Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: BradHeath Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Why is 'offering' in italics | Rom 8:3 | BradHeath | 134008 | ||
I understand the dynamics. I am always confronted by those who say he was a sinner on the cross. The OT type was never before, during or after unholy. Even some who follow John McArthur hold to the view that Jesus died spiritually. Some always seem to point out the italicized words. I find it disturbing many Christians refuse to learn the OT types and shadows to help explaine the NT. | ||||||
2 | Why is 'offering' in italics | Rom 8:3 | BradHeath | 133907 | ||
Hank, thanks from a visually impaired person. My reading software picked up your answer quite nicely. I would ask why the word 'offering' was not added to @ Corinthians second occurance of the word 'sin'. People who are not familiar with the Old Testament 'type' or who wish to ignore that part of the Holy Scripture would not say Jesus became sin or a sinner or unholy on the cross? | ||||||
3 | Why is 'offering' in italics | Rom 8:3 | BradHeath | 133887 | ||
Do you beleive Jesus became sine on the tree (cross)? Whatever you typed in the Answer for 2 Cor 5:24/Romans 8:3 came out indistinguishable. I assune you do not use a NASB translation. | ||||||
4 | Was Paul speaking a believer or not one | Not Specified | BradHeath | 133880 | ||
Is Paul speaking from being a believer or his unsaved perspective in his battle with sin? | ||||||
5 | Was Paul speaking a believer or not one | Rom 7:15 | BradHeath | 133882 | ||
Is Paul speaking from being a believer or his unsaved perspective in his battle with sin? | ||||||
6 | Why is 'offering' in italics | Rom 8:3 | BradHeath | 133879 | ||
I beleive 2 Corinthians 5:21 rendering of the second use of the word 'sin' could or should be 'sin-offering'. Romans 8:3 bears witness to this rendering, but I am concerned about the added emphsis of 'offering' in italics. Is there grammatical or other justifiable reasons the word was added or is this just man's reasoning that it makes more sense or that we have an agenda? I definitely believe it should be there but I am a lay person without the background to justify the rendering. | ||||||