bible-truths.com/forums

=> General Discussions => Topic started by: HoneyLamb56 on June 09, 2012, 12:25:46 PM

Title: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: HoneyLamb56 on June 09, 2012, 12:25:46 PM: I was re-reading Ray's article "Rules to Pray By":

"And there appeared an angel unto Him from heaven, strengthening Him. And being in an agony He prayed more earnestly: and His sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground" (Luke 22:43-44).

I doubt that any of us can ever fully appreciate what unfathomable human trauma and agony was taking place for those three hours in the garden that night two thousand years ago. The eternal destiny of the entire human race was at stake, and Jesus KNEW IT! And believe me, Jesus’ Father was agonizing right along with His Son:

"In all their afflictions, He [GOD] was afflicted… in His love and in His pity He redeemed them…" (Isa. 63:9).

I am confused by this as Luke 22:43-44 is in the list of spurious passages. I know this does not change the context of how to pray but why did Ray quote these verses? if these verses are then not spurious, it leaves me wondering who witnessed the angel ministering to Jesus and who saw the sweats of blood because it also states that the disciples were asleep?

I tried a cusory search on discussion of these two spurious passages and could not readily find anything. Any clarification would be appreciated.
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Kat on June 09, 2012, 03:59:21 PM: Hi HoneyLamb,

Ray did not learn about Tischendorf’s list of spurious Bible verses until he was preparing for a conference in 07. I think that his article on 'Praying by God's Rules' came before that. So that would be why he used that passage.

Now Jesus does state that He found the disciples asleep after He returned from praying for an hour.

Mat 26:40 And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour?

Now thought they were sleeping when He returned that does not mean they were asleep the whole time. I'm thinking that at least one could have been awake some of that time to report/witness about the angel. But then again those Scriptures of the angel are said to be spurious, so maybe it did not actually occur at all. But this idea (of the angel) could have been believed and passed down in the early church and was written as a note on the page of a scroll, then was added to the Scripture later by a copyists that believed it was part of the Scripture (this is said to be how some spurious things got added to Scripture).

Anyway whether this was real or not it does not take away from the event, so I'm not so concerned about it.

mercy, peace and love
Kat
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Dennis Vogel on June 09, 2012, 05:17:54 PM: Unlike most other preachers, Ray changed his mind on a few somewhat minor issues and was not afraid to admit it.

Thanks Kathy.
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: John from Kentucky on June 09, 2012, 07:16:00 PM: I respect Ray for being willing to change something as led by God's Spirit. How rare is that?

In his April 2, 2011 message, third paragraph from the bottom, Ray admits his trinity paper did not bring all the scriptures together on the Enigma of God issue he was studying this past year.

http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,12934.0.html

Yep, he has my respect.
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: HoneyLamb56 on June 10, 2012, 10:03:28 AM: Thank you Kat, Dennis and John for the clarification. There is so much material and discussion that I had probably read something along what you said Kat that I just didn't remember. You are a patient group, thank God. :)
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Extol on June 10, 2012, 10:57:49 AM: In his recent Judas article, Ray mentioned another spurious passage, Luke 23:34--

Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.

This is one of those passages that sounds like something Jesus might say (knowing what we know about the plan of God), so I don't think it's that big a deal to me. Just curious if anyone knows why he included this in the article...
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Kat on June 10, 2012, 01:50:57 PM: Well it's a pretty long list and it's hard for me to remember everything that on it all the time. Also you get used to using these Scriptures and just don't always think about checking to see if they are on the spurious list.

mercy, peace and love
Kat
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: mmijares on June 12, 2012, 12:07:16 AM: Did Ray say anything as to how we treat spurious passages? I searched the forum but found nothing. Sorry if this was discussed before.

Thanks,
-Mike :-\
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: cherokee on June 12, 2012, 09:25:12 AM: Mike,

Ray went over the spurious passages in the 2007 conference on How We Got The Bible.
Here is the link to it.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,5815.msg49001.html
Go down to reply #23 and scroll past the spurious passages.

