Results 41 - 60 of 78
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: pcdarcan Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137052 | ||
I do believe that you are going to any extent to not except the fact that Satan is "the god of this world". You already acknowledged in your other post dealing with the rebuttal to Clarke's commentary, that Clarke was wrong on some of his conclusions - that's what you posted. Clarke doesn't sound like a go-to guy for an understanding of 2 Cor 4:4. I'll let the other readers decide from the many posts whether the Bible supports Satan as being "the god of this world", because I know I'm not going to convince you. |
||||||
42 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137058 | ||
So, you weren't being entirely "honest" then Steve, were you? Not to mention being "judgemental" of my sincere replies that took some time to research and publish. Seems like "repentance" for your dishonesty and judging of another is in order to qualify for "salvation"; thankfully, there's still time 2 Pet 3:9 ;) |
||||||
43 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137063 | ||
Whatever are you talking about? | ||||||
44 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137065 | ||
Hank, why are you supporting what Steve did? He was dishonest and you know it! That is in direct violation of the Lockman Foundation. And, did you not read what he said about my post? Was that not judgemental? - Ad hominem attacks are not permitted. If you report me, I'll report Steve and you for supporting him. Remember, its all documented in these posts what "he" and now, "you" said. |
||||||
45 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137068 | ||
ATTN: Lockman Foundation Recently, I caught both Hank and Steve (Usernames: Hank and SRBAEGON) conspiring on your forum to cover their breaking of the Lockman rules, but they would have you believe it is I who did this. Also, Hank and Steve have been abusing posters, esp. Hank who often breaks out into tirades! You need to investigate their posts and not take their word without investigating the matter. I have many fine posts in this forum and on this thread, but both Hank and Steve try to "incite" posters to respond to "their dishonest lures". This quote if from a post from Steve below: "The reason I kept leading you on was because you were stuck on how great your exegesis and reasoning was." That's a breaking of the Lockman rules and totally uncalled for. I'm not sure what lead to this, but I didn't go running to report them, even though this was wrong. Since Hank was successful in getting this post temporarily restricted, I believe it should be re-opened and simply strike the specific posts that are out of line with the Lockman Foundation ground-rules. Sounds like a reasonable request and solution. Please let me know. I know you will decide in fairness, esp. after you read the specific posts below: Please take note of their most recent posts and mine in ID # 137058. Subject: 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b Note: Hello pcdarcan, Hank is correct about a little inductive reasoning. The best explanation for "the god of this world" to be Satan is the paragraph itself. The comparison of light (God; Jesus Christ) to the blinding causes me to say it is Satan. The reason I kept leading you on was because you were stuck on how great your exegesis and reasoning was. Steve Subject: 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b Note: So, you weren't being entirely "honest" then Steve, were you? Not to mention being "judgemental" of my sincere replies that took some time to research and publish. Seems like "repentance" for your dishonesty and judging of another is in order to qualify for "salvation"; thankfully, there's still time 2 Pet 3:9 ;) Subject: 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b Note: pcdarcan - Lay off Steve! Ad hominem attacks are not permitted. Look at your post to Steve. Who's being judgmental and who is setting the terms for his "qualifying" for salvation? Retract your post or I will report you for abuse of this Forum's guidelines! We don't play these kinds of games. --Hank Subject: 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b Note: Hank, why are you supporting what Steve did? He was dishonest and you know it! That is in direct violation of the Lockman Foundation. And, did you not read what he said about my post? Was that not judgemental? - Ad hominem attacks are not permitted. If you report me, I'll report Steve and you for supporting him. Remember, its all documented in these posts what "he" and now, "you" said. |
||||||
46 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137069 | ||
Hi Steve, Could you please elaborate on what you mean? Clarke's commentary was long and I had many elements to address, so don't blame me if the response was lenghty, I warned the readers of this. I knew the answer was simple, but some posters really weren't convinced that "the god of this world" is Satan and so Clarke's commentary which was used to support that Almighty God is "the god of this world" had to be addressed. But, I don't see where I refrained from answering any of your questions in this thread. Could you point it out to me? |
||||||
47 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137103 | ||
