I know that I don`t always do as well as I would like...I know that I will have plenty to answer for myself if I ever get to meet Jesus face to face...missed opportunities for kindness, times I could have done more.....but one thing is for darned sure.....I sure as HECK am not afraid to stand by my posts at grease spot that are meerly talking about, and expressing my disgust at what vp and his hand picked leaders in twi actually DID to the innocents under their care :(
JC: When you did these things to the least of these people......you did them unto me...*Depart for I knew you not* sad.gif
I don`t think it is gonna be pretty.
Seems like you have forgotten that incorruptible seed is exactly that, incorruptible. Oh, but you don't believe he was born again of that incorruptible seed. I just think that it is hard for we mortals to know with a certainty what God himself will do later.
Seems like you have forgotten that incorruptible seed is exactly that, INCORRUPTIBLE. Oh, but you don't believe he was born again of that incorruptible seed.
I don't know if I can agree with the vey commentary on that verse anymore. It's an "escape clause" from supposed damnnation.
If one chooses to us the vicster's explanation of life, eternal life, and everything:
1. the vicster spoke in tongues * .
2. it's proof that he had the "spirit". +
3. the "spirit" is SEED, and incorruptible. &
If you accept what HE said as truth.. then on the inside, he was clean as the fresh snow..
* this is questionable, at best. Anybody can mutter some pretty weird sounding stuff. Maybe even make it sound like Swahili or something.
+ I consider it highly unlikely, on account of comments on *.
& I just plain don't agree. Too many other places suggest that God reserves the right to "yank it out".
* this is questionable, at best. Anybody can mutter some pretty weird sounding stuff. Maybe even make it sound like Swahili or something.
Speaking of "questionable muttering"........Isn't it interesting that wierwille admits to deceiving those Tulsa men at that conference when they tried to lead him into speaking in tongues and wierwille spoke in high German..??
Seems like you have forgotten that incorruptible seed is exactly that, incorruptible. Oh, but you don't believe he was born again of that incorruptible seed. I just think that it is hard for we mortals to know with a certainty what God himself will do later.
Edited to be nicer. :)
Jonny,
You've just struck on some of the heart in the verses preceding I Cor 3:17
Thank you for your response…Just thought I'd encapsulate your post – I look forward to you showing the following:
1. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts the previous verses [verses 5-16]
2. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts itself
T-Bone and doojabble,
Now that you've had a little time do look at this, do you see these contradictions yet?
Yikes, when I first read Corinthians, shortly after taking the class, and came across verse 17 it really bothered me. It just didn't fit at all. That same year I asked Walter about it, then re-searched the materials I could, and it was settled very quickly. NOW I love that verse!
I'm quite surprised, though.
I knew many grads had fallen short (myself included) in re-searching our collaterals, but this passage is in our KJVs. We were supposed to be studying that version (and others) prior to the completion of the collaterals.
But is seems that this passage, and it's connection to forgiveness, is not well known here.
Is there anyone here on this thread who re-searched their KJVs back then as well as they now research the demise of TWI?
There IS a verse on the Return to that effect. It's another verse hardly any grads knew about, or at least the ones I tried to talk to about it. This verse is I John 2:28. It's not exactly your warm and soothing Return of Christ verse, unless you've been hurt and need to know that God evens the score sooner or later.
This verse may apply to some posters here too, though, so be careful how much you want to see the verse happen. Can you imagine justifying your posts, each and every one, to Jesus Christ personally?
Mike,
I generally stay out of this stuff but I gotta tell you...that's just about the silliest thing I ever read in any post in any forum at any time...and I've seen some classics!
I generally stay out of this stuff but I gotta tell you...that's just about the silliest thing I ever read in any post in any forum at any time...and I've seen some classics!
Thanks for the laugh!!
Well Ron,
I guess you reject and laugh at this too:
Matthew 12
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.
34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.
36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.
I don't mean to tell you "when" to do anything.
You claim there are contradictions... I'd say the burden of proof is on you. You made the statement.
