An Appeal To SDA's On This Site

[Robert]

There ARE two atonements in the Sanctuary Service in the Old Testament, there are two atonements seen in Rev.11:1-2. This is an explanation as to what those two atonements are for. I would appreciate reading alternative ideas.

You're confused. Again, get away from the symbols and understand the gospel. Paul can help....

There's the atonement in which Christ saved the human race in Himself.

Then there's the "day of atonement" when we receive what we now have by faith.

By faith I am perfect in Christ. By faith I am immortal in Christ, but on the day of atonement I will be perfect and I will be immortal. I will have received what I have by faith now.

[John317]

John 21:15 -

First usage of words translated "Lambs" is Stongs's #721-721 arnion ar-nee'-on diminutive from 704; a lambkin:--lamb. The second usage of the word translated "Sheep" is Strong's #4263-probaton prob'-at-on probably neuter of a presumed derivative of 4260; something that walks forward (a quadruped), i.e. (specially), a sheep (literally or figuratively):--sheep(-fold).

Strongs # 4263 occurs in Rev. 18: 13 and refers to sheep. That is its only occurrence in Revelation.

The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon

Strong's Number: 4263

Definition

any four footed, tame animal accustomed to graze, small cattle (opp. to large cattle, horses, etc.), most commonly a sheep or a goat

a sheep, and so always in the NT

================================

Strong's #4260 is a verb, as given below, and has nothing to do with the word sheep in any of the verses you are talking about. See definition below.

The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon

Strong's Number: 4260 Browse Lexicon

Original Word Word Origin

probaivnw from (4253) and the base of (939)

Transliterated Word TDNT Entry

Probaino None

Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech

prob-ah'-ee-no Verb

Definition

to go forwards, go on

King James Word Usage - Total: 5

be well stricken 2, go on 1, go farther 1, be of ... age + (2250) +&version=kjv 1722 1

[John317]

I thought that I was sufficiently clear in defining 'the brothers and sisters of Jesus Christ' wherein I apply the word "Arnion". There is a distinction between Jesus Christ as Arnon/Aren and His siblings Arnion. There are two Greek words that define in application two distinct entities. I do not have the language to be more clear in my explanation (if such language exists).

Your problem is that you've demonstrated in your posts that you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the Greek language.

You're wrong on many fundamentals of the language, things that students learn in their first semester of Greek. I've listed quite a few in my previous posts.

[Richard Holbrook]

In Revelation John uses two Greek words that have both been translated Lamb....

These (the ten kings v.12-13) will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and those who are with Him are called, chosen, and faithful. Rev. 17: 14

The first use of the word ‘Lamb’ is actually the word Arnion or lambkin, meaning the kin of the Lamb. The second use of Lamb is the word Arnon meaning ‘a lamb at least a year old.’

I don't know why you make this statement. It simply is not true. Both times the word Lamb is used here, it is the same word. Strong's #721 Arnion.

I don't even know greek but I can reference and read a Strong's lexicon. Are you so caught up in your own ideas that you're seeing something that isn't there? What?

John317 on the other hand obviously knows something about greek and has pointed out many errors on your part. Yet you plow ahead as if nothing were wrong. Something IS wrong And on more than one level.

[Richard Holbrook]

Happy Sabbath Everyone..

[Richard Holbrook]

I also noticed (besides your putting words on the screen that aren't in the Bible) that you try to do away with faith, and the fact that Jesus does give us the white robes of righteousness.

The person who was not involved directly in providing the robe of righteousness to the bride is Jesus Christ.

So what are you going to do, Earn it? Who do you think gives you the power to do righteous acts in the first place?

Psa 24:5 He shall receive the blessing from the LORD, and righteousness from the God of his salvation.

Jhn 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

Hab 2:4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.

Gen 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

[LifeHiscost]

Believe what you will about this, I am presenting the product of my own study and the study of others and we are solely responsible for the content. Thank you for not dismissing this out of hand because the research part of this was very time consuming, not to mention the writing.

Thank you Musicman, for your well intended effort to give me what has obviously been much thoughtful consideration of the safety of my soul. And there are obviously some who read every word of your treatise.

However I must admit that when it comes to that much paging for Truth, the place I find myself most comfortable is in front of the Holy Scriptures. Even Strong's concordance is seldom an option, except and unless there is a particular word that beckons me to dig deeper into its' meaning.

Perhaps not many find my method satisfying, but I have to admit, even preachers who have spent most of their life with their noses in books, Holy Bible included, do not satisfy my longing for the Water of Life, which most often comes with an hour or so in the Word and abiding in the Holy Spirit's presence.

