- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi Mike
I found the “ra” word. Yes it means evil in Hebrew, and translated into different words, …but according to the context. So I agree it does not mean sun god!
I found this good article by Karl Simms, but could not copy and paste.
Whilst I was reading it, my computer froze. It could not handle it.
If it's doing this to my computer, imagine what it does to my brain? I've been on this for hours now and still have not answered you because I lost everything. I will get back to you when I am less frustrated.Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 29 2013,10:15) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 29 2013,13:10) Journey, A Lexicon is basically a dictionary.
KerwinIt's a lot harder for me to use than just a dictionary.
Journey,The online ones have a lot of other tools linked to it that it took me a bit to start using. I still do not use many of them as I see no need.
Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 28 2013,22:33) Hi Mike I found the “ra” word. Yes it means evil in Hebrew, and translated into different words, …but according to the context. So I agree it does not mean sun god!
I found this good article by Karl Simms, but could not copy and paste.
Whilst I was reading it, my computer froze. It could not handle it.
If it's doing this to my computer, imagine what it does to my brain? I've been on this for hours now and still have not answered you because I lost everything. I will get back to you when I am less frustrated.
I'm sorry your post got buggered up. I've worked for hours on a post before – only to lose it before I could post it. That's why I don't do the long posts as much anymore.The bottom line is that you've discovered that “ra” is indeed a Hebrew word – and that ONE of it's meanings is “evil”. Now look at all the OTHER meanings of the word….. meanings that the KJV itself uses MANY times in other verses. Then tell me that “evil” is the ONLY way the KJV could have translated “ra” in Isaiah 45:7.
If you can say “evil” was the ONLY CHOICE the KJV had in 45:7, then you are only fooling yourself. The rest of us aren't buying it, and know in our hearts that God never “created evil”. It is a flawed translation by the KJV – which is why even the NKJV changes it.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 30 2013,01:30) Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 28 2013,22:33) Hi Mike I found the “ra” word. Yes it means evil in Hebrew, and translated into different words, …but according to the context. So I agree it does not mean sun god!
I found this good article by Karl Simms, but could not copy and paste.
Whilst I was reading it, my computer froze. It could not handle it.
If it's doing this to my computer, imagine what it does to my brain? I've been on this for hours now and still have not answered you because I lost everything. I will get back to you when I am less frustrated.
I'm sorry your post got buggered up. I've worked for hours on a post before – only to lose it before I could post it. That's why I don't do the long posts as much anymore.The bottom line is that you've discovered that “ra” is indeed a Hebrew word – and that ONE of it's meanings is “evil”. Now look at all the OTHER meanings of the word….. meanings that the KJV itself uses MANY times in other verses. Then tell me that “evil” is the ONLY way the KJV could have translated “ra” in Isaiah 45:7.
If you can say “evil” was the ONLY CHOICE the KJV had in 45:7, then you are only fooling yourself. The rest of us aren't buying it, and know in our hearts that God never “created evil”. It is a flawed translation by the KJV – which is why even the NKJV changes it.
Mike,I suspicion “peace” is the wrong word as well since the result according to context is that the two words have opposite meaning therefore covering the full range of God's abilities in that aspect.
I don't understand, Kerwin. I realize God is contrasting opposites, but why isn't “peace” opposite of “calamity”, or “trouble”?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 30 2013,03:40) I don't understand, Kerwin. I realize God is contrasting opposites, but why isn't “peace” opposite of “calamity”, or “trouble”?
Mike,I only checked evil but I cannot think of a meaning of peace they would be the opposite of calamity. Maybe trouble.
Trouble would work as a disturbance of the peace when peace means the equivalent to a land without war.
Trouble is among the near antonyms of the first definition of peace in the Merriam-Webster online thesaurus though I did not find peace among the antonyms of trouble.
