Results 1 - 20 of 45
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Shythiyl Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | references about importance of the bible | Bible general Archive 3 | Shythiyl | 168380 | ||
I can't recall the passage, but there is an allusion to your question in scripture. Something to the affect that it is for our learning. I'm surprised someone hasn't pointed it out. Doc? |
||||||
2 | Context versus what is translated. | 1 Sam 25:22 | Shythiyl | 168013 | ||
The term "pisses against the wall" is not a literal term. It is figurative. Could a female piss against the wall. Probably. If she was determined enough. Does every male piss against the wall? I hope not, for it would be a pretty smelly wall, but then it is more likely that it would be a mele who could, or would piss against the wall. True, the males hadn't personally done anything to David, but he was dertermined to cut off Nabal's blood line. One must understand the thinking of the day before they render a judgement concerning the actions of the individuals of that time. Please do not take offence, but I don't know where you get your "whole text in the original" from. It may be wonderful in the original you have, but I do not believe yours to be original anything, other than counterfeit, for there is no doubt in my mind that scripture is not as far from the original as you would have me believe. |
||||||
3 | Gift of speaking in tongues for all? | Bible general Archive 3 | Shythiyl | 168005 | ||
Thank you Kalos. To me it is evident from scripture that the miracle is in the speaking rather than hearing. Though I am having a difficult time getting it straightened out in my mind, your quote appears to clarify something which has bothered me. I couldn't understand why when this fact was so clear to me, it wasn't to others. I think I now know. When we see, hear or read something which is so hard to comprehend, we tend to attempt to explain it, just as I am now doing. In the case of tongues, it is understandable that even the most learned would have a hard time understanding what takes place. It is absolutely normal that one would attempt to explain it, even if that one explains it incorrectly. Personally I attempt to stay as close as possiable to the original thought depicted, which I have found, is generally the clossest to the truth. I see the gift of tongues as a miracle. And though this dosen't limit my desire to understand, I also know that I couldnt possiably understand all miracles. Can you imagine a single word spoken which contains all the syllables nessisary to convey the sound of a word in numerous languages? It is nearly unfathomable, but then, so is it's originator. I picture the happening at penticost as being compariable to one who speaks only English, when influenced by the Holy Spirit of God, speaking in a language which is understood in German, French, Spanish, Hebrew, Greek, and whatever other language or dialect is present at the time. This is foolishness to many, yet what is mans wisdom to God? |
||||||
4 | Gift of speaking in tongues for all? | Bible general Archive 3 | Shythiyl | 168004 | ||
Then it is merely self edification. | ||||||
5 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167731 | ||
Jam 4:2 .............. You do not have because you do not ask If you refuse to believe, it wouldn't do you any good to ask anyway.. S |
||||||
6 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167729 | ||
Brother Hank, many years ago, and as reciently as the last couple of years, I have witnessed the speaking of tongues. Neither was not as disorderly an occurrence as the many which I have seen depicted on these boards. Quite the contrary. The first time was something I did not understand at the time, something almost frightening, yet joyous. If there had been no interpretor, the second time I would have known it for what it would have been, the trash Searcher56 calls it. I do not mean to make it a comparison, but your reference "incomprehensible babble " puts me in mind of what those who have, either witnessed the fake professor, or are simply ignorant to scripture, call Gods word. There is little doubt in my mind that you, and those who argue, have ever seen the reality of the gift. No doubt there are devilish pretenders who are frauds. There are the same who call themselves Christians. This is why it is very difficult to convince many of the faith. Yet, do those who pretend to be Christians void Christianity? No, and neither do those who pretend to posess one of the 7 gifts called tongues, void the gift, or what Paul wrote concerning the validity thereof. There are those who contend that the gift of tongues is a gift of the past. There are also those who contend that Jesus was no more than a prophet or the archangel. All would be wise to weigh their contentions prior to speaking blasphemy. Please keep in mind brother Hank, that though my words are strong, they are written in love. I may or may not convince you, or anyone else concerning what the Holy Spirit has revealed to me. This is, as I have spoken to Searcher56, a trivial matter which is not really worth the expendature of time. Jesus Christ is the foundation. Salvation is the ultimate goal. Such a matter promotes neither. I do not seek the satisfaction of winning a debate. Nor do I claim to know it all. I do desire to clarify what the Holy Spirit has revealed to me through His Living Word. Though I may not read them, for I have a hard time not responding when it appears nessisary, I will now opt out of the discussion of this topic, and let those who must, have their last words. Your servant S |
