Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Calvinist?

The Book of Hebrews (and the ‘falling away’ verses) was written during the latter half of the 1st century. I’m talkin’ about the time period after Jesus’ death, and before ANY of the Christian texts that became the New Testament were even written...!

Jesus having the task of sorting sheep from the goats ,[Matthew 25]
would indicate God created with the knowledge that some are doomed.

25:34 "Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father,
inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:"

25:41 "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire,
prepared for the devil and his angels:"



sounds like a lofty ideal that God has, but full well knowing its not going to happen.

Revelation 13:8 and 17:8 , show there are those beast worshippers that are not written in the Lambs Book of Life
from the foundation of the world. ....followed by....

[Revelation 20:15] "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire".

And once again:


"The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.'' Proverbs 16:4

It is certainly easy to draw that conclusion but there are other potential answers. If we are created, fallen and fallible as scripture teaches, the blame for interpretation falls at the feet of the man who errs in reading.

The words say what they say and mean what they mean. Given what the words say and mean, using non controversial definitions, the contradictions are there. Some try to rationalize them away with semantics.

You've never translated anything to English, have you.

The former pastor of a church we attended, who happens to be a Calvinist, which I am not, was skilled in reading the Greek and Hebrew. We were discussing the Greek text and how it translates into English. His comment was that the text comes alive in a much more dynamic way when read in the original language. The point being made that the doesn’t translate well into any language. The best understanding coming from reading the original text within its original context. The test within context is not popular because people are kept from their personal interpretations.

So God knowingly made man so stupid that he would not be able understand the written words of God?

and being stupid, its only natural fallible man also misinterpreted what God was saying before writing it down,
thus the Hebrew and Aramaic text can't be trusted, nor the Apocrypha, the Greek Septuagint or Latin Vulgate , etc

Then of the 50+ English translations drawn from a varying mixture of the above sources , we have formal equivalence and
dynamic equivalence translations coming from the list.. and Bibles with mIx of both formal and dynamic.

Then you have modern day Christtian readers who having a personal bias - pick the version/s they like most ,
only to then interpret them in their own personal way.

Yet they claim they are reading the infallible words of God in whatever questionable version they prefer , and of course
their version of book and interpretation is superior to that of the plethora of other halfwit sheep.

****

As much a people today are still largely clueless as to what they are actually reading, consider that Prior to the literacy
levels of our modern world, folks were for millennia largely illiterate, so they had to rely on crap bag self interest driven
clergy to tell them what God is saying , wants them to believe and what to do, ..and many brain dead folk in the 21st century
still prefer it that way.

Lets remember that Christians have been divided - highly factionalised since the very early centuries following Christ,
learn about the fierce Christian rivalry conditions leading to the council of Nicaea 325 and the corrupt dirtbag way in which
proceedings were held.
and you can see what a clusterfck the human church of Christianity was and continues to be to this day.

Greek text O.T. (Septuagint) was translated from Hebrew, then catholics like Jerome [commissioned by Pope Damasus 4th century],
used the Septuagint(Greek) to translate into Latin (Vulgate) but then Jerome decided Septuagint was not satisfactory, so he translated
Hebrew O.T. into Latin.

6th century- a complete Bible was commonly used., containing Jerome’s O.T. translation from Hebrew, except for Psalms; his Gallican Psalter;
his translation of the books of Tobias (Tobit) and Judith (apocryphal in the Jewish and Protestant canons); and his revision of the Gospels.
but the remainder of the N.T. was taken from older Latin versions,..whille certain other books found in the Septuagint—the Apocrypha for Protestants
and Jews; the deuterocanonical books for Roman Catholics—were included from older versions.....Various editors and correctors then produced
revised texts of the Vulgate over the years.

How many folks actually know the full source or mix of what they are reading in their own particular choice of Bible?

How many christians are ever going to bother to delve into Hebrew, Greek , Latin,.. to better understand what they are reading in English?

For all the discussion let us never forget the meaning of the Cross. Jesus died on the Cross for our sins.

We don't know that. Some believe it because that is what it says in the Gospels. The story is not rational. Just consider one factor, how likely it is that a Being capable of creating a Universe would think like the ancient people who wrote the stuff, people who believed in blood sacrifice for atonement or favour from god, a common belief, Babylonians, Aztecs, etc, etc.

Q./ Which Bible says Jesus died on a cross?

Many Bibles simply say pole, stake or tree,

if you look at the Greek it says; Stauros (σταυρός)

The Imperial Bible-Dictionary: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·rosʹ], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling,
on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground.





Christian hope is based on the claim that Jesus was raised back to life, not that he died on a piece of wood of questionable shape.

There is no description in the Bible of the specific 'stauros' on which Christ died. If it were important for us to know its shape, God would have provided
additional information?..However, the fact that the cross figures so prominently in earlier pagan religious custom ought to give pause for thought.

Christians have adopted other pagan symbols and festivities and called them their own, so I don't think they would stop at adopting a pagan cross.

So let's ignore Roman history entirely. Not everything need be in the bible, nor can be.

Romans did a lot of impaling or fixing onto simple wooden stakes/poles... or Stauros.

and scripture indicates Jesus was to be killed and removed according to Hebrew law/ritual, which does not specifically involve a cross.
(Scripture makes repeated mention of Jesus in a tree.)

It wasn't until the 4th century that the cross symbol was heavily promoted and really took off for christians.

How would we really know if we make up our own minds or God causes us to think or act in a particular fashion? We would never know for sure either way.

These debates are excellent, but in the end it's us mortals trying to figure out God, sometimes trying to put Him in a box we can understand.

Jesus was killed under the authority Pilot and Roman law allowed crucifixion. A very effective deterrent and Rome wanted control, domestic peace makes for more to tax. Needn't have been the ideal cross seen in churches of course.

iF the death/punishment of Jesus was solely under Roman durastictional law he would not have been taken down when he was.
hence he was taken down according to Hebrew ritual.

since when did the Romans (in their specifically most tortuous form of punishment]) only leave people fixed to a wooden pole
for six hours.?

Romans generally allowed the people of occupied territories to follow their traditions, but Joseph of Arimathea, still earnestly requested
of Pilate permission to take down Jesus’ body.

Pilate's goal was to keep Judaea peaceful and profitable lest Rome take it personally. There was tension and violence with the Jewish population and the trial and execution of Jesus, as it is described biblically and historically, was an accommodation to the Jewish hierarchy to keep peace. I've never heard anyone dispute this.

Nobody here is questioning Pilates reasons.

and did not Pilate offer Jesus to the Jews to do with him as they wish?

but they insisted the Romans punish him?

The Jewish hierarchy wanted to be rid of Jesus who they saw as a challenge to their power and wealth. Under Roman law only the governor could make that happen. Otherwise it would be rebellion against Rome which would not be a smart move. On the other hand if the Jews got rambunctious Pilot would have to answer to Tiberius which definitely would not be pleasant. So Pilot was tractable to making a deal. Execute Jesus under Roman law and we'll make sure that the Jewish population doesn't cause trouble. Offer you can't refuse.