ATTN: Lockman Foundation Hi, could you please look into this... There is an inner circle of posters that is disrupting the Christian spirit of this forum. I have found Hank and Srbaegon to be two in particular. Hank is particularly aggressive and rude towards many posters - even going into tirades (its awful and awfully hypocritical of a professed Christian). They dive into posts that they don't agree with and set into motion a process whereby they lure people into getting either kicked off or having very informative threads set to restricted because they don't want people to see their conspiring methods. Hank and Srbaegon are out of control with self-imposed power - they are "forum bullies". Have you seen his sarcastic and belittling comments about the Catholic church? Or, his insulting comments about people's lack of knowledge of the Bible? Someone from the Lockman Foundation has to do something about this as I have seen so many of their posts that break the Lockman Foundation rules, it is undermining the integrity and intent of this forum's rules and reflects poorly on the foundation. I see that others have experienced the same attacks by these wolves in sheep's covering. Thank you for your time and help in addressing this. pcdarcan |
||||||
48 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137104 | ||
I have Steve, any everyone else should who have been bullied by Steve, Hank and anyone else on this forum who violates the Christian spirit and intent of this forum. | ||||||
49 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137107 | ||
Again, no idea what you are talking about Steve? You agreed that Satan was "the god of this world", so whatever are you talking about? | ||||||
50 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137110 | ||
Steve, could you please provide an example of your assertion of me twisting 2 Cor 4:4? Thank you. | ||||||
51 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137116 | ||
Abuse to Report Lockman Foundation Abuse Report Abusing Username: Hank In a nutshell, Hank chimes in on each and every note he disagrees with - the result is strife and undue conflict. I’m sure if his fingers could type fast enough, he would respond to every post, whether he agrees or not. His excessive use of sarcasm is demeaning and only incites posters to stoop to his provoking attitude – although I refuse to. Many don’t find Hank’s words to be seasoned with salt (although he does try, I will admit). Hank is very aggressive in attacking anyone who doesn’t embrace his believes systems – although he hides these behind the Lockman Foundation rules, as a pretense. His actions, esp. his conspiring ways with other members (i.e. srbaegon and others, I’m sure), are meant to lure people into conducting themselves in a manner that would get them in trouble with the rules. It’s unethical, immoral and unchristian. In my example, one of his partners (i.e. srbaegon) called a post of mine “illogical and cogent” – it was totally uncalled for and totally unprovoked – check it out. When I made the observation about srbaegon’s dishonest posts on an additional personal attack from srbaegon (and for which Steve (aka srbaegon) admits he was intentionally being dishonest about his posts), Hank conveniently ignores srbaegon’s personal attack on me and his dishonest methods and said “I” - the offended” - was the culprit. Can you believe that? That’s a sure sign of a conspiracy and hypocrisy of the highest nature. Please look into this… thank you very much Lockman Foundation and thanks for providing this forum – I trust honest and upright members won’t be discouraged by those who would bully their believes on others and even use conspiracy as a tool. Terms of Use (Updated November 2, 2004) FORUMS - MEMBER CONDUCT (Excerpt) * Limit content that contains known denominational biases that produce potential strife and undue conflict. *You agree to interact with each other in a Christian spirit, with respect and grace. * Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person. (Colossians 4:6) * You agree not to "stalk" or otherwise harass another; or collect or store personal data about other users. * You agree not to impersonate any person or entity or “falsely state” or otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with a person or entity. Hank has violated these and other member conduct rules, here’s some quoted excerpts from various posts of his (btw: I’m sure he’s going to change his tune on his newest posts because he knows I’m reporting him.): “Go back and brush up on what the Bible says God did in the six days of creation and what He did on the seventh day. - Hank” “Hello, tduplechain - How crass of anyone to hurt your feelings by disagreeing with your conclusions!” “junemeskle - … Thanks a lot for correcting my unlettered and obviously errant "Protest-ant" thinking! And, of course, I know better than to attempt to refute or rebuke you or the infallible Catholic Church, because, as you say, neither I nor my other misguided Protestant brothers can ever dream of being successful at doing that. Everyone with a brain knows that the Catholic Church has exclusive rights to Christianity. ..... We're so fortunate to have you, O gifted herald, on the Forum as our premier expositor of truth, without which we would languish away forever in our dank pit of darkness and despair. –Hank” “CiY127 - … How did you come into possession of this rare gem of theological brilliance? - Hank” “Seems to me like a Bible trancelated by folks that speak American is kinda nice. Besides, I think we got jest as good Bible scollars as England does. Well, thanks a heap for listening to me and be sure to come to see us when you can. The turnip greens sure is good this time of a year. –Hank” “Why settle for the musty old Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts when you can have the real thing, the authorized, inspired KJV! Makes perfect sense to me. – Hank” … and there’s plenty of others. Let me close with a comment from Hank himself: “You yourself as a user have the authority to report abuse on any user at any time if you believe that the user has crossed the line and violated the established guides for Forum use. –Hank” Well, I believe Hank has crossed that line and needs to be reprimanded. He (and Steve) certainly owe me an apology. - pcdarcan |
||||||
52 | 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b | 2 Cor 4:1 | pcdarcan | 137117 | ||