||||||
7 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167726 | ||
Thanks for your input Mark. The word "other" (het-er-os) according to Strongs Hebrew and Greek Dictionary, means "of uncertain affinity." I would like to pose a question to Searcher56. Is what is uncertain, unknown? "G1100 Of uncertain affinity; the tongue; by implication a language (specifically one naturally unacquired): - tongue." May I ask if anyone can tell me why folks are now so certain as to what was then uncertain? Are we so much wiser today, than they who actually heard and discribed the speaking of the gift of "tongues"? (I am speaking to any who would argue the point.) Read on down to verse 6 in Acts 2. What did the people hear. NASB states "And when this sound occurred, the crowd came together,..." Note the use of the word "sound." Is it likely that, understanding the "sound" in each his own language, one would use the word "sound"? I contend that (keeping in mind what Paul stated concerning the use and gift of tongues,) one should consider that when Acts 2:4-13 is read as it is written, and in context, one will see that each individual heard what was spoken ---in their own language.--- (Not that the individual language was actually spoken.) In other words, though the apostles were Galileans, each "heard" them speak in his own tongue. Thus, the speaking of "tongues." There is no mention of such in scripture, and it is quite unlikely that each of the apostles were linguists, or that the few who may have been fluent in Greek and Hebrew, were as well, in the dozen or so other languages and dialects of those gathered together. Is it so hard for todays Church (believers) to believe in miracles, that it/they must discount those spoken of in what it/they professe/s, the Living word of God? Your servant Shythiyl |
||||||
8 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167724 | ||
What is amazing is that you really believe you have "proven" something concerning this topic. I doubt this is the first time you have convinced yourself in such a manner. Searcher, what may I ask do you consider important when it comes to the Living Word? Is it more important that we debate and understand trivial matters, or that we do His will in living and spreading that word? You have yet to "prove" anything invalid. An unknown tongue, be it plural or otherwise is still an unknown tongue. Your rationalization changes absolutely nothing. And the fact that you wish to make it appear that what was and is is not, changes nothing either. I hope you do not feel that I was calling you names, for this was not my intention. I was simply stating my thoughts concerning the wording of your post which you referenced. If I were to state that belief in eternal salvation is "a very common demonic doorway," I expect it would cause a pretty big stir among those who hold such a belief. Your statement in post #48618 is comparable to such. Your servant. S |
||||||
9 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167678 | ||
Please see my post 167677 . If you desire to continue this conversation, it is doubtfull it will turn into anything other than a sparring match. This would accomplish little, and glorify no one. For I am just as set on my belief in what scripture states as you. And this topic is of such insignificance that I am sure we could find something which would be more likely to suit His purpose, to discuss. We could discuss Spiritual infancy. i. The spiritual infant is concerned with self rather than service. ii. The spiritual infant is concerned with argument rather than action. iii. The spiritual infant looks to people rather than the Master. 1. God wants you to leave the elementary principles of Christ -- to leave (not abandon), the elementary principles about Christ. He wants you to progress beyond them. A. What are the elementary principles? i..... ii.... |
||||||
10 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167677 | ||
Searcher56, not that this particular topic is one of any great importance, and I mean no disrespect, but I immediately loose respect when I see one who professes Christianity, no matter how learned they may consider themselves, labeling that which they do not understand in scripture, as demonic. Though, ignoring the bias, I agreed with much of what you said in the first post you mention. The second however, managed to loose my attention after about 7 or 8 words. No doubt you have been resident this forum long enough to get away with such boisterous and rude comments, but you wouldn't want to hear mine concerning your utter lack of Christianlike kindness and brotherly love in referencing a topic concerning which, you so evidently twist and distort scripture. I am agreeing to disagree, continuing, and doing so, in brotherly love, and not desiring to carry this discussion on any farther God Bless you my brother.. |
||||||
11 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167676 | ||