Blessings,
Suzie
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: mmijares on June 13, 2012, 01:16:43 AM: Thank you Suzie.
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Duane on June 18, 2012, 12:33:56 AM: Going back to the original question: It DOES NOT say that Jesus "sweat great drops of blood" it sez:
Luke 22:44 "...and His sweat was as (if) it WERE great drops of blood falling down to the ground."
Hope this helps understand the agony of Jesus.
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on June 18, 2012, 03:10:00 AM: Quote from: Extol on June 10, 2012, 10:57:49 AM
In his recent Judas article, Ray mentioned another spurious passage, Luke 23:34--

Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.

This is one of those passages that sounds like something Jesus might say (knowing what we know about the plan of God), so I don't think it's that big a deal to me. Just curious if anyone knows why he included this in the article...

Hi there Extol.

I about fell off my chair when I read that was spurious (about a year or so ago). I should be more like you and not get so worked up so easily by things like that.

Yeah, I don't understand why he used that passage either. Maybe because we don't have the originals of any of the manuscripts, only copies of the originals--so who knows for absolute certain what those originals said.

But it does sound like something He would've said. Or that's me looking at Jesus through the rose-colored glasses of Christendom. I don't know.

But I want to know, Why would He say that?

They knew what they were doing! They knew exactly what they were doing. They might not have known WHY they were doing it, but they knew He was innocent and never did anything wrong and that they were only going along with the desires of those who were chanting for His death, and that they were total cowards.

They knew what Barabas was! And yeah, I've heard the lofty schpeel about how Barabas' freedom is prophetic / symbolic of Jesus setting the "captive" free by paying the penalty for sin. But I call foul on that because at that point Jesus hadn't even died or even been hung on the cross. Death is the penalty for sin -- not simply the shedding of blood.

If Jesus ever said "Father forgive them for they know NOT what they do..." I'll eat my hat. (What does that mean anyway: "I'll eat my hat." God I hope it's not too embarrassing. :D )

But then I had another problem to work out.

Acts 7:59 While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60 Then he fell on his knees and cried out, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.”

And I thought, Oh great! If Stephen said that, then that means maybe Jesus really did say the other verse.

But look at what Stephen really said:

"Lord, do not hold this sin against them "; he never said: for they know not what they do.

They did too know what they were doing! They may not have understood WHY they were doing it. Honestly, how sick and ignorant does a person have to be to stone an innocent man to death who was preaching salvation and not feel even the slightest twinge of guilt?

But I suppose he wouldn't have been out of line to say that. And when I figure how Saul (later Paul) was there casting his vote against Stephen (doing it out of ignorance), for sure Jesus did answer Stephen's prayer. Jesus didn't hold that sin against Paul, without a doubt.

I guess because I can't picture myself saying those words, that's why I personally have a hard time believing he said them. They sound a little too lofty or something for me.

But now it dawns on me that maybe the reason I'm having trouble there too is because those were words that God inspired Stephen to say. It wasn't that Stephen was some super holy, humble man, but simply a man that God chose to do that miracle through. I mean, it would take a miracle for anyone to respond that way to something so horrific. Do you agree?

EDIT: I just remembered Hebrews 12:24 says: "...and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel." And that leads me to believe that Jesus at the very least said, "Father forgive them."

Does that help at all? (I talk a lot, don't I! Geez. Sorry about that.)
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: doug on June 18, 2012, 07:52:54 PM: Quote from: Gina on June 18, 2012, 03:10:00 AM

Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.

Yeah, I don't understand why he used that passage either.

But it does sound like something He would've said.

But I want to know, Why would He say that?

They knew what they were doing! They knew exactly what they were doing.

If Jesus ever said "Father forgive them for they know NOT what they do..." I'll eat my hat.

Hello Gina,

Maybe to help you out in your study of this passage you have to consider that when Jesus was speaking to a crowd, He spoke in parables. In the last part of the phrase - for they no not what they do; what do you suppose the spiritual application could be? At this point, as I have not checked it out, I wouldn't be able to help you. Except it may go along the lines of... they will not know that they will have to experience working out their salvation with greater stripes in the Kingdom Age?

p.s. I've been told that hats have a very sweaty flavor and that they also tend to make one constipated... wouldn't what for you to have to go thru that experience....
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on June 18, 2012, 10:54:58 PM: haha, Yeah, I wouldn't want to go through that either. Thanks.

