• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

In the "Pneo"

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
W

wmssid

Guest
Alexander Campbell, beginning in 1823, and repeating sporadically for 30 years, translated John 3.8.

1) The children of darkness render this, "the wind blows."

2) Campbell countered with, "the Spirit breathes" (pneo).

3) They were worldly, he was spiritual.

The Modern Bible translations have all gone back to, "the wind blows."

Campbell even published, "The Living Oracles" NT, with, "the Spirit breathes."


PNEUMA= Spirit.
PNEO = Breath.
AEROS = Wind (which is not in the MSS in this verse).

You have lost much wisdom and knowledge by deserting the history of the RM.

Why is the RM not publishing Bibles today? [I am.]

Why is the RM not writing Bible commentaries today? [I am.]

"For as the Body [Local Congregation] without the Spirit [of God] is dead, so is faith without works dead also" - Jas 2.26.

Where are your "works"?

In Extreme Love (apage),

wmssid
 
D

- DRA -

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2004
3,560
96
Texas
✟4,218.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Here's John 3:8 in various translations:

KJV "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth ..."
ASV "The wind bloweth where it will, and thou hearest the voice thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth ..."
NRSV "The wind blows where it chooses, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes ..."
NIV "The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going ..."
NASV "The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going ..."
ESV "The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes ..."

The "wind blows" is the unanimous translation from the various translation committees who have considered the Koine Greek words "pneuma pneo." May I ask what Campbell knew about these words that all these scholars missed? And, let's insert Campbell's proposed "translations" into the text and consider what is said: "The Spirit breathes where it [or He] wishes, and you hear its [or His] sound, but you do not know where it [or He] comes from or where it [or He] goes" (borrowing from the wording of the ESV). I have to wonder what made Campbell so sure the sound of the Spirit was under consideration, and not the sound of the wind. Perhaps you can help us understand how Nicodemus (or any of the other Jews at that time) could relate to the sound of the Spirit's breath?

And, perhaps you can help us understand how the history of the RM is the source of wisdom and knowledge. Isn't the wisdom and knowledge we all should seek based on "all Scripture" per 2 Timothy 3:16-17, since it completely furnishes us what all we need to please and serve God?

Members of the church are indeed writing commentaries. Let me direct you to a couple of really good websites with commentaries by members of the Lord's church: http://www.ch-of-christ.beaverton.or.us/ and http://executableoutlines.com/

Couldn't James 2:26 also mean the physical body without the spirit is dead, just as faith without works is dead?

The works that God accepts are those based on faith, the conviction that results from hearing God's word by the one who accepts, reverences, and obeys it (per James 2:14-26 and Romans 10:17). Those are the works I am interested in, not in following RM history per se.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
W

wmssid

Guest
DRA:

Thank you for your reply. I have been seeking dialogue with members of this forum.
Thank you for the list of CofC Bible commentaries. I had only found two of them on Publishing house lists. But there were no New Covenant commentaries (which is in Revelation only).

  • “Why is Spirit (Jn 3.8) preferable to Wind?”
This was answered in my original post: “wind” is “aeros” and “Spirit” is “pneuma.”
Axiom: “Bible words for Bible things.”

The “breath” (pnoes) is also corrupted in Acts 2.2 to read “wind.”

But then, you cannot, with righteous judgment, accuse these references of yours to be “translations.” [You can prove every heresy imaginable by the Bible translations.]
A) Rhiems NT, 1749, “Spirit breathes.”
B) Young’s Literal Translation, 1868, “Spirit breathes.”
C) Geneva Bible, 1599, “Wind blows.”
D) 1611 Authorized Version, “Wind blows.”
Robert Young, a lexicographer has “spirit – 151 Xs” and “wind – 1 X only.” And James Strong has “spirit” and no “wind.” William D. Mounce has “Wind” – 1 X only; and “spirit” repeatedly.
Walter Bauer has “Wind” from many pagan sources of literature, but few references to the Bible. On the other hand, “spirit” is the frequent translation.

These are the “great men” of Greek lexicography.
After 20 years of dedicated labor, I am also a Greek translator.