I don't believe that either T-Bone or I ever said we would be willing students to your tutelage... so the Socratic method is not applicable here.
No, no, doojabble. There's no burden here. It's easy.
The burden is for those folks who have NOT re-searched their KJVs but who are very diligent to research every nook and cranny of the TWI demise.
If you don't see the contradictions I mentioned with that verse it might possibly be because you did NOT word this passage long ago?
I have come to the conclusion that I know a LOT less than I ever thought I knew...
So, what I worked in the past is irrelevant to me. I don't even like the phrase, "work the Word" anymore... it seems to point to manipulation - like the way people "work a room," or "work people."
So, if you won't say what you think you know, then for me at least, this discussion is over.
The guy who claimed to have the mastery over the "contradictions" gave people problems worse than the contradictions themselves.
"faith" may be wonderful.. but let's see the "works".
Oh, speaking of contradictions, have you ever seen this?
Some sets, such as the set of all teacups, are not members of themselves. Other sets, such as the set of all non-teacups, are members of themselves. Call the set of all sets that are not members of themselves "R." If R is a member of itself, then by definition it must not be a member of itself. Similarly, if R is not a member of itself, then by definition it must be a member of itself.
Yes I have studied that extensively. The best writing on it I've seen in Rudy Rucker's "Infinity and the Mind." Russell's paradox is closely related to Godel's Theorem. The best I've seen on that is found in the Pulitzer Prize-winning "Godel, Escher, Bach" by Douglas Hofstadter.
The contradictions in I Corinthians 3 are illusory, stemming from erroneous mind pictures of the translators and one mistranslated word. With the proper translation of that word the contradictions easily disappear.
But the contradictions in Russel's paradox are not so easy.
Fairly recently I alluded to Russel's paradox in a post here. I mentioned that a graduate student put on the dedication page of his thesis: "This thesis is dedicated to all those students who do not dedicate their thesis to themselves." The paradox comes in asking if that particular graduate student included himself in that dedication... or not...
***
So, Ham, do YOU see the problem with verse 17? Had you worked ON this passage of Corinthians ever?
Long ago I assumed that all grads read their KJVs, and ESPECIALLY those epistles addressed to them. More and more I get the impression that many (or even most) posters here not only neglected their collaterals, but their KJVs as well.
these sets he spoke of were and are real, tangible things. It's pretty simple. A set is either a member of itself or it isn't.
you have the set of all dogs.. the set of all hydrogen nuclei.. the set of all salamanders..
either the whole set is a set of itself, or it isn't.
pretty simple..
so you tell me. Is the set of all sets not belonging to themselves in the set, or is it not?
It's the biblical stuff that's hard. How a "certain one" can corrupt the temple.. creep in "unawares"..
look genuine.. but he can't be "counterfiet".. he's a speakin da word.. hear? he even speaks in tongues.. but if he has the real spirit, why doesn' he live like it? but that doesn't make any difference. Debils can't speak in tongues. He can't be a counterfiet.. he's a sspeakin da word. But why doesn't he live it? Why does he abuse people worse than a tyrant? Naw.. that can't be right.. must be counterfiet..
see, it's even worse than Russel's Paradox. If he's a man-o-gawd, he CAN'T be a man-o-gawd..
on the other hand, if he's NOT a man-o-gawd, he must be..
Jonny, I don`t know what God will do...never claimed to.
In response to Mike`s exhortation...I tried to place myself in the situation where I had to answer to Jesus for what I had written here. I just took a passage of scriptures where Jesus was talking to people who desired entrance into the kingdom of heaven, and tried to adapt it to this scenario.
In the teaching, Jesus related how some were allowed entrance because they fed the hungry, gave the thirsty to drink, and visited those in he jails. Jesus said, that he *knew* them.
Some were told to depart, even though they pompously proclaimed to have cast out demons and prophesied in Jesus name...but when asked, admitted that they didn`t feed the hungry, give the thirsty to drink, visit those in jails.