Quote a state without war
Synonyms peacefulness
Related Words accord, amity, concord, harmony; calm, quiet, serenity, tranquillity (or tranquility); order, stability; pacification
Near Antonyms conflict, contention, discord, dissidence, strife, trouble; tumult, turmoil, unrest, upheaval; fighting, warfare; action, battle, combat
Antonyms warNote: It is not my preferred definition of peace but it works and the result is true.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 30 2013,10:06) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 30 2013,03:40) I don't understand, Kerwin. I realize God is contrasting opposites, but why isn't “peace” opposite of “calamity”, or “trouble”?
Mike,I only checked evil but I cannot think of a meaning of peace they would be the opposite of calamity. Maybe trouble.
Trouble would work as a disturbance of the peace when peace means the equivalent to a land without war.
Trouble is among the near antonyms of the first definition of peace in the Merriam-Webster online thesaurus though I did not find peace among the antonyms of trouble.
Quote a state without war
Synonyms peacefulness
Related Words accord, amity, concord, harmony; calm, quiet, serenity, tranquillity (or tranquility); order, stability; pacification
Near Antonyms conflict, contention, discord, dissidence, strife, trouble; tumult, turmoil, unrest, upheaval; fighting, warfare; action, battle, combat
Antonyms warNote: It is not my preferred definition of peace but it works and the result is true.
You guys should study *phrontistery*(wordology).
instead of the bible.wakeup.
Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 30 2013,07:03) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 30 2013,10:06) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 30 2013,03:40) I don't understand, Kerwin. I realize God is contrasting opposites, but why isn't “peace” opposite of “calamity”, or “trouble”?
Mike,I only checked evil but I cannot think of a meaning of peace they would be the opposite of calamity. Maybe trouble.
Trouble would work as a disturbance of the peace when peace means the equivalent to a land without war.
Trouble is among the near antonyms of the first definition of peace in the Merriam-Webster online thesaurus though I did not find peace among the antonyms of trouble.
Quote a state without war
Synonyms peacefulness
Related Words accord, amity, concord, harmony; calm, quiet, serenity, tranquillity (or tranquility); order, stability; pacification
Near Antonyms conflict, contention, discord, dissidence, strife, trouble; tumult, turmoil, unrest, upheaval; fighting, warfare; action, battle, combat
Antonyms warNote: It is not my preferred definition of peace but it works and the result is true.
You guys should study *phrontistery*(wordology).
instead of the bible.wakeup.
Wakeup,You should learn the language so you can understand Scripture that is written in it.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 30 2013,13:50) Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 30 2013,07:03) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 30 2013,10:06) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 30 2013,03:40) I don't understand, Kerwin. I realize God is contrasting opposites, but why isn't “peace” opposite of “calamity”, or “trouble”?
Mike,I only checked evil but I cannot think of a meaning of peace they would be the opposite of calamity. Maybe trouble.
Trouble would work as a disturbance of the peace when peace means the equivalent to a land without war.
Trouble is among the near antonyms of the first definition of peace in the Merriam-Webster online thesaurus though I did not find peace among the antonyms of trouble.
Quote a state without war
Synonyms peacefulness
Related Words accord, amity, concord, harmony; calm, quiet, serenity, tranquillity (or tranquility); order, stability; pacification
Near Antonyms conflict, contention, discord, dissidence, strife, trouble; tumult, turmoil, unrest, upheaval; fighting, warfare; action, battle, combat
Antonyms warNote: It is not my preferred definition of peace but it works and the result is true.
You guys should study *phrontistery*(wordology).
instead of the bible.wakeup.
Wakeup,You should learn the language so you can understand Scripture that is written in it.
Kerwin.You should read the hebrew, latin, and greek bible and leave alone the engilsh. For old english is hard for you to understand.
Maybe the new age bible would suit your spirit.wakeup.
But what do you think about the FACTS journey has recently uncovered from the lexicons, Wakeup?
