> General Discussions
CARM
nightmare sasuke:
I was reading an article by Matt Slick attempting to refute the Truths of God and I noticed something. In my opinion, what I noticed is a total mistranslation and/or twist of God's Word.
Now, I have not taken four and a half years of Greek like Matt, but I have enough common sense to see through what, in my opinion, is a huge error! First of all, I have doubts about Matt's supposed four and a half years of Greek training. I saw him debate with someone in a chartroom, the person challenged his ability, showed him a verse in Greek, and asked him to translate it quickly. Matt, however, did not do a very good job. In fact, from what I remember, he did not translate it literally at all, but said something of the sorts, it’s talking about… and something about…. His response showed his failure to read Greek fluently.
Specifically, if memory serves me right, a guy was asking Matt about a word translated all, it had something to do with the predestination of all men, or something, and Matt said he could prove the word all does not mean all at all! He quoted, "So, as through one offense, there resulted condemnation to all men, so also, through one righteous deed, there resulted justification of life to all men" (NASB. Emphasis added). Matt said, and I quote him directly:
--- Quote ---Matt_Slick: noticed what it says at the end of the verse that justification result to all men
...
Matt_Slick: we know that all men are not saved therefore all men there cannot be every individual who ever let [sic].
Matt_Slick: every lived [sic].
--- End quote ---
I replied:
--- Quote ---nightmare_sasuke: Matt...did you ever consider, all men Will be saved in the end?
...
nightmare_sasuke: and that's why it says "all"[?]
--- End quote ---
And what do you think he asks me?
--- Quote ---Matt_Slick: night, are you a Universalist?
...
nightmare_sasuke: I'm..nothing [I am not a Universalist, but I am a follower of the Word, which teaches the "justifcation of life to all men" (NASB), which he happened to quote].
nightmare_sasuke: I believe it [the Scriptures] when it says "who will have all men to be saved"
--- End quote ---
The one guy who was questioning Matt’s ability to read Greek did not seem very pleased with Matt’s supposed Greek-reading abilities:
--- Quote ---
Taheton: Matt, I asked if fyou were a Greek expert, to which you replied, "i've had 4.5 years"
Taheton: I then said, "May I test it?" You said, "By all means."
…
Taheton: Matt, I just can't believe how you are dodging this. I am not talking about it anymore.
--- End quote ---
Moreover...
--- Quote ---John_P: Matt... with all due respect... it seems to me that you are being evasive yourself.
--- End quote ---
Now, what really offended me was this:
--- Quote ---Matt_Slick: I'm about ready to kick them out of here
...
Taheton: if you want me to leave, I iwlll
...
Taheton: Matt, I will not live under these threats everytime I examine your arguments.
...
Matt_Slick: good bye [Matt then booted Taheton. Just when someone begins to question his authority, and present good, diplomatic, and controlled arguments, Matt bans them.]
...
Taheton has left.
- Emphasis added
--- End quote ---
Taheton came back, though:
--- Quote ---Taheton has joined.
...
Taheton: Matt...
Taheton: you kicked me [out] again
--- End quote ---
What happened next?
--- Quote ---
Taheton has left.
...
georg: This is fun [sarcasm]
georg: ::lol
--- End quote ---
Thank God for John (who ever he is!)
--- Quote ---
John_P: It doesn't upset me as much as it upsets God.
...
John_P: You [the mods, I think] are setting a very bad example.
--- End quote ---
Now look at this Christ-like attitude!
--- Quote ---
Taheton: Matt was just having a bad night
--- End quote ---
The reason why I showed some of the conversation from the chatroom is to prove that Matt's knowledge of Greek may be limited and also to give you all an insight into his personality/actions. But then again, these quotes may not reflect the totality of Matt's knowledge, because as Taheton said, Matt could have just had "a bad night."
Moving on… Matt quoted, in his article:
--- Quote ---". . . and I [God] will accomplish all My good pleasure," (Isaiah 46:10).
"But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases," (Psalm 115:3).
"Whatever the Lord pleases, He does," (Psalm 135:6).
--- End quote ---
Now, we all know what these verses mean. They mean God does and will do what he desires. Now here's what Matt says:
--- Quote ---To begin with, are God's desires always accomplished? No, they are not. God's desire is that people do what is right and not sin: "To do righteousness and justice is desired by the Lord rather than sacrifice," (Prov. 21:3). But people still sin in spite of God's stated desire" (Emphasis added).
--- End quote ---
Now, I have no idea what translation Matt used for that verse, but it is obviously in error. Here’s the KJV with Strong’s numbers:
--- Quote ---
Pro 21:3 To do6213 justice6666 and judgment4941 is more acceptable977 to the LORD3068 than sacrifice.4480, 2077
--- End quote ---
The KJV translates the word acceptable and not desired. When you look at the Hebrew word, more light is shed on this subtle and deceiving error:
H977
בּחר
bâchar
baw-khar'
A primitive root; properly to try, that is, (by implication) select: - acceptable, appoint, choose (choice), excellent, join, be rather, require.