Please do not accept this as a criticism. Only as a note to let you know that the most simple of us find our greatest rest in the strokes given by the promises of the Shepherd of our souls.

"Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name."

Malachi 3:16 KJV

"...who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began...2 Timothy 1:9 NKJV

His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and goodness."

2 Peter 1:3 NIV

Blessings!

[LifeHiscost]

There's the atonement in which Christ saved the human race in Himself.

Then there's the "day of atonement" when we receive what we now have by faith.

By faith I am perfect in Christ. By faith I am immortal in Christ, but on the day of atonement I will be perfect and I will be immortal. I will have received what I have by faith now.

Just as I know our Father sees me as perfectly cleansed through the blood of Jesus, I also make effort to grasp the reality of that cleansing you try to persuade us of, Robert. However, just as you see most on this forum as flawed, that have difficulty accepting your conclusions, they also, who depend entirely upon the righteousness of Jesus Christ, will stand before the throne of gtace along side others, who do not accept their own understanding as the key to eternal life.

"Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding..."Prov 3:4 NKJV

Blessings!

[Musicman1228]

Thank you, LifeHiscost, for your understanding of what I am trying to do. What I have found in my experience in searching for truth is that most people are not able to lay aside their current paradigms long enough to look at something new with an open heart and mind. I don't blame them because we all get comfortable in our understanding and don't want to have to change anything once we have found 'our truth'. I am grateful of the fact that you actually read what I wrote.

For those of you who criticize my understanding of Greek and my use of the lexicon I will only say this; I will not rely on 'experts' in any of the disciplines of research in order for me to find truth, because experts have bias that often prevents them from seeing information in a new way. I will always listen to constructive criticism that is given me in a non-personal way. It is my experience that the experts that come out of Denominational theological institutions have an internal bias toward the acceptable approach that is endemic in the institution itself; to expect them to think outside of that box is just not going to happen.

My research methods are not based in the need to prove what is already believed by the majority. I go where the information leads me, and I don't try to lead the information to conclusions that I have already drawn. If that means that I read a Greek lexicon differently than most 'experts' then that is all right with me. If our salvation is based on how the 'experts' look at truth then we are all in trouble. This is the same condition that existed in the 'church' when Jesus Christ lived on earth.

[Richard Holbrook]

I read every bit of it. I told you I was no expert, and I pointed out something wrong. To which you have not replied.

[John317]

What you are saying is "never mind the facts, my mind is already made up. Full steam ahead."

[John317]

Musicman, you said Rev. 19: 7 should read:

Quote:

"Let us be glad and rejoice and give them glory, for the marriage of the lambkin has come, and their wife (bride) has made herself ready."

Please reply to the following:

This is false. It cannot possibly be translated as "their wife". The Greek pronoun "autou" is NEVER translated as "their." autou is singular. On the other hand, the word "their" is plural, and if the writer meant to say "their," he would have used the third personal plural genitive pronoun, autown.

autou MUST always be translated either as masculine or neuter singular: "his" or "its." In this verse it is masculine, "his."

Please quote a single translation which reads this way. The reason you cannot find any translation which reads that way is that it is IMPOSSIBLE.

You have already demonstrated that you do not know anything about Greek, yet you claim to be able to give us "the corrected translation."

I'm not asking anyone to accept my word for it. I document and give many references for everything I am saying. 100% of the translations of this verse read "His," and not a single one reads "their." There is also 100% agreement on this among the Greek Lexicons and Greek Grammars.

Do you honestly expect anyone to simply cast aside this evidence and accept your private, personal opinion, when you have given proof that you do not understand Greek?

Is this an example of how you work in your commentaries on the prophecies?

What you are doing is "translating" on the basis of how you want a verse to read and not on the basis of the rules of translation. This is irresponsible and misleading, to say nothing of poor scholarship.

[Richard Holbrook]

He cannot answer that, so he just calls you a biased expert and brushes you aside. The fact that you know something about the greek language has nothing to do with theology. It has everything to do with how he is murdering the language.

[Richard Holbrook]

I'm no expert, and he won't answer the problem I pointed out.

It's kinda like you said. "Never mind the facts."

[John317]

I will not rely on 'experts' in any of the disciplines of research in order for me to find truth, because experts have bias that often prevents them from seeing information in a new way. I will always listen to constructive criticism that is given me in a non-personal way. It is my experience that the experts that come out of Denominational theological institutions have an internal bias toward the acceptable approach that is endemic in the institution itself; to expect them to think outside of that box is just not going to happen.

In other words, you think that it's best to take the opinion of someone who has not studied a language and to reject 100% of the translations by people who know and teach the language and who are professional translators.

