Christians are "ALREADY" Perfect and Complete in Christ, Colossians 2:10.

[Right Divider]

Lev 16:4 ...these are the holy garments.

I stand corrected.

Our improvement comes for the harsh discipline of the Lord to train us in righteousness: Heb 12:5-11.

You are taking the book to the Hebrews as a prescription for the body of Christ. It is not.

Hebrews 12:5 refers back to the OT where God is speaking to Israel. Here is one example:

Deut 8:1-6 (AKJV/PCE)
(8:1) All the commandments which I command thee this day shall ye observe to do, that ye may live, and multiply, and go in and possess the land which the LORD sware unto your fathers. (8:2) And thou shalt remember all the way which the LORD thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness, to humble thee, [and] to prove thee, to know what [was] in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no. (8:3) And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every [word] that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live. (8:4) Thy raiment waxed not old upon thee, neither did thy foot swell, these forty years. (8:5) Thou shalt also consider in thine heart, that, as a man chasteneth his son, [so] the LORD thy God chasteneth thee. (8:6) Therefore thou shalt keep the commandments of the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to fear him.

 

[Robert Pate]

GOD has told us many times that no one dies (suffers, goes to hell) for the sins of another.
Deut 24:16, Jeremiah 31:30, Ezekiel 18:20. It is an injustice to account a person guilty of the crimes of another...this doctrine blasphemes GOD's goodness and righteousness with these assertions.

Oh my! You don't believe the Gospel. Jesus in our name and on our behalf, atoned for our sins and the sins of the whole world, 1 John 2:2.

 

[Clete]

Don't know what you mean by PCE. The Bible says, "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all of sinned" Romans 5:12.

Yeah, I don't know what "PCE interpretation" means either. My bet is that if/when you (we) discover what it means that we'll simultaneously discover that ttruscott is not a Christian in the normal sense of the term and that it's more than a little bit of a waste of time to be debating Christian doctrine with him. I suspect you'd do just as well trying to convince a Christian Scientist of the Trinity doctrine.

 

[Robert Pate]

Yeah, I don't know what "PCE interpretation" means either. My bet is that if/when you (we) discover what it means that we'll simultaneously discover that ttruscott is not a Christian in the normal sense of the term and that it's more than a little bit of a waste of time to be debating Christian doctrine with him. I suspect you'd do just as well trying to convince a Christian Scientist of the Trinity doctrine.

I don't know why some people come on a Christian Forum and try to convince us that we are a bunch of idiots.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yeah, I don't know what "PCE interpretation" means either. My bet is that if/when you (we) discover what it means that we'll simultaneously discover that ttruscott is not a Christian in the normal sense of the term and that it's more than a little bit of a waste of time to be debating Christian doctrine with him. I suspect you'd do just as well trying to convince a Christian Scientist of the Trinity doctrine.

I think I've asked him before, and from what I remember, this is, in fact, the case.

 

[Ed Dixon]

PURE CAMBRIDGE EDITION

You're Welcome

 

[Right Divider]

PURE CAMBRIDGE EDITION

You're Welcome

That explains PCE... but what does "pce interpretation" mean? That is the question.

 

[Ed Dixon]

pce is a updated version of kjv. it was done around 1900. So "interpretation" refers to the changes in language from one to the other. What else could it mean?

 

[Right Divider]

pce is a updated version of kjv. it was done around 1900. So "interpretation" refers to the changes in language from one to the other. What else could it mean?

If we were sure what ttruscott meant, we wouldn't be asking.
We are not mind readers and neither are you.

 

[Clete]

PURE CAMBRIDGE EDITION

You're Welcome

Perchloroethylene

You're welcome

 

[Right Divider]

Enjoy!

 

[Robert Pate]

What Catholics, Pentecostals, Nazarenes and other holiness religions are trying to attain to in their flesh is ALREADY ours in Jesus Christ.

God ALREADY sees his people as perfect and complete in Christ. In Jesus Christ we have ALREADY been justified, sanctified and redeemed, 1 Corinthians 1:30. If you don't believe this, then you don't believe the Gospel.

This is why Christians are not under the law or subject to it. In our name and on our behalf, Jesus has ALREADY fulfilled the law for us. This is why Paul wrote, "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believes" Romans 10:4. Where there is no law there is no judgment. Where there is law there is judgment and condemnation, Romans 4:15. This is why Paul said, "For as many as are of the works of the law (religion) are under the curse" Galatians 3:10. This is also why Jesus abolished the law, nailing it to his cross, Colossians 2:14.

CHRISTIANS ARE WAITING FOR GLORIFICATION.

This is the only thing that we don't have. We only have the "first fruits" of the Spirit. "And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body" Romans 8:23. We will be glorified when Jesus appears or when we are resurrected. "When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall you appear with him in glory" Colossians 3:4.

Knowing and believing these things how should we now live. Paul wrote, "The life that I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved and gave himself for me" Galatians 3:20. Living by faith means to live like a Christian.

