Recent content by fredoheaven

Of truth Jesus says in John 5:24 " ...he that hearth my word, and believeth and believeth on him that sent me hath everlasting life...." and so is the condition.of having everlasting life. Who says you save youselves when it is God' will to believe to have eternal life. It seems the problem lies...

John 5 is a case of hearing to believe and not to believe. Those who believe are given eternal life, those who reject Christ certainly dont have it. So it is either to believe or not to believe. Point is man has the capacity to choose. JESUS said it verily, verily, whats yours

Umm, scripture says yes given in the context. Your opinion, its a no. Well, you have put another proof text that is out of context. John 5:38 are those Jews who reject v.24-25, He that hears Christ, those dead may hear his voice shall live. Yes, i still believe the scripture of truth over...

Yes, God will put his laws to them, and their sins will be remembered anymore them that does the will of God"...after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise. Hebrews 10:36 or those "...that believe to the saving of the soul." Hebrews 10:39

And the good part is to believe the gospel and the bad part is to reject it.

:)

Actually, Rufus is trying to redefine what context is or means.

Acts 16:31 KJV — And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Thank you for your response. As we examine the context, I'd like to reiterate that the presence of the Hebrew suffix 'im' is no longer a valid reason to claim that the KJV is in error for translating Genesis 1:1 as 'heaven' (singular). I've listed previous English Bibles that also translated...

The point is clear: it is possible to translate the masculine plural 'שָׁמַיִם' (shamayim) into English as a singular noun. The primary reason for this is syntactic agreement, where the singular verb 'created' and the singular noun 'earth' in Genesis 1:1 influence the translation of 'שָׁמַיִם'...

I appreciate your input, but quoting DBW is irrelevant. You're essentially reiterating the article's points. However, the article disregards the legitimate translation of masculine plural forms into English singulars. Notably, Daniel B. Wallace's Net Bible supports this translation approach, as...

Umm, a snippet view of the link you provided just give a snippet opinion and no documentation so far for any heberw grammatical rules. So my snippet view on the article of Genesis 1:1 is incorrect.. It is because the Heb word is plural it demands to be plural in the English language. A...

could you have a new one? Or are you willing to document Genesis 1:1? What are your thoughts why Kjb is in error? Thanks

Could you have a one or two examples of 10's of thousands documented changes? Thanks

Including this one were already taken in the many threads. Thanks