Author Topic: End of the age or End of the world.  (Read 514 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline seekingHiswisdom

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 755
  • Manna: 17
  • Gender: Female
  • I am Rella. Still 6 & counting.
End of the age or End of the world.
« on: Mon Feb 17, 2020 - 08:34:33 »
A very confusing subject even for the most learned but to  a non-biblical trained layman can make one wonder.

I have always understood the original biblical texts to be mainly written in Biblical Hebrew, with some ... such as Daniel and Ezra...portions  in Biblical Aramaic.

Somewhere along the way  I read that Biblical, or Classical  Hebrew, is an archaic form of the Hebrew language.

And that the very first translation of the Hebrew Bible was into Greek.

To my understanding

The New Testament was written in Greek ,as Greek was the language of the learned during the years of the composition of the New Testament from 50 to 100 AD.

By that time many Jews could not even read Hebrew anymore so, around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC.

Gradually this Greek translation of the Old Testament ( the Septuagint) was widely accepted and was even used in many synagogues.

But enter  now something that bugs me. The New Testament and how someone somewhere got something wrong.

Most of us, if not all, at one point in our lives followed King James Version of the bible. At least I did.

King James translation seems to trip in a spot or two if all his translators did not get a verse translated properly from the original Biblical Greek into the Kings language that they were commissioned to do.

King James states  Mathew 28:20 to say

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Now, the Greek , that the New Testament was originally written in states Mathew 28:20.

ἕως     τῆς     συντελείας     τοῦ          αἰῶνος  .
   
until    the     completion     of the       age

But it was Aramaic, that the original New Testament was not written in that says

ܘܐܠܦܘ ܐܢܘܢ ܕܢܛܪܘܢ ܟܠ ܡܐ ܕܦܩܕܬܟܘܢ ܘܗܐ ܐܢܐ ܥܡܟܘܢ ܐܢܐ ܟܠܗܘܢ ܝܘܡܬܐ ܥܕܡܐ ܠܫܘܠܡܗ ܕܥܠܡܐ ܐܡܝܢ
20 And teach them that they must observe all what I have Commanded you. And behold, I am with you all the days, until the end of the alma {the world}. Amiyn {Amen}.”​


Simple question. Is King James yet again proven wrong?

And why would the KJV translators by pass what would have been the original writings. What would they have gained?




Christian Forums and Message Board

End of the age or End of the world.
« on: Mon Feb 17, 2020 - 08:34:33 »

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12648
  • Manna: 357
  • Gender: Male
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #1 on: Wed Feb 19, 2020 - 15:38:57 »
It's a matter of words changing meaning over time.

The way they used "world" was not to say the earth, or even the people in it, but more closely holds the idea of the current age, and is therefore similar to the Greek.  You can see this in other verses as well:

...But whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. Matthew 12:32

Offline seekingHiswisdom

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 755
  • Manna: 17
  • Gender: Female
  • I am Rella. Still 6 & counting.
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #2 on: Wed Feb 19, 2020 - 16:59:44 »
It's a matter of words changing meaning over time.

The way they used "world" was not to say the earth, or even the people in it, but more closely holds the idea of the current age, and is therefore similar to the Greek.  You can see this in other verses as well:

...But whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. Matthew 12:32

ἕως     τῆς     συντελείας     τοῦ          αἰῶνος  .
   
until    the     completion     of the       age

This pretty well sums it up for me.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #2 on: Wed Feb 19, 2020 - 16:59:44 »

Offline seekingHiswisdom

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 755
  • Manna: 17
  • Gender: Female
  • I am Rella. Still 6 & counting.
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #3 on: Thu Feb 20, 2020 - 09:10:13 »
Quote from: @Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Yesterday at 15:38:57
Quote
    It's a matter of words changing meaning over time.

The way they used "world" was not to say the earth, or even the people in it, but more closely holds the idea of the current age, and is therefore similar to the Greek.  You can see this in other verses as well:

...But whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. Matthew 12:32       



Carrying on my studies into this subject matter I was again reminded of what is considered  one of the earliest known manuscript of the Christian Bible, compiled in the 4th century AD. Yes, I am aware that political correctness, world wide, begs the use of CE or common era, but when talking of our Lord or His words, there is nothing common about that.

I am referring to Codex Sinaiticus ~ (Deliberately not including the  Codex Vaticanus... which is actually earlier then Sinaiticus, and is considered to be closer to the Greek New Testament,... so as to not have some believe what they would).

The  Codex Sinaiticus  manuscript was discovered by Konstantin von Tischendorf in the monastery of Saint Catherine at the foot of Mount Sinai in the period 1844-1859.

