COMMUNITY CHURCHES AND CHURCHES OF CHRIST

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

September 12th, 2005, 1:00 pm #31

Permission? Authors may quote very brief passages from books, periodicals, or any other media as long as they give full credit for the source. It's called "fair use" in the publishing industry, and it's quite legal (surely you remember doing term papers in high school or college and citing sources for your quotes). I quoted a LINE from one of your profane posts at the Ex-Church of Christ web site and gave you FULL credit for it. I also cited some of your colorful phrases from the Concerned Members web site and gave you FULL credit for the source.

BTW, I noticed that in order to register at the Ex-C of C site, each person must electronically "sign" a statement (push the "I accept" button) to the degree that s/he will not use abusive language or behave in an uncivil manner; if reported, violators will have their IP addresses reviewed, and their access to that site could be permanently terminated. You're a persistent violator, so I don't need to tell you to tread lightly there as well as here. That's not a threat, that's a PROMISE.

And I'd also be most careful about slinging around words like "disturbed" when you so freely use profanity/vulgarity like you're addicted to it. There's addiction to drugs, addiction to sex, addiction to pornography, etc. You, my friend, are addicted to profanity/vulgarity and you are in dire need of spiritual HELP.

Heed Matt. 5:22 (KJV) and turn away from this bane before it completely eats you up.

But maybe a tiny bit of healing has begun: you didn't use one profane/vulgar word in your response here; the anger and hatred are still there, however, which you need to purge as well.

Quote
Share

ChristianScholar
ChristianScholar

September 12th, 2005, 8:45 pm #32

Christian Scholar:

Can't you put aside your obvious hatred for us for a few minutes and offer some heart-felt prayer for a poor soul like Kent/Brad who has an obvious fetish for profanity/vulgarity, as I asked? That's so obvious that it's a no-brainer about whether it's wrong or not. We all need prayer, because we ALL sin. But I'm beginning to think that, because you manifest such intense hostility toward us, you are in need of special prayer to help you rid yourself of such hatred. You mentioned Matthew and sin. There’s also a verse in Matt. about using abusive language toward your brother (Matt. 5:22 KJV). Further, there’s a verse in Matt. which implies that having animosity toward your brother cancels any offering that you could present to God (Matt. 5:23-24 KJV). Scholar, you obviously have animosity toward us and this web site. I admonish you to be reconciled to us and thus fulfill the command of Matt. 23-24.

BTW, you never did respond to the three requests I made of you earlier regarding your false premise that the KJV is inaccurate. So I will restate them:

1. What specific Greek New Testament edition (Traditional Text [Textus Receptus, Received Text], Critical Text, etc.) did you use as a comparison to form such a conclusion?

2. Please produce at least twelve New Testament passages (or many more if desired) which clearly demonstrate the most profound of alleged inaccuracies of the King James translation. Let the proof be so clear that we cannot do anything but discard our KJVs.

3. Since it is obvious that you reject the KJV, please recommend a specific New Testament translation which is allegedly the most accurate and reliable when compared with the Greek, and please cite ample reasons for this recommendation.

