Please explain this.

[GodsGrace]

I know that the wolves will rush in as soon as I leave, not sparing the flock

They're already here!

 

[marks]

ah, guess you werent here for the "you cannot state a single Absolute Truth from Scripture" deal...so there it is, do your best, try to prove any truth that you like from Scripture to me. Long shory stort you are going to fail, in almost exactly half of the opinions, right?

Of course I'll fail! How can I convince you of anything? But whether or not I can convince you has no bearing on whether or not the Bible means a certain thing.

:)

 

[marks]

Are you a new christian?

Does that matter?

Many have talked themselves out of knowing anything given the time to do so.

So what you're saying is that ONLY YOU understand the bible because God had you in mind?

Is that what I said? No it is not.

I DIDN'T SAY IT WAS SLOPPY.

I realize that. I said, "I guess you're idea is that it's just sloppy", which was in response to . . .

The answer is easy.
IF the writers of the N.T. had any inkling we'd mess up what they thought, they would have been VERY CAREFUL in what they stated....
But they just had NO CLUE that some of these modern belief systems would EVER be accepted by the Christianity they knew.

. . . i.e. they were not careful, that is, they were sloppy.

Except I believe it was God Who wrote Scripture.

Much love!

 

[bbyrd009]

The answer is easy.
IF the writers of the N.T. had any inkling we'd mess up what they thought, they would have been VERY CAREFUL in what they stated....
But they just had NO CLUE that some of these modern belief systems would EVER be accepted by the Christianity they knew.

This is why I like OLD THEOLOGY.
And not stuff that was made up recently in the past 500 years and even in the past 200 years, and even in the past 50 years.

This new stuff is like new revelation.
There cannot be new revelation...Jesus was the last revelation to man from God.

so wadr i would...contemplate that the Naive dialectic demands that every truth contain its own counter-truth, so to speak, in order to reflect what is it? and to hide wisdom from the wise, who naturally expect to read the Bible from the Hegelian dialectic, like they have been raised, go team, literally, history, facts and proof, even though not a single absolute truth may be derived from Scripture at all, as we already maybe know right.

but gee, GG, even over/above that i would say that John Doe was obscured for most of 2000 years, also that who knows what...manifestations of the Rev might be valid tomorrow? I mean still looking for two literal people to lay dead in some street for 3days or whatever?

 

[bbyrd009]

Here is a verse with a word that EVERYONE knows the meaning of, right?

"Let no man seek his own, but every man another’s wealth." (1 Cor. 10:24)

That was not by Joel Osteen, it is the KJV. :)

ha i hate to see ol Joel caste like that, knowing what i know about his preferences for ever even assuming the ministry. He is Aaron, i tell ya what. Love the guy myself. Anyway i'd hafta read that in the lex at least to reoly to your q sorry

 

[marks]

but if you read my post again,,,you'd see that you totally missed the point.

Maybe it's my point that is being missed.

If I look at the verse that says Jesus make clay with spit and dirt and put it in the man's eyes, and then he could see, I can read this as an account of a miracle, which contains some strange elements, but that was how Jesus did it, and I can read this as the same account, and give meanings to those strange elements, though I don't see those meanings listed specifically.

The spit is the original water of creation, the dirt the earth, now reblended after being separated, reblended into the original primordial ooze from which the world was make, now beginning creation over in this man's eyesockets, giving him sight.

Or . . . the eye is make of water and earthy elements, and Jesus mixed them in the man's eye sockets to make his missing eyes.

I can stick with what is stated, or I can add flights of fancy to the story. How many "flights of fancy" do you suppose are enacted upon Scripture? Would you expect them all to agree? Oh, but those who have them love to hold to them.

But if we can divorce ourselves from the desire to inject ourselves into what we read, and are willing to change ourselves instead of changing the meanings of the words we read, we'll be much more likely to agree.

Much love!

 

[marks]

OK M.
We don't really need to discuss this.
To me it's important, but not to everyone.

Is it me that doesn't want to discuss this? Or is it you??

Time will tell.

Much love!

