Basic bible study -

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,832
13,558
113
#61
one Greek word can have MANY interpretations because it is the surrounding text or words that define the one. No Lexicon or Dictionary will give you that.
maybe you've never actually looked at a lexicon or dictionary?

below is an example from Thayer's for "aion" -- see if your assertion holds true :)




αἰών, (ῶνος, ὁ (as if Αιε — poetic for ἀεί — ὤν, so teaches Aristotle, de caelo 1, 11, 9, vol. i., p. 279{a} 27; (so Proclus book iv. in Plato, Timaeo, p. 241; and others); but more probable is the conjecture (cf. Etym. Magn. 41, 11) that αἰών is so connected with ἄημι to breathe, blow, as to denote properly that which causes life, vital force; cf. Harless on Ephesians 2:2). (But αἰών ( = αἰϝών) is now generally connected with αἰεί, ἀεί, Sanskrit evas (aivas), Latinaevum, Goth. aivs, German ewig, English aye, ever; cf. Curtius, § 585; Fick, Part i., p. 27; Vanicek, p. 79; Benfey, Wurzellex, i., p. 7f; Schleicher, Compend. edition 2, p. 400; Pott, Etymologicum Forsch., edition 2, 2:2, p. 442; Ebeling, Lex. Homer under the word; Liddell and Scott, under the word ἀεί; Cremer, edd, 2, 3 ,4 (although in edition 1 he agreed with Prof. Grimm); Pott and Fick, however, connect it with Sanskrit ayus rather than evas, although both these forms are derived from i to go (see Pott, Sehleicher, Fick, Vanicek, as above).) In Greek authors:

1. age (Latinaevum, which is αἰών with the Aeolic digamma), a human lifetime (in Homer, Herodotus, Pindar, Tragic poets), life itself (Homer Iliad 5, 685 με καί λίποι αἰών etc.).

2. an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity, (Plato, Tim., p. 37 d. 38 a.; Tim. Locr., p. 97 d. (quoted below); Plutarch, others). With this signification the Hebrew and rabbinical idea of the word עולָם (of which in the Sept. αἰών is the equivalent) combines in the Biblical and ecclesiastical writings Hence, in the N. T. used:

1.

a. universally: in the phrases εἰς τόν αἰῶνα, לְעולָם (Genesis 6:3), forever, John 6:51, 58; John 14:16; Hebrews 5:6; Hebrews 6:20, etc.; and strengthened εἰς τόν αἰῶνα τοῦαἰῶνος, Hebrews 1:8 (from Psalm 44:7 () Alexandrian LXX, cf. Winer's Grammar, § 36, 22 (Tobit 6:18; Psalm 82:18 (), etc.); εἰς αἰῶνα, Jude 1:13; εἰς ἡμέραν αἰῶνος unto the day which is eternity (genitive of apposition), 2 Peter 3:18 (cf. Sir. 18:10 (9)); with a negation: never,John 4:14 (Lachmann in brackets); ; 1 Corinthians 8:13; or not for ever, not always, John 8:35; εἰς τούς αἰῶνας, unto the ages, i. e., as long as time shall be (the plural denotes the individual ages whose sum is eternity): (Luke 1:33); Romans 1:25; Romans 9:5; Romans 11:36; ( R G Tr WH); 2 Corinthians 11:31; Hebrews 13:8; εἰς πάντας τούς αἰῶνας, Jude 1:25; εἰςτούς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων (in which expression the endless future is divided up into various periods, the shorter of which are comprehended in the longer (cf. Winers Grammar, § 36, 2; among the various phrases to express duration composed of this word with preposition or adjuncts (which to the number of more than fifteen are to be found in the Sept., cf. Vaughan on Romans 1:25), this combination of the double plural seems to be peculiar to the N. T.)): (Romans 16:27 L T); Galatians 1:5; (Philippians 4:20); 1 Timothy 1:17; (2 Timothy 4:18; 1 Peter 4:11); Revelation 1:6, 18; Revelation 4:9; Revelation 5:13; Revelation 7:12; Revelation 10:6; Revelation 11:15; Revelation 15:7; Revelation 19:3; Revelation 20:10; Revelation 22:5; εἰςαἰῶνας αἰώνων, Revelation 14:11; ὁ αἰών τῶν αἰώνων the (whole) age embracing the (shorter) ages, Ephesians 3:21 (cf. Meyer (or Ellicott) at the passage); ἀπό τῶν αἰώνωνfrom the ages down, from eternity, Colossians 1:26; Ephesians 3:9; πρό τῶν αἰώνων before time was, before the foundation of the world, 1 Corinthians 2:7; πρόθεσις τῶν αἰώνωνeternal purpose, Ephesians 3:11.

