Results 3621 - 3640 of 4232
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
3621 | Can we say that all of the scriptures | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 43267 | ||
It is true that every word is profitable, etc., but not because we experienced it to be so. It is in the Bible because it is true. We never test the Bible by experience. Instead we test our experience by the Bible. ------------- "The use of the term revelation or reveal(ed) in reference to one's own understanding or teaching implies that those teachings were directly from God and thus infallible." ************* *Illumination* is the ministry of the Holy Spirit which makes clear the truth of the written revelation in the Bible. In reference to the Bible, *revelation* relates to its content or material, *inspiration* to the method of recording (recording, not perpetuating or preserving) that material, and *illumination* to the meaning of the record. I say again: *Illumination* is the ministry of the Holy Spirit which makes clear the truth of the written revelation in the Bible. Notice WHAT and WHERE revelation is; it is WRITTEN and it is IN THE BIBLE. There is no new revelation. The canon of Scripture is complete and has been complete for approximately 2,000 years. Jesus Christ is God's final and complete revelation to mankind (Heb. 1:1,2). The use of the term revelation or reveal(ed) in reference to one's own understanding or teaching implies that those teachings were directly from God and thus infallible. |
||||||
3622 | Try looking it up in the Bible. | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 57159 | ||
A UNIVERSAL ANSWER to satisfy most Bible questions. Many, if not most, of the questions posted here could be answered by the questioner himself/herself, using the following principles: 1) Use a concordance to look it up in the Bible. 2) Read your Bible. 3) Be willing to obey every teaching you find; it is God speaking to you. 4) Use an English dictionary. 5) Use a Bible dictionary. 6) By all means, look up the center column (cross) references in your Bible. 7) Remember that: We must compare Scripture with Scripture in order to understand its full and proper sense. And SINCE THE BIBLE DOESN'T CONTRADICT ITSELF, ANY INTERPRETATION OF A SPECIFIC PASSAGE THAT CONTRADICTS THE GENERAL TEACHING OF THE BIBLE IS TO BE REJECTED. 8) Respect the silence of the Bible regarding any issue/question on which the Bible is silent. In other words, avoid speculation. 9) Christ has given to the church pastors and teachers. 10) One need not re-invent the wheel. Don't be too proud to consult translations, commentaries and God-given pastors and teachers. |
||||||
3623 | What is "Inspiration"? -- correction | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 58689 | ||
serenetime: I am confused. I thought the question was regarding the definition of biblical inspiration. Yet you seem to be discussing the character and qualifications of Dr. Ryrie. I was not aware that this was the subject. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
3624 | What is "Inspiration"? -- correction | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 58696 | ||
Serenetime: Please forgive me if I have misunderstood you. If I have misread the intent of your post, then I am the one who is in error and I owe you an apology. However, I am still confused. You write: "I am speaking in a general sense overall of many." I still don't understand. Are you speaking of the human authors of the Bible? Their qualifications and character are not under discussion here, the canon of the Bible having been settled centuries ago. If not the Bible writers themselves, then of whom are you speaking in a general sense overall -- those who define the term "inspiration"? Again, the character and qualifications of modern (contemporary) authors is not at issue here. It is not my intent to accuse you of anything nor to put words into your mouth. It is just that I am still confused as to whom you are speaking of. Any clarification will be appreciated. Thank you for your input and interest. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
3625 | Is Your Modern Translation Corrupt? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 58732 | ||
'IS YOUR MODERN TRANSLATION CORRUPT? Answering the Allegations of KJV Only Advocates 'by James R. White 'Summary 'King James Version Only advocates argue that all modern translations of the New Testament are based on Greek manuscripts that contain intentional doctrinal corruptions. However, an examination of the most important manuscripts underlying these translations demonstrates that such charges are based more upon prejudice than fact. The papyri finds of the last century, together with the great uncial texts from the fourth and fifth centuries A.D., do not deprecate the deity of Christ, the Trinity, or salvation by grace through faith. Modern translations, such as the NIV and NASB, are not "corrupt" but instead trustworthy and useful translations of the Word of God. (...) 'The importance of the topic should not be underestimated. While the vast majority of conservative Christian scholars completely reject the KJV Only position, the emotionally charged rhetoric of KJV Only advocates causes unnecessary concerns among many believers. It is a sad truth that most Christians have only a vague knowledge of the history of the Bible and almost no knowledge of the mechanisms by which the Bible has come to us today. Issues regarding the transmission of the text over time (the process of copying), the comparison of one written text to another (textual criticism), and translation are not popular topics of discussion or study in the church today. Therefore, the claims of KJV Only advocates are liable to deeply trouble many Christians, even to the point of causing them to question the reliability and usefulness of their NIV or NASB Bibles. When believers are wrongly led to doubt the integrity of the translation they have used for years, Christian scholars have a responsibility to set the record straight. 