Do differences in practices of faith mean we follow the same Jesus Christ? (reject, gospel)

[uss_bigd]

Originally Posted by IIChr7:14

And by the way let me ask you some question,

Do I insult God Word's if I can not have or in any other way to have access to the best scholarship that these world has to offer?

What If I enroll in a college that is not greater than you'rs I am insulting God's word for having a low budget?

I'll wait for your reply?

hey sojourner, you have a pending question ...

[uss_bigd]

Originally Posted by IIChr7:14

And by the way let me ask you some question,

Do I insult God Word's if I can not have or in any other way to have access to the best scholarship that these world has to offer?

What If I enroll in a college that is not greater than you'rs I am insulting God's word for having a low budget?

I'll wait for your reply?

Sojourner, you have a pending question...

" if one were to enrol in a college which is less in what ever standards as your college, will that person be insulting God for not having much money to afford your college sojourner?"

[sojourner]

I find no rebuttal, you just said what you just wanted to say "proof-texting and then refer me to matthew 20:16. And i dont see any relationship between matthew 20:16 about the apostles being the last.

It's apparent that you couldn't find your biblical backside with both hands. Matt. 20:16 refers to the quotation of Jesus that "The first shall be last, and the last shall be first." This, too, is an ordinal of place, not of time.

It may not be the best but that doens't prove you are right. And please dont sound like your more correct than King James.

I don't see any Sojourner's version of the bible.

The King James language there is a little confusing. I prefer the NRSV, which, as far as translations go, is considered to be, by most Biblical scholars, superior to the King James. it has little to do with what I think.

"You dont have the least idea of what Paul "should have used", because your so interested on your own interpretation. "

Not so. Got my information from several noteable commentaries (Interpreter's Bible, Anchor Bible Commentary, etc.) Sorry to disappoint you.

And what is a valid argument, yours?
"Backing something up with scripture is clearly proof-texting" Im am very sorry Mr. but you are puffed up with your scholarship.

Logs and specks...
Assigning meaning and then using scripture the way you want is easy ... too easy. However, having scripture inform one's intepretation in order to form meaning is ... exegesis.

1 John 1:3-4
"We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. We write this to make our joy complete.

What?! "We write these" then there goes your scholarship saying, "There is very litte clear evidence that the apostles wrote the gospels" I Assume you know what you are tallking about, especially a scholarship is not free if i am correct.
What are those "very little clear evidence"?
Give me those clear evidence according to you.

Or is it just according to sojourner's epistle?

'K. Who is "we?" Since John's gospel can be dated to around the year 100 c.e., there is very little chance that it was written by someone who witnessed Jesus' ministry, which ended 70 years before. Even if the witness was 20, he'd be 90 by the time he wrote the gospel, which, in that time and place, was highly unlikely.

The gospels do not, themselves, name authorship. The authorships were added by later redactors, probably in order to lend the writings authenticity. Or, they could have been written pseudonymously -- a very common practice in those days. In any case, there simply is no clear evidence in the texts, themselves, that they were written by apostles.

Again, this is not my conjecture, it is the considered opinion of Biblical scholars (as well as anthropological common sense.)

Romans 12:6-7
Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching;

How can you therefore teach if you dont have the gift of grace?
How can you prophesy if you dont have the gift of grace?

According to your scholarship grace has very little to do with interpretation. And what something big has to do with interpration, your scholarship?

Poor first century christians, there grace is not enough and has little to do with there understanding. If only they have existed today they would just work hard and get a decent salary and pay to get scholarship and then finally understand the bible. Just like what Sojourner did.

1Peter 5:5
Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea,
all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility:
for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.

Now I understand why according to you that grace has little to do with interpretation.

Proud of your biblical scholarship eh?

This is nothing but a knee-jerk rant. What I'm saying is that one does not gain the ability to interpret magically, just because one is under salvific grace. One still has to do the scholastic and interpretive leg work. But then, it appears that you don't want to have a leg to stand on...