You have made certain accusations. Now you must be prepared to back them up with Scripture in complete context; if not, you automatically proclaim yourself a false person.
The point of my critisism is not to say that KJV is an invalid version of the Bible. In no way is that bible evil or wrong. I take offense to someone claiming the NIV is some sort of bible from Satin and that it serves no purpose. It was never intended that biblical translations be perfect. Take for example the Septuigent. The Israelites fully accepted that version except for a few radical groups. If we are actually going to claim that there is one true translation then we must go back to the Greek text, the tradtional greek text because there are words that are impossible to translate to english correctly. The greek was translated to English to make it accessable for all. It was actually translated from Latin since that was the text of the Time when the KJV was created. No one on earth speaks old english any longer so we again updated the bible so that it would be accessable to everyone. Its not a matter of accuracy, because it is impossible to be completely accurate in any text. Even the greek texts may not be accurate because of the passing down of the letters over time since the finalized Canon was not astablished until the 4th century. No one is saying that the KJV is invalid, im saying that it is outdated. In respose to your other post, you have provided no rebuttle to my other accusations. I do not understand how you are so sharply critisizing someone who used profane language when your language is just as dangerous. I believe that James said something about the Tongue and how it can lead the entire body astray. You come on this website and write words of slander about members of a congregation and yet you claim that the one who says a few swear words should be prayed over? I think we all need to ccheck our own language before we critisize. I do not hate any of you on this site, I am just afraid. Im afraid that this type of christianity. This closeminded christianity will drive away people from a church that is already dying. Its rather reminicent of the Catholic Churches response to Protestantism. Your thought process is now the minority for church of christ. The common church goer no longer speaks as you do, we have better ideas of the early church than we used to and we understand that many of our preconcieved notions were wrong. If you want more information about the first century church read The Story of Christianity by Justo Gonzales. This portrays a perfect picture of what the early church really was like. It was not a church where women sat in silence and there were no clear established leaders. It was not a church of harmony but a church of many different ideas. You can even continue reading and realize where the thought process for the Church of Christ came from because unfortunatly our church is not the church of the bible or the first century, Many of our ideas come from men and not from text. We read scripture the way we do because of Men who came before us who put forth these ideas. Now if you would like to continue some discussion please be my guest and i will continue to respond. I do not wish to destroy what you do, I only wish to show some that this process of thought is not furthering the Kingdom of God, It is only hindering it.
Quote
Share

David Rhoades
David Rhoades

September 12th, 2005, 11:38 pm #33

You state:

"Take for example the Septuigent. The Israelites fully accepted that version except for a few radical groups"


Sorry scholar, you need to go back to school;

" The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Old Testament. Remember, it was the Massoretic Old Testament Text which Jesus quoted when he walked the earth. And, it was the Massoretic Old Testament Text that has been verified.

Yet, some 'modern textual critics' use the Greek Septuagint to determine the wording of 'new versions'. Instead of using the proven Hebrew Massoretic Old Testament Text, some translators admitted they used Origin's Septuagint. For instance; the NIV translators said they used the Old Testament Text that was: "standardized early in the third century by Origin" [S3P537].

"Thus, we see that Origin was a key participant in the corruption of God's Word."


And no, Jesus never quoted from the Septuagint.

http://www.concernedmembers.com/spiritu ... tion.htm#7

=============================================

You state:

"It was actually translated from Latin since that was the text of the Time when the KJV was created"


Sorry scholar, The King James Bible was never trnaslated from Latin.

The Old Testament came from the Massoretic Old Testament Text, and New Testament came from the Traditional Majority Greek Text.

http://www.concernedmembers.com/spiritu ... tion.htm#5


Sorry scholar, you failed.

Your lies and deceptions will be countered here with your every step you take. You will be seen for who you really are.
Quote
Share

ChristianScholar
ChristianScholar

September 13th, 2005, 12:29 am #34

Unfortunatly you are wrong

When The KJV was originally created it used the latin text, for the NT, because that was the bible that was used and they also used the Greek, The issue is not over what bible was used its the fact that they made a translation that could be read by the masses which as you may know the church in rome rejected. Just as you reject all versions but the KJV and your right Jesus did not speak out of the Septuigent thatsa because he spoke Aramaic. It does not make it less valid, The Septuigent was just as valid as the Hebrew OT considering it was translated by the Jews. You being a christian really have no authority over the OT considering the OT we have came from the Jews so you cannot be an expert. But this not the issue. The issue is how you deny the fact that your way is not the only way. When jesus said the way is short and narrow he did not mean that only group of christians would make it, He meant that many would not believe or follow his teachings. He did not mean only CofC would go to heaven. Thats the real issue not some petty argument over Bible Translation
Quote
Share

kent
kent

September 13th, 2005, 12:53 am #35

Permission? Authors may quote very brief passages from books, periodicals, or any other media as long as they give full credit for the source. It's called "fair use" in the publishing industry, and it's quite legal (surely you remember doing term papers in high school or college and citing sources for your quotes). I quoted a LINE from one of your profane posts at the Ex-Church of Christ web site and gave you FULL credit for it. I also cited some of your colorful phrases from the Concerned Members web site and gave you FULL credit for the source.

