 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Luvnlife
Lion King
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 1200
Location: US
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:21 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
TBax: | Quote: | Ecc 7:9 Do not hurry yourself in your spirit to become offended, for the taking of offense is what rests in the bosom of the stupid ones.
I am sorry. I guess I should have realized you would be offended by "Y". |
That was kind of rude. You're baiting him and using the scriptures to call him names. Is that what we are supposed to use the bible for?
Luv
_________________
Matthew 6:21
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Biblegateway Christian Viewpoints |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Yehushuan
King Kong
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 2739
Location: Charismatic
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TBax wrote: | | I don't know what your purpose is here. |
Poor thinking irritates me. I’m trying to help you.
| TBax wrote: | | It doesn't matter what Jude knew about the RC when he wrote that letter. |
No, but it DOES matter what Jude accepted as scripture, and you can be pretty darn sure he had the Book of Enoch in his Bible.
| TBax wrote: | | God has the ability to preserve His word. |
Yet God doesn’t have the ability to preserve the Church?
The Catholic Church canonized the Bible. The Catholic Church also declared that salvation is conferred by participation in water baptism. How can you keep a straight face proclaiming that God has the ability to preserve a book but is unable to ensure that his church understands salvation? He can save the book but can’t save the people?
Now if you possibly could even look at the facts of history, you would understand that God did Not preserve the Bible the way you think. Please, go down to the library and get out the book:
Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. Bart Ehrman, (2005) HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-073817-0
This will help give you a background from which to make informed decisions. It directly addresses the actual variations in manuscripts of the New Testament that shows your understanding of God’s “preservation” is sorely lacking.
| TBax wrote: | | What is it about Jude that makes you think it is not inspired? |
I have no inner witness from the Holy Ghost, and he quotes from the Book of Enoch. And I most assuredly don’t trust the Catholic Church in matters pertaining to inspiration. Why do you?
| TBax wrote: | | … have you seen it make such claims in the actual text? If so where? |
The headings are IN the text.
| TBax wrote: | | Scripture is God breathed. |
And when Peter wrote this, he most certainly did not include his own letter. He was actually referring to what you know as the Old Testament. Again, it was the Catholic Church that changed the definition of “scripture” to include New Testament writings.
| TBax wrote: | | If God chose to include information from another source that doesn't make the source inspired, just the section included in the Bible. |
Because God DIDN”T CHOOSE. The Catholic Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria Egypt chose. And again, if God could ensure that his choices were correct, why wouldn’t God ALSO ensure that the good Bishop’s doctrine of salvation was correct? (Especially since salvation is more important.)
| TBax wrote: | | Using tools like references or translative sorces is not conceding "ecclesiastical authority". |
Then whose “ecclesiastical authority” established the canon? Yours?
Ya know, I’ve been waiting for the assertion that some angel gave Charles Taze Russell a revelation of canon. At least that would be internally consistent. Otherwise, you ONLY have the authority of the Catholic Church upon which to lean for matters of canonization, and you ONLY have the authority of the Anglican Church for matters of translation (at least for the KJV).
| TBax wrote: | | You haven't proven anything to me, |
No, but what I’ve shown to everybody who ever reads this thread (including God) that you reject the authority of your own New World Translation which uses an indefinite article in the passage from 1st Thessalonians. Your entire argument for a single solitary archangel was based upon the existence of a definite article in one passage. And when confronted by a different passage speaking of an archangel that has no definite article (even in your own translation) you have no valid refutation. You cannot prove there is only one archangel. Even the prefix 'arch' in Greek allows for more than one.
And if you had the courage to actually believe what is actually written, you would find that the Lord descends with three things. (He brings them along with Him.)
(1Th 4:16 New World Translation) because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first.
I know what you want the verse to say, but in Greek this would have to be written something like “because the Lord himself will descend shouting from heaven, with the archangel’s voice of him (or in his own archangel’s voice – εν αυτος φωνη αρχαγγελου), as God’s trumpet.......
But it don’t say that. Do it.
Get over it.
Finally, TBax, my request regarding my name has nothing to do with me being offended, it has everything to do with YOUR lack of respect.