Yes, I realize that they didn't understand Jesus' parables so they couldn't repent and be healed.

Here's why I say they knew WHAT they were doing, but not necessarily why they were doing it:

John 3:2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that you do, except God be with him.

Nicodemus acknowledged to Jesus, "we [me and my pharisee friends] know that you are a teacher come from God, for no man can do these miracles that you do, except God be with him.

Matt 12:7 If you had known what these words mean, 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the innocent.

John 2:25 And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.

Jesus knew the hearts of men. He knew they knew well and good they were condemning Him for nothing, but they did it anyway.

Judas walked with Jesus for three and a half years. He knew for sure that Jesus was innocent.

They were all extremely jealous of Him. Every last one of them. That's not to say that they could have done any differently because it had to be that way.

If they didn't know what they were doing was wrong, if they didn't know that they were condemning an innocent man, I'll eat that hat. But I really don't think I'm going to have to eat that hat. ;) I don't know what else to say.

I guess what I'm saying is, I have no problem with that passage being spurious; but I don't take issue with Ray using it in his Judas paper either. I thank God I was not in Judas' shoes. There but for the grace of God go I. I know my heart--it's no better than theirs and I can definitely see myself having done what Judas and the others did given the same set of circumstances.

I hope that makes sense. :)
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: santgem on June 19, 2012, 06:37:19 AM: Quote from: Extol on June 10, 2012, 10:57:49 AM
In his recent Judas article, Ray mentioned another spurious passage, Luke 23:34--

Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.

This is one of those passages that sounds like something Jesus might say (knowing what we know about the plan of God), so I don't think it's that big a deal to me. Just curious if anyone knows why he included this in the article...

Hello Extol,

Are you referring to the article "Was it better for Judas had he not been born"?

Oh that Christians would believe the Word of God.

Is it possible for Jesus to forgive Judas? Possible? He already has forgiven Judas for his sins! Need proof?

Listen carefully: Were those who spit in the face of Jesus; punched Him in the mouth; beat Him within an inch of His life; nailed Him to a rugged cross; and pierced Him with a spear; somehow guilty of a LESSER crime than that of Judas giving Jesus a KISS ON THE CHECK?! Give me a break. How do intelligent theologians come up with such utter nonsense. What did Jesus say regarding all those involved in His condemnation, torture, and death? Let's read it:

"Then said Jesus, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34).

FORGIVE THEM! Who are the "them?" Don't you think it includes "all of them?" Who are the "all of them" responsible in one way or another for the crucifixion of our LORD? Certainly it involved all those who took part in any aspect of His real crucifixion, and that would include not only those who nailed Him to the cross, but those who beat Him; and those who mocked Him; and those priests who falsely condemned Him. Is not Judas also included in all of "them?"

Who else? What about the Pharisees of whom Jesus said: "...Ye seek to KILL Me...." (John 8:37)? What about all those who assembled together the chief priests, the scribes, the elders, the people, the high priest, the deputies, the high council, and all those who "Consulted that they might take Jesus by subtility, and KILL Him" (Matt. 26:4)? There were multitudes besides Judas.

What about all those Jews that said, "His blood be on us and on our children" (Matt. 27:25)? What about all those Jesus included when we read that "He [Jesus] would not walk in Judea, because the JEWS sought to kill Him" (John 7:1)? What about the entire nation of Israel? Were they included in the crucifixion of Jesus? Answer: "...let it be known to you all and to the entire people of Israel in the name of Jesus Christ, the Nazarene, Whom YOU [the entire nation] CRUCIFY" (Acts 4:10)? What about all the Gentiles? Are we guilty as well as the Jews? Did not Paul say that the sins of the Gentiles were also covered by His crucifixion:

"For I delivered unto you [you Gentile Corinthians & other Gentiles -- see Phil. 3:3] first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures" (I Cor. 15:3). The truth is that Jesus was put to the cross by the sins of the whole world. We are all responsible. But what is Jesus' response to all these sins? "Forgive them." In God's heart and mind, we are already forgiven:

"God Who quickens the dead, and calls those things which are not as though they were" (Rom . 4:17).