'Moreover, there is a real desire on the part of many to hold to the "old ways" — the "traditions" of the "good ol’ days" when things were so much better than they are today. Since many believers distrust anything connected with the term "modern," for them the KJV becomes an icon of what was "good" about the past, and modern translations end up representing everything that is wrong with today’s church. 'Is there any weight to the charges being made against the manuscripts used by modern translations? Should one distrust modern translations? Those are the questions we must answer.' ------------- To read this entire article, go to (www.equip.org/free/DK115.htm) IS YOUR MODERN TRANSLATION CORRUPT? Answering the Allegations of KJV Only Advocates Also recommended, James White's book: "The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust The Modern Translations?" James R. White/Bethany House Publishers/1995 (Type: Trade Paperback) |
||||||
3626 | Is Your Modern Translation Corrupt? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 58789 | ||
Thanks for the recommendation. I have bookmarked the website and will look into it in more detail later. kalos |
||||||
3627 | Is Your Modern Translation Corrupt? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 90015 | ||
Is the KJV truer to the original manuscripts than the modern critical Greek texts and their underlying textual traditions? - - - - - - - - - - "We are back to the absurd view that the KJV is the Bible of Paul and the apostles." - - - - - - - - - - 'STATEMENT DB015 'A Summary Critique: New Age Bible Versions G. A. Riplinger (A. V. Publications, 1993) by H. Wayne House 'Riplinger's book 'goes beyond previous works, however, by developing a conspiracy theory for the KJV-only view. Author G. A. Riplinger believes that lying behind modern versions (especially the NASB and NIV, apparently) is New Age influence.' (...) 'Riplinger rejects [the] earlier manuscripts and urges us to return to the Bible of the precritical era. 'If there is anything good to say about Riplinger’s New Age Bible Versions (hereafter NABV), it is that the book is not any longer than it is and that the foolishness of its various claims are transparent when one takes the time to study them... 'NABV is replete with logical, philosophical, theological, biblical, and technical errors. Riplinger lacks the proper training to write this book (her MA. and M.F.A. in “Home Economics” notwithstanding). Many of her errors arise from a lack of understanding of Old and New Testament textual criticism as well as biblical and theological studies...She hesitatingly admitted that she really could not read Greek. '...Simply comparing the KJV with the NIV and NASB through endless charts does not prove a thing. She needs to demonstrate that the specific translations she accepts are really better textual renditions than the alternatives she rejects, rather than merely assuming the superiority of the majority text type or the KJV. (...) 'The bottom line in Riplinger’s mind is that the King James Version of 1611 is alone the Word of God. Anything prior to or after that specific translation is in some measure not really the Word of God. We are back to the absurd view that the KJV is the Bible of Paul and the apostles. 'A volume the size of NABV would be required to point out Riplinger’s misunderstanding of theology, translation technique, and her fascination with New Age conspiracy and its association with modern versions. This book will cause a temporary stir. Hopefully, however, most Christians will recognize NABV as an ill-begotten book and will turn back to a study of the Word of God in the language of the people today. In so doing they will fulfill the prayers of godly translators of centuries past, including the very ones who translated the King James Version of the Bible.' ____________________ [This article has been edited to fit here. To read the entire article, see (www.equip.org/free/DB015.htm)] |
||||||
3628 | StudyBibleForum or MyOpinionForum? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 114644 | ||
mommapbs: Let your speech always be with grace. Amen. Also, let your Bible answers always be seasoned with Bible references. You've got a point. :-) And since you raised the question, please suggest one or more Scripture references on the topic of not including Scripture references in one's answer. Where are we heading? What, Hank has not already made it abundantly clear where he's heading? Grace and peace to you, kalos ******************** To one and all: Welcome to StudyBibleForum.com, where one guess is as good as another. |
||||||
3629 | StudyBibleForum or MyOpinionForum? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 114652 | ||
How about quoting a verse on the subject of changing the subject in the middle of a thread? :-) Even if I were guilty of being impolite in my posts, that does not address the subject of the original Question, "StudyBibleForum or MyOpinionForum?". As I said earlier, the game of "What does this verse mean to me?" is a very popular one on this forum. |
||||||
3630 | StudyBibleForum or MyOpinionForum? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 114659 | ||