Don't you admit that it's a little cool that we today can, with the click of a mouse, look at all the information about the Hebrew words that the KJV scholars had? (Actually, we can today see even MORE information about those words than the KJV scholars had when they produced the KJV.) Isn't that wonderful? Isn't God great for preserving this information for us – so each and every one of us can uncover the real truth of the scriptures – without relying on the CHOICES of English translators?
I think it's purely the work of God that we are in this incredible position today. We know longer have to just accept that God created evil because certain men in 1611 said He did. We can see with our own eyes the various other things the Hebrew word “ra” can mean, and the various other ways even the KJV scholars translated that same word in other verses. We can see that they translated that same word as “adversity”, “trouble”, and “affliction” – among many other things. And seeing this allows us to KNOW that it was merely the CHOICE of these mere men to translate it as “God created evil” in Isaiah 45:7. And knowing that it was merely their CHOICE allows us to either accept or reject that CHOICE…….. because we have access to all the other ways it could have been translated in that verse.
There are no longer any scholars who translate that word as “evil” in Isaiah 45:7 – not even the NKJV, which uses “calamity” instead of “evil”.
And I would bet dollars to dimes that, given the chance and the knowledge we have today, those original KJV scholars would also repent from that damaging translation they made, and render it as “calamity” or “trouble”.
But whether or not you agree with that last statement, or even if “evil” is the wrong translation in Isaiah 45:7, you must at least know by now that there were other choices for the translation of that Hebrew word. And surely you now know enough to see how easy it is for false doctrines to be built upon flawed translations of the Hebrew and Greek words.
All of us can see the false doctrines that are built on, and supported by, the flawed translations in some of the newer Trinitarian Bibles, right?
The difference is that your brain allows you to see the flaws in the current translations – but won't allow you to accept the possibility that perhaps the men who produced the KJV were also fallible.
That is a close-minded view, Wakeup. What it amounts to is you saying that all other translators in the world are fallible men, but for some reason, the men who produced the KJV were infallible, and incapable of making even the slightest error.
It's like you put these mere men on a pedestal, and forget that they were, in fact, mere fallible men.
Why do you do that?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 01 2013,03:36) But what do you think about the FACTS journey has recently uncovered from the lexicons, Wakeup? Don't you admit that it's a little cool that we today can, with the click of a mouse, look at all the information about the Hebrew words that the KJV scholars had? (Actually, we can today see even MORE information about those words than the KJV scholars had when they produced the KJV.) Isn't that wonderful? Isn't God great for preserving this information for us – so each and every one of us can uncover the real truth of the scriptures – without relying on the CHOICES of English translators?
I think it's purely the work of God that we are in this incredible position today. We know longer have to just accept that God created evil because certain men in 1611 said He did. We can see with our own eyes the various other things the Hebrew word “ra” can mean, and the various other ways even the KJV scholars translated that same word in other verses. We can see that they translated that same word as “adversity”, “trouble”, and “affliction” – among many other things. And seeing this allows us to KNOW that it was merely the CHOICE of these mere men to translate it as “God created evil” in Isaiah 45:7. And knowing that it was merely their CHOICE allows us to either accept or reject that CHOICE…….. because we have access to all the other ways it could have been translated in that verse.
There are no longer any scholars who translate that word as “evil” in Isaiah 45:7 – not even the NKJV, which uses “calamity” instead of “evil”.
And I would bet dollars to dimes that, given the chance and the knowledge we have today, those original KJV scholars would also repent from that damaging translation they made, and render it as “calamity” or “trouble”.
But whether or not you agree with that last statement, or even if “evil” is the wrong translation in Isaiah 45:7, you must at least know by now that there were other choices for the translation of that Hebrew word. And surely you now know enough to see how easy it is for false doctrines to be built upon flawed translations of the Hebrew and Greek words.
All of us can see the false doctrines that are built on, and supported by, the flawed translations in some of the newer Trinitarian Bibles, right?
The difference is that your brain allows you to see the flaws in the current translations – but won't allow you to accept the possibility that perhaps the men who produced the KJV were also fallible.