Jesus didn`t ask em did they speak in tongues, did they say romans 10:9 & 10 He didn`t ask if they had studied to show themselves approved....how much they had tithed, didn`t forgive them...he just told them to get the heck out!
Yes I know, just another passage in the bible that needs to conveniently be ignored if we are to follow wiewilles doctrines. Galatians doesn`t say what we want, Mathew 25 is rather inconvenient, let`s tear em out of the bible.
Now that you've had a little time do look at this, do you see these contradictions yet?
Yikes, when I first read Corinthians, shortly after taking the class, and came across verse 17 it really bothered me. It just didn't fit at all. That same year I asked Walter about it, then re-searched the materials I could, and it was settled very quickly. NOW I love that verse!
I'm quite surprised, though.
I knew many grads had fallen short (myself included) in re-searching our collaterals, but this passage is in our KJVs. We were supposed to be studying that version (and others) prior to the completion of the collaterals.
But is seems that this passage, and it's connection to forgiveness, is not well known here.
Is there anyone here on this thread who re-searched their KJVs back then as well as they now research the demise of TWI?
Mike, YOU are the one who made the following claims:
T-Bone,
You missed it. How can verse 17 be a warm and soothing verse when it talks that way?
I'm often amazed at how so many grads are totally ignorant of this wonderful passage. When I first came across verse 17 it really bothered me. It seems to not only contradict the previous verses, it even seems to contradict itself!
Do you see it? Do you see the contradictions?
There's one word improperly translated in most versions that turn that verse from a warm and soothing one to a nasty, condemning SNL Church Lady verse. I hope someone here wants to see how this difficult KJV Corinthian passage is properly translated into a warm and soothing passage, and THEN how it furthers a deeper understanding of the Galatians verses so often flung about.
Therefore, YOU should present the research which YOU have implied YOU have already done to back up YOUR claim. Unless, you would like to revise YOUR claims or downgrade them to "unsubstantiated", pending your opportunity to solicit help from other folks – YOU need to address the following six items of my post # 398:
Thank you for your response…Just thought I'd encapsulate your post – I look forward to you showing the following:
1. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts the previous verses [verses 5-16]
2. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts itself
3. Identify the one improperly translated word in I Corinthians 3:17 and
4. Demonstrate the correct method of translating the passage
5. Explain how the correct translation you suggest - changes the tone of the verse from condemning to warm and soothing
6. Explain how I Corinthians 3:17 correctly translated by you, furthers a deeper understanding of Galatians 5
And since YOU have made another claim in YOUR post # 408 – I've revised the list to seven issues [your latest addition in post # 408 identified in bold red] – that YOU need to address with the research that YOU imply YOU have already done:
1. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts the previous verses [verses 5-16]
2. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts itself
3. Identify the one improperly translated word in I Corinthians 3:17 and
4. Demonstrate the correct method of translating the passage
5. Explain how the correct translation you suggest - changes the tone of the verse from condemning to warm and soothing
6. Explain how I Corinthians 3:17 correctly translated by you, furthers a deeper understanding of Galatians 5
7. Explain the connection to forgiveness in I Corinthians 3: 5-17.
I don't understand your reluctance to provide this information. I am merely responding to something you expressed in your post # 386:
Mike said
..I hope someone here wants to see how this difficult KJV Corinthian passage is properly translated into a warm and soothing passage, and THEN how it furthers a deeper understanding of the Galatians verses so often flung about...
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit
Darned tootin I have reason to suspect that wiewille was never born again, Jonny.....