Well this is not right if "Hank" is "the Lockman Foundation". What association does Hank have with the Lockman Foundation - do you know? This would be a serious conflict of interest and would be most unethical. | ||||||
53 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136002 | ||
The context of 2 Cor 4:4 also helps one to draw the conclusion that Satan is "the god of this world". How so? Before chapters and verses were added to the Bible as a study aid, the book of Corinthians was one long letter to the 'congregation of God in Corinth'. Keep that in mind as you read this. Early in Paul's second letter to the Corinthians he mentions "Satan" by name in 2 Cor 2:11 (New International Version), warning: "in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes." Consequently, with Satan's name already mentioned early in the letter - 7 paragraphs later - 2 Cor 4:4 says "The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God." The qualifying remarks about "the god of this world" in 2 Cor 4:4 namely, "has blinded the minds of unbelievers" relates to Satan who was introduced 7 paragraphs earlier in 2 Cor 2:11 "we are not unaware of his schemes". Supporting this thought that the apostle Paul did not have to keep re-introducing Satan's "name" everytime he referred to him by a different label, is this verse (later in the letter) in 2 Cor 11:3 "But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ". So, early in Paul's letter in 2 Cor 2:11, he uses Satan's name and gives a warning 'not to be outwitted or unaware of his schemes'. "The god of this age" (2 Cor 4:4) is described as one who "has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel". "The serpent", is described by Paul in 2 Cor 11:3 as a 'deceiver', 'cunning', 'misleading people's minds' ("your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ"). Paul's very similar "descriptions" of "Satan", "the god of this age", and "the serpent" would lead one to the conclusion that they are all one and the same - known and exposed by different labels (but similar tactics) throughout Biblical history, down to Eve. I also find it interesting that Paul didn't have to keep re-introducing Satan's name when he referred to him later as the "god of this age" and "the serpent" - leading one to the conclusion that there was no confusion about this in Paul's day. |
||||||
54 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136169 | ||
I'm going to check out that link - thank you! btw: Some (like Clarke's commentary) use Jesus and Paul's quote from Isaiah 6:9,10 to supposedly prove that God is the one doing the blinding. Please see my response to this - it's two Parts. I go line-by-line, stating Clarke's thought or position first, followed by a response. It's not short, but its "reasonably" long and a good read because it contains many scriptures to reason on. I trust you and others will enjoy it. Please check out: ID# 136012 Questions and/or Subjects for 2 Cor 4:1 Author Date (Eastern Time) 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b (?) matronsgt13 Tue 10/26/04, 8:38am I have a New Living Traslation bible and... xmikx Tue 10/26/04, 12:14pm Specifically, these posts... Part 1 - "exceedingly unlikely" - but ... pcdarcan Wed 10/27/04, 4:52pm Part 2 - "exceedingly unlikely" - but ... pcdarcan Wed 10/27/04, 5:04pm |
||||||
55 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136787 | ||
Clarke's commentary uses Jesus and Paul's quote from Isaiah 6:9,10 to prove that God is the one doing the blinding. If you have found this interesting... Please see a rebuttal to Clarke's commentary - it's two Parts. I go line-by-line, stating Clarke's thought or position first, followed by a response. It's "reasonably" long and a good read because it contains many scriptures to reason on. I trust you and others will enjoy it. Please check out: ID# 136012 Questions and/or Subjects for 2 Cor 4:1 Author Date (Eastern Time) 2 corn. 4:4 the god of this world hath b (?) matronsgt13 Tue 10/26/04, 8:38am Specifically, these posts... Part 1 - "exceedingly unlikely" - but ... pcdarcan Wed 10/27/04, 4:52pm Part 2 - "exceedingly unlikely" - but ... pcdarcan Wed 10/27/04, 5:04pm |
||||||
56 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136837 | ||
Could you be more specific? What was not logical or understandable? Perhaps I could assist if you were more specific. (Proverbs 4:7). Saying that 'the god of this world' in 2 Cor 4:4 is the Creator - as opposed to Satan - is not logical. And, more importantly is not scriptural. Please consider... Jesus words in prayer to his loving Father is "additional" support that Satan is "the god of this world", and not Jesus' Father: "I have given them [Jesus' diciples] your word and the world hated them, for they are not of this world any more than I am of this world. My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. "They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world (Compare Heb 3:1 where Jesus is called an apostle - form Greek meaning sent forth one), I have sent them into the world." - John 17:14-18 (NIV) Jesus indicates 'I am not of this world', 'nor are my disciples' and consequently petitions his Father to "protect them from the evil one". Given Jesus' words above, God (the Father of Jesus) cannot be "the god of this world" in 2 Cor 4:4, who "blinded the minds of the unbelivieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ". NASB I am only trying to help with this question about 2 Cor 4:4, so please let me know what you find to be illogical about my response to Clarke's commentary? Thank you. |
||||||
57 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136858 | ||
