You've raised the issue of translations several times. Just wondering why.Quote:
I've raised it twice???
He was the perfect lamb from the foundation of the world since he was, "slain from the foundation of the world."
|
You've raised the issue of translations several times. Just wondering why.Quote:
I've raised it twice???
He was the perfect lamb from the foundation of the world since he was, "slain from the foundation of the world."
Huh??? Please tell me which posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Are you so completely dependent on others that you can't find this for yourself? Well, I'll do it for you. Posts 44, 28, and 32 are three of them.
And, of course, you will not answer the question now asked three times. Oh well.
That was days ago and had nothing to do with the current discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
By the way, which is your favorite Stephen King novel?
Yesssss it did. All on the same thread. As I said, you sure seem to be afraid to answer.Quote:
That was days ago and had nothing to do with the current discussion.
Don't care about Stephen King novels as I but rarely read fiction. Now see how easy that is? Try it!
Seriously, I never ran into liberals being so afraid to answer questions until I came to this site. It's really been a shocker to me. I've always enjoyed the give and take of discussions, but that sure isn't the case here. Very strange.
I answered. Are you deef?
Same thread, different intent, subtopic
No answer…again.
What's the question?
Posts 158 & 161. I guess it's not really important. I just wondered what your thinking was, but we can move on since you seem to prefer not to answer. No big deal.
I just can't pass on this since it's so strange. First you claimed, "I answered. Are you deef?" Then just above you posted, "What's the question?" If you didn't know what the question was, how could you think you had answered?
JL: You've raised the issue of translations several times. Just wondering why.
WG: I guess my first question is, why are there so many translations and versions? Do readers gain (or lose) more when they use only one version/translation? Our (early 1970's) neighborhood women's Bible study group was made up of several Catholics, a Baptist, a Lutheran, two Methodists, and an agnostic. We read from the KJV and the RSV. I'm wondering if newer translations would offer any value to a Bible study group like this?
Great question. Do we really need several dozen translations? I could understand the development of translations up through the 1980's. Those would include the Amplified, NKJV, NIV, NASB, JP Philips, Living Bible, and a few others. It just seems that what we've had since then are just redundant. However, I don't see it as being a big problem. I only know of a handful of translations that seem to be a real difficulty.Quote:
WG: I guess my first question is, why are there so many translations and versions?
I think people stand to gain from using more than one translation. I currently use the NASB, JB Philips, NET, and CSB, so I spend four days on the same passage. It helps me a great deal. I don't care for the KJV since the language is so archaic.Quote:
Do readers gain (or lose) more when they use only one version/translation?
Thank you for the response.
This is not an Honest Question. You are simply responding to an earlier statement with a question. This question that you posted is more of a statement, a formulated assertion, that you have come up with on your own; "Jesus could have definitely sinned Because..." - Because he was tempted or because God allowed it! And it doesn't matter how many different ways you might hear it, your thoughts will continue to be just that, "your thoughts -*Yes, Jesus Could have sinned."Quote:
Then why was Jesus tempted -- and why did God allow that?
"Pray - Prayer!
The question is: Could Jesus have sinned (not - then why this or why that)?
For Jesus to have given himself over to sin he would have to have acknowledged that there is a greater force....impossible. Jesus is the greatest force in the known universe, in all of creation. Jesus knows that God is even greater than He. Jesus Knows who his Father is. Jesus Knows he is his father's Son....Do you know what that means???
So what was the point of Jesus being true God and true man?
Again with the why's...why this why that...why anything???
Do you know what this means???Quote:
For Jesus to have given himself over to sin he would have to have acknowledged that there is a greater force. Jesus knows that God is even greater than He. Jesus Knows who his Father is. Jesus Knows, Jesus knows, Jesus has known all along, that he IS his Father's Son
Walter, you are back to, "Thus sayeth Walter". Your and my ideas have no authority. Please state your case on the Word.
Perhaps you two have pretty much worn this topic out. Neither of you seems likely to convert the other to his/her point of view.
Your idea of "the Word" and my understanding that "The Word" Is a Living Word aka the Bible makes all the difference. I don't need you to understand me!Quote:
Walter, you are back to, "Thus sayeth Walter". Your and my ideas have no authority. Please state your case on the Word.
This:Is irrefutable. Warning (WG) - If you believe Jesus was ever capable of sinning, you will always take God's word with a grain of salt. Thus sayeth Walter.Quote:
For Jesus to have given himself over to sin he would have to have acknowledged that there is a greater force than he
This is getting redundant.
Then why is it that you don't make your appeal to that Living Word? Becoming angry and "firing back" is not the answer. I've been guilty of that myself. The only authority you or I have is by appealing to what the Bible says. Our own opinions carry no weight at all.Quote:
my understanding that "The Word" Is a Living Word aka the Bible makes all the difference.
Thus sayeth a mere man.Quote:
Thus sayeth Walter.
When you say something you have to say it true. It is not saying something that is true outside of you, but true inside of you. You might quote the Bible that you know as true. The reason you Don't understand what I'm (ever) talking about is that you choose to refute it, believing it is something of my own and It is something of my own. But rather than trying to refute it using Scripture, try to understand it using scripture. That's All I can say about that.