And I suspect that some participants are so subjective in their approach to interpreting Scripture that they miss the letter and the Spirit and the meaning of it. Carefully studying and interpreting the Word does not automatically make a person an unfeeling legalist or a Pharisee. Nor does interpreting according to one's emotions automatically make a person spiritually superior. |
||||||
3631 | StudyBibleForum or MyOpinionForum? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 114697 | ||
You have the right to remain silent... Careful, Hank. Anything you post in this thread can be used against you. You may even be subjected to cross-examination. Any person on the other side of the debate may question your personal life to determine your character and whether you practice what you preach. --kalos ******************** Welcome to StudyBibleForum.com, where one guess is as good as another. |
||||||
3632 | StudyBibleForum or MyOpinionForum? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 114733 | ||
Mommapbs: I have wronged you and I am truly sorry. Please accept my apology. I was wrong to answer you so harshly. You deserve my respect and courtesy. I went too far in my postings to you. There is no excuse for it. I've followed your postings since you first joined the forum. I agree with you far, far more than I disagree. I know from your long participation in this forum that you are a committed Christian, a person of character and integrity. I deeply regret the offense I've given you. I would be happy to answer your question about what God is currently doing in my life. But it will have to wait a few hours, at least. I'm getting ready to go to Wednesday night prayer meeting/Bible study at my church. So I'll get back to you later. Sincerely, kalos (a.k.a. John) |
||||||
3633 | Is the Bible inspired? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 148856 | ||
Is the Bible inspired? 'Question: "What does it mean that the Bible is inspired?" 'Answer: When people speak of the Bible being inspired they are referring to the fact that God divinely influenced the human authors of the Scriptures in such a way that what they wrote was the very Word of God. In the context of the Scriptures the word inspiration simply means “God-Breathed” and it communicates to us the fact the Bible truly is the Word of God and makes the Bible unique among all other books. 'While there are different views as to what extent the Bible is inspired, there can be no doubt that the Bible itself claims that every word in every part of the Bible is inspired by God (1 Corinthians 2:12-13; 2 Timothy 3:16-17). This view of the Scriptures is often referred to as verbal plenary inspiration. What that means is that the inspiration extends to the very words themselves (verbal inspiration), not just concepts or ideas, and that the inspiration extends to all parts of Scripture and all subject matters of Scripture (plenary inspiration). There are some people who believe that only parts of the Bible are inspired or only the thoughts or concepts that deal with religion are inspired but these views of inspiration fall short of what the Bible itself claims and what are the essential characteristics of the Word of God. 'The extent of inspiration can be clearly seen in 2 Timothy 3:16, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” This verse tells us that God inspired all Scripture and that it is profitable to us. It is not just the parts of the Bible that deal with religious doctrines that are inspired but each and every part from Genesis to Revelation is the very Word of God. Because it is inspired by God the Scriptures are therefore authoritative when it comes to establishing doctrine and sufficient for teaching man how be in a right relationship with God, (“training in righteousness”). The Bible claims not only to be inspired by God but to also have the ability to change us and make us “complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. 'Another verse that deals with the inspiration of the Scriptures is 2 Peter 1:21. This verse tells us that “prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” This verse helps us to understand that although men wrote the Scriptures the words they wrote were the very words of God. Even though God used men with their distinctive personalities and writing styles, God divinely inspired the very words they wrote. Jesus Himself confirmed the verbal plenary inspiration of the Scriptures when He said, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished" (Matthew 5:17-18). In these verses Jesus is reinforcing the accuracy of the Scriptures down to the smallest detail and the slightest punctuation mark because it is the very word of God. 'Because the Scriptures are the inspired Word of God, we can conclude that they are also inerrant and authoritative. A correct view of God will lead one to a correct view of His Word. Because God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and completely perfect, His Word will by its very nature have the same characteristics. The same verses that establish the inspiration of the Scriptures also establish that it is both inerrant and authoritative. Without a doubt the Bible is what it claims to be--the undeniable, authoritative Word of God to humanity. 'Recommended Resource: Scripture Alone by James White. 'Related Topics (that can be read at www.gotquestions.org/Bible-inspired.html): 'Is the Bible truly God's Word? 'Can/Should we interpret the Bible literally? 'Does the Bible contain errors, contradictions, or discrepancies? 'Who were the authors of the books of the Bible? 'Is it possible that more books could be added to the Bible?' ____________________ http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-inspired.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * www.seekfind.org Christian Search Engine The mission of SeekFind.org is to provide God-honoring, Biblically-based, and theologically-sound Christian search engine results in a highly accurate and well-organized format. |