 

[bbyrd009]

But God did know. He knew exactly how I'd read and understand His Book, and when He wrote it, I believe He had me in mind. A person letter from God to me!

And I think He was extremely careful.

Much love!

well we do have plenty of warnings in there i guess, tares, seven worse spirits, twice the sons of hell you are so yeh, i guess ppl, believers, dont really read Paul to their destruction much after all maybe
huh?

 

[bbyrd009]

Of course I'll fail! How can I convince you of anything? But whether or not I can convince you has no bearing on whether or not the Bible means a certain thing.

:)

um, didnt we just cover how you could convince me of stuff? i am not hard to convince. But anyway, i undersatand your assumption there, sure, and to that i would say thats what juries are for, state your first absolute truth from Scripture and lesssee! What do you have to lossse?

 

[bbyrd009]

and then whether the Bible actually means what you think It means there, a whole diff subject iow, we could cover later maybe. easier to demonstrate after you have realized the um nature of truth thing prolly

 

[Grailhunter]

Is it me that doesn't want to discuss this? Or is it you??

Time will tell.

Much love!

Is it me that doesn't want to discuss this? Or is it you??

Time will tell.

Much love!

I am not sure if GodsGrace's kindness or patience can help you. If you are not careful religion can put you in bubble. Some people still think the world is flat. If you think that the scriptures only convey one doctrine....you need to count the number of denominations that are out there. Wiser to look to see how differing scriptures can be harmonized and sometimes you have to take that to the language level and the cultural level. Then there are some scriptures that are klondike. Like you must hate your father and mother to be a disciple of Christ and it is better not to touch a woman... if that caught on we would not be having this discussion. Believe it or not we all have mothers. No Mark....your way is not the only way described in the scriptures.

 

[bbyrd009]

But whether or not I can convince you has no bearing on whether or not the Bible means a certain thing.

the inference @ "whether or not I can convince you" being that you would be convincing me of the "truth," right?

You would be convincing me of something that is "from" the Bible, iow

 

[marks]

um, didnt we just cover how you could convince me of stuff? i am not hard to convince. But anyway, i undersatand your assumption there, sure, and to that i would say thats what juries are for, state your first absolute truth from Scripture and lesssee! What do you have to lossse?

That's part of the fun with posting when you haven't read the latest responses because we're all writing at the same time!

LOL!

Just that I don't see that I convince anyone of anything, I only share what I have, and the Holy Spirit will do the convincing if there is convincing to be done.

But let's play!

True, or not true:

Hebrews 11:6 "And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him."

And absolute truth from Scripture. If you do not believe that God exists, you cannot please Him.

Do you believe?

Much love!

 

[Nancy]

This is a plate:

• 

This is a platter:

• 

This is the end of poor John:

• 

And this is a charger:

• View attachment 6754

End of story!

 

[Nancy]

How would you know unless you yourself were 100% correct on biblical truth?

Since I too am included in my own post, as there are many areas that are still growing in my faith. But, I would never, ever say I know ALL truth...one day The Holy Spirit WILL bring me into all truth. So, you kind of made my point?

 

[aspen]

You cannot separate or rank faith and works because they are interdependent. Like Jesus, who was fully man and fully God, our sanctification is fully faith and fully works.

 

[justbyfaith]

You know anything can be proven by scripture.

The atheist once proudly said, "I found it! The Bible says, "there is no God."

To which the believer replied, "you have taken that out of context. It says, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.""

I agree with you that it is stated in other places, so if the person truly wants to serve God, he will still get the correct message.

And if the person does not want to serve the Lord, he will take the wrong message from that scripture passage and run with it...

Here is a verse with a word that EVERYONE knows the meaning of, right?

"Let no man seek his own, but every man another’s wealth." (1 Cor. 10:24)

That was not by Joel Osteen, it is the KJV. :)

Wealth is in italics. It could just as well be translated well-being. There is no word for it in the original Greek.

Also, since babies and young children cannot sin,

Excuse me, every last one of us was conceived in sin (Psalms 51:5). All have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23, 1 John 1:10); babies are not exempt from these scriptures. They declare the word "mine!" very early on.

