Forums118
Topics9,225
Posts196,116
Members1,325
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
5 registered members (dedication, Kevin H, daylily, 2 invisible),
2,289
guests, and 8
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the KJV only argument
[Re: Daryl]
#145051
09/03/12 09:05 PM
09/03/12 09:05 PM
|
|
I find this next quote interesting and confusing in relation to the other quotes: If they [the youth] receive Christ and believe in Him, they will be brought into close relationship with God. He gives them power to become the sons of God, to associate with the highest dignitaries in the kingdom of heaven, to unite with Gabriel, with cherubim and seraphim, with angels and the archangel. Spalding and Magan Collection, 52. {TA 285.2}
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the KJV only argument
[Re: Daryl]
#145054
09/03/12 09:37 PM
09/03/12 09:37 PM
|
Banned SDA Active Member 2015
3500+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,613
USA
|
|
Yes there are only two archangels mentioned, Michael and Lucifer.
This is where I believe the Mormons get the idea that Satan and Jesus were brothers, which is from Satan.
Gabriel was given the position that Lucifer fell from, bestowed with more authority, but was not recreated or reformed into a more powerful angel. He is completely satisfied with the power God originally bestowed upon him.
In his weakness he was honored above other angels, by being permitted to be the trump of God both in announcing the birth of Jesus to the prophets and Marry and being sent to minister to God's lovely Son here on earth, a very wonderful position. So in the example, weakness is stronger than might.
When Lucifer and his angels fell, God had to judge all of the angels. Gabriel was one God could trust because he passed the test without wavering in his faith of the Father, so he was honored with the powerful position of being the covering Cherub. Awesome!
Search me oh God and know my heart, test me and know my anxious thoughts, see if there is any offensive way in me and lead me to the way everlasting. Amen
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the KJV only argument
[Re: jamesonofthunder]
#145055
09/03/12 09:48 PM
09/03/12 09:48 PM
|
Banned SDA Active Member 2015
3500+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,613
USA
|
|
"The words of the angel, “I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God,” show that he holds a position of high honor in the heavenly courts. When he came with a message to Daniel, he said, “There is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael [Christ] your Prince.” Daniel 10:21. Of Gabriel the Saviour speaks in the Revelation, saying that “He sent and signified it by His angel unto His servant John.” Revelation 1:1. And to John the angel declared, “I am a fellow servant with thee and with thy brethren the prophets.” Revelation 22:9, R. V. Wonderful thought—that the angel who stands next in honor to the Son of God is the one chosen to open the purposes of God to sinful men. {DA 99.1}
Search me oh God and know my heart, test me and know my anxious thoughts, see if there is any offensive way in me and lead me to the way everlasting. Amen
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the KJV only argument
[Re: jamesonofthunder]
#145056
09/03/12 09:55 PM
09/03/12 09:55 PM
|
Banned SDA Active Member 2015
3500+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,613
USA
|
|
So in all of this THE archangel would seem to be the correct translation of the text since there is only one archangel left, right?
Last edited by jamesonofthunder; 09/03/12 09:59 PM.
Search me oh God and know my heart, test me and know my anxious thoughts, see if there is any offensive way in me and lead me to the way everlasting. Amen
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the KJV only argument
[Re: jamesonofthunder]
#145064
09/04/12 01:06 PM
09/04/12 01:06 PM
|
Banned Member
Full Member
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 178
Deer Park, WA
|
|
The term "archangel" need not denote nature, but rather could be referring to an exclusive position or title. In that case, Gabriel could have been promoted to archangel status without undergoing a change of nature. In fact, the word angel simply means messenger and does not necessarily have to be a cherub.
As for "trump" vs. "trumpet", the greek word "σαλπιγξ" means "trumpet" and is the correct rendering.
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the KJV only argument
[Re: jamesonofthunder]
#145067
09/04/12 05:41 PM
09/04/12 05:41 PM
|
Active Member 2013
Full Member
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 215
Florida, USA
|
|
I saw that discrepancy in the writing also but I knew that Lucifer also was called an archangel, so the thought didn't arise to argue the point.
