The Dangerous Lie That You Don’t Need to Repent

[KingJ]

Can a person decide without first and foremost being born again from within?

There are two items to consider.

1. Do we need to be a Christian to have an awareness of sin?

No. We all have a conscious.

Gen 3:22 - And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.

It is only important to note that our conscience does not all alert us of some sins that upset God. Sins like those Paul was committing against His people. Sexual sins are the best example of this. They don't hurt anyone and alert our conscience, but yet God utterly hates this. He ordained graphic and violent deaths by stoning for homosexuals and lesbians. As such it is clear that we can be 'terribly' far from God's sin awareness on certain sins. We would need to be a Christian to know all those sins that upset God, and do not necessarily 'hurt' anyone.

2. Do all who decide to repent of their sins meet Jesus and become born again?

Yes. If repentance is sincere, God will pay you a visit, reveal Jesus to you and you will accept Him. Fact.

James 4:8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.

People only reject Jesus because they do not want to repent. They hate the light and love the darkness. That is the verdict according to scripture.

John 3:19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world (Jesus), but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

 

[Garee]

Yes of course. We all have a conscious.

Gen 3:22 - And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.

It is only important to note that our conscience does not all alert us of some sins that upset God. Sins like those Paul was committing against His people. Sexual sins are the best example of this. They don't hurt anyone and alert our conscience, but yet God utterly hates this. He ordained graphic and violent deaths by stoning for homosexuals and lesbians. As such it is clear that we can be 'terribly' far from God's sin awareness on certain sins.

God is greater than our conscience he knows all things and rested on the 7th day.

Therefore, we can pray give us this day our daily bread or reveal your will Holy Father .He makes our conscience good

1 John 3:20;For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.Beloved, if our (born again ) heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.

 

[Kermos]

You didn't read the link explaining the subjunctive mood of the present tense did you.
(Of course not, it's likely you don't even understand it, but still must protect your ego.)

I run into a lot of people like you who cannot admit that they MIGHT be wrong (subjunctive mood present tense), even when shown academic proof. You've never taken any substantive courses in language, whether English or Greek, have you? But your own pride won't allow you to admit this, even to yourself, since the core of your ego has convinced you that you're always right; even enough to claim that you are a prophet from God through whom God sends messages to others. This is not an insult. It's an observation. You claiming that I've insulted you is just the victim status you embrace. And you know you're no angel.


The mood alters the presentation of the tense, dude. Look, do you even have the ability to answer honestly? Did you even graduate from High School? (I'm actually asking you.) It's okay if you didn't, but your claims to any insight just make you look ridiculous.


No he didn't. Your own delusions did.


Check your spelling and try again. What you wrote makes no sense.


Neither is yours; you suffer from Dunning Kruger (again, an observation) which makes it nearly impossible to have any correspondence with you at all, let alone a friendly one. Again, it's a pathology that doesn't allow you even the remotest possibility to think that you might be wrong, and when shown, your condition demands that you become combative and play the victim.

I've asked your level of education, but you'll never give an honest answer, because that would destroy your ego.


You think you're showing love? It's just one more delusion that you'll never get fixed. Even God wonders where you came up with the word "controls" for G4912 συνέχω sunechō

Marshall's gloss, as well as the NKJV, is "compel" (that's not control). KJV thinks G4912 means "constraineth." And since you somehow think Strong's is a viable authority, where is the word "controls" in his entry? (It isn't.)

For the love of Christ urges us on, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died.​

(2 Corinthians 5:14 NRSV)

But I see the problem. Someone somewhere convinced you to use the ESV (LINK).

What you don't seem to understand is that a BAD translation cannot help but lead to BAD theology.

I'd take the time to translate the verse for you, but it would be a waste of my time. But HEY, since you claim to read Greek, it's your turn. Go ahead:

η γαρ αγαπη του χριστου συνεχει ημας κριναντας τουτο οτι ει εις υπερ παντων απεθανεν αρα οι παντες απεθανον

η γαρ αγαπη του χριστου συνεχει ημας κριναντας τουτο οτι εις υπερ παντων απεθανεν αρα οι παντες απεθανον

(Chose your Greek version carefully, though. And please indicate which lexicon you used.)

Or you could do yourself and all of us a great favor and just admit you're a poser. Confession cleanseth the soul.

Rhema


Indeed they would. The Christian first seeks Truth.

Dear Theologian Rhema (proof post #87),

Every single person in whom “the work of God” (John 6:29) is worked, then such a person receives belief/faith as delivered by the Author and Perfecter of the Faith (Hebrews 12:2).

