Results 1 - 10 of 10
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Only "three 'things' in heaven"? Really? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 7339 | ||
It has been said on this Forum: "There are only three things in heaven, the Father,the son (sic) and the angles (sic), unless you count satan and his bunch than (sic) there's four." My question: can anyone provide Scripture references to clearly support or refute the assertions made in the above quote? Is it true that "there are only three 'things' in heaven"? Scripture reference(s), please. |
||||||
2 | Only "three 'things' in heaven"? Really? | Bible general Archive 1 | Makarios | 7340 | ||
Dear JVH, I can find no reference whatsoever to there being only 'three things in heaven'.. This may be a 'stretch' or misquote from 1 John 5:7 where it says that there are 'three that testify'.. Other than that, I see no Scriptural support origination of this idea whatsoever.. :) Nolan | ||||||
3 | Only "three 'things' in heaven"? Really? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 7347 | ||
Nolan: Bingo! Correct answer. Are you ready to go on the next round? :-) You have given a correct and very specific answer to a very specific question. It's true! Neither a single verse nor the combined teaching of the entire Bible supports the quoted assertion. And IF one said that 1 John 5:7 supported it (which is not what you said, no criticism here) that person would be providing a classic example of poor scripture interpretaion, i.e., scripture twisting. |
||||||
4 | I'm curious why did you do this? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 7357 | ||
I’m curious why did you do this? Your correcting something someone previously said in the forum, but unless you append your question and the answers to that thread in error how will anyone see the correction? I can and have searched for who incorrectly stated there are only 3 things in heaven. However someone reading that thread will never see the correction unless they somehow stumble upon this thread. Would it not have been better to append your question and the answers you receive to the thread that contained the error? I hate to ask this but my curiosity has gotten the best of me and makes me foolish enough to tread where I’m sure I will invoke someone’s wrath. |
||||||
5 | I'm curious why did you do this? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 7364 | ||
EdB: Thank you for your question. I'll be glad to answer it. No one would ever invoke my wrath by asking a legitimate, honest question. My original question, being a question and not an answer, corrected nothing. Whenever I reply to another's posting, I feel it is my choice whether to add to or comment upon his answer. But this is not the issue, and not worth arguing. Why did I not append my question to "that thread in error"? Because it was not my primary purpose to correct or embarrass anyone. I merely wanted to start afresh with what I considered to be a reasonable question. If one person held the belief that there are "only 3 things in heaven", perhaps others, who were not previously Forum members, would also be interested in this specific question. Thus, I posted a new primary question. Additonally, an original thread often gets bogged down with off-topic postings, nitpicking over every jot and tittle of previous answers, and personal insults. That is why, in the opinion of some, myself included, it may be better to start afresh and get back on track. Or in some cases, after 100 postings to the same thread, it may be wiser to end it and go on to something else. The assumption has been made that I am "correcting something someone previously said in the forum." I agree with this much: If I choose not to append my question and the answers to that thread in error , no one will see the correction. However, it is not my purpose to correct. Therefore, I saw no need to append to the original thread. Many times in the 116-day history of the Forum, there have been 2, 3 or more similar questions that might have been combined into one thread. But the authors chose not to do that. The short answer is: I merely wished to post a new question without specific reference to a previous post. To do otherwise might be to embarrass someone whom I have no desire to embarrass. And when I originally joined the Forum, I did not intend to embarrass or to be embarrassed. It was not my original intention to quarrel over every syllable of every word that another member may post . And it would be arrogant and presumptuous of me to pronounce judgment upon respected evangelical Christian writers whose words are quoted in various postings. Not that I necessarily agree with 100 percent of what my favorite authors write. It's just my contention that to issue a blanket condemnation that the writer (not his writing) is wrong, false, or in error would be inappropriate. When I can read the OT and the NT in the original languages, then I might think of challenging MacArthur, Swindoll, Stanley or others. I might, but I doubt it. Because by then they will have gained another 5 or 10 years of Bible knowledge and understanding. In this reply I am not trying to convince anyone that I was not at fault in my choices regarding the wording and posting of my question. I merely seek to answer your question as you asked it. Thanks again for your posting. :-) JVH0212 |
||||||
6 | Can I express my opinion? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 7388 | ||
JVH0212 I think I understand, I think? I still have the concern that someone that may be looking for direction or an answer to a question and may stumble upon the erroneous response and decide since it hasn’t been challenged by other contributors it must be correct. JVH0212 I think (my opinion) it is fair to challenge another man’s interpretation of the Bible. Many times we read what we are conditioned by environment and previous training to read. We assume more than anyone of us care to imagine. It was said by someone else in the forum and of course it was refuted, but I still believe it to be true. ‘We all have religious beliefs that have been influenced to some degree by others’. All the ideas we have about God, man, sin and salvation are not just ideas formed purely by reading the Bible. I further submit that when we do read the Bible these ideas, beliefs, reconceived notions, and prejudices effect how we comprehend what we are reading. Have you seen the example of the 6 hidden “f’s” in a story. They are hidden in the word “if’ and most people