The forgiveness of the whole world is not as yet a fact, BUT IT WILL BE. When?

"WHEN Thy Judgments are in the earth, [then] the inhabitants of THE WHOLE WORLD will learn righteousness" (Isaiah 26:9).

God has prophesied the outcome of the human race, and that outcome is that there shall be no more pain, death, sorrow or curse (Rev. 21), and that God will be "ALL in all" (I Cor. 15:28).

Yes, Judas did a evil and cowardly thing, but it was written and prophesied, and therefore someone had to do it. But let's not think that Judas will be forever doomed to a hellish torture. He will not. Judas repented and therefore is qualified for salvation:

"But this Man [Jesus], because He continues forever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore He is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever lives to make intercession for them" (Heb. 7:24-25).

The whole human race has this promise.

It is not spurious passages. What my understanding is that Judas and all of us are included in Jesus saying that "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do".
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Extol on June 19, 2012, 12:43:22 PM: Quote from: Gina on June 18, 2012, 03:10:00 AM
Quote from: Extol on June 10, 2012, 10:57:49 AM
In his recent Judas article, Ray mentioned another spurious passage, Luke 23:34--

Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.

This is one of those passages that sounds like something Jesus might say (knowing what we know about the plan of God), so I don't think it's that big a deal to me. Just curious if anyone knows why he included this in the article...

But I want to know, Why would He say that?

They knew what they were doing! They knew exactly what they were doing. They might not have known WHY they were doing it, but they knew He was innocent and never did anything wrong and that they were only going along with the desires of those who were chanting for His death, and that they were total cowards.

They knew what Barabas was! And yeah, I've heard the lofty schpeel about how Barabas' freedom is prophetic / symbolic of Jesus setting the "captive" free by paying the penalty for sin. But I call foul on that because at that point Jesus hadn't even died or even been hung on the cross. Death is the penalty for sin -- not simply the shedding of blood.

If Jesus ever said "Father forgive them for they know NOT what they do..." I'll eat my hat. (What does that mean anyway: "I'll eat my hat." God I hope it's not too embarrassing. :D )

Hi Gina,
I always assumed that the "them" was referring to the people performing the actual execution, the Roman soldiers. (i.e. "Forgive them, for they are only doing their job and they don't know who I am.")

Then after I came to BT I thought the request for forgiveness was for all of them (the crowd, the priests, Pilate, the soldiers), and "they know not what they do" referred to their lack of free will. In other words, "Father, forgive them, for they are the ones chosen to do this, that the prophecies might be fulfilled, and our mission may be accomplished." Just like Pharaoh and Nebuchadrezzar and the King of Assyria were used to bring glory to God (and were completely oblivious to that fact), the people involved in Christ's crucifixion were simply the ones chosen to do it--because someone had to. Thus, I believed that "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" was God accepting ultimate responsibility for our sins, since we are made too weak to resist.

Now that I've read that it's a spurious passage, I'm not sure what to think about it. :o
But I agree with you, it seems reasonable that Jesus at least said "Father, forgive them." (Or it is something he WOULD say.)
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on June 19, 2012, 01:18:12 PM: Yes, Extol, that's precisely what I thought--everything you said about Him forgiving those nailing him to the cross, and then later after coming to B-T realizing He was talking about everyone involved. (Santgem, thank you for pulling out that excerpt from Ray's Judas paper!)

I think the one scripture that supports Him saying that is one that I've seen Deborah (Arcturus) and others post before that I posted originally:

Hebrews 12:24 says: "...and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel."

Instead of His blood crying out for vengeance, it speaks a better word: "Father forgive them for they know not what they do."

These verses wanted to stump me too:

Matt 23:7 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: 35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. 36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

But this is interesting: Jesus' blood is not incorporated into those that they killed, only the blood of Abel to Zacharias.

37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! 38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. 39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Much like Joseph's brothers did when Joseph saved them out of their famine after he rose to power--after they threw him in that pit and left him for dead. They threw their arms around him and wept -- so happy to see Joseph, who they didn't even recognize! And for that matter couldn't have known he would be their savior, because just like the pharisees who were blinded to what Jesus was there for, so were Joseph's brothers. It had to happen that way.

