PDA

View Full Version : 1st John 2:6



Eaglenester
Aug 1st 2008, 12:51 PM
Scripture, ie Yahweh's Holy Spirit through John, says:


The one who says he stays in Him (Yahshua The Messiah) ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

(1John 2:6)

How did Yahshua walk?

What does this look like in a disciples life?

In what manner are you walking even as Messiah walked?

How successful are you walking even as Messiah walked, and what areas need the most improvement?

tt1106
Aug 1st 2008, 01:19 PM
Scripture, ie Yahweh's Holy Spirit through John, says:


The one who says he stays in Him (Yahshua The Messiah) ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

(1John 2:6)

How did Yahshua walk?

Free from sin. Proclaiming the father from first breathe to last.


What does this look like in a disciples life?

Evidence of Fruit being produced.


In what manner are you walking even as Messiah walked?
God has been asked to expose all sin in my life and help me rid my life of it.
He has spoken and much to my sinful life's objection, I have removed those aspects. (Work in progress)
I have also asked Jesus to use me and he has answered mightily. I hope to begin attending seminary in the fall.


How successful are you walking even as Messiah walked, and what areas need the most improvement?
So far very successful. I still have the occasional falling down. I no longer feel as if I'm going to hell every time I sin. I sin less and less frequently. I feel a joy like I've never felt.
I need to work on my skills witnessing and also my study habits. I read about 3 days a week, but I want to read more.
Jesus is hard at work in my life.

BroRog
Aug 1st 2008, 02:27 PM
Paul says in Philippians 2 that we ought to be humble as Jesus was humble, putting others ahead of ourselves.

theBelovedDisciple
Aug 1st 2008, 06:38 PM
[Let] nothing [be done] through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.

Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.

Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross

------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with the Phillipians verse.. a portrait of what should be our state of mind.. and our 'walk' as we abide 'in Him'.... 'let this mind be in you'.. only 'able' thru the Power and Work of the Holy Ghost... 'a mind' that has been released from the blinders that the god of this world had 'blinded' prior to being born again.

Paul rejoiced in the fact that he served the law of God with his mind...

its stated in this verse:

Rom 7:25 (http://cf.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=7&v=25&t=KJV#25)I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

RoadWarrior
Aug 24th 2008, 03:30 AM
Scripture, ie Yahweh's Holy Spirit through John, says:


The one who says he stays in Him (Yahshua The Messiah) ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

(1John 2:6)

How did Yahshua walk?

What does this look like in a disciples life?

In what manner are you walking even as Messiah walked?

How successful are you walking even as Messiah walked, and what areas need the most improvement?

1. Jesus walked in Holiness.
2. By this you shall know that you are my disciples, when you love one another.
3. If I stop to brag, then I lose my step.;)
4. I am successful when I am not doing the walking, but He is walking in me. I most need improvement in surrendering to His will.

Jerry4America
Aug 24th 2008, 03:56 AM
Scripture, ie Yahweh's Holy Spirit through John, says:


The one who says he stays in Him (Yahshua The Messiah) ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

(1John 2:6)

How did Yahshua walk?

What does this look like in a disciples life?

In what manner are you walking even as Messiah walked?

How successful are you walking even as Messiah walked, and what areas need the most improvement?Just a side question... why do you say Yahweh and not Jesus? What is so special about saying Yahweh over against Jesus? I ask because I notice a lot of Christians on this board are now saying Yahweh instead of Jesus.

Eaglenester
Aug 24th 2008, 04:28 AM
Just a side question... why do you say Yahweh and not Jesus? What is so special about saying Yahweh over against Jesus? I ask because I notice a lot of Christians on this board are now saying Yahweh instead of Jesus.
OK

Yahweh is actually not being used instead of Jesus

Yahweh is God's eternal name revealed in Exodus to Moses - whenever you see The LORD in Scripture, it's Yahweh.
Many Bibles will put this info up front.

And Elohim (God) said to Moses, “I am that which I am.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you.’ ”

And Elohim said further to Moses, “Thus you are to say to the children of Israel, Yahweh Elohim of your fathers, the Elohim of Abraham, the Elohim of Isaac, and the Elohim of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My Name forever, and this is My remembrance to all generations.’
(Exodus 3:14-15)

Now let's look at a couple things here.

