Search results

Thank you. So it looks like we may be in agreement here. Excellent! You quoted Matthew 24:13: But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. The word "endure" here in Matthew 24:13 is the same word in James 5:11, Strong's #5278 hupomenó, meaning "endured, endure, endures...

Yes, that's fair. And I understand your point about God speaking to Job. So here is one question regarding Job's story and its relationship to other Scripture: 1. What is your response to the words of the apostle James, and what James writes about Job in his epistle? James commends Job for...

This is how you wrote your statement: You wrote "after the second test" as if it's a comparison to before the second test. Well, God does not say anything *to* Job before the tests either, He only says things *about* him. It appears you are referring to when God saying Job is perfect and...

You're right. God actually says two good things about Job, not just one. Job 42:7,8 And so it was, after the Lord had spoken these words to Job, that the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite, “My wrath is aroused against you and your two friends, for you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My...

The text plainly states that Job is not suffering because of some sin that he had committed. I don't think it could be more clear. It should also not require any debate that Job is suffering unjustly and for NO fault of his own. How can anyone insist otherwise when God's testimony says the...

The subject being addressed is cause and effect. Cause and Effect is "the direct relationship between an action or event and its consequence or result. Do you understand this concept within the context of this story? When God says Job's suffering has arisen "without cause" He is saying that...

Yes. I did see your statements, and yes, I did address them. Yes. Did you read my responses? Did you address them? In Post #451 you wrote: In Post #452 I responded by characterizing this as an "untethered invention." In Post #453 you wrote: And in Post #455 you wrote: Then in Post #456...

Yes, I think you and I agree on the basics of this story, and I think we could have a healthy discussion about any differences or nuances each of us may have on a particular point. Would be happy to have that dialogue! One of the challenges I see at present on this thread, however, is the...

So let's look at what you have stated regarding the foundation of Job's story as laid out in chapters 1 & 2. In Post #450, you were asked if you accept the terms of the story as written in chapters 1 & 2, and if you accept God's testimony about Job, that his suffering arose "without cause" yes...

You didn't address how you rearranged the sequence of events in your version of the story. Why? "God's cause" vs. "satan's cause". Where are you getting this from? It's like some kind of clever invention or fancy footwork to suit a preconceived notion. No, actually, "without cause" is just...

Yeah, did you notice the sequence of events? satan challenges God about Job, then Job loses his possessions, then Job reacts to his loss (1:21). That’s the order. Then satan appears before God a second time, and God says: Job 2:3 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant...

Thank you. Whether you realize it or not, you have answered the question. No, you do not accept God’s testimony about Job. God says Job’s suffering is without cause, meaning Job committed no sin to incur it. Yet you say there is a cause, and that Job is to blame for his suffering because of...

Do you, or do you not, accept the terms of the story as written in chapters 1 & 2? Do you, or do you not, accept God’s testimony about Job? Before launching into the rest of the narrative with what and how Job suffers, do you, or do you not, accept that Job’s suffering came about “without cause”...

Like I said, you seem desperate to find fault where there is no fault. Your response here is more of the same. Yes, the Lamentations verses are strikingly similar. You’re right. But do you know what the difference is? The context. Context. We know why Judah suffers, don’t we? Jeremiah had...

The opposite of bless is not "bless not". The opposite of bless is curse. You seem desperate to find fault where there is no fault. It should not be ignored how Job is characterized by God, specifically as one who “fears God” and “shuns evil.” This is stated by the narrator of the story and...

I believe the word you meant to use was “there”, not “their”. It appears you use the KJV when quoting the bible. So what is your opinion about the KJV regarding Job 2:5? Job 2:5 KJV But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. What is...

So there is not one translation of that verse you can point to (outside of yourself) that supports your personal interpretation. Got it. Please tell us then, is it your view then that every English translation of that verse is wrong? Is that your position? Please explain.

Excellent. Job is not Jesus, but the parallels and similarities are striking, namely a blameless, innocent man who suffers. It appears God may have been using Job and his story as a foreshadowing of the Messiah to come later. And, of course, Job and his testimony are not the only narrative in...

Pretty sure this question was posed to you before, but here it is again. Is there any English translation you can point to that supports your personal view? Is there a translation you can share that shows the meaning of that verse to indicate that Job will “not bless” instead of “curse” God...

OK, nice, you found a verse about it, but let's not change the subject. The point about verbiage was about you comparing Moses' words with Job's words and injecting it into the story as some sort of qualifier for Job. You have superimposed this qualifier which is untethered from the story. This...