Every single person who receives not “the work of God” (John 6:29) is a person without saving faith/belief.

The grammatical subjunctive mood verb “believe” (John 6:29) exists not in a vacuum, but the verb exists in a greater syntactical structure which is grammatically called a sentence. Behold, Christ utilized the word “that” (John 6:29) to indicate an essential requirement; therefore, you fail to understand the Word of God "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" (Matthew 19:26) in relation with this Word of God “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

You think you hold the key to the Word of God in John 6:29, yet you fail to present your translation in this exchange, Mr. Theologian.

By God's grace, @Garee posted a crucial relationship with "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13) in post #118).

You wrote "But I see the problem. Someone somewhere convinced you to use the ESV (LINK)" shows that you fail to judge righteously. I wonder whether you have examined a single one of the multi-verse citations which God caused me to post where you would find parallel versions of the KJV, NASB1995, and YLT. The Word of God declares "Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you" (Matthew 7:1-2).

Will you please stop shooting your flaming missiles at me so that we may engage in congenial correspondence focused on words of Life?

Love,
Kermos

 

[Rhema]

Will you please stop shooting your flaming missiles at me...

Like your sarcasm here?

Dear Theologian Rhema

There is just no way to take you seriously. You want respect, but you make the most ridiculous claims, not the least of them claiming to be a prophet.

You wrote "But I see the problem. Someone somewhere convinced you to use the ESV (LINK)" shows that you fail to judge righteously.

Righteously? I judge accurately. Whoever came up with the gloss "control," needs to retake to first year Greek. You are NOT being controlled by God. The fact that you believe this is a measure of crazy that I can do nothing about.

I wonder whether you have examined a single one of the multi-verse citations which God caused me to post...

You remind me of the JWs who take a verse from here and one from there and another verse from over yonder all devoid of context and stitch them together to form a Frankenstein theology that's completely irrational. God doesn't cause that.

The grammatical subjunctive mood verb “believe” (John 6:29) exists not in a vacuum, but the verb exists in a greater syntactical structure which is grammatically called a sentence.

You just can't admit that you have no clue about the subjunctive mood. Okay, that's typical of an NPD.

The Word of God declares "Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you" (Matthew 7:1-2).

FANTASTIC. In that I judge for accuracy in translation, I would expect nothing less for me from anyone else who knows Koine Greek. But you don't, as demonstrated in your posts.

you fail to understand the Word of God

You mean Bible, right? Why not just admit this?

Rhema

 

[Kermos]

Like your sarcasm here?


There is just no way to take you seriously. You want respect, but you make the most ridiculous claims, not the least of them claiming to be a prophet.


Righteously? I judge accurately. Whoever came up with the gloss "control," needs to retake to first year Greek. You are NOT being controlled by God. The fact that you believe this is a measure of crazy that I can do nothing about.


You remind me of the JWs who take a verse from here and one from there and another verse from over yonder all devoid of context and stitch them together to form a Frankenstein theology that's completely irrational. God doesn't cause that.



You just can't admit that you have no clue about the subjunctive mood. Okay, that's typical of an NPD.


FANTASTIC. In that I judge for accuracy in translation, I would expect nothing less for me from anyone else who knows Koine Greek. But you don't, as demonstrated in your posts.


You mean Bible, right? Why not just admit this?

Rhema

Dear Theologian Rhema,

You published your schooling credentials as per proof post #87, so you made your theologian status known in the same post which you tried to dominate me with your theologian self-superiority by calling me "son". Theologian is the title that you conveyed in your own post.

Your failure to produce your translation for "Τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ ἔργον τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἵνα πιστεύητε εἰς ὃν ἀπέστειλεν ἐκεῖνος" shows your educational failure! The accurate translation is “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

As a Christian, Christ's love controls me (2 Corinthians 5:14). You flaming missiles fail against the Armor of God in which my Lord and my God Jesus Christ has outfitted me.

Love,
Kermos

 

[Garee]

FANTASTIC. In that I judge for accuracy in translation, I would expect nothing less for me from anyone else who knows Koine Greek. But you don't, as demonstrated in your posts.

The exclusive Kione Greek club ..

Knowing what about Kione Greek, that it has been translated into English? And some mistranslate?

Accurately define the Greek word apostle and how it is used . Who was the first apostle? Was he the first martyr?

Accurately define the Hebrew word Malak and how it was used and who was it used o in respect to?

 

[Garee]

Dear Theologian Rhema,

You published your schooling credentials as per proof post #87, so you made your theologian status known in the same post which you tried to dominate me with your theologian self-superiority by calling me "son". Theologian is the title that you conveyed in your own post.