||||||
3634 | can we be sure the Bible is valid? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 148912 | ||
As they do the rest of the Scriptures Speaking of this as he does in all of his letters. There are some things in those [epistles of Paul] that are difficult to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist and misconstrue to their own utter destruction, just as [they distort and misinterpret] the rest of the Scriptures. (AMPLIFIED 2 Peter 3:16) joehelt: You raise some good questions about the inspiration and authority of the NT books. These are questions all of us need to be able to answer so that we can always be prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks us for a reason for the hope that is in us (1 Peter 3:15). You write: 'When Paul wrote to Timothy to say that "all scripture is God-breathed..." he couldn't have been referring to his own letters, the Gospels and all of the other letters and books in the New Testament.' What do you mean by that? And how did you come to that conclusion? Why could'nt Paul be referring to his own letters and other books in the NT? Second Peter 3:16 'is one of the most clear-cut statements in the Bible to affirm that THE WRITINGS OF PAUL ARE SCRIPTURE. Peter's testimony is that Paul wrote Scripture, but the false teachers distorted it. The NT apostles were aware that they spoke and wrote the Word of God (1 Thess. 2:13) as surely as did the OT prophets. Peter realized that the NT writers brought the divine truth that completed the Bible (1 Peter 1:10-12)' (MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997. Emphasis added.) Grace and peace to you, Kalos |
||||||
3635 | Translating is not simply a matter of... | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 154387 | ||
"Translating is not simply a matter of looking up synonyms in a thesaurus." (www.lifeway.com) --Quote of the Day |
||||||
3636 | The job of translation is to translate | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 154390 | ||
Writing of one of the newer translations of the Bible, one reviewer objects: "pronouns addressed to deity are capitalized, which is totally artificial to the English language, is not found in the Greek, and introduces dogma into the translations in reference to Jesus. The job of the translation is to translate, not promote a doctrinal view..." | ||||||
3637 | What is sola scriptura? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 157471 | ||
What is sola scriptura? 'Answer: Sola scriptura is from the Latin: "sola" having the idea of "alone", "ground," "base," and the word "scriptura" meaning "writings" - referring to the Scriptures. Sola scriptura means that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. The Bible is complete, authoritative, true. "All Scripture is 'God breathed' (given of inspiration of God) and is profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, instruction in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16). 'Sola scriptura was the "rallying cry" of the Protestant reformation. For centuries the Roman Catholic Church had made its traditions superior in authority than the Bible. This resulted in many practices that were, in fact, contradictory to the Bible. Some examples are: prayer to saints and/or Mary, the immaculate conception, transubstantiation, infant baptism, indulgences, and papal authority. Martin Luther, the founder of the Lutheran church and father of the Protestant reformation, was publicly rebuking the Catholic church for its unbiblical teachings. The Catholic church threatened Martin Luther with excommunication (and death) if he did not recant. Martin Luther's reply was, "Unless therefore I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture, or by the clearest reasoning, - unless I am persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted, - and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the Word of God, I cannot and will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me! Amen!" 'The Word of God is the only authority for the Christian faith. Traditions are valid only when they are based on Scripture and are in full agreement with Scripture. Traditions that are in contradiction with the Bible are not of God and are not a valid aspect of the Christian faith. Sola scriptura is the only way to avoid subjectivity and personal opinion from taking priority over the teachings of the Bible. The essence of Sola scriptura is basing your spiritual life on the Bible alone, and rejecting any tradition or teaching that is not in full agreement with the Bible. 2 Timothy 2:15 declares, "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the Word of truth."' ____________________ http://www.gotquestions.org/sola-scriptura.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. 2 Tim 4:3a NIV |
||||||
3638 | What is sola scriptura? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 157472 | ||
