I have noticed that when people oppose the view of God’s sovereignty that Calvinists hold, the majority of the time they misrepresent the Calvinists’ views on it. Here are some quotes by Calvinists.

I’m not looking for a debate which is why I don’t try to characterize those who disagree, just posting some quotes.

R.C. Sproul:

The Sabeans and Chaldeans were free to choose [to steal Job's animals and kill his servants - Job 1:13-15], but for them, as for us, freedom always means freedom within limits. We must not, however, confuse human freedom and human autonomy. There will always be a conflict between divine sovereignty and human autonomy. There is never a conflict between divine sovereignty and human freedom. The Bible says that man is free, but he is not an autonomous law unto himself.

Suppose the Sabeans and Chaldeans had prayed, ‘Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.’ I’m absolutely certain that Job’s animals would still have been stolen. But I’m equally certain that the Sabeans and Chaldeans would not have been responsible because their prayer would have altered the entire situation. There is freedom within limits, and within those limits, our prayers can change things. The Scriptures tell us that Elijah, through prayer, was given power to command the rain. He was not dissuaded from praying by his understanding of divine sovereignty.

No human being has ever had a more profound understanding of divine sovereignty than Jesus. No man ever prayed more fiercely or more effectively. Even in Gethsemane he requested an option, a different way. When the request was denied, he bowed to the Father’s will. The very reason we pray is because of God’s sovereignty, because we believe that God has it within his power to order things according to his purpose. That is what sovereignty is all about—ordering things according to God’s purpose. So then, does prayer change God’s mind? No! Does prayer change things? Yes, of course!

A.W. Pink, Gleanings In Joshua:

…theologians have so often gone wrong, by attributing either too much or too little unto the creature. Only by cleaving very closely to Holy Writ as a whole — and not by singling out detached fragments — are we preserved from serious error.

On the one hand, we must see to it that we return right answers to the questions, ‘For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?’ (1 Corinthians 4:7); on the other, we must give due place to such exhortations as ‘Strive to enter in at the strait gate’ (Luke 13:24) and ‘Let us labor therefore to enter into that rest’ (Hebrews 4:11); and not ignore such statements as ‘knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance’ (Colossians 3:24).

Only thus will the balance of truth be preserved.

It is indeed true that the child of God has nothing good or spiritual but what the Lord has freely bestowed upon him. But does that mean he is as passive a ‘receiver’ as the earth is when fructified by heaven’s refreshing showers and genial sunshine?

Great care needs to be taken in answering that question lest we contradict the Word of Truth.

Certainly he is no cooperator with Christ in the work of his redemption. There is not the least warrant for us to say, ‘God will do His part if we do ours.’ There is no dividing of the honors: the glory is God’s alone, and we have no ground for boasting. Most assuredly the elect have nothing to do with their election, for God chose them in Christ before the foundation of the world, and there is not a line in His Word to show that His choice was determined by anything praiseworthy which He foresaw in them. Those ordained to be vessels of honor were ‘clay of the same lump’ as the vessels appointed to dishonor. Nor had they a thing to do with their redemption, for all that was required to make atonement for their sins and reconcile them to God was accomplished by Christ centuries before they existed. Nor had they anything whatever to do with their regeneration, for they were dead in trespasses and sins when the Spirit quickened them into newness of life.

But it is quite wrong to infer from the above that the regenerated soul remains a passive agent. Equally wrong is it to suppose that he is how possessed of any self-sufficiency, that his new nature empowers him to perform his duty. Though he has become a living branch of the Vine, yet he is entirely dependent upon the Vine’s nourishing and fructifying. But we must not confine ourselves to that particular figure and relationship. The Christian is a moral agent, and grace has been given him to improve.

Eternal life is a Divine gift (Romans 6:23), but we are to ‘lay hold on’ it (1 Timothy 6:12). The celestial inheritance is ‘the purchased possession’ of Christ for His people (Ephesians 1:14), yet it is also ‘the reward’ of service unto the Lord (Colossians 3:24). Grace is freely given, but we are to use it, and must improve the same if we would receive more (Luke 8:18; Matthew 25:16). ‘Seek the Lord, and His strength: seek His face evermore’ (Psalm 105:4) — there is the meeting-place of the two sides! We have no sufficiency of our own, but if grace be duly sought (Hebrews 4:16) then ‘our sufficiency is of God’ (2 Corinthians 3:5).

