River Jordan wrote:
Does anyone have anything unbiased and unprejudiced to say about Westcott and Hort?
They were two amazing men that God used to translate another version of His Word. Who cares what version everyone uses? They are all God speaking to us through the original languages that have been translated into English so we can benefit from it.
Can anyone disagree with that??

The "Can't we all just get along" sentiment is nice, but there are some issues worth conteding for. The Word of God is of paramount importance. Since Gen. ch.3 the devil has sought to attack to Word either directly or by diluting, or diverting it.

May 21,2011 wrote:
Closing remarks of the late & honourable Adam Clarke:
Michael is this archangel, and head of all the angelic orders; the devil, great dragon, or Satan, is head of all the diabolic orders. When these two hosts are opposed to each other they are said to act under these two chiefs, as leaders; hence in Revelation 12:7, it is said: MICHAEL and his angels fought against the DRAGON and his angels. The word Michael seems to be compounded of mi, who, ke, like, and El, God; he who is like God; hence by this personage, in the Apocalypse, many understand the Lord Jesus."
Michael was the man child which the woman brought forth."—Clarke's Commentary.
- continued

Rob wrote:
Probably the most indisputable translation error

R .Gr wrote:
Joe the P... tell us in your own words how to apply the 5th com apply it 2 us.

Paul wrote:
Completely agree with keeping the Ten Commandments, Joe. But I see a lot of effort in Christians striving to stay under the Law that Moses put down for the Israelites to follow, hence the Mosaic Law. We are under grace and the whole Law can be boiled down, if you will to two commands (remember, "I give you a new command...?)We all know this, why remain under ritual and religion when Jesus wants us to be free to live for Him?

Paul wrote:
Well guys, I hope in keeping the sabbath, you also tithe, sacrifice burnt offerings, circumcise your boys...etc. And in keeping the sabbath, make sure you don't cook, watch TV, turn lights on and off, fasten buttons, zip zippers, drive your vehicle, and don't ever spit on the ground, because if it happens to make mud, you're in trouble. Boy the bondage on this comment thread is quite shocking. Do you who are in favour of the sabbath and living by the law actually follow all of these requirements? If you do not follow each and every facet of the law, you subject yourself to the curse, and make Christ's sacrifice of no effect for He was made a curse for us, so we wouldn't be at the mercy of the law. You either live in grace or you in under the law,

Kyle wrote:
if you want to keep the sabbath, your church better be very close to your house or you might have to walk a long way. That's a violation of the sabbath. You could drive, but that would be against the spirit of letting your animals have the day off. If the israelites were not allowed to build a fire on the sabbath, are you allowed to turn your oven on? Do you make calls on the sabbath? Do you go out to eat? Do you go grocery shopping? Are you ok with the football players working so you have something to watch? You've posting here on a sabbath, aren't you? Isn't that verboten?

Yet another name wrote:
Only God is perfect, Joe.
Only God saves, in Christ.
As for me the sinner? The way Paul puts it....
Ro 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
God be with you.

Berleigh wrote:
You cannot prove that.
Therefore you have lied.
The difference between Wesley and Whitefield was doctrine.
The difference between Protestant and Roman catholic is doctrine.
The difference between JW's and Protestant is doctrine.
Are Roman Catholics and JW's going to heaven 'ANYWAY' - and doctrine ie the revelation of the Spirit doesn't count?

Lurker wrote:
Now, now, bro. In spite of our present disagreements I'm confident the Lord will make us sit together in heavenly places.

Jessica Dawson wrote:
My cat's a Christian, I admit it! I even baptized him myself! I've preached the Gospel to him and he's been converted from his sins. I would not be willing to have a pet that wasn't a believer. Hope I don't get into any trouble over this!

John Yurich USA wrote:
As long as a Bible translation is translated from the original languages copy then it is fine.

The positions is translation are either: Word for Word (i.e. what did God mean when He said it)

Or, Thought for Thought (what do I feel like it means to me)

Those two approaches yield two totaly different results.

Mike wrote:
"Instead of separating from the world, the Next Christians are engaging the world and going into the darkest places to shine the light of Christ. As they do so, the world will gradually change its negative view of Christians as judgmental, hypocritical, too political, anti-homosexual, etc."
One would think "Young Evangelical" got no eddication. How else did he miss all the history of missions that went on before him? But youth must outgrow arrogance, and the idea that it has invented a new thing be set aside when it is discovered to be not a new thing at all.
You can hear the foolish and erroneous heart-cry, that if only the world would like us, we could influence it for Christ.

Wekrock wrote:
I simply added the Calvin quote because I knew he supported my reading of the text. I can think for myself Joe, the insult was unnecessary!

Wekrock wrote:
Note "unequally yoked" is not about marriage.

Wekrock wrote:
How can any mortal tell whether the person they marry is a Christian, or not? EG Matt 7:21-23, Rev 3:14ff etc.
Secondly how can a mortal tell, or not, whether a person is going to become a Christian in the future?

As to your use of Mat.7. I gather you are trying to refer to ch.7 v.1-5. The judgment clause obviously does not refer to being able to discern things, or recognize evil. Look at what Jesus himself says in Mat. 7:6,13-20.

Swing Lee wrote:
I would have though the Statue of Imitaions would have run out by now.

Shun Them wrote:
"It would be quite wrong to say that modern versions such as the NIV bear no testimony to the truths we have been considering, as a systematic survey of the complete contents of these versions will show. Yet at the level of individual verses or passages there is a dangerous, cumulative undermining of important truths.
The fact that these alterations go unnoticed by many who read modern versions or hear them read makes the matter all the more serious.
Our stance on this vital subject should be clear: we should shun the modern versions.
‘If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?’ (Psalm 11.3).Such an anxiety is a natural one for the believer.
In Jer 20.7 Calvin wrote:
God indeed, could not be separated from his own truth; for nothing would be left to him, were he regarded as apart from his word. Hence a mere fiction is every idea which men form of God in their minds, when they neglect that mirror in which he has made himself known. Nay more, we ought to know that whatever power,majesty, and glory there is in God, so shines forth in his word, that he does not appear as God, except his word remains safe and uncorrupted.

ouini wrote:
I don't get how some Christians never seem to understand why secularists have a problem with the more enthusiastic Muslims, Christians, and Jews who try to make laws align to their religion. i.e., There must be prayer to *my* god in public. Children must be indoctrinated in *my* religion in schools to the exclusion of others. And people's private lives must align with *my* religion's ideas of work, recreation, or sex.
It is somewhat amusing, though sad at the same time, that people who believe there is a God are so vigorous in their attempts to make others act as if there is. If there is an eternal afterlife why name-call the non-believers? All the railing against secularism and atheists will not stop it, nor produce a mad outbreak of Christianity.
I'm glad there's no mindless secularist dogma to quote. Repeating trite ad hominem quotes always comes across as an unwillingness to understand an issue.