What does it say in the bible about...

God's Word doesn't say that, so where does it come from? You're not just making it up are you?

My hierarchical interpretations? I quote a few scriptures, word for word and suddenly it's my hierarchical interpretation? Now that's funny.

Yes you do. Deny it all you want but diverge you do.

Yes you have, that is why I can say you diverge from God's word.

Oh, you mean to say that Jesus was hiding "behind a sheaf of paper" when he said; It is written? Interesting.

 

God created heaven and earth and all that is in it.

Yes, you interpret scripture from a hierarchical model of the world taught to you by the world.

That would be the same Jesus that said it is written but I tell you something different.

 

As ye go preach saying the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in light: and what you hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops.

 

Why yes he did. But does not mean that; All of God is in all things.

I could very well; "interpret scripture from a hierarchical model of the world taught to you by the world" but see the problem is when I "quote a few scriptures, word for word" that is not an interpretation, that is the Bible speaking straight to you, are you listening?

Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God.. . .(2 John 9)

 

Yep, that's what I do, do you?

 

God is the God of creation, not of withholding. A law without opposite.

It is not a problem but an aspect of process, that both of us bring to mind and present scripture from the perspective of a line of thought. Your perspective is that the Bible has a magical quality that supersedes reason. My perspective is that the bible has a practical quality that informs everything.

I am a disciple of Christ and I teach as I am taught by the Holy Spirit.
I assume you have no problem with this unless you wish to accuse me of something else. As for pushing ahead, I have been at times a reluctant participant in this discussion because I personally don't see any reason for it.

 

I too believe that the Bible has a practical quality, that by living by it's principles things will go well with you.

But I will not say the Bible has a "magical" quality, I will say though, it has a Godly quality that allows it to do and be things that other books just can not do.

I am glad to hear you are a disciple of Christ and that you believe you are lead by the Holy Spirit but when you said; "That would be the same Jesus that said it is written but I tell you something different" I was worried and wanted to warn you, that according to the Bible, that may not be a good thing.

 

We must be as innocent as doves and wise as serpents brother. By definition your beliefs are magical.


mag·ic [májjik]
n
1. conjuring tricks: conjuring tricks and illusions that make apparently impossible things seem to happen, usually performed as entertainment
2. inexplicable things: a special, mysterious, or inexplicable quality, talent, or skill
watched the dancer's feet work their magic

3. supposed supernatural power: a supposed supernatural power that makes impossible things happen or gives somebody control over the forces of nature.
Magic is used in many cultures for healing, keeping away evil, seeking the truth, and for vengeful purposes.
4. practice of magic: the use of supposed supernatural power to make impossible things happen
It could be argued that the "deification" of a book constitutes fashioning a graven image.
I say only magical belief.

I could see when I posted this statement how you would interpret it. You are suspicious of me as being hostile to the truth. You can not recognize that this is not so, because what I say challenges your beliefs. What I say does not challenge any fact. When I said "but I tell you something different", it was paraphrase for the many times Jesus quoted tradition yet called us to a higher requirement. I.e. matt. 5:17-48

 

Well let's see.

Well, no I do not believe the Bible to be a conjuring trick for entertainment.

It is not inexplicable. The simple answer is that God can do things that mankind can not.

Sorry, God is not a supposed supernatural power.

Once again, Sorry, God is not a supposed supernatural power.

Deification? I don't believe the Bible is God but is God's word and can do what God says it can.

What you say does not in any way challenge my beliefs.

As I have pointed several times already what you say disagrees what the Bible. Perhaps that is your problem you don't believe the Bible.

You are not Jesus. :toetap05:

PS Did you even bother to read the Scripture before you cited it? Jesus did not have any high regard for man made traditions, that's true but when it came to what was written, he did not tell them "something different" but explained what they should already have known. (Matthew 5:17-19)

 

A book can not move from here to there without the hand of man.

You believe the bible has super natural power. You also believe God is a supernatural power, although you disguise this belief from yourself by saying it is a fact that god is a supernatural power.
I say that God is the only power there is and nothing could be more natural.

Exactly and unequivocally.