How is that illogical to the discussion of 2 Cor 4:4? (You're side-stepping my sincere question.) You said you found the rebuttal illogical and not rational. Please provide detailed examples, as this is what fosters healthy Bible discussion and understanding. Your reply has nothing to do with "the meat" of the discussion around 2 Cor 4:4 contained in the 'Clarke's rebuttal' post. Certainly you must have specifics - unless you didn't read all the responses and Bible references in your own copy of the Bible? How else can one prove who 'the god of this world' is unless they use the Bible as the authority? I trust that is what people on this forum want - scriptural support of any purported understanding. I'm sure this would be a worthwhile scriptural discussion, if you would only provide some detailed examples of what you found specifically to be illogical and irrational in the rebuttal dealing specifically with Clarke's commentary on why he feels God - and not Satan - is "the god of this world". What specifically in the rebuttal was illogical? Thank you. |
||||||
58 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136860 | ||
btw: I supplied further scriptural proof of why Satan - and not Jesus' Father - is "the god of this world" in 2 Cor 4:4, but no acknowledgement from you (was it logical or illogical, scriptural or not scriptural?). Excerpt of Jesus prayer to God: "I have given them [Jesus' diciples] your word and the world hated them, for they are not of this world any more than I am of this world. My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one." John 17:14,15 (NIV) Jesus prayed that God not take the disciples out of the world for they had a preaching commision to enlighten people to the gospel. (Matthew 28:19,20... they were to preach until the end of this age -or- world as we know it.) Jesus also said he and his disciples 'were not of this world'. This would be a strange statement in prayer to "the god of this world" - if you believe this to be God - wouldn't you agree? Of course, since Jesus is 'not of this world', neither is God "the god of this world". These are the scriptures talking, not me. |
||||||
59 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136892 | ||
Hello Tim, welcome back. T.M.: The term 'world' is used in many different ways in Scripture. Sometimes, it refers to the physical earth. Sometimes, it refers to the 'system' of fallen men who oppose God. Pcdarcan: While this is true, thankfully the scriptures themselves can provide a great help without always having to understand the Greek. In this case, earlier in John 15:18 Jesus said to his disciples: "If the world hates you, keep in mind it hated me first." In this case, I don’t have to know the Greek in this verse to understand that the "world" spoken of is not the "physical earth" because how can the literal earth hate - and even if it could - why would it hate Jesus? ;) So, the second definition above is closer to the understanding, the world of mankind that hated Jesus and his disciples – which btw is another argument to prove that the Creator is not "the god of this world" that promotes hatred of Jesus and his disciples. Again, one doesn’t need to dissect the Greek word in 2 Cor 4:4 to see if it’s the same Greek word in John. The Emphatic Diaglott uses "age" instead of "world", but the Bible's internal evidences is pretty clear about the identity of "the god of this world/age" as displayed in these posts. As a matter of fact, the evidence is overwhelming, if we allow the Bible to speak for itself. T.M.: However, even if the same word were used, your case does not logically follow. Scripture also tells us that God loves the world, that God created the world, that God sent His Son to save the world. Is He not also the God of this world that He created, loves, and saves? :-) He is God of all, whether they want to admit it or not! ;-) Pcdarcan: Ah, but you just said "world" is used in many different ways in Scripture. Jesus died for the 'world of mankind', but John 3:16 shows that the benefits of that sacrifice are conditional – belief is necessary, that’s what the Bible states. And, yes God created the 'world of mankind' and the physical world (a.k.a. earth); however, He is not the God of this world of unbelievers who allow Satan to blind their minds. No, just because He is the Creator doesn't mean He is their God – their way of life belies that statement. 1 Cor 10:20 states "...the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God." So, I just don't agree with the statement "He is God of all, whether they want to admit it or not". I believe it to be a stretch to say that just because He created the world of mankind and provided his Son's life for anyone in the world who would avail themselves of the value of that sacrifice, that He is consequently their God. The Creator is certainly not the God of Satan and the demons. Jesus knew that most of 'the world of sinful mankind' would not accept his ransom sacrifice: “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." Matthew 7:13,14 |
||||||
60 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136948 | ||
Hi Tim, Going back to your post, you said, "He is God of all, whether they want to admit it or not". And, I politely disagreed with that statement. To reiterate, just because God is their Creator, doesn't mean He is their God. Your revised statement: "God doesn't stop being God simply because someone doesn't believe in Him!" is probably what you really wanted to say and most would not find issue with that statement. Thanks for the clarification. There are many words in Greek that have similar meanings - various types of apples if you will (macintosh, golden -and- red delicious, cortland, etc.) but they are still apples (just different flavours), so they don't "always" have to be the same exact Greek word when comparing verses. And, there are many verses in the Bible that say the say time, but in different ways and with different words. In conclusion, I rather have the internal scriptural evidence promote the understanding of questionable verses. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |