Pristine Grace
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 109

Thread: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

  1. #21
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by ~JM~ View Post
    What method is used to determine what is, might be or is not scripture?
    The WORD OF GOD is used to determine what is Scripture.
    This is my signature.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    260
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Gill View Post
    The WORD OF GOD is used to determine what is Scripture.
    Of course. What do you mean by "the word of God" and how do you know what the word of God is? It's a question of epistemology. One is theological as Darth Gill stated, the critical method is naturalistic and rationalistic.

    j

  3. #23
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by ~JM~ View Post
    Of course. What do you mean by "the word of God"
    Jn 1:1, (NASB), In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    This is my signature.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    260
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Gill View Post
    Jn 1:1, (NASB), In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

    You’re assuming John 1:1 is scripture.

    How do you know it is scripture?

    Is it a warm feeling in your bosoms? (kidding)

    If we allow for the critical method of studying mss then we are dealing with hasty generalizations and probabilities based on what scholars believes to be the written word of God and we therefore cannot be certain we have the scriptures since no one knows.

    What happens if we find older mss that do not contain John 1:1, should we exclude it from the text?

  5. #25
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by ~JM~ View Post
    You’re assuming John 1:1 is scripture.

    How do you know it is scripture?

    Is it a warm feeling in your bosoms? (kidding)

    If we allow for the critical method of studying mss then we are dealing with hasty generalizations and probabilities based on what scholars believes to be the written word of God and we therefore cannot be certain we have the scriptures since no one knows.

    What happens if we find older mss that do not contain John 1:1, should we exclude it from the text?
    John 1:1 was my answer - but in reality the answer is CHRIST and HIS GOSPEL. Christ and His Announcement IS the WORD of God. And THAT is what I use to "determine what is Scripture."
    This is my signature.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    260
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    CHRIST and HIS GOSPEL
    Where did you learn of Christ and His Gospel?

  7. #27
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Why the same way Lydia did!

    Acts 16:14, KJV And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.

    I wrote this a while back on the 66 book canon thread:
    Acts 10:34-45, (KJV), Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: (35) But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. (36) The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all (37) That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; (38) How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him. (39) And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree: (40) Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly; (41) Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead. (42) And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead. (43) To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. (44) While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. (45) And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    Here the Gospel was preached, and while it was being preached the Holy Spirit opened the minds of those attending. There was no mention of a canon by the way.

    When the elect hear the truth of the GOSPEL they will believe it. The Holy Spirit will assure this! At that point in time, all the elect have a base from which to judge all things - yes even the writings of men (such as James). The core canon are the Gospels of Christ and Pauls Epistles and all other books which directly speak of the Gospel. From there we can judge other books to see if they are canonical - to see if they are in line with the core Gospel canon. If they are, we accept and embrace them.

    This notion of accepting books just because it's been accepted for centuries is ridiculous because there is no objective base. There is no objective standard for determining if a book should be canonical because many books for example have been accepted by certain groups and rejected by others. Do we simply accept a teaching as inerrant because someone else says so? Of course not! But we do with our Bible. For centuries, men have said that THESE BOOKS are the word of God and nothing else, and if you don't accept our understanding of the canon - anathema on you!
    This is my signature.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    260
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Wonderful.

    How do you know the passages relating the conversion of Lydia is real? Is it tradition? Is it the burning in the bosom? Is your way of understanding different from the way a Muslim would approach the Qu'ran or the Mormon the B of M?

    Are your views about scripture different from Mr. Higby's view?

    It would seem you quote scripture with the assumption it's true when defending your position...would that be a truthful statement? Are you assuming scripture is true?

    If you are, which mss constitute the scriptures?

    The Reformed church catches a lot of flack on this forum but it seems we all have our traditions, we all have our assumptions...

    jm

  9. #29
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by ~JM~ View Post
    Wonderful.
    Is it really? It's hard to tell if you really think this or if you are being sarcastic here...

