|
Okay, Terry, I'll do that in my quiet time, while
reading, meditating upon, and loving God's Word.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 11:29
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perverting the
words of the living God
Rhetoric LOL
Open your eyes and look at the shameful condition of these
Manuscripts.
They are full of additions subtractions blank spaces, big ugly blotches
from erasing.
VATICANus & Sainaiticus are tainted on almost every page. It is the
product of hundreds of years of tampering. Whay all the fixes?
Ps 119:140 Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth
it.
"Wm. Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 6:56
AM
Subject: [TruthTalk] Perverting the
words of the living God
I don't know that I would phrase it like that
Bill. When I was born again I know that God sealed me with the Holy
Spirit of promise but it was only when I layed aside all of the doctrines
of men that had gotten me confused (because there are so many of them)
[Judy, that's like saying you are now the only one
among us who is not confused, yet you gobbled up Kevin's mss rhetoric
yesterday--that is before we began to talk and you backed off a bit. I say
this simply to say that you are as influenced still by the world as is the
next mature Christian. It's when we are honest about this that we
are paidia -- children, because me
are paideai, formable.] and came asking God for wisdom that things came
together for me [that is when things began to
come together for me also]. I no longer need to cut out some parts
of the Bible out because they don't fit into my
doctrine [What are the implications of this
statement: that I do have to "cut out" portions of the
Bible "because they don't fit into my doctrine"? Can you give me examples
of where I have done this?]. I
love every Word, they are all life-giving, better and more satisfying than
my necessary food. You, John, and Lance cheer each other on because
you have all read and follow some of the same theologians [I don't know that I have ever heard John mention the name
of any theologian]. I recognize God's Word when it is spoken
in balance and in context. For eg; I don't know what Kevin has been
into or what he reads but when he posts God's Word in balance and in
context I know he has been with the Lord. Does this make any
sense to you? [Yes, Judy, it makes a great deal
of sense to me. You agree with Kevin because his theology is close to your
own. You disagree with others of us because your theology is less
compatible with ours. This, however, is a reflection and demonstration of
our own limitations, our own theologies, and not a reflection or
demonstration of the absence
of Spirit guidence on the part of us with whom you do not agree.
Godly, obedient, Spirit filled, turth seeking Christians can
have sincere and honorable disagreements concerning matters of truth,
without that necessitating an either/or scenario on behalf of any of us.
Bill] judyt
Judy, in all respect and candor, how do you
know you are "from the Spirit of Truth"? I'll speak for my self here, when
I go to Scripture, I go in prayer, earnestly, inwardly, desiring that the
Spirit lead me to truth. Yet I sometimes (most times?) come away with a
"leading" different from the "leading" you receive. Does that
necessarily mean I am the one in error,
the one deceived, the one perverting the words of the living God? Does it
necessarily mean the same about you? Of course not on both counts. Please
listen to what Lance is saying, look to his words for their intended
meaning, try to understand him. This is an important distinction and one
which gets to the heart of any discussions of fellowship (see
parallel thread). Bill
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
[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
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
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
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
Jt provides "worldview analysis" Whoda
thunk it. Yup, convictions arrived at concerning some matters
influence others. Lance
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
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? You should avoid like the plague, the Wescott & Hort
text - Nest/Aland any edition
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
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo!
Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway - Enter
today
|