Your failure to produce your translation for "Τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ ἔργον τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἵνα πιστεύητε εἰς ὃν ἀπέστειλεν ἐκεῖνος" shows your educational failure! The accurate translation is “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

As a Christian, Christ's love controls me (2 Corinthians 5:14). You flaming missiles fail against the Armor of God in which my Lord and my God Jesus Christ has outfitted me.

Love,
Kermos

It's easy to see he denies the labor of Christ or work of faith . Many say God needs no faith.

Faith is a work.

 

[Rhema]

@Kermos, with all due respect there's just no way to fix the way you think. I've asked about your type and level of education so I could try to adjust how I speak to you, but to no avail. (Meaning you're too embarrassed to admit that you have none.) All you've done here is just repeat yourself, and play the victim again, as if this all means anything. it doesn't.

I'm not sure why you think the ESV is right when using the gloss "control" for G4912, but let's start with the KJV:

For the love of Christ constraineth (G4912) us ; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:​

(2 Corinthians 5:14 KJV)

For the love of Christ urges (G4912) us on, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died.​

(2 Corinthians 5:14 NRSV)

Now I'd love to cut and paste the exact entry from the Cambridge Greek Lexicon for G4912 (συνέχω sunechō), but this forum doesn't allow for that.

Cambridge Greek Lexicon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The entry for G4912 (συνέχω) is found in volume II page1334, and I shall highlight ALL the entries:

1 - hold, or keep tightly together (NT as in shut one's ears).
2 - (of tendons, belt-buckles) join, meet
3 - keep together - people, troops, ships, or an army (in opposition to disbanding an army)
4 - hold together - in a condition of stability or unity such as the universe or one's emotions
....a keep together - the rhythm of people rowing a boat, or musicians
....b maintain - a partnership
5 - contain, comprise, embrace - holding together a plurality of things
6 - encompass, confine - keeping enclosed or within boundaries
7- occupy, engage - oneself with something or someone
8 - || passive) be brought into close contact
9 - || passive) be entangled or embroiled - with some sort of trouble
10 - || passive) be gripped or afflicted - by anxiety or dreams, disease, war, or similar

And that's it, sir.

G4912 (συνέχω) can in no wise mean "control." You're being misled by a bad translation. Period.

Will this help to get you to think? I doubt it, given your past posts, but I've done my best to show the errors of your ways. But I'm sure you'll just continue to err.

You flaming missiles...

Truth isn't a flaming missle, Kermos. The sooner you figure that out, the better your life will be.

Now you go run along and have some wonderful conversations with the likeminded some of whom you might even convince (subjunctive present) that you're a prophet.

Rhema

The accurate translation is “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

No it isn't. Any Greek scholar will tell you.
Hey, here's an idea, go find one. And good luck with that.

 

[Kermos]

@Kermos, with all due respect there's just no way to fix the way you think. I've asked about your type and level of education so I could try to adjust how I speak to you, but to no avail. (Meaning you're too embarrassed to admit that you have none.) All you've done here is just repeat yourself, and play the victim again, as if this all means anything. it doesn't.

I'm not sure why you think the ESV is right when using the gloss "control" for G4912, but let's start with the KJV:

For the love of Christ constraineth (G4912) us ; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:​

(2 Corinthians 5:14 KJV)

For the love of Christ urges (G4912) us on, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died.​

(2 Corinthians 5:14 NRSV)

Now I'd love to cut and paste the exact entry from the Cambridge Greek Lexicon for G4912 (συνέχω sunechō), but this forum doesn't allow for that.

Cambridge Greek Lexicon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The entry for G4912 (συνέχω) is found in volume II page1334, and I shall highlight ALL the entries:

1 - hold, or keep tightly together (NT as in shut one's ears).
2 - (of tendons, belt-buckles) join, meet
3 - keep together - people, troops, ships, or an army (in opposition to disbanding an army)
4 - hold together - in a condition of stability or unity such as the universe or one's emotions
....a keep together - the rhythm of people rowing a boat, or musicians
....b maintain - a partnership
5 - contain, comprise, embrace - holding together a plurality of things
6 - encompass, confine - keeping enclosed or within boundaries
7- occupy, engage - oneself with something or someone
8 - || passive) be brought into close contact
9 - || passive) be entangled or embroiled - with some sort of trouble
10 - || passive) be gripped or afflicted - by anxiety or dreams, disease, war, or similar

And that's it, sir.

