What kind of Faith did Noah have?

[jeremiah1five]

Saved from the water.

Noah was in relationship with God. Noah was among those that "called upon the LORD" which is another way of saying "worship." And no one can worship God unless God gives them permission. As David said, "Blessed is the man whom THOU CHOOSESTS and CAUSES to approach unto thee,"
Any man who is in relationship with God is saved. Follow the family line in Genesis all the way to Christ and beyond.
From Adam to Seth to Lamech, Enos, to Methuselah, to Salah, to Eber, to Shem, to Abram, to Isaac, Jacob, the twelve tribes in covenant with God. Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. Not his wife, not his sons, not his son's wives. NOAH.
Baptized in water and as a Preacher of righteousness the Spirit of God would be involved. This implies salvation more than water.

20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 1 Peter 3:19–21.

 

[sethproton]

Noah was in relationship with God. Noah was among those that "called upon the LORD" which is another way of saying "worship." And no one can worship God unless God gives them permission. As David said, "Blessed is the man whom THOU CHOOSESTS and CAUSES to approach unto thee,"
Any man who is in relationship with God is saved. Follow the family line in Genesis all the way to Christ and beyond.
From Adam to Seth to Lamech, Enos, to Methuselah, to Salah, to Eber, to Shem, to Abram, to Isaac, Jacob, the twelve tribes in covenant with God. Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. Not his wife, not his sons, not his son's wives. NOAH.
Baptized in water and as a Preacher of righteousness the Spirit of God would be involved. This implies salvation more than water.

20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 1 Peter 3:19–21.

Noah was not indwelt by Jesus. No one can stand in God's presence without having been indwelt by Him. How does that fit into what you are teaching? Noah did not go to be with God when he died. He went to the place that is later dentified as Abraham's bosom.

 

[Titus]

Yes. Acts 2:38 says that. I accept and believe it. But your interpretation is where my issue is. SInce you seem interested in simply repeating your understanding, but no real interest in looking at ideas handed you, it does not progress. So again, your interpretation is where my issue is,1 Peter 3:21 Baptism is the appeal for a good conscience.
And yes, we have the words "Baptism does now save you." But it is clarified by the next words that it washes the flesh which does not bring salvation.

Peter preached repentance and baptism at the very beginning of christianity in Acts 2.
Peter was clear in his gospel sermon to the Jews on pentecost of what the Jews had to do to be saved.
Peter later in his book is going to teach exactly the same purpose for baptism.

Acts 2:38 explains what Peter believes is the purpose of baptism.
He teaches it is for the forgiveness of sins.

Acts 2:37-38, In verse 37 the Jews are believers in their Messiah. The gospel Peter preached pierced their hearts and now they ask what must they do.

- Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles men and brethren what shall we do,
- Then Peter said to them Repent and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit

Peter teaches to recieve forgiveness of sins they must repent and be baptized.

With this knowledge we can better understand what Peter believes about baptism when he says,
1Peter 3:20-21,
- there is also an anti-type which now saves us baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience toward God) through the ressurection of Jesus Christ

Peter believes baptism saves us.
So the next teaching that baptism is not taking a bath to remove the filth from the flesh, should be understood that Peter is teaching what baptism is NOT.

Peter goes on to say that when someone obeys the gospel command to be baptized they do this by an appeal, meaning they submit to Jesus Christs gospel. For a good conscience, meaning their conscience no longer has guilt of their previous sins.
Through the ressurection of Jesus Christ, meaning their salvation is made possible because Jesus rose from the dead.

Summary of 1Peter 3:20-21,
New testament baptism saves us.
Baptism is not for cleansing the flesh, it is not a bath.
We obey the commandment to be baptized(appeal) out of a good conscience.(The gospel cuts to the heart of man)
Our salvation is made possible because Jesus rose from the dead.

Peter teaches baptism is essential to ones salvation.

 

[sethproton]

Peter preached repentance and baptism at the very beginning of christianity in Acts 2.
Peter was clear in his gospel sermon to the Jews on pentecost of what the Jews had to do to be saved.
Peter later in his book is going to teach exactly the same purpose for baptism.

