Search results

AI, have no link persay, just typed in "Root meaning of Nacham" Do you realize you are saying 'context' tells you how to translate one word? While I understand the point, there is no need to make a word say something context already gives you for meaning. Some translators put two-and-two...

Or you, to yourself? --> https://vojisrael.org/hebrew-word-of-the-week-nacham-the-comfort-of-god/ "The comfort of God." 🌿 Root Sense At its deepest level, the root נָחַם implies: One of us committed to a deeply held theological position, the other wants to know exactly what words...

Conveyance, especially accuracy. Any one of us can (an do) come up with language to describe something. Often, you have called me on not being clear with any particular statement. I have big concepts and agree they don't always make paper as well as I (and you, and others) would like...

Just over 9k 🆙 Really at the heart of what I'm saying: translation pushes meaning further than Hebrew intent. I believe it best, on point, to recognize that "to sigh" is best. In a sense, God has no lungs, therefore we have to grasp a deeper concept, but we need to be careful how...

But plugging in a modern colloquialism isn't best either. We'd instead follow: Nacham means to sigh. When we think of circumstances that cause One to sigh, we see that it can be from frustration, from a forseen perhaps inevitable outcome. "Sighing" is a legitimate word. We don't have...

Language expresses a thought/idea from one being to another.

I'm likely in the wrong thread anyway. This is supposed to be a 'how' thread, I just couldn't help but weigh in that some 'how's' aren't quite connecting. Which is always my argument as well. You'd probably intimate that I can change 'me' but I'm wondering why this is a point to connect...

"Change one's mind" is modern colloquialism, and I argue it cannot be seen as literal. I took it up with ChatGPT and it said the problem was 'mind' vs. brain in how we determine what 'mind' means. It said it'd be absurd to say "I changed my brain" but said 'mind' was a very broad concept...

Good work and ty for it. I think, in addition, they lose the goal, take their eyes off the prize 1 Corinthians 9:24 and become as you said in the ask thread, a social loving(? I don't believe we can love if we don't tell people what God says is true) church, rather than a both a member-loving...

Do you even realize it was sarcasm, because that is where the conversation was going? We were arguing 'who is smarter' because you weren't listening. I suggested we just go to the end game of who has the larger IQ and better grades at that point, because that was the posturing going on...

Arianism, though persecuted, simply died out, from infighting. The fruit is either good or it is not. Simply consider scripture: I acknowledge Jesus says: John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I...

Why?

Very huge. I argue "we don't even know what it means to be Christian (as gentiles) without Paul!" The council in Acts would have had to go the other way: Only Judiazed Christians could be Christians without Paul and the necessity of Christ's revelation through him, to us. To minimize him...

Chat gpt summary of what is on the table

Ask Clete: If someone rejects Pauline authority and apostleship, does it damage both their Christian identification, and their walk with Christ? I am just starting to study implications, but I believe they are dire. Your thoughts and study? Thanks.

Er, but if it points that way? How addicted to your own theology are you? Lots are, very much here on TOL. It is why I get 'whishy washy' but I'm more honest with God about asking Him to make me more like Him instead of always thinking "I've" found it!" Some call it whishy washy, I call it...

I don't believe you have to be Mid Acts at all to see Divine arrangement. What you'd expect to see, is that as Christians organized these books, they'd have placed them in a semblance of order. If such points to Mid Acts, we'd all be well encouraged to consider the theology thereof. What...

Yet flat-out rejecting Pauline Apostleship and authority from Christ, IS rejecting Christ (as well as any sense at all of what it means to be gentile Christian). If you reject Paul, you've made a grave error.

I've met a few people recently who reject Paul's writings as nonauthoritative. "He was a good guy, got a lot of stuff wrong." Obviously, I'd think, the impetus is upon sexual sin etc. They believe Christ allows for homosexuality and believe Paul too hard on women. I would and will...

Maybe even they didn't know? We don't have a name on Ruth, Samuel is mentioned as traditionally the author. We don't know the author of Job, Job himself? Moses? Samuel? True for most of us. Some will argue emphatically "Paul."