Hebrews 6:4-6

[Brother Bob]

No, but have enough faith to believe that God was in the arrangements which gave us the translation.

 

[LeBuick]

No, but have enough faith to believe that God was in the arrangements which gave us the translation.

My experience taught me to place more focus in the message than in the individual words. Otherwise the words will overshadow the WORD.

 

[Brother Bob]

I really don't think there is anything big here about If. I just think they are wrong trying to change it and I don't see the purpose except to try to prove they know Greek and they haven't proved anything to me yet. Even Stongs explained why it was if in that one passage and they won't take that. I don't believe in falling from Grace and they are not going to convince me any different by running to Greek of which they are in disagreement with many that came before them. They seem to know more Greek than the Greeks themselves.

 

[Brother Bob]

oops............

 

[LeBuick]

Sorry, I was probably putting words in your mouth. I was more addressing your views after spending time with your Greek associates. That's when you wrote;

There are so many words not even put in the Scriptures, just plain left out!
They had their hands full translating, at least I can see that but you fellows seem to know all about it. Na,

I was agreeing it is impossible to word for word translate old greek to english so if one's entire argument or theory depends on a single word then you don't have much to stand on. I think one needs agreement from other scriptures to have a doctorine and if your interpretation of any scripture conflicts with doctorine then it is the interpretation that is flawed.

Since we know eternal security or OSAS is supported in many other scriptures, to interpret one scripture contrary certianly means a flawed interpretation.

I don't believe in falling from Grace and they are not going to convince me any different by running to Greek of which they are in disagreement with many that came before them. They seem to know more Greek than the Greeks themselves.

I'm with you here and one word, "IF", won't change my view here.

 

[Brother Bob]

I agree with you LeBuick;
That is why I tell everyone you must take Rev with the rest of the Bible especially what Jesus spoke to be able to understand it at all. The same is true with the rest of the Bible. Its ironic that all those who translated the Bible of the NT into English agree with me. Its the modern Greek scholars that are giving conflict. What scares me is how we have lived and preached all these years and now to have some tell us that it was wrong when very intelligent men like Strongs, Geneva, KJV of which the King picked I think it was 7 or more Professors to translate the Bible. I doubt if those fellows were unlearned and just played fast and loose with the translations. I suppose they spent their lives translating the Bible. I for one believe God had a hand in it and the message came through. I will continue on preaching what I always have. May be a few things I won't stress as much but I am not going to change now when the Bible says He that lacketh wisdom let him ask of God. Well I have done that over and over. You know LeBuick, I learned a long time ago the first Bible course I took in college that it all depends on which college you go to that determines the belief you have on certain subjects when you finish that course. Some of the teachers were a joke.

 

[LeBuick]

You know LeBuick, I learned a long time ago the first Bible course I took in college that it all depends on which college you go to that determines the belief you have on certain subjects when you finish that course. Some of the teachers were a joke.

That is scary especially because a lot of the professors are not even Christians. I've been in siminary classes where we never opened the Bible.

God has a message for Man and that message came flesh many years ago. He taught us how to live and showed us how to die.

 

[Brother Bob]

I have learned since being on here that some look down on those who use KJV only but that is what we use. We will not use another Bible. It has worked for hundreds of years, why not continue on? Blessings,

 

[Jarthur001]

Its the modern Greek scholars that are giving conflict. What scares me is how we have lived and preached all these years and now to have some tell us that it was wrong when very intelligent men like Strongs, Geneva, KJV of which the King picked I think it was 7 or more Professors to translate the Bible.

Oh brothers....:BangHead:

Bob you have shown you do not know greek,...now you post history wrong.

1st...Geneva was not a intelligent man. As a matter of fact, Geneva was not a man at all. The Geneva Bible was from the "Church of Geneva" which is a city

2nd...Strongs did not translate anything that I know of.

3rd...Modern Greek scholars having nothing to do with this. All greek text say the same thing.

4th...As to the great King James Of England.


What was the name of the king that prosecute, and jail those who openly believed the Church needed to be purified and all these people fleed England to get away from this so called great king and started this very nation?? I'll give you a hint . His name starts with a "J". The Pilgrims primarily used the Geneva Bible. Because King James hated the Pilgrims, he demanded a new Bible and placed his name on it as a means to force his hand on the Church. My kingdom...my Bible...do as I say.

