Search results

That happened to me once also. My walk with Christ went downhill from there, until I returned to the kjv as my daily reading habit.

My continuing in His goodness has nothing to do with self-effort and everything to do with my relationship with Christ as a branch connected to and abiding in the vine.

You deny that the Father is the Lord of heaven and earth then? Are you going to, next, take scissors and cut out Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21 from your Bibles? (consider the consequences for such a thing in Revelation 22:19!)

Those who are born to burn in the lake of fire (Jude 1:3-4) will be given the opportunity to receive Jesus but God knows from eternity past (and eternity future; and everything in between) what choice they will make. Iow, predestination (whether to heaven or hell) is according to foreknowledge...

@Christophany How is the eternal Father not the Father? Notice you have taken step one and have changed the Bible once...changing it from everlasting Father to Eternal Father. There is only one Eternal Father...and that is the Father... Jesus is an immortal human...and therefore He can be...

The righteousness of the Lord is not only imputed and positional; it is imparted and practical (1 John 3:7, Romans 5:19, Matthew 5:6). And yes, we are told to continue in His goodness, lest we be cut off from the olive tree as a branch (Romans 11:20-22).

It is the only difference that I am aware of at this moment.

Your loss. For all you know, the kjv is the only Bible that is the unadulterated word of the Lord for this generation. It is indeed the narrow way that leads to life (Matthew 7:13-14). (other translations can help us in our understanding of the kjv where the archaic language differs from...

Here:

Biblical Trinitarianism accepts the literal rendering of Isaiah 9:6 in the kjv.

So, the Father is the one Kurios, the Son is the one Kurios; how is the Son then not the Father? Try again. Next time take into account the scriptures in the following post (and what I say by them): True Trinity.

post #505: I disagree with the scholarship on this issue because it requires that one change the rendering of the kjv in order to fit a mold, thus the scholarship in question is based in eisegesis rather than exegesis.

I am kjv-superior. I agree that the Father is not the Son... But I call myself a biblical Trinitarian in that I agree with the literal rendering of Isaiah 9:6 that the Son is the Father.

The others are not the one Kurios. It is the literal interpretation. Pro 1:6, To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings. 2Pe 1:20, Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. So taking that into...

That is so very weak... I suppose that if someone really wants to latch onto it, they will... Some people are simply susceptible to false teaching because it scratches their itching ears. Glory to God!

Give me a break, man................ We are not in debate mode here (see Romans 1:29, 2 Corinthians 12:20-21).

You have to change the wording of the kjv, not once, but twice, in order to deny the reality of the matter. btw, I am a Trinitarian. (for I believe that there is a distinction between the members in the Godhead.)

When kurios is capitalized it refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. There is one Kurios, Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 8:6). The Father is the Kurios of heaven and earth (Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21). There are many kurios' (1 Corinthians 8:5). Capitalization matters; if you don't acknowledge it...

Do you yield to others by conceding an argument when you still believe that you have the truth of the matter?

If you remain unconvinced, it is because you aren't heeding the voice of the Holy Spirit.