Green, so if the SDA commentary is not always a credible source, could your sources not be credible either?

That is, why should any believe you versus me?

If you have evidence that my sources are false, or not credible, then no--you shouldn't accept them. This, however, may be the difference: I already have such evidence with the SDA Commentaries.

Here's one example: The SDA Bible Commentary speaks of the "rapture" verses in Matthew 24 with the following interpretation.


The trouble with the above is that it is wrong on multiple counts, and has exactly the opposite interpretation from the correct one. Multiple Adventist evangelists are now correctly preaching that the "left" are the righteous. And what is this about "the Greek precludes the idea that is it righteous who are 'left'?" It does no such thing! The author of this obviously had not done his homework. The Greek word aphiemi is translated as "forgiven" far more than it is translated as "dismissed" or "sent away." Last time I checked, it is the righteous who are forgiven, and it is the righteous who are called the remnant, or that which is left after all others are taken out.

This is just one of many such poor commentaries that I have encountered. I could name others, but suffice it to say, I have lost confidence in the commentaries for being of much greater value than a pastor's opinion. Only the inspired portions written by Ellen White can be considered reliable.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I'm not sure you understand the Greek. Take the verse, 1 John 1:9 AKJV If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

The word "forgive" is the Greek work aphiemi. It means to "send away", "remit", "let go", "leave", "forsake", "yeild up", "lay aside", and it often translated "forgive". In 1 John 1:9, this word is used to indicate that sin is send way, remitted, let go. It has nothing to do with the offended person, and everything to do with the offender. The offended person, God, is not changed by our confession of sins. We are the once changed, and God will cleanse us from all unrighteousness. He will "send away" the sin.

There is another Greek word translated often "forgive", and that word is "charizomai". It can mean, "forgive", "pardon", "give" or "grant", "rescue". This is more in line with our common use in English of the word forgive. If we forgive, we grant pardon. Charizomai has to do with the offended.

The above quote of the SDABC holds true. The wicked are sent away.

APL,

The very fact that some Adventist evangelists and Bible students like myself can see a different interpretation from the one you are seeing still means that the SDABC cannot be true. It says "the Greek precludes the idea that it is the righteous who are 'left.'" But, the problem is, it doesn't. The Greek is not that clear. I have a clear argument to the other side, and that is that it is the "paralambano" crowd that are "taken" to destruction, while the "aphiemi" group is that which remains.

Here's the breakdown of ALL the times the word "aphiemi" is translated to English in the KJV:

leave 52, forgive 47, suffer 14, let 8, forsake 6, let alone 6, misc 13

Of the 146 times the word is used in the entire Bible, it only appears as "forsake" 6 times, and if it is ever translated as "send away," it must be in the 13 miscellaneous translations of the word. That doesn't make a very strong case on your side. To the contrary, it is translated as "forgive" at least one third of all the times it is used, with another third being "leave," a neutral term.

Throughout the Bible, "taken" is typically a bad thing. Conversely, "left" is typically a good thing.

It is partly from these facts that I have drawn my conclusions. The other part is really a much larger study which deserves a thread of its own.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Ummmm..... Did you really mean to say that as it stands?

kland,

It would be a bit like the SDABC saying that "the Greek does not permit an acceptance of the Johannine Comma." Trouble is, the Greek has nothing to do with whether or not the Comma is accepted--people do!

Perhaps that clarifies my point.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

GC - I gave a specific example (1 John 1:9) where you want to "send away" sin, Aphiemi sin, translated in the KJV, "forgive sin". It is SIN that is sent away, not the sinner. Aphiemi is the right term. Charizomai and Aphiemi are both translated "forgive", but mean very different things. /apl

Why is "send away sin" any better than "forgive sin?" That makes no sense to me. It isn't "sent away," it is "forgiven." And then we are "cleansed" of all unrighteousness. If it were "sent away," to where is it sent? I've never heard of anyone speaking of "sending away" sin before. This phraseology is completely foreign to me. I'll stick with the KJV on this one.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Which may not be as bad as I thought you said. But what you are saying is that "more is better".

I think I've already stated on this thread that I take no special side in the debate concerning the Johannine Comma. I find both sides to be untenable. Neither side has proof. However, I have observed that there is nothing in the Comma which would introduce a contradiction with the rest of the Bible. The Comma agrees with the rest of the Bible, and introduces no new information. Therefore, whether or not the Comma was in the original writing, it seems neither to help nor harm by having been inserted. The main harm is the debate itself, for precious time is wasted discussing it.

Mrs. White speaks well of Erasmus' work, and Erasmus included the Comma after seeing a manuscript which contained it. She never uses the verse, however, and indicates to us that there are places in the Bible where people edited things thinking to make them more clear, but instead have muddied it up.



She speaks well of Erasmus' first work. The third edition of this work, which came out in 1522, contained the comma. Mrs. White appears not to mention it.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.