Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

Jerry

Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Posts

    8,739
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    88

Reputation Activity

  1. I Agree
    Jerry got a reaction from Pastor Scott Markle in Satan and Eden   
    I think, based on these passages, that the angels were created by or just before the third day, when the foundations of the earth were laid (and none had fallen yet) - look at the order of events.
    Genesis 1:9-10, 13 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good... And the evening and the morning were the third day.
    Job 38:4-7 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
    Psalm 104:2-5 Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire: Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.
    Nehemiah 9:6 Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.
    In the last passage, the host of heaven being referred to are the angels, as the heaven of heaven certainly seems to refer to the third heaven, where the presence of God dwells, and it is stated that those are the host of that heaven (ie. therefore not referring to the stars in the second heaven). That also means the third heaven was not created until creation week - there would be no need to have a "third heaven" as a place until there were occupants in it, which were created during creation week.
    Exodus 20:8-11 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
  2. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from 1Timothy115 in Satan and Eden   
    I believe they are the same garden. The different descriptions could be different areas of the garden.
    I do not believe any angels fell during creation week. At the end of the sixth day, God said it was very good. I don't believe He would have pronounced His creation very good if there was sin in it.
    Other passages state that everything that was made - including the hosts of heaven, the angels (yes, context determines which hosts are in view - either angels or stars) - was made in those six days. Hebrews 1:14 states angels are ministers to those who shall be heirs of salvation, so there is no reason for angels to be created sometime before the creation of the earth (and the universe).
    Also, there is nowhere in Scripture that states that the earthly Eden was a type or shadow of a Heavenly Garden of Eden - but in reference to the temple and even Jerusalem, we are told that.
    Genesis 2 does indicate that there was gold and other precious stones nearby or in the garden of Eden, connected to one of the rivers:
    Genesis 2:10-12 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.
  3. Thanks
    Jerry got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in Satan and Eden   
    One book I have called The Serpent Of Paradise by Erwin Lutzer states this:
    This Eden was not the garden of Eden, for this is a description of mineral beauty, not vegetation. It is a garden bedecked with jewels and every form of extravagance, a paradise that is a suitable home for one who possessed creaturely perfections.
    A couple of the other resources I have do not mention this subject. If I find out any more references, I will try to post them here too.
  4. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from 1Timothy115 in "Counseling"   
    Through the years, I have given Biblical counsel, even during my time as a supervisor at the Gospel Mission. There was never a "you need to do this" approach, but always "here is what the Bible says on this issue, these doctrines, etc." - attempting to show them where certain principles, precepts, etc. were in the Bible, and to exhort a person to apply them. Then there is no line crossed as far as what is said goes - I just taught Bible principles, and showed them where to find them themselves, as well as encouraged them to seek the Lord and dig further into the Bible for guidance. I do agree that any pastor or "Christian counsellor" that uses psychological methods or tells those they are counselling how to live (ie. as a kind of dictator in their lives) is doing wrong. A pastor (and any other minister in a similar situation needing counselling) is a shepherd, who is to guide, lead, teach.
  5. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from 1Timothy115 in "Counseling"   
    I believe all the counselling a child of God needs should be based on the Bible - not on the world's philosophies (which psychology and psychology are - and usually what is often included in the general title "Christian counsellor" when it is referring to someone with a degree or a title). Also, Psalms 1 deals with not following the counsel of the ungodly - of which both psychology and psychiatry come from.
    That being said, I do believe Christians that do counsel based upon the Word of God should take whatever steps are appropriate and necessary to protect themselves and those they counsel. Men should counsel men and women should counsel women - or at least the men who counsel women (ie. like a pastor counselling a member of his flock) should have another woman present at all times to prevent any problems - perhaps a husband and wife could counsel the female member together, if the issue was such that the pastor's perspective was needed.
  6. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from swathdiver in Bibles That Remove Or Confuse The Deity Of Christ   
    Let's make this simple then. The KJV is God's preserved, inerrant Word in English. Regardless of how much others may or may not change their own Critical Text manuscripts (and I truly do not have the resources or the time to study this issue out right now), the fact that they depart from the preserved Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Textus Receptus (which have had God's hand on them throughout history) is good enough for me to warn others against this corrupted stream of manuscripts and whatever is translated from it, inasmuch as it differs from those preserved texts I have mentioned above. Even if a particular English translation was 100% exactly the same (as much as possible as a translation can be) as THEIR underlying Critical Texts, I would still warn against the changes that their CT texts have made to the Word of God.
    God didn't inspire two streams of competing manuscripts (or changed manuscripts) - so as much as they do differ, one or both are wrong. However, studying out the history of the texts and of the English (and some other language) translations from these underlying texts, I know where and why I stand on the King James Bible and its underlying manuscripts. There is more to the issue than personal preferences on either side. There are doctrinal changes because certain people - editors, translators, compilers, and scribes - chose to change or corrupt things along the way. Yes, granted some of the changes may even have been unintentional (ie. a copyist error), though most are not, and these changes are significant and do affect the doctrine of the text that they are in.
    You are welcome to your preferences - but I would rather have convictions based on the evidence behind and for both streams of manuscripts.
  7. I Agree
    Jerry got a reaction from Pastor Scott Markle in Charismatic calvinists   
    God's Word indicates that even in the first century He never gave the gift of tongues to everyone - so for those who believe it is a sign of salvation, they are missing the boat (especially when you consider that the "gift of tongues" they are using is not the same as the gift of tongues as found in the Bible (especially the book of Acts and 1 Corinthians 12-14).
    1 Corinthians 12:4-6 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
    1 Corinthians 12:28-31 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.
  8. Like
    Jerry reacted to Salyan in If you could read Hebrew and Greek   
    One example would be the word 'let.' 2 Thess. 2:7 uses this word with the idea of hindering, while our common  modern usage has more the idea of permitting.
  9. Like
    Jerry reacted to Jordan Kurecki in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    I basically have agreed with almost everything you have said up to this point, but I just want to offer some light, pushback on this. 