Romans 9:11 confirms that without conscious awareness of sin, an infant does not sin.

It does not confirm that at all. What it confirms is that Jacob and Esau didn't commit any sins while they were in their mother's womb.

There is NOTHING at all heretical about the NASB--I have no idea where he gets that.

I would share what the heresy is with all of you...except for the fact that it stumbled me in my faith for a very long time, and I do not wish the same experience on any of you. Call it a cop-out if you wish...you can take my word for it or call me a liar until you stumble on the same heresy in your own reading of the NASB (it is also in the NIV and who knows what other version; but not in the kjv).

Indeed. If JBF believes that Elizabethan English is the only way to salvation, I would ask him why we don't force everyone to learn Koine Greek? William Tyndale went to the stake for daring to translate the Scriptures into what was then, contemporary English. It is to tread on his blood when KJV zealots insist that the Holy Spirit only speaks through the KJV. Think about it, He spoke in MANY languages at Pentecost--and now we are presumptuous enough to demand that He only speak with Elizabethan English when speaking to English-speakers? What is even more laughable is that they are so zealous that they have even translated the KJV into other languages! That must be amusing to watch someone in another land try to read THAT mess!

Now where did I ever say that Elizabethan English is the only way to salvation? I am saying that other translations are watered-down and lack the potency of the fullness of the saving gospel of Jesus Christ. That it is written in Elizabethan English is a side-point that has no relevance to the issue. Truth is, the kjv is the only version that has the form of sound words that we are commanded to hold fast to in 2 Timothy 1:13. It is the only translation that preserves every jot and tittle that Jesus said will never pass away from the true word of God (Matthew 5:18)

copied from my Facebook page: The fact that there is a controversy (concerning kjv-only) means we should examine the validity of the claims of both sides. On the kjv-only side, there is Matthew 7:13-14 and Matthew 5:18. Jot and tittle have been taken away in other versions; and they are also based on different manuscript sources. You have to really seek the Holy Spirit's answer on which ones are right (see Jeremiah 29:13). Personally, I feel that other versions are watered-down and that people go to them because they have itching ears (2 Timothy 4:1-5). Not everyone; some started with the NIV or NASB thinking they were valid translations. In my own life I began with the kjv and someone suggested that I "try another version". I did, and my walk with Christ then proceeded to go downhill until I returned to the kjv. Just a testimony (see Revelation 12:10-11).

Since I too am included in my own post, as there are many areas that are still growing in my faith. But, I would never, ever say I know ALL truth...one day The Holy Spirit WILL bring me into all truth. So, you kind of made my point?

But suppose that I have the whole truth, even being right 100% of the time? How would you know that unless you were also right 100% of the time and also knew it? If you don't have the whole truth and are not right 100% of the time, then you would be in disagreement at least some of the time with anyone who has it 100% of the time.

Now of course I am being somewhat facetious. I have posted elsewhere that I believe that I can be wrong at any time and that I need to keep a humble and flexible attitude so that if anyone can prove me wrong, I would be willing to change my pov. However, I also posted in the same breath that we ought to read the Bible in such a way as to find the truth; and that when we find it, we need to hold it as truth unless someone can show us biblically that we are wrong.

 

[Nancy]

The atheist once proudly said, "I found it! The Bible says, "there is no God."

To which the believer replied, "you have taken that out of context. It says, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.""



And if the person does not want to serve the Lord, he will take the wrong message from that scripture passage and run with it...



Wealth is in italics. It could just as well be translated well-being. There is no word for it in the original Greek.



Excuse me, every last one of us was conceived in sin (Psalms 51:5). All have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23, 1 John 1:10); babies are not exempt from these scriptures. They declare the word "mine!" very early on.



It does not confirm that at all. What it confirms is that Jacob and Esau didn't commit any sins while they were in their mother's womb.