A comparison of the original  Codex Sinaiticus as translated to the KJV of 3 verses in Mathew shows

In the KJV  Mathew 13 : 39-40 ; 49

"The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world . . . So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,"
Matthew 13:39-40, 49, KJV

In the Codex Sinaiticus

Mathew 13 : 39-40 ; 49
39 the enemy that sowed them is the devil: the harvest is the conclusion of the age, and the reapers are angels.

40 As then the tares are collected and burned in fire, so shall it be in the conclusion of the age.

49 So shall it be in the conclusion of the age: the angels shall come forth, and separate the wicked from among the righteous,

Then

KJV  Matthew 24: 3

"And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? . . .
Matthew 24: 3

Codex Sinaiticus

Mathew 24 : 3

3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, his disciples came to him privately, saying: Tell us, when shall these things be, and what the sign of thy coming and of the conclusion of the age?

Also:

KJV Mathew 28:20

"Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."
Matthew 28:20, KJV

Codex Sinaiticus

Mathew 28:20

20 teaching them to observe all things whatever I commanded you. And lo, I am with you, all the days, to the conclusion of the age.

So everything prior to all the kings men translating things says end of age or end of days.

Why did they get it wrong?

I do not buy the idea that  "It's a matter of words changing meaning over time"... Passover never meant Easter. They were two different things altogether ... see Acts 12:4 KJV

I just think that everything government is involved in.... and the King certainly is government.... they mess it up.

But the sad thing is it really messes up the common man, who we encourage to read and study the written word and not
just the preachers we all hear.... for who or what are they to believe.

Heck Codex Sinaiticus does not even have a Mark 16:16 verse.

The link for those who are interested in bookmarking to check things for themselves

http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?book=33&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0 ( There is an English translation window on the page)

While it has the entire bible as they wrote it, there are books that have not made it into the "protestant end of things..."

Maccabees: Which is a great educational read on its own.

The First and Second Books of Maccabees contain the most detailed accounts of the battles of Judah Maccabee and his brothers for the liberation of Judea from foreign domination. These books include within them the earliest references to the story of Hanukkah and the rededication of the Temple, in addition to the famous story of the mother and her seven sons.

And yet, these two books are missing from the Hebrew Bible.

In order to begin addressing the question of this omission, it is important to understand the formation of the Hebrew biblical canon. The word “canon” originally comes from the Greek and means “standard” or “measurement.” When referring to a scriptural canon, the word is used to designate a collection of writings that are considered authoritative within a specific religious group. To the Jewish people, the biblical canon consists of the books found in the Tanach (Hebrew Bible).

The canonization process of the Hebrew Bible is often associated with the Council of Jamnia (Hebrew: Yavneh), around the year 90 C.E. Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai managed to escape Jerusalem before its destruction and received permission to rebuild a Jewish base in Jamnia. It was there that the contents of the canon of the Hebrew Bible may have been discussed and formally accepted. However, this is a scholarly proposition that has lost adherents in recent years. Be that as it may, some of the debates surrounding these discussions–whenever and wherever they may have taken place–do appear in rabbinic literature, although we have no complete surviving record of these debates. Therefore, we can only speculate on why some materials were excluded from our canon and others included.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/omitting-the-maccabees/





Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #3 on: Thu Feb 20, 2020 - 09:10:13 »

Offline dpr

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 513
  • Manna: 5
  • Gender: Male
  • Protestant Huguenot
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #4 on: Wed Feb 26, 2020 - 11:15:27 »
A very confusing subject even for the most learned but to  a non-biblical trained layman can make one wonder.

I have always understood the original biblical texts to be mainly written in Biblical Hebrew, with some ... such as Daniel and Ezra...portions  in Biblical Aramaic.

Somewhere along the way  I read that Biblical, or Classical  Hebrew, is an archaic form of the Hebrew language.

And that the very first translation of the Hebrew Bible was into Greek.

To my understanding

The New Testament was written in Greek ,as Greek was the language of the learned during the years of the composition of the New Testament from 50 to 100 AD.

By that time many Jews could not even read Hebrew anymore so, around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC.

Gradually this Greek translation of the Old Testament ( the Septuagint) was widely accepted and was even used in many synagogues.

But enter  now something that bugs me. The New Testament and how someone somewhere got something wrong.

Most of us, if not all, at one point in our lives followed King James Version of the bible. At least I did.

King James translation seems to trip in a spot or two if all his translators did not get a verse translated properly from the original Biblical Greek into the Kings language that they were commissioned to do.

King James states  Mathew 28:20 to say

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Now, the Greek , that the New Testament was originally written in states Mathew 28:20.