G4912 (συνέχω) can in no wise mean "control." You're being misled by a bad translation. Period.

Will this help to get you to think? I doubt it, given your past posts, but I've done my best to show the errors of your ways. But I'm sure you'll just continue to err.


Truth isn't a flaming missle, Kermos. The sooner you figure that out, the better your life will be.

Now you go run along and have some wonderful conversations with the likeminded some of whom you might even convince (subjunctive present) that you're a prophet.

Rhema

Dear Rhema the Theologian (proof post #87),

We Christians know that the Truth (John 14:6) is “he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, that his works may be revealed, that they are having been worked in God” (John 3:21), so the love of Christ controls us Christians (2 Corinthians 5:14).

I get it - your theologian education confused you from understanding that "1 - hold, or keep tightly together" is another way of saying "controls", but God is not a god of confusion but of peace (1 Corinthians 14:33).

No it isn't. Any Greek scholar will tell you.
Hey, here's an idea, go find one. And good luck with that.

Your persist in failing to produce your translation for "Τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ ἔργον τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἵνα πιστεύητε εἰς ὃν ἀπέστειλεν ἐκεῖνος", and your education won't help you! The accurate translation is “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

You challenged me with "No it isn't. Any Greek scholar will tell you. Hey, here's an idea, go find one", and my Lord Jesus has me respond with this short yet profound list which are largely the same:

• Bill Mounce and the Greek scholars of the NIV
• the ESV Greek scholars
• William Tyndale left behind a translation of New Testament reading largely the same
• the KJV scholars left behind the KJV translation
• Robert Young left behind a translation of NT reading largely the same

And there are more, such as the NASB Greek scholars translation of Christ's words as “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

Where is your translation, Mr. Theologian?

Love,
Kermos

 

[Garee]

@Kermos, with all due respect there's just no way to fix the way you think. I've asked about your type and level of education so I could try to adjust how I speak to you, but to no avail. (Meaning you're too embarrassed to admit that you have none.) All you've done here is just repeat yourself, and play the victim again, as if this all means anything. it doesn't.

I'm not sure why you think the ESV is right when using the gloss "control" for G4912, but let's start with the KJV:

For the love of Christ constraineth (G4912) us ; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:​

(2 Corinthians 5:14 KJV)

For the love of Christ urges (G4912) us on, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died.​

(2 Corinthians 5:14 NRSV)

Now I'd love to cut and paste the exact entry from the Cambridge Greek Lexicon for G4912 (συνέχω sunechō), but this forum doesn't allow for that.

Cambridge Greek Lexicon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The entry for G4912 (συνέχω) is found in volume II page1334, and I shall highlight ALL the entries:

1 - hold, or keep tightly together (NT as in shut one's ears).
2 - (of tendons, belt-buckles) join, meet
3 - keep together - people, troops, ships, or an army (in opposition to disbanding an army)
4 - hold together - in a condition of stability or unity such as the universe or one's emotions
....a keep together - the rhythm of people rowing a boat, or musicians
....b maintain - a partnership
5 - contain, comprise, embrace - holding together a plurality of things
6 - encompass, confine - keeping enclosed or within boundaries
7- occupy, engage - oneself with something or someone
8 - || passive) be brought into close contact
9 - || passive) be entangled or embroiled - with some sort of trouble
10 - || passive) be gripped or afflicted - by anxiety or dreams, disease, war, or similar

And that's it, sir.

G4912 (συνέχω) can in no wise mean "control." You're being misled by a bad translation. Period.

Will this help to get you to think? I doubt it, given your past posts, but I've done my best to show the errors of your ways. But I'm sure you'll just continue to err.


Truth isn't a flaming missle, Kermos. The sooner you figure that out, the better your life will be.

Now you go run along and have some wonderful conversations with the likeminded some of whom you might even convince (subjunctive present) that you're a prophet.

Rhema


No it isn't. Any Greek scholar will tell you.
Hey, here's an idea, go find one. And good luck with that.

Back at it again brother . . . playing the intellectual card. ???

Find any Greek liar or the one you choose?

The loving commandment of Christ our husband is that we study individually to show Emanual's approval. Working in our lives.

It's the faithful (Creative law) : let there be love as a work of God by which dying mankind can believe Him who has no form

Remember Christ the husband not only teaches but his living word also comforts and brings to our new born again memory the previous things he has taught (John 14)

Which Greek Philosopher do you show yourself approved to?

Why would someone look for a Greek scholar? Is God Greek?

The loving commandment (in English) below.

