Results 141 - 160 of 165
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Radioman Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
141 | Did Jesus go to hell after dying? | Ephesians | Radioman | 26695 | ||
Son, you obviously don't have enough knowledge of the Bible to determine that this or that preacher/teacher is wrong in his interpretations of it. What you have is a lot of nerve to assert that because someone disagrees with your uninformed interpretation he is wrong. Too many of your postings border on the insulting and the abusive. A word of warning: Posting to this forum is not a right; it is a privilege. To abuse it is to lose it. You need to watch your step. You can ignore this or come back with a smart-aleck reply. But, if so, you ignore it at your own risk. |
||||||
142 | Do we play or pray? | Col 2:16 | Radioman | 7929 | ||
EdB concludes: "Scofield must be right his Bible has been in print for 90 years 9 decades". You're the one who said it, EdB, not me. Steve Butler must be right, because EdB agrees with him. EdB must be right, because Steve Butler, the man who knows everything and understands nothing, agrees with him. Or, here is another alternative: The blind are leading the blind. |
||||||
143 | what is the true worship day sun. or sat | Col 2:16 | Radioman | 25148 | ||
Likewise, some seem to feel that translators can do no right, while they themselves, the critics, can do no wrong. |
||||||
144 | What IS your belief? | Col 2:16 | Radioman | 25369 | ||
I'm afraid I do not understand. How is it that the findings of others are the mere ramblings and speculations of man, but your findings are not the mere ramblings and speculation of man? Are you not a man? Do you have a direct line to God that no one else has? As to the question, "I still don't know whether you are saying that we should repent and dump Sunday assembly, or it's technically wrong but morally OK, or what?" -- you still have not given a direct answer, have you? Are you trying to hide something or what? I assume you will add my question to the list of those you refuse to answer. |
||||||
145 | What IS your belief? | Col 2:16 | Radioman | 25375 | ||
You write: "And God knows exactly what you know and why you know it. He also knows why you don't know some things and what you could have known if you had taken the effort to know. Kapeesh?" Spare me the sermon. I was asking for clarification, not your judgment of me. What I kapeesh is that your last paragraph was a putdown of me. God knows what I could have known if I had taken the effort to know. Cute. Very cute. You spent two years studying two verses, but your study was of limited scope? No, I don't want a myth. How did you interpet from what I said that I wanted a myth? All I understand from your third paragraph is that you're a pastor -- one who studies at the rate of one verse per year - a pastor who doesn't interpret the Bible. Whatever. Enjoy the myth of your own superior knowledge or piety or both. |
||||||
146 | what is the true worship day sun. or sat | Col 2:16 | Radioman | 25378 | ||
Now I know the area in which you are superior -- witty comebacks and putdowns of others. It takes a lot of learning to get a man as deep as you think you are. By the way, the plural of thesis is "theses," not "thesis's." |
||||||
147 | Who was that masked man? | Col 2:16 | Radioman | 25757 | ||
Heard on Christian radio. "Look for people who always seem stuck on one over-emphasized point of theology. This is the person who bangs the proverbial drum for his own little area. Some crazy quirk. And it usually is not some great divine insight. They'd like you to think they're so close to God that they have a great divine insight that no one else has. The fact of the matter is they're seeking a platform for the feeding of their ego. Watch for people with a lack of balance." If one has submitted a total of 80 postings and 79 of them are about the same verse, does that not seem a bit quirkish? Could someone who submits 79 out of 80 postings about ONE verse of the Bible be considered yet another Internet Lone Ranger Bible teacher and self-appointed expert with a lack of balance? |
||||||
148 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | Radioman | 26019 | ||
If you guys had the ability to read (especially minds); if you were smart enough not to make assumptions (where insufficient data exists); if you possessed a suprior mentality such that you always made good grades; if you could impress people with the length of your bibliographies; in short, if you had attended grad school, you would be brainy enough to figure out his position, which is: He has no position. His only position is that he, poor writing and communication skills aside, is right and all uneducated swine are wrong. If you don't believe it, just ask him. | ||||||
149 | What does this verse mean? | 1 Tim 2:15 | Radioman | 40741 | ||