ἕως     τῆς     συντελείας     τοῦ          αἰῶνος  .
   
until    the     completion     of the       age

But it was Aramaic, that the original New Testament was not written in that says

ܘܐܠܦܘ ܐܢܘܢ ܕܢܛܪܘܢ ܟܠ ܡܐ ܕܦܩܕܬܟܘܢ ܘܗܐ ܐܢܐ ܥܡܟܘܢ ܐܢܐ ܟܠܗܘܢ ܝܘܡܬܐ ܥܕܡܐ ܠܫܘܠܡܗ ܕܥܠܡܐ ܐܡܝܢ
20 And teach them that they must observe all what I have Commanded you. And behold, I am with you all the days, until the end of the alma {the world}. Amiyn {Amen}.”​


Simple question. Is King James yet again proven wrong?

And why would the KJV translators by pass what would have been the original writings. What would they have gained?

Sounds like your confusion is from heeding a doctrine of man that makes you interpret the idea of an age to mean a short era of a generation (i.e., Preterism).

The KJV didn't make a mistake according to what you just revealed from the Aramaic (alma), but actually confirmed the KJV translation in Matt.28:20 with 'end of the world'.


Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #4 on: Wed Feb 26, 2020 - 11:15:27 »



Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 617
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #5 on: Wed Feb 26, 2020 - 12:00:17 »
 seekingHiswisdom is correct.
It is "age" not world. The NKJV corrected the KJV. The NIV also says "age."

Plus, there is no end of the world in the Bible. I could think of doomsday world ending scenarios, but I pray we will not nuke ourselves to death!


Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #5 on: Wed Feb 26, 2020 - 12:00:17 »

Offline dpr

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 513
  • Manna: 5
  • Gender: Male
  • Protestant Huguenot
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #6 on: Thu Feb 27, 2020 - 10:30:19 »
seekingHiswisdom is correct.
It is "age" not world. The NKJV corrected the KJV. The NIV also says "age."

Plus, there is no end of the world in the Bible. I could think of doomsday world ending scenarios, but I pray we will not nuke ourselves to death!

No it isn't. What you're presenting is word fallacy just to serve a doctrine of men.
 

The Greek word aion is also translated to 'world' in the KJV which is not an error...

Matt 13:40
40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
KJV

Matt 13:49
49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
KJV

Matt 28:19-20
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
KJV

Mark 10:29-30
29 And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,
30 But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.
KJV


I could keep going to show the Greek word aion is PROPERLY translated in the KJV and is NOT an error, simply because the word 'age' does NOT have to mean a short generation of time. The idea of an 'earth age' relates to the whole time encompassed by this present world from Genesis 1 to the end of it and start of the new heavens and a new earth.


Offline seekingHiswisdom

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 755
  • Manna: 17
  • Gender: Female
  • I am Rella. Still 6 & counting.
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #7 on: Thu Feb 27, 2020 - 15:50:39 »
No it isn't. What you're presenting is word fallacy just to serve a doctrine of men.
 

The Greek word aion is also translated to 'world' in the KJV which is not an error...

Matt 13:40
40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
KJV

Matt 13:49
49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
KJV

Matt 28:19-20
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
KJV

Mark 10:29-30
29 And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,
30 But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.
KJV


I could keep going to show the Greek word aion is PROPERLY translated in the KJV and is NOT an error, simply because the word 'age' does NOT have to mean a short generation of time. The idea of an 'earth age' relates to the whole time encompassed by this present world from Genesis 1 to the end of it and start of the new heavens and a new earth.

 ::frown::

Concerning the noun, aiõn, however, both lexicons (and all other such works) allow for an interpretation that would harmonize with the teaching of eventual, universal salvation. Thayer’s lexicon gives as its first definition of aiõn the sense of “age.”

https://www.concordant.org/expositions/the-eons/greek-words-aion-aionios/
Here is a clear understanding explanation of aion.

'World' is a bad translation of aion because the Greek word for 'world' is kosmos and not aion.

The Greek word Aion

Aion occurs 128 times in the Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament and it is used in the Bible, depending on the context, to have the following two meanings:

A period of time that never ends, meaning forever, everlasting or eternal

OR

A period of time that begins and ends, meaning an age or age-lasting. (this wouldbe the meaning we are looking at)

The KJV translators and translators of other versions of the Bible accept that the Greek word aion means either ‘everlasting’ or ‘age’, as its context in Scripture demands. Thus, Strong’s Concordance and Thayer’s Greek Lexicon define aion to have both of the above meanings of ‘everlasting’ and ‘age’.

So, let us now prove the point that aion has these two meanings, depending on its context, by giving examples from the New King James Version.

1 Timothy 1:17

Now to the King eternal (aion), immortal, invisible, to God who alone is wise, be honor and glory forever (aion) and ever (aion). Amen

Revelation 11:15

Then the seventh angel sounded: And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever (aion) and ever (aion)!”