    Even in the bible itself, especially in the Gospels for example, you will often see words that are different from each other used to in those inspired parallel accounts, but words which are closely synonymous. Even in the KJO preface (Which I know is not inspired) they defend their practice of NOT translating Hebrew or Greek words consistently by appealing to their perception that God used a "diversity" of words to express the same sense in his word. Couple that with the Hebrew practice of parallelism which often contrast, expands, and sometimes even states one singular idea with two different phrases, I think we should be careful of making a sharp distinction simply due to different words choices. Yes different word choices do sometimes denote different meanings, but not always. 

    Another caution about doing words studies as well is in order, words have what we call "Semantic Range", meaning that a word can have more than one meaning, depending on the context in which it used. For example, the word  "good" in English can mean a variety of things, it can mean "morally excellent" as in "The law is good" or it can mean "pleasant" as in the "the food tastes good" or it can mean "of a high quality" as in "he does good work" etc etc etc. All of those meanings are slightly different in nuance and highly contextualized. Some words can have pretty significant difference depending on context, for example the English word run. You can "run" to the store, meaning you "went", you can "run" a business, meaning you're in charge and responsible for it, you can also "run" for your life, meaning you fled, a car automobile can "run" meaning it operates properly. 

    That being said, a word study, whereby one looks at all the occurrences of word in the Bible will be good for illuminating the semantic range of word, but some people make the mistake of forcing the sense of a word in one context, onto another context and vice verse, or of trying to apply ALL the different senses and uses of a word into each place the word is found in linguistics this is called the "illegitimate total fallacy". Just because a word has one sense in 324 places for example, it may still yet have another distinct sense in 1 other single place based on context.

    That being said, I essentially agree with the conclusions you are presenting here, but I just wanted to point out something that I see people say. People often say things that are different are not the same, but usually when people say they, they are only looking at the form of words and not the sense, and what many people do not realize is sometimes different forms can express similar or identical "senses" 

    That being said, let me make some observations. 
    1. כְּלִי and שִׂמְלָה both appear to be set in parallel to each-other, with the second clause clearly being about a man wearing a woman's garment. 
    2. כְלִי appears to be a word that has a rough meaning of "articles, possessions, objects" etc, and the type of objects it can refer to seems largely dependent on context, in some contexts it appears to refer to items of warfare, in some places just general objects, in some contexts used of a yoke of oxen, and we could go on and on and on. 
    3. In Hebrew, a rigidly literal translation of the phrase in question would be "There should not be upon women, כְּלִי  of a man. 

