Results 1721 - 1740 of 1999
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Ray Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1721 | Does the OT talk about resurrection? | Matt 22:30 | Ray | 16900 | ||
Hi Nolan, I can't respond to the OT and resurrection but I can give you my read of 2 Thess 2:6. 2 Thess 2:5,"Do you not remember that while I was still with you, that I was telling you these things? And you know what restrains Him now, so that in His time He may be revealed. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way. And then that lawless one will be revealed..." |
||||||
1722 | Small "s" or not? | 1 John 3:24 | Ray | 16843 | ||
Hi Bill Mc, I definitely believe that the Holy Spirit is a Person of the triune God. Let me first go to Rom 8:10 where in your last post for emphasis wrote "THE SPIRIT IS ALIVE (present tense) because of righteousnness." The NKJ for that verse capitalizes Spirit and the NASB has it in lower case. The way you wrote it I don't know what your choice would be. I think that that is important in order to see whose righteousness is being spoken of, and what Spirit has the power. I agree with you that we have eternal life now, from the minute we put our faith and trust in Christ. Can you give me a reference verse for "He dwells in you through the Holy Spirit?" I look forward to talking more with you. I'm sorry that I took so long in answering you here. |
||||||
1723 | Examine yourselves! | 2 Cor 13:5 | Ray | 16825 | ||
Hi Brent, Can I get any comment from you about my "Small "s" or not?" question on 1 John 3:24? | ||||||
1724 | The Glory of Israel | Num 23:19 | Ray | 16797 | ||
Hi EdB, Consider Psalm 8 along with Hebrews 2:6-9. Psalm 8 says from beginning to end, "O Lord, our Lord, How majestic is Thy name in all the earth." Verse 4, "What is man, that Thou dost take thought of him? And the Son of Man, that Thou dost care for Him? Yet Thou hast made (Him) a little lower than God, And dost crown Him with glory and majesty." Parenthesis and capitals are my interpretation. What do you think? Who is majestic here; man or the Son of Man. I would say the Son of Man, even our Lord. | ||||||
1725 | The Glory of Israel | Num 23:19 | Ray | 16795 | ||
Hi EdB, Do you think that capitalization of the Son of Man in Hebrews changes the meaning or does it indeed explain it. I considered your translations earlier and I look at more literal ones. Consider Psalm 80:14. I haven't done an in-depth study of the third book of Psalms so I can't speak from any knowledge. But it appears in verse 14 a possible interpretation of this vine (Vine), a shoot (or Root), a son (or the Branch). But it goes on and says that "It is burned with fire, it is cut down; They perish at the rebuke of Thy countenance. Let Thy hand be upon the man (probably Man) of Thy right hand, Upon the son of man (probably Son of Man) whom Thou didst make strong for Thyself. I've been trying to impress on people the need for us to examine the Scriptures and make it alive and personal for themselves. How much does one believe in the Deity of Christ, how much are the Scriptures prophetic, how much of a difference is there between our God and man? |
||||||
1726 | The Glory of Israel | Num 23:19 | Ray | 16786 | ||
Hi EdB, I understood what you believed and wrote. But you have missed my point that whether it be capitals or lower case the Scripture still says "GOD IS NOT A MAN, THAT HE SHOULD LIE, NOR A SON OF MAN, THAT HE SHOULD REPENT." I'm not shouting here or writing for emphasis; that is how the Hebrew writes it. I want to make it lower case too to show that the best of us don't measure up to the Son of Man. But the passage says that God is not a man, nor a son of man (nor a Son of Man). So in this case I write it for who I know He is and find other Scripture to shed further light. I think I found one in Hebrews. It is good to be able to type fast. Take your time and consider this and let me know what you think. |
||||||
1727 | The Glory of Israel | Num 23:19 | Ray | 16770 | ||
Hi EdB, You say "I won't" and I congratulate you and praise you on your desire to give God glory through your capitalization. I can only say in my defence that I do not blaspheme the Holy Spirit, although I seem to speak against the Son of Man here in this thread. See Matthew 12:32. Let me look with you at the passages again and try to tell you what problems I am seeing. I, too want to capitalize Son of Man for He was God. He was not just a man; he was not just the best man around (a son of man), for He was the Son of Man. But the Scripture says here, "God is...Nor a son of man..." The Hebrew has it in all capitals so that doesn't help us. If it means "Nor a son of man" then it certainly shows that the translator/interpreters of our Bibles are wrong in not capitalizing the pronouns of this Man. But it still remains that Scripture says "GOD IS...NOR A SON OF MAN". I believe that Hebrews 2:6 is a passage that speaks of "What is man, that Thou rememberest him?" and recognizes the "littleness" of man. But it speaks just as Numbers does,of "the Son of Man that Thou art concerned about Him? Thou hast made Him for a little while lower than the angels..." Now it is time to crown Him with glory and honor, for "we do see Him who has been made for a little while lower than the angels, namely Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone." We know from John 11:50, "'that it is expedient for you that one Man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish.' Now he did not say this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. So from that day on they planned together to kill Him." Yes, Jesus was the Son of Man, He was the Son of God, and He was the Holy One. He was the One sent from God. Do I dare say that He was not God? All that I can say is that God in all His glory can not be seen. They saw Jesus, and got to know the Father through Him. But when we get to heaven we will know Him and see Him as He is, the triune God. John 4:23ff |