John MacArthur:

How these two sides of God’s truth—His sovereignty in choosing us (Romans 9) and our responsibility to confess and believe (Romans 10)—reconcile is impossible for us to understand fully. But Scripture declares both perspectives of salvation to be true (John 1:12-13). It’s our duty to acknowledge both and joyfully accept them by faith.

Aside from gender, weights and measures, and names, what are your favorite improved verses in the TNIV compared to the NIV?

This first one is by far my favorite so far which has been previously mentioned here.

Philippians 4:13 NIV
I can do everything through him who gives me strength.

Philippians 4:13 TNIV
I can do all this through him who gives me strength.

This was also mentioned a little later at Koinonia.

Another one I like:

Philemon 1:6 NIV
I pray that you may be active in sharing your faith, so that you will have a full understanding of every good thing we have in Christ.

Philemon 1:6 TNIV
I pray that your partnership with us in the faith may be effective in deepening your understanding of every good thing we share for the sake of Christ.

What are your favorites?

Related posts:

• NIV & TNIV – Thoughts and Meditations
• NIV vs. TNIV: Hebrews 11:11 – TNIV Truth
• NIV vs. TNIV: 1 Peter 4:12 – TNIV Truth

I got Paul Apostle of the Heart Set Free by F.F. Bruce for $1 from a resale shop today. Having a low book budget I feel very blessed. Has anyone read it? I would imagine I’ll use it for reference as opposed to reading the whole thing like I usually do.

Daniel prayed: “Blessed be the name of God from age to age, for wisdom and power are his. He changes times and seasons, deposes kings and sets up kings; he gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to those who have understanding. He reveals deep and hidden things; he knows what is in the darkness, and light dwells with him. To you, O God of my ancestors, I give thanks and praise, for you have given me wisdom and power, and have now revealed to me what we asked of you, for you have revealed to us what the king ordered.”
Daniel 2:20-23 (NRSV)

Here are some facetious but Biblically accurate* book titles I was thinking of. Do you think they would sell?

• The Sermon on the Mount: How To Lose Your Self Esteem
• Your Best Life Then – How God Uses Weakness and Suffering To Achieve Your Spiritual Potential
• Be Prepared: Things Can Always Get Worse
• How God Ordains Evil

Just plain facetious:

• How To Start a Coffeeshop In Your Church

Do you have any to add?

* Inevitably, some will quibble with this.

It’s hard to believe this blog is one year old.

A little over a year ago I was wondering if I wanted to take the time and if it would be worth the time to post on a blog. I wanted to write down what I was learning to further cement those things into my brain and to post quotes and links to have a repository for them. (I often find myself searching my own blog for these things.) I also hoped that eventually others would comment so that I could learn from them.

For quite a while I felt like I was talking to myself but the first two objectives were being fulfilled.

At one time I was wondering if I should be posting anything about what I’m learning in case I was leading anyone astray because of my own ignorance.

As time went on I got in with a circle of blogging friends and feel that the third objective is being fulfilled. Thank you for taking the time to comment or just reading.

I thought I would list some of my favorite posts.

• Reflections on Psalm 19:7-10 – I worked on this over a period of weeks. It’s by far the most time I spent on a post and was by far the most rewarding to spend so much time on part of my favorite Psalm. It’s fitting with the name of this blog.
• Psalm 119:92 with a surprise ending – Did I say Psalm 19 is my favorite Psalm? Maybe it’s 119.
• God’s Sovereignty/God’s Glory/Our Good
• Bible Commentary Lists and Reviews (Updated) – I go here if I’m looking for a commentary to buy (when I have the money).
• Blind Translation Comparisons 2 – Psalm 119:1 – Most interesting comments. There’s that Psalm again.

