Rhema
Active
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2021
- Messages
- 4,084
None. I read the Greek text of the NT directly.What weird cult was Rhema raised in?
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
SignUp Now!None. I read the Greek text of the NT directly.What weird cult was Rhema raised in?
when it comes to the Word of God it's not really our place to put what we believe the author meant,
Then why does your church have sermons in its service? Are they not expositions of what the speaker believes the author meant? If not, then one should just read scripture and nothing more.
If you believe what you actually said to be true, then you would never read any commentary on scripture ever again, and ought to discourage others from practicing this sin.
My issue with you at times is that you don't quote the entirety of what is said. How about I try this and then you tell me you don't have a problem with what I got from it....
My issue with you at times is that you don't quote the entirety of what is said.
It wouldn't have changed my reply. So here is the entirety of your quote:
Never said it didn't but when it comes to the Word of God it's not really our place to put what we believe the author meant, when the best we know of the author is all second hand to begin with. I do believe that is the very issue you have with many translations/translators.
Good! Now notice who I am talking to: "You/Me" not all/most of Christendom, and beyond. I stated this, because as I ended that portion to you "I do believe that is the very issue you have with many translations/translators. Was I wrong in that last statement?Then why does your church have sermons in its service? Are they not expositions of what the speaker believes the author meant? If not, then one should just read scripture and nothing more.If you believe what you actually said to be true, then you would never read any commentary on scripture ever again, and ought to discourage others from practicing this sin.
Now had you said, "It's not really our place to translate what we believe the author meant," than THAT means something different, and my reply would have been different.
So here you wind up hurling blame at me because YOU have difficulty writing what you mean.
Your inability to see your own insulting ways, has always been my point.
Because you have shown almost without exception that each person you communicate with here on Talk Jesus winds up ending with a negative response from you. Malintent, would require one to know your intention. I know not why, just that it is, and I take it as negative because the comments that I refer to do nothing to further the topic that you or the other are involved with!If you're having trouble writing what you mean (as I've just shown above) why do you think you don't have trouble reading what I write?
You constantly impute malintent to my posts when none exists. But of course if I ask you to read my posts more closely and more accurately, you'll just see another insult that doesn't exist.
The difference in the one I mentioned that I use is that it ends with a semi-colon and not a period like yours does.Marshal renders the above verse as
Then says to them - Jesus: All ye will be offended in me - - tonight; it has been written for: I will strike the shepherd, and will be scattered the sheep of the flock.
Gosh, sometimes I can't help but tickle the dog's paw, just to see them kick. You ever do that?
Now I know why you don't have a sense of humor.No. I don't torture animals. I'm not that sick.
No Bible says that Satan is the ruler of the world, not even the KJV.Get a KJV Bible and read how Satan is the ruler of the world.
Nick, I read through that section twice. Your reply doesn't make sense.Good! Now notice who I am talking to: "You/Me" not all/most of Christendom, and beyond. I stated this, because as I ended that portion to you "I do believe that is the very issue you have with many translations/translators. Was I wrong in that last statement?
I'm beginning to think that there is a very big disconnect between what you are saying and what you think you are saying. The purpose of translation is to accurately convey what the author is saying. Meaning, though is something different, athough there is truly an overlap at times between translation and interpretation. The problem I have is that there are certain meanings that must be said in certain way. There are certain things said that just cannot mean what certain people take them to mean. Ephesians 6:17 is one of them. The Bible is not the sword, prayer is."I do believe that is the very issue you have with many translations/translators. Was I wrong in that last statement?
Well there... Hi to all.Sword of the Spirit: The sword of the Spirit is the Word of God. This includes God's written Word (the Bible), God's incarnate Word (Jesus as Logos), and God's spoken Word (the Holy Spirit within us).
And now you insult my MOTHER ???Never tickled by a loved one......when my saintly mother would tickle me,..
Seriously.The difference in the one I mentioned that I use is that it ends with a semi-colon and not a period like yours does.
Good! Now notice who I am talking to: "You/Me" not all/most of Christendom, and beyond. I stated this, because as I ended that portion to you "I do believe that is the very issue you have with many translations/translators. Was I wrong in that last statement?
One what was the original point? Below you were speaking to what Luke believed, and reasoned what he would have written if he had been. And away we went. You then eventually extrapolated this to include sermons/churches and the why of...see the next quoted portion on how we reached where we are now...well where I'm trying to take youNick, I read through that section twice. Your reply doesn't make sense.
Were Luke to have been Trinitarian, he would have written, Jesus growing in wisdom, stature, and favor with the Father.
when it comes to the Word of God it's not really our place to put what we believe the author meant,
Back to the beginning...my point was and still is, that when it comes to the word of God it's not really our place to put what we believe or think they woulda shoulda coulda said for whatever instance you want to use which in this case was the topic of the Trinity. Your comment (Luke comments) was pure conjecture, and why you should have just responded to me by simply saying "true". It would have saved us both a lot of time.Then why does your church have sermons in its service? Are they not expositions of what the speaker believes the author meant? If not, then one should just read scripture and nothing more.
If you believe what you actually said to be true, then you would never read any commentary on scripture ever again, and ought to discourage others from practicing this sin.
"I do believe that is the very issue you have with many translations/translators. Was I wrong in that last statement?
So, are you telling me that you didn't read into what Luke's shoulda, woulda, coulda, written if his belief was Trinitarian? Which by the way was the whole point! Which is again I say purely conjecture and not what I would have expected of someone who is so exact in what they do. Just like I don't accept what you were doing, I also would have issues with translators who put what they think shoulda, woulda, coulda, been said instead of what it actually was said by God that He wanted those entrusted to communicate it for us to know.I'm beginning to think that there is a very big disconnect between what you are saying and what you think you are saying. The purpose of translation is to accurately convey what the author is saying. Meaning, though is something different, athough there is truly an overlap at times between translation and interpretation. The problem I have is that there are certain meanings that must be said in certain way. There are certain things said that just cannot mean what certain people take them to mean. Ephesians 6:17 is one of them. The Bible is not the sword, prayer is.