I don't have a problem with the Bible. Your problem with me is that I do not share your magical beliefs about the bible.

As I have told you before I am a disciple of Christ. I teach as I am taught by the Holy Spirit.
Do you know what Christ means?

Can you provide documentation on your statement that "I am" is a mistranslation? This is like the fifth time I've asked this question.

 

Please show me where I said it could?

Please show me were I said it did.

Please show me where I ever said he was.

Well, I will say that the entire Universe is sustained by God's power and is in existence because of his power and nothing could be more natural.

Please show me where I have ever said that God's word is anything other than what God says it is.

That would be easy to do if you don't really care what it says.

Actually, I have no problem with you, other than you're trying to teach things that disagree with the Bible.

Jesus pointed out that there would be two groups that would claim to be his disciples. One group Jesus would approve of and to the other group he would say get away from me you workers of lawlessness.

As for your being taught by the "Holy Spirit", How do know it's the Holy Spirit? One test is whether it agrees with it self and I've already pointed out several times the the Spirit that is teaching you seems to be disagreeing with what was written by Holy Spirit in the Bible.

Yes, do you ?

Like your arm is broke and can't look it up for yourself.

Oh well, First, realize that what was said in Exodus was written in Hebrew and what Jesus said was written in Greek and thus the two expressions were not the same.

God’s reply in Hebrew was: ’Eh·yeh′ ’Asher′ ’Eh·yeh′. Some translations render this as “I AM THAT I AM.” However, it is to be noted that the Hebrew verb ha·yah′, from which the word ’Eh·yeh′ is drawn, does not mean simply “be.” Rather, it means “become,” or “prove to be.” The reference here is not to God’s self-existence but to what he has in mind to become toward others. Therefore the above Hebrew expression is properly rendered as “I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE.” Jehovah thereafter added: “This is what you are to say to the sons of Israel, ‘I SHALL PROVE TO BE has sent me to you.’”—Ex 3:14

Jesus—In Existence Before Abraham

Joh 8:58—“before Abraham came into existence, I have been”

Gr., πρὶν ᾿Αβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

(prin A·bra·am′ ge·ne′sthai e·go′ ei·mi′)

Fourth/Fifth “before Abraham was, Syriac—Edition:
Century I have been” A Translation of the Four
Gospels from the Syriac of
the Sinaitic Palimpsest,
by Agnes Smith Lewis,
London, 1894.

Fifth Century “before ever Abraham Curetonian Syriac—Edition:
came to be, I was” The Curetonian Version of
the Four Gospels, by
F.Crawford Burkitt, Vol. 1,
Cambridge, England, 1904.

Fifth Century “before Abraham Syriac Peshitta—Edition:
existed, I was” The Syriac New Testament
Translated into English
from the Peshitto Version,
by James Murdock, seventh
ed., Boston and London,
1896.

Fifth Century “before Abraham Georgian—Edition:
came to be, I was” “The Old Georgian Version
of the Gospel of John,” by
Robert P. Blake and Maurice
Brière, published in
Patrologia Orientalis,
Vol. XXVI, fascicle 4,
Paris, 1950.

Sixth Century “before Abraham Ethiopic—Edition:
was born, I was” Novum Testamentum . . .
Æthiopice (The New
Testament . . . in
Ethiopic), by Thomas Pell
Platt, revised by F.
Praetorius, Leipzig, 1899.

The action expressed in Joh 8:58 started “before Abraham came into existence” and is still in progress. In such situation εἰμί (ei·mi′), which is the first-person singular present indicative, is properly translated by the perfect indicative. Examples of the same syntax are found in Lu 2:48; 13:7; 15:29; Joh 5:6; 14:9; 15:27; Ac 15:21; 2Co 12:19; 1Jo 3:8.

Concerning this construction, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, by G. B. Winer, seventh edition, Andover, 1897, p. 267, says: “Sometimes the Present includes also a past tense (Mdv. 108), viz. when the verb expresses a state which commenced at an earlier period but still continues,—a state in its duration; as, Jno. xv. 27 ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἐστέ [ap’ ar·khes′ met’ e·mou′ e·ste′], viii. 58 πρὶν ᾿Αβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμι [prin A·bra·am′ ge·ne′sthai e·go′ ei·mi].”