Elohim said "I Am that which I Am"

When this is studied, it is a first person statement.

Then He gives His name, Yahweh, which basicly means I will be who I will to be
and it is a third person statement.
This will be important later when looking at the Gospels.

So how long is Yahweh His name?
Does it still relevant today?

This is My Name forever

So how did The LORD come to replace Yahweh in most translations of Scripture?

It all stems from a misinterpretation of Exodus 20:7

"You shall not take the name of Yahweh your Elohim in vain, for Yahweh will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain.

The Jewish religious leaders told the people that they could not say Elohim's name - so that whenever they saw
They would say Adonai which translates to master.

The English translators continued this practiced based on a misinterpretation.

The KJV was the first translation to do this - Lord was a title given to every land holder in England - so that is the title they used to replace Elohim's name.

So what is more correct interpretation of Exodus 20:7

“You do not bring (5375) the Name of Yahweh your Elohim to naught (7723), for Yahweh does not leave the one unpunished who brings His Name to naught.

H5375: to lift, bear up, carry, take
H7723: emptiness, nothingness, vanity, naught

So actually, by forbidding the speaking the given name of Elohim, they are bringing His name to naught or nothingness - thus breaking this commandment rather than keeping it.

So I, having a personal relationship with Elohim, feel I can address Him by His revealed given name rather that a title, and not be disrespectful.

I liken it to President Bush.
If addressing him, we would say Mr President, that's his title and position.
But his close friends would call him George.

I think we, as His chosen, are on intimate enough terms to be able to use Elohim's name Yahweh, if not he wouldn't have used it over 7000 times in The Scriptures.

Also, my reasoning for using the Hebrew for His name instead of English, being I'm not Hebrew is:

I went to Africa - they called me Walter
I went to Russia - they called me Walter
I went to Israel - they called me Walter

What is the President of Russia's name - Vladimir, what is he called when he comes here to the USA? Vladimir - no name change

We generally call people by the name they tell us, we don't change it.

Osama
Hussein

People who migrate here from Asia are still called by their Asian names.

The same with Hispanics.

As far as Jesus' name - He came in His Father's name (Yahweh)
His given name you will see as Yashua/Yeshua/Y'shua.

His full name would be seen as Yahushua - Yahweh (Yah) is salvation (Shua)
Realize the letter J is not represented in Hebrew, it didn't come about untill the 1500s, and then it had the Y sound.

Jesus is what is called a transliteration, His Hebrew name was said into Greek, then translated to Latin, then into English.
Rest of the NT doesn't go thru Latin to get to English.
If you translated Messiah's name directly to English it would be more proper as Joshua.

Eaglenester
Aug 24th 2008, 04:33 AM
Let's look at more of Messiah's use of the name of Elohim.

I showed earlier in Exodus
And Elohim said to Moses, “I am that which I am.”
I am has sent me to you

And said that was a first person statement (the person referring to himself) and that was important.

Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? And the prophets died!
Who do you make yourself out to be?"
Yashua answered, "If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing.
It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, 'He is our Elohom.'
But you have not known him.
I know him.
If I were to say that I do not know him, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and I keep his word.
Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day.
He saw it and was glad."
So the Jews said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?"
Yahushua said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."
So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.
(John 8:53-59)
Do you see it?

The religious leaders asking The Messiah
Who do you make yourself out to be?

And what does He say
I am
He is using the first person statement Yahweh used with Moses.

They KNEW what He was saying and what the implication was.

They were soooo angry they wanted to stone Him on the spot.

Messiah is clearly stating He is Yahweh, no denying it.

The mormons and jws with their poor English translations miss this.

Let's look at another instance of the first persom I Am statement:

Judas, then, having received the company of soldiers, and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, came there with lanterns, and torches, and weapons.
Yashua, then, knowing all that would come upon Him, went forward and said to them, “Whom do you seek?”
They answered Him, “Yahushua of Natsareth.” Yashua said to them, “I am.”
And Judas, who delivered Him up, was also standing with them.
When, therefore, He said to them, “I am,” they drew back and fell to the ground.
Once more He asked them, “Whom do you seek?”
And they said, “Yashua of Natsareth.”
Yashua answered, “I said to you that I am.
If, then, you seek Me, allow these to go,” in order that the word might be filled which He spoke,
“Of those whom You have given Me, I have lost none.”
(John 18:3-9)

Do you see it?
Most translation incorrectly add He to the I AM statement - He is NOT in The Scriptures.

