ECT The content of faith, required to be believed, in Mt.-John, prior to the dbr

[turbosixx]

Right there is what you have been doing to the passages - reading INTO them...

I don't recall you ever pointing out where I read "INTO" a passage.

Tell me is Paul saying Israel didn't fall then say they did fall?

11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

 

[Danoh]

I don't recall you ever pointing out where I read "INTO" a passage.

Tell me is Paul saying Israel didn't fall then say they did fall?

11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

Only if one reads that INTO the KJB's translation.

Yours is a failure at familiarity with its Early Modern English manner of putting things. Weaned on later Bibles where the work has already been done by these later translators (and just as often poorly as not) you have been rendered unable to get at the intended sense of a passage without other men's labors.

It is why you are so often so clueless as to what the passages - even in these later, spoon feeding Bibles - are actually talking about.

You are a product of today's let the words of Denominational translators dwell in you to the dulling of your senses you are now at.

I find no problem with KJV word structure - none.

May you soon climb out of your mess as to this issue.

 

[turbosixx]

Only if one reads that INTO the KJB's translation.

Yours is a failure at familiarity with its Early Modern English manner of putting things. Weaned on later Bibles where the work has already been done by these later translators (and just as often poorly as not) you have been rendered unable to get at the intended sense of a passage without other men's labors.

It is why you are so often so clueless as to what the passages - even in these later, spoon feeding Bibles - are actually talking about.

You are a product of today's let the words of Denominational translators dwell in you to the dulling of your senses you are now at.

I find no problem with KJV word structure - none.

May you soon climb out of your mess as to this issue.

I personally trust the KJV the most but do not limit myself. As stated example, Paul isn't saying they didn't fall then they did. That's when I go to other translations and the Greek to get a better understanding. I have seen those who take this verse to say they DID fall which if kept in context clearly didn't happen.

I'm curious. When you read Jesus describing the kingdom, do you see this kingdom on hold or the church?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Exactamundo, D, as its the "create a moving target technique," leading to rabbit trails, dodge ball, do the hokey pokey and spin all around, as both of them counter with questions that are quite irrelevant, having NADA to do with the argument being presented/topic at hand. Roman Catholics perfected this technique, in hopes others will forget what the debate was in the first place.

You pan-gospelists are all the same with your stable targets and staying on track!
Who is your guru?

 

[john w]

Is that the best you can do to prove me wrong. Brilliant!!

Is that the best you can do, is provide an emotional soundbyte/cliche, and allegedly correct an uncorrectable LORD God, and His book, as a bible corrector, not believer? Define bible believer. We will wait-for an eternity.

So there.

 

[john w]

I personally trust the KJV the most but do not limit myself. As stated example, Paul isn't saying they didn't fall then they did. That's when I go to other translations and the Greek to get a better understanding. I have seen those who take this verse to say they DID fall which if kept in context clearly didn't happen.

I'm curious. When you read Jesus describing the kingdom, do you see this kingdom on hold or the church?

No, you don't trust the KJB, as you correct it, the definition of not believing it, so save the spin. It is suppose to correct you.

"Limit" yourself, you quip? No, sport, we worship and serve a LORD God, who limits us, by His book.

A deluded Muslim to you: I do not want to "limit" myself, by the bible. Would you like a copy of my Koran?

You: Right on!!!


"the Greek"-you

There is no such thing as "the Greek," which suggests that you are a phony.


Define bible believer.

 

[turbosixx]

and allegedly correct an uncorrectable LORD God, and His book, not believer

I'm the one agreeing with God. You make him out to be a liar and powerless to do what he promises. He gave prophecy his kingdom would be established during the Roman Empire, Dan. 2:40 Then there will be a fourth kingdom......44 In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed,

Jesus said it was at hand and even gave evidence it was upon them. Matt. 12:28 But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

After Jesus' DBR, Paul said we have been transferred to his kingdom. Col. 1:13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son,

And Paul also said Christians are suffering for the kingdom, 2 Thess. 1:5 This is a plain indication of God's righteous judgment so that you will be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which indeed you are suffering.


