Waiting

Juk said:
God told me a couple of weeks ago through an unrelated song that an intimate relationship with Him is not something that I can handle right now, but do not give up. I am still praying and reading His Word, but I have stopped worrying some. I just wanted to let you guys know. God bless :)
Click to expand...

My dear young brother. That is the problem in believing God spoke to YOU out of a song.

God speaks to us today out of His Word, the Bible. The truth is that God does want to have an intimate relationship with ALL who will repeant and believe upon the Lord Jesus Christ.

1 John 1:3...........
"That which we have seen and heard declare we unto YOU, that ye also may have fellowship with us, and truely our fellowship is with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ".
 
Juk said:
I thought the song was relating to the issues I was having at that time (which I am still having), which are: being in a close relationship with God and talking to Him in a normal conversation like I am having with you guys now.
Click to expand...

That is what I am Talking about Juk, No where in the original conversation of this when you first began to talk to us about this was it said "RELATIONSHIP" YOU were all concerned on HEARING and this is not the same as a rtelationship. From what I rememberit was more to the tune of you needed to continue developingyour hearing as we do at this time.

So how come now you have added something else to that answer from Him? That is NOT a very wise move brother, UNLESS you know for sure God said oh and add this too.
Juk you as the rest of the Body of Christ are instructed to develope our relationship with the Father and Lord Jesus Christ. It's the only way you can grow. When you say God told me that a personal and close relationship with Him was not for me now is like saying God said, hey Juk, like ya know son, I have decided to keep you as a baby Christian for I need the sound of baby wimpers of lack of knowledge about me running around my Kingdom here.

That is and will not ever be so...You build up your relationship with the Father and Jesus every single day. Do not allow any one to convince you different.
Have a blessed and wonderful day
Jim
 
  • Like
Reactions: Juk
Hey Juk. Your question might have already been answered, but I'm going to answer anyways ;)

God desires you. God loves you. Why would there be a desire in Him to say to you, "I don't think you're ready for an intimate relationship." We are told countless of times God is with us in Scripture. Draw close to Him and He will draw close to you. That's intimacy.

God would never, ever tell someone that there shouldn't be intimacy right at a certain time. I am at work right now, but when I get off, I will look up Scriptures and do some studies on it at some point and share a bit with you!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Juk
Fish Catcher Jim said:
That is what I am Talking about Juk, No where in the original conversation of this when you first began to talk to us about this was it said "RELATIONSHIP" YOU were all concerned on HEARING and this is not the same as a rtelationship. From what I rememberit was more to the tune of you needed to continue developingyour hearing as we do at this time.

So how come now you have added something else to that answer from Him? That is NOT a very wise move brother, UNLESS you know for sure God said oh and add this too.
Juk you as the rest of the Body of Christ are instructed to develope our relationship with the Father and Lord Jesus Christ. It's the only way you can grow. When you say God told me that a personal and close relationship with Him was not for me now is like saying God said, hey Juk, like ya know son, I have decided to keep you as a baby Christian for I need the sound of baby wimpers of lack of knowledge about me running around my Kingdom here.

That is and will not ever be so...You build up your relationship with the Father and Jesus every single day. Do not allow any one to convince you different.
Have a blessed and wonderful day
Jim
Click to expand...
Ok
 
Euphemia said:
The Spirit of God speaks to us no matter what bible version we use. The NLT is one version I refer to a lot. You can trust the Lord to speak His truth to you no matter which version you use. There is no perversion going on there.
Click to expand...
The NLT was compared to the King James Bible, which is the midst accurate English translation. It changed the entire meaning of many pieces of Scripture, and it even took out a lot of verses. Even the footnotes say so.
 
Juk said:
The NLT was compared to the King James Bible, which is the midst accurate English translation. It changed the entire meaning of many pieces of Scripture, and it even took out a lot of verses. Even the footnotes say so.
Click to expand...

Nothing has been removed from scripture, and nothing has been changed.
 
Juk, I think it's important to know that we all have our own experiences with God.
@shineyourlight8 may experience a wonder from God and I never will get that experience; and visa versa.
We have our own unique relationship with Him and He knows our trials.
We must not idolise what others have and concentrate on what our relationship with God is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Juk
Euphemia said:
I refuse to consult with a heresy-hunter type of website. Please try and give us one example.
Click to expand...
In 1 Corinthians 4:6, it says, "...If you pay attention to what I have quoted from the Scriptures..." then, as a footnote, it says, "Or if you learn not to go beyond what is written". The wording here is so bad that they completely changed the meaning if the verse! What is written in the footnote is what it says UN the KJV, the only preserved Word of God in English.
 
Juk said:
In 1 Corinthians 4:6, it says, "...If you pay attention to what I have quoted from the Scriptures..." then, as a footnote, it says, "Or if you learn not to go beyond what is written". The wording here is so bad that they completely changed the meaning if the verse! What is written in the footnote is what it says UN the KJV, the only preserved Word of God in English.
Click to expand...

No. The full meaning is not changed whatsoever.
 
Juk said:
I believe so. And even if the meaning was not changed, it makes it harder to understand. Also, please tell me how the meaning is not changed.
Click to expand...

The full meaning is right there. Footnotes are included so that not a bit is missed, and that means nothing is missed for those who would seek to criticize.

The NLT is a good translation that helps us gain an even better understanding of scripture.
 
Euphemia said:
The full meaning is right there. Footnotes are included so that not a bit is missed, and that means nothing is missed for those who would seek to criticize.

The NLT is a good translation that helps us gain an even better understanding of scripture.
Click to expand...
That is a good explanation. But my point is that the writers of the NLT took the original meanings, the one in the KJV, which is the closest translation of the original Scripture. Then the writers added something else that either does not have the same meaning, or makes it even harder to understand.
 
Juk said:
That is a good explanation. But my point is that the writers of the NLT took the original meanings, the one in the KJV, which is the closest translation of the original Scripture. Then the writers added something else that either does not have the same meaning, or makes it even harder to understand.
Click to expand...

I disagree with that completely.
 
Juk said:
So, do you think that what the NLT writers put in place of the original KJV verse conveyed the message better than the KJV did? But I guess that it's a matter of opinion at that point.
Click to expand...

Nothing is better, but the NLT serves a purpose---to modernize the archaic language of the KJV so that people of this century can appreciate, and apprehend the truth easily, where the King James lingo would be stilted and would perhaps be a bit of a hindrance.
 
Euphemia said:
Nothing is better, but the NLT serves a purpose---to modernize the archaic language of the KJV so that people of this century can appreciate, and apprehend the truth easily, where the King James lingo would be stilted and would perhaps be a bit of a hindrance.
Click to expand...
That is why I liked the NLT so much before. But for me, I have learned to understand the old English. I like it so much that I want to start taking and writing in it lol
 
Juk said:
That is why I liked the NLT so much before. But for me, I have learned to understand the old English. I like it so much that I want to start taking and writing in it lol
Click to expand...

Well that is your prerogative. However, for me, it is better to become familiar with the modern English (not barring the KJV for personal use) so as to be relevant to those in this era who need Jesus so desperately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Juk
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top