As to the number that translated the KJV...it was not 7, but 54 were asked. Some died and others withdrew, and the final list numbered 47.

One small side note that has nothing to do with this thread, but you may like to know. All 47 tranlators claimed to have a Calvinist slant. I thought you may like to know that.

http://www.corkfpc.com/criticisingcalvinism.html

6) IF YOU ARE A KJV ONLY MAN… DO REMEMBER THE KJV TRANSLATORS WERE CALVINISTS TO A MAN:
Just for the record, and to avoid any come back, I use only the Authorised Version, and although I do, as a preacher, occasionally have a wee peep at other versions (mainly because I use the Online Bible and they are only a click away) I hold that the Received Text is the true text and that in the AV we have a faithful accurate translation of the same. I can quite happily hold up my AV Bible and say "This is the word of God." I would not feel at liberty to do the same with any version based on the Westcott and Hort texts.

What do you know about the AV translators? Yes…they were godly men and spiritual giants. They were well equipped for their job of translating the word of God. But they were also Calvinists - a point readily acknowledged by Mr Cloud in his reply to Gail Riplinger. So you need to be very careful when you say that Calvinism is heresy or that it is produces pride etc., It is all very well running a fine tooth comb over the translation committees of the NIV etc., and pointing out whatever doctrinal error you want…just remember you are using a Calvinistic translation of the word of God. We take this theme up here in more depth.

 

[npetreley]

How much needless fuss there is being made over the word "if"!

4 For it is impossible for people on the ground, 6 AND walking, to fly without the use of a flying machine, since they are not built for flying and have no wings.

There you go. An impossible situation posed as a quasi-hypothetical without the word "if".

I still think the answer lies in verse 9.

9 But, beloved, we are confident of better things concerning you, yes, things that accompany salvation

The comparison against the former hypothetical is "things that accompany salvation", which means the former cannot be "things that accompany salvation".

 

[Jarthur001]

I still think the answer lies in verse 9.



The comparison against the former hypothetical is "things that accompany salvation", which means the former cannot be "things that accompany salvation".

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Its really something what one can learn when they READ the text.

Thanks for pointing that out AGAIN for us.

 

[Brother Bob]

Oh brothers....:BangHead:

Bob you have shown you do not know greek,...now you post history wrong.

1st...Geneva was not a intelligent man. As a matter of fact, Geneva was not a man at all. The Geneva Bible was from the "Church of Geneva" which is a city

Where did I say the Geneva Study Bible is a man. I said it took men to translate it. That is silly James.

Also just as silly, is you trying to tell me who King James is.

You say I don't know Greek and you certainly are correct, but the translators of the KJV 1611 did know Greek and I would venture to say a lot better than what little you know.

You argument is against all them, I am just standing up for them being they all dead. Why don't you take on some "live" Greek translators instead of all the "dead" ones?

καιπαραπεσονταςπαλινανακαινιζεινειςμετανοιανανασταυρουνταςεαυτοιςτονυιοντουθεουκαιπαραδειγματιζοντας

Ifthey shall fall awayto renew themagainuntorepentanceseeing they crucifyto themselvesthe Sonof Godafreshandput him to an open shame

 

[Brother Bob]

You can read this entire thread and see there were only 3 or 4 that agreed with you James. All the others did not even know what you were talking about when you and another poster said "if" was not part of the verse. There is another thread with the same name on General Discussions, and no one has mentioned that "if", is not in fact part of the verse. This entire thread was hijacked by you and a few, of which if you will read, the others did not even know what you were talking about, or if they knew, they must not of agreed with you. Think about it, you are denying KJV 1611, Geneva Study Bible, Strong's + KJV explanation of verse and several other old translations along with some modern translators. Again, the translators took the "content of the text" and agreed that "if" was the proper word to use.

καιπαραπεσονταςπαλινανακαινιζεινειςμετανοιανανασταυρουνταςεαυτοιςτονυιοντουθεουκαιπαραδειγματιζοντας

Ifthey shall fall awayto renew themagainuntorepentanceseeing they crucifyto themselvesthe Sonof Godafreshandput him to an open shame
__________________

Strong's name would not be on there without their permission or involvement.