The translators missed it.

Now remember, these are not Roman soldiers, they are temple guards (the word soldier in not in the Scriptures either)
How do we know this
from the chief priests and Pharisees.

These are all Jews coming to arrest Messiah.

He uses the first person statement I AM.

The Jews know what He is saying and the implication, which is why they draw back and fall to the ground.


And people all the time are saying "Jesus never claimed to be God"
WRONG
Just showed 2 places where He directly said He was Yahweh Elohim

Does this also clarify The Messiah's other I AM statements:
I AM the way, the truth and the life
I AM the light of the world
I AM the bread of life
I AM the door
I AM the good shepherd

It lines up with OT uses of Yahweh with other descriptors to define Elohim's character:

YHWH Yireh (Genesis 22:14, "He sees"),
YHWH Rophekah (Exodus 15:26, "He heals"),
YHWH Nissiy (Exodus 17:15, "My Banner"),
YHWH Meqaddishkem (Exodus 31:13, "He makes you holy"),
YHWH Shalom (Judges 6:24, "Lord of peace"),
YHWH Tseba’oth (1 Samuel 1:3, "Yahua of hosts"),
YHWH Tidqenuh (Jeremiah 23:6, "Yahuah, our righteousness"),
YHWH Shammah (Ezekiel 48:35, "He is there"),
YHWH Elyon (Psalm 7:17, "He is most high"),
YHWH Ro‘iy, (Psalm 23:1, "He is my shepherd")

Does this help?

Jerry4America
Aug 24th 2008, 04:38 AM
That's a lot of information. So, you think it is wrong when hymnwriters wrote Holy, holy, holy LORD God Almighty? I personally think this is just extreme nitpicking. I love the name of Jesus and I love to call him Lord. I love the english language. Sorry.:hug:

Eaglenester
Aug 24th 2008, 04:58 AM
That's a lot of information. So, you think it is wrong when hymnwriters wrote Holy, holy, holy LORD God Almighty? I personally think this is just extreme nitpicking. I love the name of Jesus and I love to call him Lord. I love the english language. Sorry.:hug:

Yes it is alot of info - I hope you will find the time to read through it sometime.

I didn't say it was wrong
He is Lord
But He is Yahweh, that is His name.


You may think think I'm extreme nitpicking by using God's eternal revealed name, by Yahweh doesn't - that's what we will call Him in heaven.

His put His name in Scripture 7000 times for some reason, why would the translators want to remove it?

I have the blessing of being able to call Him by His self given name.
You have the freedom not to call Him by His name.

mcgyver
Aug 25th 2008, 12:37 PM
Yes it is alot of info - I hope you will find the time to read through it sometime.

I didn't say it was wrong
He is Lord
But He is Yahweh, that is His name.


You may think think I'm extreme nitpicking by using God's eternal revealed name, by Yahweh doesn't - that's what we will call Him in heaven.

His put His name in Scripture 7000 times for some reason, why would the translators want to remove it?

I have the blessing of being able to call Him by His self given name.
You have the freedom not to call Him by His name.

Not saying you're wrong...but for me personally I am not comfortable using The Father's name in such manner...

When I was a child, and later as a young adult; I loved my daddy very, very much. We had a good relationship and I know he loved me (as well as my siblings)...but I would never have dreamed of calling him by his first (given) name...To do so (for us) would have been a mark of disrespect...addressing him as an equal...after all he was my father and so deserved the respect of his children.

I love the Lord very, very much; and I know without a doubt that He loves me. He is my heavenly Father, to whom I can cry "Abba"...Yet He is also the Holy One, the maker of all things, righteous, just...and deserving of my respect as well as my love as His child.

So for me personally, I choose as a measure of respect (from the way I was raised) to address Him as Lord and God, though I know His name.

