|
Post by prokoff on Jul 8, 2006 21:06:29 GMT -5
Praise God for the brain that God gave us...but heaven help us, if we use our logical gifts, and come up with non-conventional/orthodox interpretations of scripture. Heaven help us if we look too far outside of the box...and see things that do not jibe with Christian fundamentalism.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jul 8, 2006 22:26:23 GMT -5
Any good ideas for a topic on a thesis for a Masters in Biblical Studies? I would like to do something on the F&W, perhaps on their theology or maybe on their status as a cult/not a cult. Over the next month or two I need to look for a topic and I hoped you lot might have some viable ideas. I have a couple of ideas but want to see what others can think up. I don't know if the predominant tenor of the ex movement, or perhaps your own prejudices would allow you to paint the 2x2's in anything more than at best a token favorable light, but if you'd like to take the path less trodden, you might want to consider at least the early similarities between it and the Christian revivalist movements and thought of the more recent 30 years. Standing back from it all, I really see many similarities, and really see history and revelations being repeated. The concept of non denominationalism is commonly preached in "born again" churches today, and has long been a claim of workers as the truth of God. Women evangelists were early on accepted as legit. Organized churches have been growing more representative. Organized "religion" is preached against and validity of personal revelation, is a common denominator. Self supporting home churches, were often the beginnings of new churches today. The 2x2's may be one of the longer running versions that has survived in that format. There are probably many similarities, and just might be a very worthy and timely study.
|
|
careful what you read
Guest
|
Post by careful what you read on Jul 8, 2006 23:49:10 GMT -5
studylearning - why don't you simply read your bible, you know, the gospel stories, and let these alone be your guide, huh?
|
|
|
Post by studylearning on Jul 9, 2006 0:07:51 GMT -5
studylearning - why don't you simply read your bible, you know, the gospel stories, and let these alone be your guide, huh? Humm what a smug type of question. How do you know that I do not read my bible? I most likely read it more than you. I also read many other books related to understanding of the Bible. That is what learning is all about. You know, there are a lot of Bible Scriptures which are mis-interpeted because people do not know the context nor the translations of what was in the original Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic? Why may I ask do you ask such a question in the context of this thread? It seems that you have some type of dig to make so make it now and show your true colors.
|
|
eurp
Senior Member
Posts: 290
|
Post by eurp on Jul 9, 2006 9:00:50 GMT -5
studylearning: Do you then dismiss the idea that the Holy Spirit will guide the reading and studying of the faithful? Is it necessary to follow the teachings of men?
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 9:40:12 GMT -5
Hey Eurp! Bert here. Do you have a sidekick called Treb? Yes I agree Eurp. People who read outside material to the bible simply feel that the bible is not clear enough, not honest enough, or that other opinions ought to count too.
But.., Our translations are fairly accurate. Paul warned about stiving over words. Other material usually reflects current secular attitudes towards the bible (I have the Oxford bible dictionary, written by an atheist W.F.Browning - anyone reading this would get a distinctly different impression of the bible.) In Jesus' time there was extra-biblical materal such as the Haggadah, which Jesus did not quote from, and I firmly believe, would never have read. "Context" is often a word used a as ruse to otherthrow biblical themes (a new African bible has just been published - giving African perspectives on the bible. We no longer have to learn and understand what the Jewish customs were to know our bible.)
|
|
|
Post by Greg Lee unplugged on Jul 9, 2006 9:43:00 GMT -5
People who read outside material to the bible simply feel that the bible is not clear enough, not honest enough, or that other opinions ought to count too. The same can rightly be said about hearing preachers.
|
|
Studylearning notlogged
Guest
|
Post by Studylearning notlogged on Jul 9, 2006 9:47:27 GMT -5
studylearning: Do you then dismiss the idea that the Holy Spirit will guide the reading and studying of the faithful? Is it necessary to follow the teachings of men? Eurp, did I say that or make any such claim? Do you dismiss the idea that the Holy Spirit is guiding me in my reading and study. You added the "Faithful." Are you denying that I am faithful or is your concept of faithful only in the fellowship of F&W's? Seems your are trying to say I am not faithful and do not know what I am talking about. Since you do not know my 57 years of fellowship I think you should back off from your implied remarks as to my understanding, faith and learning. We left out the word "Study." Matthew 22:35-37 (King James Version) King James Version (KJV) Public Domain 35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, 36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law? 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.Someone pointed out this to me. With all thy MIND. I use my mind to study all that I can such that I have a greater understanding of what Gods love is and therefore do also. This study is Spirit led. The tone of these last few posts addressed to me seem to imply that I do not know scripture and only you or some select know. I have never stated such. All of my thread have stated experience. You seek to entrap me with your line of questions but it will not work.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 9, 2006 9:54:58 GMT -5
The wilfull ignorance of many people is never short of astounding. 'nuff said on many of the posts.
----------------------
Eurp wrote:
If the Holy Spirit is sufficient (and I don't doubt His power) why do the F&W's have such disparate beliefs, even on essentials of the faith?
Where did your current translation of the Bible come from? Did it drop out of the sky?
---------------------------
Prubert,
Then you'd better heavily edit your site ASAP. You draw extensively on extra-biblical material
How do you know?
A text without a context is a pretext. Old but true.
Bollocks. How much evangelical Christian scholarship have you interacted with?
So what?
Context is absolutely necessary to provide definition to words.
