Posted on 04/08/2012 6:16:40 PM PDT by ealgeone
“And for me, and I’m sure for some of you, it’s also a chance to remember the tremendous sacrifice that led up to that day, and all that Christ endured--not just as a Son of God, but as a human being.”
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
No, children of God is not correct.
The total implication of Sons of God means a literal new creation, not of biological nature. Each “son of God” is a unique immortal creation, and that is what our “new bodies” are going to be.
.
Not sure how you know more than the scholars/translators...and as I am having a hard time trying to figure out where you are coming from, I’ll just say, “Have a glorious Easter!”.
haha... someone had to say it!
but also, SO fitting, and so true! I am so thankful He did, too.
We have Cable and Fiber optic systems with a few hundred channels, many were showing 24 hour Easter programing. I nave not watched a major alphabet network in months.
No, he's not. He's not that bright. In fact, he's an idiot who can't string together anything resembling a coherent sentence without a teleprompter. If anything, it's just another example of his hubris: This walking turd can say or do anything and the MSM, along with the gimme-gimme public (we know who they are) will give him a pass, if not outright agree with him.
...and he knows it.
Wow, dog...
Rookie mistake. Didn’t your bible at least put brackets around “the son”? There’s no “the son of” in Luke, just “of.” Modern bibles interpolate “the son,” bu usually at least leave editorial marks so no-one thinks that Adam was “the son of God.”
The real verse is “Which was of Enos, of Seth, of Adam, of God.”
My daughter, last night, putting a few lessons together, asked if 0bama was the anti-Christ.
I had to laugh a bit, then I said, “Nope, he’s not smart enough.”
Not a blunder - it is an intentional statement that Jesus was just a man like everyone one else.
>> “Not sure how you know more than the scholars/translators.” <<
.
What ‘scholar’ holds any position other than the one I posted directly out of the scripture? I am unable to find any.
Well, the scholar/translator teams who translated the American Standard Version, the New International Version, the Contemporary English Version, the New King James Version, and many others hold a position other than yours. They all say it translates best as “children of God”.
And as I said, since I don’t read the original languages, I can’t really argue for either “children” or “sons” with any certainty.
But those are all Westcott/Hort based Satanic Bibles that by FJA Hort’s own admission was intended to “refute the entire New Testament.”
BTW, none of them was ever qualified to be called a “Bible scholar.” Most of the translation staffs for all of those “versions” were unbelievers.
You need to read Gail Riplinger’s extensive work on this subject.
Thanks for identifying who you’re with; its good to know for future reference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.