Search results

Baptist churches vary greatly in their beliefs and practices, so even if there was a Baptist church close by, I would want to check that it viewed the bible as its authority for faith and practice.

Thank you for your gracious response.

Thanks for that, Shawn. No, I don't think it can be right for any translation, new or old, to make it sound as though God is commanding divorce. I have looked at several translations. The Bible in Basic English has: For I am against the putting away of a wife, The CEV (Australia) has...

I do understand that, but this particular discussion started when you said in the OP: "God hateth divorce and its correctly translated." That is why I kept saying that neither Geneva nor the KJV say "divorce." It would have been clearer if you had said that Geneva was wrong to make it sound...

Thanks. I clearly didn't edit my post quite quickly enough! As for where the Latin translation got "book" rather than "tree", I don't know. I imagine that it was a translation into Latin of the original Greek, which I understand to be "biblos", or book.

No, it is not one saying "put away." Both the KJV and Geneva have it. The KJV says: For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously...

Sorry, but what does, "Where Latin get book?" mean? Do you mean, "Where did the Latin translation get the idea of 'book of life'?"

But you are still attempting to assert that when the bible mentions King Cyrus or King Darius, it really means (according to you) King James VI of Scotland, who became King James I of England. You are still saying, it seems to me, that Ezra is not really describing the rebuilding of Jerusalem...

I'm no Latin expert - far from it - but I thought the Latin for "tree" was "arbor." "Lignum" is the Latin word for "wood."

Having a separate pastor for children is not something I see in the bible. If "children's pastor" is just another name for leading the outreach of a church to children, I suggest a better name be found.

I think I understand your reasoning, but really it doesn't work like that. It's not only the issue of women pastors; there are several matters on which genuine, born again Christians differ. They hold the beliefs they do because that is what the believe God teaches in His word. Take the issue...

Well, kjv has: For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously. Geneva has: If thou hatest her, put her away, saith the Lord God of...

That is not so. I only used the office of pastor because this thread has a title which concerns churches with women pastors. I didn't say that only the pastor can lead or teach. In Acts we read: “So when they had appointed elders in every church, and prayed with fasting, they commended them...

Yes they were, but they weren't women pastors. Not a woman pastor. Acts 16:14 & 40 don't say that Lydia was the pastor of the church: “Now a certain woman named Lydia heard [us]. She was a seller of purple from the city of Thyatira, who worshiped God. The Lord opened her heart to heed the...

Well, you may have meant Geneva and the modern versions, but: 1) the KJV doesn't say "divorce" and 2) the NKJV, a modern version, does say "divorce." So, incidentally, do the KJV2011, HCSB, GWV, GNBE, ESV, and RSV, all modern versions.

So the KJV was wrong not to use the word "divorce?" Haven't you said in many posts that you believe that the KJV was perfect? To be clear, I don't think the KJV was wrong here. "Putting away" was a way of referring to divorce. As a little boy, I used to think that where the KJV said that...

However, the KJV doesn't use the word "divorce" in Malachi 2:16: For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously. The NKJV does use...

I have just looked through all your posts in this thread, and I see that you have mentioned before that you believe Timothy wrote Hebrews. In post 16 you wrote: "No, Timothy wrote it." Your wrote similarly in some other posts. But you haven't said which manuscripts say that Paul wrote...

Surely we can discuss and differ without calling others on the Forum liars. I often find myself disagreeing with things you write, but I don't stoop to calling you a liar.

Which manuscripts? How to you know that Timothy wrote it? You often seem to state certain things without giving any evidence to back it up. I'm not being rude, just that it seems that way to me. For example, you just say, "Timothy wrote it." No evidence, no source of information.