Search results

How is a video about a specific relief ministry relevant to the thread topic?

The words used to define another word are not necessarily synonyms. Devotion and zeal are related concepts but are not synonymous. I said "JW's", not "Jews". The three I named are religions, not people groups. Your post adds nothing to your argument, and doesn't counter any of mine, so it is...

ResidentAlien nailed this one. I suspect the problem is more one of not knowing the context, rather than avoiding the context. As for divorcing the text from its context knowingly, I suppose that does happen, but it's probably rare. Yes, and yes.

Here's the rub: the KJV translators were not working from manuscripts at all, but from printed editions. ;)

None of which is relevant.

I considered that possibility several years ago and realized that if we held this qualification and actually applied it, many churches would have no leaders at all. It's rare when both are gifted for leadership. Certainly, the spouse must be a believer in good standing, but that's about it. I...

What "modernist, liberal scholars" think is not the issue. What Scripture says is. You have no business slandering people just because they happen to disagree with you... or with Knox. Further, there are other ways to interpret this passage. Yet they are encouraged to pray in chapter 11. If...

Never have I ever seen a grammatically acceptable but awkward phrase without wondering whether there is a less-awkward way of constructing it. But it's early, and I'm still working on my first coffee.

Wrong. Verses 1-3 are talking about the same people discussed in 9:30-33. 10:1 makes abundantly clear that Paul is talking about unbelieving Jews, as he writes "that they may be saved". One does not pray such a thing for those already saved. Again, wrong. Zeal is not devotion. They are loosely...

You have no idea what I know.

See my post #86. A thoughtful response would be appropriate.

While Romans was written to the believers in Rome, verses 1-3 were written about the unbelieving Jews, who believed that they obtained righteousness based on law (v. 5). Paul contrasts that with righteousness based on faith (vss. 6-13), which is what Christians have. Paul is not contrasting one...

You have that responsibility whether you want it or not. Your choice may be different than that of others, but it is your choice, nonetheless.

Thanks and likewise! Welcome to CC. :)

Your question is inherently fallacious. God didn't preserve "a Bible"; He preserved His word which is the Bible. The Bible is available in English in dozens of translations, and in thousands of translations into other languages. As with most KJV-onlyists, you overlook the importance of the...

Bahahahahaha! That you consider your version to contain a"fundamental teaching" that happens to exist only in the KJV should be ample evidence to you that it is neither fundamental nor valid. If it isn't in the original-language texts, it isn't a biblical teaching at all. Nobody except an...

They made a decent translation, which though certainly (and proveably) not "perfect", was adequate for the time. Now that we have access to thousands more manuscripts, it makes sense to use all available evidence and wisdom to determine not only which is the best English to render the original...

I usually disagree with the posts by the OP, but I took the time to read through the linked article (the first part, relevant to this thread) and it is spot-on.

(Your response to ResidendAlien's post) You cannot possibly prove that the KJV is the only correct one by using the KJV. All you can do is prove that it is different. Of course, if you are deluded by logical fallacies, you might erroneously think that your "proof" is valid.

Of yourself. You might borrow God's words, but only through a dense fog of arrogance and self-righteousness. Were you actually "of God", there would be humility and grace in your words. As it is, there is only judgment and condemnation.