Grow up,
Yehushuan
_________________
There must be a God; Natural Selection would have gotten rid of you a long time ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1968
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 5:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yehu,
| Yehu wrote: | | Poor thinking irritates me. |
You must be constantly irritated with the way you think. 
| Yehu wrote: | | I’m trying to help you. |
I don't doubt your motives. I doubt your thinking process and conclusions. Basically, you doubt Jude's inspiration because you don't "feel" it is.  Yes, you are "helping" me with the solid proof of how you feel about Jude, what the "inner witness from the Holy Ghost" indicates to you. With that kind of reasoning we would have thousands of versions of what should be included in the Bible. Thanks for your "help".
| Yehu wrote: | Yet God doesn’t have the ability to preserve the Church?
|
Your poor thinking is rearing it's ugly head.
I didn't say that. His holy word tells us that the apostasy would take place. It also shows the true disciples would flurish once again in the last days when they would be seperated from the apostates Satan sowed. Not sure what your point is in bringing that out. If you want to beleive the Catholic church is God's church that is your call. I won't. 
| Yehu wrote: | | I have no inner witness from the Holy Ghost, and he quotes from the Book of Enoch. |
You really don't make your points clear. Why were you arguing the Book of Enoch was viewed as scripture???
So the Book you are trying to tell me was scripture, Jude quotes from, thus making Jude nonscriptural. 
Plus the fact that you have no inner witness from "the Holy Ghost." So nothing factual, just how you feel? Good work! Poor thinking irritates you, does it?????????
| Yehu wrote: | | The headings are IN the text. |
Poor thinking irritates you, does it? I'll take that as a "no" you haven't seen it in the actual text.
| Yehu wrote: | | Your entire argument for a single solitary archangel was based upon the existence of a definite article in one passage. |
No it wasn't. That was just one indication. There are many other things that you cannot comprehend. Way to deep for you. 
Plus, regarding other points you made, if you were the least bit knowledgable, you would know that translating is almost never 100% perfect.
| Yehu wrote: | | And if you had the courage to actually believe what is actually written, you would find that the Lord descends with three things. |
What is actually written??? What was that about poor thinking ability???
Literally: The Lord in shout-of-command in voice OF-chief-messenger
If you had the least bit of sense, you would realize the the chief messenger is "the Word of God".
| Yehu wrote: | | Finally, TBax, my request regarding my name has nothing to do with me being offended, it has everything to do with YOUR lack of respect. |
Your percieved display of a "lack of respect" is proof of you being offended. You bringing it forth as noteworthy is further proof.  My name has 4 characters and a few have called me "Tman" or even "T". How is that the least bit offensive or disrespectful????? You are overly sensative. 
Grow up,
Yehu
-------------
luvnlife,
Hi,
Yes, that was harsh, yet true. If the scripture has application, so be it. "Y" wasn't meant as an offense.
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yehushuan
King Kong
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 2739
Location: Charismatic
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TBax wrote: | | You must be constantly irritated with the way you think. |
To be honest, your words show irritation, not mine (and this is clear for all to see). I truly feel sorry for you.
| TBax wrote: | | Yehu wrote: | Yet God doesn’t have the ability to preserve the Church?
|
I didn't say that. |
(Shall I presume you didn't notice the question mark? TBax, question marks mean a question was asked, not a claim that you said something.)
I never believed the Catholic Church is God's Church anymore than I believe your Church is God's Church. It is not I who depends upon Catholic Authority for the New Testament Canon. You do, having claimed that God would preserve The Bible.
Perhaps I err to presume that you and the Catholic Church are in odds over the doctrine of salvation? But the question you cannot answer is still there. How can you claim that God preserved the Bible, when He did not preserve the Church's doctrine of salvation?
Your God is more interested in preserving a book than in saving souls?
I again implore you to read "Misquoting Jesus." Then you will have at least some FACTUAL background as to this supposed "preservation."
| TBax wrote: | | His holy word tells us that the apostacy would take place. |
Surprise! The Catholic Church thinks its YOU. And they have the higher ground on that debate.
| TBax wrote: | | So the Book you are trying to tell me is scripture … |
Congratulations on irritating me once more. (I’m sure it’s your only noble goal in life.) I only pointed out that JUDE considered the Book of Enoch to be scripture, not I. (Do you always have this much trouble reading?)
| TBax wrote: | | So nothing factual, just how you feel? |
Again, more presumption on your part – that the inner witness is just feeling good. Are you sure you wish to denigrate the “inner witness”? After all your own “inspired” book testifies to this.
(Rom 8:16 NWT) The spirit itself bears witness with our spirit that we are God’s children.
Is that what your Church teaches, that the inner witness is just “feelings”? Nothing more than feelings?
What facts are you looking for? That the Catholic Bishop of Alexandria, Athanasius, established the list of the supposedly inspired books of the New Testament in 367? There’s a couple of facts for you. Here’s another:
(Joh 16:13 NWT) However, when that one arrives, the spirit of the truth, he will guide YOU into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own impulse, but what things he hears he will speak, and he will declare to YOU the things coming.
Where does your own Bible say that the Bible will guide you? Does not your own Bible testify to the guidance by the spirit of truth? Yet you wish to ridicule this. (God only know why.)
| TBax wrote: | | I'll take that as a "no" you haven't seen it in the actual text. |
You really do have trouble thinking. I again feel sorry for you. There are no “headers” put in by translators. These words are IN the text. (Exactly what I’ve already said.)
| TBax wrote: | | If you had the least bit of sense, you would realize the the chief messenger is "the Word of God". |
Fascinating.
Then from the definitional framework you’ve established, the name of the Bible is Michael. I hadn’t known that. But since you’ve already established that the Word of God is the Bible, now saying that the archangel is the Bible, having said the archangel’s name is Michael....
So the archangel is the Bible. Again, fascinating.
At this point it’s obvious you have no idea what you mean, so I will move on to help others who are not so hopelessly lost (and go read some of my Michael). May God have mercy on your soul.
Yehushuan
_________________
There must be a God; Natural Selection would have gotten rid of you a long time ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1968
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yehu,
Dude, your reasoning is intellectually vacuous.
From the first:
| Yehu wrote: | | TBax wrote: | | You must be constantly irritated with the way you think. |
To be honest, your words show irritation, not mine (and this is clear for all to see). I truly feel sorry for you. |
Way to twist what I said. What I wrote was in responce to what you said, namely:"Poor thinking irritates me. "
Do you get it now?? You see, if you read the quote, and then the response, you may understand why the response is there.
To the middle:
| Yehu wrote: | | TBax wrote: | | So the Book you are trying to tell me is scripture … |
Congratulations on irritating me once more. (I’m sure it’s your only noble goal in life.) I only pointed out that JUDE considered the Book of Enoch to be scripture, not I. (Do you always have this much trouble reading?) |
So you use false reasoning to prove that Jude considered the Book of Enoch as scripture, then asked if I read the Book of Enoch and used false points from Enoch to show multiple archangels, I asked you a question to clarify if you had a problem with the inspiration of Jude or the Book of Enoch not being scripture and you give a smart aleck non-answer, yet me thinking you are trying to show the Book of Enoch is scripture is irritating to you? Yes, I am sure it was my "goal" to lure you here to show me your foolish confused reasonings. I didn't seek you out. You came here dude.
It is your poor thinking and your poor explanation that caused you to be irritated here. Perhaps now you can understand "You must be constantly irritated with the way you think." Do you get it now?
To the last:
| Yehu wrote: | | Then from the definitional framework you’ve established, the name of the Bible is Michael. I hadn’t known that. But since you’ve already established that the Word of God is the Bible, now saying that the archangel is the Bible, having said the archangel’s name is Michael.... |
"The Word" is the name Jesus is called. But then again you probably doubt John and Revelation are inspired as well. Who knows what you think? Only you! I don't have "the Yehushuan list of accepted scriture." 
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
composer2005
Fierce Wolf
Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 561
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 4:24 pm Post subject: J.W's |
|
|
When you have finished your normal barrage of personal insults against those that expose you TBax I am STILLLLLLL! looking forward for your responses to each of my points at: -
http://bible-discussion.com/message-board-forum/viewtopic.php?p=116445#116307
Just because you duck and dive doesn't mean they are going to disappear -
Thank you |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
composer2005
Fierce Wolf
Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 561
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yehushuan wrote: | | Did JUDE consider the Book of Enoch to be scripture? Since he actually quoted from it, as did quite a number of Church Fathers from the first century, it’s obvious he did . . . . |
In actual fact merely making reference to or even quoting does not necessarily equate to 'legitimacy'.
It is reasonably obvious from the context of Judes reference to The Book of Enoch that it was NOT a favorable one.
Please see a discussion about this - e.g. I think it's precisely the kind of apostate gibberish against which Peter, Paul, and Jude warned. I don't believe that any of them except for Jude referred to it, and I don't believe that Jude quotes it favourably. (Post #4 - http://www.thechristadelphians.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=4737&st=0)
Cheers! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1968
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 5:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nice work composer,
According to your thinking, someone, you have demonstrated, who draws wrong conclusions has exposed me? His reasoning ability is similar to yours.
If writting gibberish is exposing me, then you and Yehu do so exceedingly.
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yehushuan
King Kong
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 2739
Location: Charismatic
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
(It remained to be seen whether your character is so deficient as to demand you get the last word in.)
Yehu
_________________
There must be a God; Natural Selection would have gotten rid of you a long time ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1968
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yehu,
I assume that was directed to me as you don't seem to respond to composer. Yehu's judgement of my character means nothing.  If wanting people to understand and be reasonable is a slight of character, so be it.
Do you apply your standards to you? 
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
composer2005
Fierce Wolf
Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 561
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 3:23 pm Post subject: J.W's |
|
|
Time for the next error of yours to be corrected TBax, perhaps you could start another Thread called: TBax's blunders cntn'd Re: Your Drowning spirit Demons
Perhaps you could notify when it is up and running?
Cheers! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Luvnlife
Lion King
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 1200
Location: US
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello TBax;
This is slightly off-topic and so I am apologizing in advance.
You said: | Quote: | luvnlife,
Hi,
Yes, that was harsh, yet true. If the scripture has application, so be it. "Y" wasn't meant as an offense. |
I respect you but find I am losing some respect for you because of this type of behavior. I stated that what you said was rude. You changed it to 'yeah, it was harsh but true...' and in one quick sentence you wrote off what I said to you and justified your behavior.
I understand others may change your chosen forum name and it doesn't bother you. My name is Luvnlife on this forum. Most call me Luv. I don't mind. But if I did and I stated that I did I would want people to show me enough respect to honor my request. I know people with formal names like Charles, Edward and Catherine. Some prefer more casual references like Charlie, Eddie & Cate or Cathy. Some prefer to go by their given names. It's simply a personal preference and it's simply a sign of respect to honor that request without grumbling.
I belong to another forum. One time, I made a comment comparing one persons avatar to another person on the forum. I meant it in fun and as a joke/observation. She was offended. I explained that I was just having a little fun but I also acknowledged her feelings and told her that because it did upset her, I was sorry. She forgave me. We moved on.
I don't think I have ever seen you apologize to anyone on this board even when you know you hurt or upset them.
The following is a quote a friend of mine on another forum uses as her profile quote:
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Mahatma Gandhi
I know we are not perfect but shouldn't we be trying to become a little better than before and always striving to be a little closer to Christ?
Luv 
_________________
Matthew 6:21
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Biblegateway Christian Viewpoints |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TBax
King of the Jungle
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 1968
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
luvnlife,
Hi,
I appreciate how you feel.  But seriously, I meant no offense by not spelling out Yehu's name. I thought he didn't like "Yman" so I shortened it to "Y". When he said it again I changed it to Yehu but forgot in one instance, and he had a cow and attacked my character.
To personally not like something and want it changed like this is fine. I tried to cooperate with his percieved problem because I tought perhaps Yehu is offended by being called a man. I don't know. That is why I shortened it to "Y". When he said it again I started calling him Yehu. Personally, I would view Yehu as worse then "Y". Almost sounds like "Yahoo". So I was trying to be respectful as I did consider that. Regardless, it is not mockery, and was never intended as such. He showed himself easily offended. That is a fact. That scripture was from the Bible, and showed we shouldn't be that way. If he recognizes this and applies it in the future, great.
| luvnlife wrote: | "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Mahatma Gandhi |
Yes I know that quote and I appreciate what he said. People in Christendom don't behave like Christ as they go around killing people and behaved in ways against Jesus' teachings. You do realize Jesus wasn't "politically correct" with his opposers, don't you? As a matter of fact he did things you could consider to be "rude" as well. On one occation he called his mother "woman". Yes, you could be offended by that, but that would be foolish. Instead of assuming bad motives or mockery, perhaps we need to look deeper for understanding.
| luvnlife wrote: | | I know we are not perfect but shouldn't we be trying to become a little better than before and always striving to be a little closer to Christ? |
Yes, I know we cannot read hearts like Jesus and we have no right to judge motives. Yet the Bible does judge certain actions.
