Re: [TruthTalk] Re [Truth Talk] Saved -- Salvation -- and the pigpen

Thu, 14 Apr 2005 15:04:52 -0700

I use them to communicate with people who do not accept God's Word as is, without these extra trappings.
He doesn't forbid it but if we follow His own example we would not need to. He quoted the Old Covenant
scriptures all the time without qualifying anything, even using God's Word as a two edged sword to defeat
Satan in the wilderness.  Imagine that!!!   jt 
 
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:33:09 -0600 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Judy writes  >  He doesn't expect this from us and this is why He has made His Word available to us in our generation in the English language.
 
If you truly believe this, Judy, then why just this morning were you nuancing the differences between the Greek words "philos" and "agape"? Our English Bibles translate both as "love": Why if God "has made his Word available to us in our generation in the English language," and this --, along with the Holy Spirit -- is all we need to gain understanding, did you present us with a "word study" on the meaning of Greek words? Oh, and weren't you also the one who earlier today wrote to John, saying: "I don't see Jesus leaving any admonition about ... Word Studies in order to understand the meaning of His Word"? It looks to me like you are operating under a double standard. You think it's okay when you nuance the meaning of words, but when others do it, they are using "qualifiers as an excuse to make the Word of God say what [they] want it to ... '"
 
Seems hypocritical to me, Judy. Will you please explain to us why it is not?
 
Bill 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 1:03 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Re [Truth Talk] Saved -- Salvation -- and the pigpen

 
 
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:41:30 -0400 "Debbie Sawczak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Maybe, then, Judy, we needn't even bother to read the Bible in our own language. We could "read" it in Inuktitut
and the Holy Spirit could just siphon the content into our brains without ANY of the normal means of linguistic processing.
 
Debbie, please tell me you are being silly rather than serious here...
 
The point being (as laid out in an earlier post) that making use of context is something we all do every day in understanding 
anything we hear or read. But in this case, we are so far away from the context (Jesus' hearers weren't) that we have to make
a conscious effort to go after it. Of course it will STILL be necessary for the Holy Spirit to enlighten and enliven us, as it was
for Jesus' hearers back then; but why would he expect us to deliberately short-circuit the normal process of understanding
language?  Debbie
 
He doesn't expect this from us and this is why He has made His Word available to us in our generation in the English language. However, an English speaking person can read an English Bible and a Greek speaking person can read a Greek Bible with both knowing all about Israel's history and local customs and yet it will still be a closed book without the ministry of the Holy Spirit which is not so with what  we read and what we hear every day on TV and in the newspaper.
 
It's something to think about...
Judyt
 
    
 
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 08:48:33 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do you use biblcial, historical and cultural context to help understand the meaning of words?
Or do you see that as a devise of the uninspired?   JD
 
I don't see Jesus leaving any admonition about history, culture, and  Word Studies in order to understand the meaning
of His Word.  He sent the Holy Spirit to give us understanding.  I don't know what Kevin's response will be but I see the above qualifiers as an excuse to make the Word of God say what you want it to and conform it to strange and different doctrines rather than receive the "faith once delivered to the saints".  jt
In a message dated 4/14/2005 4:36:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Does the "context" of your writings demand that we REDFINE your words also?

 
 
 

Reply via email to