Posted on 05/21/2006 2:04:31 PM PDT by Full Court
An enormous amount of faith and doctrine is available by studying the Blood of Christ.
John MacArthur's comments are indeed true in many aspects and for the believer in fellowship with Christ, may offer food for further understanding the Word of God by the work of the Holy Spirit.
The article's author quickly criticizes the person of MacArthur without comprehending the Scriptural references which he seeks to argue from a rationalistic perspective.
It's a bit ironic that the same critic who would seek to use Scripture to argue the point, fails to allow the Holy Spirit to furthur his grasp of doctrine regarding the Blood of Christ and its significance throughout Scripture in the very fashion John MacArthur attempts to illustrate.
Funny thing about faith. One either has it or they don't.
In the late 70s to mid eighties, there were quite a few doctrines touching upon the Blood of Christ, which also echoed the notes mentioned in this article.
Billy Graham, MacArthur, Thieme, and a number of DTS alumni shared that perspective that was very well reasoned and divinely guided.
I've noticed some Calvary Chapel ministries recently have lapsed into the reformed legalistic perspective that the blood is more materially significant than the life of Christ that was being sacrificed.
Do you ~really~ want to know what happens/happened to Kim?
thanks for the reminder!:)
Maybe because you got the extra-translational gizmos that we don't have...
It is real simple, resty. Here's a bible site: www.crosswalk.com
Go there. Type in Urim or Thummim and come back with the answers to the questions I've asked:
Color, shape/size, texture, of the Urim & Thummim.
Also, what size were they?
It is real simple, resty. Here's a bible site: www.crosswalk.com
Go there. Type in Urim or Thummim and come back with the answers to the questions I've asked:
Color, shape/size, texture, of the Urim & Thummim.
Also, what size were they?
Here's another one:
What is the bible verse that tells what the Urim & Thummim were made out of?
Amen.
Christians ought to check out how similiar a New World Translation is to the modern versions.
Same verses omitted, some changes.
1 2 3
1. Seer stone apparently used by Joseph Smith. Smith's widow Emma passed it on to relatives of her second husband, Lewis Bidamon. (Wilford Woodruff Museum)
2. Green seer stone owned by Utah pioneer Philo Dibble. Matches description of stone given to Joseph Smith by Jack Belcher in Pennsylvania in the 1820'
3. Stone of David Whitmer, who was a special witness to the Book of Mormon (LDS Photo Archives).
I'm looking for bible verses on: shape, color, size, texture, composition, etc.
Got any?
:>)
....Just because I happen to see those who in the past who said the Bible was Infallible, Inerrant, Verbally Inspired etc...now debating over which Bible is translated correctly or if any?
For this many want to contend over the LDS doctrine, instead of seeing one's own inconsistency!
Photo #1 & 2 are from the Avalonian Church
The Photo # 3 comes from an anti LDS site!
Its nothing more than a he says she says!
I was hoping to steer the thread into a discussion of the evils of POKEMON but that went nowhere.
This magic "Uma Thurman" Stones discussion is rather interesting. But someone told me that they don't want to hear a "peep" from me on this subject. That's ok, I use the Fred Flint Stones when I translate golden plates.
What are they afraid of, someone 'stealing' God's words or their own?
They were paid for the work that they did, but their goal was not to make money, but to make a work that glorified God. Technically we are all paid to do work which glorifies God, whether it be flipping hamburgers or preparing sermons. I suspect that many of the translators of modern translations had the same motives as those who translated the 1611 KJV. No better, no worse. Their motives were to faithfully translate the words from Hebrew or Greek to English. Are we to impugn their motives simply because they were called to study Hebrew and Greek in the 20th Century instead of the 17th?
What we are to impugn the motivation of those who would sell the word of God like it was a product ' get the newest, freshest, clearest, crispist translation ever'
I do not see the same motives that drove Luther, Tyndale, the Geneva, Valera, and the King James, because those men were serious about the word of God, they saw the battle over it.
As for studying Greek and Hebrew, that is not the problem.
The problem comes in the words they have removed from the Bible, to break the word references that God the Holy Spirit put there to grow
Moreover, you have men who do not believe in Biblical Preservation and are using man's 'wisdom' depend on corrupt texts, such as the Alexanderian.
Tyndale was hunted down like a criminal and killed for translating the correct text. His goal was not monetary profit, but love of the truth. If motivation is the principle test of a translation's worth, then why are we not using Tyndale's version instead of the KJV? Motivation is irrelevant. Accuracy of transmission is the principle goal. And I am not willing to impugn the motivations of people who have been called to study Hebrew and Greek in the 21st Century. I'm sure that many of these people would willingly lay their lives down for Christ as Tyndale did. You don't know until you are put to the test.
I am not using Tyndales Bible because that is not the one God gave me to use.
He gave me the King James.
Tyndales motivation is indicative of why God blesses a translation and doesn't bless another, like the modern versions that keep churning out.
As for those who would give their lives for God's words, many of these translators are not even Christian, like the Lesbian who was on the NIV style committee.
Yes, but the motivation should be the same in translating the Bible as it is in teaching the Bible, 'willingly, not for filthy lucre but of a ready mind' (1Pet.5:2) I suppose we could condemn wholesale the idea of a professional ministry. Especially if for some reason the minister made more money than a hamburger flipper who pays his tithes to support the minister.
I think we should condemn a minister who is in the ministry for the money.
I do not believe a minister should receive a salary since he is not a professional and should live on offerings which are grace.
Hi CC. You got here even before I pinged you. Are those the Fred Flint Stones?
Hey x-man, did you receive a salary for being a military chaplain?
I do not care what version of the bible you get the verses out of:
What bible verses tell the: color, shape, size, texture, composition, etc. of the Urim & Thummim?
Do you not know?
Does your bible not have it included?
Still do receive compensation for being a military chaplain.
And a housing allowance from the church I pastor.
LOL and that takes some mighty big stones, if you ask me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.