Results 4161 - 4180 of 4325
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Hank Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
4161 | Does God love everything? | 1 John 4:8 | Hank | 97286 | ||
flinkywood - "Condemned" may imply not so much the absence of God's love as it does the wrath of His righteous judgment for disobedience. --Hank | ||||||
4162 | Does God love everything? | 1 John 4:8 | Hank | 97355 | ||
Tim - Hard-core evangelism indeed. Yes, Tim, it would be that, and very different from preaching to the choir, that's for sure. But, dear brother, if you feel that God calls you to this ministry, please go. He will make a way where there seems to be no way. My belief and prayer for you and your family is that God will make you an instrument to His glory. --Hank | ||||||
4163 | Why did God Provide us with Free Will | 1 John 4:16 | Hank | 175651 | ||
Dear Mr., Mrs., or Miss Grasshopper - You have given us a dictionary definition of free will. Can you now provide a biblical definition or example? --Hank | ||||||
4164 | Who is this One (or one)? | 1 John 5:6 | Hank | 96311 | ||
Godman - You shouted, "GO TO SCHOOL AND LEARN HOW TO SPEAK ENGLISH." -- Perhaps others of us need to go to charm school and learn how to speak politely. --Hank | ||||||
4165 | Who is this One (or one)? | 1 John 5:6 | Hank | 96326 | ||
Darcy - The distinguished "Oxford don" who advised another user to go to school and learn how to speak English, in the post he made immediately before he issued his advice he did a fair job of butchering the king's English himself, to wit: ......"a waist of time" ..... "their is so many wims (sic) of doctrine" ...... "peoples own selvs" ..... "corecting people" ..... "if they wont listen" ...... Moral: Those who live in glass houses .... (you know the rest of the story!) :-) --Hank | ||||||
4166 | Who is this One (or one)? | 1 John 5:6 | Hank | 96330 | ||
Ray - When "that" is used as a relative pronoun, it can refer to a person regardless of gender, or to a thing or an idea. In the construction, "It is the Spirit that," the pronoun "that" no more indicates that the Spirit is an "it" than it does that the Spirit is a "he" or a "she." In other words, one must seek clarification of gender from the immediate or a broader context of Scripture. Has any light been shed? :-) Very cordially, --Hank | ||||||
4167 | Who is this One (or one)? | 1 John 5:6 | Hank | 96370 | ||
Hello again, Ray - For a backwoodsy Arkansas Razorback, I get by in English tolerably well I suppose. I have an exiguous knowledge of Latin, German and French -- just enough to be highly deficient in them. But Greek has always been Greek to me. I'm at the mercy of translators and find it most handy to have Tim Moran around. He works cheap, too, by the way :-) --Hank | ||||||
4168 | What does baptism consist? | 1 John 5:6 | Hank | 113705 | ||
Arrow1: "Things have gotten harder" you say? Why, it wouldn't surprise me if before you know it, we'll be required to go dip seven times in the Jordan just to keep from losing our salvation, even though it is a gift of God by grace. :) --Hank | ||||||
4169 | baptism important ,why the delay? | 1 John 5:6 | Hank | 113730 | ||
Arrow1: Given: That baptism is a command of the Lord Jesus Christ and should not be taken lightly or put on the back burner. That said, I think we are reducing this whole argument to a point of sheer absurdity when we nit-pick about exactly how long it should be after the believer is saved until he submits to water baptism. I've never personally known of anyone taking a brand new believer down to the creek or to a swimming pool and baptizing him on the spot, although there is no law against it and no particular reason why it couldn't be done. I do agree that some churches and some Christians have waxed lax in regard to baptism. Being a direct command of our Lord, it has never been an option for a follower of Christ. But there are other commands of our Lord too. What would you say to the notion that we put baptism on hold for a while and address a few other biblical topics for a change? By the way, if you would still like to read more about baptism, just type in the word in Search and you will have enough additional reading material on baptism to do you at least until a week from Thursday :-) --Hank | ||||||
4170 | What does baptism consist? | 1 John 5:6 | Hank | 113732 | ||
Hey, brush off the chip and smile. Lighten up! Please re-read my answer. Didn't you notice the -- :-) -- little funny face? Maybe the whole Forum is coming down with a case of baptismal battle fatigue! --Hank | ||||||
4171 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98548 | ||
justanotherchristian - Do you seriously believe the Comma Johanneum poses a grave threat to the authenticity of all Scripture? I fail to see how it does. I can't agree with Riplinger about the conspiracy of "New Age" translators to pervert and emasculate Holy Writ. That's being rather too reactionary in my view. --Hank | ||||||
