Actually, the topic at hand speaks of one having an intimate relationship with Christ or not. For can one hate (with one's words) and still have God living within them and know the intimacy of His love? What is the purpose of talking about His love if we are not to share that love with other people or to correct others who show (by what they do) that they do not know Him? Notice how he did not share His intimacy with Christ but I have; And in my doing so, I was attacked because of it. This is nothing new. The apostles were attacked (verbally and physically) for their intimacy with Christ. But this is something I am glad to do in service to Christ and in knowing Him.
Its kinda ironic that you say its a mystery to some. 1Cor.15 says behold i show you a mystery
1 Corinthians 15:53 (KJV)
[SUP]53 [/SUP]For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
1PETER1
[4] To AN INHERITANCE INCORRUPTIBLE, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,
[5] Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto SALVATION READY TO BE REVEALED IN THE LAST TIME.
[9] Receiving the END OF YOUR FAITH, EVEN THE SALVATION OF YOUR SOULS.[10] Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:
[13] Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and HOPE TO THE END FOR THE GRACE THAT IS TO BE BROUGHT UNTO YOU AT THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST;
[23] BEING BORN AGAIN, NOT OF CORRUPTIBLE SEED, BUT OF INCORRUPTIBLE, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
1Peter1 is all about being born again. Its not something that happens during the life time of a believer. {ERROR} Thats plain to see.....
An inheritance
Revealed in the last time
End of your faith
Hope to the end
Grace brought at the revelation of Christ
Being born again
Ya know how some will say they were saved and then tell ya the specific day that they were born again. That doesnt fit with scripture either. {ERROR}
ROMANS 8 [24] For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? [25] But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.
1PETER1 [13] Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and HOPE TO THE END FOR THE GRACE THAT IS TO BE BROUGHT UNTO YOU AT THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST;
Scripture says you are saved by hope....well just read above scriptures. Now if someone claims they are already saved then what does he hope for?
Believe what you want bro...All I did was question your use of a word and even stated such in my post...the truth convicts and you are the one that lashed out and judged my motive and salvation which is NOT biblical.....so...take it how ever you want to take it as I said all that I need to say and you are still arguing and judging me....WHO ART thou that JUDGEST another man's SERVANT.....I can quote scripture as well as you can bro!
Hey, I stuck my head in the water and the preacher man said I was good why not just end it. I'd rather be there than here.
For if one attacks my testimony of my walk with Christ, they are actually attacking the One in whom I love. For Jesus said that that when others persecute you, it is not you that they hate, but it is Christ. But there is hope. We don't have to hate one another. We can listen to God and believe that He commanded us to love all other people. For Jesus is in the life changing business. A change whereby we will love God and all other people. Love. For God is love. That is what I want for everyone. A love for even my enemies or those who appear to be against me.
This is really interesting you have pointed this out.
I think DC was trying to make a valid point.
It is true that we should love our enemies but lets not forget we are on a Christian website where it is ok to have a general different point of view.
Just like you had your say about how Catholics practice "evil" which would be categorizing this religion, and showing no love towards them only ridiculing them. Acting like you are holier than thou will resort to you receiving the responses you have been. Your answers are not always correct and it is always nice to take a humble approach.
Youve quoted scripture from the GW, NIV, HCSB, NKJV. Seems as though youll search any kind of books until ya find what ya want to hear. Not once did ya show scripture from the Word of God. The Ole King James.
The Word of GOD is what it means by what it says, not the Translation you use. They all mean the same thing. Besides the King James is a paraphrase because they used large portions of earlier English Translations, and Latin translation, instead of translating from original language manuscripts, for the most part of their work. READ the The Origninal Preface of the 1611 KJV, and you will find that the Translation team admitted that is what they did. King James Version Original Preface
I have 10 translations open on my WORDsearch 10 open at all times, AND I search all ten Translations simultaneously, and the results show up on ONE list. The first one that my eyes fall on, is the one I use, because it is just faster that way. I have have NO PROBLEM with any one of the 10 Translations that I have open, but my LEAST FAVORITE is the GW and KJV is only one above that in my opinion. It has NOTHING to do with what I want to HEAR. But it apparently has everything to do with what all you want to hear, and that being The Ole King James.
Careful Jason, mant translations are a part of the ateheist agenda, don't think so
BLENDING ALL RELIGIONS — THE OLD RELIGIONS WILL HAVE TO GO Another area of discussion was RELIGION. This is an avowed atheist speaking. And he said, "Religion is not necessarily bad. A lot of people seem to need religion, with it's mysteries and rituals – so they will have religion."
But the major religions of today have to be changed because they are not compatible with the changes to come. The old religions will have to go. Especially Christianity. Once the Roman Catholic Church is brought down, the rest of Christianity will follow easily. Then a new religion can be accepted for use all over the world. It will incorporate something from all of the old ones to make it more easy for people to accept it, and feel at home in it. Most people won't be too concerned with religion. They will realize that they don't need it.
CHANGING THE BIBLE THROUGH REVISIONS OF KEY WORDS In order to do this, the Bible will be changed. It will be rewritten to fit the new religion. Gradually, key words will be replaced with new words having various shades of meaning. Then, the meaning attached to the new word can be close to the old word. And as time goes on, other shades of meaning of that word can be emphasized, and then gradually that word replaced with another word.