    How do you know the passages relating the conversion of Lydia is real? Is it tradition?
    It's a historical account of what happened by one of Christ's Apostles (Luke). Everything he has written lines up with THE GOSPEL, so I have no reason not to believe it.

    Is it the burning in the bosom?
    Yep, I even got heartburn when reading that passage! In all seriousness though, no, I have solid evidence that the Gospel is true. The Scriptures are self verifying - just read the prophecies of Christ - the historical circumstances and prophecies fulfilled. You'd have to be a fool to deny the Gospel of Christ based on the historical facts alone. Yeah, the Holy Spirit opened my heart and showed me the Gospel, but He did it through propositional facts and logical and rational presentation.

    Quote Originally Posted by JM
    Is your way of understanding different from the way a Muslim would approach the Qu'ran or the Mormon the B of M?
    Yes. Mormons or Muslims don't use the Gospel to judge their "holy" books.

    Quote Originally Posted by JM
    Are your views about scripture different from Mr. Higby's view?
    No. Not that I can tell anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by JM
    It would seem you quote scripture with the assumption it's true when defending your position...would that be a truthful statement? Are you assuming scripture is true?
    The Scripture I have quoted to make my point I have already judged as truly inspired - discerned via the Gospel.

    Quote Originally Posted by JM
    If you are, which mss constitute the scriptures?
    Almost all accepted christian manuscripts and translations contain the scriptures - for the most part - although we cannot be for certain that all inspired literature is contained within them nor can we be for certain that everything contained within them is truly inspired just because they've been handed down through the centuries. They MUST BE JUDGED / DISCERNED.

    Quote Originally Posted by JM
    The Reformed church catches a lot of flack on this forum
    As well it should!

    Quote Originally Posted by JM
    but it seems we all have our traditions, we all have our assumptions...
    Certainly.
    This is my signature.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    343
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    21
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    To answer the question, which manuscripts constitute the scriptures, one has to humble oneself and realise that no human being has the full answer to this question.

    It is another one of these controversies that frankly is not worth falling out over. I have bible versions from both King James tradition and the modern version texts, and have profited from both of them. I could tell you which one I prefer, but it is not going to answer this question for you.

    As for the issue surrounding the James debate that keeps rumbling on, I see no reason to get rid of the book of James, any more than I should get rid of 3 John, Esther or Ecclesiastes.

    It is interesting to me that John Gill, Herman Hoeksema and Gordon Clark believed in the inclusion of the book of James. I would genuinely be interested to know which other scholars other than Luther rejected James or is it just p-net?

    The thing I would say is that while it is claimed on this forum that fellowship is accepted from those who believe James should be left in the canon, it would seem to me that James believers are vilified. Why should this be if we are Christians and on our way to heaven? Do you really think that you will be the only ones in heaven because you have dropped the book of James? If not, then why be so contentious about it?

    Are there not more important issues to think about, such as living a life of holiness and joy in the Holy Ghost?

    Isn't the Christian faith a lifestyle and not all in the head?

    For me, if all we can do is be contentious in our dealings with our opponents, we completely miss the entire point of the gospel, namely that our lives are changed by Christ, and that the fruit we produce is that of Holy, sanctified people, and not harshness.

    I think we need to refrain from writing people off, whether it is the reformed movement, arminians, catholics, lutherans and the rest, because God has His elect in these organisations. You may not believe that, but I think this is true.

    We should never write anyone off, because we are not God. If God has written people off, then that is a different story. It is not our calling to do this, because we do not know the end from the beginning.

    May the Lord Bless you ALWAYS!

    Kevin.

  11. #31
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hawker View Post
    The thing I would say is that while it is claimed on this forum that fellowship is accepted from those who believe James should be left in the canon, it would seem to me that James believers are vilified. Why should this be if we are Christians and on our way to heaven? Do you really think that you will be the only ones in heaven because you have dropped the book of James? If not, then why be so contentious about it?
    Your perceptions are completely wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hawker
    Are there not more important issues to think about, such as living a life of holiness and joy in the Holy Ghost?
    NO

    Isn't the Christian faith a lifestyle and not all in the head?
    NO

    For me, if all we can do is be contentious in our dealings with our opponents, we completely miss the entire point of the gospel, namely that our lives are changed by Christ, and that the fruit we produce is that of Holy, sanctified people, and not harshness.
    What's wrong with harshness?

