- This topic has 18,301 replies, 269 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
To all…………I think martain is more frustrated then anything else, I have experienced the same thing here. We all want to hold on to what we (think) we know, but the truth is we Know nothing like we UT to Know. If we hold to our opinions with out opening up to other possibilities we close off and can not grow. God spirit should be guiding us all into more sound understandings of His word and if it means to listen to other view points we should try to see what they are explaining and consider the possibilities of what's said.
IMO……..gene
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Mar. 24 2008,08:53) To all…………I think martain is more frustrated then anything else, I have experienced the same thing here. We all want to hold on to what we (think) we know, but the truth is we Know nothing like we UT to Know. If we hold to our opinions with out opening up to other possibilities we close off and can not grow. God spirit should be guiding us all into more sound understandings of His word and if it means to listen to other view points we should try to see what they are explaining and consider the possibilities of what's said. IMO……..gene
I passed frustrated a long time ago. If I were to assign any emotion to this board it would be boredom and futility. Although those are not really very profound in their nature.
What some do not understand is that I put very little importance on this venue as efecting the Kingdom. It is simply something to pass the time.
I see very little fruit coming from here. I know some will counter that they have had such 'WONDERFULL fruit from here. Personally I do not believe it.Gene, I agree with what you wrote about being open to other possibilities and allowing God' spirit to teach us. Thank you!
You know I just received news that my mentor, teacher, pastor and best friend had a heart attack last night. When faced with real life issues like that all of this petty squbling on a web site seems even more pointless and silly.
I'm sorry Martian. It sounds like he is a pretty important man in your life. I pray that all goes well for him.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 23 2008,06:53) Hi martian,
You too can learn.
You should listen.
Nick, you have suggested that I try to learn something from the others on here. You suggest that I should listed and learn. Learn from who? Those that have little or no understanding of how to interpret scripture? How can I learn from people that from the onset deny and/or ignore the most basic principles of interpretation? This denial virtually guarantees that their conclusions will be wrong. I can understand that many Christians are ignorant of the proper way to study scripture. That is really only a matter of educating them, but when it is made clear to some and they brush it aside in order to protect their doctrines, I worry for their well being. It reminds me of the old saying. “You can educate ignorance, but there is not cure for stupid”. It is a foolish and stupid thing to try to teach when you have no idea how to properly interpret the word. I certainly cannot take their teachings or conclusions very seriously. The most important word in proper Biblical interpretation is context. Context within the verse, within the chapter, within the Bible and most important within the language and culture of the writers of the verse. This includes the mental perceptions those writers had associated to the words we read and how their culture and way of thinking effected those perceptions. Without that understanding you might as well be reading Essops fables and make up whatever conclusions you want. (Actually making up conclusions is exactly what has occurred in many cases)From the “cut and past” theologies to the ignorance of the culture of the writers of scripture, failure to see past preconceived ideas of doctrine have prevailed.
In a previous post I gave proofs of the Hebrew origins of the book of Mathew. I only included one book because no matter how much proof I stack up many on here will ignore it in favor of their doctrinal bent and Greek philosophies. Their understandings are a clear example of the Greek/Western evangelical nonsense that has been pushed on the real church for the last 1500 years. They quote references that have their beginnings in the late 1800s and, even though there are some more recently published, they have none the less just been copies of the former works. Very few works are out there that take into consideration the more recent discoveries such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Hittite pictographs or the ancient tie in with the Hebrew pictographs. Many still hold onto the false belief that a knowledge of the Greek will give you a clear understanding of the NT scriptures. They do not even consider that the Hebrew culture prevalent in NT times is vastly different then the Greek or Western Cultures that we now enjoy. They do not consider that this Hebrew culture is different even to the way they think! No scripture in the Bible was meant to be understood outside of it’s culture or original language. Without a knowledge of the Hebrew culture and a knowledge of the way they viewed the world, it is impossible to have an in depth understanding of the NT.