b. in hyperbolic and popular usage: ἀπό τοῦ αἰῶνος (מֵעולָם Genesis 6:4, cf. Deuteronomy 32:7) from the most ancient time down (within the memory of man), from of old, Luke 1:70; Acts 3:21; Acts 15:18 (Tobit 4:12 οἱ πατέρες ἡμῶν ἀπό τοῦ αἰῶνος; Longinus, 34 τούς ἀπ'αἰῶνος ῥήτορας); also ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος, John 9:32 (1 Esdr. 2:19, 22 (23); Diodorus 4:83 of the temple of Venus τήν, ἐξ αἰῶνος ἀρχήν λαβόν, 17, 1 τούς ἐξ αἰῶνος βασιλεῖς(excerpt. de legat, xl.), p. 632 τήν ἐξ αἰῶνος παραδεδομένην ἐλευθερίαν).

2. by metonymy of the container for the contained, οἱ αἰῶνες denotes the worlds, the universe, i. e. the aggregate of things contained in time (on the plural cf. Winers Grammar, 176 (166); Buttmann, 24 (21)): Hebrews 1:2; Hebrews 11:3; and (?) 1 Timothy 1:17; (Revelation 15:3 WH text; cf. Psalm 144:13 (); Tobit 13:6, 10; Sir. 36:22; Philo de plant. Noe § 12 twice;de mundo § 7; Josephus, Antiquities 1, 18, 7; Clement of Rome, 1 Cor. 61, 2 [ET]; 35, 3 [ET] (πατήρ τῶναἰώνων); 55, 6 [ET] (Θεός τῶν αἰώνων); Apostolic Constitutions 7, 34; see Abbot in Journal Society for Biblical Literature etc. i., p. 106 n.). So αἰών in Wis. 13:9 Wis. 14:6 Wis. 18:4; the same use occurs in the Talmud, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic; cf. Bleek, Hebraerbr. ii., 1, p. 36ff; Gesenius, Thesaurus ii., p. 1036; (cf. the use of οἱ αἰῶνες in the Fathers, equivalent to the world of mankind, e. g. Ignatius ad Eph. 19, 2 [ET]):

. . .
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,832
13,558
113
#62
((continued, the entry is too large for a single post))


