Results 81 - 100 of 165
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Radioman Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | Why do you believe the earth revolves? | Josh 10:12 | Radioman | 5394 | ||
My recommendation regarding answering Lionstrong: KVJ Pr 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Pr 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. TEV Proverbs 26:4-5 If you answer a silly question, you are just as silly as the person who asked it. Give a silly answer to a silly question, and the one who asked it will realize that he's not as smart as he thinks. God's Word Version 26:4-5 Do not answer a fool with his own stupidity, or you will be like him. Answer a fool with his own stupidity, or he will think he is wise. Radioman |
||||||
82 | Defining Truth | Josh 10:12 | Radioman | 6482 | ||
Prov 17:28 Even a fool, when he keeps silent, is considered wise; When he closes his lips, he is considered prudent. (Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.) Prov 15:14 The mind of the intelligent seeks knowledge, But the mouth of fools feeds on folly. Prov 20:3 Keeping away from strife is an honor for a man, But any fool will quarrel. Prov 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; Fools despise wisdom and instruction. Prov 1:22 "How long, O naive ones, will you love being simple-minded? And scoffers delight themselves in scoffing And fools hate knowledge? Prov 1:32 "For the waywardness of the naive will kill them, And the complacency of fools will destroy them. Prov 3:35 The wise will inherit honor, But fools display dishonor. Prov 8:5 "O naive ones, understand prudence; And, O fools, understand wisdom. Prov 10:1 The proverbs of Solomon. A wise son makes a father glad, But a foolish son is a grief to his mother. Prov 10:8 The wise of heart will receive commands, But a babbling fool will be ruined. Prov 10:10 He who winks the eye causes trouble, And a babbling fool will be ruined. Prov 10:14 Wise men store up knowledge, But with the mouth of the foolish, ruin is at hand. Prov 10:21 The lips of the righteous feed many, But fools die for lack of understanding. Prov 11:29 He who troubles his own house will inherit wind, And the foolish will be servant to the wisehearted. Prov 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, But a wise man is he who listens to counsel. Prov 12:16 A fool's anger is known at once, But a prudent man conceals dishonor. Prov 12:23 A prudent man conceals knowledge, But the heart of fools proclaims folly. Prov 13:16 Every prudent man acts with knowledge, But a fool displays folly. Prov 13:20 He who walks with wise men will be wise, But the companion of fools will suffer harm. Prov 14:3 In the mouth of the foolish is a rod for his back, But the lips of the wise will protect them. Prov 14:7 Leave the presence of a fool, Or you will not discern words of knowledge. Prov 14:8 The wisdom of the sensible is to understand his way, But the foolishness of fools is deceit. Prov 14:16 A wise man is cautious and turns away from evil, But a fool is arrogant and careless. Prov 14:18 The naive inherit foolishness, But the sensible are crowned with knowledge. Prov 14:24 The crown of the wise is their riches, But the folly of fools is foolishness. Prov 15:2 The tongue of the wise makes knowledge acceptable, But the mouth of fools spouts folly. Prov 15:7 The lips of the wise spread knowledge, But the hearts of fools are not so. Prov 16:22 Understanding is a fountain of life to one who has it, But the discipline of fools is folly. Prov 17:10 A rebuke goes deeper into one who has understanding Than a hundred blows into a fool. Prov 17:16 Why is there a price in the hand of a fool to buy wisdom, When he has no sense? Prov 17:24 Wisdom is in the presence of the one who has understanding, But the eyes of a fool are on the ends of the earth. Prov 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding, But only in revealing his own mind. Prov 18:7 A fool's mouth is his ruin, And his lips are the snare of his soul. Prov 19:1 Better is a poor man who walks in his integrity Than he who is perverse in speech and is a fool. Prov 23:9 Do not speak in the hearing of a fool, For he will despise the wisdom of your words. Prov 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Or you will also be like him. Prov 26:5 Answer a fool as his folly deserves, That he not be wise in his own eyes. Prov 26:11 Like a dog that returns to its vomit Is a fool who repeats his folly. Prov 26:12 Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him. Prov 28:26 He who trusts in his own heart is a fool, But he who walks wisely will be delivered. Prov 29:9 When a wise man has a controversy with a foolish man, The foolish man either rages or laughs, and there is no rest. Prov 29:20 Do you see a man who is hasty in his words? There is more hope for a fool than for him. |