Acts 2:38 explains what Peter believes is the purpose of baptism.
He teaches it is for the forgiveness of sins.

Acts 2:37-38, In verse 37 the Jews are believers in their Messiah. The gospel Peter preached pierced their hearts and now they ask what must they do.

- Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles men and brethren what shall we do,
- Then Peter said to them Repent and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit

Peter teaches to recieve forgiveness of sins they must repent and be baptized.

With this knowledge we can better understand what Peter believes about baptism when he says,
1Peter 3:20-21,
- there is also an anti-type which now saves us baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience toward God) through the ressurection of Jesus Christ

Peter believes baptism saves us.
So the next teaching that baptism is not taking a bath to remove the filth from the flesh, should be understood that Peter is teaching what baptism is NOT.

Peter goes on to say that when someone obeys the gospel command to be baptized they do this by an appeal, meaning they submit to Jesus Christs gospel. For a good conscience, meaning their conscience no longer has guilt of their previous sins.
Through the ressurection of Jesus Christ, meaning their salvation is made possible because Jesus rose from the dead.

Summary of 1Peter 3:20-21,
New testament baptism saves us.
Baptism is not for cleansing the flesh, it is not a bath.
We obey the commandment to be baptized(appeal) out of a good conscience.(The gospel cuts to the heart of man)
Our salvation is made possible because Jesus rose from the dead.

Peter teaches baptism is essential to ones salvation.

Have you noticed in the Bible verses that you quote (1 Peter 3:1)what is what "how"? Yes it says that baptism saves, but how? What does the scripture teach you about how this comes to pass? I mean the specific words in this verse.
For example we can say that we are saved by the blood because the scripture teaches we are cleansed by it which makes us acceptible to God, soothes His anger against us. These ideas all come directly from scripture.

 

[Titus]

Have you noticed in the Bible verses that you quote (1 Peter 3:1)what is what "how"? Yes it says that baptism saves, but how? What does the scripture teach you about how this comes to pass? I mean the specific words in this verse.
For example we can say that we are saved by the blood because the scripture teaches we are cleansed by it which makes us acceptible to God, soothes His anger against us. These ideas all come directly from scripture.

How water baptism saves according to Peter in 1Peter 3:20-21,
- there is also an anti-type which now saves us baptism......through the ressurection of Jesus Christ.

Peter teaches baptism is able to save because Jesus rose from the dead.

But also,
- which now saves us baptism......but an appeal to God for a clear conscience

Peter teaches baptism is able to save because of our appeal to God. Which is the same as submitting to Gods authority by obeying His gospel. Appeal means to submit to authority or call on Gods authority.
Submitting to the will of God is the only way to be saved by God.
Baptism is a commandment of God that we must submit to in order to be saved by God.

 

[sethproton]

How water baptism saves according to Peter in 1Peter 3:20-21,
- there is also an anti-type which now saves us baptism......through the ressurection of Jesus Christ.

Peter teaches baptism is able to save because Jesus rose from the dead.

But also,
- which now saves us baptism......but an appeal to God for a clear conscience

Peter teaches baptism is able to save because of our appeal to God. Which is the same as submitting to Gods authority by obeying His gospel. Appeal means to submit to authority or call on Gods authority.
Submitting to the will of God is the only way to be saved by God.
Baptism is a commandment of God that we must submit to in order to be saved by God.

Sure. It could be said we are saved "because" of our appeal to God, knowing that means we cannot save ourselves but we can ask to be saved.
But asking God to be saved is not part of the mechanics of salvation. Neither is baptism, as the verse teaches that baptism is a way to ask God for salvation.

 

[Titus]

Sure. It could be said we are saved "because" of our appeal to God, knowing that means we cannot save ourselves but we can ask to be saved.
But asking God to be saved is not part of the mechanics of salvation. Neither is baptism, as the verse teaches that baptism is a way to ask God for salvation.

Asking God to save is not the appeal.
Appealing to God or calling on God is submission to His will.
What is His will?
Acts 2:38,
- repent and let everyone of you by baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit

If I asked you Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
Would you teach the exact same gospel as Peter did?