3. As the Jews distinguished הַזֶּה הָעולָם the time before the Messiah, and הַבָּא הַעולָם, the time after the advent of the Messiah (cf. Riehm, Lehrb. d. Hebraerbr., p. 204ff; (Schürer, § 29, 9)), so most of the N. T. writers distinguish ὁ αἰών οὗτος this age (also simply ὁ αἰών, Matthew 13:22; Mark 4:19 G L T Tr WH; ὁ ἐνεστὼς αἰών, Galatians 1:4; ὁ νῦν αἰών, 1 Timothy 6:17; (2 Timothy 4:10); Titus 2:12), the time before the appointed return or truly Messianic advent of Christ (i. e., the παρουσία, which see), the period of instability, weakness, impiety, wickedness, calamity, misery — and αἰών μέλλων the future age (also ὁ αἰών ἐκεῖνος, Luke 20:35; ὁ αἰών ὁἐρχόμενος, Luke 18:30; Mark 10:30; οἱ αἰῶνες οἱ ἐπερχόμενοι, Ephesians 2:7), i. e., the age after the return of Christ in majesty, the period of the consummate establishment of the divine kingdom and all its blessings: Matthew 12:32; Ephesians 1:21; cf. Fritzsche on Romans, vol. 3:22f. Hence, the things of 'this age' are mentioned in the N. T. with censure: ὁ αἰών οὗτος, by metonymy, men controlled by the thoughts and pursuits of this present time, Romans 12:2, the same who are called υἱοί τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου in Luke 16:8; Luke 20:34; κατά τόν αἰῶνατοῦ κόσμου τούτου conformably to the age to which this (wicked) world belongs, Ephesians 2:2(cf. Trench, § 59 under the end); ἀγαπᾶν τόν νῦν αἰῶνα, 2 Timothy 4:10 (see ἀγαπάω); ἀρχόντων τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου, 1 Corinthians 2:6 (see ἄρχων); ὁ Θεός τοῦ αἰ. τούτου, the devil, who rules the thoughts and deeds of the men of this age, 2 Corinthians 4:4; αἱ μέριμναιτοῦ αἰῶνος, the anxieties for the things of this age, Mark 4:19; πλούσιος ἐν τῷ νῦν αἰῶνι, rich in worldly wealth, 1 Timothy 6:17; σοφία ... τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου such wisdom as belongs to this age — full of error, arrogant, hostile to the gospel, 1 Corinthians 2:6; συζητητής τοῦ αἰ.τούτου, disputer, sophist, such as we now find him, 1 Corinthians 1:20; συντέλεια τοῦ αἰ.τούτ., the end, or rather consummation, of the age preceding Christ's return, with which will be connected the resurrection of the dead, the last judgment, the demolition of this world and its restoration to a more excellent condition (cf. 4 Esdr. 7:43 []), Matthew 13:39f, 49; Matthew 24:3; Matthew 28:20; it is called συντέλεια τῶν αἰώνων in Hebrews 9:26 (so Test xii. Patr., test. Levi 10, test. Benj. 11 (cf. Vorstman, p. 133)); τά τέλη τῶν αἰώνων the ends (last part) of the ages before the return of Christ, 1 Corinthians 10:11; δυνάμεις τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, powers which present themselves from the future or divine order of things, i. e., the Holy Spirit, Hebrews 6:5; τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐκείνου τυχεῖν, to partake of the blessings of the future age, Luke 20:35. Among the N. T. writers James does not use the word αἰών. (On the word in its relation to κόσμοςsee Trench, § 59: Its biblical sense and its relation to עולָם are discussed by Stuart, Exeget. Essays on Words relating to Future Punishment, Andover, 1830 (and Presbyterian Publishing Committee, Philadelphia); Tayler Lewis in Lange's Commentary on Ecclesiastes, pp. 44-51; J. W. Hanson, Aion-Aionios (pp. 174), Chicago, 1880. See especially E. Abbot, Literature of the Doctrine of a Future Life, etc. (New York, 1867), Index of subjects, under the word For its meanings in ecclesiastical writings see Suicer, Thesaurus Eccl. i. col. 140ff, cf. ii. col 1609; Huet, Origeniana (Appendix to Vol. iv. of De la Rue's Origen) book ii. c. ii. quaest. 11, § 26.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,832
13,558
113
#63
((continued again, in fact it's too large for two posts))



