Grand Canyon University Web Resources

Official site. Comprehensive source of information about the state and the state government.

Matthew Johnson wrote:
>The passage is 1 Cor 1:18. Unfortunately, many people are confused by the KJV
>translation which incorrectly uses a past participle, probably because we don't
>_have_ a passive present participle in English! A better translation is:
>
>
> For the word of the Cross is folly to the perishing,
> but to us, to those being saved it is the power of God (1 Cor 1:18)
>
>
>'Word' here, means 'preaching'. The important difference is "those being saved"
>verses [sic; I believe Matthew meant "versus"] KJV "saved".
>
>
>Now my point is: what _could_ this mean, if, as you say, there are only the two
>meanings of "to save"? Clearly the 2nd sense is out of the question. But in the
>first sense, he already calls them "saved". Or does he?

[Before replying to Matthew, let me first recap the two senses of
"saved" for those who've just tuned in:
1. Saved as "entered into the kingdom of heaven"
2. "Saved" in the more usual sense, as rescued or healed]

Matthew, despite your offer to provide me with other shades of meaning
of "saved," the closest you've come is to suggest that a change in verb
tense is needed. The particularly interesting thing about the change
you propose is that it defeats your own argument. If a better
translation than "the saved" is "those being saved", then it follows
that they are not yet saved, so meaning #1 fits entirely.

So, again: Once the meanings of the term "saved" are properly
understood, the
answer to the question seems fairly obvious: one who has been rescued
or healed, for example from alcoholism, may well be in need of healing
again in the future. One who has entered into the kingdom of heaven on

the other hand, is saved permanently.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

On Wed, 11 May 2005 03:00:07 +0000 (UTC), Douglas Cox
wrote:

>On Tue, 10 May 2005 15:07:26 +0000 (UTC), Mike Rhodes
> wrote:

>>On Mon, 9 May 2005 20:04:24 +0000 (UTC), Douglas Cox
>>wrote:

>>>Lying to God's apostle and to the Holy Spirit proved to be a fatal
>>>mistake. The story has provided fair warning to many generations of
>>>Christians.
>>
>>The story is not about lieing. But about giving all one's property
>>away, and not wanting to do that, and being punished for not doing
>>that.
>>
>
>Yes, it is a story about two people who lied to the Holy Spirit. Most
>people have no difficulty understanding that.

You presume upon the audience with your own conclusion, without
disproving my statements (not even approaching them at all), and
without providing any argument of your own.