You expect me to accept one verse taken out of context as proof the kingdom is on hold. Would you accept that line of reasoning from me?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I'm the one agreeing with God. You make him out to be a liar and powerless to do what he promises. He gave prophecy his kingdom would be established during the Roman Empire, Dan. 2:40 Then there will be a fourth kingdom......44 In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed,

Jesus said it was at hand and even gave evidence it was upon them. Matt. 12:28 But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

After Jesus' DBR, Paul said we have been transferred to his kingdom. Col. 1:13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son,

And Paul also said Christians are suffering for the kingdom, 2 Thess. 1:5 This is a plain indication of God's righteous judgment so that you will be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which indeed you are suffering.


You expect me to accept one verse taken out of context as proof the kingdom is on hold. Would you accept that line of reasoning from me?

How do you know the 4th empire is/was Rome?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

There is no such thing as "the Greek," which suggests that you are a phony.

Oh yeah? Tell that to Barn's tap dance teacher, Miss Mendelopolous.

 

[turbosixx]

"the Greek"-you

There is no such thing as "the Greek," which suggests that you are a phony.

This is where I go to get a better understanding of words.

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm

What do you think of this verse. Is Paul saying they didn't fall then say they did fall?
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

Taking the KJV as written he is so that's when I go to "the Greek" word to see if they are the same word. In this case they're not so it's not the same type of fall which would make sense because surly Paul isn't contradicting himself. If my reasoning is wrong, please point out how I should address this apparent contradiction.

 

[turbosixx]

How do you know the 4th empire is/was Rome?

History, also didn't Jesus appear during the Roman Empire and say the kingdom was at hand?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

History, also didn't Jesus appear during the Roman Empire and say the kingdom was at hand?

Rome doesn't seem to match Daniel's description for the 4th beast.

 

[turbosixx]

Rome doesn't seem to match Daniel's description for the 4th beast.

What kingdom do you believe it to be?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

What kingdom do you believe it to be?

The final one, whoever that may turn out to be.

 

[john w]

I'm the one agreeing with God. You make him out to be a liar and powerless to do what he promises. He gave prophecy his kingdom would be established during the Roman Empire, Dan. 2:40 Then there will be a fourth kingdom......44 In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed,

Jesus said it was at hand and even gave evidence it was upon them. Matt. 12:28 But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

After Jesus' DBR, Paul said we have been transferred to his kingdom. Col. 1:13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son,

And Paul also said Christians are suffering for the kingdom, 2 Thess. 1:5 This is a plain indication of God's righteous judgment so that you will be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which indeed you are suffering.


You expect me to accept one verse taken out of context as proof the kingdom is on hold. Would you accept that line of reasoning from me?

As usual, the above has nothing to do with your latest "argument"-"create a moving target....." You are a bible corrector, in contrast to a bible believer. As such, your "doctrine" determines what the bible is, and should say; if it does not fit/validate/agree with/support your doctrine, you correct it, and find a "the" bible that supports/validates/agrees with your doctrine. Correcting any bible, presupposes an authority over it.

Define bible believer.


Silencio, Ozz.

 

[john w]

You pan-gospelists are all the same with your stable targets and staying on track!
Who is your guru?

I once accepted uncritically traditional views, but have found them unbiblical or problematic, and based upon theological wooden literalism. Your exegesis is based on a few proof texts without more credible interpretations ,in context. And we cannot dialogue with ad hominem attacks and false accusations is outside of biblical, historical, orthodox Christianity on the essentials, in light of church history. I deny your flawed interpretation of the text, to support your cultural bias, as you are stereotyping out of ignorance. False accusations of heresy are not the same thing as proven heresy, which is a logical fallacy, divorced from reality,and superficial understandings, contextually, etc. You lack credibility to make simplistic judgments, as my objection is with ad hominem attacks that are unjust, not wooden literalisms, isms, that throw the baby out with the bath water. One who clings to preconceived notions, logical, systematic, inconsistencies, presuppositions/assumptions, etc., such as yourself, and sloppy exegets a text, w/o the context, and proof texting, is not the ideal person to arbitrate doctrinal disputes. Your proof texts, using your interpretation, would lead to contradiction, so they must be interpreted somewhat figuratively, in light of metaphors.