Its use in Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristotle, Plato, Tim. Locr., is exhibited in detail by E. S. Goodwin in the Christ. Exam. for March and May, 1831, March and May, 1832. "On αἰών as the complete period, either of each particular life or of all existence, see Aristotle, cael. 1, 9, 15; on αἰών and χρόνος, cf. Philo (quis rer. div. her. § 34) i. 496, 18f; (de mut. nom. § 47) i. 619, 10f." Liddell and Scott, edition 6; see also Philo de alleg. leg. iii. 8;quod deus immut. § 6 at the end;de secular § 11;de praem, et poen. § 15; and (de mund, opif. § 7) especially J. G. Muller, Philo's Lehre v. d. Weltschopfung, p. 168 (Berl. 1864). Schmidt (chapter 44) gives the distinction, for substance, as follows: both words denote the abstract idea of time and with special reference to its extent or duration; χρόνος is the general designation for time, which can be divided up into portions, each of which is in its turn a χρόνος; on the other hand, αἰών, which in the concrete and simple language of Homer (Pindar and the Tragedians) denotes the allotted lifetime, even the life, of the individual (Iliad 4, 478 μινυνθάδιος δέ οἱ αἰών etc.), in Attic prose differs from χρόνος by denoting time unlimited and boundless, which is not conceived of as divisible into αἰῶνες (contrast here biblical usage and see below), but rather into χρόνοι. In philosophical speech it is without beginning also. Cf. Tim. Locr. 97 c. d. χρόνῳ δέ τά μέρεα τάσδε τάς περιόδως λέγοντι, ἅς ἐκόσμησεν ὁΘεός σύν κόσμῳ. Οὐ γάρ ἦν πρό κόσμῳ ἄστρα. Διόπερ οὐδ' ἐνιαυτός ὀυδ' ὠρᾶνπερίοδοι, αἷς μετρηταί ὁ γεννατὸς χρόνος οὗτος. Ἑικών δέ ἐστι τῷ ἀγεννάτωχρόνῳ, ὅν αἰῶνα ποταγορεύομες. ὡς γάρ ποτ' ἀΐδιον παράδειγμα, τόν ἰδανικὸνκόσμον, ὅδε ὁ ὠρανός ἐγεννάθη, οὕτως ὡς πρός παράδειγμα, τόν αἰῶνα, ὅδε ὁχρόνος σύν κόσμῳ ἐδαμιουργήθη — after Plato, Timaeus, p. 37 d. (where see Stallbaum's note and references); Isocrates 8, 34 τούς εὐσεβείας καί δικαιοσύνης ζῶντας (ὁρῶ) ἐν τέτοῖς παροῦσι χρόνοις ἀσφαλῶς διάγοντας καί περί τοῦ σύμπαντος αἰῶνος ἡδίουςτάς ἐλπίδας ἔχοντας. The adjective ἄχρονος independent of time, above and beyond all time, is synonymous with αἰώνιος; where time (with its subdivisions and limitations) ends eternity begins: Nonnus, metaph, evang. Johan. 1:1, ἄχρονος ἦν, ἀκίχητος, ἐν ἀρρήτω λόγος ἀρχή. Thoroughly Platonic in cast are the definitions of Gregory of Nazianzus (orat. xxxviii. 