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 10:04:30 GMT -5
Hi Rob. Re "cults." Assuming that "cult," like the word "sect" used to describe the apostles, defines fringe religious beliefs, then an interesting thesis would be to study how God's people formed cults throughout the bible. We can go as far as to say that the truth was fringe to mainstream Jewish religions for most of the 2,000 years of biblical history. A rare number given was the 7,000 faithful in Israel (population two-four million?) in Jeremiah's time. Even in Israel's glory of David and Solomon's time some of the authors of the Psalms felt their society was hostile towards them. Bert on behalf of Prue
|
|
eurp
Senior Member
Posts: 290
|
Post by eurp on Jul 9, 2006 10:07:25 GMT -5
Studylearning
I didn't mean to poke a stick in your eye, but sure got a reaction.
My questions were not designed to trap. Plain ordinary questions.
I didn't say (or intend to imply) that you were unfaithful. You added that not me. I didn't define "the faithful", but had in mind all Christianity. Didn't say you don't know what you're talking about, you said that. Didn't dismiss the idea that the Holy Spirit is guiding you in your study.
Hope your eye gets better.
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 10:08:11 GMT -5
Re - translations. From time to time I have come across tabulated verse comparisons. What surprises me is that contentions over words is so minor. I don't know of any specific words which seriously alter the bible's meaning in any of the established old translations. We read the bible's themes, we don't strive over words. Bert
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 9, 2006 10:08:31 GMT -5
The apostles were not pyschologically abusive. Workers often are. That makes them a sociological cult in certain areas of the world.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 9, 2006 10:09:43 GMT -5
You still haven't answered the question. How do you know current translations are accurate? What source(s) of information are you relying on to support this assertion?
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 10:12:13 GMT -5
Rob, re "pyschologically abusive Workers" Put yourself in the position of those libertines and apostates who hated Paul. Read Paul's letter and the Acts, and see how these people would easily have called him "pyschologically abusive." Bert
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 10:13:47 GMT -5
hey eurp, where you from?
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 9, 2006 10:15:49 GMT -5
Defend. Defend. Defend. Any abuse can be justified as long as its perpetrated in the name of "the faith", right?
You still haven't answered the question. How do you know current translations are accurate? What source(s) of information are you relying on to support this assertion?
|
|
eurp
Senior Member
Posts: 290
|
Post by eurp on Jul 9, 2006 10:19:55 GMT -5
Pruebert asked "hey eurp, where you from? "
your use of the word "from" implies the past. From what period of the past do you wish to know my location?
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 10:20:46 GMT -5
Rob - accuracy of translations. Don't have anything here with me at 1.20 am to quote. But many times I have read articles which deal with this subject. Sometimes translations, such as the Greek naos, if I recall (which give the impression that Jesus was in the temple when he wasn't,) can be misleading. But these are exceptions. People were diligent to ensure sacred words were properly translated. Theories about 2nd century textural fiddling need more facts. The real problem lies with apocryphal books - not translations. Bert
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 10:21:48 GMT -5
eurp... er, how about now?
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 9, 2006 10:22:04 GMT -5
You still havent answered the question. How do you know any given translation is accurate or inaccurate? Are you relying on extra-biblical writers?
|
|
|
Post by Greg Lee unplugged on Jul 9, 2006 10:22:50 GMT -5
Rob, re "pyschologically abusive Workers"Put yourself in the position of those libertines and apostates who hated Paul. Read Paul's letter and the Acts, and see how these people would easily have called him "pyschologically abusive." Bert I'm not sure what a libertine is. I think Paul indicates that Christ believers are called similar, as he wrote that some say they (the believers) contend they can keep on sinning because of grace. That contention against believers happens even today. The workers (in general) like to use that contention. If I understand the meaning of apostate, then Paul was an apostate and (probably) all that followed Jesus were apostates. Hey, even Jesus himself was an apostate? I suppose if you took a few verses or even many verses on their own one could contend even Jesus was pyschologically abusive. There would need be specifics and looking at whole contexts and themes to identify such as true or not for Jesus, Paul, the workers, and any other.
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 10:24:14 GMT -5
eurp... re, my question about where are you "from." Just think, current theories about space time hold that all events in the universe which have already occurred, are still happening somewhere "out there." Kind of creepy, isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 9, 2006 10:26:24 GMT -5
Now what are you on about? This appears to be drawn from a tenseless theory of time which denies tense and temporal becoming. Is that what you are affirming? Is this extra-biblical writings again?
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 10:28:30 GMT -5
Greg. I mean "libertine" and "apostate" in terms relative to those men. An example of how some would have seen Paul as being abusive was the way he "withstood" James to his face (if I recall the text correctly) and how he urged young women to marry, submit to their husbands, be careful about hair and dress standards, etc..
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 10:30:16 GMT -5
Rob - re space time, 5th dimensions etc.. I was joking with eurp, it has no bearing on anything on this subject!
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 9, 2006 10:31:47 GMT -5
OK, so you're not defending a tenseless theory of time. So back to the subject.....
How do you know any given translation is accurate or inaccurate? Are you relying on extra-biblical writers?
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 9, 2006 10:37:53 GMT -5
Oxford dictionary on the Resurrection, quote "improbable... apologetic... too many inconsistencies... no objective vision... historically questionable... impossible... " Such authorities, such as they are, tend to be secular. Bert
|
|