||||||
83 | Defining Truth | Josh 10:12 | Radioman | 6548 | ||
Anyone can make any assertion about anything. But do you have proof that what you assert here is true? If you can, give us the title of the book, the author, the page number, and the publisher where it says the law of gravity changed in 1905. Who changed it? How did it change? Was it abolished or merely amended? | ||||||
84 | Quest for Truth | Josh 10:12 | Radioman | 6549 | ||
"Sometimes the context or other passages helps us understand how a word is to be taken." Sometimes an English or Greek dictionary helps us understand what a word means. "John 14:6 teaches that Jesus is the truth. It does not teach that truth is Jesus." This makes about as much sense as saying: It is true that 2 plus 2 equals 4. It is not true that 4 equals 2 plus 2. |
||||||
85 | Which is truth, Science or God's Word? | Josh 10:12 | Radioman | 6557 | ||
Once you make up your own private definition of what truth is, a definition which no one but you can understand or believe, then you can prove to yourself that anything and everything is fasle. But what a confused and confusing world you would live in. | ||||||
86 | The burden of proof is on you. | Josh 10:12 | Radioman | 6691 | ||
True to form you split hairs over gravity and miss the main point of the original discussion, which has nothing in the world to do with gravity. Gravity was merely cited as an example. You waste your time and everyone else's. I never knew of anyone who had such a talent for writing endlessly about nothing. I see no Christian motive whatever behind your participation in the forum. Your every utterance is contrary to everyone and everything. Prov 17:28 Even a fool, when he keeps silent, is considered wise; When he closes his lips, he is considered prudent. (Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.) Prov 15:14 The mind of the intelligent seeks knowledge, But the mouth of fools feeds on folly. Prov 1:7 ...Fools despise wisdom and instruction. Prov 1:22 "How long, O naive ones, will you love being simple-minded? And scoffers delight themselves in scoffing And fools hate knowledge? Prov 26:11 Like a dog that returns to its vomit Is a fool who repeats his folly. If you can read this and continue to sit there grinning like an idiot as though you had accomplished something worthwhile, then maybe you're the one who had best find other websites with which to amuse yourself. You neither help nor enlighten anyone by your words or your attitude. |
||||||
87 | Why won't Calvinists answer directly??? | Job 38:1 | Radioman | 1566 | ||
I agree with you: Election is unconditional. The word election is synonymous with choosing, just as elect is a synonym of choose. According to some people's definition of election, it is not choosing at all. Whenever a word in the Bible is interpreted to mean someting other than the ordinary English definition of the word, Beware! Someone is not rightly dividing the word of truth. According to the opinion of some, there is NO Bible doctrine of election. I wonder then: when the Bible speaks of "the elect", whom is it talking about? Thank you for taking a stand for the Bible doctrine of election. | ||||||
88 | Why won't Calvinists answer directly??? | Job 38:1 | Radioman | 1708 | ||
Thank you for your encouraging reply. No, I have never read Edwards on this. But the treatise on free will sounds extremely interesting. I will look for it to read it. I agree with you regarding both election and the process and principles of correct interpretation of the Scripture. Have you noticed that often when anti-electionists are asked to consider Scriptures that support election, they do not reply to any of the Scripture references? They totally ignore them in their replies and then proceed to write a long harangue made up primarily of human reasoning. If they quote any Scripture at all in their replies, it is usually verses that don't have a thing in the world to do with the subject of election. I have also noticed that many, many people ignore the principle that we learn what the Bible MEANS by what it SAYS. For some, if what the Bible says conflicts with what they already believe, they dismiss or explain away the clear verse of Scritpure and stick with their preconceived notion instead. May I recommend if you haven't already done so, that you use the Search function on this website to look up the following. Search for "I want to thank you for the dialogue we" and "WHAT DOES THE BIBLE TEACH ABOUT ELECTION". Both entries were submitted by JVH0212 on 02-28-2001 at 5:24 pm and 5:28 pm respectively. It is the most thorough, yet concise article on the Bible doctrine of election that I've ever seen. It's packed with Scripture. You will find it a good resource for any debates with the people who are pro-man's freewill and anti-Sovereignty of God. Thank you again for a very insightful, well-written reply. | ||||||
