Not much to say...
- Thread starter Zenn
- Start date
I agree with you.
I believe he is one of banned ones recently. I don't remember his username at the moment. He was addressing everyone and disagree with all of them.
WatchmanOnTheWall
New member
A few 'catfish' make for an interesting time and whats even better here at TOL is the 'light touch' moderation. Lot's of traffic and a lively debate, even if it can be a little hostile at times. :salute:
BTW everyone, if anyone thinks they know of a better Christian forum please let me know.
WatchmanOnTheWall
New member
Well I've already given the link to the Interlinear I found at the age of 14, way before any introduction to the inscrutable machinations of the academics.
Alas at one time I had an entire seminary library at my beck and call. (Moravian for those who are curious.)
Zenn
PS: Glad to meet you SabathMoon
I thank God I spent my time with the Interlinear rather than the 'inscrutable machinations of the academics and seminary libraries' but I take my hat off to those who have as long as they haven't wondered from Christ's Words and Meanings.
Right Divider
Body part
Why were the first ones called Christians not the ones in Jerusalem that were following Christ?
Acts 11:26 (AKJV/PCE)
(11:26) And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
:nuke:
Zenn
New member
I presume you mean wandered, in that there are many Words and Meanings put forth as Christ's about which I do wonder.
Zenn
Zenn
New member
Is "good" also in the eye of the beholder?
Zenn
New member
I've provided the scripture quotes, musterion, weren't those scriptures enough to answer your question?
Zenn
Zenn
New member
Zenn
New member
Well that's quite a leap of "knowing". Especially when the nouns Paul uses are neuter to speak of things, and NOT people. It's rather an abuse of language to transmogrify words that speak of things into words that speak of people. Your teaching may be right, but your proof-scripture does not say this nor lend it support. In that passage Paul is not talking about people, but about "spiritual things" i.e. doctrines.
No, there is only one who will come to judge the quick and the dead. We (or at least those of us who are spiritual) are to judge the teachings of others - the things they believe and teach to be true - not the actual people.
No. Not the prophets. Not the teachers. But the prophecies and the teachings. (Those things.) Now you based your teaching on 1 Cor. 2:13-16, but indeed Paul is writing about doctrines or things (again using words with a neuter gender). Words written to indicate people are not expressed as neuter but rather have male or female endings. So the language itself disagrees with your erroneous conclusion. But please realize I do not judge YOU when I point out that this thing you teach cannot be linguistically supported in the Greek text.
Spiritual "Things". Like - offering blood sacrifices to the gods will make the crops grow well this season. Spiritual "Things" like - say five Hail Marys. Spiritual things like "Hell is eternal conscious torment in pain". A spiritual thing like "Circumcision saves us." And there are many spiritual things like... transubstantiation, rapture, baptism, inerrancy, indulgences, limbo, prevenient grace. These are the things about which Paul speaks.
You may not wish to depart from what is actually written, "ο δε πνευματικος ανακρινει μεν παντα αυτος δε υπ ουδενος ανακρινεται"
Zenn
PS: One example of a spiritual "thing" I'd like to mention is that there is a denomination that forbids the use of musical instruments in their worship services. A capella singing is permitted, but they teach instruments are of the devil and so are not holy for services.
PPS: As I live in Amishland PA, I certainly know of a people who preach a spiritual truth (to them) that electric lights are sinful. You by all means are welcome to judge that teaching.
Zenn
New member
I very much appreciate the invite. That was the same thread that cobra invited me over here to join.
I will see what I can contribute as time provides. (And my newbie shackles permit.)
Zenn
glorydaz
Well-known member
I know you. You have come to sow discord. :
opcorn:We are to try the spirits, whether they be of God....or, whether they be like you, false prophets.
Last I checked, false prophets are men.
1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
Be that as it may, I'm used to answering a fool according to his folly around here.
All the deep things of God are revealed to us by His Spirit. So let's see what that might include. "The things of a man"...that the spirit of man knows. I see nothing there that limits that to a man's "doctrine". Is the man's spirit that of the world, or of God?
1 Cor. 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
What is freely given to us? The fruit of the Spirit, gifts of the Spirit (including discernment). The ability to examine and detect the spirit of the natural man.... Yes, that is exactly what Paul is speaking of here.
The spiritual things that the natural man cannot know....they are foolishness to him. And you're telling me Paul is not telling us to examine and discern the spirit of the natural man? Are you telling me that the spiritual man is not to judge the natural man? Are you interested in actually reading and understanding what the verses say, or just rambling on about the Greek?
2 Cor. 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
Therefore, since you only have your Greek, and not the mind of Christ, you'll have to take a seat on the back of this bus.
2 Cor. 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.
We ARE to judge whether they be natural men of the flesh or spiritual men. Therefore, we, who have the mind of Christ, are judging men. Look up the Greek meaning of "judge" instead of "things", you might be better off.
A good thing for you, too, because the natural man is not to judge the spiritual man, and I can see why. :chew:
:blabla: :blabla: :blabla:
glorydaz
Well-known member
Last time I checked, you were ignorant. Nothing has changed.
Zenn
New member
Ahh, so you are impatient and demand the instant gratification for which Americans are so well known.
I'm tempted to ask which Gospel, but I don't think that's an appropriate subject for the purposes of this thread.
Interesting. Unless one is Greek Orthodox, all gospels might be considered "unorthodox" no? And I think I can say here, Orthodoxy truly is in the eye of the beholder.
Well the obvious conclusion, then, is that you DO know how to be saved. So again, why are you asking me? To make a quick judgment? To dance in the cotillion of the stereotype?
And what of those non-atheistic trolls?
Not really. It's kind of like the Christian equivalent of dogs sniffing each other. I think I shall decline out of common decency.
Soteriology is a rather involved study, but it would seem you think such can be summarized in a sound bite. The doctrines of Soterilogy and Ecclesiastical Authority define the three major branches of Christianity. But I'm sure you know this. Suffice it to say here that I am not Catholic, nor am I Protestant.
Zenn
PPS: Here's a sound bite for you. A person is saved when the spirit of unbelief is removed from them by God.
PPPS: (But of course the wise man would wonder, "Unbelief of what?")
Since I've now been deigned worthy to edit my own posts, I've rephrased the sentence that seems to have offended certain dainty ears, although I can't possibly fathom why the word b*** would be considered vulger. My English ain't that badly.
Last edited:
Zenn
New member
Judgement with an attitude. You must have been doing this for awhile.
Zenn
PS: I would, though, challenge your definition of hostility. Dust off that dictionary my good man. I'm not the one who is "MAD".