Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jesus speaks to me also , but it is through His word, the bible, and no other way. I wonder how anyone can think their 'thoughts' are from Jesus, the Holy Spirit, or any other way ( maybe even the devil) ? Everybody, including very faithful Christians, have 'thoughts' and they all differ from one another. Who determines who's thoughts are from a heavenly source? The thoughts of anyone are influenced by what they believe. If you are diligent searchers of the word of God, and retain that word, your spiritual thoughts should be in accordance with God words. If you are listening to something that a 'preacher' is preaching, your thoughts will be in accordance with what the preacher has said, even if it is contrary to the word of God. That is why it is so important to search the word to see if these things are so.
His word is also written on our hearts. His guidance starts out as conscience, and the still small voice within, then can grow into being audible.
Jesus heard His Fathers voice, and we can do the things He did and more, to those that can believe.
Jesus speaks to me also , but it is through His word, the bible, and no other way. I wonder how anyone can think their 'thoughts' are from Jesus, the Holy Spirit, or any other way ( maybe even the devil) ? Everybody, including very faithful Christians, have 'thoughts' and they all differ from one another. Who determines who's thoughts are from a heavenly source? The thoughts of anyone are influenced by what they believe. If you are diligent searchers of the word of God, and retain that word, your spiritual thoughts should be in accordance with God words. If you are listening to something that a 'preacher' is preaching, your thoughts will be in accordance with what the preacher has said, even if it is contrary to the word of God. That is why it is so important to search the word to see if these things are so.
Great post, Marianinark! I hope you aren't too dismayed that a preterist is agreeing with you!
Arguy: Copying and pasting the work of someone else is inexcusable. Do you yourself understand ALL that this article is saying or do you simply see that it is disagreeing with preterism so you therefore post it as your position?
Have you personally investigated the passages that are used in this article to see how they are being used in their contexts? If you have not, how do you know that what is being said is true?
Can you present just one of the arguments from this article that YOU have thoroughly studied yourself, using the verses in their context?
I am not going to go through this article to refute all the arguments of this writer.
Do you not suppose that I could find a learned "scholar" who agrees with me and then simply post all of his work?
If you had written something yourself and demonstrated first that you understood and could defend the position presented in the article, that would have been fine. But you said nothing. You simply provided a link.
Why not share your own words and your own work, arguy?
Arguy: Copying and pasting the work of someone else is inexcusable. Do you yourself understand ALL that this article is saying or do you simply see that it is disagreeing with preterism so you therefore post it as your position?
Have you personally investigated the passages that are used in this article to see how they are being used in their contexts? If you have not, how do you know that what is being said is true?
Can you present just one of the arguments from this article that YOU have thoroughly studied yourself, using the verses in their context?
I am not going to go through this article to refute all the arguments of this writer.
Do you not suppose that I could find a learned "scholar" who agrees with me and then simply post all of his work?
If you had written something yourself and demonstrated first that you understood and could defend the position presented in the article, that would have been fine. But you said nothing. You simply provided a link.
Why not share your own words and your own work, arguy?
Thanks!
Preterist
1.last time i looked its not inexcusable to post a link to a website i didnt try to take credit for any of it myself..so
2.that being said..yes i read the article, it pretty much defends itself
3. im done with this argument..
Then, get a good Bible, one that is KJV or very similar such as NKJV or NIV.
Get involved with a good Bible based Christ centered church or Bible study, and learn God's Word for yourself. Don't listen to every teaching......let the Bible and the Holy Spirit guide you into the truth of God's Word.
There are some genuinely real and loving Christians on this board that will be more than happy to help you in your search. Figuring out who they are is a little frustrating, and as you can see above in post #84, I've had to weed through them myself. Proceed with caution, and look to God for the answers, not men. Find your own truth. God bless you!
KJV and the NIV are two very different bibles.
There are basically one of either two categories of New Testament manuscripts which all bibles are based upon.
1) Majority Text (Textus Receptus) - originally known as the Received Text, which was compiled between 1514 and 1641. The Majority Text has, since then, been made up of thousands of other Greek manuscripts. These later manuscript discoveries have confirmed the reliability of the Received Text.
2) Minority Text (Alexandrian Text) - is based mainly on just two manuscripts, the Vaticanus (also known as "B") and the Sinaiticus (also known as "Aleph"). These manuscripts not only disagree with the Majority Text, but they disagree with each other!