    I think we need to refrain from writing people off, whether it is the reformed movement, arminians, catholics, lutherans and the rest, because God has His elect in these organisations. You may not believe that, but I think this is true.
    He also has his elect amongst the atheists, muslims, ecumenists, and maybe even the nfl.

    We should never write anyone off, because we are not God. If God has written people off, then that is a different story. It is not our calling to do this, because we do not know the end from the beginning.
    Yup.
    This is my signature.

  12. #32
    Administrator Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,136
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    18
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    15
    Thanked in
    8 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hawker View Post
    To answer the question, which manuscripts constitute the scriptures, one has to humble oneself and realise that no human being has the full answer to this question.
    Then maybe we shouldn't try to answer any questions about anything at all. If it's about me humbling myself (this sounds like a 1 2 3 step formula to me) then I will miserably fail, because my humbling will never be entirely adequate.

    It is another one of these controversies that frankly is not worth falling out over. I have bible versions from both King James tradition and the modern version texts, and have profited from both of them. I could tell you which one I prefer, but it is not going to answer this question for you.
    If you don't really have anything to add to this topic then why post?

    As for the issue surrounding the James debate that keeps rumbling on, I see no reason to get rid of the book of James, any more than I should get rid of 3 John, Esther or Ecclesiastes.
    The issue is not which books that are kept or ditched, it is a question of how do you Kevin, determine what is the canon and why? That seems relevant to many here.

    It is interesting to me that John Gill, Herman Hoeksema and Gordon Clark believed in the inclusion of the book of James. I would genuinely be interested to know which other scholars other than Luther rejected James or is it just p-net?
    This does sound like sarcasm to me. Also what constitutes a scholar and why should we take their words for anything? If I have been regenerated and have the mind of Christ, does that make me ill equipped to understand what God has revealed without a string of letters behind my name?

    The thing I would say is that while it is claimed on this forum that fellowship is accepted from those who believe James should be left in the canon, it would seem to me that James believers are vilified. Why should this be if we are Christians and on our way to heaven? Do you really think that you will be the only ones in heaven because you have dropped the book of James?
    No, we don't believe that.

    If not, then why be so contentious about it?
    Because most of us here are jerks. Actually I think that if you re read all the James and canon threads, and then you will know why we hold to the opinions we do and that we did not come to these decisions lightly.

    Are there not more important issues to think about, such as living a life of holiness and joy in the Holy Ghost?
    No.

    Isn't the Christian faith a lifestyle and not all in the head?
    Where is this taught in the scriptures? I was taught this in false gospel churches.

    For me, if all we can do is be contentious in our dealings with our opponents, we completely miss the entire point of the gospel, namely that our lives are changed by Christ, and that the fruit we produce is that of Holy, sanctified people, and not harshness.
    When Jesus tipped over the money changer's carts or called the Pharisee "you brood of vipers" or "whitewashed sepulchers" or told them they where "children of hell", would these things constitute harshness to you if I said them? The truth is harsh. It's a piercing bright light in the darkness. Not some pleasant children's night light.

    I think we need to refrain from writing people off, whether it is the reformed movement, arminians, catholics, lutherans and the rest, because God has His elect in these organisations. You may not believe that, but I think this is true.
    Who here has written any one off? And why do you accuse us of such?

    We should never write anyone off, because we are not God. If God has written people off, then that is a different story. It is not our calling to do this, because we do not know the end from the beginning.

    May the Lord Bless you ALWAYS!

    Kevin.
    This all sounds to me like you have a big chip on your shoulder about pnet. You say we shouldn't do this thing, but we should do this other. I for one don't believe you have your facts correct, and I believe that your pint of view in one of legalism and rebellion.