In the Bible, when aion is used to describe the eternal attributes of God, then of course aion means forever, everlasting or eternal, as correctly translated in these verses.

Now, let us consider a verse where its context dictates that aion can only mean an ‘age’ which begins and ends and that it cannot mean ‘everlasting’.

Matthew 24:3

Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when these things will be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age (aion)?”

In this verse, Jesus’s disciples are enquiring about His Second Coming. Notice, the disciples understood that when Jesus Christ returns to earth it will mark the end of this present aion, which is correctly translated here to mean ‘age’ as dictated by its context.

The expression ‘the end of the age’ is used several times in the Bible, which clearly shows that aion in certain contexts means an age, a time-period, which begins and ends.

The KJV has preferred to translate aion, in the majority of cases, to mean ‘world’ when the Bible means age or ages. ‘World’ is a bad translation of aion because the Greek word for ‘world’ is kosmos and not aion. Also, when Christ returns, it will mark the end of the age, and not the end of the world (kosmos).


There are many other places in the Bible, such as in Ephesians 1:21 and 3:5, where its context dictates that aion can only mean age or age-lasting. Most Bible versions agree that aion means age or age-lasting in at least 30% of its 128 occurrences in the New Testament.

The important thing to understand is that aion can have one of two meanings, and it is aion’s context in Scripture that dictates whether aion is translated to mean age/age-lasting or forever/everlasting/eternal.

The key question to ask is, ‘Can aion ever be translated to mean everlasting when relating to God’s future punishment of unbelievers?’ The clear biblical answer is: Absolutely not!

 You don’t have to be an expert in the Greek language to be one hundred percent sure of this.

 Aion can never mean forever, everlasting or eternal when describing God’s future judgement of unbelievers or fallen angels. Why not? Because such translations contradict the Word of God, which says that God is the Saviour of the world, and the Saviour of all men.

Such mistranslations contradict many glorious scriptures including those quoted in Chapter 4, Universal Reconciliation Scriptures – The Riches of Christ.

We now give you examples of such mistranslations found in popular versions of the Bible that support the unbiblical doctrine of hell.

Mistranslations of Aion

2 Peter 2:17

These are wells without water, clouds carried by a tempest, for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever (aion).

The NKJV translation of aion in this scripture to mean forever is a serious mistranslation. A correct translation of this verse is given in Young’s Literal Translation, as follows:

2 Peter 2:17 (YLT)

These are wells without water, and clouds by a tempest driven, to whom the thick gloom of the darkness to the age (aion) hath been kept.

The meaning of this verse is that all of these unbelieving false teachers, the ‘wells without water’, who walk in spiritual darkness will be kept under the thick gloom of darkness until they repent through God’s judgement in the Lake of Fire.

Revelation 19:2-3 (NKJV)

2 “For true and righteous are His judgments, because He has judged the great harlot who corrupted the earth with her fornication; and He has avenged on her the blood of His servants shed by her.” 3 Again they said, “Alleluia! Her smoke rises up forever (aion) and ever (aion)!”

This is another example of a mistranslated verse in Bible versions that support the doctrine of hell. ‘Her smoke rises up forever (aion) and ever (aion)’ is a mistranslation.

The correct translation is ‘Her smoke rises up for an age of the ages’. The ‘age of the ages’ refers to the judgement, taking place in the Lake of Fire during the Great White Throne Judgement Age, of unbelievers who perpetrated and deceived many through their false religious system (the Great Harlot) and also martyred true believers, whose shed blood will be avenged by God. These unbelievers will be judged by God’s Spiritual Refining Fire

Revelation 20:10 (NKJV)

The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented (basanizo) day and night forever (aion) and ever (aion).

In this NKJV verse, both of the Greek words basanizo and aion have been mistranslated to mean ‘And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever’.

The correct translation of this verse is, ‘And they will be refined and purified day and night for an age of the ages’.

https://godsplanforall.com/free-online-book/part-ii/chapter-17-translations-of-owlam-aion-and-aionios/

Shall I post more?

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12648
  • Manna: 357
  • Gender: Male
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #8 on: Thu Feb 27, 2020 - 22:19:43 »
I do not buy the idea that  "It's a matter of words changing meaning over time"... Passover never meant Easter. They were two different things altogether ... see Acts 12:4 KJV
Passover vs Easter was not the discussion.  The specific example in question was "end of the world" in the KJV.  That was a fine translation... for the 17th century.  It is no longer the 17th century, and the words don't mean to us now quite what they did to those in 17th century England.  Words change meaning over time.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #8 on: Thu Feb 27, 2020 - 22:19:43 »

Offline dpr

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 513
  • Manna: 5
  • Gender: Male
  • Protestant Huguenot
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #9 on: Fri Feb 28, 2020 - 02:12:32 »
::frown::

Concerning the noun, aiõn, however, both lexicons (and all other such works) allow for an interpretation that would harmonize with the teaching of eventual, universal salvation. Thayer’s lexicon gives as its first definition of aiõn the sense of “age.”