And therefore of no more meaning that what anyone else believes.Quote:
rather to refute it, believing it is something of my own. It is something of my own.
You can certainly have your own personal truth if you want to, but it has no authority in trying to convince others. "I believe..." is the weakest form of argument I know of. We need to proclaim, "Thus sayeth THE LORD," and we know that only from the Bible.Quote:
It is not saying something that is true outside of you, but true inside of you.
@WG; Maybe we can talk this the other way around. For the sake Of Argument, even using Scripture It could be proven Jesus and God Are sinners. Do you believe not that? Not that they are sinners, but that It could be proven that way??
Let's see it.Quote:
using Scripture I could prove Jesus and God Are sinners.
JL, what is it that your 2nd to last post is missing?
You have made a claim. "using Scripture I could prove Jesus and God Are sinners."
Let's see the proof. Can you show that or not?
I have absolutely NO idea what you're saying and what you might be headed toward.Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
Yep. I just don't see this one.Quote:
I have absolutely NO idea what you're saying and what you might be headed toward.
I would like to show you if you'd allow me.
The only thing is, Jl you'll have to hold back. Are you able to do that? You'll get your chance, But for now, could you just hold back for a sec??? Maybe we can Have some Fun with it. JL hold back until I say go? OK?? Is that alright???
If not tell me your parameters. I'd like for you to come out with them before I start this exercise in futility.
I am certainly willing to listen. Go right ahead. Am I willing to "have fun" with this effort to show God and Jesus to be sinners? No, but I am willing to listen.
I'd present it this way. We can potentially challenge each other's beliefs in a respectful way. BTW, as WG no doubt will affirm, this is my normal parameter.
I got a good laugh at this one (let it go).Quote:
respectful way.
You've already expressed your understanding on this subject. You've already come to the understanding that this subject is at a standstill. All I'm asking is for you to butt out (please). If you can't have fun then I don't want you here. At first you had no opinion on this subject. Now you do, OK, we know your opinion. Now I want to get to the truth of the Matter. Regarding the talk - "Jesus could have sinned"> Hers is what you are actually saying: Jesus Had to have sinned because Jesus repented! Please allow WG to explain what she means by this...these being even more why Questions.Quote:
Am I willing to "have fun" - No
You are trying to change the subject. You have made a claim. "using Scripture I could prove Jesus and God Are sinners." Let's see the proof. Can you show that or not?
Why don't you go first? You've made a wild claim, or at least it certainly seems that way. I'd like to see those scriptures.Quote:
Please allow WG to explain what she means by this.
Now since it appears you can't do it, then I'm perfectly happy to back out. The field is yours.
Look at yourself JL?Yes, Please. Thank you.Quote:
I'm perfectly happy to back out.
@WG: Only sinners need to repent and Jesus repented. Jesus must have been a sinner. - Right?
Like I said.I've never understood why people want to make these dramatic claims only to be found completely unable to back them up. It's like they think no one is going to challenge their wild statements. Well...guess again.Quote:
Now since it appears you can't do it, then I'm perfectly happy to back out. The field is yours.
You are free to ask WG to do what you have shown you are not able to do. I only ask that you leave me out of it. No more of, "Look at yourself JL?"
Please define "sinner".Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
Please tell us more about when Jesus repented. Why? Because of what?
With the same Idea as you claim Jesus could have sinned...Jesus must have sinned because the Bible (your idea of Sin) says that Sinners need to repent and be Baptized. It's easy...Using your own Logic; Because Jesus was Baptized...as to Why - Because he sinned. Could you please explain to me - If Jesus didn't Sin (as you said he could have) then why did he need to repent and be baptized?
No, that's not why Jesus was baptized.Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
Great answer. thank you. I believe you [Sarc]. Now maybe you could explain Why "Jesus Chose"(for he did have a choice did he not?) to repent and be baptised? If Jesus didn't Sin (as you said he could have) then why did he need to repent and be baptized?
Jesus didn't repent.
He could have sinned, yes, but He didn't.
Why was Jesus baptized?
John's Baptism was a baptism of repentance, was it not? WG, you're making this hard on yourself. Please don't do that. You can tell me, just say what's on your mind, please. Jesus sinned...He had to have, he repented and was Baptized.Quote:
Jesus didn't repent.
Jesus didn't repent because He hadn't sinned.
Now, why was He baptized?
Of course he did! Are you just going to ignore the fact that John's Baptism was a Baptism of REPENTANCE???Quote:
Jesus didn't repent
I'm just telling you (using your own Logic) with your own words, that Jesus was a sinner because he was Baptized with a baptism of repentance. Do you know why those Pharisees didn't get baptized by John or anybody else...Because they had no need of repentance.
Not in Jesus' case.Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
By baptizing Jesus, John was declaring to all that Jesus was the One they had been waiting for, the Son of God, the Savior.
Jesus’ baptism also showed that He identified with sinners. His baptism symbolized the sinners’ baptism into the righteousness of Christ, dying with Him, and rising free from sin and able to walk in the newness of life.
Jesus’ baptism by John showed His approval of John’s baptism -- and that it was approved by God.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:17 AM. |