JMO

Emanate
Aug 25th 2008, 12:39 PM
The Scriptures speak very fondly of those that know the name of Yahweh.

mcgyver
Aug 25th 2008, 12:50 PM
The Scriptures speak very fondly of those that know the name of Yahweh.

Very true!!!

In those days, to know the name of the LORD signified an intimate relationship with God...For God Himself revealed it to His people.

Yet...I would submit something simply for consideration, just something to ponder:

Eaglenester stated that His name is given over 7000 times in scripture, but the translators chose to substitute it with something else...

If we accept that all scripture is God-breathed, then in all the times that His name is translated as LORD, etc...It was not the translators who chose not to write His name, but it was by the prompting of the Holy Spirit that His name was so transliterated...

Just a thought :hmm:

Eaglenester
Aug 25th 2008, 12:54 PM
The Scriptures speak very fondly of those that know the name of Yahweh.

Yes it does.

In fact it even says:

All who call on the name of Yahweh shall be saved

Yet few churches teach His name.
.

All through Scripture (especially the Psalms) we are told to

Praise the name of Yahweh

Yet few churches teach His name.

Eaglenester
Aug 25th 2008, 01:00 PM
Very true!!!

In those days, to know the name of the LORD signified an intimate relationship with God...For God Himself revealed it to His people.

Yet...I would submit something simply for consideration, just something to ponder:

Eaglenester stated that His name is given over 7000 times in scripture, but the translators chose to substitute it with something else...

If we accept that all scripture is God-breathed, then in all the times that His name is translated as LORD, etc...It was not the translators who chose not to write His name, but it was by the prompting of the Holy Spirit that His name was so transliterated...

Just a thought :hmm:

TOTALLY disagree with the last assumption.
You are saying that the translations are Elohim breathed which AIN'T true.
There are WAY WAY to many errors in the different translation to even begin to say Yahweh breathed the translations.

The only ones who apply the Elohim breathed to translations are the KJV only people - and they are nut cases in that.

mcgyver
Aug 25th 2008, 01:11 PM
TOTALLY disagree with the last assumption.
You are saying that the translations are Elohim breathed which AIN'T true.
There are WAY WAY to many errors in the different translation to even begin to say Yahweh breathed the translations.

The only ones who apply the Elohim breathed to translations are the KJV only people - and they are nut cases in that.

Repectfully my brother (and I am seeking your thoughts),

If this is the case, then can we really trust our scriptures? For the door of doubt stands wide open...

Does not the bible testify of itself that "all scripture is God-breathed"?

Is God not well able to keep His word in any language?

diffangle
Aug 25th 2008, 01:41 PM
Repectfully my brother (and I am seeking your thoughts),

If this is the case, then can we really trust our scriptures? For the door of doubt stands wide open...

Does not the bible testify of itself that "all scripture is God-breathed"?

Is God not well able to keep His word in any language?
It does help to study the Scriptures in its original language b/c there are examples of poor/wrong translations, take for example Acts 12:4, "And when he had apprehended him, he put [him] in prison, and delivered [him] to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people"... the word easter was improperly translated from the Greek word pascha meaning Passover. Imo, YHWH doesn't approve of His Passover being replaced with a goddess worshipping holiday b/c of what His Word says about that very thing...

Deut 12

29 “When YHWH your God cuts off from before you the nations which you go to dispossess, and you displace them and dwell in their land, 30 take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.’ 31 You shall not worship YHWH your God in that way; for every abomination to YHWH which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods.
32 “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.

Bryan43
Aug 25th 2008, 01:44 PM
Repectfully my brother (and I am seeking your thoughts),

If this is the case, then can we really trust our scriptures? For the door of doubt stands wide open...

Does not the bible testify of itself that "all scripture is God-breathed"?

Is God not well able to keep His word in any language?


I must say I agree with Eaglenester on this one. The only inspired words are the origional writings. man who translate have the problem of being tempted to put their own twist on things.
'
for example, why was baptism not translated, but transliterated into english form? And thus the argument that has since been created for centuries, which could have been stopped dead in its tracks of the word was translated.

many examples of poor translation have led to false beliefs.