What kind of philosophy of man is that???

The Greek word aion can also mean 'world', not just an 'age'.

Luke 18:29-30
29 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake,
30 Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting.
KJV


It doesn't matter whether one wishes to translate Greek 'aion' there to 'world' or to 'age', it STILL means the same idea because of the context Jesus gave with it, i.e., the FUTURE new heavens and a new earth! Don't you wonder why He attached that "life everlasting" phrase on the end of that? It was obviously for people like you, who has been deceived as to what timing He was pointing to there, i.e., the future world to come, the time of the future resurrection and gathering of His Church to Him! (and I don't mean a pre-trib rapture either, I'm not pre-trib, so don't try to start that junk either).


Offline seekingHiswisdom

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 755
  • Manna: 17
  • Gender: Female
  • I am Rella. Still 6 & counting.
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #10 on: Fri Feb 28, 2020 - 08:37:59 »
Passover vs Easter was not the discussion.  The specific example in question was "end of the world" in the KJV.  That was a fine translation... for the 17th century.  It is no longer the 17th century, and the words don't mean to us now quite what they did to those in 17th century England.  Words change meaning over time.

This is the most common example of how all the Kings men managed to translate something that was not accurate.

It was after Passover......

No way could one every say Passover meant Easter.

Yes words change over time.... but this one doesnt.

And the end of an age is not the end of the world.

The world was in existence before the age of mankind started.  It is not going to go away or blow up after final judgment of man.

It is an inappropriate translation


Offline seekingHiswisdom

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 755
  • Manna: 17
  • Gender: Female
  • I am Rella. Still 6 & counting.
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #11 on: Fri Feb 28, 2020 - 08:44:30 »
What kind of philosophy of man is that???

The Greek word aion can also mean 'world', not just an 'age'.

Luke 18:29-30
29 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake,
30 Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting.
KJV


It doesn't matter whether one wishes to translate Greek 'aion' there to 'world' or to 'age', it STILL means the same idea because of the context Jesus gave with it, i.e., the FUTURE new heavens and a new earth! Don't you wonder why He attached that "life everlasting" phrase on the end of that? It was obviously for people like you, who has been deceived as to what timing He was pointing to there, i.e., the future world to come, the time of the future resurrection and gathering of His Church to Him! (and I don't mean a pre-trib rapture either, I'm not pre-trib, so don't try to start that junk either).

I am not any Trib so leave that out of the equation.

Does a new earth mean to you that this earth will blow up or disolve away leaving a hole in space for the new eart to be placed?

It does not to me.

It means a cleansing of current earth. A rejuvenation if you will.

NO I dont wonder about "life everlasting". That is the promise of our faith. Our reward.



 




Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12648
  • Manna: 357
  • Gender: Male
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #12 on: Fri Feb 28, 2020 - 13:15:13 »
And the end of an age is not the end of the world.

The world was in existence before the age of mankind started.  It is not going to go away or blow up after final judgment of man.

It is an inappropriate translation
For today, it is wrong.  But in 1611, the very idea that the LAND might disappear from existence didn't even exist in that place and time.  It clearly wasn't in view, and wasn't what they understood by "end of the world."  They were referring to a re-structuring of the power that be, the end of an age.

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 662
  • Manna: 12
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #13 on: Fri Feb 28, 2020 - 13:42:26 »
  IMO, the KJV is not a very good BV for today.Much of its language is obsolete, not to mention its goofs & booboos, such as "Easter" in Acts 12:4 & the ADDITION of "and shalt be" in Rev. 16:5.

  The Model T (1909-1927) was a great car-for its time. But it was not made for today's highways. its crank starter & hand-operated windshield wipers are obsolete. So it is with the KJV. it was a great Bible version for the British if the 17th C,  but we have much-better now, in OUR English.

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7509
  • Manna: 369
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #14 on: Sat Feb 29, 2020 - 04:58:32 »
IMO, the KJV is not a very good BV for today.Much of its language is obsolete, not to mention its goofs & booboos, such as "Easter" in Acts 12:4 & the ADDITION of "and shalt be" in Rev. 16:5.

  The Model T (1909-1927) was a great car-for its time. But it was not made for today's highways. its crank starter & hand-operated windshield wipers are obsolete. So it is with the KJV. it was a great Bible version for the British if the 17th C,  but we have much-better now, in OUR English.