That is a close-minded view, Wakeup. What it amounts to is you saying that all other translators in the world are fallible men, but for some reason, the men who produced the KJV were infallible, and incapable of making even the slightest error.
It's like you put these mere men on a pedestal, and forget that they were, in fact, mere fallible men.
Why do you do that?
Mike B.Why was my question not answered'.
By you or kerwin,cant remember.1.Who created satan?(who made the axe)?
2.Who started the great flood?
3.With all the technology today;why are there more
denominations?
4. Why more confusion?
5.Why more divisions?
6.Is the christian world upgrading or degrading?
7.Is the falling away not coming?
8.Is the land not desolate? The rivers (spiritually) has gone
dry.Why should I put any man on a pedestal?
The praise should Go to God,for looking after his Word to be preserved.wakeup.
Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 30 2013,23:52) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 01 2013,03:36) But what do you think about the FACTS journey has recently uncovered from the lexicons, Wakeup? Don't you admit that it's a little cool that we today can, with the click of a mouse, look at all the information about the Hebrew words that the KJV scholars had? (Actually, we can today see even MORE information about those words than the KJV scholars had when they produced the KJV.) Isn't that wonderful? Isn't God great for preserving this information for us – so each and every one of us can uncover the real truth of the scriptures – without relying on the CHOICES of English translators?
I think it's purely the work of God that we are in this incredible position today. We know longer have to just accept that God created evil because certain men in 1611 said He did. We can see with our own eyes the various other things the Hebrew word “ra” can mean, and the various other ways even the KJV scholars translated that same word in other verses. We can see that they translated that same word as “adversity”, “trouble”, and “affliction” – among many other things. And seeing this allows us to KNOW that it was merely the CHOICE of these mere men to translate it as “God created evil” in Isaiah 45:7. And knowing that it was merely their CHOICE allows us to either accept or reject that CHOICE…….. because we have access to all the other ways it could have been translated in that verse.
There are no longer any scholars who translate that word as “evil” in Isaiah 45:7 – not even the NKJV, which uses “calamity” instead of “evil”.
And I would bet dollars to dimes that, given the chance and the knowledge we have today, those original KJV scholars would also repent from that damaging translation they made, and render it as “calamity” or “trouble”.
But whether or not you agree with that last statement, or even if “evil” is the wrong translation in Isaiah 45:7, you must at least know by now that there were other choices for the translation of that Hebrew word. And surely you now know enough to see how easy it is for false doctrines to be built upon flawed translations of the Hebrew and Greek words.
All of us can see the false doctrines that are built on, and supported by, the flawed translations in some of the newer Trinitarian Bibles, right?
The difference is that your brain allows you to see the flaws in the current translations – but won't allow you to accept the possibility that perhaps the men who produced the KJV were also fallible.
That is a close-minded view, Wakeup. What it amounts to is you saying that all other translators in the world are fallible men, but for some reason, the men who produced the KJV were infallible, and incapable of making even the slightest error.
It's like you put these mere men on a pedestal, and forget that they were, in fact, mere fallible men.
Why do you do that?
Mike B.Why was my question not answered'.
By you or kerwin,cant remember.1.Who created satan?(who made the axe)?
2.Who started the great flood?
3.With all the technology today;why are there more
denominations?
4. Why more confusion?
5.Why more divisions?
6.Is the christian world upgrading or degrading?
7.Is the falling away not coming?
8.Is the land not desolate? The rivers (spiritually) has gone
dry.Why should I put any man on a pedestal?
The praise should Go to God,for looking after his Word to be preserved.wakeup.
Wakeup,I did answer you but many of these questions are new.