||||||
1728 | The Glory of Israel | Num 23:19 | Ray | 16638 | ||
Hi Ed B and Pivot71, Thanks for your responses and here's my interpretation for what its worth, until I change my mind.:) I'm going to stick with the NASB and have five capitalized words of Deity in both of the passages for there is a direct correlation. Numbers 23:18, "God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a Son of Man, that He should repent;..." l Samuel 15:29, "And also the Glory of Israel will not lie or change His mind; for He is not a man that He should change His mind." |
||||||
1729 | Can we now crown Him as Priest and King? | Heb 2:6 | Ray | 16623 | ||
Hi Hiram Abiff, I am sorry that I missed your reply here. My interpretation was that after "What is man that Thou rememberest him?" the rest of the pronouns should be capitalized because they speak of the Son of Man. Any more comments at this late date? | ||||||
1730 | Small "s" or not? | 1 John 3:24 | Ray | 16558 | ||
Hi Bill Mc, Thank you for responding to me. I was not saying by this question that there is a difference between the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ. Basically, I'm introducing the idea that there is "spirit of holiness" as well as the Holy Spirit. Let me get back to that after I've agreed more and questioned some about your post to me. You might rethink your opinion about the Spirit of God leaving Him for it is just that righteous Spirit in us that will give life to our mortal bodies after we die. Romans 8:10 I think that He cried out in Matthew because He was forsaken as a Man. "This Man is calling for Elijah." Matthew 27:47 Now as far as 1John 3:24-4:3, I believe that the passage is speaking about the spirit that we receive, the spirits that we are to test, that we are to use to confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, and also the spirit of the antichrist. I also believe that Matthew 12:28 and Luke 11:20 give credence to the operation of a spiritual power as well as the Person. In Christ (and His spirit) Ray |
||||||
1731 | I do agree with most of your post, but.. | Matt 6:14 | Ray | 16456 | ||
Hi Bill Mc, Ephesians 4:32 compares with Colossians 3:3 interestingly also. | ||||||
1732 | Did you forgive the Tuesday terrorists? | Matt 6:14 | Ray | 16310 | ||
Hi everyone, Don't forget the verses in between also. Compare Matthew 6:14,14 with 1 John 2:9,10 "The one who says he is in the Light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now. The one who loves his brother abides in the Light and there is no cause for stumbling in him." I would say however that the verses talk about "his brother". How you look at them for application in view of present events is up to you individually. For me, I go to verse 6, "...the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked." I go to Matthew 5:44, "But I say to you, love (forgive???) your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." As far as "brothers" is concerned, Matthew goes on and says, "If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." You know the Father, that He is righteous. |
||||||
1733 | is the NIV a good bible to read? | Bible general Archive 1 | Ray | 16304 | ||
Hi kalos, Most probably all the translators of the NIV believe in the Deity of Christ. My statement, "I don't see it recognizing His Diety" is indeed only an opinion. I don't "see it" because Deity isn't capitalized. I looked over Nolan's references for determining a good translation. I would be happy to share some thoughts about them and how some of those verses, even in the NIV, could "appear" to deny God's Deity when correct capitalization is not utilized. Those verses apply to all translations and so I would suggest a new thread. |
||||||
1734 | is the NIV a good bible to read? | Bible general Archive 1 | Ray | 16252 | ||
Hi Tim, Thanks for answering. 1) The fact of the many different spellings are what adds to the "coincidences" that Del Washburn found in theomatics. In any case, it is his book and I don't have to defend it. 2) The NIV doesn't capitalize Deity pronouns. That's why I don't like it in this stage of my walk with Christ; I don't see it recognizing His Deity. Any bible would be good to read; but for interpretation you need one with capitalization. Thanks Tim. |
||||||
1735 | is the NIV a good bible to read? | Bible general Archive 1 | Ray | 16181 | ||
Hi charis, Thank you for your concern also. I'm pretty well talked out, having written Tim, so please go there for how I feel. Bunk does have an interesting word history. But we have to do what we have to do. I was led to 1 Cor 4:1-5. Later, Ray |
||||||
1736 | is the NIV a good bible to read? | Bible general Archive 1 | Ray | 16176 | ||