4172 | Why would you include 1 John 5:7? | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98585 | ||
Ray - As I see it, the issue is not to "get out of that period of intellectual stagnation (i.e. the Dark Ages) AND DETERMINE THAT the whole passage should be included in the Scriptures." It is rather to examine the best manuscripts extant AND DETERMINE WHETHER the passage is genuine and should be included in the Scriptures. To a large extent this has been done and the passage has received weak and questionable manuscript support, support that clearly falls beneath the high standards of authenticity that have been used by creditable biblical scholars for centuries. --Hank | ||||||
4173 | Why would you include 1 John 5:7? | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98642 | ||
justanotherchristian - Of course, the warning in Revelation 22 applies to the adding to and the taking from the inspired words. Therefore, the question before you is this: Is the inclusion of 1 John 5:7 adding to Scripture or is the exclusion of it taking from Scripture? At all events, the choice should not be made arbitrarily or without good reason, don't you think? --Hank | ||||||
4174 | Why would you include 1 John 5:7? | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98647 | ||
Radioman - It's rather like this little man who keeps pestering me. Last night I saw upon the stair a little man who wasn't there. He wasn't there again today. O, how I wish he'd go away! --Hank | ||||||
4175 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98668 | ||
Justanotherchristian - I speed-read the "Great Dream" on line at the site you gave. Are you perhaps its author? I'm curious about why you recommend a later edition instead of the 1611 edition of the King James. And how do you feel the translators of the NKJV messed up? I do gather from your web site that your group is not of the KJV-only persuasion. Is that right? A final question. Have you submitted your concerns about the NASB to Lockman? Might not do any harm and would probably do more good than these interminable treads on this forum :-). Their e-mail address is listed at the bottom of this page. I must say your site www.apostasynow.com is interesting. --Hank | ||||||
4176 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98674 | ||
justanotherchristian - Something I've never quite understood and on which perhaps you can cast some light: If God preserves His word via the KJV, which is in English, what about the billions of people round the world who don't read a word of English? And what happens, should the world stand another thousand years, when the English speaking peoples will understand no more of the Elizabethan-age English of the King James Bible than the modern reader of today understands of early English, which predates the KJV by at least 500 years and is all but incomprehensible to the reader of English who is not specifically trained in it? [Try reading "Beowulf" in its original Old English and tell me how you liked it. :-) ] --Hank | ||||||
4177 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98686 | ||
Colin - Are you sure the Chinese peasant doesn't have his own "Autholized Velsion" written in 1611 Mandarin? --Hank | ||||||
4178 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98755 | ||
Hello, Aixen - You concluded your post with the words "...not on making it (Scripture) literally perfect. Even if Christendom had in its possession a "literally perfect" translation ...even if it were translated from the original autographs (an impossibility, of course) ...and even if there were but one "authorized" translation permitted in each of the several languages on our globe ...even if all these conditions existed, I submit that there would be divisions still. There would be the persistent parsing of words and phrases ...there would still be those who insist that baptism is a synonym of regeneration ...that world in John 3:16 means the elect ...that all and whoever and everyone are restrictive and exclusive terms: they neither mean what they say nor say what they mean ...that we mortals still have the right to put God in the dock and force Him to give to him who "names it and claims it" radiant physical health and financial prosperty. ...... Admixed into all this ebullient chatter about God voting for the Authorized Version I see a pale glimmer of a tendency to lean to the letter of the law in preference to the spirit thereof. --Hank | ||||||
4179 | WILL YOU ADD TO, TAKE AWAY FROM, OR LEAV | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98803 | ||
Makarios: "KJV Advocates are masters at taking verses way out of context." ..... Ah, but they ain't the only players in that game :-) --Hank | ||||||
4180 | KJV "inspired"?? | 1 John 5:7 | Hank | 98804 | ||
The translators' "Preface to the Reader" in the 1611 KJV Bible can be read on line at www.acts413.org/studyhelps/kjvpreface.htm .... It is printed in full in my Concord Cambridge King James Bible. --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 ] Next > Last [217] >> |