One thing is for sure, forgiveness alone cannot get the sin out of the sinner (http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php?topic=7047.0 (http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php?topic=7047.0)); and for that we need God's righteous judgment and that includes the kindness of God which leads to repentance:

"Forgive them." In God's heart and mind, we are already forgiven:

"God Who quickens the dead, and calls those things which are not as though they were" (Rom . 4:17).

The forgiveness of the whole world is not as yet a fact, BUT IT WILL BE. When?

"WHEN Thy Judgments are in the earth, [then] the inhabitants of THE WHOLE WORLD will learn righteousness" (Isaiah 26:9).

-from the Judas paper.

That makes sense to me. I hope it helps a little.

God bless you, Extol! Great discussion. :)
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Joel on June 19, 2012, 11:32:01 PM: I didn't see Acts 3:17 in the spurious passages, where Peter is speaking about the Crucifixion.

Acts 3:17 And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.

Paul speaking to the Corinthians concerning the plan of God, in 1st Corinthians 2:8, also not listed as spurious.

1st Corinthians 2:8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Joel
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on June 20, 2012, 04:22:17 AM: Quote from: Joel on June 19, 2012, 11:32:01 PM
I didn't see Acts 3:17 in the spurious passages, where Peter is speaking about the Crucifixion.

Acts 3:17 And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.

Paul speaking to the Corinthians concerning the plan of God, in 1st Corinthians 2:8, also not listed as spurious.

1st Corinthians 2:8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Joel

Right. I'm seeing it now. If they had known, they wouldn't have had the heart to crucify Him. God had to blind them to the Truth to believe a lie so that they would feel enough anger towards Him and feel like they had the perfect excuse to do what they did. God hardened them like he hardened Pharaoh against Moses; otherwise, they would have gone all soft and had pity on Jesus and would have been totally unwilling to sacrifice Him. And we'd all be out of a Savior.
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on June 20, 2012, 04:35:55 AM: I don't know if I should feel sorry for the Pharisees. I mean, if they didn't know what they were doing then they deserve the fewer lashes, right?

Luke 12:48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows.

Hmmm... Stymied again.

I'm not exaggerating when I say I thoroughly enjoy studying the bible. I hate being bored, and I am never, ever bored when I'm studying the bible -- even if I'm stumped because now I trust that the answer is there because God's word doesn't contradict. Thank you, Ray! (And all who loved him and made it possible for him to teach someone like me!)

Ray said in an email: We will also be saved from: pain, disease, heartache, fear, weariness, boredom, hatred, laziness, immorality, stupidity, vanity, inferiority, weakness, addiction,

http://bible-truths.com/email13.htm

I told a forum member that it makes me very glad to know (to truly believe) that God doesn't want me to be bored anymore than I want to be bored. Ah! What an awesome God!
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: eggi on June 21, 2012, 04:19:22 AM: Hi all,

Just a thought. Maybe you already discussed this and I didn't get it. :) I think they knew what they were doing as to getting rid of someone that they considered a troublemaker and speaker of blasphemy, but had they known just WHO they killed they would not have done it. So they knew very well what they did but they didn't understand WHO they did this to. Paul also believed that when Christians were tracked down and killed, it was really a GOOD thing. Well that was his understanding at that time, but clearly it was totally wrong. But it's not like he didn't know what he was doing.

Again, just a thought.

God bless you,
Eirik
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on June 21, 2012, 04:34:35 AM: That's it in a nutshell. Beautiful!
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on June 25, 2012, 12:51:53 PM: Extol (and Eggi) I saw this a while back:

Dear Jennifer:

. . .

When Jesus warned of this sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, it was when He had cast out demons. The Scribes said that Jesus cast out devils by the prince of devils (Mark 3:22). The Pharisees also accused Him of this very same thing (Matt. 9:34). And we are told that Jesus gave that stern warning, "Because they said, He [Jesus] has an unclean spirit."