As to the answer of those new questions, before the coming of the Roman empire's state church there were many denomination which each man teaching his own doctrine. Catholic basically means universal and comes from the Greek words “kata”, which means, “with respect to” and “holos”, which means “whole”. From what I can seen, the Catholic Church had no real way to enforce its authority before the government of the Roman empire ,and their heirs, became it enforcer. Many considered heretics were killed, imprisoned, exiled, by the governments zeal. The governments have slowly stopped being the enforcer and with that lack of enforcement sects have been allowed to either break off or form independently. At the same time the world population grew and thus the number of sects also grew in relation to that growth.
Despite all of this there is but one true sect and one true teaching.
Note: Google gave me the ethmology of the word Catholic when I did a search for it.
I answered him too, Kerwin. In fact, I answer his #1 in the other thread, asked him a subsequent question about whether or not “night/darkness” was “evil” – and he answered “NO”.
So his point was null for #1, and then I answered his #2 and asked a subsequent question.
I have not heard back from him about it since.
Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 30 2013,11:52) Why should I put any man on a pedestal?
You shouldn't. So why DO you do it with the MEN who produced the KJV – as if they, being mere men like us, were unable to make a mistake?Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 01 2013,05:36) Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 30 2013,11:52) Why should I put any man on a pedestal?
You shouldn't. So why DO you do it with the MEN who produced the KJV – as if they, being mere men like us, were unable to make a mistake?
Mike B.You believe the gospels.
Are you putting the apostles on a pedestal?wakeup.
Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 01 2013,05:21) Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 30 2013,23:52) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 01 2013,03:36) But what do you think about the FACTS journey has recently uncovered from the lexicons, Wakeup? Don't you admit that it's a little cool that we today can, with the click of a mouse, look at all the information about the Hebrew words that the KJV scholars had? (Actually, we can today see even MORE information about those words than the KJV scholars had when they produced the KJV.) Isn't that wonderful? Isn't God great for preserving this information for us – so each and every one of us can uncover the real truth of the scriptures – without relying on the CHOICES of English translators?
I think it's purely the work of God that we are in this incredible position today. We know longer have to just accept that God created evil because certain men in 1611 said He did. We can see with our own eyes the various other things the Hebrew word “ra” can mean, and the various other ways even the KJV scholars translated that same word in other verses. We can see that they translated that same word as “adversity”, “trouble”, and “affliction” – among many other things. And seeing this allows us to KNOW that it was merely the CHOICE of these mere men to translate it as “God created evil” in Isaiah 45:7. And knowing that it was merely their CHOICE allows us to either accept or reject that CHOICE…….. because we have access to all the other ways it could have been translated in that verse.
There are no longer any scholars who translate that word as “evil” in Isaiah 45:7 – not even the NKJV, which uses “calamity” instead of “evil”.
And I would bet dollars to dimes that, given the chance and the knowledge we have today, those original KJV scholars would also repent from that damaging translation they made, and render it as “calamity” or “trouble”.
But whether or not you agree with that last statement, or even if “evil” is the wrong translation in Isaiah 45:7, you must at least know by now that there were other choices for the translation of that Hebrew word. And surely you now know enough to see how easy it is for false doctrines to be built upon flawed translations of the Hebrew and Greek words.
All of us can see the false doctrines that are built on, and supported by, the flawed translations in some of the newer Trinitarian Bibles, right?
The difference is that your brain allows you to see the flaws in the current translations – but won't allow you to accept the possibility that perhaps the men who produced the KJV were also fallible.
That is a close-minded view, Wakeup. What it amounts to is you saying that all other translators in the world are fallible men, but for some reason, the men who produced the KJV were infallible, and incapable of making even the slightest error.
It's like you put these mere men on a pedestal, and forget that they were, in fact, mere fallible men.
Why do you do that?
Mike B.Why was my question not answered'.
By you or kerwin,cant remember.1.Who created satan?(who made the axe)?
2.Who started the great flood?
3.With all the technology today;why are there more
denominations?
4. Why more confusion?
5.Why more divisions?
6.Is the christian world upgrading or degrading?
7.Is the falling away not coming?
8.Is the land not desolate? The rivers (spiritually) has gone
dry.Why should I put any man on a pedestal?