I read all the “fine print” in the NLT Study Bible about the NLT translation. I won’t go into detail here other than to say that they say it’s for the modern reader. Also, here is a quote from the NLT blog:

As a dynamic-equivalence translation, the NLT translates the Hebrew and Greek text in natural, understandable English. This means that we try to avoid technical terms that the average reader would not understand.

This post is more about what other people say. I’ve heard things like 6th grade reading level, new Christians, unchurched, shouldn’t be used for serious study, etc. I couldn’t find any of those terms in what the NLT and Tyndale say about the NLT.

So is modern reader or average reader code for all those things? I’m wondering why people and organizations put these terms onto a translation that’s in natural, understandable English but is also true to the underlying languages, translated by scholars—many who have written commentaries on the books of the Bible they translated.

I’ve been a Christian for over 20 years and have been much more serious about studying the Bible for over 2 1/2 years and still the NLT sheds new light on many passages that were somewhat befuddling while for the most part still not sounding overly idiomatic or paraphrastic. I don’t think it’s because I can only read at a 4th grade reading level or because I haven’t gone to church. I will admit that I am not as well educated in the Bible as most of my blogging friends but I would bet that many of them will have a better understanding of some passages when reading them in the NLT and in fact this is one reason why many of them read it.

I’ll still use more formal translations for reference and some aspects of study but I think the NLT gets a bad wrap and the people posting on the NLT blog are trying to rectify some of these assertions.

It might be interesting to know what directives the translators were given as far as target audience, reading level, etc.

I’m not trying to sound like a rabid fan of the NLT, just posting some thoughts I’ve had recently after becoming more interested in the translation.

Psalm 119:18 NLT
Open my eyes to see
the wonderful truths in your instructions.

Respnse:
The Intended Audience of the NLT – NLT Blog (noted in a comment)

Related post:
Translations, Target “Reading Level” and Their Differing Uses

Since nobody commented on my post yesterday I thought I’d write another one with the translations.

Which one is ESV?

Mark 9:23

1. NIV “‘If you can’?” said Jesus. “Everything is possible for him who believes.”
2. NET Then Jesus said to him, “‘If you are able?’ All things are possible for the one who believes.”
3. ESV And Jesus said to him, “‘If you can’! All things are possible for one who believes.”
4. NLT “What do you mean, ‘If I can’?” Jesus asked. “Anything is possible if a person believes.”

I came across this verse and noticed that the ESV is gender inclusive so I thought I would try and trick you.

Which one is ESV?

Mark 9:23

1. “‘If you can’?” said Jesus. “Everything is possible for him who believes.”
2. Then Jesus said to him, “‘If you are able?’ All things are possible for the one who believes.”
3. And Jesus said to him, “‘If you can’! All things are possible for one who believes.”
4. “What do you mean, ‘If I can’?” Jesus asked. “Anything is possible if a person believes.”

Aside from the gender difference, I’m assuming the other differences are because Greek doesn’t have question marks or exclamation marks so the translators need to decide according to grammar, which may have wider possibilities than in English. This would also include whether or not to use and, then etc. at the beginning of a sentence.

It’s easy to see how if taken out of context one could misinterpret what’s being said, especially if the single quotes aren’t paid attention to.

Context:

Mark 9:17-29 HCSB
Out of the crowd, one man answered Him, “Teacher, I brought my son to You. He has a spirit that makes him unable to speak. 18 Wherever it seizes him, it throws him down, and he foams at the mouth, grinds his teeth, and becomes rigid. So I asked Your disciples to drive it out, but they couldn’t.” 19 He replied to them, “O, unbelieving generation! How long will I be with you? How long must I put up with you? Bring him to Me.” 20 So they brought him to Him. When the spirit saw Him, it immediately convulsed the boy. He fell to the ground and rolled around, foaming at the mouth. 21 “How long has this been happening to him?” Jesus asked his father. “From childhood,” he said. 22 “And many times it has thrown him into fire or water to destroy him. But if You can do anything, have compassion on us and help us.” 23 Then Jesus said to him, “‘If You can?’ Everything is possible to the one who believes.” 24 Immediately the father of the boy cried out, “I do believe! Help my unbelief.” 25 When Jesus saw that a crowd was rapidly coming together, He rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to it, “You mute and deaf spirit, I command you: come out of him and never enter him again!” 26 Then it came out, shrieking and convulsing him violently. The boy became like a corpse, so that many said, “He’s dead.” 27 But Jesus, taking him by the hand, raised him, and he stood up. 28 After He went into a house, His disciples asked Him privately, “Why couldn’t we drive it out?” 29 And He told them, “This kind can come out by nothing but prayer [and fasting].”