Where is Lucifer called an archangel?
Harold T.
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the KJV only argument
[Re: Harold Fair]
#145071
09/04/12 07:59 PM
09/04/12 07:59 PM
|
Banned Member
Full Member
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 178
Deer Park, WA
|
|
I saw that discrepancy in the writing also but I knew that Lucifer also was called an archangel, so the thought didn't arise to argue the point.
Where is Lucifer called an archangel? Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.” Rebellion originated with Satan. Notwithstanding the exalted position which he occupied among the heavenly host, he became dissatisfied because he was not accorded supreme honor. Hence he questioned God’s purposes and impugned his justice. He bent all his powers to allure the angels from their allegiance. The fact that he was an archangel, glorious and powerful, enabled him to exert a mighty influence. (ST September 14, 1882, par. 9 )
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the KJV only argument
[Re: Alpendave]
#145073
09/04/12 08:05 PM
09/04/12 08:05 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2024
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,499
Midland
|
|
The term "archangel" need not denote nature, but rather could be referring to an exclusive position or title. In that case, Gabriel could have been promoted to archangel status without undergoing a change of nature. In fact, the word angel simply means messenger and does not necessarily have to be a cherub.
As for "trump" vs. "trumpet", the greek word "σαλπιγξ" means "trumpet" and is the correct rendering. Thank you, thank you, and thank you for what you have written! It's what I had failed to get across from some, even though it does appear you have failed so with some, too. I ask those what should it be translated as. To which I get a confused response. Because what they really mean is it should be translated as to what they have always believed. Hard to argue with that. Regarding the archangel, whether it should be "an" or "the", it shouldn't be either according to what you've shown. However, the English language requires someone, who probably isn't inspired, to insert a word. This doesn't mean one version is more correct than another version. It just means one translator chose one way, and another chose another way. Still, "an" or "the" I don't see making a real difference. Because, "the" archangel is still "an" archangel. But that is arguing English. And you reminded me it was probably "Veith" who I listened to a video for a whole hour waiting for him to make his point and he never came to it other than "more" is better.
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the KJV only argument
[Re: gordonb1]
#145074
09/04/12 08:19 PM
09/04/12 08:19 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2024
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,499
Midland
|
|
Rosangela, are you referring to errors in the English translation of the KJV, or errors in the Portugese translation of the KJV?
Could you post some examples?
_________________
I don't think she was talking about English nor Portugese but what it should be translated as regardless of the target language. When you look at the Greek and Hebrew, it has a certain meaning. That meaning should be conveyed in the target language. Which means, if one was translating KJV English to Portugese (rather than the commentary), one could accidentally come up with a better translation without having read the Greek or Hebrew. The people who choose the English words (or whatever language) are not necessarily inspired and may choose wrong words here, but right words there. That's why comparing multiple versions, looking at the Hebrew and Greek, doing word searches (Greek/Hebrew) is not only the best way for Bible study, but also part of digging diligently. Anyone who has spent any time reading the commentary should realize the KJV is far from "perfect". Word after word has comments such as "rather it should be...", "better translated as...", etc.
|
|
|
Re: The truth about the KJV only argument
[Re: kland]
#145075
09/04/12 08:19 PM
09/04/12 08:19 PM
|
Banned Member
Full Member
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 178
Deer Park, WA
|
|
Regarding the Pericope Adulterae, I figured that while not being part of the original synoptic, it had an unshakable and fully legitimate oral transmission tradition which God providentially saw to it eventually being included in the synoptic. The Adventist Biblical Research Institute also says something to that effect. I would conjecture that its oral origin is with John (though he did not include it in his original written gospel). The story is also found in a manuscript of the Gospel of Luke, who may have learned about it when conducting his research on the life of Jesus (see Luke's introduction). At any rate, the evidence is overwhelming in favor of its veracity and worthiness of inclusion in the Bible.
Last edited by Dave Mullbock; 09/04/12 08:20 PM.
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|