    Kevin, if you want to post here, please do, but if you want to post on a forum and not have your points challenged, then perhaps posting is not the answer.
    Isaiah 45:7, (KJV), I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

  13. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    343
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    21
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    We fundamentallly disagree on the foundation of Christianity. There is a heresy of doctrine, but there is also a heresy of manners.

    We are exhorted to live a holy life, for without holiness, no-one shall see the Lord. This isn't a holiness of our own making, but a holiness wrought out by God in our lives, that is revealed in our characters.

    Frankly, a head knowledge of bible doctrines is useless without a lifestyle to back it up. 1 Corinthians 13 tells us that if we have all knowledge and have this without love, we are nothing. Now this would go against your idea that a mental assent to the truth is all that is required. This couldn't be further from the truth.

    I couldn't care less whether you agree with me or not. I am just wanting you to back up your "mental assent to the truth" claims from scripture. I look forward to seeing what kind of stuff you come up with.

    What's wrong with harshness you ask? Well, the bible tells us that the man of God is not meant to strive? If you want more scriptural evidence, I will provide it, but to me, this is basic Christianity, that we show kindness to all. The fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness and temperance. This is taken from Galations 5:22-23. We further read in the following two verses that they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts, and that if we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

    If you need any further evidence I will provide it. Scripture demolishes any notion that head knowledge is all that matters, because this simply is not true.

    To have a head knowledge only of bible doctrine with no lifestyle change makes a nonsense of Christianity.

    To answer the question about people being written off on this forum, John Piper was written off by someone on my blog.

    Quote: I long ago wrote off piper and those associated with him. They are anti-gospel in my opinion. They are basically like Phil Johnson and all the other fullerist worshipers. (Darth Gill 16/06/09)

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    boise
    Posts
    104
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlyfavored View Post
    Because most of us here are jerks. Actually I think that if you re read all the James and canon threads, and then you will know why we hold to the opinions we do and that we did not come to these decisions lightly.
    I'm happy to be one of the Messiahs jerks, but seriously, after all of the threads we had on the "James" issue and then St. Nicks paper,and not to mention alot of prayer I have to reject James. There is NO Gospel in James!
    Col 2:9, (NASB), For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form

  15. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Wichita Falls, TX
    Posts
    415
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hawker
    Frankly, a head knowledge of bible doctrines is useless without a lifestyle to back it up.
    A Godly lifestyle is impossible without a correct understanding of Biblical doctrine.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hawker
    What's wrong with harshness you ask? Well, the bible tells us that the man of God is not meant to strive? If you want more scriptural evidence, I will provide it, but to me, this is basic Christianity, that we show kindness to all. The fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness and temperance. This is taken from Galations 5:22-23. We further read in the following two verses that they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts, and that if we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
    You are being to harsh with us.

    To have a head knowledge only of bible doctrine with no lifestyle change makes a nonsense of Christianity.
    No one on P-Net has had a lifestyle change since our conversions. Brandan is mean, Greg is a jerk and I am a blood thirsty bellicose butcher.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hawker
    I think we need to refrain from writing people off, whether it is the reformed movement, arminians, catholics, lutherans and the rest, because God has His elect in these organisations. You may not believe that, but I think this is true.
    This statement here tells me that you do not yet have a correct understanding of P-Net or of us who post on this forum. We believe that there is elect people in these organizations. For we all have come out of them. For example, I was an arminian and I believe that brother Nick was a catholic.

    Welcome back, Kevin. I hope that you continue to post here on P-Net.
    Rom 8:18-21, (NASB), For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.

  16. #36
    Administrator Brandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5,830
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    147
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    92
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hawker View Post
    What's wrong with harshness you ask? Well, the bible tells us that the man of God is not meant to strive? If you want more scriptural evidence, I will provide it, but to me, this is basic Christianity, that we show kindness to all. The fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness and temperance. This is taken from Galations 5:22-23. We further read in the following two verses that they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts, and that if we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
    Gal 5:12, (NASB), I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate themselves.