But this alone is not all there is to this sin. Even in the Old Testament, when one sinned "ignorantly," he was held to a lower standard than if he sinned "willfully, knowlingly." God's principles are always true. There was more to the sin of these Scribes and Pharisees than merely stating that Jesus had a devil and cast out devils by the prince of devil. The truth is THEY KNEW BETTER. They knew that they were lying in order to deceive the multitudes who were beginning to believe in and trust Jesus as a Man of God. They were SINNING AGAINST LIGHT. They were sinning aginst WHAT THEY KNEW WAS THE TRUTH. And how do we know this? We are frankly TOLD this in the Scriptures.

In John 3 we have a "Ruler of the Jews" by the name of Nicodemus, and this is what we are told by him: "There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a RULER [this man KNEW what the Scribes and the Pharisees believed behind closed doors] of the Jews. The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto Him, Rabbi, WE [Scribes, Pharisees, Rulers, Jews] KNOW that you are a Teacher COME FROM GOD; for no man can do these miracles [such as casting out demons] that You do, except GOD BE WITH HIM" (John 3:1-2).

It is when we KNOW the truth and blaspheme AGAINST THE TRUE LIGHT THAT WE KNOW, that we then "blaspheme against the Holy Spirit" which is the means by which light and truth is imparted.

God be with you,

Ray
(http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2175.msg17491.html#msg17491)
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: eggi on June 25, 2012, 01:30:15 PM: Hi again,

I guess we are left with two possible explanations. Either the scripture that was quoted from Acts 3:16 is not referring to the unbelieving Pharisees, but the Romans or some other rulers. Most likely the Pharisees.

There were Pharisees who believed, and there were Pharisees who didn't believe (Acts 15:5). It is a possibility that Nicodemus was speaking only on behalf of the believing party. In that way he could truly say that they knew Who Jesus was. The other party which didn't believe would stop at nothing to get rid of Jesus. And later, the Saducees wanted to prevent talk about a resurrection since they didn't believe in it.

God bless you,
Eirik
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on June 25, 2012, 06:04:03 PM: Ah, it's no big. Either way, they're forgiven! :-D
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: eggi on June 25, 2012, 07:21:20 PM: I agree with you Gina. It's what matters. :)

God bless you,
Eirik
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on July 04, 2012, 06:55:49 PM: Still, I confess; I just want to slap the living crap outta them.

Just slap them.

I just want to slap them across their face really hard. And them slap them across their other face even harder.

Figuratively speaking, of course.

Warmly, ;)
Gina
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: indianabob on July 04, 2012, 10:42:33 PM: Hi,
If Jesus didn't want to take revenge upon them why should we want to do so on his behalf?
He who lives by the slap across the face shall die by the slap across the face.
We shall be judged by the manner in which we judge.
Be angry and sin not.

Warmly offered, Bob
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on July 04, 2012, 11:33:28 PM: Wow, we truly are to never take our OWN revenge.

Romans 12:19 Never take your OWN revenge, beloved, but leave room for the WRATH [ not the "warm fuzzies," but the wrath] of [who? Satan? no...] GOD, for it is written

"VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY," says the Lord.

You can't really say simply wanting to figuratively slap a literal murderer is repaying evil for evil. Well you could lol - but you'd be mistaken.

Even Ray said:

You see when I put thing’s in different words, sometimes people look at it a little differently. If I ask somebody, why do you love your wife? They’ll give me reasons, I say you mean all those things ‘make’ you love her? They say, ‘oh they do make me love her.’ Then I say, you don’t love her freely? You have to be ‘caused’ to love her. So unless she does this to ‘cause’ you to love her or she cooks good meals for you and ‘causes’ you to love her, when she rubs your back and it ‘makes’ you love her. If it weren’t for all that, you wouldn’t love her? Then they say, ‘well not so dearly, no.‘ And they say that’s not sincere love at all? Get out of here, you know sometimes I just want to slap these peoples faces spiritually.

( http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php?topic=5154.0 )

Nothing wrong with what Ray said, in my humble opinion, Bob.

:)
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: indianabob on July 05, 2012, 02:57:25 AM: True, we are not to take our own revenge.
But neither does God who has the authority take revenge on poor sinners.
God returns good for evil and so should we.