 
Sir, your analogy falls way short to prove your point. The big problem is this: "Cars, etc. made by man, whose ability is so limited, does the best he can at the time of doing whatever the undertaking may be"~yet God, who is The Word from eternity past, created "languages" to be us as a means of communicating among flesh and blood whom he created for his glory and honor. The original 1611 KJV which I have a copy of, is no different than my modern-day KJV except in spelling certain words, yet the SAME WORDS~they had use words in 1611, that truly have the SAME MEANING yet words that we may not use to today (letteth~when we use the word hinder, YET the same meaning....listeth, when we use the word pleaseth~different words, SAME MEANING) they do not create a problem UNLESS someone is looking for some discrepancies~and some may think they have found them in such words as "Easter" in Acts 12:4~yet Easter and Passover are one and the SAME meaning, which every little schoolboy should know that. God knows the end from the beginning and knew PERFECTLY what he was doing when he did what he did in giving the English world a bible in 1611 shortly after the printing press was invented, or we would have had it sooner no doubt, and why God waited so long, it is not for us to know, and it truly does not matter.   

Offline seekingHiswisdom

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 755
  • Manna: 17
  • Gender: Female
  • I am Rella. Still 6 & counting.
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #15 on: Sat Feb 29, 2020 - 09:48:02 »
UNLESS someone is looking for some discrepancies~and some may think they have found them in such words as "Easter" in Acts 12:4~yet Easter and Passover are one and the SAME meaning, which every little schoolboy should know that. God knows the end from the beginning and knew PERFECTLY what he was doing when he did what he did in giving the English world a bible in 1611 shortly after the printing press was invented, or we would have had it sooner no doubt, and why God waited so long, it is not for us to know, and it truly does not matter.

That may be my problem. I am not a little schoolboy.

Easter and Passover mean the same?

Not even close.

You should know that Passover, or Pesach in Hebrew, is one of the Jewish religion's most sacred and widely observed holidays. Passover commemorates the story of the Israelites' departure from ancient Egypt, which appears in the Hebrew Bible's books of Exodus, Numbers and Deuteronomy,

The Passover Seder is an occasion for praise and thanksgiving and for re-dedication to the idea of liberation.

Jesus celebrated the Passover dinner where He instituted what we refer to as Holy Communion.

While they were eating, Jesus took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it, he broke it, gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”—Matthew 26:26–28

And we know that

The event described in Matthew 26:26–28 (also in Mark 14:22–25 and Luke 22:14–23) is known as the Last Supper. It was Jesus’ last meal with his disciples before his crucifixion. In that meal, which was a Passover meal,

Easter is the most important and oldest festival of the Christian Church, celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ and held (in the Western Church) between March 21 and April 25, on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the northern spring equinox.

Easter, also called Pascha (Greek, Latin) or Resurrection Sunday, is a festival and holiday commemorating the resurrection of Jesus from the dead,

Two celebrations for entirely different reasons.

When the Marys arrived at Jesus' tomb, it was the first day of the week. It followed the Sabbath. Which followed the Passover of the last supper. And there was no understanding when they went there that He would be gone. No reason to celebrate. They were going to properly care for His body as they thought He was dead.

There is no way the term Easter should have been applied to this day in Acts 12:4

The Kings men got it wrong

From KJV

3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread)

The days of unleavened bread were, of course, Passover.  The celebration of the Jews

4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

There was no Easter as it was not being celebrated.

God never commanded an Easter celebration, and certainly not one that could tie back into Pagan beliefs. He did, however , command Passover.

Remember:
Although most who profess Christianity now celebrate it, Easter-Sunday was not observed by the second century Christians in Asia Minor. They observed Passover.

so the Kings men got it wrong....

Now, if you are comfortable with Easter being in KJ... fine.

But do not equate the two as meaning the same. They dont.

Offline GB

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1264
  • Manna: 9
  • Gender: Male
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #16 on: Sat Feb 29, 2020 - 12:40:20 »
That may be my problem. I am not a little schoolboy.

Easter and Passover mean the same?

Not even close.

You should know that Passover, or Pesach in Hebrew, is one of the Jewish religion's most sacred and widely observed holidays. Passover commemorates the story of the Israelites' departure from ancient Egypt, which appears in the Hebrew Bible's books of Exodus, Numbers and Deuteronomy,

The Passover Seder is an occasion for praise and thanksgiving and for re-dedication to the idea of liberation.

Jesus celebrated the Passover dinner where He instituted what we refer to as Holy Communion.

While they were eating, Jesus took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it, he broke it, gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”—Matthew 26:26–28

And we know that

The event described in Matthew 26:26–28 (also in Mark 14:22–25 and Luke 22:14–23) is known as the Last Supper. It was Jesus’ last meal with his disciples before his crucifixion. In that meal, which was a Passover meal,

Easter is the most important and oldest festival of the Christian Church, celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ and held (in the Western Church) between March 21 and April 25, on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the northern spring equinox.

