Keep in mind, most translations of the bible do not use the word hell. Of course Chandler and his friends have the "intuition" to only use versions which condemn people to hell.
@gsschoenfeld Most translations? It occurs 13 times in NASB (most accurate to the original manuscripts), and 14 times in NIV and ESV. These are the most used translations of today. The word appears 54 times in KJV, but KJV is virtually outdated and no one preaches from it anymore. Chandler and preachers that do not hide the truth of our depravity and condemnation to hell without the grace of God and being saved through Jesus Christ deserve the praise that false prophets such as Osteen receive.
@mattpwns93 LOL. If the dogma is so obvious why can't these translations get it right? Why is it so inconsistent? Which one get's hell exactly right in your opinion? But I don't know why I would bother trying to justify my views to someone who thinks the NASB is most accurate. That translation condones father-daughter incest in it's translation of 1 Cor 7:36.
@gsschoenfeld The inconsistencies are not in the message, but in the wording. NIV and NLT clearly provide a means for ease of reading as they exhibit a more colloquial manner of speech, by today's standard. I would suggest these for children or new believers. ESV and NASB are more appropriate for accuracy of wording, but the message in each verse remains the same. And I won't even bother to address the legalistic view of that verse. Tell me what version you use that does not speak of hell?
@mattpwns93 Here is the problem. What you essentially told me here is that you don't care how the bible is actually worded, just as long as the overall wording is consistent with the overall message you believe in. Hey, you know what, maybe that's perfectly fine. But the overall message is not one about hell and condemnation, it's one of God's love and redemption.
So logically speaking wouldn't it be just as acceptable to rephrase the bible so it doesn't have to use the word hell at all?
@gsschoenfeld I don't claim it's perfect or the most readable but on important issues I always double check with the Young's Literal Translation. It's the only English translation I know of which was translated with the intention of accuracy.
@gsschoenfeld I understand what you're saying, and God's love and redemption is a promise to those who believe, I wholeheartedly agree, but to hide a part of God's Word isn't right. I realize that perhaps you believe the whole "hell and condemnation" preaching pushes people away from accepting Christ. But without people's awareness of it, what's to make them want to repent and accept Him? If they don't know the reality they'll face by not accepting Him, they're unlikely to want His love anyways.
@mattpwns93 Yes, I agree that hell-fire preaching drives people away from Christ, but maybe not for the reasons you think. The main problem is that whole theology of hell is a flimsy house of cards. People who actually study it discover most of what they were told is just propaganda and fear-mongering. Then otherwise good churches appear to be manipulative, abusive, and fraudulent. I can understand why people reject Christianity when they think it's leaders are frauds.
@mattpwns93 KJV is definitely not outdated. And I don't think Chandler deserves the praise-it's all about JESUS!! He's just a vessel for Christ...(I think I understand what you are saying though)
Keep in mind, most translations of the bible do not use the word hell. Of course Chandler and his friends have the "intuition" to only use versions which condemn people to hell.
gsschoenfeld 7 months ago
@gsschoenfeld Most translations? It occurs 13 times in NASB (most accurate to the original manuscripts), and 14 times in NIV and ESV. These are the most used translations of today. The word appears 54 times in KJV, but KJV is virtually outdated and no one preaches from it anymore. Chandler and preachers that do not hide the truth of our depravity and condemnation to hell without the grace of God and being saved through Jesus Christ deserve the praise that false prophets such as Osteen receive.
mattpwns93 7 months ago
@mattpwns93 LOL. If the dogma is so obvious why can't these translations get it right? Why is it so inconsistent? Which one get's hell exactly right in your opinion? But I don't know why I would bother trying to justify my views to someone who thinks the NASB is most accurate. That translation condones father-daughter incest in it's translation of 1 Cor 7:36.
gsschoenfeld 7 months ago
@gsschoenfeld The inconsistencies are not in the message, but in the wording. NIV and NLT clearly provide a means for ease of reading as they exhibit a more colloquial manner of speech, by today's standard. I would suggest these for children or new believers. ESV and NASB are more appropriate for accuracy of wording, but the message in each verse remains the same. And I won't even bother to address the legalistic view of that verse. Tell me what version you use that does not speak of hell?
mattpwns93 7 months ago
@mattpwns93 Here is the problem. What you essentially told me here is that you don't care how the bible is actually worded, just as long as the overall wording is consistent with the overall message you believe in. Hey, you know what, maybe that's perfectly fine. But the overall message is not one about hell and condemnation, it's one of God's love and redemption.
So logically speaking wouldn't it be just as acceptable to rephrase the bible so it doesn't have to use the word hell at all?
gsschoenfeld 7 months ago
@gsschoenfeld I don't claim it's perfect or the most readable but on important issues I always double check with the Young's Literal Translation. It's the only English translation I know of which was translated with the intention of accuracy.
gsschoenfeld 7 months ago
@gsschoenfeld I understand what you're saying, and God's love and redemption is a promise to those who believe, I wholeheartedly agree, but to hide a part of God's Word isn't right. I realize that perhaps you believe the whole "hell and condemnation" preaching pushes people away from accepting Christ. But without people's awareness of it, what's to make them want to repent and accept Him? If they don't know the reality they'll face by not accepting Him, they're unlikely to want His love anyways.
mattpwns93 7 months ago
@mattpwns93 Yes, I agree that hell-fire preaching drives people away from Christ, but maybe not for the reasons you think. The main problem is that whole theology of hell is a flimsy house of cards. People who actually study it discover most of what they were told is just propaganda and fear-mongering. Then otherwise good churches appear to be manipulative, abusive, and fraudulent. I can understand why people reject Christianity when they think it's leaders are frauds.
gsschoenfeld 7 months ago
@mattpwns93 KJV is definitely not outdated. And I don't think Chandler deserves the praise-it's all about JESUS!! He's just a vessel for Christ...(I think I understand what you are saying though)
91011johan 2 weeks ago
Great!
AgainstTheFlowMedia 10 months ago
Is that chandler at the end?
weasel77111 1 year ago
@weasel77111 Yes.
blakeash2 1 year ago
@weasel77111 It was a sermon when he had a cold.
tgrjosh25 9 months ago