Quote:

---

I've raised it twice???

---

You've raised the issue of translations several times. Just wondering why.

He was the perfect lamb from the foundation of the world since he was, "slain from the foundation of the world."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You've raised the issue of translations several times. Just wondering why.

---

Huh??? Please tell me which posts.

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.

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.

By the way, which is your favorite Stephen King novel?

Quote:

---

That was days ago and had nothing to do with the current discussion.

---

Yesssss it did. All on the same thread. As I said, you sure seem to be afraid to answer.

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?

Quote:

---

WG: I guess my first question is, why are there so many translations and versions?

---

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:

---

Do readers gain (or lose) more when they use only one version/translation?

---

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.

Thank you for the response.

Quote:

---

Then why was Jesus tempted -- and why did God allow that?

---

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."

"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???

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

---

Do you know what this means???

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.

Quote:

---

Walter, you are back to, "Thus sayeth Walter". Your and my ideas have no authority. Please state your case on the Word.

---

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!

This:

Quote:

---

For Jesus to have given himself over to sin he would have to have acknowledged that there is a greater force than he

---

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.

This is getting redundant.

Quote:

---

my understanding that "The Word" Is a Living Word aka the Bible makes all the difference.

---

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:

---

Thus sayeth Walter.

---

Thus sayeth a mere man.

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.

Quote:

---

rather to refute it, believing it is something of my own. It is something of my own.

---

And therefore of no more meaning that what anyone else believes.

Quote:

---

It is not saying something that is true outside of you, but true inside of you.

---

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.

@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??