Do you have a bee in your bonnet?

 

[turbosixx]

The final one, whoever that may turn out to be.

I don't see how that can be since there have been many, more than three, since Babylon which was the first.

 

[Danoh]

This is where I go to get a better understanding of words.

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm

What do you think of this verse. Is Paul saying they didn't fall then say they did fall?
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

Taking the KJV as written he is so that's when I go to "the Greek" word to see if they are the same word. In this case they're not so it's not the same type of fall which would make sense because surly Paul isn't contradicting himself. If my reasoning is wrong, please point out how I should address this apparent contradiction.

If you are not careful, you might take what you are about to read wrong, but, I believe it needs to be pointed out.

The method you have just suggested reveals an incompetence on your part as to how to handle such surface level, first impression seeming errors.

The proper response is NOT to right off reach for ANY "resource" - including other "translations" - or the Greek, or what have you, for help as to "whatever could this passage in my KJB be talking about?"

The proper response is to remain in the KJB as to the overall scope and context in which a writer is saying what he is, until enough time in the KJB results in so many passages and narrative stored up within the mentality of one's soul that, next thing one knows, the passage in question is has ended up not only no longer an enigma, but one finds one now "knows" or has a profound grasp of a much deeper understanding of it.

There is nothing mystical about this. It is the result of actually laboring in the Word one on one with it.

You rob yourself of that - you and those who right off reach for another "translation" and or the Greek this, Vine's that, and so on...

If we want to really want to "know" how someone else lives, the way to do that is to go and live in their world with them until it is somewhat our own.

The fact is that Paul's point is THE VERY SAME POINT HE OPENS ROMANS 11 WITH.

From much time in my KJB WITH Paul in his words - what Paul is talking about is the issue that it APPEARS that Israel has FOREVER fallen; that it APPEARS that God is FOREVER through with that nation.

Have they stumbled that they should fall? Have they stumbled so and to where they have FOREVER fallen, it's over; God is forever through with them?

Paul has already established earlier in Romans that such is NOT the case.

That the actual case is that of JUST ONE MORE OF MANY EXAMPLES THROUGHOUT ISRAEL'S HISTORY where it had ALSO appeared AS IF God was through with Israel.

But Paul is WELL AWARE of God's Promise TO - HIM - SELF AS TO THIS ISSUE.

Paul is WELL AWARE that to conclude from SEEMING appearances that God is through with HIS "Covenant unto THEM" is to speak evil OF GOD HIMSELF!

Thus, Paul's "God forbid!" For what THAT ACTUALLY CALLS INTO QUESTION!

Romans 3:3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

It IS ALL THERE in my KJB - no other "translation" needed - no Greek, no fool going by the name of "Faither" ACTUALLY CHANGING passages, need apply.

This fool needs none of it.

Problem is, Turbosixx, you and yours are not only playing with a fully loaded semi-automatic weapon when EVER you handle the KJB, but one with a highly sensitive hair trigger - off it goes each time you approach it from YOUR confusion.

The thing to do when you set it off to find you have once more shot yourself in the foot - the thing to do EACH TIME you find you have done that - is to go all Miesha Tate once more, get back in there, and keep getting back in there until its Championship belt is at last yours.

Fact is, as to Romans 11...the way to understand the passages as is, is ALWAYS - MORE passages...

Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

 

[turbosixx]

If you are not careful, you might take what you are about to read wrong, but, I believe it needs to be pointed out.

The method you have just suggested reveals an incompetence on your part as to how to handle such surface level, first impression seeming errors.