The KJV is translated from the Majority Text.
The NIV is translated from the Minority Text.
Quote:
Figuring out who they are is a little frustrating,
There are basically one of either two categories of New Testament manuscripts which all bibles are based upon.
1) Majority Text (Textus Receptus) - originally known as the Received Text, which was compiled between 1514 and 1641. The Majority Text has, since then, been made up of thousands of other Greek manuscripts. These later manuscript discoveries have confirmed the reliability of the Received Text.
2) Minority Text (Alexandrian Text) - is based mainly on just two manuscripts, the Vaticanus (also known as "B") and the Sinaiticus (also known as "Aleph"). These manuscripts not only disagree with the Majority Text, but they disagree with each other!
The KJV is translated from the Majority Text.
The NIV is translated from the Minority Text.
I see no point of this response AT ALL. My post that you quoted was to a different poster concerning getting into the word of God. I am so sick of these petty arguments and responses. I have read both versions, and for a new Christian who would have trouble understanding the KJV, the NIV is perfectly fine and is still the word of God. I have compared one to the other, and the only difference I see is the NIV is written in the way we speak today. I see no offenses to the KJV.
You have taken things out of context from my post, only to make an attempt to stir up another argument. Good luck with that.
I see no point of this response AT ALL. My post that you quoted was to a different poster concerning getting into the word of God. I am so sick of these petty arguments and responses. I have read both versions, and for a new Christian who would have trouble understanding the KJV, the NIV is perfectly fine and is still the word of God. I have compared one to the other, and the only difference I see is the NIV is written in the way we speak today. I see no offenses to the KJV.
You have taken things out of context from my post, only to make an attempt to stir up another argument. Good luck with that.
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way, I am not trying to stir up anything. I just think that there might be an interested soul who will want to know the difference in the bibles. I know myself, I used to wonder "why" all the different translations, and which one might be right. It is just a question of "seeking the truth". And not stir up a argument. This is not such a difficult thing to question. Anyone can question whatever they want to, and look for answers. In Christs day the Pharisees became quite angry when Christ spoke to them about "their temple" and a lot of different subjects.
Matthew 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
KJV 1 John 4:3, " And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist,"
NIV 1 John 4:3, " but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist,"
Since the spirit of the NIV does not confess in this verse that "Christ is come in the flesh," it must be the spirit of the antichrist.
KJV Philippians 2:6, "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"
NIV Philippians 2:6, "Who, being in the very nature of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,"
The Minority Text contradicts John 10:30, "I and my Father are one."
KJV Matthew 9:13, "for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."
NIV Matthew 9:13, "For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
The Minority Text deletes the purpose behind calling sinners!
KJVActs 8:37, "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
NIV Omitted
Acts 8:37 teaches one must first "believe" before one can be baptized, and the Minority Text omits it altogether. In other words, this powerful profession of faith is no longer needed for one to be baptized...baptism itself leads to salvation. But God says no such thing.
KJV I John 5:13, "...and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."
NIV Omitted
The Minority Text does not want anyone to believe in Jesus Christ!
KJV Mark 16:9-20 (all twelve verses), "Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen."
NIV Removed in the footnotes
There is a line separating the last 12 verses of Mark from the main text. Right under the line it says: [The two most reliable early manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9-20] (NIV, 1978 edition)
The NIV has published a new American, gender-inclusive NIV. Gender-inclusive language renders "brother" to "brother and sister". "Man" becomes "human beings", etc. How many of us agree with calling a man a woman and man? If the NIV is so accurate, why is it changing the original masculine words to masculine and feminine? Because the NIV is not accurate!
KJV Daniel 3:25, "He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God."
NIV Daniel 3:25, "He said, Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods."
I see no point of this response AT ALL. My post that you quoted was to a different poster concerning getting into the word of God. I am so sick of these petty arguments and responses. I have read both versions, and for a new Christian who would have trouble understanding the KJV, the NIV is perfectly fine and is still the word of God. I have compared one to the other, and the only difference I see is the NIV is written in the way we speak today. I see no offenses to the KJV.
You have taken things out of context from my post, only to make an attempt to stir up another argument. Good luck with that.