Easter, also called Pascha (Greek, Latin) or Resurrection Sunday, is a festival and holiday commemorating the resurrection of Jesus from the dead,

Two celebrations for entirely different reasons.

When the Marys arrived at Jesus' tomb, it was the first day of the week. It followed the Sabbath. Which followed the Passover of the last supper. And there was no understanding when they went there that He would be gone. No reason to celebrate. They were going to properly care for His body as they thought He was dead.

There is no way the term Easter should have been applied to this day in Acts 12:4

The Kings men got it wrong

From KJV

3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread)

The days of unleavened bread were, of course, Passover.  The celebration of the Jews

4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

There was no Easter as it was not being celebrated.

God never commanded an Easter celebration, and certainly not one that could tie back into Pagan beliefs. He did, however , command Passover.

Remember:
Although most who profess Christianity now celebrate it, Easter-Sunday was not observed by the second century Christians in Asia Minor. They observed Passover.

so the Kings men got it wrong....

Now, if you are comfortable with Easter being in KJ... fine.

But do not equate the two as meaning the same. They dont.

You are right about the difference between Easter and Passover. Easter is a stand alone high day or "Feast of the Lord" created by religious men with roots in Paganism. Paul warned against partaking of such observances in 1 Cor. 10.

"7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play."

He got this teaching from Ex. 32.

Ex. 32: 4 And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. (Depicting the Jews belief that it was the blood of Bulls that cleansed their sin and not the Lamb of God)

5 And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation, and said, To morrow is a feast to the LORD.

6 And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.

7 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves:

Much the same way that modern religions have created an image of God in the likeness of some very handsome, men's hair shampoo model, born Dec. 25th, who died on Friday night and raised from the dead early Sunday morning.

Passover, in contrast, was not a stand alone high day from man. It was taught to God's People since the beginning and was followed immediately by "Feast of Unleavened bread" signifying a simple Salvation plan for God's People. Place HIS Blood (life) on our works and mind (Walk as He walked) to be spared by the death angel, and then "Go and sin no more", with His Help, as foreshadowed by Israel, following Moses, departing sin (Egypt) in haste, and observed by ridding the "leaven" (sin) out of our house (Temple, mind) for 7 days, representing our life. ("He that endures to the end shall be saved").

In the last supper Jesus gave HIS Apostles bread and wine to signify the placing of HIS Blood in our body and mind. This same Christ did the same thing for Abraham.

Gen. 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God. 19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:

This is the same Christ who became a man in the person of Jesus.

John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?

58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Abraham knew of and partook of the Passover.

Gen. 22:7 And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?

8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

Abraham and Isaac and Jacob knew of this Christ. He was revealed to Jacob as a "Ladder" to heaven, the only way to God was through this High Priest. But in the process of time, the Children of Israel forgot about these things. So God separated Levi out from among them and gave him a Covenant, a Priesthood which was to teach them God's Laws and provide for the atonement of their sins until the Prophesied "Lamb of God" should come. A Covenant Levi broke.

The main difference between Easter and Passover, other than Easter is a man made "Feast unto the Lord" and  Passover is a "Feast of the Christ" created by Him and for Him, is Easter is the end of Salvation for the religions of this Land, while Passover is the Beginning of Salvation according to the Word of God.

But in discussing these truths you will be scorned by "Many" who come in His name, as "Good Friday" and "Easter Sunday" with their eggs and fish fries are ancient religious traditions held sacred by the inhabitants of much of this world, while Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread are openly considered "Beggarly Elements" by the "MANY" who come in Christ's name.

It is also worthy to note that Easter didn't become a "Christian" high day until some 350 years after Jesus ascended, as you said in part, while the bread and wine given to the Disciples of Christ, was also given to Abraham from the High Priest of his time.

With so much emphasis placed on "Unlocking the mystery of the end of the world" from the promoters of Easter, we are distracted from the many fascinating truths of the scriptures. We are distracted from the truth that "End of the age" and "end of the world" is the same thing for all who have died. When the eyes of those who died are opened we will be in a different place, our world will be gone, our age will be gone, whether we are believers or not.

This is why Jesus said;

Matt. 6:31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?

32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.

33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

And again; "Today if you hear His Voice, harden not your hearts."

This is why Jesus spent more time warning about listening to religious men who "come in His Name", than working to unlock mysteries of a future that even He didn't know.