Romans 12:9-21
(NKJV)
Behave Like a Christian

9 Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil. Cling to what is good. 10 Be kindly affectionate to one another with brotherly love, in honor giving preference to one another; 11 not lagging in diligence, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord; 12 rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly in prayer; 13 distributing to the needs of the saints, given to hospitality.

14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep. 16 Be of the same mind toward one another. Do not set your mind on high things, but associate with the humble. Do not be wise in your own opinion.

17 Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men. 18 If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. 19 Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,”[a] says the Lord. 20 Therefore

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
If he is thirsty, give him a drink;
For in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head.”
21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: newgene87 on July 05, 2012, 03:02:26 AM: i guess i can finally add my 2 cents in. My question is, regarding "spurious passages"; WHY is John 8:1-11 really a spurious one? i read where Ray actually spoke a little on it...

(quote) John 8:1-11 (all these verses)
That’s the woman taken in adultery. That whole story is not in the Sinaiticus or the Vaticanus, so maybe it’s not Scripture. I can explain it though, because up until last spring I thought it was Scripture. I’ve got an explanation for it, because this is a way to show another contradiction in the Bible. That Christ did not obey the laws of God, that He broke them. Because the law of Moses said to stone her and they ask Him, “what do You say.” Christ said;

John 8:7 …He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.
v. 8 And again bending down, He wrote on the ground.
v. 9 And hearing, and being convicted by conscience, they went out one by one…

So how do you get around the fact that Jesus is breaking the commandment of Moses? Here was the woman caught in adultery, with eye witnesses and Moses’ law said to stone her. How did Christ get around that without breaking the law of Moses? Well I figured out how He did, that is if it is Scripture, it has to do with how Jesus will judge when He returns. Now that’s going to be an eye opener. (end quote, empasis MINE)

Now, i discovered how Jesus "got around" it by allowing the actual scriptures speak for themselves. Actually, John 8:1-11 is one of few moments, Jesus shows keen knowledge of the Law VS the Pharisees trying their best to "tempt" or test Jesus, and missing the full Law. Jesus, the Word made flesh, knew already the TWO distinct circumstances written in the law whether or not a woman, caught in adultery, was to be stoned. Deuteronomy 22:24, speaking of a "betrothed (engaged) damsel (virgin)", if caught in the act, was to be stoned along WITH the man. On the other hand, Jesus knowing their thoughts, knew that this Woman was most likely a man's WIFE, in which the law written in Numbers 5:11-31 speaks of ADULTERY WITHOUT stoning, which actually followed a complete set of instructions to cleanse her act. Jesus fulfilled all the acts of the priesthood and even simulated the "action" of writing (which could very well explain Jesus stooping down to write on the ground)

"and the priest shall write these curses in a book, and He shall blot out with the bitter water" (Num 5:23)

My point is, after discovering the message of this story, it actually reveals the intentions of the Pharisees, their evil hearts, the need of a new covenant (Hebrews 8:7-9), new priesthood, and actually knowledge and agreement of the Law: Deuteronomy 22:23-24 vs Numbers 5:11-31. if John 8:1-11 is so Spurious why does it reveal such an even more wise savior?? Actually, indirectly throwing the Law of Moses in their face WITH the Law of Love. Maybe this is what Ray was on his way to discover but i dont see a contradiction of Jesus and the Law. She was most likely a man's Wife and all the actions of Numbers 5:11-31 were required and Jesus had already supplied her cleansing.

just my 2 cents on this particular spurious passage ;)

Eugene
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on July 05, 2012, 03:42:56 AM: Wow, and thank you for your 2 cents. I never would have considered this:

"and the priest shall write these curses in a book, and He shall blot out with the bitter water" (Num 5:23)

I just was wondering about this same "spurious" passage this past week at work! But I had little desire to study it out for myself to get to the truth of the matter, to be perfectly honest with you all. So, this saying is true: Consider the ravens, for they neither sow nor reap; they have no storeroom nor barn, and yet God feeds them [spiritual manna]; how much more valuable you are than the birds!. (Luke 12:24)

I know I have to keep an open mind about "spurious" passages and while I'm sure some passages could be spurious, once a "spurious" passage is backed up with solid, sensible scriptural support then to say they're spurious is, well, .... for the birds.

