| Author | Message | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 781 Registered: 7-2003  |
Freeatlast, you are correct. Here is the text in question from the well respected NRSV: Hebrews 4:15 (NRSV) 15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who in every respect has been tested as we are, yet without sin. And here it is from the new (yet exceedingly accurate and conservative) HCSB: Hebrews 4:15 (HCSB) 15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tested in every way as we are, yet without sin. Finally, here is the transliteraed Greek with a literal translation directly beneath each phrase: ou gar echomen NOT FOR WE DO HAVE archierea mÁ dunamenon A HIGH PRIEST NOT BEING ABLE sumpathÁsai tais TO SYMPATHIZE WITH THE astheneiais hÁmÙn WEAKNESSES OF US, pepeirasmenon de HAVING BEEN TESTED BUT kata panta IN EVERY WAY kathí homoiotÁta IN SIMILAR FASHION chÙris hamartias [YET] WITHOUT SIN. The word in question (tranliterated) is "pepeirasmenon" or in the form we would find it in a lexicon "peirazo". Here is what Spiros Zodhiates' excellent and accessible lexicon, "The Complete Word Study Dictionary" has to say on "peirazo": peir·zo #333;; fut. peir·sō, from peÌra <G3984>, experience, trial. To try, to prove in either a good or bad sense, tempt, test by soliciting to sin. Similar to peir·ō <G3987>, to assay. (I) Of actions, to attempt, assay, followed by the inf. (Acts 16:7; 24:6). (II) Of persons, to tempt, prove, put to the test, followed by the acc. (A) Generally and in a good sense in order to ascertain the character, views, or feelings of someone (Matt. 22:35 [cf. Mark 12:28, 34; John 6:6; Rev. 2:2]; Sept.: 1 Kings 10:1; Ps. 17:3). (B) In a bad sense, with ill intent (Mark 8:11; 10:2; 12:15; Luke 11:16; 20:23; John 8:6). Hence by implication, to try one's virtue, tempt, solicit to sin (Gal. 6:1, "lest thou also be tempted," yield to temptation; James 1:13, 14; Rev. 2:10); especially by Satan (Matt. 4:1, 3; Mark 1:13; Luke 4:2; 1 Cor. 7:5; 1 Thess. 3:5). (C) God is said to try men by adversity, to test their faith and confidence in Him (1 Cor. 10:13; Heb. 2:18; 11:17, 37; Rev. 3:10; Sept.: Gen. 22:1; Ex. 20:20; Deut. 8:2). Men are said to prove or tempt God by doubting, distrusting His power and aid (Acts 5:9; 15:10; 1 Cor. 10:9; Heb. 3:9 quoted from Ps. 95:9; Sept.: Ex. 17:2, 7; Isa. 7:12). Peir·zō is connected with peÌra <G3984>, experience (Heb. 11:29, 36). To attempt (Acts 16:7; 24:6); to entangle a person in sin or to discover what good or evil, what weakness or strength, is in a person (Matt. 16:1; 19:3; 22:18); to know what a person's weakness or strength is and to make it manifest to the one being tempted (2 Cor. 13:5, "examine"). Satan tempts to show someone unapproved (Matt. 4:1; Rev. 2:10). Satan is called ho peir·zōn, the tempter (Matt. 4:3). Deriv.: apeÌrastos <G551>, not temptable (i.e., incapable of being tempted); ekpeir·zō <G1598>, to try, put to the test; peirasmÛs <G3986>, testing, temptation. Syn.: anakrÌnō <G350>, to examine; exet·zō <G1833>, to search, question; dokim·zō <G1381>, to prove, test, approve; apodeÌknumi <G584>, to prove, approve; ochlÈō <G3791>, to harass, vex; enochlÈō <G1776>, trouble; parenochlÈō <G3926>, to annoy, trouble; basanÌzō <G928>, to torment. ó The Complete Word Study Dictionary So it seems to me that the best translation of "peirazo" in the context of Hebrews 4:15 is tested. In other words, the text is not saying that Jesus really had to struggle to somehow try and overcome sinful desires, but that Satan and the world through everything they had at him, but to no effect, He passed every test presented to Him. And why did He pass the test? Was it because He tried really really hard or was better at relying on God then we are? No! It was because He Himself was God, and as God He could not countenance sin. By definition God cannot sin because sin can only be defined as that which is against God's character. God cannot violate His own character or do anything that is not consistent with who He is as God. In short, God cannot sin nor can He have the desire to sin. It is important to keep in mind that whether you translate the word as "tempted" or "tested", either way Jesus is the object of the verb. That is to say, it is something being done *TO* Him, not by Him or within Him. I hope this is helpful. Chris (Message edited by Chris on May 11, 2005) | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1478 Registered: 3-2004  |
WOW!! What blasphemy EGW teaches. I wonder how many of the regular church members know of this. If they know what have they done? I am just finding out what SDAs really believe and this has been done since I did not rejoin the church. Those church members who are finding out about her will eventually leave or they will have to deal with the cognitive dissonance that this causes. Thank you God for taking me out. I praise you as you are such an awesome God. Diana | ||
| Cy Registered user Username: Cy Post Number: 17 Registered: 1-2005 |
Something that really drove me to question Ellen White was where she casts the blame on her own followers for a perceived delay in Christ's second coming. Here's an example:
It doesn't make any sense to me that Christ would be delaying because of the lack of unattainable perfection in His people. Cy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1937 Registered: 12-2003  |