8) αἰών γάροὔτε χρόνος οὔτε χρόνου τί μέρος. Οὐδέ γάρ μετρητόν, ἀλλ' ὅπερ, ἡμῖν ὁ χρόνοςἡλίου φορά μετρούμενος, τοῦτο τοῖς ἀϊδίοις αἰών, τό συμπαρεκτεινόμενον τοῖςοὖσιν οἷον τί χρονικὸν κίνημα καί διάστημα (Suicer as above). So Clement of Alexandria, strom., i. 13, p. 756 a., Migne edition, ὁ γ' οὖν αἰών τοῦ χρόνου τό μέλλον καί τό ἐνεστὼς, αὐτάρ δή καί τό παρωχηκος ἀκαριαιὼς συνίστησι. Instances from extra-biblical writings of the use of αἰών in the plural are: τόν ἀπ' αἰώνων μύθον, Anthol. vol iii., part ii., p. 55, Jacobs edition; εἰς αἰῶνας, ibid. vol. iv. epigr. 492; ἐκ περιτροπῆς αἰώνων, Josephus, b. j. 3, 8, 5; εἰς αἰῶνας διαμενεῖ, Sextus Empiricus, adv. Phys. i. 62. The discussions which have been raised respecting the word may give interest to additional references to its use by Philo and Josephus. Philo: ὁ πᾶς (ἅπας, σύμπας) or πᾶς (etc.) ὁ αἰών:de alleg. leg. iii. § 70;de cherub. § I (a noteworthy passage, cf.de congressu ernd. § 11 and references under the word θάνατος);de sacrif. Ab. et Caini § 11;quod det. pot. § 48;quod deus immut. § 1, § 24;de plantat. § 27;de sobrietate § 13;de migr. Abr. § 2;de secular § 9;de mut. nom. § 34;de somn. ii., § 15, § 31, § 38;de legat. ad Gaium § 38; (ὁ) μακρός αἰών:de sacrif. Ab et Caini § 21;de ebrietate § 47;de secular § 20; αἰών μήκιστος:de sobrietate § 5;de secular § 21; ὁ ἄπειρος αἰών:de legat, ad Gaium § 11; ὁ ἔμπροσθεν αἰών:de praem, et. poen. § 6; αἰών πολύς:de Abrah. § 46; τίς αἰών:de merc. meretr. § 1; δἰ αἰών:de cherub. § 26;de plantat. § 27; εἰς τόν αἰών:de gigant. § 5; ἐν (τῷ) αἰώνω:de mut. nom. § 2 (twice) (note the restriction);quod deus immut. § 6; ἐξ αἰών:de somn. 1 § 3; ἐπ' αἰῶνος:de plantat. § 12 (twice);de mundo § 7; πρό αἰῶνος:de mut. nom. § 2; πρόςαἰ.:de mut. nom. § 11; (ὁ) αἰών:de secular § 18;de alleg. leg. iii. § 70;de cherub. § 22;de migr.Abr. § 22;de somn. i., § 18, § 22;de Josepho § 5;de vita Moys. ii. § 3;de decalogo § 14;de victimis § 3; fragment in Mang. 2:660 (Richter vi., p. 219);de plantat. § 12 (bis);de mundo § 7. Josephus: (ὁ) πᾶς αἰών: Antiquities 1, 18, 7; 3, 8, 10; contra Apion 2, 11, 3; 2, 22, 1; μακρός αἰών: Antiquities 2, 7, 3; πολύς αἰών: contra Apion 2, 31, 1; τοσοῦτος αἰών: contra Apion 1, 8, 4; πλῆθοςαἰῶνος: Antiquities prooem. § 3; ἀπ' αἰῶνος: b. j. prooem. § 4; δἰ αἰῶνος: Antiquities 1, 18, 8; 4, 6, 4; b. j. 6, 2, 1; εἰς (τόν) αἰωνον: Antiquities 4, 8, 18; 5, 1, 27; 7, 9, 5; 7, 14, 5; ἐξ αἰωνον: b. j. 5, 10, 5; (ὁ) αἰών: Antiquities 19, 2, 2; b. j. 1, 21, 10; plural (see above) 3, 8, 5. Seeαἰώνιος.)
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,832
13,558
113
#65
No Lexicon or Dictionary will give you that. This is why there are many listings for one word in a STrong's.
yeah pretty sure that's not at all true.