Do any of you see the word desired in the definition? I sure as heck don’t! Lets look at an example of bachar used in the Scriptures:
--- Quote ---“Yet now hear, O Jacob my servant; and Israel, whom I have chosen [bachar]…� (Isa 44:1, KJV).
--- End quote ---
Is this word translated desired? No.
Here’s Rotherham’s rendering of Pro 21:3:
--- Quote ---“To do righteousness and justice, is more choice to Yahweh than sacrifice� (Pro 21:3, Rotherham).
--- End quote ---
Do any of you see the word desired in there? I don’t. Here’s Yong’s Literal Translation:
--- Quote --- “To do righteousness and judgment, Is chosen of Jehovah rather than sacrifice� (Pro 21:3, Young).
--- End quote ---
I would quote the CLV but I do not have it downloaded to this computer. I will post some more renderings of this verse later, including some literal interlinear renderings.
Matt goes on to say:
--- Quote --- But people still sin in spite of God's stated desire. Was it the desire of God that Adam and Eve rebel? No. Was it God's will that David commit adultery? No. Yet, they did the very thing God did not want. God commands that all people repent (Acts 17:30); but not all do. Clearly, God's will is not always done.
--- End quote ---
Matt did not quote a single Scripture to support his claim that it was not God’s “desire … that Adam and Eve� rebelled. I think we can all agree that God very well planned and desired (not out loud) that Adam and Eve rebelled. I could write paragraphs and paragraphs of why God desired Adam and Eve to rebel, but I’m sure Ray already did, so I won’t.
Matt, moreover, said that God did not desire David to commit adultery. I'm not sure about this. I'd have to look into it. But what I am sure of is that Matt did not quote a Scripture to support his claim.
Matt also said, “God commands that all people repent…� God commands… so what? Who said commandment and desire are synonymous? God commanded Abraham to kill his only son (Gen 22:2), but did God desire Abraham to kill his son? Of course not!
Matt quotes three Scriptures explaining God does what he desires. Then he goes on to explain God does not always do what he desires. Not only did Matt only quote but one Scripture (ONLY ONE WITNESS) within the paragraph (pertaining to the subject of God's desires not being fulfilled in the end) to support his claim God does not do what he desires, but also the verse he quoted was mistranslated.
Now I do not have time to read the entire article tonight and refute it, but I think you guys can get the main idea from this post. Matt has a whole section on Universalism, http://www.carm.org/universalism.htm, and I personally think someone should write an article refuting it. I might sooner or later, starting with the article I just examined briefly.
I do not have anything against Matt Slick. I'm sure he is a good man. Maybe, as Taheton said, he was just having a bad night, the time he was in the chatroom. And maybe the error (as I see it) in his article was a mistake. However, I felt the need to share this with you guys.
PS. If this post contains any obvious errors, please forgive me, I wrote this post quickly (unlike Matt who probably spent a lot of time writing the article for his universalism section), and do not have the time to examine his entire article. If you guys would like to see the full chatroom conversation (or at least what I have saved) I can send it to you.
P.P.S. John_P is a very good man. He set a good example and stuck up for Taheton, me, and georg (we were all banned from the chatroom... me and georg for different reasons). I'm going to have to send him a personal message later thanking him.
nightmare sasuke:
Keep in mind, I did not make this post so that we can hop around making fun of Matt, saying things like, we’re right and he’s wrong, we’re better than him! To the contrary, I have complete respect for Matt and I expect the rest of you to respect him as well. Even though, in my opinion, Matt is wrong on a lot of subjects, at least he’s taking the effort to write about those subjects and share what he thinks is the Word of God, which is more than most down right blind sheep can say.
Just like Matt, I would not enjoy having a mistake pointed out in my writings or teachings (I would admit to them and correct them, if someone pointed some mistakes out, though). However, I noticed the mistake (if what I said is correct), and thought my post could help people who were having doubts about the salvation of all mankind.
PS. Don't take my posts word for it, look for yourself! That's what I did when I started reading Matt's article, anyway, rather than blindly accepting what he said as Truth—it’s what we ALL (heh, heh) should do (in the Harlot, or out of it)!
dogcombat:
From what you posted, I would say that Matt fits into something we can all attest to when it comes to learning to discern the Truths of God. Spiritual Discernment comes only from God (In Christ) not our limited line of human logic trying to understand. Thus Matt comes across as well intended but sadly ignorant. I'm sure he didn't mean to contradict himself, but not everyone can accept the fact that they can handle the Truth.
Ches
nightmare sasuke:
--- Quote from: dogcombat ---From what you posted, I would say that Matt fits into something we can all attest to when it comes to learning to discern the Truths of God. Spiritual Discernment comes only from God (In Christ) not our limited line of human logic trying to understand. Thus Matt comes across as well intended but sadly ignorant. I'm sure he didn't mean to contradict himself, but not everyone can accept the fact that they can handle the Truth.
Ches
--- End quote ---
As for the mistranslated verse he quoted, I'm sure that was the result of trusting a translation without investigating the Hebrew. As for the other things he said that I disagree with—they were probably the result of orthodox theological indoctrination.
Origen II:
You sparred with Matt, Nightmare?
I'm impressed. I've never had the opportunity...nor have I ever tried.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version