Chris, thank you for the word study. It's good to see you here again! Cy, I agree. I have also pondered the outrageous implications that Jesus delays His coming because of our laziness and failure. Who's in charge, anyway? According to Adventism, it would seem WE are. How ego-gratifying! How blasphemous. Colleen | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 418 Registered: 7-2004 |
I found this post by Onigiri on R/S under the Town Hall heading. It's labelled "ID Card..." ---------- The American Senate passed a bill yesterday that according to this article would: Quote: Americans will be required to obtain federally approved ID cards with ìmachine readable technologyî that abides by Department of Homeland Security specifications. Anyone without such an ID card will be effectively prohibited from traveling by air or Amtrak, opening a bank account, or entering federal buildings. http://www.great-controversy-movie.com/blog/ If the president signs this, it will definitely be one step closer to the mark of the beast. ----------- Have any of you heard anything about this? Belva | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 282 Registered: 3-2005 |
Belva, That is just another stupid internet fraud. That group is one of the worst conspiratorial groups ever. Colporteur thinks Bush planned the 9/11 attacks! They are hopelessly misguided. Chris, it is great to see you back--Thanks for that Hebrews text exposition. Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 647 Registered: 10-2004  |
Actually, the quote that came from that great-controversy-movie.com site is actually an authentic quote from ZDNet News and they give the link to it: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5702505.html?tag=nl.e589 Jeremy | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 420 Registered: 7-2004 |
In my opinion, Oni has a tendency to identify with Chicken Little. Even if this does become law, it has nothing to do with worship. It would be like protesting drivers licensing, or something on that order. As long as an identity system has nothing to do with worship, but is used for its intended purpose only, it isn't the mark of the beast--not yet. I think people were concerned that the Social Security numbering system was a type of "Mark of the Beast" when it first was started. For people who live in fear, the sky will always be falling. Belva | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 285 Registered: 3-2005 |
Jeremy, I stand corrected. I guess I was reacting as Belva did to what onagiri was trying to twist this news into becoming a sign that the Mark of the Beast is coming through this. Remember, Colporteur, not only accusing Bush of 9/11, but also he said ALL medications and drugs are bad, and that there is a conspiracy by the drug companies to poison us. These people see a Sunday law behind every Bush! Stan | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 373 Registered: 5-2002 |
It sounds like Colporteur reads "Pastor" Jan Marcussen's newsletters! In the last one, he spent 6 pages documenting how the Roman Catholic Church controls all the major pharmaceutical companies and in the most recent one he talks about how Bush (who secretly answers to the Masons who report to the Black Pope who reports directly to Lucifer, by the way)traded the twin towers for a future bombing of the dome of the rock. I praise God daily that He yanked me out of that web of fear and deceit. | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 874 Registered: 7-2003  |
Sounds like B to me. He thinks medicines are awful and kill more people than they ever help. He said that to my son one day, and I called him on it. He doesn't have any "evidence", he just has this general mistrust of drug companies and their agenda. I guess it fits in with Marcussen's ideology, which he tends to agree with. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 649 Registered: 10-2004 |
EGW wrote that drugs have caused more deaths than "all other causes combined"! Jeremy | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 876 Registered: 7-2003 |
Well, that's B's party line....I guess it's not original, huh! | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 424 Registered: 7-2004 |
Please understand that when I posted Onigiri's statement made on R/S I was responding to that post with tongue in cheek. They can find a conspiracy theory under every rock. I, for one, would like to see the sieve of a southern border tightened up a bit, and if a national ID card will help, I'll carry it. I already carry a SS card, a Drivers License, and an AARP card. Add in my credit cards, and my purse weighs a ton. What's one more card. The ID card system has nothing to do with worship. It's about making certain that the people benefiting from being in the country are here legally. Yes, these systems can be twisted to become something else at some future date, but so what? Why must everything lead to the mark of the beast? Can we just get over it already? | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1493 Registered: 3-2004 |