 

[Faith alone]

Here we go again!

Whole lot of translators disagree with you. The word "kai" in Greek is connected to other words such as "they were to fall away" can be "if". Agreed in most cases "kai" is used as "and" but the translators, even the KJV 1611 considered it to be "if". You are wrong when you say that the Greek does not use kai as if in all cases. It can be "if" in Greek if used with other words and apparently the translators considered this to be such a case.

How can it be conditional if you remove the "if"?

Strange all these translators all down through time have considered it to be "if" and here in the last days we remove it?

Bob,

Sorry... don't have time to respond very often to posts.

There are various means of expressing possibility in Greek. In general, EI or AN is present. But the idea is not so much that there is a word to translate as "if," but more just the idea of conditionality. Usually it is in the subjunctive mood. In this case, we simply have a series of participial phrases. This should not be strictly speaking translated as "if they fall away." I would be very surprised if any Greek grammarian will disagree with that statement.

The NET Bible has...

Hebrews 6:4-6 For it is impossible in the case of those who have once been enlightened, tasted the heavenly gift, become partakers of the Holy Spirit, tasted the good word of God and the miracles of the coming age, and then have committed apostasy (lit. - fall away), to renew them again to repentance, since they are crucifying the Son of God for themselves all over again and holding him up to contempt.

Notice that they do not use "if" at all. Now this whole discussion about "if" is somewhat a waste of time since the possibility of someone falling away is clear, and most accept it.

Here's what I said,

"and falling away" (KAI PARAPESONTAS) There is no hint of conditionality (there is no semantic marker -"if"), yet it is somewhat implicit, which is why most Bibles have added it. Also note that the "falling away" is not a sure thing, but just a possibility.

Now how in the world does the "kai" (a conjunction") mean "if"?!

Now I said above that the conditionality, by the phraseology, is somewhat implicit.

Now, is there something else in my post to which you object (or perhaps agree with), or are you going to circle the wagons around the idea of "kai" meaning "if"?

If you are, could you list a Greek grammar or someone like say AT Robertson who has wirtten to the effect that this could be true?

Thx,

FA

 

[Brother Bob]

Faith; Now I said above that the conditionality, by the phraseology, is somewhat implicit.

(what about "they shall" It does not say "they will" but for some reason it says "they shall", which seems to be offering them

the opportunity to go either way, I mean the orginal translators just didn't throw in words for no reason, Faith.)

If you are, could you list a Greek grammar or someone like say AT Robertson who has wirtten to the effect that this could be true?

Apostasy, Falling Away from the Faith, Losing Salvation, Falling ...
A. T. Robertson

says that the preposition in compound adds to the force of the linear ... if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; ...


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2006-12%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=AT+Robertson+on+%22if+they+shall+fall+away%22

"If God permits." - eanper, "If indeed". The second particle used with the conditional particle emphasizes that the proposed action is in spite of opposition; i.e., "if in spite of his opposition God permits." "If indeed after all" (A. T. Robertson).

The writer of this letter to the Hebrews desires the spiritual health of the recipients of his letter (this also includes us, now that we have it in our possession), and he is willing to reinculcate the badly neglected souls of Christians with truths that will bring them to a state of spiritual maturity. Here the addressed believer’s association with the things of God is experiential. The general thought of these emphasized portions of scripture is that the believer in a deteriorated state of spirituality, if he is willing, may be allowed to be carried forth to spiritual maturity by him, others, and God, in spite of his own past irresponsible neglect of spiritual matters; but this would only be possible without the opposition of God; for only God knows for sure if their deteriorated state is due to falling away into unbelief. "Without faith it is impossible to please God." "And to him who has will more be given, but to him who has not, even what he has will be taken away." That is why the following scripture begins with "For", for it connects the condition which follows under which God would oppose the reinculcation of those who have displayed spiritual deterioration with spiritual truths; for if they had fallen away into unbelief, it would be throwing Christian pearls before swine.