Or maybe not. In case you are interested in my musings…

I’ve been using the NRSV as my main translation for 2 1/2 years. I’ve come to dislike the archaisms despite its major improvement in that area over the RSV.

I’ve been looking for a Bible that will be all things to me—one I can use for reading, studying, taking notes in etc. I also wanted one that is on the formal/literal end without a lot of the archaisms but uses standard theological terms. The HCSB seems to fit the bill but I am/was waiting for the expected update next year.

However, the more I read the NLT, the more I like it. I’ve been reading the NLT Study Bible, as cumbersome as it is, and recently looked again at the Favorite Verses of the Bible for a second time. For some reason when I looked at them recently I liked them a lot better than I did a few months ago.

So for now, I’ve decided that the NLT will be my reading/devotional Bible, and I will continue to use the NRSV for taking notes, which is where I have a ton of notes and highlighting, and also as a more literal/formal alternative. There is no single translation that is all things. The NRSV a fine translation so why not keep using it? I will continue to use the HCSB for reference, quoting and memorizing when I see fit. I will re-evaluate next year.

I wasn’t raised on the Bible and catechisms so I’m not sure if it would be of benefit to stick with a formal translation for most of my reading, especially when it comes to the Old Testament and the NT use of it. And even many who have been well educated in things Biblicular have espoused the use of a dynamic translation like the NLT.

As far as a Bible for “studying”, I’m not sure if it really matters which one I use, since I will be using other materials like commentaries, word definitions etc. Phrasing Scripture might be best with a more formal translation as far as the grammar goes, but again I don’t think it’s critical as to which one I use if I feel a need to use something other than or in addition to the NRSV.

The thing about the NLT is that even though it fits squarely in the dynamic (previously termed as thought-for-thought) realm, it’s still very “accurate” and is rarely paraphrastic or overly idiomatic. So as far as the NLT, why not use it too? (For you TNIV fans, I have already looked into this and am very familiar with it especially since I used the NIV for 20 years.)

Here is some stuff about the NLT if you’ve managed to even read this far:

Esteban mentioned an interesting article that I didn’t take the time to read until now.
New Living Translation (NLT) Evaluation Committee Report of the Christian Reformed Church in North America

Don’t let the length scare you—those of you with short attention spans—the NLT portion is only six pages long. If you are interested in the NLT it’s a great read for the most part. But for those who don’t want to read the whole thing, here are some quotes.

It [also] avoids words such as ‘justification,’ ‘sanctification,’ and ‘regeneration,’ as carryovers from Latin translations. In their place it uses equivalents such as ‘we are made right with God,’ ‘we are made holy,’ and ‘we are born anew.’

I never knew these were carryovers from Latin translations. But since they are such common theological terms, the main thing that bothers me about the NLT is that they are missing. And where the NLT1 explained propitiation well in Romans 3:25 they truncated it. Oh how I wish they wouldn’t have messed with that. I’m sure they have their reasons.

Some positive examples:

…the NIV reads, ‘The hand of him who is going to betray me is with mine on the table.’ The NLT captures the sense of the original well with the translation ‘But here at this table, sitting among us as a friend, is the man who will betray me.’ In John 13:18, compare ‘turned against me’ (NLT) with ‘has lifted up his heel against me’ (TNIV). In these and many more examples the NLT has provided a very readable translation that is accurate to the intent of the original text.

From Esteban:

I’m glad to note that I’ve been intimately acquainted with the New Living Translation since its release in 1996: I bought a copy hot-off-the-press, and used it in short order as my teaching text for a Bible study on Acts that I lead during my freshman year. I had a rather decent reading knowledge of Greek by then, and I was consistently impressed by how well the NLT rendered St Luke’s narrative—lively, engagingly, idiomatically, and above all, accurately.