20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
YO.........MIKE!............don't feel badly that ham has not yet answered your question from your post #419 on page 21 of this thread........or, your post #421 on page 22 of this thread.............i asked a number of questions of the poster who started this thread in my post #37 on page 2 of this thread.........got no answers yet!!..........as a matter of fact, all i got was a blatant lie.........."no link".........from nathan friedly's last post on this thread!..........so, in my post #72 on page 4 of this thread, i asked a bunch more questions........to this date, after over 350 more posts to this thread......i still have not gotten an answer to any of those questions!...........so, in my post #84 on page 5 of this thread, i asked some more questions...........to date, still no answers to any of them!...............so, in my post #200 on page 10 of this thread, i asked some more of the same questions.......to date, still no answers to any of them!............so,.......here we are on page 22 of this thread, some 200 plus posts since my last post, and, still.......not one answer to any of my questions!!............you're doing great so far with getting answers to your questions.........but you have not answered those posed to you by T-Bone and others just a page or two ago..........so........here's a couple more for ya.........
when jesus christ returns, with pfal book in hand (as you've taught us he will)......will the "standard" by which we will be held accountable for "every word" we speak be according to pfal?........what "word" or words will jesus christ use to judge us by?..........is jesus christ done "working and studying" pfal yet?..........is he using your tapes and transcripts, or just what twi published under vic's name?.............feel free to take another couple of hundred posts to answer my questions if you need to........but, please answer T-Bone's and Doojable's and Ham's first!..................thanks!...............peace.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
128
169
106
102
Popular Days
Feb 19
54
Feb 26
50
Feb 22
47
Apr 2
40
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 128 posts
Mike 169 posts
Ham 106 posts
waysider 102 posts
Popular Days
Feb 19 2008
54 posts
Feb 26 2008
50 posts
Feb 22 2008
47 posts
Apr 2 2008
40 posts
Posted Images
rascal
The above scenario was mostly tongue in cheek.
I know that I don`t always do as well as I would like...I know that I will have plenty to answer for myself if I ever get to meet Jesus face to face...missed opportunities for kindness, times I could have done more.....but one thing is for darned sure.....I sure as HECK am not afraid to stand by my posts at grease spot that are meerly talking about, and expressing my disgust at what vp and his hand picked leaders in twi actually DID to the innocents under their care :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I was just wondering where you got that line from and with what authority dies it stand, i.e., what text is that from.
...and also, brideofjc, do you see the KJV contradictions that I mentioned earlier.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Seems like you have forgotten that incorruptible seed is exactly that, incorruptible. Oh, but you don't believe he was born again of that incorruptible seed. I just think that it is hard for we mortals to know with a certainty what God himself will do later.
Edited to be nicer. :)
Edited by Jonny LingoLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I don't know if I can agree with the vey commentary on that verse anymore. It's an "escape clause" from supposed damnnation.
If one chooses to us the vicster's explanation of life, eternal life, and everything:
1. the vicster spoke in tongues * .
2. it's proof that he had the "spirit". +
3. the "spirit" is SEED, and incorruptible. &
If you accept what HE said as truth.. then on the inside, he was clean as the fresh snow..
* this is questionable, at best. Anybody can mutter some pretty weird sounding stuff. Maybe even make it sound like Swahili or something.
+ I consider it highly unlikely, on account of comments on *.
& I just plain don't agree. Too many other places suggest that God reserves the right to "yank it out".
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Speaking of "questionable muttering"........Isn't it interesting that wierwille admits to deceiving those Tulsa men at that conference when they tried to lead him into speaking in tongues and wierwille spoke in high German..??
Anyone remember that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Jonny,
You've just struck on some of the heart in the verses preceding I Cor 3:17
Cool!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
T-Bone and doojabble,
Now that you've had a little time do look at this, do you see these contradictions yet?
Yikes, when I first read Corinthians, shortly after taking the class, and came across verse 17 it really bothered me. It just didn't fit at all. That same year I asked Walter about it, then re-searched the materials I could, and it was settled very quickly. NOW I love that verse!
I'm quite surprised, though.
I knew many grads had fallen short (myself included) in re-searching our collaterals, but this passage is in our KJVs. We were supposed to be studying that version (and others) prior to the completion of the collaterals.
But is seems that this passage, and it's connection to forgiveness, is not well known here.
Is there anyone here on this thread who re-searched their KJVs back then as well as they now research the demise of TWI?
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
hmm. That is assuming a lot..
1. That we are mortal..
3. I think it is far easier for some to willfully ignore what God himself at least attributes to himself as "doing later".