Likewise, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J. H. Moulton, Vol. III, by Nigel Turner, Edinburgh, 1963, p. 62, says: “The Present which indicates the continuance of an action during the past and up to the moment of speaking is virtually the same as Perfective, the only difference being that the action is conceived as still in progress . . . It is frequent in the N[ew] T[estament]: Lk 248 137 . . . 1529 . . . Jn 56 858 . . . ”

Attempting to identify Jesus with Jehovah, some say that ἐγὼ εἰμί (e·go′ ei·mi′) is the equivalent of the Hebrew expression ’ani′ hu’, “I am he,” which is used by God. However, it is to be noted that this Hebrew expression is also used by man.—See 1Ch 21:17 ftn.

Further attempting to identify Jesus with Jehovah, some try to use Ex 3:14 (LXX) which reads: ᾿Εγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν (E·go′ ei·mi ho on), which means “I am The Being,” or, “I am The Existing One.” This attempt cannot be sustained because the expression in Ex 3:14 is different from the expression in Joh 8:58. (See Ex 3:14 ftn.) Throughout the Christian Greek Scriptures it is not possible to make an identification of Jesus with Jehovah as being the same person.—See 1Pe 2:3 ftn

 

Now it is not "God" that "writes" the bible but the Holy Spirit. You are the one my friend who is denying the Holy Spirit in me, not Christ.

You are tedious with your efforts not to be forth coming.

It is not my claim.

You should realize that the words are written in English. All that you quote, which by the way are treatises of interpretation, are not as useful as you imagine.
The word in Aramaic that is translated today as daily bread in the lords prayer did not exist in the Greek language and was coined especially to make a translation. The latin translation of the Greek word that was used is
"supersubstantialem" which means super existing or super substantial, which is an idea somewhat removed from necessary or daily.
What can we make of this? Probably many things, but my point is that to go beyond English in this regard requires special resources that are in fact not "biblical", but academic.

 

Do you even bother to read the Bible? (2 Peter 1:21)

As for me denying the "Holy Spirit" in you, I have not really said one way or another but I have pointed out that the Spirit that you have seems to disagree with what the Bible says and that would call in to question whether it's the Holly Spirit or not.

I answered your question, did you answer mine?

Ah no, they weren't.

When the Bible was written, the English language was either not in existence or unknown by those writing the Bible.

Perhaps not to you.

Daily Bread? Please, at least try to make some connection to what is being discussed.

Go beyond English? Do you really believe the Bible was written in English?

 

Again the bible does not speak, you needn't respond. we already know your answer will be, yes it does.

I do. The problem here seems to so many of the connections that are made you simply miss. You have a gap about you, whether intentional or not I cannot say. However it requires endless remedial attention.

I don't need to believe it brother. I can't read any other language beside English. The Bible I read is written in English. If you belief otherwise, you are insane.

 

Yes it does.

Please humor me and tell me what the connection might be.

You crack me up. :smilielol5:

 

The example I give is equal to yours' in its' capacity to make complex and subject to debate. The relevance of the living word is that it comes to us in our own language and is applicable in every vain to our present life. Certain things do not apply only to historical times. To interpret things in a manner that tries to suggest what "they may have thought in their time" or what "They may have faced in their time", is a speculative venture that lacks the power of the works of faith to convince.

The plain truth has every capacity to increase enjoyment. I am glad you can appreciate it so joyfully.

 

Come again? You're saying that because you also gave an example of something, that has nothing to do with what is being discussed but because it is an example, the two have something in common and thus is some sort of an answer to the topic at hand?

 

What are ya'll even talking about? I have no idea whats going on.

 

Just ignore the dope and me, because we hijacked the thread and go back to the original OP.

 

The bible was the word of little opinion; that must be also put to rest. The real opinions of passing moments... because all time missed the point for seeking out faith after unfaith. {darn, too late to laugh)


_______________________________________________
Stay sane.