Like you Belva, I would like to see the southern and northern borders tightened. I took, carry a drivers license, credit card, SS card, AARP, and other cards. I would not mind a national ID card either, if it would help with the sieve on both borders. I do not even think of what I used to believe as an SDA. I just know that what ever may happen in the future, God will take me through it. He is holding me tight now and will not let go of me, so why fret and worry about it. God does not want us worrying about tomorrow. Today has enough to think about. God will take care of tomorrow. He already has. It was done at the cross. Thank you Jesus. You are awesome. Diana | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 250 Registered: 7-2004  |
If a national ID card would help get me through security lines at airports quicker. Sign me up. | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 434 Registered: 7-2004 |
I just read through the most active thread I could find at R/S, "Shall We Clap," (I fell asleep in the process and am still a little drowsy) I realized that the thing being condemned the most by the R/Sers is the "Willow Glen" model. Can anyone here explain Willow Glen to me? Don't get me wrong, I believe in honoring the house of God, and don't believe that we should insult God by what we do while in his house. I'm nearly 60, so I'm not inclined to get up and dance and would probably throw my back out if I tried, but I thoroughly enjoy celebrating my joy in the Lord. The last time I was exposed to SDA worship was in 2002 when I attended my Academy reunion. We were singing the well-worn songs that were always sung, from the time I can remember. Now, at that time I thought they were singing those songs to help us reminisce. Reading from R/S, that was just the on-going "We're doing this the way we always have" manner of worship. Don't get me wrong, I love the old gospel songs, but do they have to be sung as though they are a dirge? Does God celebrate that every time we go to church we treat the music as though we were attending a funeral? Don't you think He might like to hear something new now and then, and to hear a catchy tune that makes you want to clap to the beat. That is what I love about hearing a gospel song sung by a black choir. When they deliver the music with joy and verve, you feel like you are a part of something that really praises God. My last time in the SDA church we sang like we were at a funeral, and if it had not been for the sermon, delivered by a woman from my graduating class, thank you, we would have all been sound asleep by noon. At R/S they are bemoaning the ordination of women and praise songs. Welcome to the 21st Century. Maybe if going to church became more of a delight, the leak of the youth going out the back door would be lessened. Just a thought. Belva | ||
| Bob Registered user Username: Bob Post Number: 249 Registered: 7-2000  |
Belva, I think they mean "Willow Creek." Here is the church's website. Check it out for yourself. http://www.willowcreek.org/ Bob | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 436 Registered: 7-2004 |
The did say Willow Creek. I live in California and there is a nearby community named Willow Glen. I misspoke. Thanks for the web address. Belva | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 880 Registered: 7-2003 |
Our church does its version of "willow creek" style. To me, it's not about dishonoring God, but using a variety of forms to honor God or teach his word. We have skits, musicals, even ballet (which did take quite a bit to get used to). But once I learned how each method could be used to reach others with the gospel of Christ, or just for worship, it became more meaningful for me. The dance was the hardest to get used to, in part, because I'm not a great fan of ballet, but let's face it...there are people who are not that big into music (or certain styles of music...), yet we use it in our service to honor God. David danced before God ... and if you can read Psalm 150 and think God is only honored in silent, "respectful" worship ... I can't figure out how they did it with the tamborines. To be sure, I believe in honoring when a service is happening, but I've visited a church that uses a glorified gym for a worship center. When a worship service is not going on, they move the chairs and the kids play basketball...or on Wednesdays they have their family dinners in there. If you think about it, it is used more than the average sanctuary, which might see people a few hours a week. Their worship center is used 7 days a week for some activity. I think that is a great use of God's facilities and resources. But that's just me. My southern baptist church wouldn't let us use the fellowship hall to square dance because the church was so dead-set against dancing. So, we rented facilties so the church wouldn't get polluted with our "fun". My current church opens its gym up to the community several days a week. Anyone who wants to come play can. There are rules (no alcohol, smoking, profanity, etc.) but they hope by building a relationship with the community, they can reach those in the community for Christ. I guess it all depends upon how you see your mission in the community and what means you can use what you have to reach people for Christ. I know not everyone agrees, or is comfortable with the "louder" worship services, which they seem to assume are meaningless and shallow. I've never worshipped so wholly as I have in our "willow creek" style services. It's "for" God, not people. But we've had some of the battles too.... |