I won't share "2."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Ham,
What God will do later is well documented in I Cor 3.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Mike - just keep your word. You said that you'd say what you thought the verse said - so do it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
You want to tell me when to do it...
I ask you now if you see the contradictions...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
Mike,
I generally stay out of this stuff but I gotta tell you...that's just about the silliest thing I ever read in any post in any forum at any time...and I've seen some classics!
Thanks for the laugh!!
Edited by Ron G.Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
I don't mean to tell you "when" to do anything.
You claim there are contradictions... I'd say the burden of proof is on you. You made the statement.
I don't believe that either T-Bone or I ever said we would be willing students to your tutelage... so the Socratic method is not applicable here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Well Ron,
I guess you reject and laugh at this too:
Matthew 12
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.
34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.
36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.
No, no, doojabble. There's no burden here. It's easy.
The burden is for those folks who have NOT re-searched their KJVs but who are very diligent to research every nook and cranny of the TWI demise.
If you don't see the contradictions I mentioned with that verse it might possibly be because you did NOT word this passage long ago?
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
I have come to the conclusion that I know a LOT less than I ever thought I knew...
So, what I worked in the past is irrelevant to me. I don't even like the phrase, "work the Word" anymore... it seems to point to manipulation - like the way people "work a room," or "work people."
So, if you won't say what you think you know, then for me at least, this discussion is over.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Did you ever read that section of Corinthians before?
Did you wonder over why that verse 17 seems to do a back flip?
Do you see NOW how that verse seems to contradict itself?
I Cor.3:17 (KJV)
If any man defile the temple of God,
him shall God destroy;
for the temple of God is holy,
which temple ye are.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
The guy who claimed to have the mastery over the "contradictions" gave people problems worse than the contradictions themselves.
"faith" may be wonderful.. but let's see the "works".
Oh, speaking of contradictions, have you ever seen this?
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell-paradox/
they say he wasn't exactly "right" after trying to deal with this little hole in reality..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Yes I have studied that extensively. The best writing on it I've seen in Rudy Rucker's "Infinity and the Mind." Russell's paradox is closely related to Godel's Theorem. The best I've seen on that is found in the Pulitzer Prize-winning "Godel, Escher, Bach" by Douglas Hofstadter.
The contradictions in I Corinthians 3 are illusory, stemming from erroneous mind pictures of the translators and one mistranslated word. With the proper translation of that word the contradictions easily disappear.
But the contradictions in Russel's paradox are not so easy.
Fairly recently I alluded to Russel's paradox in a post here. I mentioned that a graduate student put on the dedication page of his thesis: "This thesis is dedicated to all those students who do not dedicate their thesis to themselves." The paradox comes in asking if that particular graduate student included himself in that dedication... or not...
***
So, Ham, do YOU see the problem with verse 17? Had you worked ON this passage of Corinthians ever?
Long ago I assumed that all grads read their KJVs, and ESPECIALLY those epistles addressed to them. More and more I get the impression that many (or even most) posters here not only neglected their collaterals, but their KJVs as well.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Not easy? seems pretty obvious to me..
these sets he spoke of were and are real, tangible things. It's pretty simple. A set is either a member of itself or it isn't.
you have the set of all dogs.. the set of all hydrogen nuclei.. the set of all salamanders..
either the whole set is a set of itself, or it isn't.
pretty simple..
so you tell me. Is the set of all sets not belonging to themselves in the set, or is it not?
It's the biblical stuff that's hard. How a "certain one" can corrupt the temple.. creep in "unawares"..
look genuine.. but he can't be "counterfiet".. he's a speakin da word.. hear? he even speaks in tongues.. but if he has the real spirit, why doesn' he live like it? but that doesn't make any difference. Debils can't speak in tongues. He can't be a counterfiet.. he's a sspeakin da word. But why doesn't he live it? Why does he abuse people worse than a tyrant? Naw.. that can't be right.. must be counterfiet..
see, it's even worse than Russel's Paradox. If he's a man-o-gawd, he CAN'T be a man-o-gawd..
on the other hand, if he's NOT a man-o-gawd, he must be..
