Results 181 - 200 of 3692
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Makarios Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
181 | Questions for a Pretribulationist | Matt 24:22 | Makarios | 159416 | ||
Greetings Mark, If you read the quote that Kalos had posted, he indicated that it was Satan who does not want us to know those things that were indicated. In fact, I'm sure that Satan would rather that we did not consider the Bible at all. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
182 | srry i dont see the blue letter | Bible general Archive 3 | Makarios | 159311 | ||
Greetings Bows44! Your post to Lil_kea13 was certainly explanatory enough in showing how one views another's Forum profile, but if you insist, I will give it a shot if Lil_kea13 continues to have difficulty. Perhaps with two people providing suggestions, it will be made more clear. :-) Lil_kea13, if you are viewing a post on the Forum homepage (the first page that appears when you log onto the Forum), and you would like to view the profile of the author of a particular post, then go all the way up to the top of that post, and simply click on the author's name. If you would like to read the profile of, say, Bows44, then simply click on "Bows44" and the next page that you view will be the user's profile. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
183 | Rapture? Pre? Mid? Post? | 2 Thess 2:3 | Makarios | 159301 | ||
Greetings John! I most heartily agree with you on this subject of eschatology and the supposed 'imminency' of the rapture. I also believe that the answer can be found in Scripture by looking at Scripture as a whole rather than attempting to base a specific view on only selected verses. We know that the Pretribulation position argues that the church will not see the wrath of God, primarily using Romans 5:19, 1 Thessalonians 1:10, 5:9, and Revelation 3:10 as proof-texts. However, those who hold to the Posttribulation position maintain that the church will undergo the persecution of Antichrist, basing their position on Matthew 24:21-22,29-31, 2 Thess. 2:1-8, Rev. 13:3-10, 14:9-12. So, with two completely different and seemingly contradictory positions being supported by different passages of Scripture, can we possibly find some middle ground, since we know that the Bible does not contradict itself? I firmly believe that the Prewrath view is supported by all Scripture verses within their context, harmonizing the verses so frequently quoted by Pretribulationists and Posttribulationists alike. The prewrath view (so well stated in your profile) "is the position that the true church will be raptured when the great tribulation by Antichrist, inspired by Satan, is cut short by God's day-of-the-Lord wrath, (Matt. 24:22) which will occur between the sixth and seventh seals of Revelation, sometime during the second half of the seventieth week. (cf. Rev. 7:9-17) The persecution associated with the great tribulation of Antichrist is viewed as the wrath of Satan, whereas the events that follow beginning with the seventh seal, are considered the wrath of God." (www.solagroup.org) Blessings to you, Nolan |
||||||
184 | why is the devils number 666 | Rev 13:18 | Makarios | 158884 | ||
John: Thank you very much for that! That gave me a good laugh! :-) Nolan |
||||||
185 | what fruit did eve eat? | Genesis | Makarios | 158778 | ||
Well said, Doc! - Makarios | ||||||
186 | "Flies" should read "given" | Eccl 10:1 | Makarios | 158751 | ||
Greetings Sid, "To: Makanos: I am primarily a Bible expositor." Would you mind telling us a bit more about your background? "All of the conservative Protestant expositors had to begin by editing the translation; because they are all so bad." I disagree with this statement as nonfactual until you can provide me with some concrete support. "They are all so bad because they have retained thousands of KJV errors." I disagree with this statement as nonfactual until you can provide me with some concrete support. "They have four names of God wrong because the KJV had them wrong." I disagree with this statement as nonfactual because it simply is not true. "However, the Internet is full of websites with the proper translations of these names." Show me. "James Strong identified "Elohim" to be "plural gods"; both pagan gods, and Father and Son. Matthew Henry and Robert Jamieson agreed. The webmasters of these sites also agree; but they think that we should stick with status quo." I disagree with this statement as nonfactual because it simply is not true. "William D. Mounce's lexicon identified "Christos" to be "Anointed." Show me. "The Interlinear Bibles all read "Iesous" instead of "Jesus." The British invented the letter "J" in about AD 1725." I disagree with this statement as nonfactual because it simply is not true. "HWH is "to be." The prefix "Y" reads "he." HYHA is "I Am." God taught this to Moses. HWHY is "He Is." Moses taught this to Israel." Show me. "Jesus came teaching "I Am." Peter confessed, "You are Anointed, Son of