[TruthTalk] Perverting the words of the living God

[Judy Taylor]

What about the HS giving understanding Lance?  Believers!!  Ppl believe in all kinds of doctrines and ideas and not all are from the Spirit of Truth. Those with opposing meanings should be able to show in balance and in context why the scriptures I post are being wrongly used.   By intrinsic do you mean "inward"?  (In the person or in the Word)? Both should be the same. I wouldn't want to be in the shoes of the latter at the 'eschaton' because without understanding they will be the ones walking in lawlessness who will say "Lord, Lord!!"  judyt   From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Check archives re:the role of the HS in interpretation (my understanding). Given: Some on this site are actually "believers". They quote scriptures intended to support an opposing meaning to those you've quoted. This, at its worst is the "O Ya" factor and, at its best is simply an indication that some can't or won't be lead by the Spirit to a correct apprehension of the "intrinsic meaning" therein.I believe everyone is and will be reflective of the latter position this side of the eschaton. Lance From: Judy Taylor Correct me if I'm wrong Lance but I'm reading you stating that I misread scripture because of outside influence (you have already said that you don't believe the Holy Spirit is involved in this) so IYO I am led away from what is "intrinsically true and right" However, in saying this you are setting yourself (or some theologian that you respect and follow) up as the standard of what is true and right rather than God's Word.  If I am perverting truth here, you have the responsibility as a fellow believer to show me in balance and in context why you think I am doing so (in love), so that I may walk in all truth.  judyt   From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kinda yes and kinda no. The "no" part" has to do with your scripture quotations. Every one of them is believed by yourself to refer to a meaning that makes whatever point you are about in that conversation. Sometimes that meaning is the real meaning. But, you too are"influenced". Sometimes that "influence" (folks you study with, books you read etc) can be seen to have lead you away from that which is intrinsically true and right. Please don't respond by asking me if I believe myself to always reflect one over the other 'cause just like you and all others on TT, I don't. Lance From: Judy Taylor Are you being funny Lance? Yes some matters do influence others, (where is discernment these days)? Bad company corrupts good morals and we are not ever exhorted to seek out the devil in order to receive wisdom from God.  Read the Preface to the KJV and compare that with what these other theologians were about.  judyt   From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Jt provides "worldview analysis" Whoda thunk it. Yup, convictions arrived at concerning some matters influence others. Lance From: Judy Taylor Now Bill, got to tell it like it is. I'm just reading how Nestle and Aland were evolutionists and Westcott and Hort were only nominally orthodox in theology, both denied Biblical inerrancy and promoted spiritism and racism. Nestle and Aland, like Kittel were German theological liberals... What's so good about all that?  As the old saying goes, no smoke without fire...jt [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Oh please. When new manuscript evidence is discovered, a new edition is released with notes in the lower margin explaining the nature of the discovery. It's only when the evidence contains a very high degree of probability concerning authenticity that the actual text is changed, reflecting the updated evidence. The variant is then placed in the margin, with explanatory details as to why the change. You guys should be journalists for CNN; you can make anything sound seedy. Bill   From: Judy Taylor Please do, I will be looking fwd to that. I don't know a whole lot about German theologians other than things began to change for the worse when their textual criticism began to permeate the Seminaries in this country. I had heard of Westcott & Hort but not this Nestle/Aland pair.  jt     From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I have a lot of problems with the NA text. When they finally get it right I will give you a critique. Right now we are at revision 26 - revised corrected new improved edition and counting, right? [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You should avoid like the plague, the Wescott & Hort text - Nest/Aland any edition     [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin.   A true scholar is one who can separate his personal views from the task he is qualified to perform.  The guy who cannot do that is just a well  educated sectarian.  All you have proven is the former.   So you don't agree with Aland in theory.  That does not change the fact that he and others did a monumental work in this most recent text (and the others).   Do you have some textual criticism.  I was quoting the text with no reference to Aland's theology. Aren't you the guy who thinks the KJ is the inspired version?   John