 

[marke]

PURE CAMBRIDGE EDITION

You're Welcome

Is there such a thing as a pre-Cambridge version of the KJV Bible?

 

[ttruscott]

Is there such a thing as a pre-Cambridge version of the KJV Bible?

If this pe-Cambridge edition of the bible is supposed to represent MY references to pce interpretation or content, then it misses the mark by miles.

I personally use PCE to refer to the Pre-Conception Existence Theology that I am currently very interested in and which I have been discussing intermittently for some 12 years now in this and other forums. If the discussion is actually about bible editions and one is referred to also as PCE then carry on..

I contend that in many verses the original words of scripture can support our pre-conception existence understanding, interpretation, pov, of the bible but it is hidden in the interpretations of other translators who deny our pre-conception existence and so choose English words that hide the fact the actual words can be interpreted to support our pre-conception existence. Pre-Conception Existence Theology is often misnamed as our pre-existence ignoring the fact that nothing can pre-exist its existence.

I do not offer verse interpretations as proof of my suggestions any more than any verse proves any Christian doctrine to the point of shutting down all argument about alternative interpretations. I ask only that they be read, holding sceptical criticism in abeyance for a bit, to see if the words can in fact be interpreted to support my suggestions. That is, though it might not be the true interpretation I claim that they CAN in fact be read my way without any tricks or damage to the language...

Repudiating my suggestions of interpretation due to past decisions about the alternative interpretation without recourse to the actual words in the verse is mere eisegetics.

 

[marke]

If this pe-Cambridge edition of the bible is supposed to represent MY references to pce interpretation or content, then it misses the mark by miles.

I personally use PCE to refer to the Pre-Conception Existence Theology that I am currently very interested in and which I have been discussing intermittently for some 12 years now in this another forums. If the discussion is actually about bible editions and one is referred to also as PCE then carry on..

I contend that in many verses the original words of scripture can support the PCE understanding, interpretation, pov of the bible but it is hidden in the interpretations of other translators who deny our pre-conception existence and so choose words that hide the fact the actual words can be interpreted to support our pre-conception existence.

Pre-Conception Existence Theology is often designated as our pre-existence but this misnomer fails in the light of the fact that nothing can pre-exist its existence.

I do not offer verse interpretations as proof of my suggestions any more than any verse proves any Christian doctrine to the point of shutting down all argument about alternative interpretations. I ask only that they be read, holding sceptical criticism in abeyance for a bit, to see if the words can in fact be interpreted to support my suggestions. That is, though it might not be the true interpretation I claim that they CAN in fact be read my way without any tricks or damage to the language...

Repudiating my suggestions of interpretation due to past decisions about the alternative interpretation without recourse to the actual words in the verse is mere eisegetics.

I asked whether there is a pre-Cambridge Edition of the KJV because I do not know if there is. Nevertheless, I totally trust the KJV Bible available in modern stores to be the best English translation available. I do not understand what is going on in the OP. I do not believe life on earth existed before God created life and Adam on earth during the week of creation mentioned in Genesis.

 

[ttruscott]

I do not believe life on earth existed before God created life and Adam on earth during the week of creation mentioned in Genesis.

I understand...

But to understand my thinking, a look at Job 38:7 which is about the creation of the physical universe, tells us there were witnesses who sang HIS praise at this proof of HIS divinity and power: ...while the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?... Yes, all the sons of God is actually written in the text but because this at face value implies the creation of ALL people in HIS image as pre-physical spirits before the creation of the physical universe, some of those who deny this implication try to hide its possibility by choosing the word angels to refer to ALL the Sons of GOD. It is this sleight of hand that I object to, preferring that they let the bible speak for itself and let the Holy Spirit lead our understanding rather than to mis-translate bene Elohim as angels.

 

[marke]

I understand...

But to understand my thinking, a look at Job 38:7 which is about the creation of the physical universe, tells us there were witnesses who sang HIS praise at this proof of HIS divinity and power: ...while the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?... Yes, all the sons of God is actually written in the text but because this at face value implies the creation of ALL people in HIS image as pre-physical spirits before the creation of the physical universe, some of those who deny this implication try to hide its possibility by choosing the word angels to refer to ALL the Sons of GOD. It is this sleight of hand that I object to, preferring that they let the bible speak for itself and let the Holy Spirit lead our understanding rather than to mis-translate bene Elohim as angels.

I believe the sons of God in Job 38:7 were angels. Who else could they have been?

 

[ttruscott]

I believe the sons of God in Job 38:7 were angels. Who else could they have been?

All I know for sure is that it says "ALL the Sons of GOD!" that is, if you are a Son of GOD by creation, ie, in HIS image, were you there?

 

[Right Divider]

All I know for sure is that it says "ALL the Sons of GOD!" that is, if you are a Son of GOD by creation, ie, in HIS image, were you there?

Sometimes, all is used as a generalization.