:rolleyes:

((as demonstrated above))
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
#66
What do you mean by Bible? What do you mean by inerrant? What do you think that 2Tm 3:16 means? What do you mean by "God-breathed"?

lol

Without definitions, I cannot say "yes" or "no".
I mean the 66 books we have called The Bible.
I mean by inerrant it doesn't contradict internally and has no factual mistakes. I believe 2 Timothy 3:16 means that while Paul and John wrote the letters, God inspired them, therefore they dont contain error but instead contain spiritual truths.
That is what I mean by God-breathed. God inspired. breathing out information

You next
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,832
13,558
113
#67
skimmed it. I don't like loooong posts that are usually someone's opinon anyway......as was yours on Strong
well if you'd actually read it, you'd see it is factual, and you wouldn't have wound up telling lies now out of ignorance.

perhaps we really should have a conversation about basic study
in light of which -- thanks for making this thread :)
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#68
POSTHUMAN.......are you really TRYING to get on my bad side??.........LOOK at that LOOOOONG post...........this is the Reader's Digest of chat talk, NOT War and Peace length.
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#70
SCRIPTURES God-BREATHED

2 Tim 3:16-17

God BREATHED – theopneustus – this term is strong, that which is the theopneustus has ULTIMATE authority. (BB Warfield)

If it be scripture at all…….then it is ALL theopneustus …GOD BREATHED.
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#71
well if you'd actually read it, you'd see it is factual, and you wouldn't have wound up telling lies now out of ignorance.

perhaps we really should have a conversation about basic study
in light of which -- thanks for making this thread :)
YOU call me a liar and then want to do a basic bible study. wow.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,832
13,558
113
#72
YOU call me a liar and then want to do a basic bible study. wow.
now, that was a very short post; i didn't think you would merely skim it.
you admitted that you didn't really read the article i dug up for you, in order to help you, and you said it was my 'opinion' about Strong's. that's a patently false statement - it's a factual article, not an opinion piece, and i didn't write it. i gave the source, twice.


so i corrected you saying that if you had taken the time to actually read it you would not be making false statements about it, out of ignorance. i do not believe that making false statements out of ignorance -- and i was careful to explicitly mention your ignorance in the matter, as well as it's cause -- is tantamount to being a liar. that would be if you knowingly & habitually tell untruths. so now, out of miscomprehension, you are falsely accusing me.

you are also misunderstanding what i said ((skimming again?)) -- i think we need to have a conversation about the basics of study in general. point one being, you need to actually read something before you can make a truly informed opinion about it. that is true for a cookbook just as much as it is for the Bible. skimming ain't gonna cut it.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
#73
Of course not brother.
Why did you call me a brother when you said earlier i preach a false gospel? And what part of Romans 3:21-26 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 is false? Thats the gospel i believe in.

I dont believe calvinists preach a false gospel. I have heard them say the same exact things i would say when preaching. So whats the issue?
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,832
13,558
113
#74
POSTHUMAN.......are you really TRYING to get on my bad side??.........LOOK at that LOOOOONG post...........this is the Reader's Digest of chat talk, NOT War and Peace length.
read what i quoted from you again, please -- you said dictionaries and lexicons do not give the full scope of a word's possible meanings.
that is patently false.
to demonstrate, i gave you evidence that they can provide a wealth of information -- the volume of text in the definition of one simple word of Greek conclusively shows your opinion about lexicons/dictionaries is wrong. i purposefully showed you a lengthy entry not to 'piss you off' but to inform you and to directly explain through counterexample that your opinion was uninformed.


this is also basic to study of any matter: don't make assertions about things you have not explored. :)

i am trying to help you. i am sorry that angers you.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
#75
I mean the 66 books we have called The Bible.
I mean by inerrant it doesn't contradict internally and has no factual mistakes. I believe 2 Timothy 3:16 means that while Paul and John wrote the letters, God inspired them, therefore they dont contain error but instead contain spiritual truths.
That is what I mean by God-breathed. God inspired. breathing out information

You next
I do not hold to 66 books. I agree with the 27 books of the New Testament, but Revelation is quite a problematic for understanding, so I do not read it much. Regarding the OT, I do not hold to any specific canon, but if I would have to, it would not be the protestant/Jewish one.

Contradictions and mistakes - I do not think there were mistakes or contradictions in originals. I think there are contradictions, lost texts, added texts etc in today's versions we have.

I do not think that the inspiration was automatic writing, it was more about message, some sentences of Paul are not finished, he added personal notes etc.

And regarding the preservation of the Old Testament, there are even huge portions of books we do not know how it should be, because various textual versions differ so much from each other.

I do not think that all books of the OT are equally inspired and equally useful for the Church. In the New Testament, there are inconsistencies between gospels, but not too serious ones.