Hey, who would have doubt if in the near future that there will be an epistle of Sojourner, or a Wise Soujourner's version(WSV) of the bible. Just a thought.

Only if you're very lucky...

Was Peter a scholar?
Did he study to understand the words of God?
Is he educated in the bible like the Pharisees and Saducees?

Peter was there when Jesus walked the earth. We are not. You bet Peter used scholars to interpret the scriptures that were extant -- he was illiterate. He was not a Rabbi.

Since we are looking at documents that are 2000 years old, from a different culture, written in different languages, and coming to us through a series of redactions, you bet we use scholarship to determine what was meant.

No matter how many colleges and scholarship you have, If God wont make known his words to you, then your just wise in your own conceits.

in the book of Luke,
In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.

The wise and the prudent of the world, God has hidden these things.

With at least 8 colleges and graduate of biblical courses.. holding a perfect gradepoint average... In world standard you are considered to be wise, no doubt.

But considering these verse "that thou had hid these things from the wise and prudent"

I would have rather have the gift of grace of God and to be called uneducated of this world ,than a biblical scholar like you who say's grace has little to do with interpretation.

Exegetical scholarship and understanding is a different animal from the wisdom your Biblical passages speak of. Scholarship is not an end in itself -- it's a tool to help us toward the end, which is wisdom (unless you just happen to be in it for the intellectual exercise -- which I'm clearly not).

My definition and use of the word "grace" is very tight here. Grace is the state of having been reconciled to God. In that state, yes, we prophesy, and understand, etc. But it is not the grace, itself that causes it. Grace makes it possible for our scholarship to take on greater meaning, thereby giving us wisdom.

there is a difference between exegesis and wisdom. Exegesis helps lead us to wisdom, but cannot take the place of wisdom.

I Thank God Sojourner's god, is not my God.

"Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God, the Lord is One."

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

Sojourner, you have a pending question...

" if one were to enrol in a college which is less in what ever standards as your college, will that person be insulting God for not having much money to afford your college sojourner?"

God is pleased when we do the best we can. God is interested in kinesis, not potential. Read the parable of the talents.

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by IIChr7:14

2Cor 1:13 For we write none other things unto you, than what ye read or acknowledge; and I trust ye shall acknowledge even to the end;

Yeah yeah proof-texting is very poor scholarship.. because IT DOESN'T WORK.

**Sigh**

You have just done a very good job of proving that proof-texting doesn't work. Thank you.

[madhatter85]

Originally Posted by sojourner

God is pleased when we do the best we can. God is interested in kinesis, not potential. Read the parable of the talents.

but what i get from the parable of the talents is that of reaching your potential....

the one who did nothing with his talents got nothing in return while those who reached thier potential and exceeded the expectations were added upon even more.

"Where much is given much is required"

[IIChr7:14]

Originally Posted by sojourner

It's apparent that you couldn't find your biblical backside with both hands. Matt. 20:16 refers to the quotation of Jesus that "The first shall be last, and the last shall be first." This, too, is an ordinal of place, not of time.

You have a way of playing with verses.

I Corinthians 4:9 is different from matthew 20:16

I Corinthians 4:9 is CLEARLY talking of ordinal of time, because Paul shouldn't have said "as it were appointed to death" if he was not talking of ordinal of time.

And it is true,
Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
What is apparent is, your scholarsip has led you to believe that you are what you think you are.

Originally Posted by sojourner

The King James language there is a little confusing. I prefer the NRSV, which, as far as translations go, is considered to be, by most Biblical scholars, superior to the King James. it has little to do with what I think.

Well just because most biblical scholars considered NSRV superior over KJV, do you think that would be enough to nullify KJV as a whole?

Originally Posted by sojourner

Not so. Got my information from several noteable commentaries (Interpreter's Bible, Anchor Bible Commentary, etc.) Sorry to disappoint you.

Sorry mister i'm not. So you base your scholarship to commentaries?

