Wayne M. wrote: Wasn't the Geneva Bible translated basically from the same manuscripts as the Authorized KJV 1611?
"The Geneva Bible was the most widely read and influential English Bible of the l6th and 17th centuries, which was printed from 1560 to 1644 in over 200 different printings.
In addition to being the reason for its popularity, the marginal notes of the Geneva Bible were also the reason for its demise. These strongly Protestant notes so infuriated King James that he considered it "seditious" and made its ownership a felony. James I was particularly worried about marginal notes such as the one in Exod 1: 19, which allowed disobedience to Kings. Consequently, King James eventually introduced the King James Version, which drew largely from the Geneva Bible (minus the marginal notes that had enraged him). During the reign of James I and into the reign of Charles I the use of the Geneva Bible steadily declined as the Authorized King James version became more widely used. In 1644 the Geneva Bible was printed for the last time." [Dr. C M McMahon]
Weapon of Miss direction wrote: It's just simple English folks. Paul makes very clear his position on divorce:
BUT don't forget Yamil
You did agree that this is the Word of God. Deuteronomy 24:1 "When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: THEN LET HIM WRITE HER A BILL OF DIVORCEMENT, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife. 3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; 4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance."
Yamil Luciano wrote: I just happen to believe that you are going beyond the Bible to justify divorce. There is nowhere in the Bible where divorce is justified.
Yamil Is this the Word of God? OR The word of man?
Deuteronomy 24 1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife. 3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; 4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
"Arminius held that man had free will for the initiation of repentance and faith. Yet when asked why some men exercised this freedom by responding and others by refusing the overtures of God, he replied in effect, "It is the grace of God working in them that makes them respond." "Then why does not the grace of God act to make all men respond?" "Because the grace of God is directed only towards those who God sees will respond." And so we end up with the conclusion that the grace of God which brings a response is exercised to bring a response, and that it brings a response because this is why it is exercised. All men can respond, but only some do. Why only some? "Because God enables them to by his grace." "Why does He not then enable all men to respond?" "Because He extends his grace only to those He knows will do so." "Then what makes the difference between men?" "The difference is in their responsiveness." "How does this difference come about?" "It comes about because God's grace enables those who do respond to respond." "On what is God's selective enabling based?" "On foreseen responsiveness in the objects of his grace."
The discussion becomes never-ending and there is no way to break out of it." (A. Custance)
Scholia post below "DB Note 1John 5:13 "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God" This qualifies that John is talking specifically to "you that believe" - viz they have already been called and born again. Thus it does not include the unbeliever (everybody) who as yet cannot receive the truth. (Free offer???)
Yamil """... and that ye may believe in the name of the Son of God." So according to the F_anciful L_and of the Calvinist, John was writing to believers who had a hard time believing in Jesus. Ha! Funny but ironic: The only people that I know are like that would be the Calvinist. I prescribe Scholia a rude awakening with the devastating truth."
1] Yamil has quoted the WRONG words or the WRONG verse???
2] His churlish childish rantings and insults to people belie a statement of the free will crowd that even they should be upset about.
3] If this is a "Pastor" then I feel very very sorry for this congregation.
4] The verse explicitly states "These things have I written **UNTO YOU THAT BELIEVE** on the name" Thus John directed it specifically to the Believer.
Yamil you either CANT read or WONT read according to the Word, But instead according to your flagrant heresy.