The belief that the NT is solely written in Greek or Aramaic is simply wrong. Any study that depends on understanding from that perspective is subject to grave error. Aramaic is nowhere mentioned in the New Testament. Yet on numerous occasions it speaks of the “Hebrew” language in first century Judaea – from the title over Jesus’ cross “in Hebrew” (John 19:20), to descriptions of places like Gabbatha and Golgotha “in the Hebrew tongue” (John 5:2; 19:13, 17; Rev. 9:11; 16:16), to Paul gaining the silence of the Jerusalem crowd by addressing them “in the Hebrew tongue” (Acts 21:40; 22:2), to Jesus himself calling out to Paul, on the Damascus road, “in the Hebrew tongue” (Acts 26:14).
In past years it was concluded that the Hebrew language was all but dead, in NT times, except for an occasional religious document. The Dead Sea Scrolls which date from the NT period are 80% in Hebrew. Greek, Aramaic and a few others make up the rest. This 80% is not just legal documents or religious texts but simple business forms and personal letters. This was the language in common use. Since the discovery of the Scrolls archeologists and biblical historians have had to change their minds about the Hebrew language and conclude that it was the prevalent language of Israel during the Gospel period.
From the day of Pentecost (28AD) to the opening of the gospel to the gentiles some 14 to 16 years elapsed. During this time the Apostles stayed in Jerusalem and ministered to the people of Israel. This places the gospel going to the gentiles about 42 AD. Prior to this event there was no need to write in any language other then Hebrew. Scripture is clear that the Apostles were surprised that the gospel went to the Gentiles by their questioning of Peter about his ministry at the house of Cornelious. Many renowned authorities now clearly date Matthew prior to this event. Because of the great similarities in the three synoptic gospels (Mathew. Mark and Luke) it has been concluded that they also are original from that period and written in Hebrew.
In past years some scholars have tried to date books like Revelation coming as late as 90 AD.
AT Robertson, one of the most prominent authorities on the NT says in his book “Redating the New Testament” , that there is no reason to date any of the NT later then 70 AD. He asserts this because nowhere in the NT is the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple mentioned, which happened in that year. The most cataclysmic event to attach itself to Temple worship is not even mentioned. Even the book of Hebrews, which speaks of the ending of Temple worship does not mention it.Even those portions of the NT which we are not sure about their original language cannot be understood from a Greek/Western mindset. When I speak of “mindset” I am speaking of the process, both emotionally and linguistically that goes on in the mind when a word or phrase is heard or read. Even if written in another language other then Hebrew, the Hebrew writers would write from the perspective of their culture and way of thinking. Most Greek concepts of thought were completely foreign to them and would not even have occurred to them. Let me give an example —
Today if I say “I am blue”. Most would assume I am speaking of a depression state I am in. One hundred years ago most would assume my skin had change color to blue. In the Hebrew it is even more pronounced. When we read the term “King David” the concept in our mind is king = title and David = personal identifier. Because the Hebrews view things from a functional standpoint rather then an appearance one, they would have the concept of king = one who rules and David = one who is loved. These are the visual and conceptual images that would come to the Hebrew mind.
Another example –
The Hebrew word for faith is hnwma (emunah – Strong's #530) and is an action oriented word meaning “support”. This is important because the Western concept of faith places the action on the one you have faith in, such as “faith in God”. But, the Hebrew word hnwma places the action on the one who “supports God”. It is not knowing that God will act, but rather I will do what I can to support God. This idea of support for the word emunah can be seen in Exodus 17:12.But Moses' hands grew weary; so they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat upon it, and Aaron and Hur held up his hands, one on one side, and the other on the other side; so his hands were steady (emunah)until the going down of the sun.
It is the support/emunah of Aaron and Hur that held up Moses' arms, not the support/emunah of Moses. When we s
ay “I have faith in God”, we should be thinking “I will do what I can to support God”.
Rather then sitting back and waiting for what God may do, it is a matter of finding out what God would have us do to accomplish His will.How can I honestly take seriously the conclusions of people that blatantly ignore the most basic principles of proper biblical interpretation. So for now I will continue to see these boards as a simple internet game. Perhaps that is not what you think of the forums or you think that is not fair about the forums. Sorry my friend, that is my opinion. To me it’s value is entertainment. Because I am dealing with on going health issues and somewhat housebound, that does serve a purpose for me.