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way, I am not trying to stir up anything. I just think that there might be an interested soul who will want to know the difference in the bibles. I know myself, I used to wonder "why" all the different translations, and which one might be right. It is just a question of "seeking the truth". And not stir up a argument. This is not such a difficult thing to question. Anyone can question whatever they want to, and look for answers. In Christs day the Pharisees became quite angry when Christ spoke to them about "their temple" and a lot of different subjects.
Matthew 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
KJV 1 John 4:3, " And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist,"
NIV 1 John 4:3, " but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist,"
Since the spirit of the NIV does not confess in this verse that "Christ is come in the flesh," it must be the spirit of the antichrist.
KJV Philippians 2:6, "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"
NIV Philippians 2:6, "Who, being in the very nature of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,"
The Minority Text contradicts John 10:30, "I and my Father are one."
KJV Matthew 9:13, "for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."
NIV Matthew 9:13, "For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
The Minority Text deletes the purpose behind calling sinners!
KJVActs 8:37, "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
NIV Omitted
Acts 8:37 teaches one must first "believe" before one can be baptized, and the Minority Text omits it altogether. In other words, this powerful profession of faith is no longer needed for one to be baptized...baptism itself leads to salvation. But God says no such thing.
KJV I John 5:13, "...and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."
NIV Omitted
The Minority Text does not want anyone to believe in Jesus Christ!
KJV Mark 16:9-20 (all twelve verses), "Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen."
NIV Removed in the footnotes
There is a line separating the last 12 verses of Mark from the main text. Right under the line it says: [The two most reliable early manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9-20] (NIV, 1978 edition)
The NIV has published a new American, gender-inclusive NIV. Gender-inclusive language renders "brother" to "brother and sister". "Man" becomes "human beings", etc. How many of us agree with calling a man a woman and man? If the NIV is so accurate, why is it changing the original masculine words to masculine and feminine? Because the NIV is not accurate!
KJV Daniel 3:25, "He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God."
NIV Daniel 3:25, "He said, Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods."
I've been accused of so many things since I've been on CD (R&P), which hasn't been long. I was even accused of being blasphemous and self-righteous because of the screen name that I use. There's a reason for it, just like my being here. It wasn't an accident I stumbled across CD in 2006.
There's been so many questions and disagreements about the end times. Here's what I believe, and here's what the screen name means. Once again, I will state my purpose; to spread God's message of the salvation through Jesus Christ His Son to acheive an eternal, immortal life in heaven with God.
"Day of the Lord" is derived from the many times this term is used in the Bible to refer to the rapture of the church, as well as Jesus' second coming. Some seem to be confused by the fact that they are not one in the same, so I want to clear that up if possible. There will be a 2nd coming, but it's actually in two phases.
1 Thessalonians 5:1-2
"Now, brothers, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night."
Let me just take a moment to dissect these two verses.
NOW = change in topic.....NOT "now", as in right this minute.
Like we would say in conversation; "Now, I want to talk about something else." TIMES (plural)= (greek=chronos) = chronology EVENTS (plural)= epoch (kairos) = happenings
"Times" and "events" that lead up to the "day of the Lord" FIRST "YOU" = Paul is speaking to Christian people 2ND "YOU" = Paul is speaking to ALL
In this instance, the "day of the Lord" refers to the day the Lord returns briefly to collect the believers or the body of Christ.
This is the order of things to come:
1. Rapture (day of the Lord, day of "visitation', day of wrath)
2. Rise of the AntiChrist (7 year reign)
3. Salvation of Israel
4. Opening of the seven seals
5. Sounding of the trumpets
6. The 2nd coming of Christ
7. Battle of Armageddon
8. 1000 year reign of Christ
9. Binding of Satan for 1000 years
10. Release of Satan for a short time
11. Final stand or rebellion
12. Great white throne judgement
13. New heaven and the new earth will be created
Essential message:
Believers will not face this day of wrath (day of rapture and God's wrath)
Unbelievers WILL face this day of wrath (the day of wrath for unbelievers)
What you must do to be raptured:
1. Acknowledge your sin
2. you must confess your sin to Jesus
3. You must trust on Jesus....accept Him by faith
I could go on, but I will stop here so as to not make this any longer than it already is and to allow for discussion.
In order to get this thread back on track, here is my original OP. This thread had actually fell by the wayside and was revived outside of the purpose of the thread. If it's going to be revived, then it needs to be in the context of the thread.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i didnt try to take credit for any of it myself..so 
KJV and NIV