Edited by HamLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Ham,
You didn't answer my question.
Did you ever work on understanding I Cor 3 ?
Is this new material to you, too?
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Jonny, I don`t know what God will do...never claimed to.
In response to Mike`s exhortation...I tried to place myself in the situation where I had to answer to Jesus for what I had written here. I just took a passage of scriptures where Jesus was talking to people who desired entrance into the kingdom of heaven, and tried to adapt it to this scenario.
In the teaching, Jesus related how some were allowed entrance because they fed the hungry, gave the thirsty to drink, and visited those in he jails. Jesus said, that he *knew* them.
Some were told to depart, even though they pompously proclaimed to have cast out demons and prophesied in Jesus name...but when asked, admitted that they didn`t feed the hungry, give the thirsty to drink, visit those in jails.
Jesus didn`t ask em did they speak in tongues, did they say romans 10:9 & 10 He didn`t ask if they had studied to show themselves approved....how much they had tithed, didn`t forgive them...he just told them to get the heck out!
Yes I know, just another passage in the bible that needs to conveniently be ignored if we are to follow wiewilles doctrines. Galatians doesn`t say what we want, Mathew 25 is rather inconvenient, let`s tear em out of the bible.
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Mike, YOU are the one who made the following claims:
Therefore, YOU should present the research which YOU have implied YOU have already done to back up YOUR claim. Unless, you would like to revise YOUR claims or downgrade them to "unsubstantiated", pending your opportunity to solicit help from other folks – YOU need to address the following six items of my post # 398:
And since YOU have made another claim in YOUR post # 408 – I've revised the list to seven issues [your latest addition in post # 408 identified in bold red] – that YOU need to address with the research that YOU imply YOU have already done:
1. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts the previous verses [verses 5-16]
2. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts itself
3. Identify the one improperly translated word in I Corinthians 3:17 and
4. Demonstrate the correct method of translating the passage
5. Explain how the correct translation you suggest - changes the tone of the verse from condemning to warm and soothing
6. Explain how I Corinthians 3:17 correctly translated by you, furthers a deeper understanding of Galatians 5
7. Explain the connection to forgiveness in I Corinthians 3: 5-17.
I don't understand your reluctance to provide this information. I am merely responding to something you expressed in your post # 386:
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Mathew 17 is rather inconvenient as well...
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit
Darned tootin I have reason to suspect that wiewille was never born again, Jonny.....
20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Things look bleak for wierwille and his buddies.
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
YO.........MIKE!............don't feel badly that ham has not yet answered your question from your post #419 on page 21 of this thread........or, your post #421 on page 22 of this thread.............i asked a number of questions of the poster who started this thread in my post #37 on page 2 of this thread.........got no answers yet!!..........as a matter of fact, all i got was a blatant lie.........."no link".........from nathan friedly's last post on this thread!..........so, in my post #72 on page 4 of this thread, i asked a bunch more questions........to this date, after over 350 more posts to this thread......i still have not gotten an answer to any of those questions!...........so, in my post #84 on page 5 of this thread, i asked some more questions...........to date, still no answers to any of them!...............so, in my post #200 on page 10 of this thread, i asked some more of the same questions.......to date, still no answers to any of them!............so,.......here we are on page 22 of this thread, some 200 plus posts since my last post, and, still.......not one answer to any of my questions!!............you're doing great so far with getting answers to your questions.........but you have not answered those posed to you by T-Bone and others just a page or two ago..........so........here's a couple more for ya.........
when jesus christ returns, with pfal book in hand (as you've taught us he will)......will the "standard" by which we will be held accountable for "every word" we speak be according to pfal?........what "word" or words will jesus christ use to judge us by?..........is jesus christ done "working and studying" pfal yet?..........is he using your tapes and transcripts, or just what twi published under vic's name?.............feel free to take another couple of hundred posts to answer my questions if you need to........but, please answer T-Bone's and Doojable's and Ham's first!..................thanks!...............peace.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.