The proper response is NOT to right off reach for ANY "resource" - including other "translations" - or the Greek, or what have you, for help as to "whatever could this passage in my KJB be talking about?"

The proper response is to remain in the KJB as to the overall scope and context in which a writer is saying what he is, until enough time in the KJB results in so many passages and narrative stored up within the mentality of one's soul that, next thing one knows, the passage in question is has ended up not only no longer an enigma, but one finds one now "knows" or has a profound grasp of a much deeper understanding of it.

There is nothing mystical about this. It is the result of actually laboring in the Word one on one with it.

You rob yourself of that - you and those who right off reach for another "translation" and or the Greek this, Vine's that, and so on...

If we want to really want to "know" how someone else lives, the way to do that is to go and live in their world with them until it is somewhat our own.

The fact is that Paul's point is THE VERY SAME POINT HE OPENS ROMANS 11 WITH.

From much time in my KJB WITH Paul in his words - what Paul is talking about is the issue that it APPEARS that Israel has FOREVER fallen; that it APPEARS that God is FOREVER through with that nation.

Have they stumbled that they should fall? Have they stumbled so and to where they have FOREVER fallen, it's over; God is forever through with them?

Paul has already established earlier in Romans that such is NOT the case.

That the actual case is that of JUST ONE MORE OF MANY EXAMPLES THROUGHOUT ISRAEL'S HISTORY where it had ALSO appeared AS IF God was through with Israel.

But Paul is WELL AWARE of God's Promise TO - HIM - SELF AS TO THIS ISSUE.

Paul is WELL AWARE that to conclude from SEEMING appearances that God is through with HIS "Covenant unto THEM" is to speak evil OF GOD HIMSELF!

Thus, Paul's "God forbid!" For what THAT ACTUALLY CALLS INTO QUESTION!

Romans 3:3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

It IS ALL THERE in my KJB - no other "translation" needed - no Greek, no fool going by the name of "Faither" ACTUALLY CHANGING passages, need apply.

This fool needs none of it.

Problem is, Turbosixx, you and yours are not only playing with a fully loaded semi-automatic weapon when EVER you handle the KJB, but one with a highly sensitive hair trigger - off it goes each time you approach it from YOUR confusion.

The thing to do when you set it off to find you have once more shot yourself in the foot - the thing to do EACH TIME you find you have done that - is to go all Miesha Tate once more, get back in there, and keep getting back in there until its Championship belt is at last yours.

Fact is, as to Romans 11...the way to understand the passages as is, is ALWAYS - MORE passages...

Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Thank you, that's what I was looking for.

 

[Interplanner]

Thank you, that's what I was looking for.

But it is not. Because Danoh thinks that the Israel that is in Romans is the nation, the 'ethne', and Paul keeps saying he is not talking about that. He is talking about those in God's mission of the Gospel. Danoh believes in 2P2P and that means that there is supposed to be a return to a theocracy, about which God was not crazy to begin with, and which HEBREWS says is irrelevant. Did I mention that it was HEBREWS saying this? How come we have a NT with a letter to ALL JEWS (HEBREWS) and yet bibleexperts like Danoh never consult what is being told to the Jews?

There is nothing in Rom 11 that goes back to the '2nd program, 2nd people' or to the theocracy or modern Israel. There is absolutely nothing in the light of the glorious grace of the Gospel of Christ that needs to go back into that channel of things, which was a child-trainer/tutorial for Christ, Gal 4.

It's not that Danoh does not quote a proof text here or there, but he doesn't quote the self-organizing and self-declaring chapters of the NT about such issues like Gal 4. He doesn't know what Acts 13 is about; it doesn't 'fit.' That's in spite of it being the one authoritative apostolic unpressured (by some kind of crisis) sample sermon for Jews in other countries, meeting in synagogues. Even armed with the mighty KJV has helped him realize what is really going on in Rom 11 quoting Isaiah as fulfilled already and defining 'saved' the same way John the Baptist has.

After Danoh weighs in on Mt 4's bomb (see the threads next door), you might have a real question.