God." Hebrews reads, "Who being radiance of the glory ... of essence of Him" - Heb 1.3; and other similar verses." I am unable to follow any coherent line of thinking here. "The Jews did not believe in "The Son of God" - Psalm 2.7." Please clarify. "They changed the names of God (plural Gods, He Is) in the Septuagint." I disagree with this statement as nonfactual because it simply is not true. "The "traditions of men" is the great stumbling block." Please clarify. "I have translated, and interpreted, all of Ecclesiastes." Oh really? In what capacity? "Death given" (10.1) is about the death of Israel being prophesied in Verse 3.2." Please explain further. "Matthew Henry and Andrew Fausset agree with this interpretation of Verse 3.2." Show me. "Please believe me, that I do not speak foolishly or recklessly." The jury is still out on that, until complete, in-depth and mentally coherent explanations can be given for what you have written above and in your other posts. "Respectfully submitted." "sid" --Makarios |
||||||
187 | "Flies" should read "given" | Eccl 10:1 | Makarios | 158738 | ||
Greetings Hank: Well said, my friend! Shoo fly pie.. This Forum is flypaper to self-promoted Greek illiterates who constantly want to change Holy Writ for one reason or another; whether capitalization, whether anti-KJV, etc, etc.. Too bad we just don't all sit down and read what the good book says and try to do it instead of looking for crossword puzzles in all the wrong places.. :-) - Makarios | ||||||
188 | What does Luke 16 mean? I don't get it. | Luke 16:9 | Makarios | 158727 | ||
Greetings SerrasNewRoad, I appreciate your comments. Welcome to the Forum! Would you mind taking a few minutes to write a bit about yourself in your user profile so that we can get to know you better? Thank you! Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
189 | "Flies" should read "given" | Eccl 10:1 | Makarios | 158723 | ||
Greetings Sid, I appreciate your post, but I must disagree with you and ask you where you are getting your information.. Are you using only Strong's Exhaustive Concordance?? If you substitute the word 'given' for the word 'flies' in Ecc. 10:1, then you are not remaining true to the Hebrew text, you are not truly translating a passage from Hebrew to English because it would then make no sense at all in English, and you are breaking possibly every single translational and grammatical law that there is to follow in both Hebrew and English in translating a passage. You state: "Look at the translators of the KJV statement of disrespect for the word of God:" I'm not sure exactly what interpretation you are reading into the preface to the 1611 KJV. Are you saying that the KJV translators purposefully changed words to dilute the Word of God? I do believe to an extent and have seen that the KJV translators did not use very much uniformity or consistency with specific English words when the same Hebrew words were presented in varying passages. The NIV does the same thing. But I also believe that, for the most part, the KJV translation was among the best of the English translations at the time it was originally translated, and it still remains a formidable translation, although its archaisms have been updated in newer translations such as the NASB, NKJV, ESV and the NIV. So, if you are using one of these newer translations, then I really don't see where continuing to bash the KJV will do any good, since the majority of people on this website either use the NASB or something other than the KJV, and it is commonly accepted that the KJV does indeed have its faults (as every translation does). Now, if you are using your argument (that the KJV translators purposefully changed the words to be misleading) to state that the Hebrew word 'zebub' in Ecclesiates 10:1 MUST be changed to the English verb 'given' instead of being rendered as the English word 'flies' (which is the rendering found in every Bible translation since 1611) to carry over the appropriate meaning, then you are simply wrong! And, if that is essentially your argument, then your argument does not stand up against the Bible or good sense. Truthfully, Makarios |
||||||
190 | why the error? | Matt 21:29 | Makarios | 158722 | ||
Greetings John! Yes, you can still order the 1901 ASV at http://www.starbible.com. I pray that all is going well with your Sunday school class! Blessings to you, Nolan |
||||||
191 | "Flies" should read "given" | Eccl 10:1 | Makarios | 158676 | ||