Would you tell me to repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of my sins?
No one was ever saved because the said "please God save me'

God has laid out His gospel.
That is Gods will or plan for saving man.
To be saved by God, one must submit to His instruction. That instruction is laid out for us in His gospel.
Just as Peter preached it.
You cannot make up your own way of being saved, which would be something like a sinners prayer. Not found in the gospel of Christ

 

[sethproton]

Asking God to save is not the appeal.
Appealing to God or calling on God is submission to His will.
What is His will?
Acts 2:38,
- repent and let everyone of you by baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit

If I asked you Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
Would you teach the exact same gospel as Peter did?

Would you tell me to repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of my sins?
No one was ever saved because the said "please God save me'

God has laid out His gospel.
That is Gods will or plan for saving man.
To be saved by God, one must submit to His instruction. That instruction is laid out for us in His gospel.
Just as Peter preached it.
You cannot make up your own way of being saved, which would be something like a sinners prayer. Not found in the gospel of Christ

Huh? Ask and appeal are synonyms. And I agree calling/asking is a submission to His will. You wrote that no one is saved by the words "please God save me" Yes of course; words don't save. God saves. But He requires us to ask. But when you talk about submitting to instruction it sounds like works salvation, saying you have to obey much doctrinal truth in order to become saved. But am I just misreading you?

 

[Titus]

Huh? Ask and appeal are synonyms. And I agree calling/asking is a submission to His will. You wrote that no one is saved by the words "please God save me" Yes of course; words don't save. God saves. But He requires us to ask. But when you talk about submitting to instruction it sounds like works salvation, saying you have to obey much doctrinal truth in order to become saved. But am I just misreading you?

Ask and appeal are synonymous but words have no real meaning without context.

The only way to learn and understand the Bible is to read it like a young child would read it.
You must try you best to put your presuppositions aside when studying the Bible.

Friend I'm a Bible believer. I read what it says and simply believe what it says.

Now would Noah have been saved if he disobeyed God just believed what God said but did not do what God said by building the ark? Could His belief absent from his obedience save him?

Likewise with the Jews on pentecost.
Could the Jews have just believed the gospel Peter preached to them but when Peter told them what to do "repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins", could they have been saved if they did not repent and been baptized?

You understand by those Jews obeying what Peter said they appealed to God? Submitted to Jesus' gospel.

The bible teaches there is only one way man is saved. It's the gospel of Christ,
Romans 1:16,
- for I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ for IT is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth to the jew first and also to the greek

 

[sethproton]

Ask and appeal are synonymous but words have no real meaning without context.

The only way to learn and understand the Bible is to read it like a young child would read it.
You must try you best to put your presuppositions aside when studying the Bible.

Friend I'm a Bible believer. I read what it says and simply believe what it says.

Now would Noah have been saved if he disobeyed God just believed what God said but did not do what God said by building the ark? Could His belief absent from his obedience save him?

Likewise with the Jews on pentecost.
Could the Jews have just believed the gospel Peter preached to them but when Peter told them what to do "repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins", could they have been saved if they did not repent and been baptized?

You understand by those Jews obeying what Peter said they appealed to God? Submitted to Jesus' gospel.

The bible teaches there is only one way man is saved. It's the gospel of Christ,
Romans 1:16,
- for I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ for IT is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth to the jew first and also to the greek

mostly agreed. one thing in particular I'v been working on for years is, as you say, putting assumptions aside when reading/studying the word.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Noah was not indwelt by Jesus.

I didn't say that. But he was overshadowed by Christ.

No one can stand in God's presence without having been indwelt by Him.

Correction. No one can stand before God without the anointing. This mean unbelievers cannot become saved until God saves them since no one can stand before God without the anointing.
First, the anointing. As the OT says, there is none that seeks God.

How does that fit into what you are teaching? Noah did not go to be with God when he died. He went to the place that is later dentified as Abraham's bosom.

The Hebrews believed Abraham went to be with God and so to be on Abraham's bosom means to be where Abraham is and that is with God.
But no man has ascended. Personally, I believe when a person who is a believer dies, He goes immediately to be with God. Even the OT saints.

 

[sethproton]

I didn't say that. But he was overshadowed by Christ.

Correction. No one can stand before God without the anointing. This mean unbelievers cannot become saved until God saves them since no one can stand before God without the anointing.
First, the anointing. As the OT says, there is none that seeks God.

The Hebrews believed Abraham went to be with God and so to be on Abraham's bosom means to be where Abraham is and that is with God.
But no man has ascended. Personally, I believe when a person who is a believer dies, He goes immediately to be with God. Even the OT saints.

When I say "stand before God," I refer to being in heaven with our new bodies. I was maybe too brief to be clear.
As far as where Abraham went before Jesus resurrected, what verses are you referring to that say Abraham went to be in His presence?
About annointing. John 14:17 - Jesus told them the Spirit was currently WITH them, but in the future He would be IN them. WITH is temporary. IN is eternal.

 

[jeremiah1five]

When I say "stand before God," I refer to being in heaven with our new bodies. I was maybe too brief to be clear.

Either way, one cannot stand before God in this life or the next without our Advocate Holy Spirit doing all the talking.

As far as where Abraham went before Jesus resurrected, what verses are you referring to that say Abraham went to be in His presence?

God is eternal. We live in time. Saul said, "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord" because we transit from time into eternity when we die. From our perspective there's a wake, a funeral, putting the body in "hell" (grave) and time marches forward until the Lord returns. But from God's eternal perspective time is ended and everything has been said and done and some are eternally with the Lord and the rest are eternally separated from God as the Scripture teaches. God is not limited or bound by time.
But to clear up my comment it is the teaching from the Jews that they believe that to be in "Abraham's Bosom" in their minds means to be in the Presence of God because that's where they believe Abraham is. And they are right. It is supported by the New Covenant which stated John "leaned into Jesus' bosom."

23 Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.
Jn 13:22–23.

One other nugget of truth...John may have been described as the disciple Jesus loved, but Peter is known as the disciple that loved Jesus.

About annointing. John 14:17 - Jesus told them the Spirit was currently WITH them, but in the future He would be IN them. WITH is temporary. IN is eternal.

Well, there are passages in the Old Covenant Scripture of the Spirit being within certain individuals.

11 Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying,
Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock?
Where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?
Isaiah 63:11.

I used to believe what I think by your response you believe and that is, that, no man can stand before God until the atonement was past. But seeing Scripture above and others caused me to rethink these things. Then, I recall that a "lamb was slain from [before] the foundation (creation) of the world" and I was 'covered' in my understanding by which two things occurred in my mind. The first was this lamb being slain in the heavenly Tabernacle allowed God, a Righteous God, to create man, an unrighteous being. And that the belief that no man can stand before God or have God stand within a saint without the atonement. Not anymore. Isaiah 63:11 is clear. I don't twist Scripture and I receive Scripture as written. Every time a verse from the bible challenges what I believe then I must study further the question at hand and what and why I believe as I do when a passage previously unknown to me contradicts my holding.
Unlike some here the Scripture tells me what to believe, I don't tell the Scripture what to say. Most Gentiles believe 1900 years of Constantinian Gentile theology which from the beginning (after AD 70) unmoored true, biblical Christianity from its Hebrew roots and founded a new religion under a Gentile banner, a religion that has gone over countless revisions - even being hard-hearted to change a doctrine when a Scripture directly contradicts that doctrine. Case in point is Isaiah 45:7 which states God created evil. Not only do I accept it, but God has been gracious to allowing me to understand it and why. When we are born-again, we know nothing about this "so-great salvation" of the Jews and we have to be taught from Scripture like every Hebrew boy and girl in the Hebrew faith religion. We don't come into Christianity knowing the whole counsel of God. We all have to be taught. And based upon one's call, place in the body, spiritual gifts, and even the moment in time, we all have a measure of faith which is founded upon the present knowledge we have at a given moment in time as the Lord teaches us individually what to believe and why. So, yes, I used to make distinction between the OT "with" and the NT "within" (a saint) where His Spirit is concerned. But passages like the one in Isaiah 63:11 and others change all that and I've been confirmed in what Scripture teaches.

 

[sethproton]

Either way, one cannot stand before God in this life or the next without our Advocate Holy Spirit doing all the talking.