You write: "If you compare the Amplified Bible translation to the origional (sic) greek, then, yes it is someone's wrong interpretation." There is more to the work of Bible translation than most of us are aware of. Having a thorough knowledge of the original languages is just the beginning. "The art and science of Bible translation is one of the most demanding -- and humbling of all ministry professions. Perhaps Martin Luther said it best when he opined that he was glad he became a Bible translator, "...otherwise I might have died someday imagining that I was a learned man." (Apparently there are many who have never done the work of translating the Bible who IMAGINE that they know more than they actually do.) "The challenge of beginning with the original Bible languages, syntax and cultures and translating them into the receptor language, replete with its own idioms and cultural understandings, is massive. IT CAN NEVER BE A WORK OF PERSONAL PREFERENCES or accommodation to special interests." (Emphasis added. "The facts that inspired an updated Scripture text for today's reader", Zondervan.) To be qualified to translate the Bible one needs a good knowledge of ancient LANGUAGES, CULTURES, ARCHEOLOGY, and HISTORY, as well as proficiency in the receptor language (in this case English). Much more is needed than just sitting down with one's Strong's and appointing oneself an expert in Bible translation. The Amplified Bible is someone's wrong interpretation? That statement alone indicates a lack of knowledge and understanding of the Bible and the translation process. One need not like the Amplified, but it is presumptuous and erroneous to declare it to be "someone's wrong interpretation." |
||||||
150 | If the shoe fits... | 2 Tim 2:15 | Radioman | 15112 | ||
If the shoe fits,... Many of you have reminded us every other 10 minutes that the preachers, scholars and authors who write commentary are mere men and that what they write is only their opinion. Guess what? EdB, Steve B, Radioman and everyone else on this forum are only humans. Everything we/they write is merely our/their own opinion. So when you bash the 'experts' as being mere humans who write their own opinion, don't forget to bash yourselves and the rest of us along with those who have actually made a serious study of the Bible. Or, put another way, if you don't trust the recognized teachers that Christ has given to the church, then why should we trust you? Do you have some direct line to God that no one else has? |
||||||
151 | Where's the line? | 2 Tim 2:23 | Radioman | 5552 | ||
I agree entirely with your well-stated answer. Unfortunately, the people who need it most won't get it. The fact that it applies to them will roll right off their back, or their mane as the case may be. "Do you have any Scriptural support for the idea of human free will?" Apparently the person you asked has no Scriptural support. If they did, I'm sure they would be eager to tell you what it is. |
||||||
152 | I think, I feel, I believe. Hogwash! | 2 Tim 2:23 | Radioman | 14169 | ||
Why, oh why, are you people so FASCINATED with speculation about what the Bible does NOT say? Shouldn't you be watching "Unsolved Mysteries" or one of those TV shows? Does anyone here have any respect for the silence of the Bible? When you speculate on what the Bible does not say, who is edified, who is encouraged, who is comforted? You people need to study and learn what the Bible DOES say. Then you might have less questions about and interest in what it doesn't say. I assure you, the Bible is complete. God has not, as some of you have suggested, left anything out that should be there or made any mistakes in the Bible. To go on and on and on about what the Bible does not say is to cast doubt upon the inspiration and sufficiency of Scripture. Scripture surely is not sufficient if you people have to make up 1,001 questions about what it does not include. You may get some kind of kick out of questioning the reliability or sufficiency of Scripture, but all you do is add doubt and confusion to seekers and babes in Christ. And by a strange twist of logic some of you declare that this is somehow helpful in furthering the gospel and the kingdom of God. That somehow speculating on trivial matters on which the Bible is silent is going to strengthen someone's faith in God or in the essentials of the Christian faith. Read your Bible with an open mind and heart. Be willing to obey what you find there. Accept it for what it actually is, the very words of God Himself. "Therefore, the person who rejects [the Bible] does not reject man, but God, who also gives you His Holy Spirit." One more time: according to the Lockman Foundation, this is neither a discussion group, a survey, or an opinion poll. Take a hint from the Apostle Paul and do not go beyond what is written. If you find the Bible insufficient to satisfy all your curiosity, maybe you ought to discard it and turn to the Apochrypha, the Book of Mormon, the Watchtower Society, the writings of Mary Baker Eddy, or some of the more colorful and imaginative postings here at the forum. All of the above are equally spurious, fanciful and uninspired. Here at the Forum you will find all the bricks without straw, clouds without water, and idle speculation without Scripture that you'll ever need. Selah. (Pause and think about that.) |
||||||
153 | Inquiring minds want to know. | 2 Tim 2:23 | Radioman | 14538 | ||