    From my point of view, based on context and what seems to be a basic sense of כְּלִי that the word is in fact referring to clothing. One way of understanding the passage would be something like "There should not be the general things of men, UPON women", the Hebrew preposition "עַל" literal means "upon" and that tells us that the כְּלִי  in mind are things that can be "on" someone. The Hebrew preposition and the parallelism found in the passage, seems to strongly imply to me that the כְּלִי is in fact referring to the clothing of men. After all, what are the "things of men" that can be physically "upon" someone but clothing? I think the fact that the KJV translators translated it as a woman shall not "wear" seems to indicate that the KJV translators picked up on these clues as well, especially since there is no actual explicit Hebrew verb in the first half of the verse that actually means "wear".

     I don't honestly see any sharp distinction contextually to try and draw out a significant distinction between כְּלִי and שִׂמְלָה in this particular context.
  10. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from HappyChristian in "Counseling"   
    Through the years, I have given Biblical counsel, even during my time as a supervisor at the Gospel Mission. There was never a "you need to do this" approach, but always "here is what the Bible says on this issue, these doctrines, etc." - attempting to show them where certain principles, precepts, etc. were in the Bible, and to exhort a person to apply them. Then there is no line crossed as far as what is said goes - I just taught Bible principles, and showed them where to find them themselves, as well as encouraged them to seek the Lord and dig further into the Bible for guidance. I do agree that any pastor or "Christian counsellor" that uses psychological methods or tells those they are counselling how to live (ie. as a kind of dictator in their lives) is doing wrong. A pastor (and any other minister in a similar situation needing counselling) is a shepherd, who is to guide, lead, teach.
  11. Like
    Jerry reacted to heartstrings in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    Here's a verse which was always intriguing to me:
    14Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? 15But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. 16But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
    If "nature itself" teaches us things like this are a shame, pertaining to how the respective sexes should look, why wouldn't seeing some guy in a pink dress do the same? God made us male and female: we should look like, dress like,  and act like the sex we belong to. To do otherwise is just confusion.
  12. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from heartstrings in "Counseling"   
    Through the years, I have given Biblical counsel, even during my time as a supervisor at the Gospel Mission. There was never a "you need to do this" approach, but always "here is what the Bible says on this issue, these doctrines, etc." - attempting to show them where certain principles, precepts, etc. were in the Bible, and to exhort a person to apply them. Then there is no line crossed as far as what is said goes - I just taught Bible principles, and showed them where to find them themselves, as well as encouraged them to seek the Lord and dig further into the Bible for guidance. I do agree that any pastor or "Christian counsellor" that uses psychological methods or tells those they are counselling how to live (ie. as a kind of dictator in their lives) is doing wrong. A pastor (and any other minister in a similar situation needing counselling) is a shepherd, who is to guide, lead, teach.
  13. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from HappyChristian in "Counseling"   
    I believe all the counselling a child of God needs should be based on the Bible - not on the world's philosophies (which psychology and psychology are - and usually what is often included in the general title "Christian counsellor" when it is referring to someone with a degree or a title). Also, Psalms 1 deals with not following the counsel of the ungodly - of which both psychology and psychiatry come from.
    That being said, I do believe Christians that do counsel based upon the Word of God should take whatever steps are appropriate and necessary to protect themselves and those they counsel. Men should counsel men and women should counsel women - or at least the men who counsel women (ie. like a pastor counselling a member of his flock) should have another woman present at all times to prevent any problems - perhaps a husband and wife could counsel the female member together, if the issue was such that the pastor's perspective was needed.
  14. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from wretched in "Counseling"   
    I believe all the counselling a child of God needs should be based on the Bible - not on the world's philosophies (which psychology and psychology are - and usually what is often included in the general title "Christian counsellor" when it is referring to someone with a degree or a title). Also, Psalms 1 deals with not following the counsel of the ungodly - of which both psychology and psychiatry come from.
    That being said, I do believe Christians that do counsel based upon the Word of God should take whatever steps are appropriate and necessary to protect themselves and those they counsel. Men should counsel men and women should counsel women - or at least the men who counsel women (ie. like a pastor counselling a member of his flock) should have another woman present at all times to prevent any problems - perhaps a husband and wife could counsel the female member together, if the issue was such that the pastor's perspective was needed.
  15. Like
    Jerry reacted to HappyChristian in I tried peeking into the ladies forum here….   
    The ladies' forum gets used once in a while. Not often, but there are times issues and questions come up that just aren't men's business. To try to "peek" says an awful lot about one's character, TGL. Although I'm more prone to believe that you didn't really try to peek but rather just posted to get conversation going. Because that is your MO, isn't it?😉  (if you DID truly try to peek, you ought to be ashamed of yourself - it's a private forum of which you are not a member for a reason)
    And I will say that I think you are way off in thinking that the ladies would/did try to peek into the men's forum. Because we aren't curious about what men might post, simply put.
    I didn't even realize that the men's forum was gone. lol...so much for curiosity. bahaha!
    And, no, TGL, EVERYTHING does not need to be discussed in a mixed forum. There are things - even sins - that ought not be discussed. It's called discretion, which is something far too many folks forget in these days of voyeurism. 
     