God is eternal. We live in time. Saul said, "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord" because we transit from time into eternity when we die. From our perspective there's a wake, a funeral, putting the body in "hell" (grave) and time marches forward until the Lord returns. But from God's eternal perspective time is ended and everything has been said and done and some are eternally with the Lord and the rest are eternally separated from God as the Scripture teaches. God is not limited or bound by time.
But to clear up my comment it is the teaching from the Jews that they believe that to be in "Abraham's Bosom" in their minds means to be in the Presence of God because that's where they believe Abraham is. And they are right. It is supported by the New Covenant which stated John "leaned into Jesus' bosom."

23 Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.
Jn 13:22–23.

One other nugget of truth...John may have been described as the disciple Jesus loved, but Peter is known as the disciple that loved Jesus.

Well, there are passages in the Old Covenant Scripture of the Spirit being within certain individuals.

11 Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying,
Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock?
Where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?
Isaiah 63:11.

I used to believe what I think by your response you believe and that is, that, no man can stand before God until the atonement was past. But seeing Scripture above and others caused me to rethink these things. Then, I recall that a "lamb was slain from [before] the foundation (creation) of the world" and I was 'covered' in my understanding by which two things occurred in my mind. The first was this lamb being slain in the heavenly Tabernacle allowed God, a Righteous God, to create man, an unrighteous being. And that the belief that no man can stand before God or have God stand within a saint without the atonement. Not anymore. Isaiah 63:11 is clear. I don't twist Scripture and I receive Scripture as written. Every time a verse from the bible challenges what I believe then I must study further the question at hand and what and why I believe as I do when a passage previously unknown to me contradicts my holding.
Unlike some here the Scripture tells me what to believe, I don't tell the Scripture what to say. Most Gentiles believe 1900 years of Constantinian Gentile theology which from the beginning (after AD 70) unmoored true, biblical Christianity from its Hebrew roots and founded a new religion under a Gentile banner, a religion that has gone over countless revisions - even being hard-hearted to change a doctrine when a Scripture directly contradicts that doctrine. Case in point is Isaiah 45:7 which states God created evil. Not only do I accept it, but God has been gracious to allowing me to understand it and why. When we are born-again, we know nothing about this "so-great salvation" of the Jews and we have to be taught from Scripture like every Hebrew boy and girl in the Hebrew faith religion. We don't come into Christianity knowing the whole counsel of God. We all have to be taught. And based upon one's call, place in the body, spiritual gifts, and even the moment in time, we all have a measure of faith which is founded upon the present knowledge we have at a given moment in time as the Lord teaches us individually what to believe and why. So, yes, I used to make distinction between the OT "with" and the NT "within" (a saint) where His Spirit is concerned. But passages like the one in Isaiah 63:11 and others change all that and I've been confirmed in what Scripture teaches.

Where Abraham was, was the same general area as the damned were. The damed were faithless/not righteous and yet were in another part of the same place Abraham was. And of course there is no scripture stating Abraham went to be with God before the resurrection. As I read your post and at the end you said your post had the scripture that stated Abraham went to be in God's presence, I admit, I don't see that scripture. Could you write a post that has just that scripture so I can look at what you are saying?

 

[jeremiah1five]

Where Abraham was, was the same general area as the damned were. The damed were faithless/not righteous and yet were in another part of the same place Abraham was. And of course there is no scripture stating Abraham went to be with God before the resurrection. As I read your post and at the end you said your post had the scripture that stated Abraham went to be in God's presence, I admit, I don't see that scripture. Could you write a post that has just that scripture so I can look at what you are saying?

Typical Constantinian Gentile textbook answer. All that is found in commentaries and other men's bible studies. Don't you have any original thoughts to speak of? Spend more time reading and studying the Scripture and lay off the commentaries and other men's bible studies. By your response I KNOW you believe in the textbook studies of other men and I'm not going to respond to other men's commentaries and bible studies. They wouldn't stand a chance against the Word of God and true, biblical Christianity rather than that stolen Constantinian Gentile theology of false teaching that's been around for 1900 years after the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple.
Yeah, I know... Gehenna, Hell, Hades, limbo patrus, paradise, Abraham's Bosom, all that garbage.