The praise should Go to God,for looking after his Word to be preserved.wakeup.
Wakeup,I did answer you but many of these questions are new.
As to the answer of those new questions, before the coming of the Roman empire's state church there were many denomination which each man teaching his own doctrine. Catholic basically means universal and comes from the Greek words “kata”, which means, “with respect to” and “holos”, which means “whole”. From what I can seen, the Catholic Church had no real way to enforce its authority before the government of the Roman empire ,and their heirs, became it enforcer. Many considered heretics were killed, imprisoned, exiled, by the governments zeal. The governments have slowly stopped being the enforcer and with that lack of enforcement sects have been allowed to either break off or form independently. At the same time the world population grew and thus the number of sects also grew in relation to that growth.
Despite all of this there is but one true sect and one true teaching.
Note: Google gave me the ethmology of the word Catholic when I did a search for it.
Kerwin.1.WHO CREATED SATAN?
2.Is the christian world today better than yesterday?
3.is the falling away coming or not?wakeup.
Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 30 2013,12:25) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 30 2013,13:50) Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 30 2013,07:03) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 30 2013,10:06) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 30 2013,03:40) I don't understand, Kerwin. I realize God is contrasting opposites, but why isn't “peace” opposite of “calamity”, or “trouble”?
Mike,I only checked evil but I cannot think of a meaning of peace they would be the opposite of calamity. Maybe trouble.
Trouble would work as a disturbance of the peace when peace means the equivalent to a land without war.
Trouble is among the near antonyms of the first definition of peace in the Merriam-Webster online thesaurus though I did not find peace among the antonyms of trouble.
Quote a state without war
Synonyms peacefulness
Related Words accord, amity, concord, harmony; calm, quiet, serenity, tranquillity (or tranquility); order, stability; pacification
Near Antonyms conflict, contention, discord, dissidence, strife, trouble; tumult, turmoil, unrest, upheaval; fighting, warfare; action, battle, combat
Antonyms warNote: It is not my preferred definition of peace but it works and the result is true.
You guys should study *phrontistery*(wordology).
instead of the bible.wakeup.
Wakeup,You should learn the language so you can understand Scripture that is written in it.
Kerwin.You should read the hebrew, latin, and greek bible and leave alone the engilsh. For old english is hard for you to understand.
Maybe the new age bible would suit your spirit.wakeup.
Wakeup,The Authorized King James Version does not use English as if it was really the original Authorized King James Version it was still written to late. It is not the original version but a version a more recent version that has at least one more source.
Never the less you do not understand the English version that it uses much less the foreign language it is based on or ways of speaking it uses and you refuse to learn how to understand them. From what I have observed, you do not even want to hear five words with understanding, much less the whole of Scripture.
I just do not see you in any way testing those things you want to hear or those thing agree with them and you do not even really test those you do not want to hear but reject them without cause.
Quote (Wakeup @ Dec. 01 2013,00:51) Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 01 2013,05:21) Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 30 2013,23:52) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 01 2013,03:36) But what do you think about the FACTS journey has recently uncovered from the lexicons, Wakeup? Don't you admit that it's a little cool that we today can, with the click of a mouse, look at all the information about the Hebrew words that the KJV scholars had? (Actually, we can today see even MORE information about those words than the KJV scholars had when they produced the KJV.) Isn't that wonderful? Isn't God great for preserving this information for us – so each and every one of us can uncover the real truth of the scriptures – without relying on the CHOICES of English translators?
I think it's purely the work of God that we are in this incredible position today. We know longer have to just accept that God created evil because certain men in 1611 said He did. We can see with our own eyes the various other things the Hebrew word “ra” can mean, and the various other ways even the KJV scholars translated that same word in other verses. We can see that they translated that same word as “adversity”, “trouble”, and “affliction” – among many other things. And seeing this allows us to KNOW that it was merely the CHOICE of these mere men to translate it as “God created evil” in Isaiah 45:7. And knowing that it was merely their CHOICE allows us to either accept or reject that CHOICE…….. because we have access to all the other ways it could have been translated in that verse.
