Where is the church
- Thread starter ForestGreenCook
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
They were regenerated before the day of Pentecost, otherwise they probably would not have even been there. Even Moses was born with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, Isaiah 63:11- Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of the flock? Where is he that put his Holy Spirit within him?
There is no wonder there is so much confusion. The men that have revised some of these versions of the bible are men who uphold eternal salvation by man's good works and others who have revised it to fit their personal interpretation of the scriptures, I was just assuming that the natural man as described in 1 Cor 2:14 would PROBABLY not be there if he thinks Peter's preaching is foolishness. Even the Jews that were pricked in their hearts were already born again and had been given a new fleshy heart that was soft enough to be pricked unlike those men who stoned Steven to death and were cut to the heart. Can you see the contrast in the heart of stone in the unregenerate and the fleshy heart of the regenerate?
-
1
- Show all
Another argument from silence. The Bible says nothing at all of this.
It's really better to build your soteriology on what the Bible DOES say rather than on what it doesn't.
It's really better to build your soteriology on what the Bible DOES say rather than on what it doesn't.
Hello, preacher4truth, I wondered how long you could hold out from replying to one of my posts. I do not mind defending by beliefs of how I interpret the scriptures with you, if you can keep it civil, in fact I would welcome it. Some of the versions has changed the wording in Gal 2:16 to read "that we might be justified by the faith { in } Christ" instead of the way the KJV words it as { of }, which takes it away from Christ and gives it to man. The changing of the wording of Isaiah 63:11 - changed from "within him" to "in the midst of them".
The KJV in Gal 2:16 says "by the faith [of] Jesus Christ and some versions have changed the word to [in] Jesus Christ. Making it man's faith instead of Jesus's faith (faithfulness to go to the cross). By your own admission your NASB version has changed the wording of Isaiah 63:11 from "within him" to "in the midst of them".
Fallacy: circular reasoning. The KJV is NOT the final authority on what the translation should be.
Quoting a verse from the KJV is not in any way supporting evidence for your slander. Here is your statement, for which I demand evidence: "The men that have revised some of these versions of the bible are men who uphold eternal salvation by man's good works and others who have revised it to fit their personal interpretation of the scriptures,"
Further, "in" is a legitimate rendering for the word translated "of" in Gal 2:16, logically and semantically. Only if you have an a priori belief that the word means "exercised by" will you reject this.
I did not admit that the NASB "changed the wording of Isaiah 63:11". I stated that the NASB has a different translation. Again, the KJV is not the standard.
Quoting a verse from the KJV is not in any way supporting evidence for your slander. Here is your statement, for which I demand evidence: "The men that have revised some of these versions of the bible are men who uphold eternal salvation by man's good works and others who have revised it to fit their personal interpretation of the scriptures,"
Further, "in" is a legitimate rendering for the word translated "of" in Gal 2:16, logically and semantically. Only if you have an a priori belief that the word means "exercised by" will you reject this.
I did not admit that the NASB "changed the wording of Isaiah 63:11". I stated that the NASB has a different translation. Again, the KJV is not the standard.
I have no need to retract any statements for any reason, because I have not made contradictory statements. Further, I have no need to back up every statement with Scripture, because many of my statements are a-scriptural, not anti-scriptural.
As to "name-calling", I didn't call you any "names" in my post. Perhaps you can't distinguish between criticism of you and criticism of your ideas. That's your problem, not mine.
As to "name-calling", I didn't call you any "names" in my post. Perhaps you can't distinguish between criticism of you and criticism of your ideas. That's your problem, not mine.
What do you think of Daniel's interpretation of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, especially vs 44? What kingdom did God set up in the days of the 10 toes, after the days of the 4 mighty kingdoms of the Babylonian Empire, the Achaemenid Empire, the Macedonian Empire and the Roman Empire?
Is this kingdom the same as his church? I have struggled with the timing of this kingdom for a long time. It seems that it was set up after the Roman Empire was gone, which means it had to be set up after 600ad. What kingdom or religion was set up after 600ad?
Daniel 2:44
44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
Nebuchadnezzar
Is this kingdom the same as his church? I have struggled with the timing of this kingdom for a long time. It seems that it was set up after the Roman Empire was gone, which means it had to be set up after 600ad. What kingdom or religion was set up after 600ad?
Daniel 2:44
44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
Nebuchadnezzar