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

The warning to the Greek seducers

1 john 2:26These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.;But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

What is your type and level of education so I could try to adjust how I speak to you, but to no avail. (Meaning you're too embarrassed to admit that you have none.) All you've done here is just repeat yourself, and play the victim again, as if this all means anything. it doesn't.

Back to Genesis the foundation or cornerstone of the doctrines of Christ.

Define the Greek word Apostle and how and when first used?

The sooner you figure that out, the better your life will be.

 

[Garee]

Truth isn't a flaming missle, Kermos. The sooner you figure that out, the better your life will be.

I would offer,

All things written in the law and prophets. Sola scriptura is a flaming missile of truth. the fiery work

It is reckoned as strange fire in an Old Testament parable of the priesthood of believers.

The show and tell I did it, look at me, it proves it. False prophecy consumed both of Aarons sons, not a hint of smoke on the priestly ceremonial attire used as a sign to the unbelieving world. And not an intellectual sign to their own self. Just like the flaming rocket in the garden of Eden. Four words of false prophecy added to Christ words. (neither shall you touch) questioning sola scriptura the no adding or subtracting 'law not subject to change

Satan the false prophet " Neither shall you touch"

The father of lies the carnal weapon the lust of the flesh a desire to see nakedness drawn by the lust of the eye to the hidden tree of eternal life satisfied by touch and not literally dying. they had no idea of what death was denying sola scriptura opened their eyes and they saw their own nakedness


Leviticus 10:1-3And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the Lord, which he commanded them not.;And there went out fire from the Lord, and devoured them, and they died before the Lord.Then Moses said unto Aaron, This is it that the Lord spake, saying, I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me, and before all the people I will be glorified. And Aaron held his peace.

Believers have prophecy sealed till the end of time. Signs to wonder, wonder, marvel after as if true prophecy for those who believe not, or do not have the gospel understanding of Christ, our unseen Holy Father.

Acts2413-14;Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.;But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: (sola scriptura)

Law and the prophets or Moses to represent the law and prophets. Another the law and the testimony and last Moses and Elias. Elias used to represent the power of the loving law. Passed down to John the Baptist uning one new testemnt made upof sola scriptura

Matthew 11:13-15For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Luke 1:17And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

 

[KingJ]

No. We all have a conscious.

Funny typo

 

[Rhema]

Where is your translation, Mr. Theologian?

Post 86:

Nope. I'm sure you're utterly 1,000 percent convinced of this... but....

τουτο (THIS) εστιν (IS) το (THE) εργον (WORK) του (OF THE) θεου (GOD) ινα (IN ORDER THAT) πιστευσητε (Y'ALL MIGHT BELIEVE) εις (INTO) ον (WHOM) απεστειλεν (HE SENT) εκεινος (THAT ONE)

And accounting for word order, "This is the work of God in order that y'all might believe into that one whom He sent.

(What the heck is wrong with you?)

You obviously seem very disturbed, so have the last word. I just don't engage with crazy.

Have a nice day,
Rhema

 

[Garee]

Post 86:

(What the heck is wrong with you?)

You obviously seem very disturbed, so have the last word. I just don't engage with crazy.

Have a nice day,
Rhema

Words have meaning attached . Might "to be able"

Yes, without the mighty "Let there be" and "it was good work of God" no man could believe God.

Might, a mighty word

Rhema "the mighty might or power of the word .

Matthew 1:22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,

Mighty works take mighty power

Matthew 11:20 Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not:

Luke 20:20 And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.

 

[Kermos]

Post 86:

(What the heck is wrong with you?)

You obviously seem very disturbed, so have the last word. I just don't engage with crazy.

Have a nice day,
Rhema

Dear Rhema,

Thank you for providing your personally official English translation of "This is the work of God in order that y'all might believe into that one whom He sent" (Rhema Version).

In Truth (John 14:6), the English translation is “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29, NASB).

You compounded the subjunctive mood for the word “believe” in your sentence; in other words, you doubled the single subjunctive mood by repeating the subjunctive mood a second time.

The subjunctive mood indicates a possibility, so this is an appropriate syntactical construct "if this_possibility_occurs then crucially_that_occured" to diagram a subjunctive mood sentence.

The clause “that you believe in Him whom He has sent” is the this_possibility_occurs.

And, the clause “This is the work of God” is the crucially_that_occured.

Now, bringing these together:

If “that you believe in Him whom He has sent” then “This is the work of God”.
​

The related Word of God "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" (Matthew 19:26) in relation with this Word of God “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29) needs to be revisited.

The possibility of “that you believe in Him whom He has sent" (this_possibility_occurs) is fully dependent upon “This is the work of God” (crucially_that_occured).