What do you think of Jesus here?
Matt 15:7 YOU hypocrites, Isaiah aptly prophesied about YOU, when he said, 8 ‘This people honors me with their lips, yet their heart is far removed from me. 9 It is in vain that they keep worshiping me, because they teach commands of men as doctrines.’”
Yes, that could be considered "rude", but our perfect exempler was correct, even though he was harsh to these opposers.
Yes, we are not perfect yet. If you think the scripture I brought out doesn't apply to Yehu, that is your call. With his rush to be offended, and with him attacking my character and my motives, I see it fitting that circumstance perfectly.
Should Jesus apologise for calling his opposers hypocrites?
I won't appologise for recognizing how Ecc 7:9 fits here either. My purpose wasn't "to get him good", but to shock him to his senses. He seems to gloss over and twist everything, but he cannot twist that.
Should I keep silent when I recognise a major error? That is only harmful to both of us!
Ez 3:18 When I say to someone wicked, ‘You will positively die,’ and you do not actually warn him and speak in order to warn the wicked one from his wicked way to preserve him alive, he being wicked, in his error he will die, but his blood I shall ask back from your own hand.
Seriously, if one is easily offended, that will only hinder or halt any progess. If Yehu learns from the harsh words, it may help him.
Heb 12:11 True, no discipline seems for the present to be joyous, but grievous; yet afterward to those who have been trained by it it yields peaceable fruit, namely, righteousness.
_________________
Agape,
TBax |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
composer2005
Fierce Wolf
Joined: 14 Jul 2007
Posts: 561
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:38 pm Post subject: J.W's |
|
|
| TBax wrote: | Yehu,
Dude, your reasoning is intellectually vacuous. |
That is the kind of personal insults you constantly make and your pitiful rantings trying to prove yourself innocent only demonstrates just how low you are consistently prepared to go to attempt (in vain) to justify your blatant and flagrant disrespect of contributors here and how your argument is so devoid of legitimacy your repeated desperation to personal insults proves in itself the invalidity of your arguments. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yehushuan
King Kong
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 2739
Location: Charismatic
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2007 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TBax wrote: | | I thought he didn't like "Yman" so I shortened it to "Y". |
Yes! Specifically AFTER I had requested you use Yehu or Yehushuan. Do you actually fool yourself with these justifications?
| TBax wrote: | | That is why I shortened it to "Y". When he said it again I started calling him Yehu. Personally, I would view Yehu as worse then "Y". Almost sounds like "Yahoo". So I was trying to be respectful as I did consider that. |
TBax, that’s how it’s actually pronounced - yahoo. How can you possibly arrive at the conclusion it would be disrespectful to use the names I had requested? That I should carry some sort of embarrassment at the way my name is pronounced?
The answer, of course, is arrogance. You decided that Your conclusions were more valuable than my requests. You decided the pronunciation yahoo was disrespectful, totally disregarding how I might view the matter. (After all, isn’t MY name?) And then you top it off with some kind of sophomoric weenie justification?
My objective in pointing out character flaws it not to denigrate or attack. The purpose is for information (ya may have a big log sticking out of that eye dear sir!). Hopefully we are all learning to grow up, no longer being babes.
And I am trying to help you – help you to get past the intellectual scotoma (look it up) whereby you rely upon God to guide Catholic priests to select the right books, but reject that God can guide these same Catholic priests to correctly understand salvation.
| TBax wrote: | | He showed himself easily offended. That is a fact. |
No, you showed yourself to be arrogant, and I decided to address that. I’ve never had any problems with other posters over what they call me. (But then they’ve never been so arrogant.)
| TBax wrote: | | On one occation (sic) he called his mother "woman". Yes, you could be offended by that, |
And you have a doctorate in ancient anthropology to determine that such verbiage was offensive back then? How wonderfully - arrogant. I think I’d make a lot of money betting on what you think the phrase “heaping coals of fire upon their heads” means (Rom. 12:20).
| TBax wrote: | | If Yehu learns from the harsh words, it may help him. |
Your arrogance is supposed to be helping me?  (As the arrogance goes on and on and on and on…)
Moving on,
Yehu
(My name is in honor of a Chinese emperor who lived during the time of Moses. Those who wish to learn would seek out why he was so named.)
_________________
There must be a God; Natural Selection would have gotten rid of you a long time ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
