The Scriptures and Authority

Oblio · Oct 30, 2007

Why not address what was said instead of constantly attacking how it's said?

Because at best what she said is not what we believe or practice. Also, in order to 'prove' we do not follow God, she implies a false dichotomy, as if we must either follow His Church, or Him, not both. Since we follow the Church, we must not be following God. :doh:

LittleLambofJesus · Oct 30, 2007

mont974x4 said:
Why not address what was said instead of constantly attacking how it's said? Heck, chances are, most posts contain some fallacy or another.

There is no fallacy in the Scriptures. :wave:

Matthew 24:1 And having gone forth, Jesus departed from the Temple, and his Disciples came near to show him the buildings of the Temple

Hebrews 7:12 for the Priesthood being changed, of necessity also, of Law a change doth come,

Reve 11:2 and, the Court [Court of Priests/Altar of Burnt Offerings?] the one with-out/eswqen <2081> the Sanctuary, be you Casting Out!! [#1537-#906 ek-bale (5628)] out,[exw #1854]

SpiritMeadow · Oct 30, 2007

Thekla said:
its a bit more difficult to describe than that ... Greek is a greatly more nuanced language than English. For example, one must consider not only the word that was used, but also that words 1) conceptual relationship to other related words - ex, nous, logos, symbolon etc. and 2) which similar words were not used - ex there are upwards of a dozen "energy words" used in the NT, each with a distinct conceptual reference.

So very accurately stated! Few people seem to get this. You cannot just sit down with a koine greek dictionary and start translating!....but of course many do just that.

The meanings of these words must then be located into a broader cultural conceptual ground, which must include the era. Additionally, their specific Christian "filling" (ie the altered meaning to contain their new application) must be understood. For example, in his Gospel, John borrowed the use of the word logos from its use by the stoics (spermatikos logos) but then "filled" that term (logos) with a new - much larger, spiritual meaning, the Christ. This "new meaning" also referred back to the OT. In a sense, the use of the word Logos was filled and 'completed' when applied to Jesus.

Exactly true. I did a major paper on John's use of phos as it related to its meaning in the OT.

EDIT: the EO has carefully maintained the meanings of these words, for ex., through the careful 'theology' of the hymns.

http://iowamusings.blogspot.com

SpiritMeadow · Oct 30, 2007

LittleLambofJesus said:
The Pharisees also believed in "traditions" and look what happened to them.

http://www.kingdombiblestudies.org/abraham/abrahams_bosom.htm

Luke 16:14 Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, were hearing all these things and were openly sneering at Him.

Luke 16:22 Became yet to be dying, the Poor-one [Grace/Faith/Life/Israel/Gentiles], and him to be carried away by the messengers into the Bosom of Abraham. And yet died also the Rich-one [Judah/Works/Law/Death] and was buried.

yes they were also quick to demand literalness in the Torah too, even when it was patently ridiculous. Sound at all familiar?

mont974x4 · Oct 30, 2007

Are we supposed to choose between literalness and following extrabiblical traditions?

SpiritMeadow · Oct 30, 2007

LittleLambofJesus said:
There is no fallacy in the Scriptures.

Matthew 24:1 And having gone forth, Jesus departed from the Temple, and his Disciples came near to show him the buildings of the Temple

Hebrews 7:12 for the Priesthood being changed, of necessity also, of Law a change doth come,

Reve 11:2 and, the Court [Court of Priests/Altar of Burnt Offerings?] the one with-out/eswqen <2081> the Sanctuary, be you Casting Out!! [#1537-#906 ek-bale (5628)] out,[exw #1854]

do you realize that your multi-color texting is most difficult to read. I'm afraid I'm starting to avoid your posts because of their psychedelic action. Pity you are spending a lot of time typing, and you may be losing readers.

Thekla · Oct 30, 2007

SpiritMeadow said:
http://iowamusings.blogspot.com

thank-you for the link, SpiritMeadow !!!!!

(does SpritMeadow refer to the writings of the monk John Moschos ?)

LittleLambofJesus · Oct 30, 2007

SpiritMeadow said:
do you realize that your multi-color texting is most difficult to read. I'm afraid I'm starting to avoid your posts because of their psychedelic action. Pity you are spending a lot of time typing, and you may be losing readers.

How else can I post without typing?

I will tone down my colors a bit for ya though.

http://www.kingdombiblestudies.org/priest/RP24.htm

http://www.scripture4all.org/

James 5:6 Ye condemn, Ye Murder/efoneusate <5407> the Righteous-One, not He is resisting to Ye.

Revelation 9:21 And not They reform/repent/metenohsan <3340> (5656) out of the Murders/fonwn <5408> of Them, nor out from their sorceries,...........

Rick Otto · Oct 30, 2007

Thekla said:
is it the revelation or the reception that varies over history ?

Both.
Revelation got broader & deeper.
Reception the same, but not uniformly.
Reception is all over the map.
Receiver quality is a manufacturing issue.

LittleLambofJesus · Oct 30, 2007

Rick Otto said:
Both.
Revelation got broader & deeper.
Reception the same, but not uniformly.
Reception is all over the map.
Receiver quality is a manufacturing issue.

You noticed that too?

Luke 16:26 And in all of these, between Us [FAITH/LIFE] and Ye [LAW/DEATH] a great Chasm hath been established so that Those willing to pass-thru/diabhnai <1224> hence toward Ye not be able, no yet thence toward Us may be ferrying/diaperwsin <1276>.

Say bye bye to the Law

Rick Otto · Oct 30, 2007

LittleLambofJesus said:
You noticed that too?

I was inspired to.

Thekla · Oct 30, 2007

Rick Otto said:
Both.
Revelation got broader & deeper.
Reception the same, but not uniformly.
Reception is all over the map.
Receiver quality is a manufacturing issue.

is this as applied to OT/NT or NT to now ?

Rick Otto · Oct 30, 2007

Your question didn't specify, so neither did I.
Think globaly, act localy.

...effect on the Christian community over time (history)

All of history.

racer · Oct 30, 2007

actually, I was more thinking of translation from the original language in my comments. The "conceptual leap" can be difficult.

Translation of what original language and of what word? No leap can be made if one doesnt know of what he speaks.

Christ, the pre-eternal entered history for our sake; in Greek this can in part be described using the two kinds of time in Greek. In English, our word for time refers to created time.

What you are saying means nothing to me. It makes no sense, and it is not addressing my questions. You are dancing around them using diversion tactics and confusing the issue.

The idea of 'submitting to a church' may not be as you understand it.

Maybe it is as I understand it and not how you perceive it.

The ground of understanding on which the Gospel was written (language and culture) was different than 20th cent. US. Mystically revisited is a descriptive.

You are still avoiding the question. How can you assert that a word or language is different, if you dont know what the word or language is? Its a pointless accusation and argument. Of what is Mystically revisited a descriptive?

It might hold a little water, though if you could prove that the meaning or translation did not change until the 20th Century. I think that different languages and translations began a few years before.

I don't think this was meant - that no lay person can understand (in fact, most of our Saints were lay people). Rather, you can see in the hymns, for example, the maintaining of certain meanings over time.

Okay, not sure how this applies? Of which hymns do you speak, and are you referring to those recorded in ancient eastern texts or the ones in modern western text?

Certainly, language conveys different meanings in different cultures, and evolves (meanings) over time. Certainly, the idea of the "real presence", obvious to the early church, is not a feature of many modern US Christians.

This is a false and misrepresentation of the truth. Yes, History shows that some early fathers believed in the Real Presence. However, it, also, shows that some did not. To assert that History is clear and consistent is a false and un-provable argument.

LittleLambofJesus · Oct 30, 2007

Thekla said:
is this as applied to OT/NT or NT to now ?

Without the NT/NC, the Jews would not understand the OT/OC.
For example, the Jews do not read Revelation so how the heck can they see the CHRIST in either the OC or NC?