–Esteban Vázquez

There may be some “speculative additions” to the Hebrew text in the OT which you can read about in the article but many of them seem somewhat minor. The glaring one I saw was the overly colloquial Psalm 73:7, “These fat cats have everything their hearts could ever wish for!”

But all translations can be nick-picked to death. For now I’ve embraced the NLT.

Comments welcome. I could write more but I’ll stop there. And congratulations if you made it this far.

Psalm 119:31-34
I cling to your laws.
LORD, don’t let me be put to shame!
I will pursue your commands,
for you expand my understanding.
Teach me your decrees, O LORD;
I will keep them to the end.
Give me understanding and I will obey your instructions;
I will put them into practice with all my heart.

Koinonia has a quiz called Test Your View of the NT Use of the OT. Here are my results. I left the quiz on their site because it takes a while to load. (Clever way to advertise their book)

NT Use of the OT — Test Your View!

Single Meaning, Multiple Contexts and Referents view You seem to be most closely aligned with the Single Meaning, Multiple Contexts and Referents view, a view defended by Darrell L. Bock in the book “Three Views on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament” (edited by Kenneth Berding and Jonathan Lunde, Nov. 2008). This view affirms the singular nature of the meanings intended by the OT and NT authors when OT texts are cited in the NT. In spite of this essential unity in meaning, however, the words of the OT authors frequently take on new dimensions of significance and are found to apply appropriately to new referents and new situations as God’s purposes unfold in the larger canonical context. Often, these referents were not in the minds of the OT authors when they penned their texts. For more info, see the book, or attend a special session devoted to the topic at the ETS Annual Meeting in Providence, RI (Nov. 2008); Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Darrell L. Bock, and Peter Enns will all present their views.

Fun quizzes, surveys & blog quizzes by

A couple of weeks ago I couldn’t stop reading 1 Corinthians 1:17-31. I wasn’t trying to understand every word or every sentence, it was just fascinating. God’s wisdom vs. the wisdom of the world etc.

Our perception of reality is not God’s reality. God’s reality is reality. I was pondering this today and realized that part of the reason I’m fascinated with the Bible is I want to get more and more into God’s reality. Being the pessimist that I am, I don’t much like this world what we think of as reality. I want something better, as we all do, whether people realize it or not. I think that’s why people believe in other life forms that are more intelligent than us, insist on trying to make our country or our world a utopia even though it’s unattainable, seeking to be enlightened and thinking human beings can improve their morality etc. There must be something better than what we have.

And through the revelation of the mystery of the gospel and the coming of His Kingdom there is!

Isaiah 55:8-9
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
and your ways are not My ways.”
“For as heaven is higher than earth,
so My ways are higher than your ways,
and My thoughts than your thoughts.”

Luke 8:10
So He said, “To know the secrets of the kingdom of God has been granted to you, but to the rest it is in parables, so that looking they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.

Romans 12:2
Do not be conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may discern what is the good, pleasing, and perfect will of God.

Colossians 3:1-3
So if you have been raised with the Messiah, seek what is above, where the Messiah is, seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your minds on what is above, not on what is on the earth. 3 For you have died, and your life is hidden with the Messiah in God.

(HCSB)

Remember the five-minute YouTube preview of the ESV Study Bible? That video was actually part of a thirteen-minute video that goes into more depth about the ESV Study Bible’s features. You can now watch the whole video or just the sections that interest you:

ESV Study Bible Videos Galore

While commenting on another blog about Bible reading and Bible study by lay people in a congregation, I was trying to find an article that I remembered reading a while ago and couldn’t find it at the time. Thanks to Cal.vini.st’s mention of it I found it again:
Everyone Must Be a Theologian by John H. Gerstner

Psalm 119:1

1. Blessed are those whose way is blameless,
who walk in the law of the LORD!

2. Happy are those whose way is blameless,
who walk in the law of the Lord.

3. Happy are those who live pure lives,
who follow the Lord’s teachings.

4. Joyful are people of integrity,
who follow the instructions of the LORD.

Stream of thought:

I’m wondering if first word is similar in Hebrew as the word in Matthew 5:3.