89 | WAS JESUS GOD ON EARTH TOO OR JUSTMAN | Ps 8:5 | Radioman | 39189 | ||
I regard your post to Hank with a mixture of amusement and offense bordering on disgust. What brass (brazen self-assurance) it takes on your part to presume to tell Hank what the purpose of a forum is. It is true that in general the purpose of a forum is to discuss different thoughts and ideas. However, the specific reason why this forum exists is to ask and answer questions about what the Bible does say. The purpose is not to speculate, hypothesize or fantasize about what the Bible does not say. After reading 1,628 posts by Hank, I can tell you Hank's "little box" is not so little. It contains 66 compartments and is known as the Bible. Likewise, parts of the Bible may fit into YOUR little box and others may not. Maybe YOU shoud not continue to be an active user. At least not until you learn something about the Bible and get an attitude adjustment. I doubt that anyone would miss your inciteful ("incite" is a synonym of a word that "implies responsibility for initiating another's action and often connotes underhandedness or evil intention") remarks. I'm glad you are rethinking the idea that the purpose of a forum is not trying to convert other people to YOUR ways of "thinking". |
||||||
90 | Lifting up of hands? | Ps 63:4 | Radioman | 14318 | ||
Nicodemus: I see that in your ongoing debate with the other guy you keep appealing to Scripture to support your point. There is a problem with this where the other guy is concerned. The Bible was penned down by humans, preserved by human copyists, translated by humans, and published by humans. Since Mr. Right cares for no human opinion but his own, he will surely reject the Bible, since it has passed through so many human hands. Moreover, since he himself is the only authority he will listen to, then your only chance to persuade him is to quote him. The only problem with that is that when Mr. Right blows his own trumpet, it makes an unclear sound. When he plays the flute or harp, he doesn't make a distinction in the notes. How, then, will what is played be recognized? |
||||||
91 | His Spirit or Moses'? | Ps 106:33 | Radioman | 41434 | ||
If you think the Amplified Bible is a "paraphrase," you have been misled. From the Preface of the Amplified Bible, 1965, 1987: The purpose of the Amplified Bible "is to reveal, together with the single English word equivalent to each key Hebrew and Greek word, any other clarifying meanings that may be concealed by the traditional translation method." Notice the purpose of the Amplified is to reveal, "WITH the single English word equivalent", not INSTEAD OF the single English word equivalent. "...the creative use of amplification merely helps the reader comprehend what the Hebrew and Greek listener instinctively understood (as a matter of course)." Notice the use of the word amplification. Amplification -- not paraphrase. This version expresses "the perspective of an individual paraphraser (vs. translator)"? From the Preface to the Amplified New Testament, 1958: "An Editorial Committee gave dedicated and diligent attention to the manuscript. The edited and proofed *translation* was then submitted to three qualified Greek consultants." Notice it says "translation" -- not "paraphrase." "Twenty-seven translations and versions of the New Testament in whole or in part were assiduously examined and the greatest lexicographers of all times continually consulted . . . A fourfold aim for this version has been kept in view: "1. That it should be true to the original Greek . " (Emphasis added in the above quotations.) Oh, by the way, welcome to "StudyBibleForum.com brought to you by the *translators* of the New American Standard, *AMPLIFIED*, and La Biblia de las Américas Bibles" (emphasis added). |
||||||
92 | solomon and Love Stories around Ararat | Song of Solomon | Radioman | 25257 | ||
Who could argue with that? Since your post is totally unintelligible, incomprehensible and without either sense or meaning, it is impossible to agree or disagree with it. Next time you write a post, include some clues as to your meaning. If you're going to write total and complete babbling gibberish, there is no point in posting it. Come back when you have something to say. If you are a patient in an institution, that's different. In that case, never mind. |
||||||
93 | What does "3" stand for in the Bible? | Isaiah | Radioman | 24333 | ||