Quote (martian @ Mar. 27 2008,03:53) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 23 2008,06:53) Hi martian,
You too can learn.
You should listen.
Nick, you have suggested that I try to learn something from the others on here. You suggest that I should listed and learn. Learn from who? Those that have little or no understanding of how to interpret scripture? How can I learn from people that from the onset deny and/or ignore the most basic principles of interpretation? This denial virtually guarantees that their conclusions will be wrong. I can understand that many Christians are ignorant of the proper way to study scripture. That is really only a matter of educating them, but when it is made clear to some and they brush it aside in order to protect their doctrines, I worry for their well being. It reminds me of the old saying. “You can educate ignorance, but there is not cure for stupid”. It is a foolish and stupid thing to try to teach when you have no idea how to properly interpret the word. I certainly cannot take their teachings or conclusions very seriously. The most important word in proper Biblical interpretation is context. Context within the verse, within the chapter, within the Bible and most important within the language and culture of the writers of the verse. This includes the mental perceptions those writers had associated to the words we read and how their culture and way of thinking effected those perceptions. Without that understanding you might as well be reading Essops fables and make up whatever conclusions you want. (Actually making up conclusions is exactly what has occurred in many cases)From the “cut and past” theologies to the ignorance of the culture of the writers of scripture, failure to see past preconceived ideas of doctrine have prevailed.
In a previous post I gave proofs of the Hebrew origins of the book of Mathew. I only included one book because no matter how much proof I stack up many on here will ignore it in favor of their doctrinal bent and Greek philosophies. Their understandings are a clear example of the Greek/Western evangelical nonsense that has been pushed on the real church for the last 1500 years. They quote references that have their beginnings in the late 1800s and, even though there are some more recently published, they have none the less just been copies of the former works. Very few works are out there that take into consideration the more recent discoveries such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Hittite pictographs or the ancient tie in with the Hebrew pictographs. Many still hold onto the false belief that a knowledge of the Greek will give you a clear understanding of the NT scriptures. They do not even consider that the Hebrew culture prevalent in NT times is vastly different then the Greek or Western Cultures that we now enjoy. They do not consider that this Hebrew culture is different even to the way they think! No scripture in the Bible was meant to be understood outside of it’s culture or original language. Without a knowledge of the Hebrew culture and a knowledge of the way they viewed the world, it is impossible to have an in depth understanding of the NT.
The belief that the NT is solely written in Greek or Aramaic is simply wrong. Any study that depends on understanding from that perspective is subject to grave error. Aramaic is nowhere mentioned in the New Testament. Yet on numerous occasions it speaks of the “Hebrew” language in first century Judaea – from the title over Jesus’ cross “in Hebrew” (John 19:20), to descriptions of places like Gabbatha and Golgotha “in the Hebrew tongue” (John 5:2; 19:13, 17; Rev. 9:11; 16:16), to Paul gaining the silence of the Jerusalem crowd by addressing them “in the Hebrew tongue” (Acts 21:40; 22:2), to Jesus himself calling out to Paul, on the Damascus road, “in the Hebrew tongue” (Acts 26:14).
In past years it was concluded that the Hebrew language was all but dead, in NT times, except for an occasional religious document. The Dead Sea Scrolls which date from the NT period are 80% in Hebrew. Greek, Aramaic and a few others make up the rest. This 80% is not just legal documents or religious texts but simple business forms and personal letters. This was the language in common use. Since the discovery of the Scrolls archeologists and biblical historians have had to change their minds about the Hebrew language and conclude that it was the prevalent language of Israel during the Gospel period.
From the day of Pentecost (28AD) to the opening of the gospel to the gentiles some 14 to 16 years elapsed. During this time the Apostles stayed in Jerusalem and ministered to the people of Israel. This places the gospel going to the gentiles about 42 AD. Prior to this event there was no need to write in any language other then Hebrew. Scripture is clear that the Apostles were surprised that the gospel went to the Gentiles by their questioning of Peter about his ministry at the house of Cornelious. Many renowned authorities now clearly date Matthew prior to this event. Because of the great similarities in the three synoptic gospels (Mathew. Mark and Luke) it has been concluded that they also are original from that period and written in Hebrew.