So then, Bible translations have lexicon definitions, and “alleged” translations “copy” every Tom, Dick, and Harry.

2. “ … you can help us understand how the history of the RM is the source of wisdom …?”

A) “And I saw another messenger (Alexander Campbell; connected to Fall of Babylon; verse 8) flying in the midst of Heaven (Government*) having the everlasting good message to proclaim (1859**) …” – Rev 14.6-7.
NOTE *: Sun = king, Moon = Priesthood, Stars = Prophets; combined = Heaven.
NOTE **: Campbell, and associates, completed the “Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things” in 1859, when they first enjoyed missionary success.

B) “And when the thousand years have expired (1959*), Satan will be loosed from his prison (Rev 19.20), and will go out to deceive the Nations (ex-Restoration Movement churches) in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog (Ecumenical Movement) …” – Rev 20.7-8.

NOTE: “You have heard the old saying, ‘Keep the faith.’” But, you do not have any of the faith of the 1800s Movement. You do not have the slightest idea what the Restoration Movement taught. Why are Campbell’s words banned today? Why did they ban the words of B.W. Johnson and Henry H. Halley? What is their goal in withholding from you all the information necessary for a sound conclusion? Are they afraid you might like Jesus?

NOTE: 2Tim 3.16-17; Jas 2.14-26; and Rom 10.17 are all about the Old Covenant, and “speaking in tongues” and possessing “prophecy” and possessing “healing” and working “miracles.” What benefit do you hope to receive from reading about the “dead and gone”?
God is only in the “Present Tense.”

“Jesus Anointed, the same, yesterday, and today, and into the ages” – Heb 13.8.

“Every good gift, and every perfect gift is from above and comes down from the Father of Lights in whom is no variableness or shadow of turning” – Jas 1.17; and – many, many more!

God is Eternal – meaning Today!
 
Upvote 0
D

- DRA -

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2004
3,560
96
Texas
✟4,218.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Originally Posted by - DRA -

... The "wind blows" is the unanimous translation from the various translation committees who have considered the Koine Greek words "pneuma pneo." May I ask what Campbell knew about these words that all these scholars missed? And, let's insert Campbell's proposed "translations" into the text and consider what is said: "The Spirit breathes where it [or He] wishes, and you hear its [or His] sound, but you do not know where it [or He] comes from or where it [or He] goes" (borrowing from the wording of the ESV). I have to wonder what made Campbell so sure the sound of the Spirit was under consideration, and not the sound of the wind. Perhaps you can help us understand how Nicodemus (or any of the other Jews at that time) could relate to the sound of the Spirit's breath? ...


Granted, “wind” in passages such as Matt. 7:25; 8:26; 11:7 is from the Koine Greek word “anemos,” and “Spirit” or “spirit” is translated from the word “pneuma.” However, the issue is whether or not “pneuma” always means “Spirit,” or if it can be used to mean different things -- which means its intended meaning must be discerned from the context. A quick look in any respectable lexicon reveals the word is used in different ways. Therefore, the task at hand is to show why “Spirit” is the intended meaning, rather than “wind,” which takes us back to the excerpt from my previous response in the orange font at the top of this post -- which you didn’t address.


For sure, unless everyone speaks Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek, we are going to need translations of the Scriptures from those languages into a language that is spoken today. Of course, the translation must be accurate. Mature Christians use resources to ensure they understood how the words were used in Scripture and their meaning(s). By doing so, we can know when the translators used poor judgment or allowed biases to cloud their thinking (e.g., the word “Easter” in Acts 12:4).

I tend to think the “heresies” arise from taking fragmented thoughts from the Bible (e.g., “There is no God” from Psalm 14:1, and, “Let him who stole steal” from Ephesians 4:28), wishful thinking (e.g., reading faith “alone” or faith “only” into John 3:16 while failing to consider the context of the passage), and poor study habits (failing to ensure an understanding derived from one passage/text harmonizes with other passages – per Jesus in Matthew 4:5-7).

I have found the translations I quoted from to be fairly accurate. Are they perfect? Not by any means. If you have such, then please present it and brace yourself for the critiquing that will follow.