It is impossible for “that you believe in Him whom He has sent" (this_possibility_occurs) without “This is the work of God” (crucially_that_occured).

God controlled me (2 Corinthians 5:14) to warn you about this with the following:

Every single person in whom “the work of God” (John 6:29) is worked, then such a person receives belief/faith as delivered by the Author and Perfecter of the Faith (Hebrews 12:2).

Every single person who receives not “the work of God” (John 6:29) is a person without saving faith/belief.

The grammatical subjunctive mood verb “believe” (John 6:29) exists not in a vacuum, but the verb exists in a greater syntactical structure which is grammatically called a sentence. Behold, Christ utilized the word “that” (John 6:29) to indicate an essential requirement; therefore, you fail to understand the Word of God "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" (Matthew 19:26) in relation with this Word of God “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

(proof post #123)
​

The "might believe" in the Rhema Version improperly duplicated the subjunctive mood within the sentence as a whole because you introduced the word "might".

Your version is grammatically and syntactically and semantically broken in the Theologian Rhema English translation of "This is the work of God in order that y'all might believe into that one whom He sent" (Rhema Version), yet you ignored the valid warning:

Four words of false prophecy added to Christ words. (neither shall you touch) questioning sola scriptura the no adding or subtracting 'law not subject to change

Satan the false prophet " Neither shall you touch"

(proof post #131 by @Garee)
​

The NASB is accurate with this Word of God “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty!

Love,
Kermos

 

[Rhema]

You compounded the subjunctive mood for the word “believe” in your sentence; in other words, you doubled the single subjunctive mood by repeating the subjunctive mood a second time.

That makes no linguistic sense. Period.

Now if you just want to blindly put your faith in the NASB, then please just say that. You don't need to make up nonsensical explanations. The English word "that" is not an expression of a subjunctive mood. Rather, it indicates a direct causality. One does "this" so that "that will" happen, not that "that might" happen.

And if you don't understanding this, please talk to any qualified professor of English.

The clause “that you believe in Him whom He has sent” is the this_possibility_occurs.

Seriously, what is your level of education in English? Because this post proves you have none.

The subjunctive mood indicates a possibility, so this is an appropriate syntactical construct "if this_possibility_occurs then crucially_that_occured" to diagram a subjunctive mood sentence.

The word "possibility" does not exist in the verse, nor is it expressed in your English translations. Besides, in your example, you misplaced the word "possibility." To conform to the verse in question, you ought to have written, "THIS occurs, then crucially_that MIGHT_occur." But at this point I don't expect you to even understand my point here, let alone concede its accuracy.

If you think you have mastery of the English language, you are sorely deluded. One wonders, by whom. And you certainly have no mastery of Greek, this thing you claim to love to read. Why did you feel the need to lie?

The grammatical subjunctive mood verb “believe” (John 6:29) exists not in a vacuum, but the verb exists in a greater syntactical structure which is grammatically called a sentence.

Repeating this does not make it true. It merely shows that you really have no clue.

Thank you for providing your personally official English translation of "This is the work of God in order that y'all might believe into that one whom He sent" (Rhema Version).

So where was your brain when I first posted this?

The "might believe" in the Rhema Version improperly duplicated the subjunctive mood within the sentence as a whole because you introduced the word "might".

I am reminded of the phrase, "Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain."

Was not (ουκ-yes) Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?​

(James 2:21-22 KJV)

Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.​

(James 2:24 KJV)

Rhema

Even Mounce understands this:

At the beginning of a Greek question, ουκ anticipates a positive response

 

[Rhema]

the KJV scholars left behind the KJV translation

You do realize that your vaunted KJV "scholars" had no clue about Koine Greek, which means that they had no functional definition for TEN PERCENT of New Testament vocabulary. (They back inserted from the Latin.)
-----------

“One man is to be given the credit for the discovery of the Koine – a German pastor named Adolf Deissmann. Even though one or two perceptive scholars had noted the true character of NT Greek as early as the middle of the nineteenth century, their statements made no impression on general opinion. Deissmann, on a visit to a friend in Marburg, found a volume of Greek papyri from Egypt, and leafing through this publication, he was struck by the similarity to the Greek of the NT. He followed up this observation with continued study, and his publications of his findings finally led to general acceptance of the position that the peculiarities of the Greek NT were, for the most part, to be explained by reference to the nonliterary Greek, the popular colloquial language of the period. He first published his results in two volumes of Bible Studies (1895, 1897) and later on in the justly popular Life from the Ancient East (1908).”​