I tend to favor teachings or instruction so as not to confuse the word law with Torah.

The word blameless as many of us understand it seems to be an impossibility if viewed from the time of the OT. We are blameless before God now because of what Christ has done for us but our conduct is not perfectly blameless. Then again we are not perfectly pure in conduct or always act with integrity but it seems to convey the idea in a more understandable way.

…you can go to Crosswalk which for now has the NLT1 (1996) and go to the NLT web site (lower left) to see the current NLTse.

Some sites like BibleGateway, if you like to go there, have the NLTse but I’m not sure if it’s the 2004 or the slightly tweaked 2007 which the NLT site would certainly have.

There may be others with the NLT1 because many of us have inadvertently quoted from the old one by copying and pasting from the web.

To avoid embarrassment, if you do any critical comparisons on your blog, be sure to quote from the latest.

Update:
Tyndale Releases List of Changes to “NLT 2007″

Results for Blind Translation Comparisons 1

Romans 3:25(a)

1. KJV
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood,

2. RSV
God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith.

3. NASB
whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith.

4. NRSV
whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith.

5. NET
God publicly displayed him at his death as the mercy seat* accessible through faith.

6. ISV
whom God offered as a place where atonement by the Messiah’s blood would occur through faith.

7. NLT1 (1996)
For God sent Jesus to take the punishment for our sins and to satisfy God’s anger against us.

8. NLTse (2004, 2007)
For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin.

se = Second Edition

* The word ἱλαστήριον (Jilasthrion) may carry the general sense “place of satisfaction,” referring to the place where God’s wrath toward sin is satisfied. More likely, though, it refers specifically to the “mercy seat,” i.e., the covering of the ark where the blood was sprinkled in the OT ritual on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). This term is used only one other time in the NT: Heb 9:5, where it is rendered “mercy seat.” There it describes the altar in the most holy place (holy of holies). Thus Paul is saying that God displayed Jesus as the “mercy seat,” the place where propitiation was accomplished. See N. S. L. Fryer, “The Meaning and Translation of Hilasterion in Romans 3:25,” EvQ 59 (1987): 99-116, who concludes the term is a neuter accusative substantive best translated “mercy seat” or “propitiatory covering,” and D. P. Bailey, “Jesus As the Mercy Seat: The Semantics and Theology of Paul’s Use of Hilasterion in Romans 3:25” (Ph.D. diss., University of Cambridge, 1999), who argues that this is a direct reference to the mercy seat which covered the ark of the covenant.

I have added a page of phrasing passages that I’ve done. I originally wrote about it here.

I won’t announce when I put up new ones. I will use the page as a place to keep them all.

There is a link to the page in the right sidebar and at the top of the page.

This is Romans 3:25(a). As mentioned many times before, I like retaining the word propitiation, and the translation of the underlying Greek word is the subject of the comparisons. It’s a tricky subject in many ways. Here are wide variety of examples.

Interestingly, mercy seat is used in a recent translation shown below.

1. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood,

2. God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith.

3. whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith.

4. whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith.

5. God publicly displayed him at his death as the mercy seat accessible through faith.

6. whom God offered as a place where atonement by the Messiah’s blood would occur through faith.

7. For God sent Jesus to take the punishment for our sins and to satisfy God’s anger against us.

8. For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin.

Strong
ἱλαστήριον
hilastērion
hil-as-tay’-ree-on
Neuter of a derivative of G2433; an expiatory (place or thing), that is, (concretely) an atoning victim, or (specifically) the lid of the Ark (in the Temple): – mercyseat, propitiation.

Thayer
1) relating to an appeasing or expiating, having placating or expiating force, expiatory; a means of appeasing or expiating, a propitiation

I downloaded the ISV New Testament with Psalms and Proverbs and thought I would Wordle the NT. I think this has been done with the ESV but I thought I would do it myself since I have all the text.

I’m going to be taking a closer look at the ISV and tracking its progress. The translation is much better than the quality of their web site might suggest.

Click below to see a larger one.