Please disreguard my challenge. In having read a few of your posts concerning tongues, it is evident that no amount of scriptural truth is likely to sway such bias. Respectfully agreeing to disagree. But please Searcher56, pay those of us who believe contrary to yourself, the respect you yourself would expect. Otherwise, do not be dismayed when what goes around, comes around. |
||||||
12 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167673 | ||
Some state the same concerning the Rapture and the Trinity as well. One mans trash is anothers treasure. Who is to say which is what? Scripture is fact. Interpretation is of man. Likewise, the wisdom of the wise is, foolishness to the Lord. |
||||||
13 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167672 | ||
So, dear brother, all factors weighed in, would you not agree that scripture depicts "tongues" as a gift, a divine language, unknown to mortal man? | ||||||
14 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167671 | ||
I have read and understood the context of that verse, as well as those surrounding it. You add much to what is said. The passage you speak of, plainly states "And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?" This is hardly interpretation... It is evident from this passage and the context surrounding it, as well as what Paul states concerning "tongues," that this divine gift of language is unknown TO ALL. Thus when it is used in the Church, there is to be an interpretor, for otherwise, it edifys none other than the individual. I challenge you to provide scripture stating anything other than "all HEARD the speaking in their own language." Those speaking were not speaking in the particular languages heard. They were PLAINLY speaking in an UNKNOWN tongue. Scripture states nowhere that the tongues mentioned was unknown to "some." An unknown tongue is UNKNOWN. I do not recall any "interpreters" in the book of Acts. Paul speaks of such when the gift is excercised in the Church only. Again, I would politely ask, Please provide some scriptural foundation for your statements, or admit that you have nothing other than conjecture. |
||||||
15 | Can anyone speak in tonges | 1 Cor 13:1 | Shythiyl | 167625 | ||
I fully agree that tongues is a lesser, and primarily temporal gift, but are you stating that tongues is always a "known" language? If so, why would Paul have stated that there should be an interpretor? Tongues was not a "known" language in the book of the Acts. Nor is it today. For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. 1Co 14:2 |
||||||
16 | how many unforgiven sins are there? | John 1:1 | Shythiyl | 167308 | ||
Thank you for elaborating. My wife tells me that I am too concice. Not enough attantion to detail. I tell her that she gives too many details and I get boared. I guess I'm just odd... But I like your details on this matter. |
||||||
17 | ... | John 1:1 | Shythiyl | 166868 | ||
Quoting Kalos "Every translation contains verses that are at least somewhat mistranslated. In my study and teaching, I use several of the different translations in addition to studying the original languages. By comparing and contrasting the different translations, it is often easier to get a good grasp on what the verse is saying than by only using one translation. My loyalty is not to any one English translation, but --- to the inspired, inerrant Word of God that is communicated by the Holy Spirit --- through the translations (2Timothy 3:16-17).'" And we MUST preach and teach this method, or Satan will use the confusion to his advantage. Again, find a bible you are comfortable with. If you diligently seek Gods truth, there hundreds of translations thereof which will attest to the fact that The Holy Spirit will lead you. "If they are not against us, they are for us..." Kalos, dear brother, if I were half as learned as you, Doc and Tim, I would be twice as as smart as I am. .... perhaps one day. |
||||||
18 | ... | John 1:1 | Shythiyl | 166867 | ||
It gives me great courage when I see two saints standing firm. | ||||||
19 | ... | John 1:1 | Shythiyl | 166866 | ||
Doc, dear brother, your words are wise, but though I am not always successful, and at a loss without a good spell checker and dictionary, I make every attempt to use words in in their truest of meaning, and I stick by my original statement. that "God is able to inspire (to influence, move, or guide by divine or supernatural inspiration,) even modern day translations of His originally inspired (breathed) word." How else could it have been preserved even up to 1611. Surely not by the will of carnal man. Definition provided per Merriam Webster. It even gave me the meaning of the word heterodoxical. "contrary to or different from an acknowledged standard, a traditional form, or an established religion." Could Martin Luther have been considered heterodoxus? Could the Church not benifit from one who posesses "some" of his attributes today? Is it heresy to make a statement which is contrary to or different from an acknowledged standard? I think not, as long as it is within scriptural boundries. |
||||||
20 | ... | John 1:1 | Shythiyl | 166865 | ||
Very interesting information. Thank you. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 ] Next > Last [3] >> |