Members Left the Bldg Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 Oh, that's fine - I just didn't know if you'd seen it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members heartstrings Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 So they were assigned a place because they believed? Or they believed first and then were assigned a place? I think it the first since God has foreknowledge. Is this accurate? When you "assign a place" you are setting something in order. The first mention of "ordain" is in the Book of Numbers where we find a description of how the burnt offering was ordained: some things were 'set in order', such is when, where, how, and what were to be done. Likewise, for a feast, or a position of office, a place, a time, administrators, logistics, etc, no doubt would have been determined or set in order. ." From Adam we took original sin;"from him fleshly descended be we all, and engendered of vileand corrupt matter;" and the penalty of Adam's transgressiondwelleth with us as to temptation, which penalty is calledconcupiscence. "This concupiscence, when it is wrongfullydisposed or ordained in a man, it maketh him covet, by covetiseof flesh, fleshly sin by sight of his eyes, as to earthly things, andalso covetise of highness by pride of heart." The Parsonproceeds to shew how man is tempted in his flesh to sin; how,after his natural concupiscence, comes suggestion of the devil, -- Geoffrey Chaucer late 14th century Again, I believe that Chaucer's use here further helps to clarify the root meaning of the English word "ordain", as it was translated in Acts 13 from the Greek "tasso" which, likewise, was also translated in the NT into the words "determined" and "addicted". The closest I can ascertain, both "tasso" and "ordain" mean "set in order", and basically, in a way, so does 'addicted'. The man described above in The Canturbury Tales who had "concupiscence" "ordained" in him was truly "addicted" to it because when a person is "addicted" to something their whole life is fixed, established, devoted, 'set' or 'set in order' toward that obsession. It can be a good thing as well, as we see that the "house of Stephanas" was "addicted" to the ministry of the saints. Again, being also translated from the same Greek word "tasso" it shouldn't be hard to see that their lives were "set in order" toward, and revolved around that one thing. Persons and things can be "set in order" by authorities such as a king, or God. but they can also be 'set in order', addicted, ordained 'tasso' by themselves such as the man who had 'concupiscence' 'ordained' in him. But today, we only use 'ordained' when referring to the status of a priest or preacher just like we use the word 'conversation' to refer to 'talking' and 'cry' to refer to 'weep', and 'dumb' to refer to 'stupid', when those were not the original meanings as used in the KJB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 I understand the concept of putting something in order. I think my question is what is the order? First belief then ordained? Or...ordained because they believed? Not to get off topic but I am an NIV or Living Bible reader and also KJV. I would not want to venture into a "KJV only" topic. I am trying to be better familiar with KJV and want to get the Strong's concordance as suggested. I didn't want anyone to think I was an idiot. :-) I feel bad because I wasn't the one who asked the original question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 Where for art thou Romeo? Why can't she just say Hey? Romeo! Where are you!? Just a little humor. No tomato throwing please. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TheSword Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 Where for art thou Romeo? Why can't she just say Hey? Romeo! Where are you!? Just a little humor. No tomato throwing please. :-) Funny you should throw that one out there because it's so applicable to the topic. "Wherefore" actually means "why". Juliet was lamenting that the boy she loved was from the wrong family and they couldn't court openly. Wow...I never thought I'd actually use that little tidbit of knowledge. I was not at all a fan of Shakespear in high school... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members heartstrings Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 I understand the concept of putting something in order. I think my question is what is the order? First belief then ordained? Or...ordained because they believed? Not to get off topic but I am an NIV or Living Bible reader and also KJV. I would not want to venture into a "KJV only" topic. I am trying to be better familiar with KJV and want to get the Strong's concordance as suggested. I didn't want anyone to think I was an idiot. :-) I feel bad because I wasn't the one who asked the original question. Neither Those who were already 'set in order' or 'predisposed' to eternal life believed when they heard the Gospel. For instance, I think perhaps had a gentile like the Pharaoh Khufu been there, seeing he spent a 'considerable amount' preparing his own tomb most likely would have wanted eternal life. But, surprisingly, some people do not......... I always said all my life if I wasn't born and they gave me the question I'd say I don't want to be born.Jack Kevorkian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 Neither Those who were already 'set in order' or 'predisposed' to eternal life believed when they heard the Gospel. For instance, I think perhaps had a gentile like the Pharaoh Khufu been there, seeing he spent a 'considerable amount' preparing his own tomb most likely would have wanted eternal life. But, surprisingly, some people do not......... I always said all my life if I wasn't born and they gave me the question I'd say I don't want to be born.Jack Kevorkian Neither? If they were already "set in order" then ordained comes before belief. Belief after hearing the Word. Ugh! Heeelp meh Lowd Jesus! In a Southern Baptist