, do provide it; same with your myrrh and frankincense point.

Enigma:


I mean this thing is just ridiculous.

OK so Jesus was born like any other man ---- of a man's seed?

Why was he born of a virgin?

So, even though He was conceived of the Holy Spirit, he was still dead in his spirit until he became "born again"?

So even when/after the Holy Spirit descended om Him in bodily form at His baptism, he was still dead in His spirit --- until He became "born again"?

So even at the transfiguration, He was still dead in His spirit?

So the Jesus who went on the cross was a man "dead in His spirit"?

So the Spirit that he committed into the hands of God was a dead spirit?

Enigma:


^^^ As with my previous answer -----

if you have an explanation of the difference between Jesus and Christ, do provide it; same with your myrrh and frankincense point.

@Enigma

Ah! Not so fast mate . . .

"Won nla obe gbigbona beyen" literally slow and steadily

No, no, no. No.

1) " . . . so Jesus was born like any other man ---- of a man's seed?" - No!

6) "So the Jesus who went on the cross was a man "dead in His spirit"?" - No! and No to #s 2-5 as well

Its not so much a case of difference but more of a crucial distinction actually

Another pointer. Do you recall what the wages of sin is?

You might want to sleep on this. I anticipate that by dawn you'll cop on . . .

^^^ Naah, there is nothing to "cop on". I actually know where you are going but I am pushing you to be explicit so there is no issue of presupposition.

Come out with it and get on with it.

Enigma:


^^^ Naah, there is nothing to "cop on".

I actually know where you are going but I am pushing you to be explicit so there is no issue of presupposition.

Come out with it and get on with it.

@Enigma

Try me . . . Spill the beans

I'll own up if what you've imagined was where I was or heading

Trust me. Gentleman's agreement.

No can do.

Enigma:


No can do.

@Enigma

Bummer. Whats the world come to eh?

O ye of little faith 

@e36991:

Jesus "took upon Himself" the sins of all & there was a turning away by the Father. But was it His Spirit that carried the sin or His Body?

I believe Isaiah 53 shows us the answer here. The iniquities were laid upon His FLESH. Spiritually, He remained pure (which was why He recognised the moments of separation anyway). There exists understanding that even when He was on the cross i.e. whist carrying the weight of sin, that Christ could have called upon Angels and they would have responded in real time. At the moment of His death, the veil of the Holy of Holies was torn, not 3 days later when He rose. The darkness that covered the land --> was that a spiritual harbinger or physical? Are these signs of spiritual death or Spiritual Aliveness?

He "laid down" His life willingly. That is a physical gesture, and physical death, not spiritual death which would cause separation of the type Adam had which was losing salvation. Jesus was/is salvation! He NEVER lost it

We all believe/claim that Adam would have lived forever but His spiritual death triggered his physical death. Spiritual death made his flesh corruptible.

Jesus on the other hand, took in His flesh an unfair weight - Sin (which did not belong there) and died physically. But while the spirit can kill the flesh, the flesh cannot kill the spirit. His Spirit did (could) not die and thus the grave could not hold him. A new incorruptible body was "generated" for Him and thus He rose, this time for eternity

donnie:




Eph 4: 8
When He ascended on high, he led captives in His train and gave gifts to men.




Ephes. 4:9
   (What does 'he ascended' mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions?




Matthew 27:50-53
   Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. [51] And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; [52] And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, [53] And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

From where did these come? Where were these captives locked up?

Donnie,

Thanks for your response. But that passage says nowhere that Jesus went to hell. Like Nuke pointed out, it says clearly where those fellows came from - their graves. Leaves no room for any kind of speculation.

And by the way, that wasn't the verse I was expecting you to throw at me. Its even more "suggestive" than this passage you've quoted. I'll leave you to figure out which one.

^^Got ya!

Luke 16:19-31
There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: [20] And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, [21] And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. [22] And 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; [23] And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. [24] 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. [25] But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. [26] And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. [27] Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: [28] For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. [29] Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. [30] And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. [31] And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

petres_007:


kai! I just dey realise dis NIV thingy o 

@donnie,

Still awaiting your response on the "Jesus went to hell" story. Just book, chapter and verse will do.

petres_007:


Donnie,

Thanks for your response. But that passage says nowhere that Jesus went to hell.

Like Nuke pointed out, it says clearly where those fellows came from - their graves. Leaves no room for any kind of speculation.

And by the way, that wasn't the verse I was expecting you to throw at me.

Its even more "suggestive" than this passage you've quoted. I'll leave you to figure out which one. 

donnie:


^^Got ya!

Luke 16:19-31

[19]There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
^[20] And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
[21] And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
[22] And 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;
[23] And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
[24] 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.
[25] But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
[26] And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
[27] Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
[28] For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
[29] Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
[30] And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
[31] And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

@ ^^^

Please pardon this party pooper 

and mind the cat flung into the chicken coop 

This is a parable (i.e. Luke 16:19-31) and not a real event

and we all know what parables are (i.e. they are stories told to teach a moral or religious lesson)

Now compare that verse (i.e. Luke 16:22-23) with John 13:23 to understand

"Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved." - John 13:23 KJV

Have you ever questioned and wondered what it meant that "John leant on Jesus's bosom" before?

Why did John lean, particularly on Jesus' bosom?

What is wrong with leaning on Jesus' shoulder?

Why did he prefer leaning on Jesus' bosom?

Why was it recorded that he leant on Jesus' bosom?

What was he hoping to gain from leaning on Jesus' bosom?

Understanding John 13:23 helps deciphering Luke 16:19-31 and especially what transpired in Luke 16:22-23

It doesnt stop there, it reveals also how John had his profound revelation and why he was given guardianship of Jesus' mother 

PS: Nuclearboy, yeah you're close and almost snapping on my heel.

Pardon me I need to do an Arnold Schwarzenegger here - BRB to you later

♫ Oleku, tell me something wey I no fit do

Mi oo popopopo po, ma lo tu

O nini , mo nini, O deji, mo deji . . . ♫

I hope you're ready cos its oleku

and am feeling you Nuclearboy, yeah ♫ . . . 

I'm loving this!!

Ahh number-boy you have come now bad-mouthing the NIV . . . don't make me start with you again oh

JeSoul:


Ahh number-boy you have come now bad-mouthing the NIV . . .

don't make me start with you again oh 

@JeSoul

Ha-ha-ha, Haaa!

My sister from another mother . . .

Bad-mouth NIV ke?

Just said eerie with a pinch of salt and compared NIV with Wikipedia after the stab at KJV

(i.e. "Ok , before you use your king James to condemn me to hell"

Wondered though whether when it was said ". . . done my studies before I put that there . . . " he did same studies on NIV too 

Exactmente!

This was a fable used to drive home an understanding but here we see it turned into doctrine by people who would know better if they spent more time on their knees and with God in study rather than under hair dryers.

Abraham's Bosom refers to as it were, the "hope of the saints" after their earthly sojourn. That's why his ancestors could be in such a place and its why I set that trap for Aunty earlier but she missed the bait.

Interesting (and funny and MOST OF ALL illuminating of their understanding) though that some people think dead people climbed into someone's boobs and lived there after they died.

Wetin person no go see/hear

Eph 4:8-10

8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.

9(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth ?

10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)
KJV

Is this a parable too?

The story about Lazarus was not a parable, it was a real incidence.