The rules of Greek grammar and translation have nothing to do with "bias," any more than the rules of French, Latin, German or English grammar.

What would you think if I told you that 100% of the French people are wrong in how they translate a personal pronoun and that you should reject their translation and instead accept the translation of someone who does not know French?

That is comparable to what you are doing.

To give an example from the Spanish:

"his wife" in Spanish is "su esposa"

"their wife" in Spanish is "la esposa de ellos"

If you apply this to the Greek, you are telling me that I should ignore the fact that it says "su esposa" (his wife) and instead read it as if it says "la esposa de ellos" (their wife).

Wouldn't you have a problem with this?

[John317]

If this is an example of how a person proceeds in his commentaries on the prophecies and other theological matters, there is no reason to have confidence in anything he says.

[Dr. Rich]

Thanks Musicman, I know it took a lot of effort to write your posts and most people probably don't give a hoot. Many posts from others are clearly making fun of what has taken over 15 years to understand and prophecy makes it clear that those not hungry will not eat. The food is there, they just can't get away from drinking milk all the time to get into the real meat of the issue. What this shows is also in prophecy and is to be exptected.

So let them make fun and cast verbal stones. Again, only the wise will understand and since there will only be a few, then don't let these stone throwers get to you. They did the same to Jesus.

Happy Sabbath Everyone!

Dr. Rich, (SDA)

[Richard Holbrook]

What stones? I'm just trying to get a straight answer to a problem I have pointed out. He won't respond, maybe you will.

[Musicman1228]

Rich4truth,

Please have patience, I will answer your comment. Today is Sabbath and I have other commitments in addition to this one.

[Richard Holbrook]

Okay

[Dr. Rich]

Rich4Truth, you question was answered already. I clearly showed you this in another post. John's word for sheep to Peter is the same one he used for how the multitude was saved. The reason the multitude should have been toast is because they did not become righteious before the time of trouble. Sure, it could also be a lamb, but the word for the sacrifice lamb John would have used is another word and you can find that word in the first chapter of John.

Strongs has a comment for this word and it was used by translaters at a later time by Greek translators because they did not understand what is really going to happen, they had the same idea as most people. But this does not make it the final word, because we know the prophecy that only the wise would understand the end time prophecy. So this is why you don't understand-yet

[Richard Holbrook]

So you two know what words the translaters should have used. How did you get to be so wise?

[Richard Holbrook]

Musicman, you say two different words are used in Revelation for Lamb.

In Revelation John uses two Greek words that have both been translated Lamb. The words are Arnon, meaning ‘male lamb at least a year old’; and Arnion,

[Richard Holbrook]

because we know the prophecy that only the wise would understand the end time prophecy.

Who told you that you were wise? Has anyone ever told you that you were arrogant?

[John317]

John's word for sheep to Peter is the same one he used for how the multitude was saved.

That's arnion. Here in John 21: 15, the word is plural, "lambs," not singular, "lamb," as it is in Rev. 19: 7. Very significant difference, this.

The word for "lamb" in John 21: 15 and Rev. 19: 7 are both the same word, arnion, Strongs #721. In John 21: 15, the word is, ta arnia. It is a noun in the accusative case, plural, neuter.

It is the same word for "lamb" throughout the book of Revelation.

In any case, the word here does NOT mean "siblings of the lamb." Nor does it carry that meaning anywhere in the Bible.

Quote:

The reason the multitude should have been toast is because they did not become righteious before the time of trouble. Sure, it could also be a lamb, but the word for the sacrifice lamb John would have used is another word and you can find that word in the first chapter of John.

The word, amnos, occurs 4 times in the New Testament: John 1: 29, 36; Acts 8: 32; and 1 Peter 1: 19. It is correctly translated each time as "lamb." See Strongs #286.

Quote:

Strongs has a comment for this word

Could you please tell what that comment is?

Quote:

and it was used by translaters at a later time by Greek translators because they did not understand what is really going to happen, they had the same idea as most people.

Are you talking about the Septuagint (LXX)?

What does the "Greek translators" have to do with the word that the Apostle John used under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit?

Quote:

But this does not make it the final word, because we know the prophecy that only the wise would understand the end time prophecy. So this is why you don't understand-yet

OK, so in your thinking this explains why we have a right to translate the NT in a way that is not supported by the original language: because we believe we know the prophecy, we should be able to tell the Bible writers what words they should have used.

Are you sure you want to go down that road?

Shall we do that with other passages of Scripture when we might feel that it is warranted? Would you be OK with others who might want to do this?