I do not hold to Sola Scriptura (at least not to the most extreme positions about it), I am more to Prima Scriptura.
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#76
now, that was a very short post; i didn't think you would merely skim it.
you admitted that you didn't really read the article i dug up for you, in order to help you, and you said it was my 'opinion' about Strong's. that's a patently false statement - it's a factual article, not an opinion piece, and i didn't write it. i gave the source, twice.


so i corrected you saying that if you had taken the time to actually read it you would not be making false statements about it, out of ignorance. i do not believe that making false statements out of ignorance -- and i was careful to explicitly mention your ignorance in the matter, as well as it's cause -- is tantamount to being a liar. that would be if you knowingly & habitually tell untruths. so now, out of miscomprehension, you are falsely accusing me.

you are also misunderstanding what i said ((skimming again?)) -- i think we need to have a conversation about the basics of study in general. point one being, you need to actually read something before you can make a truly informed opinion about it. that is true for a cookbook just as much as it is for the Bible. skimming ain't gonna cut it.
perhaps you could point out to me where my bible study has been deficient using my own choices for reference........? I would say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#77
There are two Threads with different Titles, but same subject matter.........for whatever reason

(so I'm going to post this here as well as on the other Thread)

I understand all of this, and see the value.............BUT, it sure seems as if a person could get so involved in outside sources that they completely forget that the Holy Bible is the inspired Word of God.

The Holy Spirit (in my unlearned opinion) is the absolute BEST Reference Guide/Translator there ever was, is, or ever will be,

Gods Holy Word can touch the dullest wit and soften the hardest heart...........and It does not require commentary, translations or any such to do so.

Now, I'm not knocking folks who enjoy all of this, BUT, let us NOT say a person can not learn, grow, mature and reach full understanding of the Word of God THRU reading the Word of God itself.

No Commentary, Translation, or any such will EVER replace the Indwelling Presence of the Holy Spirit for revealing the Truth of the Word! now........that's just me I suspect
You sure missed the point of this forum!! Study anyway you like, I'm not promoting any books, ....I like what I like and if you find error in my doctrine I'm sure you will let me know.....with scripture.
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#78
Yes JaumeJ, the Holy Spirit is our only authoritative source. No tool is perfect including bible translations. The Spirit of Truth will lead us if we are listening. God's word defines God's character; which in turn defines the word properly. :cool:
If you are listening? you hear voices??? The Holy Spirit speaks to us thru the reading of the word and does not teach outside of what is written, or then you would have division among the Trinity whom are of one voice
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
#79
I do not hold to 66 books. I agree with the 27 books of the New Testament, but Revelation is quite a problematic for understanding, so I do not read it much. Regarding the OT, I do not hold to any specific canon, but if I would have to, it would not be the protestant/Jewish one.

Contradictions and mistakes - I do not think there were mistakes or contradictions in originals. I think there are contradictions, lost texts, added texts etc in today's versions we have.

I do not think that the inspiration was automatic writing, it was more about message, some sentences of Paul are not finished, he added personal notes etc.

And regarding the preservation of the Old Testament, there are even huge portions of books we do not know how it should be, because various textual versions differ so much from each other.

I do not think that all books of the OT are equally inspired and equally useful for the Church. In the New Testament, there are inconsistencies between gospels, but not too serious ones.

I do not hold to Sola Scriptura (at least not to the most extreme positions about it), I am more to Prima Scriptura.
Now I know why you believe in evolution. :D

Sad to hear bro. How can you say to anyone with any authority "God says" when you dont know? Did God say that? Or was it just a personal note, there is a corruption in the text here, so is this part right and on and on it goes.

I believe its an all or nothing deal and if you say there are small errors or small problems going on, it leads to big problems and the entire house collapses.
There is a saying: Small rivers lead to a big ocean!
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
#80
Now I know why you believe in evolution. :D

Sad to hear bro. How can you say to anyone with any authority "God says" when you dont know? Did God say that? Or was it just a personal note, there is a corruption in the text here, so is this part right and on and on it goes.

I believe its an all or nothing deal and if you say there are small errors or small problems going on, it leads to big problems and the entire house collapses.
There is a saying: Small rivers lead to a big ocean!
Its not about what is easier to say to somebody who is not informed, but what are facts.

You have the problem with "God says" as I do. Because you do not have some perfect version of the Bible while I have it not ;-)

I realize and admit facts, both to myself and to others. I can also choose some 21st century print of the Bible and shout to everybody "look, infallible word of God", but it would not make it to be truth.

If you are sad, be sad for the reality, even though I am not sure why you should be sad at all. Not for me ;-)