  16. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from TheGloryLand in The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants   
    Skirt, as used in the Bible, means the edge of a garment - not a skirt like women wear today.
    Webster's 1828 Dictionary states this about Breeches:
    A garment worn by men, covering the hips and thighs. It is now a close garment; but the word formerly was used for a loose garment, now called trowsers.
    Also, the word is related to britches - which is also pants. Even (for the sake of the argument) it referred to undergarments - they were undergarments ONLY certain men were to wear, not women. And if this is what turned into britches, trowsers, pants (as history does show), then they are men's clothing, according to the Bible and therefore an abomination for women to wear.
    Again, God is not going to have a unisex garment - such as robes - for everyone to wear (and only SOME PEOPLE wore robes in the Bible - not like in a supposed Biblical movie where everyone is wearing them), and then command this:
    Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.
    And, again, for the sake of the argument, if there was some unisex garment that was created by mankind to wear somewhere along the way, that would contradict God's Word (the word abomination signifies a greater sin against God than other sins, and those sins that are abominable to Him were never done away with in the sense that those commands no longer apply today), AND therefore should be avoided by children of God today - or else those that ARE blurring those lines and wearing unisex clothing or clothing intended originally for the opposite gender are committing an abomination today.
  17. Thanks
    Jerry got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in When I Read The Bible Through   
    When I Read The Bible Through
    I supposed I knew my Bible,
    Reading piecemeal, hit or miss,
    Now a bit of John or Matthew,
    Now a snatch of Genesis,
    Certain chapters of Isaiah,
    Certain Psalms (the twenty-third),
    Twelfth of Romans, First of Proverbs -
    Yes, I thought I knew the Word!
    But I found that thorough reading
    Was a different thing to do,
    And the way was unfamiliar
    When I read the Bible through.
    You who like to play at Bible,
    Dip and dabble, here and there,
    Just before you kneel aweary,
    And yawn through a hurried prayer;
    You who treat the Crown of Writings
    As you treat no other book -
    Just a paragraph disjointed,
    Just a crude impatient look -
    Try a worthier procedure,
    Try a broad and steady view;
    You will kneel in very rapture
    When you read the Bible through!
    by Amos R. Wells
    2 Timothy 3:15-17  And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
  18. I Agree
    Jerry reacted to HappyChristian in "Counseling"   
    Read the book Wolves Among Lambs by Stacey Shiflett. It is a very well written book about sexual abuse and things like counseling...he sets out some ideas in how to avoid the pitfalls of it. One of those is something that my husband and I have already discussed: never be alone with someone of the opposite sex. ESPECIALLY behind closed doors. And in a counseling situation? When the emotions are involved? Alarm bells! Anyone who thinks they can withstand temptation is simply deluding him/herself ("Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall"). 
    I see no problem with pastors counseling folks. And, really, just because the Bible doesn't say something like "thou shalt counsel" does not make it wrong to do so. However, biblical principle needs to be applied in that area as well. Wisdom as to just how much counsel the pastor (or pastor's wife) can/should give needs to be sought from the Lord. Heart, I think your caveat "as it is practiced today" is important...there are changes that must be made.
    I've known folks who've gone to Christian counselors - licensed, "professional" - whose lives were ruined as a result. So there is no guarantee there, either. Bluntly, I would rather receive counsel from someone who is immersed in the Word of God and not the world's view of psychology (and, yes, I do know that's what Christian counselors study...I was on that path myself, so I am aware of the things they need to learn). I'm not saying that it's not a good idea to know how the human mind works; it is dangerous to take the world's philosophies and "Christianize" them, which is what many Christian psychologists (not all, so no attack) do. There are some good ones out there, but they do need to be carefully vetted before going to them for counsel. And one must realize that, no matter how "professional" any counselor is, the possibility of temptation is still there. While it is not as popular, currently, to talk about the abuse perpetrated on patients by counselors, it is there. When counseling is involved, the emotions are involved, and that is where the temptation can begin. (again, not saying Christian psychologists are bad, just saying one must be as careful of them as any other counselor)
    Is it any wonder that Christ asked if He would find faith on the earth when He returns? Woe to the pastors that scatter my sheep, God says. And there's an awful lot of scattering going on. 😟 
  19. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from BrotherTony in Is it the same Mary in these two accounts?   
    They are two entirely different accounts. The passage in Luke is in Jesus' early ministry. The woman is unnamed - church tradition of some sort says it is Mary Madgalene for various reasons, but the Bible does not say. It is an immoral woman who poured ointment over Jesus out of gratitude for being forgiven.
    The other Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and John) contain the account of Mary of Bethany (Lazarus' sister, who was already saved), who anointed Jesus for His burial. According to those passages, this was literally the last week of Jesus' public ministry before His crucifixion.