    Tell me Kevin, was Paul harsh when he said he wished the judaizers would CASTRATE themselves?!?!?!?! Hahahahaha - I LOVE Paul in his HARSHNESS! What in the world is wrong with being sharply disagreeable or abrasive when the time calls for it? NOTHING. BTW, you are being harsh too - you just probably don't realize it.
    This is my signature.

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    260
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Thank you for your posts I have much to think about. I do believe the TR is the New Testament Greek text, does that make me a heretic or is it just bad theology?

    jm

    (I would like to make it clear that I am not a King James Only proponent. I believe Divine inspiration of the original autographs extends to the divine preservation of a pure text to this day and that the preserved word of God is found in the Hebrew Masoretic text and the Greek Textus Receptus. The Authorized King James version of the Bible is a translation and I pray that one day soon the church will have another translation of the New Testament based solely on the Textus Receptus.)

  18. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holland, Michigan
    Posts
    1,835
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by ~JM~ View Post
    Thank you for your posts I have much to think about. I do believe the TR is the New Testament Greek text, does that make me a heretic or is it just bad theology?

    jm

    (I would like to make it clear that I am not a King James Only proponent. I believe Divine inspiration of the original autographs extends to the divine preservation of a pure text to this day and that the preserved word of God is found in the Hebrew Masoretic text and the Greek Textus Receptus. The Authorized King James version of the Bible is a translation and I pray that one day soon the church will have another translation of the New Testament based solely on the Textus Receptus.)
    As to myself: NO! You're not a heretic for believing the TR!

    I am not even going to tell you why the TR is credible, more so than any document world philosophy and history has to show for themselves.
    Having said that, if you consider semantic ranges, cultural differences, etc. you would say that God left and preserved a CREDIBLE and TRUSTWORTHY document for us to know His Word and His Work, but He did not intent to lend the status of SACRED to it in the sense that we cannot debate and even waiver acceptance in portions that are not necessarily clear and perfect if you consider that there are such portions. If you don't consider that such portions exist, GREAT. More power to you!

    Thanks!

    Milt
    Grace Ambassador
    A pitiful servant of God; a pitbull guardian of the message of Grace

    My pledge to other members:
    A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger. Prov 15:1
    A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver - Prov. 25:11

  19. #39
    Moderator Eileen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    756
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hawker View Post
    We fundamentallly disagree on the foundation of Christianity. There is a heresy of doctrine, but there is also a heresy of manners.

    We are exhorted to live a holy life, for without holiness, no-one shall see the Lord. This isn't a holiness of our own making, but a holiness wrought out by God in our lives, that is revealed in our characters.

    Frankly, a head knowledge of bible doctrines is useless without a lifestyle to back it up. 1 Corinthians 13 tells us that if we have all knowledge and have this without love, we are nothing. Now this would go against your idea that a mental assent to the truth is all that is required. This couldn't be further from the truth.

    I couldn't care less whether you agree with me or not. I am just wanting you to back up your "mental assent to the truth" claims from scripture. I look forward to seeing what kind of stuff you come up with.

    What's wrong with harshness you ask? Well, the bible tells us that the man of God is not meant to strive? If you want more scriptural evidence, I will provide it, but to me, this is basic Christianity, that we show kindness to all. The fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness and temperance. This is taken from Galations 5:22-23. We further read in the following two verses that they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts, and that if we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

    If you need any further evidence I will provide it. Scripture demolishes any notion that head knowledge is all that matters, because this simply is not true.

    To have a head knowledge only of bible doctrine with no lifestyle change makes a nonsense of Christianity.

    To answer the question about people being written off on this forum, John Piper was written off by someone on my blog.

    Quote: I long ago wrote off piper and those associated with him. They are anti-gospel in my opinion. They are basically like Phil Johnson and all the other fullerist worshipers. (Darth Gill 16/06/09)
    Hi Kevin,

    It’s good to have you back even though it seems you come with some different notions than when you left and with quite an attitude.