The justice of God would oppose the reinstatement of anyone who has fallen away into unbelief, for that would be to insult and humiliate the One who died in his place. He paid for us with his life once, and he is not able to, nor can he do it, again. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." Believe again on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved again? I think not! It would be like drinking a soda pop. Once you have consumed it you can’t consume it a second time because it has already been consumed. Swallowing implies commitment.

apax means "once for all". The verb for "enlightened" means to illuminate. In other words, God has once and for all enlightened the eyes and spiritual understanding of this person, and it was a completed transaction. There is no doubt about it that this person was a saved individual.

The verb "tasting" of the heavenly gift expresses a real and conscious enjoyment of the blessings apprehended in its true character (Westcott).
metouxos, "partaker", means a sharer, or a participant. genethentas, "and were made," means to come into existence, to be created, to exist by creation, established, to come into a particular state or condition, be changed or converted, to be born. In other words, this person was a new creation in Christ, was born again, and had the indwelling Holy Spirit - and here I emphasize the word "had," meaning that it has departed from him due to his change of heart towards his God.

He "tasted" the good word of God and the powerful deeds of the age which is to come. Again as above, a real and conscious enjoyment of the blessings apprehended in its true character.

"Falling away", parapesontas, means to fall by the side of, to fall off or away from, or make defection from. Again, one can’t fall away or defect from a place he has never been; so I don’t care what kind of theological gymnastics any Bible scholar may go through to make the point of his doctrine of eternal security, this passage, and others like it clearly teach that believers can and do defect from the faith, and in doing so, throw away their salvation to their own irremedial loss.

palin anakainidzein, a present active infinitive, means to renew again, to make new again, referring to continuous or repeated action. These words refer back to the words, "For it is impossible." It is impossible for such a person to be again renewed unto repentance.

anastaurountas, present active participle accusative plural masculine, eautois, dative of advantage, "crucifying again for themselves." The participle is causal showing why it is impossible for such people to be brought to a place of repentance and begin anew for their own advantage.

Let us now read this passage of scripture again with an informed understanding: "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good Word of God, and the powers of the age to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."

Not that I agree with his belief that you can fall from Grace but he does agree with me on the "if", and this is what you

asked for.

What more is there to be said on the subject. You bring into the realm the Net Bible. Well at least we should know what IS

the Net Bible and did it make any mistakes. They seem to admit there are mistakes in the translation but I may be wrong.

You say for me to give you Greek itself and then you give me The Net Bible? I don't mean no harm Faith but your

argument and those that agree with you is with the History of Translations of NT.

They give us an example where they changed the translation from the Greek to English translation.

The NET Bible

W. Hall Harris, ed., NET Bible. Garland, Texas: Biblical Studies Press, 2005.
The NET Bible was produced by a team of translators under the direction of W. Hall Harris (the General Editor), Daniel B. Wallace (Senior New Testament Editor) and Robert B. Chisholm (Senior Old Testament Editor). All three are professors at Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS). The preface of the first "Beta Edition" (printed in 2001) stated that the version was "completed by more than twenty biblical scholars who worked directly from the best currently available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts." They were identified only as scholars who "teach biblical exegesis in seminaries and graduate schools," each of whom were "chosen in every instance because of his or her work in that particular book—often extending over several decades." It also stated that these scholars were "assisted by doctoral students."
In the First Edition (printed in 2005) a list of people on the "Net Bible Team" appears at the end of the Introduction. Twenty-two men and one woman are listed as translators and editors. For the Old Testament: Richard E. Averbeck, William D. Barrick, M. Daniel Carroll R. [sic], Robert B. Chisholm, Dorian Coover-Cox, Donald R. Glenn, Michael A. Grisanti, W. Hall Harris III, Gordon H. Johnston, Eugene H. Merrill, Allen P. Ross, Steven H. Sanchez, Richard A. Taylor, and Brian L. Webster. For the New Testament: Darrell L. Bock, Michael H. Burer, Buist M. Fanning III, John D. Grassmick, W. Hall Harris III, Gregory J. Herrick, Harold W. Hoehner, David K. Lowery, Jay E. Smith, and Daniel B. Wallace.
The New Testament has been substantially revised since its first appearance, incorporating many suggestions made by reviewers associated with the Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL). In an article published in 2000, one of the editors stated that there had been thousands of such changes, (1) and many more were to be made in the future. Because the version was primarily designed to be an Internet resource, the editors have freedom to experiment with and revise the version as they may see fit.

Method of Translation

The method of translation used in the NET Bible in its present form (2005) is somewhat inconsistent, but in general it is less literal than the New International Version. There is much use of the "common language" dynamic equivalence method, in which the use of a prosaic and contemporary English style tends to limit the accuracy of the translation.

For example, in Psalm 8:5-6 the NET Bible has

"you grant mankind honor and majesty, you appoint them to rule over your creation; you have placed everything under their authority"

where the Hebrew says,

וכבוד והדר תעטרהו

with glory and honor you have crowned him

תמשילהו במעשי ידיך

You cause him to rule over the works of your hands

כל שתה תחת־רגליו

All things you have put under his feet



Hebrew 6:6 from the 1611 edition of KJV

 

[Brother Bob]

A.T. Robertson
Professor of New Testament Interpretation
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (1895-1934)

(God) gave a revelation to make it free from errors, I believe He first made it inerrant as He made nature so. Hence, I boldly hold that the analogy of nature is in favor of inerrancy of God's original scriptures. ...Why in the world is it that there is such a terrible contention by destructive higher critics? ...I think I can tell. The school wants to change the whole order... they wish to get an entering wedge by having it admit that there were inaccuracies... in order to shift and change the order of the Word to suit themselves.
--"The Relative Authority of Scripture and Reason"

If God permits." - eanper, "If indeed". The second particle used with the conditional particle emphasizes that the proposed action is in spite of opposition; i.e., "if in spite of his opposition God permits." "If indeed after all" (A. T. Robertson).


Apostasy, Falling Away from the Faith, Losing Salvation, Falling ...
A. T. Robertson

says that the preposition in compound adds to the force of the linear ... if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance;

 

[Jarthur001]

??? ??

1 Corth: 7:28

???
But and if

according to Srongs

Bob...this is to funny....we are wrong again.

ean.de (but if) kai (and) gameo (thou marry) oux.hamartano(thou didst not sin) kai (and) ean (if) gameo (may have married) ..............

In both cases the word "if" is "ean" and the word "and" is "kai"

 

[Brother Bob]

Ok James but what about your friend and former Seminary Theologian teacher at SBC
Mr. A T Roberson?

 

[Jarthur001]

Where did I say the Geneva Study Bible is a man. I said it took men to translate it. That is silly James.

Below....

I agree with you LeBuick;
That is why I tell everyone you must take Rev with the rest of the Bible especially what Jesus spoke to be able to understand it at all. The same is true with the rest of the Bible. Its ironic that all those who translated the Bible of the NT into English agree with me. Its the modern Greek scholars that are giving conflict. What scares me is how we have lived and preached all these years and now to have some tell us that it was wrong when very intelligent men like Strongs, Geneva, KJV of which the King picked I think it was 7 or more Professors to translate the Bible. I doubt if those fellows were unlearned and just played fast and loose with the translations. I suppose they spent their lives translating the Bible. I for one believe God had a hand in it and the message came through. I will continue on preaching what I always have. May be a few things I won't stress as much but I am not going to change now when the Bible says He that lacketh wisdom let him ask of God. Well I have done that over and over. You know LeBuick, I learned a long time ago the first Bible course I took in college that it all depends on which college you go to that determines the belief you have on certain subjects when you finish that course. Some of the teachers were a joke.

Also just as silly, is you trying to tell me who King James is.

What I think is a hoot, is you uphold Strongs, yet you do not own his book. If you had his book Bob, you may understand.

You uphold KJV...but you yet you post the wrong history.

You uphold TR , but in this case TR and all the other greek text agree.

You ask a greek guy down the road, and you will not allow all Bible Lexicons.


Who knews.

 

[Brother Bob]

ean.de (but if) kai (and) gameo (thou marry) oux.hamartano(thou didst not sin) kai (and) ean (if) gameo (may have married) ..............


But and IF thou marry thou hast not sinned and if a virgin marry she hath not sinned Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh but I spare you

May be funny but why do you have to switch the words and and if around?