When you labeled your previous post "Speculation.....," I assumed you meant casiv's speculation. That's the only speculation I've seen in this thread. I know I'm going to regret that I dignified your posting with a reply. But, here goes! You write: "you cannot prove one number wrong that Bullinger has proven." Bullinger has proven NOTHING. He instructs NO ONE. He has NOTHING to say. None of us has to prove Bullinger wrong. The burden of proof is upon the one who makes the assertion. You assert that there is something to Bullinger's theory/fantasy of numbers. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you, son. Does it say "Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the *numbers* of God?" I don't think so. You would do better to toss Bullinger's book into the dumpster, stop *writing* to the forum and, instead, start *reading* your Bible without the "help" of crackpot writers like Bullinger. While you're at it, you need to lose Puppetmaster. |
||||||
94 | How close can we get to God? | Is 62:5 | Radioman | 4383 | ||
I believe there is no limit to how close one can get to God, except perhaps the limits we place upon ourselves. "As close as our calling requiures." What does that mean? Define calling. Do you mean the more important job we have in our service to God, the more we rate getting closer to Him? Or that the more superior our ministry is to that of others, the closer we get than they do? I have no Scripture to support the idea that there is a limit on how close we can get to God nor to prove that how close we can get depends on our calling. Do you have a CLEAR verse of Scripture to support your assertion? I notice there's not one verse of Scripture cited in your answer to Nolan Keck's question. |
||||||
95 | How close can we get to God? | Is 62:5 | Radioman | 4672 | ||
I shall be eternally grateful that I am NOT Benny Hinn. | ||||||
96 | Does Jeremiah 14 and 15 relate to U.S. | Jeremiah | Radioman | 19284 | ||
Ihavefavor: At times, we all use words without realizing or knowing the actual meaning or origin of them. I do not condemn you. I merely point out how the dictionary defines the word "gee." "*gee* (interjection) Used as a mild expletive or exclamation of surprise. [Alteration of JESUS.]" (American Heritage Dictionary) |
||||||
97 | Why is it translated "if", not "since"? | Matt 4:6 | Radioman | 15116 | ||
Question: "Is there a translation thst says "since", not "if" ... becuase that is the literal translation. "-Why don't translators do a better job on this word?" Answer: In the English language in a hypothetical statement, "if" and "since" are often used interchangeably. In such a case they are used to mean THE SAME THING. As someone else recently asked, "Steve, apparently the misunderstanding on this thread arose from your lack of understanding . . . In short, you didn't understand the question. Why, then, did you answer it? "And how can you presume to teach this forum in the nuances of meaning of the ancient Hebrew and Greek tongues when you yourself rarely post on this forum a single sentence in English that is free from either grammatical or orthograhic errors?" Finally, my question for you is: Why don't you do a better job of bashing the translators? Surely you've had enough practice. |
||||||
98 | Is the Jesus the Lord and God of Satan? | Matt 4:7 | Radioman | 15118 | ||
He isn't. Jesus is merely quoting Scripture. |
||||||
99 | Did Christ not fulfill the law? | Matt 5:17 | Radioman | 22106 | ||
casiv: You are correct. I agree with you regarding freewill, putting somebody down and Matthew 5:17-19 -- the three subjects all go together like a horse and carriage. To answer your previous post, I can only say: I give up. Why did the chicken cross the road? (If you don't know the answer, it's OK to ask Puppetmaster.) Radioman |
||||||
100 | Did Christ not fulfill the law? | Matt 5:17 | Radioman | 22107 | ||
casiv: I realize that this is a public forum and anyone has the right to attempt to answer any posted question. But, I suggest that before you attempt to answer questions that were NOT addressed to you, that you first answer questions which WERE addressed to you. Since you are known for answering questions with riddles, for evading questions for weeks at a time, and doing everything but giving a straight answer, perhaps you are not quite ready to take on any new questions. Answer the old ones first. Also, it would be helpful if your answers had some remote relevance to the questions being asked. And how can you accuse or imply that someone else is putting you down when you yourself have spent half your time on the forum hurling curses and judgments at other people? |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [9] >> |