Is the Bible Alone Sufficient? ____________________ " To Jesus, the Scriptures were enough and sufficient." ____________________ 'Is the Bible Alone Sufficient for Spiritual Truth? ' According to Roman Catholicism, Sacred Tradition and the Bible together provide the foundation of spiritual truth. From this combination the Catholic church has produced many doctrines which it says are true and biblical. Protestantism, however, rejects Roman Catholic Sacred Tradition and holds fast to the call "Sola Scriptura," or, "Scripture Alone." Catholics then challenge, "Is Sola Scriptura biblical?" ' The Bible does not say "Do not use tradition" or "Scripture alone is sufficient." But the Bible does not say "The Trinity is three persons in one God," either, yet it is a fundamental doctrine of Christianity. 2 Tim. 3:16 says that scripture is inspired and profitable for correction and teaching. Scripture states that Scripture is what is good for correction and teaching, not tradition. However, in its comments on tradition, the Bible says both to listen to tradition as well as warning about tradition nullifying the gospel -- which we will look at below. ' In discussing the issue of the Bible alone being sufficient, several points should be made: ' 1) The method of the New Testament authors (and Jesus as well) was to appeal to the Scriptures as the final rule of authority. Take, for example, the temptation of Christ in Matthew 4. The Devil tempts Jesus, yet Jesus used the authority of scripture, not tradition, nor even His own divine power, as the source of authority and refutation. To Jesus, the Scriptures were enough and sufficient. If there is any place in the New Testament where the idea of extra-biblical revelation or tradition could have been used, Jesus' temptation would have been a great place to present it. But Jesus does no such thing. His practice was to appeal to scripture. Should we do any less having seen His example? ' The New Testament writers constantly appealed to the scriptures as their base of authority in declaring what was and was not true biblical teaching: Matt. 21:42; John 2:22; 1 Cor. 15:3-4; 1 Peter 1:10-12; 2:2; 2 Peter 1:17-19, etc. Of course, Paul in Acts 17:11 says, "Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so." Paul commends those who examine God's word for the test of truth, not for the traditions of men. Therefore, we can see that the biblical means of determining spiritual truth is by appealing to scripture, not tradition. In fact, it is the scriptures that refute the traditions of men in many instances.' To read much more go to: www.carm.org/catholic/biblesufficient.htm * * * * * * * * * * * * * For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. 2 Tim 4:3a NIV |
||||||
3639 | What is sola scriptura? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 157473 | ||
Does the Bible teach Sola Scriptura? Yes! 'SOLA SCRIPTURA 'Evangelical Protestants believe that Scripture alone is the infallible rule of faith. Does the Bible make this claim for itself? 'Both Christ and the apostles viewed Scripture, and Scripture alone, as the unerring word of God. That Jesus held Scripture in the highest regard is evident from statements such as these: “The Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35); “Not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the law until everything has been accomplished” (Matt. 5:18); “It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law” (Luke 16:17); “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matt. 24:35). Jesus even asserted that greatness in heaven will be measured by obedience to Scripture (Matt. 5:19). 'When he disputed with the Pharisees on their view of tradition, Jesus proclaimed, “Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition...” (Mark 7:13). Scripture therefore determines whether tradition is acceptable. When Jesus was tested by the Sadducees concerning the resurrection, He retorted, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures” (Matt. 22:29). When confronted with the devil’s temptations, He responded three times with the phrase, “It is written” (Matt. 4:4-10). Clearly, Jesus accepted Scripture as the supreme authority and subjected Himself to it (Luke 24:44). And, as followers of Christ, our view of Scripture cannot be inferior to His. 'Scripture derives none of its authority from the church; its authority is inherent because it is the very Word of the living God: “All Scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16). 'Does the Bible teach Sola Scriptura? Yes! God speaks to us authoritatively only through the objective Word of God. It is for this very reason that I constantly exhort Christians not only to get into the Word, but to begin to receive the blessing of getting the Word into them.' www.equip.org/free/CP0805.htm * * * * * * * * * * * * * For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. 2 Tim 4:3a NIV |
||||||
3640 | What is sola scriptura? | 2 Tim 3:16 | kalos | 157475 | ||
Is "sola Scriptura" biblical? 'Is the concept of "sola Scriptura" biblical? Yes, most definitely. Sola Scriptura is foundational to Christianity, and was given to us by God Himself. It is God made, not man made. The Early Church clearly understood this and taught it from the beginning of Christianity.' (To read the evidence for yourself go to: www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura1.html) FICTION: 'It is my understanding that the Church did not even have the Bible (especially the New Testament) for around 350 years after Christ's death and resurrection.' FACT: 'All the Scriptures were available to the Early Church far earlier than the date you suggest (350 years). It is known, for example, that the Syriac and Latin translations of the New Testament were made around 150 A.D. This brings us within a very close time of the original documents. Based on the latest archaeological findings and textual evidence, there is no reason to doubt that the Early Church had the full Bible. The Church fathers quoted from it so heavily that virtually the entire New Testament can be reconstructed from their writings alone.' ____________________ To read more go to: www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura1.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. 2 Tim 4:3a NIV |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 ] Next > Last [212] >> |