Inquiring minds want to know. Your Questions and My Answers 1. Q: Are we to pray to Jesus? A: Had you been in combat in Vietnam, you wouldn't need (or have time) to ask that question. 2. Q: Could Jesus sin? A: No. 3. Q: Is sex before marriage wrong? A: Yes. Also note: Usually the Bible doesn't speak of right and wrong. It speaks of good and evil. 4. Q: When did God change lifespan of man? A: DID God change lifespan of man? In what verse of the Bible does it SAY he did? 5. Q: What law(s) did Christ fulfill? A: He fulfilled the law. Not "laws" (plural), but "the law" (singular). 6. Q: Why? A: Because. 7. Q: Does God have multiple motivations? A: Is the clay questioning the motives of the Potter -- AGAIN? 8. Q: Satan take the place of God in Genesis? A: No. 9. Q: Good News Bible? A: Yes. 10. Q: Does it state anywhere in the old testament about jesus' crucifixion? A: Yes, it does. Otherwise what was the source of the prophecies fulfilled when Christ was crucified? (FYI: We usually spell Jesus with a capital J.) 11. Q: Can all churches worship together as one? A: No. Can all Christians worship together as one? One day we will. This is not that day. 12. Q: Can someone give me a CLEAR answere to the question..Does salvation require baptism? A: Yes, someone can. 13. Q: Where is paradise? A: Anywhere where foolish and ignorant questionings (speculations) have ceased. |
||||||
154 | Inquiring minds want to know. | 2 Tim 2:23 | Radioman | 14659 | ||
Interesting use of sarcasm. Sandman: Thank you for expressing your judgment of my character and, in other posts, the motives and intentions of other post-ers. I have expressed my opinion of the caliber and quality of the posts of others. In turn you question the caliber and quality of mine. That's an interesting use of criticism. Sandman, you write: "Interesting use of sarcasm. Instead of edifying brothers of Christ, you have revealed the true substance of your own character. Sarcasm does not have a place on this forum." "Sarcasm does not have a place on this forum." Maybe, maybe not. But neither do rebellion, division, apostasy, heresy, wild speculation, arrogance and ignorance posing as wisdom have a place on this forum. And I honestly do not apply any of these characteristics to you, Sandman, or to sincere newcomers. My problem is not with you. Nor is it with newcomers, but with oldtimers or anyone else who base their opinions on speculation instead of Scripture. Agreeing or disagreeing with me is not the issue and it never was. The issue is not one's answer, but the supporting Scripture, if any, reasoning, and attitude with which the answer is written -- the process by which the opinion is arrived at. When I use the words wild speculation, arrogance, ignorance, etc., I'm speaking in terms of the entire history of this forum and its various crackpots and misfits who, at one time or another, have sought to dominate the forum or attract attention to themselves. Try to understand. I am not implying that to disagree with me makes one a crackpot or misfit. That is not the issue at all. What is the issue is, if anyone comes to this forum expecting answers based on Scripture and reason (common sense), then they most likely will be sadly disappointed with the vast majority of postings here. Re my Note, "Inquiring minds want to know," I would like to ask you, as a forum veteran of 40 days and 16 postings, what do you find sarcastic about my answers, numbers 1-5 and 7-10? Granted, they are blunt and to the point, but flippant? Sarcastic? Also, 7 of my 13 answers were direct answers to direct questions. Therefore, what is flippant about a "yes" or "no" answer? Just thought I'd ask. I'm not against you. I'm not saying that I am "right" and you are "wrong." Radioman |
||||||
155 | Inquiring minds want to know. | 2 Tim 2:23 | Radioman | 14661 | ||
Brian.g: I intend no sarcasm at all in this reply. In all sincerity, I thank you for your wise and gracious suggestions. In all honesty, I couldn't disagree with anything you said in your previous posting to me. I have read all of your posts since you started on the forum. I want you to know that I respect and appreciate you and all the good information you have shared with us over the past weeks. Thank you again for your well-intentioned and well-received previous post to me. Bless you, Radioman |
||||||
156 | Inquiring minds want to know. | 2 Tim 2:23 | Radioman | 14667 | ||
Norrie: Yes, that was my intention -- to quit shuckin' and jivin' and dancin' all around this "foolish and ignorant" speculation and to come quickly to the point. Thank you. Your perception and comments are both welcome and refreshing. Radioman |
||||||
157 | can you lose your salvation | Hebrews | Radioman | 24324 | ||
Yes, you can lose *your* salvation. If you are the source of your salvation, then you can lose it. However, salvation is of the Lord. You cannot lose the salvation Christ gives you. |
||||||
158 | How can Jesus be tempted if He is God? | Heb 4:15 | Radioman | 4666 | ||
2 Proverbs 1:1 Be not drawn into dispute concerning neither the King James Only controversy, Eternal Security vs Eternal Insecurity, nor Calvinism vs Arminianism. 1:2 For it tendeth only to frustration. The major portion of thy brethren neither can nor will understand the issues. 1:3 Neither will they answer thee according to Scripture, reason or logic. But their answer proceedeth out of their own emotions and the imaginings of their hearts. 1:4 Take heed unto thyself lest thou assay to challenge their pet beliefs, 1:5 For in the day that thou challengeth therof, they shall turn on thee and rend thee to pieces; 1:6 Insomuch that, if it were possible, even the very elect should be utterly cut off from all rational thought; and that without remedy. 1:7 Cast not thy learning before them that despise learning of any and every kind. |