    Personally I think you have made several erroneous statements about what P-net believes, does and stands for. There has never been a statement made on this forum that true faith only produces head knowledge and doesn’t produce the fruit of the Spirit; that is nonsense and everyone here will agree with that. I think where you are going however is that fruit and character are a part of your assurance and you look at it as some sort of proof beyond faith. I know that I certainly disagree with that. Fruit and character can be a sole product of the flesh and can look mighty good but can be about as phony as a counterfeit dollar bill. We know that the flesh profits nothing so how do you determine if it is ‘real’ fruit or ‘real’ character? Do you want to explain that?

    I wonder how you know when you have reached the exact character level that determines that now your character is sufficient? I read a little sentence the other day that was so apt to this topic by Sinclair Ferguson which said: "The greatest temptation and mistake is to try and smuggle character into God's work of grace” That is what you are doing, smuggling something of yourself into the work of Christ.

    The elect have been presented as a glorious ‘Church”…”without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, that it should be holy and without blemish” Ephesians 5:27 That is solely in Christ and His precious blood shed for us at the cross, we are holy, we are without blemish and we are without spot or wrinkle. What God requires, He provides.

    If Christ lives in me then I walk in the Spirit period. “I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live; yet not I but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me” Galatians 2:20

    So if you are going to stand in your own holiness…..well good luck to you! This is totally even off the topic of manuscripts so if you want to continue this convo it might be better in a thread of its own.

    Eileen~
    "To those who have no works-phobia, I will state that you are not trembling before the gospel" Robert R. Higby

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    343
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    21
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Re: Which manuscripts constitute the scriptures?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen View Post
    It’s good to have you back even though it seems you come with some different notions than when you left and with quite an attitude.
    If I have an attitude, I am sorry.

    Personally I think you have made several erroneous statements about what P-net believes, does and stands for. There has never been a statement made on this forum that true faith only produces head knowledge and doesn’t produce the fruit of the Spirit; that is nonsense and everyone here will agree with that.
    True faith as you correctly say produces the fruit of the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit has the mark of love. Even if I am wrong about something, harshness will never convert me to a particular point of view.

    I think where you are going however is that fruit and character are a part of your assurance and you look at it as some sort of proof beyond faith. I know that I certainly disagree with that.
    I am not going there at all. Faith produces works wrought out by God.

    Fruit and character can be a sole product of the flesh and can look mighty good but can be about as phony as a counterfeit dollar bill. We know that the flesh profits nothing so how do you determine if it is ‘real’ fruit or ‘real’ character? Do you want to explain that?
    If the character produces the fruit of the Spirit as listed in Galatians 5, that is the real fruit. If this fruit is not being produced, it is questionable whether any work of God has taken place.

    I wonder how you know when you have reached the exact character level that determines that now your character is sufficient? I read a little sentence the other day that was so apt to this topic by Sinclair Ferguson which said: "The greatest temptation and mistake is to try and smuggle character into God's work of grace” That is what you are doing, smuggling something of yourself into the work of Christ.
    It is not about us knowing when we have reached the exact character level. It is about looking to Christ to produce this character in us. We cannot produce anything of ourselves. I have made this clear in my previous posts.

    The elect have been presented as a glorious ‘Church”…”without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, that it should be holy and without blemish” Ephesians 5:27 That is solely in Christ and His precious blood shed for us at the cross, we are holy, we are without blemish and we are without spot or wrinkle. What God requires, He provides.
    I agree, but this is not some sort of theoretical statement that produces nothing in a believers life. What God requires, He provides, and works in us to do of His will.

    If Christ lives in me then I walk in the Spirit period. [I]“I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live; yet not I but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me” Galatians 2:20
    I agree.

    So if you are going to stand in your own holiness…..well good luck to you!
    I have never said that we should stand in our own holiness. Not one time.

    To be honest, it is quite stressful to read these responses. Christian interaction should not be stressful nor contentious, but rather edifying.

    I have not been edified by what I have read at all. Sorry guys.

    This is when discussing doctrines becomes fruitless and a complete waste of my time. I have learned my lesson.

    I wish all of you all the best for the future.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •