37818
Well-Known Member
I did.I didn't say anything about KJVonlyism.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I did.I didn't say anything about KJVonlyism.
I don't see what the issue is. Christ is supreme over all his creation. In the REB it says "his is the primacy over all creation. What specifically do you see as problematic in verses 16 and 17 (or even 18, for that matter) in the NLT?Not what the word of God said in . . . . πρωτοτοκος πασης κτισεως . . . ." Which refers to incarnate Christ's bodily resurrection as part of His own creation. He being Creator, verses 16-17. Big difference in what verse 15 means.
Well that's nice. No problem there.I did.
My thoughts on the version in response to the OP
John 3:16 (NLT)
“For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.
Many modern translation correct the interpretation that God was expressing the degree of love, rather than correctly as the method used to express that love.
2 Thessalonians 2:13
As for us, we can’t help but thank God for you, dear brothers and sisters loved by the Lord. We are always thankful that God chose you to be among the first to experience salvation—a salvation that came through the Spirit who makes you holy and through your belief in the truth.
Here we see two doctrine driven mistranslations.
First the NLT indicates we were chosen "to experience salvation" rather than for the purpose of salvation. Second the object of the verb chose is salvation rather than "through sanctification by the spirit and faith in the truth. These phrases actually indicate the means and basis of selection for salvation. Chosen by being set apart in Christ based on God crediting their faith as righteousness.
1 Corinthians 2:14
But people who aren’t spiritual can’t receive these truths from God’s Spirit. It all sounds foolish to them and they can’t understand it, for only those who are spiritual can understand what the Spirit means.
Here we see the interpretation that if you are not indwelt, you cannot understand any spiritual truths, such as God's divine attributes. However Romans 1:19-20 says lost people can understand some spiritual truths.
So while that NLT is easy to read and understand, the books have been cooked to hide the fallacies of Calvinism.
You are in error Van. The NLT renders it as :John 3:16 (NLT)
“For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.
Many modern translation correct the interpretation that God was expressing the degree of love, rather than correctly as the method used to express that love.
No, as that would be akin to the rank heresy of the WoF, who hold that Jesus was first to be born again , and that all of us once born again are just like Him!Colossians 1:15 (NLT)
Christ is the visible image of the invisible God. He existed before anything was created and is supreme over all creation,
Colossians 1:15 (NASB)
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation:
Here the NLT interprets "firstborn" to mean existed before anything else. And so they add to the text a whole paraphrase of their definition of "firstborn." It is wrong on many levels...
In this usage "firstborn" refers to being foremost (highest in rank) among all creation. Certainly the man Jesus was not born before his mother.
But another interpretation may also be God's intended message, Jesus is the first to be born anew, thus the first born of all the "born anew" creation, for we are a new creation. That alternate view is possible using the NASB, but not the NLT.
You are not understanding Colossians 1:15, ". . . the firstborn of all creation." The text says He is part of creation being the firstborn of it. That is a big deal. The Creator became part of His creation in His incarnation, John 1:14. And He being the sole cause of all things created, John 1:3, Colossians 1:16-17, Ephesians 3:9 KJV. The heresy being thinking Colossians 1:15 means He was the first thing God created. No. He is the Creator Colossians 1:16-17 and He became part of His own creation. And in His bodily resurrection became the beginning of the New Heaven and New Earth, Colossians 1:18, Revelation 1:5, Revelation 3:14.I don't see what the issue is. Christ is supreme over all his creation. In the REB it says "his is the primacy over all creation. What specifically do you see as problematic in verses 16 and 17 (or even 18, for that matter) in the NLT?
As you can plainly see, there is no such heresy in the NLT translation. How could there be since Christ is called "supreme over all creation." And with the passages I listed from the NLT you can see the orthodoxy of the translation. There is nothing in the pages of the NLT for heresy hunters.The heresy being thinking Colossians 1:15 means He was the first thing God created.
The teaching of Colossians 1:15, ". . . firstborn of all creation . . . ." is not what the NLT renders it. And that phrase does not mean "over" anything. That idea "over" belongs to Colossians 1:18. It is Colossians 1:16-17 which refers to Him beipg the Creator, not verse 15. It, verse 15 refers to Him being part of His creation.As you can plainly see, there is no such heresy in the NLT translation. How could there be since Christ is called "supreme over all creation." And with the passages I listed from the NLT you can see the orthodoxy of the translation. There is nothing in the pages of the NLT for heresy hunters.
Contrary to your thoughts :The teaching of Colossians 1:15, ". . . firstborn of all creation . . . ." is not what the NLT renders it. And that phrase does not mean "over" anything. That idea "over" belongs to Colossians 1:18. It is Colossians 1:16-17 which refers to Him beipg the Creator, not verse 15. It, verse 15 refers to Him being part of His creation.
I disagree.Contrary to your thoughts :
From NET Notes : "In Col. I:15 the emphasis is on the priority of Jesus' rank as over and above creation (cf. 1:16 and the 'for' clause referring to Jesus as Creator)."
John Murray in The Goal Of Sanctification states that "Firstborn' reflects on the priorit and supremacy of Christ."
John Daille (1594-1670) says in his commentary of Colossians :
"...the 'first-born' is meant the Owner, the Lord, and the Prince of every creature." (p.101)
"...Christ 'is the first-born of every creature,' that is, the master and Lord of them..." (p.102)
You can disagree all you want, but that still doesn't negate the meaning of 'the first-born' as applied to Christ.I disagree.
Yeah, His bodily resurrection as prophecied, Acts of the Apostles 13:33, Romans 1:4. I gave you the list references of this use, Colossians 1:15, is per Colossians 1:18 and Revelation 1:5. Romans 8:29.You can disagree all you want, but that still doesn't negate the meaning of 'the first-born' as applied to Christ.
Contrary to your thoughts :
From NET Notes : "In Col. I:15 the emphasis is on the priority of Jesus' rank as over and above creation (cf. 1:16 and the 'for' clause referring to Jesus as Creator)."
John Murray in The Goal Of Sanctification states that "Firstborn' reflects on the priorit and supremacy of Christ."
John Daille (1594-1670) says in his commentary of Colossians :
"...the 'first-born' is meant the Owner, the Lord, and the Prince of every creature." (p.101)
"...Christ 'is the first-born of every creature,' that is, the master and Lord of them..." (p.102)