I would share what the heresy is with all of you...except for the fact that it stumbled me in my faith for a very long time, and I do not wish the same experience on any of you. Call it a cop-out if you wish...you can take my word for it or call me a liar until you stumble on the same heresy in your own reading of the NASB (it is also in the NIV and who knows what other version; but not in the kjv).



Now where did I ever say that Elizabethan English is the only way to salvation? I am saying that other translations are watered-down and lack the potency of the fullness of the saving gospel of Jesus Christ. That it is written in Elizabethan English is a side-point that has no relevance to the issue. Truth is, the kjv is the only version that has the form of sound words that we are commanded to hold fast to in 2 Timothy 1:13. It is the only translation that preserves every jot and tittle that Jesus said will never pass away from the true word of God (Matthew 5:18)

copied from my Facebook page: The fact that there is a controversy (concerning kjv-only) means we should examine the validity of the claims of both sides. On the kjv-only side, there is Matthew 7:13-14 and Matthew 5:18. Jot and tittle have been taken away in other versions; and they are also based on different manuscript sources. You have to really seek the Holy Spirit's answer on which ones are right (see Jeremiah 29:13). Personally, I feel that other versions are watered-down and that people go to them because they have itching ears (2 Timothy 4:1-5). Not everyone; some started with the NIV or NASB thinking they were valid translations. In my own life I began with the kjv and someone suggested that I "try another version". I did, and my walk with Christ then proceeded to go downhill until I returned to the kjv. Just a testimony (see Revelation 12:10-11).



But suppose I have the whole truth, even being right 100% of the time? How would you know that unless you were also right 100% of the time and also knew it? if you don't have the whole truth and are not right 100% of the time, then you would be in disagreement at least some of the time with anyone who has it 100% of the time.

Now of course I am being somewhat facetious. I have posted elsewhere that I believe that I can be wrong at any time and that I need to keep a humble and flexible attitude so that if anyone can prove me wrong, I would be willing to change my pov. However, I also posted in the same breath that we ought to read the Bible in such a way as to find the truth; and that when we find it, we need to hold it as truth unless someone can show us biblically that we are wrong.

To start here, I do NOT believe that any one person has it right 100% of the time. We are still fallible and will remain so until He completes us. I do love the KJV but I will not say all other versions are as watered down as you say. I know there was something with the NIV not too far back that was def. error and since, it has been corrected. I don't know of the others and, I'm sure there could be errors and we just do not know it. Either way, as we submit to Him, His Spirit WILL lead us into truth no matter which bible we use. If we seek Him as He tells us to, He WILL reveal Himself. Cannot remember where I heard this, but it did impact me at the time 'if we tore out a page from each book of the bible, we would STILL end up with the same message.
"What is impossible for man..."
It is kind of hard to listen to another Christian tell another that they have all truth concerning the Word Of God. Not much humility there me tinx. :)

 

[justbyfaith]

You cannot separate or rank faith and works because they are interdependent. Like Jesus, who was fully man and fully God, our sanctification is fully faith and fully works.

Since sanctification is the work that God performs in us of making us like Christ, it is not accomplished in us through any works of righteousness that we can do. It is entirely a work of the Holy Spirit.

Those who are made like Christ will operate in good works as the result. But this (operating in good works) is to be distinguished from the work that the Holy Spirit does in us of making us holy.

I may give to the poor as the result of being sanctified; but I am not sanctified by the act of giving to the poor. I am sanctified by faith and by keeping my eyes on the Lord (2 Corinthians 3:18).

 

[justbyfaith]

It is kind of hard to listen to another Christian tell another that they have all truth concerning the Word Of God. Not much humility there me tinx. :)

I told you I was being facetious, did I not?

As a matter of fact I was speaking hypothetically.

And it is also possible that any one of us, who studies to shew himself approved, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth, might have 100% of the truth; even while they keep the humble attitude that they could be wrong on anything and have the willingness to change their position if it should turn out that they are proven wrong.

I think that the Bible is the ultimate authority on this.

There is about A 20%-70% chance that I am right and that the kjv is the final authority as the ultimate Bible.

This chance increases drastically when you begin to find damnable heresies in bibles other than the kjv.