    So two entirely different women, one named Mary of Bethany, and the other unnamed. Both anointed Jesus for different reasons, and both had different people around them (Luke mentions Simon saying something about the moral nature of that woman, and the other Gospels mention Judas getting upset that the money was not put into the treasury bag which he was in charge of).
  20. I Agree
    Jerry got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in Baptist churches that supports the LGBTQ movement   
    Exactly! They are not independent (by very definition of the word itself) if they are part of a convention, an association, or anything like that.
  21. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from HappyChristian in Baptist churches that supports the LGBTQ movement   
    Yes, while the church building/services are open to the lost (and yes, I will make this caveat - to those who are not openly flaunting their sin), no lost person should be welcomed as a member  until they actually trust in Christ for salvation and there is evidence of a change (ie. evidence of being born again).
  22. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in Baptist churches that supports the LGBTQ movement   
    Yes, while the church building/services are open to the lost (and yes, I will make this caveat - to those who are not openly flaunting their sin), no lost person should be welcomed as a member  until they actually trust in Christ for salvation and there is evidence of a change (ie. evidence of being born again).
  23. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from Jim_Alaska in Wrestling Until The Break Of Day   
    Wrestling Until The Break Of Day
    Alone with God – salvation’s story,
    Wrestling until the break of day.
    This is worth the greatest glory,
    To cling to Jesus come what may.
    Wrestling, praying, holding on so tight,
    Like a prince, I won’t let Him go.
    Transformed by grace throughout the night –
    Oh how much He must love me so!
    Running from fear, and troubling trials,
    Faltering, afraid, stopped in my tracks;
    From worry, to peace – yet, all the while,
    Knowing inside there’s no turning back.
    Wrestling until the darkness shatters,
    A part of me won’t give up this fight;
    But it’s not my hold on God that matters:
    He is wrestling with my soul tonight.
    Struggling, pleading, in desperation,
    Until my strength is taken away,
    Wondering at my situation –
    Believing He’s the victor this day.
    Within my own heart, there is a peace:
    He will not leave His work undone;
    Transforming my life piece by piece,
    Until the rising of the sun.
    Wrestling in faith, like Jacob of old,
    Until his life was rearranged –
    Now touched by God, lo and behold,
    I find myself forever changed.
    When trouble comes to darken our trail,
    Though it seems we can’t find our way,
    Our Saviour’s love will never fail –
    Wrestling until the break of day.
    June 1st/2022
    Jerry Bouey
    Jacob was in distress and worried about his brother, Esau, and his 400 armed men coming his way. Left alone with the Lord, his only option was to cling to God until the day break. This is much like us, wrestling with ourselves and our Saviour, until the day break and the shadows flee away – not letting the Lord go until He blesses us by changing our situations or ourselves.
    Genesis 32:24-31 And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day. And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob’s thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him. And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me. And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob. And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed. And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there. And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved. And as he passed over Penuel the sun rose upon him, and he halted upon his thigh.
    Hebrews 11:21 By faith Jacob, when he was a dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph; and worshipped, leaning upon the top of his staff.
    Jacob's encounter with the Lord God changed his life forever!
    Song of Songs 2:17 Until the day break, and the shadows flee away, turn, my beloved, and be thou like a roe or a young hart upon the mountains of Bether.
    Bether means “division,” ie. what separates us from our Saviour. Jesus will come leaping over the divisions and difficulties in my life.
    Song of Songs 4:6 Until the day break, and the shadows flee away, I will get me to the mountain of myrrh, and to the hill of frankincense.
    From the time the Song of Solomon was written until the time of His return again, the Lord Jesus Christ would go to the mountain of myrrh (ie. myrrh meaning death, to face death on Calvary), and the hill of frankincense (ie. incense represents prayer, and He would go as our High Priest to pray to the Father for His brethren).
    Song of Songs 8:14 Make haste, my beloved, and be thou like to a roe or to a young hart upon the mountains of spices.
    This song ends with the Shulamite looking forward to her Beloved Bridegroom’s return, much like true believers are awaiting Jesus’ return to take His bride home to be with Him forever.
    Revelation 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
    The last book of the Bible ends on the same note. Even so, come, Lord Jesus!
    For a devotional study on this theme, please read: Wrestling Until The Day Break
  24. Like
    Jerry got a reaction from wretched in Bibles That Remove Or Confuse The Deity Of Christ   
    I think perhaps you missed what I was saying. I believe Jesus IS God - my point was that by modern versions changing or removing words, they are changing or diluting Bible doctrines.
     