This is why God has kept a copy of the origional so people who were gifted By God can show us the truth.

if one opens there eyes. they can read the english text and fully understand, even get around the poor translations, because God is teaching them

However, one who is not in God could easly read an english text and due to their misunderstanding of who God is, or their preconcieved ideas easily read things hard to understand and twist it. men have been doing this for thousands of years now. which is why we have many denominations and many beliefs.

Eaglenester
Aug 25th 2008, 01:58 PM
Repectfully my brother (and I am seeking your thoughts),

If this is the case, then can we really trust our scriptures? For the door of doubt stands wide open...

Does not the bible testify of itself that "all scripture is God-breathed"?

Is God not well able to keep His word in any language?

We can't trust all translations - is The Message equal to the NASB?
If so God is wishy-washy.

mcgyver
Aug 25th 2008, 02:45 PM
First of all, and for the record: I don't have a problem if you wish to refer to God as YHWH...:hug:

The posts in this thread have served however to illustrate my point:

We do not have the autographs!

Therefore, to make an assertion that words were changed by the translators of their own "free will" and not at the prompting of the Holy Spirit is to make an assumption from facts not in evidence which can result in faulty deduction...BECAUSE we don't have the autographs with which to compare. :)

Even if we (and I'm going to keep this OT for a moment) go to the oldest Hebrew text extant...we are still reading copies of copies of copies of copies...

But yet I believe that our (mainstream) translations are reliable for many reasons...and that God has kept His word for us through out the centuries...one of the benefits of the required "Textual Criticism" courses I guess :P

BTW, I acknowledge that there are "bad" translations out there...But The Message compared to the NASB is truly apples to oranges, as even a cursory reading of either the TR or NA/UBS text reveals that The Message is at best a commentary while the NASB is one of the most formally equivalent translations available :lol:.

My point is this then: If we can't trust the underlying text (Hebrew or Greek) as the inspired word of God...We haven't got a leg to stand on!

As far as the Acrostic being supplanted by other references (i.e. LORD); Using the bible as it's own best commentary I can make a pretty good case for this as the leading of the Holy Spirit and not simply the will of the translators. ;)

I simply think that we should be circumspect in making broad and sweeping statements that we (myself included) can't really support.

Emanate
Aug 25th 2008, 03:15 PM
Very true!!!

In those days, to know the name of the LORD signified an intimate relationship with God...For God Himself revealed it to His people.

Yet...I would submit something simply for consideration, just something to ponder:

Eaglenester stated that His name is given over 7000 times in scripture, but the translators chose to substitute it with something else...

If we accept that all scripture is God-breathed, then in all the times that His name is translated as LORD, etc...It was not the translators who chose not to write His name, but it was by the prompting of the Holy Spirit that His name was so transliterated...

Just a thought :hmm:

The translators also changed the name of the brother of Y'shua from Jacob to James.

In the case of Yahweh, I believe it was more of a Jewish interpretation regarding the name that replaced the Name with Adonai.

All scripture is god breathed, however, all translations are not.

RoadWarrior
Aug 25th 2008, 03:21 PM
The Jews deeply reverence the name, so instead of using the name itself, they say "HaShem" which means, "The Name".

Have you ever done a study on the names of God?

mcgyver
Aug 25th 2008, 03:40 PM
The translators also changed the name of the brother of Y'shua from Jacob to James.

In the case of Yahweh, I believe it was more of a Jewish interpretation regarding the name that replaced the Name with Adonai.

All scripture is god breathed, however, all translations are not.

I can agree with this statement!

Is it not interesting that when Moses asked "who shall I say sent me" the response was:

"And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you."'

This certainly is how God identified Himself, yet is that His "name"?

It is written again that: "In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell safely; Now this is His name by which He will be called: THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS." (Jer 23:6)

Is This now His "name"?

Again it is written: For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.” ( Joel 2:31, Acts 2:21, Rom 10:13)

Again the question is: What is His name?

(Speaking of Jesus) "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12)

And:

Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Phil 2:9-11)

So then, what is the "name" of God?

I would propose (food for thought here) that all these are His "name"....

Lars777
Aug 25th 2008, 04:24 PM
Scripture, ie Yahweh's Holy Spirit through John, says:


The one who says he stays in Him (Yahshua The Messiah) ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

(1John 2:6)

How did Yahshua walk?

What does this look like in a disciples life?