||||||
159 | "...you are so slow to understand" | Heb 5:11 | Radioman | 8915 | ||
RSV Hebrews 5:11-14 About this we have much to say which is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need some one to teach you again the first principles of God's word. You need milk, not solid food; for every one who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their faculties trained by practice to distinguish good from evil. Today's English Version Hebrews 5: 11 There is much we have to say about this matter, but it is hard to explain to you, because you are so slow to understand. 12 There has been enough time for you to be teachers—yet you still need someone to teach you the first lessons of God's message. Instead of eating solid food, you still have to drink milk. 13 Anyone who has to drink milk is still a child, without any experience in the matter of right and wrong. 14 Solid food, on the other hand, is for adults, who through practice are able to distinguish between good and evil. |
||||||
160 | Hebrews 6:4 | Heb 6:4 | Radioman | 14672 | ||
Hebrews 6:4 and following. ibelieve, you write: "This passage is to a person who has reached a maturity in his CHRISTIAN walk that only a few people have reached. This person has tasted all that GOD has for us on this earth and is walking not as himself but as CHRIST. For a person to reach this point in this life and to turn back to the world would truly be putting Jesus on the cross again." First, it is not possible to put Jesus back on the cross. When He died, he died ONCE. Once! "It is finished." ibelieve: I respectfully disagree with you. The person in this passage is the exact opposite of one who has "reached a maturity in his CHRISTIAN walk that only a few people have reached." Actually, the person in this passage never was a believer; he is one who has stopped short of saving faith in Jesus Christ. Please consider the following: The warning in Heb 6:6-8 "is issued to those who have been instructed and even moved by the Holy Spirit but have never committed themselves to Christ. [In this passage] the experiences outlined may precede and even accompany salvation, but they do not always result in salvation. Scripture abundantly affirms the Christian's eternal security; therefore this passage must not be interpreted as teaching that believers in Christ can lose their salvation. See Jn3:15-16, 36; 10:27-30; Rom 8:35,37-39; Eph 1:12-14; 4:30; Phil 1:6; Heb 10:12-14; 1 Pet 1:3-5" (note at Heb 6:4, New Scofield Reference Bible, Oxford, 1967). ***** 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, "impossible "Hebrews 6:4-8 presents the case of Jewish professed believers who halt short of faith in Christ after advancing to the very threshold of salvation, even "going along with" the Holy Spirit in His work of enlightenment and conviction (John 16:8-10). It is not said that they had faith. This supposed person is like the spies at Kadesh-barnea (Deuteronomy 1:19-26) who saw the land and had the very fruit of it in their hands, and yet turned back. "partakers (Greek - iJlavskomai ," going along with)." Bibliography Information Scofield, C.I. "Scofield Reference Notes on Hebrews 6". "Scofield Reference Notes (1917 Edition)". http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/ 1917. ***** " . . . logically [Heb 6:4] implies that if salvation were to be lost, it would be impossible for that person to be born again, lose it, and then be born again again. This much is clear: whoever openly and consciously rejects Jesus Christ is unregenerate even if he seemed to have been saved ealier." Whether he had lost his salvation or never had it to begin with, "either way, the result is identical." (note at Heb. 6:4ff, NRSV Harper Study Bible, Zondervan, 1991) ***** No offense intended, but please spare me the observation that Dr. Scofield was a poor scholar who didn't know what he was talking about. I've already heard that on the forum approx. 40 or 50 times. It didn't work the first time I heard it and it won't work now. I am not at all implying that you would do such a thing. I merely point out that many on the forum have read an answer, which may include a quote by Dr. Scofield, MacArthur, Ryrie, etc. Then when they realize they have no answer to the points made, they try to change the subject by casting doubt upon the scholarship or character of the author that was quoted. Not to you, but to those who have employed this deceptive practice, I would say: It's a nice try and a cheap trick. But it will NOT WORK with everyone. (Disclaimer: No man, forum member, author, scholar, preacher, etc. is infallible. Only the Bible is infallible and only in the original manuscripts.) Again, I bear you no ill-will or personal criticism. I am merely expressing an alternative viewpoint. Radioman |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [9] >> |