reading English do not focus on “if” as a word therefore they can only find the two or three “f”s in other words used but cannot find the ones in the word “if”. All three men you mentioned are in fact very intelligent theologians, however they too stand at opposite corners, on a few issues. Experts don’t always agree, nor should anyone expect them too. I suspect(I guess)there must be over 100 translations of the Bible, because either a person or a team felt they could do a better job than the previous. The original or manuscript languages are not as cut and dried as many believe. Look how many times there are misunderstandings here in the forum and I think we are all talking English. One of the biggest things in life I learned is that, things that appear obvious to me are not always so obvious to everyone. When someone responds to a question, answer or note different than I did I must first ask myself what did they see that I didn’t and what is it I see they don’t? I have had threads that have ran 20 or more responses and to this day I don’t believe many of the people that responded understood what I was asking. It was because language in fluid and what communicates to one person does not always say the same thing to another. Let me say I'm not trying to convince you on anything or to judge what you did. I just felt a need to express my opinion. |
||||||
7 | Can I express my opinion? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 7396 | ||
EdB: Of course you may express your opinion. It is your Constitutional right to do so. Thank you for your posting. I agree with most, if not all, of it. In fact, I wish I had been the one to say it that way. :-) One of the many points you make with which I agree and appreciate is regarding how everything we are and everything we have been exposed to influences (consciously or otherwise) how we interpret any given verse of scripture. Not a few times, when I have heard or read a sound biblical exposition of a certain passage or doctrine, have I needed to revise my former interpretation based on my new understanding of what the Bible actually says and clearly teaches. The Bible alone is the final authority in all matters of faith and practice. I know from my own experience of looking things up in various study Bibles, that even experts do not always agree. However, in the study Bibles and sources I use, written by men of various times, places and church affiliations, I have found that the points of disagreement are very minor in both number and significance. And there is much more harmony than disharmony among their various interpretations, definitions and explanations. I have repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly stated in many postings that: no man, no author, no church, no forum member, etc., is infallible. Only the Bible is infallible and only in the original manuscripts in the original languages. And not a few times I have acknowledged that I do not necessarily agree with every word of every one of my frequently used sources. I have no problem at all with others expressing opinions contrary to mine. But, it is still true that while every man has a right to his own opinion, no man has the right to be wrong in his facts. This requires a little effort on the part of the individual. Ascertaining the facts will not come by osmosis, asking the guy at the next desk, seeking the opinion of the next guy on the assembly line, reading the Reader's Digest Condensed Bible, daydreaming or any such way. It will come as the result of a diligent search of the scriptures mingled with much prayer. It will come from the scriptures, using sound principles of interpretation and with the aid of such resources as are availalbe, including, but not limited to: an English dictionary, a good Bible dictionary, a concordance, perhaps one or more Greek word studies, and some knowledge of the archaeology, history and customs of the time and people referred to or addressed at the time of the writing of the scriptures. Also, if we in general (not meaning you and I, Ed) cannot even agree on the meaning of commonly used English words or define the terms used in the questions and answers, then we are not quite ready to debate the scriptures. Finally, there are responses and there are responses. But the assertion that the Holy Spirit is Gods (sic) holy angles (sic), his most trusted and loyal, goes beyond a mere casual observation. To say that the Holy Spirit is angels borders on blasphemy. Nor was it given and correctly labeled as an opinion, but was asserted as absolute truth when indeed it is absolute nonsense. I do not deny being a little touchy where the very character and nature of God is concerned. Again I remind you, EdB, that I happily agree with the vast majority, if not all, of your post to which I am replying. I have no quarrel with you. I value your input and respect you as a fellow believer and seeker of Bible truth. Take care. Grace to you. :-) JVH0212 |
||||||
8 | Can I express my opinion? | Bible general Archive 1 | jim | 7401 | ||
Are all these folks filled with the Spirit of God? This is the first thing i look for. Do you need the Spirit to translate any language? We would be wise to seek God when there seems to be a grey area.Thanks | ||||||
9 | Can I express my opinion? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 7404 | ||
Indeed it is always wise to seek God for wisdom and understanding. Translation or study ought to be mingled with much prayer. Isn't that what I just said in my previous post -- that "It will come as the result of a diligent search of the scriptures mingled with much prayer"? One may translate something from one language to another without having the Holy Spirit. But, normally, one cannot translate from one language to another without having STUDIED the language. (I hardly think anyone made a formal translation of the Bible from Greek into English by using the gift of tongues. Only if I observed this phenomenon would I even consider it possible.) Nothing wrong with looking to know if folks are filled with the Spirit. But if the subject is Bible translators, we ought also to be looking at their qualifications and credentials. Do they know and have they studied both the source and target languages? If not, they are disqualified from doing the work of a translator, even if they had prayed and spoken in tongues for the last 100 years. |
||||||
10 | Can I express my opinion? | Bible general Archive 1 | reformedreader | 7457 | ||
JVH0212, An excellent opinion. Sam Hughey |
||||||