Apostolic Study Bible

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Examples?

Sure! .... would one bit of "leaven" suffice to "corrupt" the "whole" thing?

"And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept rose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many."

The following is but one sentence from Page 1525, a note explaining Matthew 27:52-53 ....

"We are not told what happened to the risen saints after they WENT TO JERUSALEM."

Where is the city of Jerusalem mentioned in these passages? Nowhere! Therefore, seeing the words of Revelation 22:18 were given as a warning to those who would "add" to its contents, as it is in the example noted, I am gravely concerned, to say the least. I doubt that God takes it lightly when one alters His written Word!

[seguidordejesus]

So what is the holy city?

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by seguidordejesus

So what is the holy city?

The answer to that question should have been noted, and if not, then why not do as they did with other passages wherein they tendered no explanation, and simply make no comment at all? By stating it in the manner they did, it was expressed as a "truth," and that it wasn't!

Regarding the identity of the "holy city," rest assured that it is disclosed in the language of the sacred Writ, just not in the words of Matthew 27:52-53.... it requires an investment of time & energy in "rightly dividing the word of truth" to locate it, relying upon the Spirit as Guide, of course!

Place an eyedrop of pure wine into a barrel of raw liquid sewage and the result is just more raw sewage. Likewise, place an eyedrop of raw liquid sewage into a barrel of pure wine, and the results are the same!

When anyone deliberately, albeit unwittingly, introduces even the most minute degree of "error" into the pure Word of the Lord, it serves to corrupt the entire Bible. I'm convinced that such is the case with many of the addendums, notes, etc which appear in the UPCI KJV Apostolic Study Bible.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Esaias

In other words it uses a citation from Eusebius instead of translating the text. Yeah, that's how you give people the Word of God, don't translate the text just use Patristic citations instead!

Eusebius was quoting from the Hebrew text, which was in his possession.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Lafon

The answer to that question should have been noted, and if not, then why not do as they did with other passages wherein they tendered no explanation, and simply make no comment at all? By stating it in the manner they did, it was expressed as a "truth," and that it wasn't!

Regarding the identity of the "holy city," rest assured that it is disclosed in the language of the sacred Writ, just not in the words of Matthew 27:52-53.... it requires an investment of time & energy in "rightly dividing the word of truth" to locate it, relying upon the Spirit as Guide, of course!

Place an eyedrop of pure wine into a barrel of raw liquid sewage and the result is just more raw sewage. Likewise, place an eyedrop of raw liquid sewage into a barrel of pure wine, and the results are the same!

When anyone deliberately, albeit unwittingly, introduces even the most minute degree of "error" into the pure Word of the Lord, it serves to corrupt the entire Bible. I'm convinced that such is the case with many of the addendums, notes, etc which appear in the UPCI KJV Apostolic Study Bible.

nice. it should also be noted that the Holy Spirit was once compared to a leaven's worth also; which also reflects in Scripture, imo...and i had assumed so physical-sounding a reference meant Jerusalem proper too; please enlighten us!

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Sure! .... would one bit of "leaven" suffice to "corrupt" the "whole" thing?

"And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept rose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many."

The following is but one sentence from Page 1525, a note explaining Matthew 27:52-53 ....

"We are not told what happened to the risen saints after they WENT TO JERUSALEM."

Where is the city of Jerusalem mentioned in these passages? Nowhere! Therefore, seeing the words of Revelation 22:18 were given as a warning to those who would "add" to its contents, as it is in the example noted, I am gravely concerned, to say the least. I doubt that God takes it lightly when one alters His written Word!

"The Holy City" refers to Jerusalem

Neh 11:1 The princes of the people lived in Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts in the other cities.

Isa 52:1 Awake, awake, put on your strength, Zion; put on your beautiful garments, Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into you the uncircumcised and the unclean

[Praxeas]

lol...I honestly don't see the problem with that commentary

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

lol...I honestly don't see the problem with that commentary

Neither do I, seeing that it is contextually correct. I think that most
commentators have done it.

[seguidordejesus]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

"The Holy City" refers to Jerusalem

Neh 11:1 The princes of the people lived in Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts in the other cities.

Isa 52:1 Awake, awake, put on your strength, Zion; put on your beautiful garments, Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into you the uncircumcised and the unclean

What a bunch of sewage. Burn the forum.

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

"The Holy City" refers to Jerusalem

Neh 11:1 The princes of the people lived in Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts in the other cities.

Isa 52:1 Awake, awake, put on your strength, Zion; put on your beautiful garments, Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into you the uncircumcised and the unclean

Oh, how I already knew you would respond in such a manner. But ..... I take no pleasure in informing you that, just as those who were responsible for the commentary in the UPCI KJV Apostolic Study Bible, you're WRONG!

The error is truly "fundamental," and so simple I find it rather strange that some of the most educated people (those with PhDs, etc attached to their names) seemed to miss it completely. It involves the small word "the." Do you get it?

The English word "the" is a superlative pronoun, and is used to refer to a specific person, place, or thing! That's elementary "stuff"!

When, in the words of Matthew 27:53 we read "THE Holy City," it means just that. Matthew was not just referring to any city, but a very specific city, "THE Holy City." And you believe that Jerusalem was such a city during the days our Lord's feet trod its streets? Not quite!

Although God had chosen it as a "holy" place where His name was to be exalted, however, when He "visited" it in the person of "the" Christ child, it had become an extremely corrupt place. In fact, so much so that we are told in Revelation 11:8 that it was known "spiritually" as "Sodom and Egypt," places that are associated with evil and wickedness.

So seguidordejesus' question remains unanswered, "So what is THE holy city?" Well, here's the Bible answer ....

Seeing that neither of the gospel accounts discloses what happened to the resurrected saints, we must determine their destiny. Paul the apostle gives us that information in the words of Ephesians 4:8, "Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men."

Therefore doesn't common logic and reasoning allow one to conclude that when these resurrected saints "appeared unto many," this could ONLY have transpired in "the holy city" that is located in the heavens, and NOT the corrupted earthly city of Jerusalem? Likewise, should one not also conclude that this is why Matthew never penned anything about them after they were resurrected? Even Josephus, the noted Jewish historian, never mentioned this event in his writings.

But wait! There's even more to substantiate this conclusion. When John (the Revelator) was given visions of things within "the holy city," please note that which he saw under the altar there:

"And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?

And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled"
(Revelation 6:9-11, KJV).

You guessed it! THESE are those of whom Matthew wrote about, for our Lord took them with Him when He ascended to "THE holy city" and placed them there, where they must await the ending of the present age, at which time, they together with the souls of the righteous dead who will also be resurrected at the soon coming glorious appearance of our Lord. At that time we ALL will be given a "new" heavenly body. The reason these MUST wait, is clearly revealed in the words of Hebrews 11:40, to wit, "that they without us should not be made perfect."

Do you still hold to a belief that Matthew was referring to "THE" city of Jerusalem, an earthly locale that even the language of the sacred Writ calls "Sodom and Egypt"? Please don't misunderstand me ... God will again cleanse and sanctify the earthly city of Jerusalem, for it will be from there that He will rule the entire earth in peace and righteousness for 1,000 years!