There are no longer any scholars who translate that word as “evil” in Isaiah 45:7 – not even the NKJV, which uses “calamity” instead of “evil”.
And I would bet dollars to dimes that, given the chance and the knowledge we have today, those original KJV scholars would also repent from that damaging translation they made, and render it as “calamity” or “trouble”.
But whether or not you agree with that last statement, or even if “evil” is the wrong translation in Isaiah 45:7, you must at least know by now that there were other choices for the translation of that Hebrew word. And surely you now know enough to see how easy it is for false doctrines to be built upon flawed translations of the Hebrew and Greek words.
All of us can see the false doctrines that are built on, and supported by, the flawed translations in some of the newer Trinitarian Bibles, right?
The difference is that your brain allows you to see the flaws in the current translations – but won't allow you to accept the possibility that perhaps the men who produced the KJV were also fallible.
That is a close-minded view, Wakeup. What it amounts to is you saying that all other translators in the world are fallible men, but for some reason, the men who produced the KJV were infallible, and incapable of making even the slightest error.
It's like you put these mere men on a pedestal, and forget that they were, in fact, mere fallible men.
Why do you do that?
Mike B.Why was my question not answered'.
By you or kerwin,cant remember.1.Who created satan?(who made the axe)?
2.Who started the great flood?
3.With all the technology today;why are there more
denominations?
4. Why more confusion?
5.Why more divisions?
6.Is the christian world upgrading or degrading?
7.Is the falling away not coming?
8.Is the land not desolate? The rivers (spiritually) has gone
dry.Why should I put any man on a pedestal?
The praise should Go to God,for looking after his Word to be preserved.wakeup.
Wakeup,I did answer you but many of these questions are new.
As to the answer of those new questions, before the coming of the Roman empire's state church there were many denomination which each man teaching his own doctrine. Catholic basically means universal and comes from the Greek words “kata”, which means, “with respect to” and “holos”, which means “whole”. From what I can seen, the Catholic Church had no real way to enforce its authority before the government of the Roman empire ,and their heirs, became it enforcer. Many considered heretics were killed, imprisoned, exiled, by the governments zeal. The governments have slowly stopped being the enforcer and with that lack of enforcement sects have been allowed to either break off or form independently. At the same time the world population grew and thus the number of sects also grew in relation to that growth.
Despite all of this there is but one true sect and one true teaching.
Note: Google gave me the ethmology of the word Catholic when I did a search for it.
Kerwin.1.WHO CREATED SATAN?
2.Is the christian world today better than yesterday?
3.is the falling away coming or not?wakeup.
Wakeup,Yes, God created Satan and then Satan chose to sin.
I cannot say I know anyone who does more than claim to be a Christian. There are a remnant that appear to strive.
The falling away happened long before my time. I do not know the date as the only ones I know are Christians in spirit are those recorded in Scripture.
Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 01 2013,06:09) Quote (Wakeup @ Dec. 01 2013,00:51) Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 01 2013,05:21) Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 30 2013,23:52) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 01 2013,03:36) But what do you think about the FACTS journey has recently uncovered from the lexicons, Wakeup? Don't you admit that it's a little cool that we today can, with the click of a mouse, look at all the information about the Hebrew words that the KJV scholars had? (Actually, we can today see even MORE information about those words than the KJV scholars had when they produced the KJV.) Isn't that wonderful? Isn't God great for preserving this information for us – so each and every one of us can uncover the real truth of the scriptures – without relying on the CHOICES of English translators?
I think it's purely the work of God that we are in this incredible position today. We know longer have to just accept that God created evil because certain men in 1611 said He did. We can see with our own eyes the various other things the Hebrew word “ra” can mean, and the various other ways even the KJV scholars translated that same word in other verses. We can see that they translated that same word as “adversity”, “trouble”, and “affliction” – among many other things. And seeing this allows us to KNOW that it was merely the CHOICE of these mere men to translate it as “God created evil” in Isaiah 45:7. And knowing that it was merely their CHOICE allows us to either accept or reject that CHOICE…….. because we have access to all the other ways it could have been translated in that verse.