In past years some scholars have tried to date books like Revelation coming as late as 90 AD.
AT Robertson, one of the most prominent authorities on the NT says in his book “Redating the New Testament” , that there is no reason to date any of the NT later then 70 AD. He asserts this because nowhere in the NT is the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple mentioned, which happened in that year. The most cataclysmic event to attach itself to Temple worship is not even mentioned. Even the book of Hebrews, which speaks of the ending of Temple worship does not mention it.Even those portions of the NT which we are not sure about their original language cannot be understood from a Greek/Western mindset. When I speak of “mindset” I am speaking of the process, both emotionally and linguistically that goes on in the mind when a word or phrase is heard or read. Even if written in another language other then Hebrew, the Hebrew writers would write from the perspective of their culture and way of thinking. Most Greek concepts of thought were completely foreign to them and would not even have occurred to them. Let me give an example —
Today if I say “I am blue”. Most would assume I am speaking of a depression state I am in. One hundred years ago most would assume my skin had change color to blue. In the Hebrew it is even more pronounced. When we read the term “King David” the concept in our mind is king = title and David = personal identifier. Because the Hebrews view things from a functional standpoint rather then an appearance one, they would have the concept of king = one who rules and David = one who is loved. These are the visual and conceptual images that would come to the Hebrew mind.
Another example –
The Hebrew word for faith is hnwma (emunah – Strong's #530) and is an action oriented word meaning “support”. This is important because the Western concept of faith places the action on the one you have faith in, such as “faith in God”. But, the Hebrew word hnwma places the action on the one who “supports God”. It is not knowing that God will act, but rather I will do what I can to support God. This idea of support for the word emunah can be seen in Exodus 17:12.But Moses' hands grew weary; so they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat upon it, and Aaron and Hur held up his hands, one on one side, and the other on the othe
r side; so his hands were steady (emunah)until the going down of the sun.It is the support/emunah of Aaron and Hur that held up Moses' arms, not the support/emunah of Moses. When we say “I have faith in God”, we should be thinking “I will do what I can to support God”.
Rather then sitting back and waiting for what God may do, it is a matter of finding out what God would have us do to accomplish His will.How can I honestly take seriously the conclusions of people that blatantly ignore the most basic principles of proper biblical interpretation. So for now I will continue to see these boards as a simple internet game. Perhaps that is not what you think of the forums or you think that is not fair about the forums. Sorry my friend, that is my opinion. To me it’s value is entertainment. Because I am dealing with on going health issues and somewhat housebound, that does serve a purpose for me.
Martian Sorry but I think you are to wise in your own eyes, and think the rest of us are stupid. Let me tell you my friend, I don't need fancy writings to understand the word of God. The Holy Spirit has shown me, and only God can do that . No man can teach another. Nick is wrong to tell you that. To think so highly of self is not the right attitude to have. Listening to others have gotten many into doctrines that are simple not true.
I don't have any more time right now, have a Doctor Appointment.
Peace and Love Mrs.Quote (seek and you will find @ Mar. 27 2008,04:50) Quote (martian @ Mar. 27 2008,03:53) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 23 2008,06:53) Hi martian,
You too can learn.
You should listen.
Nick, you have suggested that I try to learn something from the others on here. You suggest that I should listed and learn. Learn from who? Those that have little or no understanding of how to interpret scripture? How can I learn from people that from the onset deny and/or ignore the most basic principles of interpretation? This denial virtually guarantees that their conclusions will be wrong. I can understand that many Christians are ignorant of the proper way to study scripture. That is really only a matter of educating them, but when it is made clear to some and they brush it aside in order to protect their doctrines, I worry for their well being. It reminds me of the old saying. “You can educate ignorance, but there is not cure for stupid”. It is a foolish and stupid thing to try to teach when you have no idea how to properly interpret the word. I certainly cannot take their teachings or conclusions very seriously. The most important word in proper Biblical interpretation is context. Context within the verse, within the chapter, within the Bible and most important within the language and culture of the writers of the verse. This includes the mental perceptions those writers had associated to the words we read and how their culture and way of thinking effected those perceptions. Without that understanding you might as well be reading Essops fables and make up whatever conclusions you want. (Actually making up conclusions is exactly what has occurred in many cases)From the “cut and past” theologies to the ignorance of the culture of the writers of scripture, failure to see past preconceived ideas of doctrine have prevailed.