Here’s the key thing to consider in your comments: “Spirit is the frequent translation.” So, it seems you are conceding the point that “pneuma” isn’t exclusively translated as “Spirit,” because that’s the inference from saying it is the “frequent” translation. It infers there are other translations for the word. That agrees with my previous point. So, once again, it takes us to the context of how the word is used to determine the intended meaning.

wmssid said:
After 20 years of dedicated labor, I am also a Greek translator.

So then, Bible translations have lexicon definitions, and “alleged” translations “copy” every Tom, Dick, and Harry.
Click to expand...

So, may I be so bold as to ask which particular lexicon authors God’s blessing, from which we can discern which are true and which are “alleged” translations?

Please don’t take this the wrong way. However, after 20 years of such dedicated labor and study, I have to wonder why you communicate in fragmented thoughts. Granted, this post is far better than the typical post I’ve seen.

Originally Posted by - DRA -
… you can help us understand how the history of the RM is the source of wisdom …?”


Okay, so how about explaining how you derived that Alexander Campbell is the angel/messenger alluded to in Revelation 14:6. You see, there’s a big difference in what the Scripture says and the proposed meaning you posted. Please don’t fault us in being more than a little reluctant to “buy” what are selling (borrowing from the thought of Proverbs 23:23).


Sorry, my mistake. I guess I failed to understand that keeping the faith was synonymous with following the teachings of those initially coming out of denominationalism in the 1800s. Up to this point, I have always associated “keeping the faith” with following the teachings of Jesus, His apostles as they were directed by the Holy Spirit, and the approved examples of first-century Christians we find recorded in God’s word.

Yes, I have more than a sight idea what those involved in the Restoration Movement taught, however I feel no allegiance to them per se.

I am not aware that Campbell’s, Johnson’s, or Halley’s words have been banned. Perhaps you can post a link or cite the reference that supports your conclusion. What do you mean by, “Their goal?” Who has conspired to withhold “all the information necessary for a sound conclusion?” This implies that prior to the 1800s, folks didn’t have all the necessary information. I’m interested to find out what “new thing” was necessary. I guess this means to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (in Jude 3) really meant that after the 1800s Christians could then contend for the faith, right?


The old covenant? Really? 2 Timothy 3:16 – 17 says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God … that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work (NKJV).” So, I guess this means you follow the Scriptures that pertain to the old covenant (i.e., the Old Testament Scriptures), and they completely and thoroughly equip you to serve God and Him today under the gospel of Christ, right? I suppose when sin today you follow the instructions given in Leviticus 6:1-7 to cover your sins, right? Are you positive that’s what Barton Stone, Thomas Campbell, Alexander Campbell, and Walter Scott believed, taught, and practiced?

James 2:14-26 uses several Old Testament examples to show the nature of the faith that pleases God. For sure, it’s more than just saying, “Lord, Lord,” but also involves doing the Father’s will (borrowing from Matt. 7:21). Are you positive those involved early on in the Restoration Movement believed that only under the old covenant did folks actually have to do what God commanded them (note James 2:21-24)?

Romans 10:17 is in the context of preaching the gospel of Christ, not the old covenant.

While I agree that spiritual gifts have ceased per 1 Corinthians 13:8-10, I do profit from reading about them. In short, they confirmed both the message and the messenger per Hebrews 2:3-4 as the gospel was being preached in the first century.


Exodus 3:6 is also used to show God in the present tense. Note Matthew 22:32.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
W

wmssid

Guest
To: DRA, my new-found friend;

I was, and am, thrilled to your response to my theme.
I have been ostracized for many decades for my religious beliefs. No one else has enquired about my reasons for why I am different.
But then, your post was very respectful, and asked for my reasons for my opinions.
I pray that you will not throw a temper tantrum, and go away pouting, as others have done (even banning me from forums to “keep up the censorship”).

1)) Concerning “Spirit breathes” versus “wind blows.”
a) First of all, “wind blows” is childish, and meaningless. God does not communicate by the “wind”; although I have read that some pagan0s believe that.
b) Your story about, “the context determines the definition of words in the Bible,” was heard by me before you were born. So then, this was not an “original thought” of yours, but something that you have been “deceived” to believe.
Which comes first, A, B, Cs or “reading”?
So then, your argument is backwards thinking. We identify the definitions of the words in order to understand the “context” of the paragraph.
Wrong words cannot lead to correct conclusions.
c) Then you disappointed me, saying “pneuma” = Spirit 141 times, and “wind” 1 time only, means that we can use the mistaken definition. The lexicographers did these word counts to point out to you that “wind” is an error But Young’s Literal Translation, 1868, reads “Spirit blows”; which is half-right. Campbell’s Living Oracles reads: “Spirit breathes.”
These were two of “the great men of God!” You would be foolish to believe an opponent of theirs on something so dogmatically documented.
d) The Bible translators had all “promised to lie to you.” Now when a man, or a group of men, announces publicly that they will lie to you, then prudence dictates that you believe that they were liars.

OT LIARS:

The Jews "changed" the names of God. They have been bragging about this deed ever since about AD 250, when the Septuagint was published. Below are quotes describing this "Jewish tradition" to change the name of God.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Shefa_Tal.png
1. In Judaism, the name of God is more than a distinguishing title. It represents the Jewish conception of the divine nature, and of the relation of God to the Jewish people. In awe at the sacredness of the names of God, and as a means of showing respect and reverence for them, the scribes of sacred texts took pause before copying them, and used terms of reverence so as to keep the true name of God concealed. The various names of God in Judaism represent God as he is known, as well as the divine aspects which are attributed to him.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.orgwikiNames_of_God_in_Judaism

2. THE TETRAGRAMMATON
​
The Sacred Name appears in the Hebrew Scriptures as four Hebrew letters Yud, hey, vav, hey, which is closest represented by the letters YHVH. This format is known as the Tetragammaton. According to Jewish tradition it is regarded as 'not to be uttered' in order never to profane it in any way. In Judaism it is therefore pronounced as 'Adonai', meaning 'Lord'. Notwithstanding this prohibition, the Sacred Name is acknowledged in its usage as part of the names of many Biblical characters, as referred to above - and as any Bible concordance or reference book will provide.

Source: http://www.revelations.org.za/NotesS-Name.htm

CONCLUSION: The Septuagint does not prove anything!
hwhy myhla is translated: "He Is Gods."
hwhy was recorded 6,400 times, meaning, "He Is."
myhla was recorded 2,300 times, meaning "plural Gods."

David Biven of JerusaemPerspective website also teaches when we come to the name of God we “change it” to adonai.

The Jews changed Genesis 1.1, plural Gods to singular god; and 2,300 times.
The Jews changed Genesis 2.4, He Is (HWHY) to adonai (Lord).
The Jews changed God of her (HLA) to God only; and no her – 92 times.
The Jews changed God of her (HLA) to a variety of words without God.

The Christians have been exposing the Jews as “liars” for centuries.
The ASV, 1901, exposed this lie in the Preface,
Wikipedia the free encyclopedia has this lie exposed.
I am 75 years old, and I have heard the Jews’ lie exposed from the pulpit several times.

BUT, GET THIS NOW! The Christians have been promoting the bastard translation of the Jews continuously for over 1900 years.

“Where is the scribe?” HERE I AM! I have a partial “real translation” of the holy Bible, having included “no known lies.”

You can imagine my shock when I decided to write a Hebrew Manual without “Fake” Vowels; after hearing the Jews exposed as liars all my life, to find all the Christian Bible translations (except mine) have the Jews’ “fake” names for God.

Even greater is my shock that all men hearing this message (except my wife*) say, “We prefer the pagan names.”
NOTE *: If I die, and I have only saved my wife, my joy is complete.