voice. LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 Funny you should throw that one out there because it's so applicable to the topic. "Wherefore" actually means "why". Juliet was lamenting that the boy she loved was from the wrong family and they couldn't court openly. Wow...I never thought I'd actually use that little tidbit of knowledge. I was not at all a fan of Shakespear in high school... Really? Why art thou Romeo? It's not where are you but why are you? Oh boy...I'm gettin' dizzy! I'm not even blonde! LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members heartstrings Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 Neither? If they were already "set in order" then ordained comes before belief. Belief after hearing the Word. Ugh! Heeelp meh Lowd Jesus! In a Southern Baptist voice. LOL! yes, correct, I said 'neither' because your two questions were.... First belief then ordained? Or...ordained because they believed? ...but I was saying '"ordained' first. then believed." (paraphrasing) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TheSword Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 Really? Why art thou Romeo? It's not where are you but why are you? Oh boy...I'm gettin' dizzy! I'm not even blonde! LOL! Haha, indeed. Just goes to show how much language can change over time. What'll really make your head spin is that it's used 344 times in the KJV and can mean either "why" or "therefore/because". The context makes most of them pretty obvious though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Left the Bldg Posted November 13, 2013 Members Share Posted November 13, 2013 yes, correct, I said 'neither' because your two questions were.... ...but I was saying '"ordained' first. then believed." (paraphrasing) Got it. Thanks for the patience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ASongOfDegrees Posted November 14, 2013 Members Share Posted November 14, 2013 As you are presenting this, wouldn't this also go along with Romans 1 where we are told that none are without excuse because God can be seen in the creation, with the meaning seeming to be that if one recognizes this and searches for God, he will find Him? In other words, God has ordained that if one truly seeks Him, even not yet knowing of Him, God will make sure he comes to Him. Which would seem to go along with those Gentiles truly seeking to know God, so God told them to send for Peter, who then brought them the Gospel and they were saved. John, Romans 1 is a general overview of mankind as a whole yet Paul does mention in Romans 2:6-11 that there are those who continued in patience in well doing. These would be the Gentiles prior to the cross who followed the law of God written on their hearts and the Jews who followed the law of Moses. They were patient waiting for the salvation of the Lord which would come through the gospel. Those who died prior to the cross who continued in well doing would reside in Paradise until Christ would "preach to the spirits in prison" and "lead captivity captive". Those during Christ's time and afterward in the early days of the gospel who continued in well doing would be ordained to hear the gospel and believe unto eternal life. As you mentioned about Peter, you are correct. Cornelius would be an example of such a person. So in a sense they were ordained to eternal life. They would finally receive that eternal life that was promise to them in Romans 2:7 but this doesn't mean they were saved by their works. They still had to believe the gospel. They were just in "limbo" for a lack of a better term. I'm not sure if anyone would be "ordained to eternal life" today as they were then since it was a transitionary period from OT to NT at that time. But it is possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members heartstrings Posted November 14, 2013 Members Share Posted November 14, 2013 Romans2 14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) Muslims, for instance, don't know God and aren't looking for God, They're enemies of God. But if you're caught stealing in some Muslim societies, they'll cut your hand off as sure as you're breathing. if you commit adultery, they'll just execute you and If you dishonor your parents, you may be killed for that too. All of that concept is found in the Mosaic law. Likewise if you were to kill the brother of a naked Indian in a remote Amazon jungle, he most likely will "avenge" his brother's death. The point? Way back in Genesis, God said that man knows good and evil; we all have a sense of what's right and wrong. Likewise, all societies, no matter how pagan, totalitarian, or even immoral, have conscience, and laws. The simple stability of any society depends on it. Notice that the King James Bible doesn't t mention anyone, including God, as having ordained the Gentiles in Acts 13 to anything. Neither were they ordained to hear the gospel because of their own "well doing". But I believe that people today are ordained to eternal life: Muslim suicide bombers are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JerryNumbers Posted November 14, 2013 Members Share Posted November 14, 2013 Since the topic of concordances came up...has anyone heard of the Dakes Bible? It's the KJV of the Bible but has the concordance built into it. I have one that I bought when I was in AOG that was suggested to me but now not sure some of what is taught in the concordance part is accurate. I've got one but would not recommend it. I do look it it once in a while to see what its says about a verse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Covenanter Posted November 15, 2013 Members Share Posted November 15, 2013 I use the Blue Letter Bible - it packs a vast amount of info, including Strongs numbers for EVERY word. It has powerful searches, & is easy to see the definitions, Biblical useage, occurrences, etc, so that we can see the Gk & the English in context. Scoll down the link to see the Gk, & click on the Strong's numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.