2 Corin 3:14 But was calloused the minds of them. For until the today day, the same covering/kalumma <2571> upon the reading of the Old Covenant is remaining, no being up-covered/anakaluptomenon <343> (5746). That In Christ it is taken away/katargeitai <2673> (5743).
==================================================
One man studied and found 348 allusions (not illusions, Light) in Revelation from the Old Testament. You see the similarity in wording and the context mirrored in Revelation and the particular Old Testament story, and immediately can recognize the reference source! That’s, IF you know the bible well enough to even notice that.

95 of the 348 plain references used in Revelation as taken from the Old Testament are repeated in Revelation. That makes about 250 Old Testament passages are cited. How many chapters are in Revelation? 22. That makes about TEN OLD TESTAMENT REFERENCES FOR EVERY CHAPTER!

Thekla · Oct 30, 2007

Translation of what original language and of what word? No leap can be made if one doesnt know of what he speaks.

I was trying to explain how the Greek of the NT, as in the description of language differences I gave, is not easily translated.

What you are saying means nothing to me. It makes no sense, and it is not addressing my questions. You are dancing around them using diversion tactics and confusing the issue.

sorry, I didn't mean to be "diverting and confusing"; rather I was trying to create a ground so that a common undersatnding is made re the 'problem of language'.

Maybe it is as I understand it and not how you perceive it.

either is possible

You are still avoiding the question. How can you assert that a word or language is different, if you dont know what the word or language is? Its a pointless accusation and argument. Of what is Mystically revisited a descriptive?

I thought we were referring to the language of the NT and its understanding in 20th c USA versus its original context.

It might hold a little water, though if you could prove that the meaning or translation did not change until the 20th Century. I think that different languages and translations began a few years before.

the meanings have been maintained in part, as my example, in the hymns both in the Greek (OC); the Bible and hymns were translated into, for example, Russian and the same understanding is maintained in the Russian OC.

Okay, not sure how this applies? Of which hymns do you speak, and are you referring to those recorded in ancient eastern texts or the ones in modern western text?

The hymns of the EOChurch

This is a false and misrepresentation of the truth. Yes, History shows that some early fathers believed in the Real Presence. However, it, also, shows that some did not. To assert that History is clear and consistent is a false and un-provable argument.

This is not a deliberate misreprentation on my part; you may believe the witnesses you will.

Thekla · Oct 30, 2007

Rick Otto said:
Your question didn't specify, so neither did I.
Think globaly, act localy.

All of history.

sorry for being vague, Rick !

need to run, but I was interested in the view of revelation (full with Christ or getting 'fuller' over the time since Christ).

Thanks

LittleLambofJesus · Oct 30, 2007

Thekla said:
sorry for being vague, Rick !

need to run, but I was interested in the view of revelation (full with Christ or getting 'fuller' over the time since Christ).

Thanks

I would think only these would have the "fulness". Just something I am working on.

Revelation 14:1 And I saw and Behold! The Lamb-kin standing on the Mount Zion, and with it hundred forty four thousands having the Name of It, and the Name of the Father of it having been written on of the foreheads of them.

Romans 11:25 For not I am willing ye to being ignorant brothers of the mystery, the-this, that no ye may be beside yourselves wise. That a hardening/pwrwsiV <4457> from part to-the Israel has become until which the filling/plhrwma <4138> of-the Nations may be entering;

racer · Oct 30, 2007

Thekla said:
thats concise !

but, for example, how is the action of the Holy Spirit seen in terms of effect on the Christian community over time (history) ?

It is not the action of the Holy Spirit in question. It's action is the same for all--individuals and churches alike. It is the actions of those being led that have guided some into error.

You can not erase the individuality out of Christianity no matter how you try. Because of this, there will be those who teach in error.

racer · Oct 30, 2007

Sorry, but I can't leave my post number on "6666" for an extended length of time--ignore this irrelevant post.

The Scriptures and Authority

Creed or Chaos

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Active Member

Active Member

The Christian Anarchist

Active Member

Thekla

Guest

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

The Dude Abides

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

The Dude Abides

Thekla

Guest

The Dude Abides

Contributor

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Thekla

Guest

Thekla

Guest

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Contributor

Contributor

Similar threads