Hi Tim, I am disappointed that you still want to place doubt on the word "ichthues" even when that is what you were told that the book said. As far as Eden is concerned, I don't believe that that was in the book "Theomatics". I have been recommending the book and am not aware of all the websites that they might have by now. The book has a copyright of the year 1977 so this "fad" is not new by any means. You can be sure that anyone interested in theomatics will have to have the letters correct, wherever they are written. My interest in the book "Theomatics" came about when a friend at work suggested that I read it "because he was reminded of my bible study when he read it". (O.K., the red flags go up) I read it and was encouraged in my own studies in that the book was glorifying God for the possibilities that are in His word. Every letter was important and had to be counted in his system. (I was counting pronouns at the time). So I was grateful to my friend for his encouragement, and for his giving me the book. I haven't read it in probably 10-12 years until now. It came to mind at this thread when 'Koinekid' spoke of the dropping of pronouns and articles. Articles are important to "Theomatics" and pronouns are important to my study. That is why I brought it forward to the discussion. You can read the book or not, it will probably not be of interest to a non-believer, it will give glory to God, it will open up minds to the complexity of the word of God, it will instill the importance of every dotted letter and quotation mark, and should encourage us not to leave out or add to the word of God. As far as to this thread is concerned, if the NIV does indeed drop pronouns, I would not recommend it. I think that the pendulum will swing as it always does in life, and we will want fewer and fewer translations. I will work toward a translation that will not need to be changed, and an interpretation that is glorifying to God. I would hope that we all can do that. Perhaps, theomatics can help in that, perhaps not. I think that it is important for us not to tear into something without looking into it first. The theory's mathmatics automatically put me out of the class; but I will praise God with them. As a disciple, a mathetes (from which we get our word mathematics), a pupil of the Scriptures and a follower of Christ, I will have to be interested in numbers. |
||||||
1737 | When did disciples receive the Spirit? | John 20:22 | Ray | 16153 | ||
Hi retxar, John 14:17 tells me "but you know Him". In fact He's standing next to you talking to you. I'll get back to you soon, but I'd like you to consider the Isaiah passage and any other passage that is referenced in a Study Bible. |
||||||
1738 | is the NIV a good bible to read? | Bible general Archive 1 | Ray | 16083 | ||
Hi Tim, You continue to cast doubt on the book but I wonder where you are getting your text . I checked Interlinear versions put out by Baker and Tyndale and find "fishes" just as the book "Theomatics" spells them. The only possible explanation for disparity is if you are not looking at Luke 9:13. | ||||||
1739 | When did disciples receive the Spirit? | John 20:22 | Ray | 16080 | ||
Hi retxar, You say that John 7:38 means to you "that salvation is not only a blessing, but also enables us to be a blessing." To my mind then, you are saying "that out of your innermost being will flow rivers of living water." So the rivers of water are the blessings that we are able to give. The only problem with that is that John 7:39 says, "But this He spoke of the Spirit..." You also say in further explanation, however, that "This is only possible with the Holy Spirit living in us. If the Holy Spirit lives in us then the love of the Holy Spirit will also flow out of us." So here to my mind you are saying, "Out of my (our) innermost being(s) because of the Holy Spirit within me (us), love flows. (The love of the Holy Spirit)" So the rivers of Living Water are the love of the Holy Spirit and they come out of the innermost being of either me (us) or the Holy Spirit." What then is capitalized if you see the Holy Spirit in that Scripture quote, "From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water." For verse 39 says, "But this He spoke of the Spirit..." What does a Bible student do when he is stuck? He looks to other Scriptures to shed more light. One reference is to Isa 44:3. If you are interested we can look at it together for it would be good to know who is doing what and who or what is given. 2) Right now I am not interested in John 17:5 :) 3) Jesus said in verse 28 that "I go away" and in John 14:18, "I will come to you", and in John 14:23, "...and We will come to him and make Our abode with him." Scripture also speaks of Christ in you the hope of glory. So who is this Holy Spirit within you; which Person? How many Helpers are there? Our God is one is He not? Yes. |
||||||
1740 | is the NIV a good bible to read? | Bible general Archive 1 | Ray | 16067 | ||
Hi Tim, Again, I say, take a look at the book. The book "Theomatics" for the word "fishes" had a total of 1,224 which is 153 x 8. You had a different total because you used different letters. The Strong's Greek dictionary has the word "fish" as (ichthus). "Theomatics" has the word "fishes" as 153 X 8 (1,224) and the word is in Greek and is spelled I believe, (ichthues). Check that math and get back with me. l) The book deals a lot with statistics and probability and looks into your thought that any number can be assigned. 2) I have mentioned on this forum that the languages themselves because of the all capitals were able to hide the Deity of the Christ who was to come. Many times Scriptures talk of how God hides Himself. Some people even believe in progressive revelation. The authors, primary of which is Del Washburn, do not "twist the Bible to say whatever they want it to say." The book is worth taking a look at. I am not a mathmetician and feel the statistics and probability section is not so important, but the main body of the book and his main thesis is glorifying of God. And no, I don't recommend the NIV. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 ] Next > Last [100] >> |