In a previous post I gave proofs of the Hebrew origins of the book of Mathew. I only included one book because no matter how much proof I stack up many on here will ignore it in favor of their doctrinal bent and Greek philosophies. Their understandings are a clear example of the Greek/Western evangelical nonsense that has been pushed on the real church for the last 1500 years. They quote references that have their beginnings in the late 1800s and, even though there are some more recently published, they have none the less just been copies of the former works. Very few works are out there that take into consideration the more recent discoveries such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Hittite pictographs or the ancient tie in with the Hebrew pictographs. Many still hold onto the false belief that a knowledge of the Greek will give you a clear understanding of the NT scriptures. They do not even consider that the Hebrew culture prevalent in NT times is vastly different then the Greek or Western Cultures that we now enjoy. They do not consider that this Hebrew culture is different even to the way they think! No scripture in the Bible was meant to be understood outside of it’s culture or original language. Without a knowledge of the Hebrew culture and a knowledge of the way they viewed the world, it is impossible to have an in depth understanding of the NT.
The belief that the NT is solely written in Greek or Aramaic is simply wrong. Any study that depends on understanding from that perspective is subject to grave error. Aramaic is nowhere mentioned in the New Testament. Yet on numerous occasions it speaks of the “Hebrew” language in first century Judaea – from the title over Jesus’ cross “in Hebrew” (John 19:20), to descriptions of places like Gabbatha and Golgotha “in the Hebrew tongue” (John 5:2; 19:13, 17; Rev. 9:11; 16:16), to Paul gaining the silence of the Jerusalem crowd by addressing them “in the Hebrew tongue” (Acts 21:40; 22:2), to Jesus himself calling out to Paul, on the Damascus road, “in the Hebrew tongue” (Acts 26:14).
In past years it was concluded that the Hebrew language was all but dead, in NT times, except for an occasional religious document. The Dead Sea Scrolls which date from the NT period are 80% in Hebrew. Greek, Aramaic and a few others make up the rest. This 80% is not just legal documents or religious texts but simple business forms and personal letters. This was the language in common use. Since the discovery of the Scrolls archeologists and biblical historians have had to change their minds about the Hebrew language and conclude that it was the prevalent language of Israel during the Gospel period.
From the day of Pentecost (28AD) to the opening of the gospel to the gentiles some 14 to 16 years elapsed. During this time the Apostles stayed in Jerusalem and ministered to the people of Israel. This places the gospel going to the gentiles about 42 AD. Prior to this event there was no need to write in any language other then Hebrew. Scripture is clear that the Apostles were surprised that the gospel went to the Gentiles by their questioning of Peter about his ministry at the house of Cornelious. Many renowned authorities now clearly date Matthew prior to this event. Because of the great similarities in the three synoptic gospels (Mathew. Mark and Luke) it has been concluded that they also are original from that period and written in Hebrew.
In past years some scholars have tried to date books like Revelation coming as late as 90 AD.
AT Robertson, one of the most prominent authorities on the NT says in his book “Redating the New Testament” , that there is no reason to date any of the NT later then 70 AD. He asserts this because nowhere in the NT is the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple mentioned, which happened in that year. The most cataclysmic event to attach itself to Temple worship is not even mentioned. Even the book of Hebrews, which speaks of the ending of Temple worship does not mention it.Even those portions of the NT which we are not sure about their original language cannot be understood from a Greek/Western mindset. When I speak of “mindset” I am speaking of the process, both emotionally and linguistically that goes on in the mind when a word or phrase is heard or read. Even if written in another language other then Hebrew, the Hebrew writers would write from the perspective of their culture and way of thinking. Most Greek concepts of thought were completely foreign to them and would not even have occurred to them. Let me give an example —
Today if I say “I am blue”. Most would assume I am speaking of a depression state I am in. One hundred years ago most would assume my skin had change color to blue. In the Hebrew it is even more pronounced. When we read the term “King David” the concept in our mind is king = title and David = personal identifier. Because the Hebrews view things from a functional standpoint rather then an appearance one, they would have the concept of king = one who rules and David = one who is loved. These are the visual and conceptual images that would come to the Hebrew mind.