- The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, pg. 486.​

"...in 1895, Adolf Deissmann published his Bibelstudien - an innocently titled work that was to revolutionize the study of the NT. In this work (later translated into English under the title Bible Studies) Deissmann showed that the Greek of the NT was not a language invented by the Holy Spirit (Hermann Cremer had called it "Holy Ghost Greek," largely because 10 percent of its vocabulary had no secular parallels). Rather, Deissmann demonstrated that the bulk of NT vocabulary was to be found in the papyri.​

​

The pragmatic effect of Deissmann's work was to render obsolete virtually all lexica and lexical commentaries written before the turn of the century. (Thayer's lexicon, published in 1886, was outdated shortly after it came off the press - yet, ironically, it is still relied on today by many NT students.)"​

- Daniel B. Wallace. The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar.​

Zondervan, 2000, p. 21.​

 

[Rhema]

Bill Mounce and the Greek scholars of the NIV

The Committee on Bible Translation that produced the NIV began in 1965. Bill Mounce didn't start until 2009.

"I must register one strong protest against one particular translation. When the New International Version was published in 1980, I was one of those who hailed it with delight. I believed its own claim about itself, that it was determined to translate exactly what was there, and inject no extra paraphrasing or interpretative glosses. This contrasted so strongly with the then popular New English Bible, and promised such an advance over the then rather dated Revised Standard Version, that I recommended it to students and members of the congregation I was then serving. Disillusionment set in over the next two years, as I lectured verse by verse through several of Paul's letters, not least Galatians and Romans. Again and again, with the Greek text in front of me and the NIV beside it, I discovered that the translators had another principle, considerably higher than the stated one: to make sure that Paul should say what the broadly Protestant and evangelical tradition said he said. I do not know what version of scripture they use at Dr Piper's church. But I do know that if a church only, or mainly, relies on the NIV it will, quite simply, never understand what Paul was talking about." Wright, N. T. (2009). Justification : God's Plan and Paul's Vision. Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic. pp. 51–52. ISBN 978-0-8308-3863-9.​

Mark Given, a professor of religious studies at Missouri State University, criticized the NIV for "several inaccurate and misleading translations" since many sentences and clauses are paraphrased, rather than translated from Hebrew and Greek. (LINK)​

Michael Marlowe, a scholar in biblical languages, criticized as "indefensible" the footnote provided in the NIV for 1 Corinthians 11:4–7, which replaced multiple instances of "head covering" with "long hair" to "harmonize this passage with modern habits of dress." Church historian David Bercot, whose focus is early Christianity, likewise deemed the footnote a "fanciful interpretation" that "is in no way an alternate translation of the Greek text." (LINK)​

Biblical scholar Bruce M. Metzger criticized the NIV 1984 edition for the addition of "just" into Jeremiah 7:22 in which the verse becomes "For when I brought your forefathers/ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices." (LINK)​

In other words, the NIV is biased slime.

If they couldn't get it right to begin with, why do you think they have it right now? Adding in words? To scripture? Taking away words to change the meaning? From Scripture? You condone this?

Don't promote what you don't understand. (To do so is to lie.)

Rhema

 

[Garee]

That makes no linguistic sense. Period.

Now if you just want to blindly put your faith in the NASB, then please just say that. You don't need to make up nonsensical explanations. The English word "that" is not an expression of a subjunctive mood. Rather, it indicates a direct causality. One does "this" so that "that will" happen, not that "that might" happen.

And if you don't understanding this, please talk to any qualified professor of English.

The faith as the power of God "Let there be" is the good work of Gods labor of love.

Mark his word what he says comes to pass.

Adding to it with what you call the gospel of dying mankind apostles and not the gospel of our living Holy Father.

Is faith a work?

 

[Kermos]

You do realize that your vaunted KJV "scholars" had no clue about Koine Greek, which means that they had no functional definition for TEN PERCENT of New Testament vocabulary. (They back inserted from the Latin.)
-----------

“One man is to be given the credit for the discovery of the Koine – a German pastor named Adolf Deissmann. Even though one or two perceptive scholars had noted the true character of NT Greek as early as the middle of the nineteenth century, their statements made no impression on general opinion. Deissmann, on a visit to a friend in Marburg, found a volume of Greek papyri from Egypt, and leafing through this publication, he was struck by the similarity to the Greek of the NT. He followed up this observation with continued study, and his publications of his findings finally led to general acceptance of the position that the peculiarities of the Greek NT were, for the most part, to be explained by reference to the nonliterary Greek, the popular colloquial language of the period. He first published his results in two volumes of Bible Studies (1895, 1897) and later on in the justly popular Life from the Ancient East (1908).”​