In what manner are you walking even as Messiah walked?

How successful are you walking even as Messiah walked, and what areas need the most improvement?







By this we may be sure that we are in him: he who says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked. (1 John 2:5-6)




This phrase, "abides in him" means exactly the same thing as "fellowship with him." They are one and the same experience. The Lord Jesus made that clear when he said, as is recorded in the 15th chapter of John's Gospel, "As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me," (John 15:4).

You can be in Christ, as a member of the vine, and only bear leaves. That is mere relationship. But if you want fruit in your life, there must be that further attitude of abiding in him, resting in him.

That, he says, is what produces significant results in life. Without that, "you can do nothing," John 5:5).

The sign of abiding, as John says here, is to walk in the same way in which Christ walked: "he who says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked." That does not mean to do the same things that Jesus did; that means to act from the same principle upon which he acted, to reflect the same kind of relationship to the Father that he had.

That is the sign of fellowship. Now, you who are familiar with the record of our Lord's life, how did he walk? How did he do the things that he did? How did he manage to speak such matchless words, convey such challenging ideas, do such remarkable things among men, and change lives so consistently?

What was the secret of his power? You can be sure that, while he was ministering, this was the question everyone was asking. "Wherein lies this man's power?"

That is what brought Nicodemus to him by night, to try to ferret out the secret, if he could. Many others came wondering what the secret of his power was.

The amazing thing was that he kept telling people what it was, as he keeps telling us. But we skip over it with easy disregard. He said, "the Son of Man does not do these things of himself." That is, "I'm not doing this; it's the Father who dwells in me; he's doing it.

I don't speak these words of myself, but I speak only that which I hear the Father say. It's the Father who speaks the words; it's the Father who does the work.

I am a man, available to him, but he is in me and his working in me is the secret of the things that I do. I am simply counting on him every minute to be at work and to do these things, and he does them," John 14: 10-11).

That is the great secret, and that is one of the hardest things for Christians to learn. How did he walk? Well, he walked in total, unrelenting, unbroken fellowship and dependence upon the activity of the Father who indwelt him.

But that seems so hard for us to learn. With us, it is the Son of God who lives within us, and he has come to reproduce the effect of his death and the power of his resurrection -- to live again his life in us. But we have such difficulty with this. Our attitude is,

"Please, Father, I'd rather do it myself!"

We are brought up with this idea that we have in ourselves an ability to act significantly, that God is looking to us to act on his behalf and if we fail him the whole program will fall apart, but if we do it God should be eternally grateful to us for our faithfulness. Does this not represent our attitude?

But this is not Christianity. This is not what a Christian is called to do. If we ever learn the great secret that John is trying desperately to impart to us it will revolutionize our lives.

We will never again be the same persons. When we begin to see it, and act on it, our lives are immediately changed, and five years from that day we will be more different than we were when it first hit us, and 50 years later we will be still different, so revolutionary, so transforming is this principle of action.

A quiet, unrelenting dependence upon an indwelling God to be always at work in us, reproducing the value of his death and the power of his resurrection -- That is what Christianity is, that is what fellowship is, that is what abiding in him means.

We are continually to expect him to do this and we are to consent to its being done.

Bryan43
Aug 25th 2008, 04:48 PM
But yet I believe that our (mainstream) translations are reliable for many reasons...and that God has kept His word for us through out the centuries...one of the benefits of the required "Textual Criticism" courses I guess


I can agree here. without this. we are open to taking a few words and totally making them say what the origional author never intended them to say. the bibek must agree as a whole. this is how we can tell if our translation or interpretation of a certain passage is faulty.

and your right about the names.

God told moses literally. I I AM ( translated I am who I am in many texts) also note. in the new testament. when jesus claimed who he was. he said these same words, I I AM before abraham, and the pharisees imediatly went after him, because he claimed to be the god of isreal. ( again I Am is a faulty interpretation. )

I believe they both come from the words amno translated I and domini translated I AM. in other words, he is more than just I or I Am.

David Taylor
Mar 6th 2009, 05:29 PM
(thread closed as per...Slug1)
As the OP has changed his status to Non-Christian and can no longer participate in this thread, as per Slug1 the thread is now closed.

Thanks to all who have participated!