Stirring the Waters, Not the Pot.

[Dennis1209]

6 hours ago, Michael37 said:

@Dennis1209 I posted a good 8 minute video on this subject for you. (Not the first post)

 

Thank you. This is an excellent video. It explained a lot I did not connect with and was unaware of. I have watched several of his teachings when he was on location in Israel and the site of Noah’s Ark.

Short videos like this one (8-10 minutes) would be perfect to insert and use in Sunday School, but we do not have internet. There is a way to use my smartphone to connect and clone to my big TV monitor. I project my laptop, but the complex procedure exceeds my pay grade. Thanks again.

[walla299]

1 hour ago, Dennis1209 said:

Thank you. This is an excellent video. It explained a lot I did not connect with and was unaware of. I have watched several of his teachings when he was on location in Israel and the site of Noah’s Ark.

Short videos like this one (8-10 minutes) would be perfect to insert and use in Sunday School, but we do not have internet. There is a way to use my smartphone to connect and clone to my big TV monitor. I project my laptop, but the complex procedure exceeds my pay grade. Thanks again.

There used to be a way to download the videos off of YouTube with a browser extension. It's been a long time since I did it, but a Google of, "How to download video from Youtube." might help. I used to download the video to my laptop for use offline.

 

[Ray12614]

Having read though all the replies to this, I just don't understand why some of the replies would be taken offense at. No where did i find that Dennis was called an liar, and frankly I feel a little dumber from reading though all the mis-communication in this thread. Maybe there was other OP disagreements bleeding over into this one? 

I do, however understand passion for various topics not essential to salvation and have at times gotten caught up in them (like Christians being involved in politics and civic duty), and last time I allowed that passion to get away from me, I regretted it because now I see OPs from that person I disagreed with and ignore them altogether.

Not very mature of me to do that is it???

So my personal outlook on Worthy is to 'eat the hay and spit out the stubble' and realize that I don't always have to have the last word on anything talked about here.

 . . . Ray . . . 

[Dennis1209]

11 minutes ago, walla299 said:

There used to be a way to download the videos off of YouTube with a browser extension. It's been a long time since I did it, but a Google of, "How to download video from Youtube." might help. I used to download the video to my laptop for use offline.

 

Thanks! After my last post, I did some investigating on that. It's a little pricey, but I signed up for YouTube Premium; now, downloading a video to my laptop is a breeze, and I am ready to go. It is also nice not to have all the numerous commercial interruptions now. 

[walla299]

1 hour ago, Dennis1209 said:

Thanks! After my last post, I did some investigating on that. It's a little pricey, but I signed up for YouTube Premium; now, downloading a video to my laptop is a breeze, and I am ready to go. It is also nice not to have all the numerous commercial interruptions now. 

Good to hear.

For ads there's the uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger extensions to keep the garbage off the screens. They work great.

[FriendofJonathan]

12 hours ago, missmuffet said:

I am saying that name calling is not something that God looks at kindly.

Thank you. I wholeheartedly agree. 

[other one]

5 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

Thanks! After my last post, I did some investigating on that. It's a little pricey, but I signed up for YouTube Premium; now, downloading a video to my laptop is a breeze, and I am ready to go. It is also nice not to have all the numerous commercial interruptions now. 

We've been Premium members for a long time and I agree that it's worth what it costs.  It's where I get most of my news these days.

[angels4u]

On 3/10/2025 at 6:56 PM, Dennis1209 said:

I am preparing for my Sunday School lesson next week (John 5:1-11, 17-20). We have long used Lifeway Senior Bible Studies for Life, a good Bible study platform. In our Bible, if it sounds strange, it is probably vital or deserves further study to get clarification. The best way to study the Bible is to let it explain itself.

You might say our church is a KJV-only congregation, and I stick to that for church and Sunday School. However, I often read other translations, such as the ESV, CSB, and LEB (acceptable word-for-word translations), to better understand some passages' meaning. But what if the verse(s) are omitted, much like original manuscripts ending at Mark 16:8 in some Bibles?

John 5:2-6 (KJV) Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches. ³ In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water. ⁴ For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had. ⁵ And a certain man was there, which had an infirmity thirty and eight years. ⁶ When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?

Does the above scripture sound doctrinally, exegetically, and Biblically correct?

Before I submit and comment on my study and thoughts, I would like to hear how you would explain and interpret the above.

I found a couple of explanations,its very interesting you picked this verse to discuss!

This is one of he explanations:According to manuscript evidence, the most likely answer is that these words were not part of the original text of the gospel of John. They might have been written in a margin, as a note, or a traditional explanation of the pool.

This is the other one:

What does John 5:4 mean?

This verse is not typically found in modern translations. Those which include it often note that it is not found in older or more reliable manuscripts. The disputed text indicates that an angel would agitate the water of the pool, and the first invalid into the water after that would be healed. This raises theological questions, such as why God would make healing into a contest, or express miraculous power in such a random yet repetitive way.

According to manuscript evidence, the most likely answer is that these words were not part of the original text of the gospel of John. They might have been written in a margin, as a note, or a traditional explanation of the pool. At some point, the note might have been inadvertently copied into the main body and absorbed as part of the text.

Ultimately, this is a better example of biblical reliability than of biblical weakness. Verses such as this represent the most extreme version of "variants" found in scriptural manuscripts. Accepted or not, the text has no bearing on any doctrine, belief, or other meaningful facts of the faith. In other words, its exclusion isn't important, and if it were included, it wouldn't overwhelm the rest of what the Bible says on related topics. The Bible is an amazingly well-preserved and well-documented work.https://www.bibleref.com/John/5/John-5-4.html

Please let me know how you read the verse ?

[Dennis1209]

40 minutes ago, angels4u said:

I found a couple of explanations,its very interesting you picked this verse to discuss!

This is one of he explanations:According to manuscript evidence, the most likely answer is that these words were not part of the original text of the gospel of John. They might have been written in a margin, as a note, or a traditional explanation of the pool.

This is the other one:

What does John 5:4 mean?

This verse is not typically found in modern translations. Those which include it often note that it is not found in older or more reliable manuscripts. The disputed text indicates that an angel would agitate the water of the pool, and the first invalid into the water after that would be healed. This raises theological questions, such as why God would make healing into a contest, or express miraculous power in such a random yet repetitive way.

According to manuscript evidence, the most likely answer is that these words were not part of the original text of the gospel of John. They might have been written in a margin, as a note, or a traditional explanation of the pool. At some point, the note might have been inadvertently copied into the main body and absorbed as part of the text.

Ultimately, this is a better example of biblical reliability than of biblical weakness. Verses such as this represent the most extreme version of "variants" found in scriptural manuscripts. Accepted or not, the text has no bearing on any doctrine, belief, or other meaningful facts of the faith. In other words, its exclusion isn't important, and if it were included, it wouldn't overwhelm the rest of what the Bible says on related topics. The Bible is an amazingly well-preserved and well-documented work.https://www.bibleref.com/John/5/John-5-4.html

Please let me know how you read the verse ?

Hi Angels,

That is exactly what I came up with.

[angels4u]

1 hour ago, Dennis1209 said:

Hi Angels,

That is exactly what I came up with.

The question puzzled me a bit and really made me think..