    Yes - but how much change can the world make upon our Bibles before that doctrine is no longer evident in them, or watered down enough that they think it is not essential or necessary for people to believe?
  25. Thanks
    Jerry got a reaction from wretched in Bibles That Remove Or Confuse The Deity Of Christ   
    Let's make this simple then. The KJV is God's preserved, inerrant Word in English. Regardless of how much others may or may not change their own Critical Text manuscripts (and I truly do not have the resources or the time to study this issue out right now), the fact that they depart from the preserved Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Textus Receptus (which have had God's hand on them throughout history) is good enough for me to warn others against this corrupted stream of manuscripts and whatever is translated from it, inasmuch as it differs from those preserved texts I have mentioned above. Even if a particular English translation was 100% exactly the same (as much as possible as a translation can be) as THEIR underlying Critical Texts, I would still warn against the changes that their CT texts have made to the Word of God.
    God didn't inspire two streams of competing manuscripts (or changed manuscripts) - so as much as they do differ, one or both are wrong. However, studying out the history of the texts and of the English (and some other language) translations from these underlying texts, I know where and why I stand on the King James Bible and its underlying manuscripts. There is more to the issue than personal preferences on either side. There are doctrinal changes because certain people - editors, translators, compilers, and scribes - chose to change or corrupt things along the way. Yes, granted some of the changes may even have been unintentional (ie. a copyist error), though most are not, and these changes are significant and do affect the doctrine of the text that they are in.
    You are welcome to your preferences - but I would rather have convictions based on the evidence behind and for both streams of manuscripts.
×
×
  • Create New...