Another example –
The Hebrew word for faith is hnwma (emunah – Strong's #530) and is an action oriented word meaning “support”. This is important because the Western concept of faith places the action on the one you have faith in, such as “faith in God”. But, the Hebrew word hnwma places the action on the one who “supports God”. It is not knowing that God will act, but rather I will do what I can to support God. Th
is idea of support for the word emunah can be seen in Exodus 17:12.But Moses' hands grew weary; so they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat upon it, and Aaron and Hur held up his hands, one on one side, and the other on the other side; so his hands were steady (emunah)until the going down of the sun.
It is the support/emunah of Aaron and Hur that held up Moses' arms, not the support/emunah of Moses. When we say “I have faith in God”, we should be thinking “I will do what I can to support God”.
Rather then sitting back and waiting for what God may do, it is a matter of finding out what God would have us do to accomplish His will.How can I honestly take seriously the conclusions of people that blatantly ignore the most basic principles of proper biblical interpretation. So for now I will continue to see these boards as a simple internet game. Perhaps that is not what you think of the forums or you think that is not fair about the forums. Sorry my friend, that is my opinion. To me it’s value is entertainment. Because I am dealing with on going health issues and somewhat housebound, that does serve a purpose for me.
Martian Sorry but I think you are to wise in your own eyes, and think the rest of us are stupid. Let me tell you my friend, I don't need fancy writings to understand the word of God. The Holy Spirit has shown me, and only God can do that . No man can teach another. Nick is wrong to tell you that. To think so highly of self is not the right attitude to have. Listening to others have gotten many into doctrines that are simple not true.
I don't have any more time right now, have a Doctor Appointment.
Peace and Love Mrs.
Being “taught by the Spirit” is a valid way to learn. It is also the cry of every false prophet and teacher to have ever existed. Most refuse sound teaching and ballance within the word of God. And when I say the word of God I am speaking of the real word of God as the Hebrew men and women wrote it, not what biased translators have given us.
Being led by the Spirit is only as effective as the person's ability to rightly perceive and understand God's voice. You ridicule me as if to say I am conceited in my views. Who is conceited? The one who believes their discernment of God's spirit needs no counter ballance by the real word of God or the one who seeks to konw the intent and real words of the writers of scripture. My leading of the Spirit is balanced with the research of the words of God. You may say the same, but that does not make it so. As long as you refuse to attempt to understand the meanings of the words of the Hebrew authors of scripture, you risk grave error.
Your mistake is no different then those that refuse to accept the obvious truth of the history of the Trinty. All one needs to do is “google” Constantine and God and you will find all kinds of documentation on the pagan roots of that doctrine. It is the same with the Hebrew origins of scripture and their culture. It just taks a little study to gain a broader perspective of God's word.You have again asumed an arrogant attitude or motive in my post when that is not in my heart at all. You have made judgement on me without a wit of discernment or knowledge of my heart in the matter. This is one of the great downfalls of mesage boards. The ability to properly understand people is greatly diminished. In the first few years of m Christian walk I realised that I needed to find out for myself what scripture really said. I spent 5 years full time in study of how to study the scriptures before I ever looked at a doctrine. Most Christians have no principles or rules what-so-ever that they follw to interpret the word. They pull out a scripture here and one there, jam them together and form a teaching. They rely solely on the modern translations without so much s a glance at the original languages or cultures to gain fuller understanding.
