Of Hebrew origin (arabown); a pledge, i.e. Part of the purchase-money or property given in advance as security for the rest -- earnest.
oh dear its not looking good for guarantee, pledge seems to be much more accurate for the term refers to giving a small deposit as one does when one procures a mortgage.
NAS: in our hearts as a pledge.
KJV: and given the earnest of the Spirit in
INT: having given the pledge of the Spirit
2 Corinthians 5:5 N-AMS
NAS: who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge.
KJV: unto us the earnest of the Spirit.
INT: to us the pledge of the Spirit
Interesting to note is that the translations which formerly recognised the same term as 'guarantee' now translate it as 'pledge', one must of course ask the question why the inconsistency? I would say religious bias again.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
earnest.
Of Hebrew origin (arabown); a pledge, i.e. Part of the purchase-money or property given in advance as security for the rest -- earnest.
oh dear its not looking good for guarantee, pledge seems to be much more accurate for the term refers to giving a small deposit as one does when one procures a mortgage.
You may be right but being a son then not being a son then being a son then not being a son...is confusion. We are his in eternity and rewarded for our works. But NOT with death.
Originally posted by divegeester You may be right but being a son then not being a son then being a son then not being a son...is confusion. We are his in eternity and rewarded for our works. But NOT with death.
this is a theological perspective rather than pure translation. the question is not that the Christian will not be rewarded for faithfulness but whether there can be any kind of guarantee placed upon the reward. I don't think there can for the rewards is dependent upon the Christians endurance and willingness to submit to the will of God but I am willing to be proved wrong.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie this is a theological perspective rather than pure translation. the question is not that the Christian will not be rewarded for faithfulness but whether there can be any kind of guarantee placed upon the reward. I don't think there can for the rewards is dependent upon the Christians endurance and willingness to submit to the will of God but I am willing to be proved wrong.
I agree regarding reward but not in regard to son ship, family membership is permanent and something you are born into. I believe there is reward in heaven for good works from obedience. I reject a god who annihilates me because I mess up.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Hardly! my God Jehovah the father of the celestial lights in awesome, he provided his only-begotten son, the Christ to undo all the effects of inherited imperfection and furnish us with a guarantee of what is to come in the earthly paradise that he has promised, no more sickness, death, pain or sorrow! He did not have to but he wanted to because he ...[text shortened]... was the greatest act of love ever, than you fail to appreciate it is what stinks of immorality!
He is god. That imperfection that you speak of is only imperfect because god thought so. Then according to his own rules he chucked us out. Then, still because of his own rules, he chooses one person to have killed in a barbaric way because according to his own rules that will somehow make the rulebreaking of other humans less severe. He is god. He could have done a billion other things to make up for his mistake yet he chooses to have somebody killed.
Literally anyone who can even remotely believe such bollocks is honestly very severely mentally retarded.
Originally posted by divegeester I agree regarding reward but not in regard to son ship, family membership is permanent and something you are born into. I believe there is reward in heaven for good works from obedience. I reject a god who annihilates me because I mess up.
Satan was a son of God and look what happened to him.
Originally posted by Great King Rat He is god. That imperfection that you speak of is only imperfect because god thought so. Then according to his own rules he chucked us out. Then, still because of his own rules, he chooses one person to have killed in a barbaric way because according to his own rules that will somehow make the rulebreaking of other humans less severe. He is god. He co ...[text shortened]... anyone who can even remotely believe such bollocks is honestly very severely mentally retarded.
On the contrary it was a master stroke, God could not be termed unrighteous in anyway because he adhered to his own standards, Christ settled the universal issue of whether a human could have remained faithful under temptation (vindicating the justice of what God did )
Six thousand years of human history has proved beyond a shadow of doubt that humans have not benefited in the slightest from independence from the creator. Each one faces the same decision of Adam, whether to submit to the will of God or whether to rebel and establish ones own morality!
You really need to be more positive in your outlook King Rat.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Why was Judas Iscariot not 'once saved always saved', he was after all appointed directly by Christ to a position of considerable authority and was until his betrayal of Christ a faithful apostle.
Yes and it is also written in scripture that Christ sent His Apostles out to heal and do all sorts of miracles. And Judas name was listed among them. This being before his betrayal of Jesus.
Originally posted by Pudgenik Yes and it is also written in scripture that Christ sent His Apostles out to heal and do all sorts of miracles. And Judas name was listed among them. This being before his betrayal of Jesus.
Originally posted by Great King Rat Yeah, I think I'm going to choose reality over "being positive", RC. I like it here too much to drown myself in fantasies.
reality? that's rich when so much of your materialistic beliefs are based upon unobserved phenomena! Plueeeeeeze give me a moment while I compose myself. So you believe whales evolved in the sea, came to land and then went back to the sea and that its nearest relative is a hippopotamus or an aquatic deer and that feathers developed from scales - wow - id get Mrs King Rat to pinch my bum if I were you for you seem to be pretty much wired to da moon!
Once Saved Eternally Saved
02 Apr '14 20:20
Back to Top