- The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, pg. 486.​

"...in 1895, Adolf Deissmann published his Bibelstudien - an innocently titled work that was to revolutionize the study of the NT. In this work (later translated into English under the title Bible Studies) Deissmann showed that the Greek of the NT was not a language invented by the Holy Spirit (Hermann Cremer had called it "Holy Ghost Greek," largely because 10 percent of its vocabulary had no secular parallels). Rather, Deissmann demonstrated that the bulk of NT vocabulary was to be found in the papyri.​

​

The pragmatic effect of Deissmann's work was to render obsolete virtually all lexica and lexical commentaries written before the turn of the century. (Thayer's lexicon, published in 1886, was outdated shortly after it came off the press - yet, ironically, it is still relied on today by many NT students.)"​

- Daniel B. Wallace. The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar.​

Zondervan, 2000, p. 21.​

The Committee on Bible Translation that produced the NIV began in 1965. Bill Mounce didn't start until 2009.

"I must register one strong protest against one particular translation. When the New International Version was published in 1980, I was one of those who hailed it with delight. I believed its own claim about itself, that it was determined to translate exactly what was there, and inject no extra paraphrasing or interpretative glosses. This contrasted so strongly with the then popular New English Bible, and promised such an advance over the then rather dated Revised Standard Version, that I recommended it to students and members of the congregation I was then serving. Disillusionment set in over the next two years, as I lectured verse by verse through several of Paul's letters, not least Galatians and Romans. Again and again, with the Greek text in front of me and the NIV beside it, I discovered that the translators had another principle, considerably higher than the stated one: to make sure that Paul should say what the broadly Protestant and evangelical tradition said he said. I do not know what version of scripture they use at Dr Piper's church. But I do know that if a church only, or mainly, relies on the NIV it will, quite simply, never understand what Paul was talking about." Wright, N. T. (2009). Justification : God's Plan and Paul's Vision. Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic. pp. 51–52. ISBN 978-0-8308-3863-9.​

Mark Given, a professor of religious studies at Missouri State University, criticized the NIV for "several inaccurate and misleading translations" since many sentences and clauses are paraphrased, rather than translated from Hebrew and Greek. (LINK)​

Michael Marlowe, a scholar in biblical languages, criticized as "indefensible" the footnote provided in the NIV for 1 Corinthians 11:4–7, which replaced multiple instances of "head covering" with "long hair" to "harmonize this passage with modern habits of dress." Church historian David Bercot, whose focus is early Christianity, likewise deemed the footnote a "fanciful interpretation" that "is in no way an alternate translation of the Greek text." (LINK)​

Biblical scholar Bruce M. Metzger criticized the NIV 1984 edition for the addition of "just" into Jeremiah 7:22 in which the verse becomes "For when I brought your forefathers/ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices." (LINK)​

In other words, the NIV is biased slime.

If they couldn't get it right to begin with, why do you think they have it right now? Adding in words? To scripture? Taking away words to change the meaning? From Scripture? You condone this?

Don't promote what you don't understand. (To do so is to lie.)

Rhema

Dear Rhema,

You lied based on your writing "so have the last word" (proof post #135) to me followed by your post quoted above.

Lord Jesus declares "You are of your father, the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and doesn’t stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks on his own; for he is a liar, and its father" (John 8:44).

You present no Mounce denounce of the NIV's translation of John 6:29 from Greek to English.

Your exaggeration of your vaunted KJV "scholars" demonstrates the desperate condition of your belief that “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29, NASB) is an inaccurate translation requiring your personal keys of "This is the work of God in order that y'all might believe into that one whom He sent" (Rhema Version). Notice, God caused me to quote the NASB to you in the post to which you replied.

Your dissertation failed to identify anyone specifically detailing an error in the KJV translation of John 6:29.

You closed with "Don't promote what you don't understand. (To do so is to lie.)". I simply responded to your writing of "No it isn't. Any Greek scholar will tell you. Hey, here's an idea, go find one" (proof post #129). You personally disqualified Bill Mounce and the Greek scholars of the NIV, the ESV Greek scholars, William Tyndale, the KJV scholars, Robert Young, and many more, such as the NASB Greek scholars. Some of your disqualification was by omission and some by incorporation.

I am familiar with the history of the English translation of the Bible.

By the way, your failed accusation against me of a "lie", there, results in you issuing your own lie, so please read the opening two paragraphs, again.

Love,
Kermos