NT LIARS:

THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER.
"Another things we think good to admonish you of (gentle Reader) that we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe, that some learned men somewhere, have been as exact as they could that way. Truly, that we might not vary from the sense of that which we had translated before, if the word signified that same in both places (for there be some words that be not the same sense everywhere) we were especially careful, and made a conscience, according to our duty. But, that we should express the same notion in the same particular word; as for example, if we translate the Hebrew or Greek word once by PURPOSE, never to call it INTENT; if one where JOURNEYING, never TRAVELLING; if one where THINK, never SUPPOSE; if one where PAIN, never ACHE; if one where JOY, never GLADNESS, etc. Thus to mince the matter, we thought to savour more of curiosity than wisdom, and that rather it would breed scorn in the Atheist, than bring profit to the godly Reader. For is the kingdom of God to become words or syllables? Why should we be in bondage to them if we may be free, use one precisely when we may use another no less fit, as commodiously?"
NOTE: Copied from "The Holy Bible, 1611 Edition, King James Version"; published by Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee; printed in the United States of America, 1993.1
The translators made every effort to make their non-conformity to the word of God seem "innocent" and "harmless." But then, God had a different opinion.
(1) MOSES CURSE ON CHANGING WORDS OF HIS LAW FROM GODS (myhla).
"You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of 'He Is' (HWHY) Gods (MYHLA) of you, (hwhy myhla) which I command you" - Deut 4.2.
(2) SOLOMON WARNED AGAINST ADDING TO THE WORD.
"Every word of Gods (MYHLA) [is] pure; He [is] a Shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar" - Prov 30.5-6.
(3) IESOUS (Ihsous) PRONOUNCED A CURSE FOR ADDING TO THE BIBLE.
"For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God (Qeos) will add to him the plagues that are written in this book. And if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the Book of Life, from the Holy City (New Jerusalem - 21.1-3), and the things which are written in this book" - Rev 22.18-19.
The translators selected examples which do not seem too grievous. But the vast amount of evidence supplied in my Hebrew Manual proves differently. We have identified numerous words with 25 or more definitions in the KJV. See: "RBD", Strong's #s 1696 to 1699. And, Johnny-come-lately has copied many of these lies in his Bible translation.
Strong’s Hebrew #559 – 36 definitions; #935 – 34 definitions, #2388 – 32 definitions, #3027 – 35 definitions, #5414 – 59 definitions, #6213 – 64 definitions, #7725 – 53 definitions.

DRA and I can not communicate in a language with 30 definitions for one single Hebrew word.
The word “give” (#5414) is even translated “take” (Eccl 7.21). Now, as you know, “take” means just the opposite of “give.”
BUT THEN – they promised to “lie to you” and they were faithful to their promise.

Imagine this! You have been taught “fake names for God” all your life.

Please discuss this thoroughly, and seriously with me.
Then I will discuss with you my, “religion different from yours.”
I serve the “Millennium religion”; you deny Jesus’ Millennium.

Buck up, like a good trooper, do not let any humiliation disrupt our conversation, for it is beneficial to the viewers.

In Extreme Love (agape), [If I did not truly love you, I would not go to all this trouble.]
wmssid


 
Upvote 0
D

- DRA -

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2004
3,560
96
Texas
✟4,218.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
wmssid said:
To: DRA, my new-found friend;

I was, and am, thrilled to your response to my theme.
Click to expand...

Glad I was able to make you happy.


One thing for sure, you are indeed different. And, I am interested in why you are different. Perhaps you can help me and others better understand where you are coming from.

As for throwing a temper tantrum, pouting, or censoring your post, rest assured, I have absolutely no intentions of behaving like anything else than a mature Christian (note 1 Timothy 3:6).

wmssid said:
1)) Concerning “Spirit breathes” versus “wind blows.”
a) First of all, “wind blows” is childish, and meaningless. God does not communicate by the “wind”; although I have read that some pagan0s believe that.
Click to expand...

New friend, I must beg to differ with your declaration that "wind blows" in John 3:8 "is childish, and meaningless." The context of this passage is the new birth. Nicodemus obviously misunderstood its nature, thinking in physical terms - "Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb?" (verse 4). Jesus explains the new birth involves both water and the Spirit. Jumping ahead in time, the new birth can be viewed in Acts 2. The Holy Spirit came upon the apostles, and the Spirit influenced the apostle Peter to use Psalm 16, 2 Samuel 7, and Psalm 110 to show from the Old Testament Scriptures that Jesus is both Lord and Christ (verse 36). In response to the Jews that were pricked to the heart by the Spirit's arrival and the message preached, Peter told them what to do have their sins taken away. Three thousand obeyed, and continued in the "apostles' doctrine" (verse 42 - note also Jesus' promise that the Spirit would guide them into all truth per John 16:13) as they began to serve God as a follower of His Son.