If the fact that I research the scriptures or the fact that I have spent 35 years in that pursuit makes me conceited, so be it. If the fact that I see grave error in the methods that others study makes me arrogant, so be it. If the fact that I seek balance between what the actual words of scripture say and leading of the Spirit makes me pompous, so be it. I prefer that to the hit and miss, accidental, or blatantly dishonest way in which many christians seek proofs for the doctrines they support.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 27 2008,05:59) Hi martian,
If you cannot learn from the work of God among us then it does say something about you.
What work would that be?Hi martian,
You accuse other teachers of being stupid.
But you teach very fallibly too so how can you avoid this appellation?
Constantly negativity towards all others here while putting yourself on a pedestal is quite revealing.Hi,
Trinity is a dogma not a bible teaching.
Following Christ in maturity demands we put aside what others have taught
And go straight to the meat of scriptureQuote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 27 2008,06:21) Hi martian,
You accuse other teachers of being stupid.
But you teach very fallibly too so how can you avoid this appellation?
Constantly negativity towards all others here while putting yourself on a pedestal is quite revealing.
Show me where I have taught wrong? Before you do you will have to agree with me on a method or system by which we can honestly guage whoes teaching is correct. Otherwise it is just a matter of opinion again and means or proves nothing.
If you purposely hit your thumb with a hammer and I call that a stupid thing to do is that wrong?
It is stupid and foolish to not consider the cultural influince of the writers of scripture.
If anything is being revealed it is the fact that you (as most Christians) are only interested in preserving your doctrines rather then seeking truth. Any research that might put a hole in your preconceived ideas of doctrine is rejected. I have given sound reearch and points for all of my claims and it has been rejected because of your will and not because you can prove otherwise.
AS I have already said thre is tons of information on the great Eastern cultures and the Hebrew culture in particular. I have gien web sites and books to look at. I doubt you have looked and if you did you rejected them. Not because they are not true but because it counters your doctrine. All proof is only good for you if it agrees with your already decided doctrine.
If I am wrong, show me where. I challenge you. I will stack up my proofs against yours any day, but again you will have to agree with me on a sysym for judging if a proof is accurate or not. O know you will not do it because you cannot do it and maintain certain doctrines you now claim.Hi martian,
It is not a competition.
We all bring our few fish to the shore
And let the Lord God show us what is usefulQuote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 27 2008,06:21) Hi martian,
You accuse other teachers of being stupid.
But you teach very fallibly too so how can you avoid this appellation?
Constantly negativity towards all others here while putting yourself on a pedestal is quite revealing.
Oh by the way. I accused no particualr person or group of people of being stupid. I said that the nethods of interpretation many use are stupid and foolish.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 27 2008,06:47) Hi,
Trinity is a dogma not a bible teaching.
Following Christ in maturity demands we put aside what others have taught
And go straight to the meat of scripture
How do you konw what is the actual “meat of scripture” An opinion?Hi martian,
You actually said
” I can understand that many Christians are ignorant of the proper way to study scripture. That is really only a matter of educating them, but when it is made clear to some and they brush it aside in order to protect their doctrines, I worry for their well being. It reminds me of the old saying. “You can educate ignorance, but there is not cure for stupid”. It is a foolish and stupid thing to try to teach when you have no idea how to properly interpret the word. I certainly cannot take their teachings or conclusions very seriously”
hmmmQuote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 27 2008,06:53) Hi martian,
You actually said
” I can understand that many Christians are ignorant of the proper way to study scripture. That is really only a matter of educating them, but when it is made clear to some and they brush it aside in order to protect their doctrines, I worry for their well being. It reminds me of the old saying. “You can educate ignorance, but there is not cure for stupid”. It is a foolish and stupid thing to try to teach when you have no idea how to properly interpret the word. I certainly cannot take their teachings or conclusions very seriously”
hmmm
I said, “It is a foolish and stupid thing”. I know I have done stupid and foolish things in my life. Have you never done something stupid or foolish? I do not consider myself stupid, do you consider yourself stupid?The “thing” I was refering to is the method of interpretation used by many christians. If you are ofended by my calling a “thing” stupid then perhaps you should examine if you have security issues in your own life.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