God told Isaiah:

18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD:
Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow;
Though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
Isaiah 1:18.

Imagine that. You can reason with God. Well, do some original thinking and do some reasoning of God's Word to come to the knowledge of the truth. Then come back with some original nuggets of truth rather than another man's nuggets of truth. God is revealing His Word in the time we live in. Those things Daniel was to shut up in a book, the closer we are to all those things becoming known and revelation. The more that the Jews control Jerusalem the closer we are to Daniel's Seventieth Week and tribulation. Are you prepared? Because only the knowledgeable will be more able to get through it. The ignorant will perish in the first few days.

 

[sethproton]

Typical Constantinian Gentile textbook answer. All that is found in commentaries and other men's bible studies. Don't you have any original thoughts to speak of? Spend more time reading and studying the Scripture and lay off the commentaries and other men's bible studies. By your response I KNOW you believe in the textbook studies of other men and I'm not going to respond to other men's commentaries and bible studies. They wouldn't stand a chance against the Word of God and true, biblical Christianity rather than that stolen Constantinian Gentile theology of false teaching that's been around for 1900 years after the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple.
Yeah, I know... Gehenna, Hell, Hades, limbo patrus, paradise, Abraham's Bosom, all that garbage.

God told Isaiah:

18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD:
Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow;
Though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
Isaiah 1:18.

Imagine that. You can reason with God. Well, do some original thinking and do some reasoning of God's Word to come to the knowledge of the truth. Then come back with some original nuggets of truth rather than another man's nuggets of truth. God is revealing His Word in the time we live in. Those things Daniel was to shut up in a book, the closer we are to all those things becoming known and revelation. The more that the Jews control Jerusalem the closer we are to Daniel's Seventieth Week and tribulation. Are you prepared? Because only the knowledgeable will be more able to get through it. The ignorant will perish in the first few days.

No, I do not have original thoughts. My intention has always been to state what I understand the Bible means to say, I have no use, in that kind of study, for original thoughts. In my life, accordingly,I have read relatively little books written by theologians. I would say that 99.99% of my reading is the Bible, along with Hebrew and Greek lexicons. Sure, in church for the last 50 years I have seen and embraced many scriptural meanings. We all start at zero. When I was younger I began to read books about the Bible, but at some point I decided that praying and reading scripture opened more up to me, so I limited outside reading and strenthened my focus on pure scripture mainly the New American Standard, though not just that translation. Maybe that can help you to understand what I stand on?
You say you will not respond to other men's commentaries, but that is exactly what you do here when you post. Everyone here is commenting on how they understand truth and you respond regularly.

 

[sethproton]

You are right. I do not have original thoughts. My intention has always been to state what I understand the Bible means to say. I have no use, in this kind of study for original thoughts. In my life, accordingly, I have read comparatively few books written by theologians. I would say that 99.99% of my reading is the Bible, along with Hebrew and Greek lexicons(not meaning that I understand either language). In church for the last 50 years I have seen and embraced many scriptural meanings, learning and being instructed and corrected. We all start at zero. When I was a younger Christian I began to also read books about the Bible, but gradually decided to that praying and reading scripture opened more truth and I began limiting outside reading, though not at first by intention. I was strenthening my focus on pure scripture mainly using the New American Standard, though not just that translation.
You say you "will not respond to other men's commentaries" but that is exactly what you do here when you post. Everyone here is commenting on how they understand truth and you respond regularly.

 

[jeremiah1five]

No, I do not have original thoughts. My intention has always been to state what I understand the Bible means to say, I have no use, in that kind of study, for original thoughts. In my life, accordingly,I have read relatively little books written by theologians. I would say that 99.99% of my reading is the Bible, along with Hebrew and Greek lexicons. Sure, in church for the last 50 years I have seen and embraced many scriptural meanings. We all start at zero. When I was younger I began to read books about the Bible, but at some point I decided that praying and reading scripture opened more up to me, so I limited outside reading and strenthened my focus on pure scripture mainly the New American Standard, though not just that translation. Maybe that can help you to understand what I stand on?
You say you will not respond to other men's commentaries, but that is exactly what you do here when you post. Everyone here is commenting on how they understand truth and you respond regularly.