Greetings Sid, Welcome to the Forum. I appreciate your study of the Bible, but I am a bit perplexed regarding your insistance that specific words were poorly chosen by well studied Bible translators who most assuredly are at the forefront of the world's best Greek and Hebrew translators.. If we examine varying translations that were created by completely different committees in different eras, we find that the use of the word "flies" in Ecclesiates 10:1 is not a point of contention in the slightest when translation of Hebrew into English is brought to the fore. In fact, the NASB (1995), ESV (2001), KJV (1611), ASV (1901), NKJV (1982), Bible in Basic English (1965), Young's Literal Translation (1898), Webster Bible (1833), Douay-Rheims (1899), and the Darby Bible (1889) all agree with the use of the English word for 'flies' as an accurate representation of the Hebrew word of 'zebub'. In fact, this Hebrew word 'zebub' occurs only twice in the KJV Old Testament, the only other place of which, in Isaiah 7:18, it is also translated as 'fly.' In conclusion, I would ask that you examine these words a bit more carefully before making an assumption that the translators got it wrong. :-) Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
192 | why the error? | Matt 21:29 | Makarios | 158674 | ||
Greetings Hank! What a monumental effort it was on Lockman's part and on the part of the translators of the 1611 to first translate Holy Writ into spoken English, and then to produce the novelties of translations that they have! I agree: it is always best to settle upon and study a translation that has been well reviewed, well read, and well criticized, since such processes only serve to "make a good translation better" as in the words of the KJV and NASB translators themselves. And, like the ESV being in the lineage of the RSV, the NASB is a direct descendent of the 1901 ASV, which has itself received wide acclaim for its accuracy. The NASB 1995 update is a great improvement on the 1977 NASB, conscientiously reflecting the work of the dedicated, Bible trained scholars at Lockman who have produced arguably the most literal English translation available today. Blessings to you, my friend! Makarios |
||||||
193 | Did God create death? | Gen 1:31 | Makarios | 158303 | ||
Greetings CDBJ! You are correct! According to Deut. 34:7, Moses lived to be 120 years old. But I do not believe that I was in error when I wrote that the average lifespan was down to around 70 at the time of Moses, because God made Israel wander around in the desert for 40 years for their unbelief, (Num. 14:34) and not for 140 or 240 or 340.. :-) Blessings to you dear brother! Makarios |
||||||
194 | What is "slain in the spirit"? | 1 Thess 5:21 | Makarios | 158302 | ||
"And I'm convinced that many other Forum users also thank you and appreciate your untiring efforts over the years as much as I do. Your excellent contributions to the Forum are nothing short of monumental. You richly deserve a word of thanks and appreciation. Without solid heralds of truth such as you, this Forum would not have survived." Hank and Kalos (about Kalos), I am in full agreement! - Makarios | ||||||
195 | How is Jesus the fulfilment of jews hope | Luke | Makarios | 158294 | ||
Greetings Doc, How very right you are, my friend! However, LC133 specifically referred to Luke in their question, so I had to speak from Luke's gospel. But you are absolutely right! Matthew wrote specifically to the Jews! Keep up the good work dear brother! Makarios |
||||||
196 | ... | Bible general Archive 3 | Makarios | 158214 | ||
Greetings Agnostic, All the same, I do ask that you seriously think about it - the reason for our existence - and if you have ever honestly given God (as the answer to the question) serious thought.. You have everything to gain by pursuing Christ! Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
197 | when God is putting you through process? | 2 Cor 12:7 | Makarios | 158104 | ||
No problem, my friend! :-) Believe me, I have done the same thing! Makarios |
||||||
198 | when God is putting you through process? | 2 Cor 12:7 | Makarios | 158087 | ||
Greetings Doc, When I wrote "I am convinced that the Lord will show us what He is doing when we have patience with Him", I meant that in the context of the question, we can expect an answer when we show patience, rather than expecting the Lord to show us immediately what we are going through and how long. So, as to not misunderstand my response to Smurfrenee, that is what I simply meant - that we need to show patience with the whys and hows and how longs. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
199 | Women less sinful than us?? | 1 Tim 2:14 | Makarios | 157958 | ||
I apologize, I meant to say "Women definitely have.." Perhaps women can type with less mistakes than men. - Makarios |
||||||
200 | Women less sinful than us?? | 1 Tim 2:14 | Makarios | 157957 | ||
Greetings Robin, When definitely have their share in the fall of mankind as well as men. Just because you found a stastic somewhere that says that there are more men in prison does not mean that that same statistic can be extrapolated as a representation of men and women as a whole in society.. Was Jezebel ever arrested? Perhaps not.. But she still had her part in the judgment, and so does everyone else. If you are looking for some support to this notion that women are any less sinful then men, then you have found the wrong internet website. - Makarios |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ] Next > Last [185] >> |