Incorrect Interpretations?

[wincam]

a major problem and cause of much disunity appears to be attributing to ourselves what does not apply to us - a case in point is at Jn.3 where  what applies to non Christians is appled to Christians - also at Jn14:16-17 where 'you' is applied to us when it should be the 'world' and all the problems that follow on from just these two misapplications imho - wincm  

[wincam]

1 hour ago, Yowm said:

Looking at John 14:16-17 appears to be talking to believers especially when you take in the larger context.

 

John 14:16-17 KJVS
[16] And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; [17] Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

 

John 14:13-18 KJVS
[13] And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. [14] If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. [15] If ye love me, keep my commandments. [16] And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; [17] Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. [18] I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

 

 

it is forbidden to add or subtract and must not be believed or accepted = I will come to you = who - wincam

[missmuffet]

3 hours ago, wincam said:

a major problem and cause of much disunity appears to be attributing to ourselves what does not apply to us - a case in point is at Jn.3 where  what applies to non Christians is appled to Christians - also at Jn14:16-17 where 'you' is applied to us when it should be the 'world' and all the problems that follow on from just these two misapplications imho - wincm  

Are you Catholic and Amillennial wincam?

[The_Patriot21]

4 hours ago, wincam said:

it is forbidden to add or subtract and must not be believed or accepted = I will come to you = who - wincam

But yet, you teach that Jesus does not have any brothers or sisters, even though the Bible specifically States he does. 

 

My point is, you can't hold others to a standard that yourself does not follow. In this case , Yom did not add nor subtract, but provided a very biblical answer, quoting the very text you listed. Instead of accusing him of adding or subtracting (which incidentally your right, you should not do either) you explain why you think he is incorrect in a precise, polite, manner.

[Flsnookman]

2 hours ago, The_Patriot2016 said:

But yet, you teach that Jesus does not have any brothers or sisters, even though the Bible specifically States he does. 

 

Hmmm. Ok im no catholic but I have had 2 very knowledgeable pastors say that just because the bible says Jesus had brothers and sisters it doesnt say who their mother was. A small point to be sure but I dont think its possible to prove biblically whether mary had children after Jesus. I dont think it matters as she would still need salvation, i'm just saying don't be so fast to claim absolute truth when there is still room for doubt.

 

[The_Patriot21]

No, there is zero room for doubt. Joseph was always described as an upright man, and there was never any mention of another wife, no any scriptural evidence (nor reason) for Mary to remain a virgin. Saying either of those you have to do so based upon assumptions based upon scripture that is not there.

[wincam]

3 hours ago, The_Patriot2016 said:

But yet, you teach that Jesus does not have any brothers or sisters, even though the Bible specifically States he does. 

 

My point is, you can't hold others to a standard that yourself does not follow. In this case , Yom did not add nor subtract, but provided a very biblical answer, quoting the very text you listed. Instead of accusing him of adding or subtracting (which incidentally your right, you should not do either) you explain why you think he is incorrect in a precise, polite, manner.

you must first learn to not read or interpret in a slipshod careless manner - so just show me where I have stated Jesus did not have brothers and sisters - wincam

[The_Patriot21]

27 minutes ago, wincam said:

you must first learn to not read or interpret in a slipshod careless manner - so just show me where I have stated Jesus did not have brothers and sisters - wincam

I do believe you said it right there, at least not with Mary being the mother-which is where I was going with it, though was not as clear as I should have been, so I apologize for that. Since there is no biblical evidence that Joseph had another wife other then Mary, the only way you can suggest it was with another woman, would be to add to scripture. 

Now, before this gets personal, and chases a rabbit trail, why don't you explain how yowm added to-or subtracted-from scripture.

[Flsnookman]

1 hour ago, Yowm said:

There's only room for doubt when one is looking for a reason to doubt. Any plain reading of Scripture shows that Jesus' brothers and sisters were from Mary. It takes someone looking to read into Scripture their own pet doctrine (eisegesis) to come up with a different take.

Uh, I'll go ahead and side with the pastors since they both have doctorates and one has many books published. If the Word doesn't explicitly say mary had other children then it is you who is"reading into scripture your own pet doctrine (eisegesis)".

[Flsnookman]

4 minutes ago, Butero said:

Among evangelical ministers, I guarantee you there are more pastors with doctorates that believe Mary did have children besides Jesus than disagree with that.  By the way, who is the Pastor that has a book published that holds to your view? 

You don't even know what my view is, you just get very upset when I say to you the same thing you accused me of. I will pass as I practice neither politics nor religion.  Good night sir.