Good job, Eugene. :)
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Kat on July 06, 2012, 03:15:17 PM: Knowing that something in a Bible was omitted by both the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts, the oldest manuscripts that had the original text, does make me not want to take it as being absolutely part of the Word of God. There are many ways it could have been added through the centuries. One way that the story could have been added was it was passed down by early church leaders, as this apparently happened with some observers, and was so familiar that it eventually got included into the actual main Scriptural text.

Ray was just saying that he had used this story as a teaching point in some of his articles before he knew it was considered spurious, so he had already figured the answer for it.

If you find it helpful then use it, it just not a certainty.

mercy, peace and love
Kat
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on July 06, 2012, 03:30:06 PM: For me, I was initially like - wow it's not scripture. Bummer. But then I really thought it over and I ended up relieved to think that it's not scripture. I can't explain why. Regardless. No sense in making an idol out of it either way. I just think it's such a lovely ending for not just the woman but the men, too. It's like they were all set free. Though, I can only picture the pharisees weren't nearly as overjoyed re their own freedom. And besides, He was "just a carpenter."
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: newgene87 on July 06, 2012, 08:53:01 PM: exactly Gina. "no need in making an idol of it". Regardless, i believe the biggest lesson to learn is that it is God...

"Who hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life" (2Co 3:6)

and as well, Jesus tell us "His Words, His Rhema, is Spirit and Life" (John 6:63)

it's unneccesary to get stuck on what's scripture or not. Jesus speaks truth to us in many different ways and thanks to Ray i see all this. Thanks Kat :D :D
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Foxx on July 14, 2012, 11:56:00 PM: just curious, does anyone know if a copy of the Sinaitic manuscript can be purchased?
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Gina on July 15, 2012, 03:43:21 AM: Have you tried Googling "copy of the Sinaitic manuscript can be purchased" ?
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: tinknocker on July 15, 2012, 04:33:27 AM: Quote from: Foxx on July 14, 2012, 11:56:00 PM
just curious, does anyone know if a copy of the Sinaitic manuscript can be purchased?

Don't know if a copy can be purchased but I have a link to manuscripts that can be viewed online. PM me and I'll send you the link.
I'm not sure if it's OK to post it here? :-\

tinknocker
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: Kat on July 15, 2012, 09:55:23 AM: Hi tinknocker,

Links to manuscripts would not be a problem. It's when the link is to a website that is connected with someones ministry. We simply can not acknowledge or recommend any other person's teaching. Because even if they have some similar things to what is taught here, I have always found that with a little searching (and usually not much) you will find gross errors. So we have this rule.

No preaching (including preaching via links).
Links are not allowed if a site or article brings its own teaching or preaching. Links are allowed if a site it just for fun or informational, ie, you tube, google translator, Esword, etc.

The last sentence is mainly for the 'Off Topics' board. But I was just trying to explain this a little more.

mercy, peace and love
Kat
Title: Re: Spurious Passage Revisited
Post by: tinknocker on July 15, 2012, 03:41:01 PM: Quote from: Kat on July 15, 2012, 09:55:23 AM

Links to manuscripts would not be a problem. It's when the link is to a website that is connected with someones ministry. We simply can not acknowledge or recommend any other person's teaching. Because even if they have some similar things to what is taught here, I have always found that with a little searching (and usually not much) you will find gross errors. So we have this rule.

No preaching (including preaching via links).
Links are not allowed if a site or article brings its own teaching or preaching. Links are allowed if a site it just for fun or informational, ie, you tube, google translator, Esword, etc.

The last sentence is mainly for the 'Off Topics' board. But I was just trying to explain this a little more.

mercy, peace and love
Kat

Thanks Kat

I think I've got it now. The site is basically a forum of experts translating and comparing translations. Lots of different manuscripts but requires some effort to view actual
manuscripts via links. Here's the link for those who are interested; http://www.bible-researcher.com/links03.html