« Last Edit: Sat Feb 29, 2020 - 12:46:17 by GB »

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7509
  • Manna: 369
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #17 on: Sun Mar 01, 2020 - 08:19:23 »
That may be my problem. I am not a little schoolboy.
My time is short today due to family members being here~so consider this article and I will add my own take on it later as time permits. http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/easter-or-passover-in-acts-124 PLEASE note the diagram and POST resurrection of Christ a KEY of understanding this seemly dilemma  along with other points.

Offline seekingHiswisdom

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 755
  • Manna: 17
  • Gender: Female
  • I am Rella. Still 6 & counting.
Re: End of the age or End of the world.
« Reply #18 on: Sun Mar 01, 2020 - 15:28:48 »
My time is short today due to family members being here~so consider this article and I will add my own take on it later as time permits. http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/easter-or-passover-in-acts-124 PLEASE note the diagram and POST resurrection of Christ a KEY of understanding this seemly dilemma  along with other points.




Okay Red.

I'll wait until you have time to reply, but in the meantime you need to consider this also.

I read your link and the first thought in my mind was how confusing it must be to the average layman, who picks up a bible... is reading it for the first or 40th time when questions start in their mind. I know it was for me. And if I would ask I was more often or not told to not read the bible without a concordance. Preferably Strong's.

 Do you remember back to when you very first looked at that? Perhaps not for you but I found myself very confused and with more questions then if I was just reading scripture.

Do you ever remember sitting in church when the minister would read a passage from the old testament and then also from the new testament and you had a bible in your hands... and he proceeded to explain the scripture or how it fit with in a particular sermon he was giving and you are reading it right along with him and you look and read it with his preaching ?  Did you ever once wonder how in the world he got his meaning from the words you were reading?

Well, I did... but then I was young and not quite into study for myself ,at that point.

Now today we have, I dont know how many, translations into English , that people read and change to , partly because of confusion and seem to find one that is more understanding, or easier to comprehend... but my question would be...
do these so called improved translation water things down from original intent. In many cases I say yes.

I wonder how much doubt is created when that Why pops into place and the average layman does not have the time, or even know how, of how to look into and study things for themselves to make an educated opinion in thought.

But I digress...

I was always a solid KJV person.... I believed that there could be no error there. After all. That is the version I grew up with in my church pews.... and the one we had in the house.... and the one I first started to read... and the one I actually wrote some of my own papers using.

But then I started research into older texts just to see what was said and how it was said.

Concerning this question about Easter in KJV... the following is what I see and why it bothers me.

Your link says (“Easter” or “Passover” in Acts 12:4? - King James Version Today)

"The Greek word, "πασχα (pascha)", is correctly translated as "Passover" 28 times in the New Testament in the KJV. For this reason, some critics say that the KJV's isolated instance of translating the word as "Easter" in Acts 12:4 is an error.  These critics agree with translations such as the ESV which has "Passover" in Acts 12:4.

The same word.... translated 28 times in the New Testament  as Passover ... and then the very same word was swapped to Easter in Acts 12:4, A "Christian" word that was unheard of during the Greek writings of the NT.

Your article claims...

"Now that it has been demonstrated that "Easter" is a biblical word referring to the day to celebrate Christ's resurrection,"

(Even if I agreed with this articles conclusion, and I can assure you I do not....)

"it will be shown why the KJV is correct in translating "Πάσχα (Pascha)" as "Easter" at Acts 12:4."

(There is absolutely nothing whatsoever that would tie Peters being in prison during Passover to Jesus' Resurrection day, hence the use of Easter just does not cut it.)

Using your choice of KJV

Acts 12

3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he (this would have been Herod Agrippa 1) proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)

4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

5 Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him.

6 And when Herod would have brought him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains: and the keepers before the door kept the prison.

Note:
Verse 3   he (Herod) proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) Says that Peter was taken and the way they wrote Then were the days of unleavened bread would indicate Peter was arrested before Passover started....and with the intention of after Passover, Peter would be brought to the people and punished.

According to all I have read Peter was arrested and then the jailer baptized in 43AD ( 13 years after Jesus' crucifixion and Resurrection.

Herod Agrippa 1 had adhered strictly to Jewish customs and rituals and it most likely is the reason he delayed Peter's punishment. It was soon to be their Holy Passover.

 Herod was really into escalating the persecution of those following Jesus undoubtedly scoring brownie points not only with the Jews of the day but the Pharisees as well.

I do not know,and do not have the time at the moment to research what day of the week Passover  started in 43AD but it is a reasonable conclusion to say that he (Herod) would not have delayed Peter's punishment to be after a day that would have been acknowledged by Jesus' followers as the most important and Holy day for Christians. The Jews that would delight in Peter's punishment would not stand for a delay until after then.

The Kings men got it wrong.

I also do not have time right now to post the applicable "old" biblical references of Acts 12:4 stating Passover and not Easter. But I can if you want me to.

I'll wait to hear from you