Well, thank you for that.
A better English translation is the KJV.
The NASB takes its NT translation from the Greek Revised Version of 1881 by two closet Catholics named Westcott & Hort. But after using the NASB for so long it may take a while to relearn how to use a new sword. So, yes, that helps me understand.
Everyone here doesn't know what I know and given the content I've read few have opened any new insights, just regurgitating Gentile false teaching I am familiar with as I used to be deceived by it in the past. It is exceedingly difficult and impossible to help the blind to see when they don't acknowledge they are blind. But I am not the Holy Spirit. It is not my ministry to open blind eyes and lighten darkened hearts.
Although everyone comments on how they understand truth yet true believers do not possess all truth, some more than others do. But it takes being more knowledgeable than they to recognize who they are. The younger should serve the older and I'm not talking age, although age does play a part. Pride destroys any true coupling with another brethren. No two can walk together unless they are agreed.

 

[sethproton]

Well, thank you for that.
A better English translation is the KJV.
The NASB takes its NT translation from the Greek Revised Version of 1881 by two closet Catholics named Westcott & Hort. But after using the NASB for so long it may take a while to relearn how to use a new sword. So, yes, that helps me understand.
Everyone here doesn't know what I know and given the content I've read few have opened any new insights, just regurgitating Gentile false teaching I am familiar with as I used to be deceived by it in the past. It is exceedingly difficult and impossible to help the blind to see when they don't acknowledge they are blind. But I am not the Holy Spirit. It is not my ministry to open blind eyes and lighten darkened hearts.
Although everyone comments on how they understand truth yet true believers do not possess all truth, some more than others do. But it takes being more knowledgeable than they to recognize who they are. The younger should serve the older and I'm not talking age, although age does play a part. Pride destroys any true coupling with another brethren. No two can walk together unless they are agreed.

When saying "original thoughts" I am not equating that to insight. I mean thoughts outside the Bible coming from me, suposedly explaining the Bible. Since the KJV is over 500 years old and a large amount of English words have majorly changed their meaning between then and now, it is not possible that the old English better expresses the Bible truth to us today. Yet, if we understand the English language usage of that time equally as well as we understand ours today, then we can make a valid judgement, as long as we also understand Greek to the same degree. I would make a blind assumption that you are like me and are not an expert in the use of all three of these languages.

 

[jeremiah1five]

When saying "original thoughts" I am not equating that to insight.

That's why you fail. First, whatever commentaries you may read are almost immediately out of date since God is not bound by yesterday's revelation or theological conclusions. At this point in time there is a great deal of Scripture revelation to uncover as God controls how much light a person or generation receives in the unfolding of prophetic history which occurs tomorrow which hasn't come yet. God also prepares His people (the Jews) of what's coming and these things will be disseminated before they happen.

I mean thoughts outside the Bible coming from me, suposedly explaining the Bible. Since the KJV is over 500 years old and a large amount of English words have majorly changed their meaning between then and now, it is not possible that the old English better expresses the Bible truth to us today. Yet, if we understand the English language usage of that time equally as well as we understand ours today, then we can make a valid judgement, as long as we also understand Greek to the same degree. I would make a blind assumption that you are like me and are not an expert in the use of all three of these languages.

Not expert. But still knowing what God reveals to take us from glory to glory.
The KJV is 413 years old from 1611. And God has ordained the KJV for the English-speaking people. It is authorized.
And you can't get any higher than a king who was head of both church and state. Old Yeller (Pres. Biden) can't sign any executive order instructing a new translation be developed. What's past is past and the KJV has stood the test of time until the Revised Version by Westcott & Hort's translation team of 1881 brought much confusion to a people that only knew and used the KJV. We can thank John William Burgon who helped Gentile believers to see through the heresies of W&H. While the liberals of the time accepted and revered their translation, traditionalists soon knew the damage these two did to the Gentile church, damage from which the Gentile church will not repair. All their work leads to the Great Whore of Revelation 18. Don't think it won't happen. Might just be the things Daniel was ordered to keep closed until the time of the end. A time that is quickly coming upon the world.