There are no longer any scholars who translate that word as “evil” in Isaiah 45:7 – not even the NKJV, which uses “calamity” instead of “evil”.
And I would bet dollars to dimes that, given the chance and the knowledge we have today, those original KJV scholars would also repent from that damaging translation they made, and render it as “calamity” or “trouble”.
But whether or not you agree with that last statement, or even if “evil” is the wrong translation in Isaiah 45:7, you must at least know by now that there were other choices for the translation of that Hebrew word. And surely you now know enough to see how easy it is for false doctrines to be built upon flawed translations of the Hebrew and Greek words.
All of us can see the false doctrines that are built on, and supported by, the flawed translations in some of the newer Trinitarian Bibles, right?
The difference is that your brain allows you to see the flaws in the current translations – but won't allow you to accept the possibility that perhaps the men who produced the KJV were also fallible.
That is a close-minded view, Wakeup. What it amounts to is you saying that all other translators in the world are fallible men, but for some reason, the men who produced the KJV were infallible, and incapable of making even the slightest error.
It's like you put these mere men on a pedestal, and forget that they were, in fact, mere fallible men.
Why do you do that?
Mike B.Why was my question not answered'.
By you or kerwin,cant remember.1.Who created satan?(who made the axe)?
2.Who started the great flood?
3.With all the technology today;why are there more
denominations?
4. Why more confusion?
5.Why more divisions?
6.Is the christian world upgrading or degrading?
7.Is the falling away not coming?
8.Is the land not desolate? The rivers (spiritually) has gone
dry.Why should I put any man on a pedestal?
The praise should Go to God,for looking after his Word to be preserved.wakeup.
Wakeup,I did answer you but many of these questions are new.
As to the answer of those new questions, before the coming of the Roman empire's state church there were many denomination which each man teaching his own doctrine. Catholic basically means universal and comes from the Greek words “kata”, which means, “with respect to” and “holos”, which means “whole”. From what I can seen, the Catholic Church had no real way to enforce its authority before the government of the Roman empire ,and their heirs, became it enforcer. Many considered heretics were killed, imprisoned, exiled, by the governments zeal. The governments have slowly stopped being the enforcer and with that lack of enforcement sects have been allowed to either break off or form independently. At the same time the world population grew and thus the number of sects also grew in relation to that growth.
Despite all of this there is but one true sect and one true teaching.
Note: Google gave me the ethmology of the word Catholic when I did a search for it.
Kerwin.1.WHO CREATED SATAN?
2.Is the christian world today better than yesterday?
3.is the falling away coming or not?wakeup.
Wakeup,Yes, God created Satan and then Satan chose to sin.
I cannot say I know anyone who does more than claim to be a Christian. There are a remnant that appear to strive.
The falling away happened long before my time. I do not know the date as the only ones I know are Christians in spirit are those recorded in Scripture.
Kerwin.You are not being honest in aswering the questions.
1. You said God created satan;but—-
The fact here is that satan is evil,and God created evil.
God knows he will be the evil one. The father of evil.
So did God not create evil?
2. You can not say that the christian *WORLD* is better
today than yesterday? What about the one world religion?
What about christians praying in mosques?3. How can the falling away was before your time, when
scripture says that the falling away and the son of
perdition must come fist before Christ's coming?
Has the son of perdition come?wakeup.
Wakeup,
The falling away has already come and the son of perdition has not.
I told you that the Christians today honor God with their lips but there hearts are far from him. I also said some of them seem to be striving to change and be like Christ.
God created Adam and chose to sin. God did not create a sinful Adam thou he did create Adam with the do either good or evil. The same is true with Satan.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