I don't know if I'm making that clear. But the idea is that everything in Scripture need not be rewritten, just key words replaced by other words. And the variability in meaning attached to any word can be used as a tool to change the entire meaning of Scripture, and therefore make it acceptable to this new religion. Most people won't know the difference; and this was another one of the times where he said, "the few who do notice the difference won't be enough to matter."
THE CHURCHES WILL HELP Then followed one of the most surprising statements of the whole presentation: He said, "some of you probably think the churches won't stand for this," and he went on to say, "The churches will help us!"
There was no elaboration on this; it was unclear just what he had in mind when he said, "the churches will help us!" In retrospect, I think some of us now can understand what he might have meant at that time. I recall then only of thinking, "no they won't!" and remembering our Lord's words where he said to Peter, "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church, and gates of Hell will not prevail against it."
So... yes, some people in the churches might help. And in the subsequent 20 years we've seen how some people in churches have helped. But we also know that our Lord's Words will stand, and the gates of Hell will NOT prevail.
1968 by dr richard day.
The Lord revealed himself to me (spiritually) when I was twenty years old. I was reading the bible with the intention of disproving the existence of God (fool that I am), and The Lord spoke to me and asked me "do you believe in me?" And I thought about what I had been reading and suddenly realized it was all true, and I responded "Yes, Lord, I believe in you.". And at that moment the Holy Spirit entered my being, it is indescribable how He filled me with joy, peace and love. The Lord has been with me ever since that day and for thirty-five years now he has never left me or forsaken me.
I wish I could say I have walked perfectly with Him since that day but I can not, I have failed my Lord many times, and at times found myself far away from Him. But every time I turn back to Him, I find that He is right there still with me never failing me, always encouraging me, always loving me.
Truly, our God is an awesome God, his patience and long-suffering is beyond my comprehension.
I pray that all would know the love of Jesus Christ, and receive Him as Lord and Savior.
Christ be with you always.
I don't disagree that there is a corruption of the Word of God within Modern Translations. I believe the KJV to be the divinely inspired Word of God for our day (that is perfect) and that we have to be careful about Modern Bibles. I use Modern Translations to help update the Old English. To put it to you another way, I look at Modern Translations as if I am sifting to the dirt to get to the gold (Which can be found in the KJV, and the original Greek, and Hebrew). They can be helpful sometimes, but they are not my final word of authority. I believe that authority to be the KJV 1769 (1611).
The Translators To The Reader
Zeale to promote the common good, whether it be by devising any thing our selves, or revising that which hath bene laboured by others, . . .
. . .
But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknowen tongue? . . . so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readinesse. . .
. . .
Yet it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to them, to take that which they found, (the same being for the greatest part true and sufficient) rather then by making a new, in that new world and greene age of the Church, to expose themselves to many exceptions and cavillations, as though they made a Translation to serve their owne turne, and therefore bearing witnesse to themselves, their witnesse not to be regarded. This may be supposed to bee some cause, why the Translation of the Seventie was allowed to passe for currant. . . . he holdeth the Authours thereof not onely for Interpreters, but also for Prophets in some respect: and Justinian the Emperour enjoyning the Jewes his subjects to use specially the Translation of the Seventie, rendreth this reason thereof, because they were as it were enlighted with propheticall grace. . . .
. . .
(and Saint Jerome affirmeth as much) that the Seventie were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to adde to the Originall, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sence thereof according to the trueth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance. This may suffice touching the Greeke Translations of the old Testament. . . .
. . .
There were also within a few hundreth yeeres after CHRIST, translations many into the Latine tongue: for this tongue also was very fit to convey the Law and the Gospel by, because in those times very many Countreys of the West, yea of the South, East and North, spake or understood Latine, being made Provinces to the Romanes. But now the Latine Translations were too many to be all good, . . . Now the Church of Rome . . . Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the peoples understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confesse, that wee forced them to translate it into English against their wills. . . .
. . .
And to the same effect say wee, that we are so farre off from condemning any of their labours that traveiled before us in this kinde, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henries time, or King Edwards (if there were any translation, or correction of a translation in his time) or Queene Elizabeths of ever-renoumed memorie, that we acknowledge them to have beene raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posteritie in everlasting remembrance. . . .
. . .
Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfited at the same time, and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen by their labours, doe endevour to make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade our selves, if they were alive, would thanke us. . . .
. . .
to have the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this meanes it commeth to passe, that whatsoever is sound alreadie (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours farre better then their autentike vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also if any thing be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the originall, the same may bee corrected, and the trueth set in place. . . .
. . .
Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest{ poorest } translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. . . .
. . .
Yet before we end, we must answere a third cavill and objection of theirs against us, for altering and amending our Taanslations [sic] so oft; wherein truely they deale hardly, and strangely with us. { The very same thing you do to MODERN Translations. } For to whom ever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to goe over that which hee had done, and to amend it where he saw cause? . . .
. . .
But the difference that appeareth betweene our Translations, and our often correcting of them, is the thing that wee are specially charged with; let us see therefore whether they themselves bee without fault this way, (if it be to be counted a fault, to correct) and whether they bee fit men to throw stones at us: But it is high time to leave them, and to shew in briefe what wee proposed to our selves, and what course we held in this our perusall and survay of the Bible. Truly (good Christian Reader) wee never thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, (for then the imputation of Sixtus had bene true in some sort, that our people had bene fed with gall of Dragons in stead of wine, with whey in stead of milke, but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath bene our indeavour, that our marke. . . . { That makes it a PARAPHRASE and not an actual Translation from the original languages. }
http://www.kjvbibles.com/kjpreface.htm