Information on which you think is accurate?

Did you study each bible commentary to be correct? I doubt

Originally Posted by sojourner

Logs and specks...
Assigning meaning and then using scripture the way you want is easy ... too easy. However, having scripture inform one's intepretation in order to form meaning is ... exegesis.

Where did I assign meaning? I let scriptures answer for itself.

The problem with you is your stuck with what you believe, that scriptures need's scholarship. And there is no biblical account that early christians need's scholarship. Or neither there was a hint that in latter time that you need one.

That is why Pharisees and Saducees with there pride as high as heaven can not accept Jesus teaching because they knew who Jesus was, a carpenter.

And Sojourner is Pharisees in our own time.

Originally Posted by sojourner

'K. Who is "we?" Since John's gospel can be dated to around the year 100 c.e., there is very little chance that it was written by someone who witnessed Jesus' ministry, which ended 70 years before. Even if the witness was 20, he'd be 90 by the time he wrote the gospel, which, in that time and place, was highly unlikely.

The gospels do not, themselves, name authorship. The authorships were added by later redactors, probably in order to lend the writings authenticity. Or, they could have been written pseudonymously -- a very common practice in those days. In any case, there simply is no clear evidence in the texts, themselves, that they were written by apostles.

Again, this is not my conjecture, it is the considered opinion of Biblical scholars (as well as anthropological common sense.)

And you considered OPINION of biblical scholars as your belief?
What happen to your scholarship?


And i thought you have that very little CLEAR evidence.
Clear- understood without confusion or uncertainty.

And I think an opinion is not clear evidence.

Originally Posted by sojourner

This is nothing but a knee-jerk rant. What I'm saying is that one does not gain the ability to interpret magically, just because one is under salvific grace. One still has to do the scholastic and interpretive leg work. But then, it appears that you don't want to have a leg to stand on...

Oh c'mon Sojourner your just saying that cause you can't answer my question straight?

Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching;

Ok i'll ask you again?

Can they teach if they did not recieve the gift of grace?
Did they receive a scholarship or did they recieve grace to understand scriptures
Those who teach are they not under the grace which is given to them?
Are you mocking early christian because they are under God's grace when they teach and prophesy?

And then here you are saying "one does not gain the ability to interpret magically, just because one is under salvific grace"

They did teach and prohesized under God's grace Sojourner, so what are you talking about magically interpreting. Answer me did they teach or not?

They did not go to scholarship and do interpretative leg work, to teach and prophesy.
They do it with God's grace and help for them to teach and prophesuzed which for you Sojourner is not enough.

I may not have a scholarship and whatever leg work your saying,

But as long as I fear the Lord and turn from His reproof that would be more than enough to trample scholarship of men.

In the book of proverbs,

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge..
Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.

I dont see scholarship there, do you?
And as for trusting so much for your scholarship,
Jer 17:5 Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.

You trust men by there opinions and commentaries and maketh flesh and arm, you do not trust God by saying grace is insufficient.

For you(Sojourner) One need's scholarship of men because you think one is not able to interpret magically just because they are under God's grace. In short grace is insufficient.

Curse be the man that trustheth in man, and maketh flesh his arm.

And you exactly fit right into it.

Originally Posted by sojourner

Peter was there when Jesus walked the earth. We are not. You bet Peter used scholars to interpret the scriptures that were extant -- he was illiterate. He was not a Rabbi.

Since we are looking at documents that are 2000 years old, from a different culture, written in different languages, and coming to us through a series of redactions, you bet we use scholarship to determine what was meant.

You did not answer my question,

Was Peter a scholar?
Did he study to understand the words of God?
Is he educated in the bible like the Pharisees and Saducees?
Pharisees and Saducees are scholar's of the scriptures. But did they come to the knowledge of truth?

Scholarship you say, you badly needed one especially your belittling God's grace.

Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Did you come to the knowledge of truth?

Originally Posted by sojourner