The new birth is detailed in Romans 6:3-11. In essence, it occurs in baptism where one is united with Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection, and where one dies to sin, is freed from it, and becomes alive to God. In short, in baptism one is born again. It's not about the physical - that is, the water - but about faith in the working of God per Colossians 2:12-13.

What is the evidence one is born again? First, we should expect that which is born of the Spirit to be spiritual (as opposed to physical) per John 3:6. Second, we can "see" the changes in the life of the one born again. Note John 3:8. Can one see the Spirit of God? No. But one can see the effects that He produces in a person's life. We can think of it just like the wind. We can't see it per se, but we can see/hear its effects. The wind is used to illustrate how the Spirit works in a person's life. We can't see the Spirit per se, but can see the changes He brings about in a person's life.

Now, perhaps you can explain why such reasoning is "childish" and "meaningless."

And, perhaps you can explain how the "Spirit breathes" fit into the context of the new birth.


Sorry, but you need to help me better understand why I can't determine the meaning of a word (that may have multiple meanings) according to the context. To illustrate, let's consider the KJV wording of Genesis 4:1 - "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. The Hebrew word for "knew" is one of those words that can mean mulitiple things. From the context, its meaning is obvious. Since Adam "knowing" Eve resulted in the conception of a child, we can be pretty certain "knowing" her did NOT mean he said, "Howdy, nice to meet you," and shook her hand. Rather, it means he "knew" her intimately. Now, to get back to our discussion, I need to understand why the wind ... that we can't see but can sense its effects, can't be comparable to the Spirit's role in the new birth.


Disappointment is a part of life. Years ago, I was interested in archery, and ordered a book by a former U.S. Olympic archery coach. However, I was terribly disappointed the first time I read the book. It wasn't at all what I expected or wanted to read. However, after considering the possibility that the author knew more about archery than I did, and I probably should really try to understand his rationale, the second reading of the book opened my eyes. In short, his book drastically help improve my ability to shoot the bow and arrow. So, initial disappointment isn't always the end of the story.

Earlier, I offered an explanation of John 3:8 using "the wind blows." Perhaps you can offer an explanation of the text using "The Spirit breathes," and we can compare/contrast the two lines of reasoning to see how things shake out.

I personally don't have any reason to suspect the various translation committees were set on opposing Campbell or Young when they considered John 3:8. Rather, I suspect their focus was on "pneuma pneo" and how the words could be used.

Although, it's a little off topic, how can I obtain a copy of your translation of the Scriptures? And, assuming I can obtain a copy, I would like to know what you used to translate the O.T. from, and what you used to translate the N.T. from? I don't think that's too much for one friend to ask of another, right?
 
Upvote 0
D

- DRA -

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2004
3,560
96
Texas
✟4,218.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Okay ... not sure I buy into some conspiracy theory. If you don't mind, I'd prefer to stay on-topic. John 3:8 is the basis of the discussion. If there's something terribly amiss in the translation of the passage, it should be apparent as we discuss the passage.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Are the Four Angels letting loose the Four Winds
Replies
0
Views
142
Traditional Adventists-Discussion Zone
reddogs
COMING IN 2027: ANCIENT CHRISTIAN STUDY BIBLE FROM OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
Replies
0
Views
166
One Bread, One Body - Catholic
Michie
The Holy Spirit
Replies
5
Views
555
Deeper Fellowship
enoob57
Why are some Catholics scared of studying the Bible themselves?
Replies
20
Views
987
One Bread, One Body - Catholic
Valletta
Thessalonians 4 Does Not Teach a Rapture Separate from the Second Coming
Replies
64
Views
2K
General Theology
Dale
Menu
Log in
Register