BTW, I noticed that in order to register at the Ex-C of C site, each person must electronically "sign" a statement (push the "I accept" button) to the degree that s/he will not use abusive language or behave in an uncivil manner; if reported, violators will have their IP addresses reviewed, and their access to that site could be permanently terminated. You're a persistent violator, so I don't need to tell you to tread lightly there as well as here. That's not a threat, that's a PROMISE.

And I'd also be most careful about slinging around words like "disturbed" when you so freely use profanity/vulgarity like you're addicted to it. There's addiction to drugs, addiction to sex, addiction to pornography, etc. You, my friend, are addicted to profanity/vulgarity and you are in dire need of spiritual HELP.

Heed Matt. 5:22 (KJV) and turn away from this bane before it completely eats you up.

But maybe a tiny bit of healing has begun: you didn't use one profane/vulgar word in your response here; the anger and hatred are still there, however, which you need to purge as well.
i'm not afraid over on that site, many say a lot of things there you might find offensive, but the moderator over there understands free speech
Quote
Share

PPB
PPB

September 13th, 2005, 1:42 am #36

The point of my critisism is not to say that KJV is an invalid version of the Bible. In no way is that bible evil or wrong. I take offense to someone claiming the NIV is some sort of bible from Satin and that it serves no purpose. It was never intended that biblical translations be perfect. Take for example the Septuigent. The Israelites fully accepted that version except for a few radical groups. If we are actually going to claim that there is one true translation then we must go back to the Greek text, the tradtional greek text because there are words that are impossible to translate to english correctly. The greek was translated to English to make it accessable for all. It was actually translated from Latin since that was the text of the Time when the KJV was created. No one on earth speaks old english any longer so we again updated the bible so that it would be accessable to everyone. Its not a matter of accuracy, because it is impossible to be completely accurate in any text. Even the greek texts may not be accurate because of the passing down of the letters over time since the finalized Canon was not astablished until the 4th century. No one is saying that the KJV is invalid, im saying that it is outdated. In respose to your other post, you have provided no rebuttle to my other accusations. I do not understand how you are so sharply critisizing someone who used profane language when your language is just as dangerous. I believe that James said something about the Tongue and how it can lead the entire body astray. You come on this website and write words of slander about members of a congregation and yet you claim that the one who says a few swear words should be prayed over? I think we all need to ccheck our own language before we critisize. I do not hate any of you on this site, I am just afraid. Im afraid that this type of christianity. This closeminded christianity will drive away people from a church that is already dying. Its rather reminicent of the Catholic Churches response to Protestantism. Your thought process is now the minority for church of christ. The common church goer no longer speaks as you do, we have better ideas of the early church than we used to and we understand that many of our preconcieved notions were wrong. If you want more information about the first century church read The Story of Christianity by Justo Gonzales. This portrays a perfect picture of what the early church really was like. It was not a church where women sat in silence and there were no clear established leaders. It was not a church of harmony but a church of many different ideas. You can even continue reading and realize where the thought process for the Church of Christ came from because unfortunatly our church is not the church of the bible or the first century, Many of our ideas come from men and not from text. We read scripture the way we do because of Men who came before us who put forth these ideas. Now if you would like to continue some discussion please be my guest and i will continue to respond. I do not wish to destroy what you do, I only wish to show some that this process of thought is not furthering the Kingdom of God, It is only hindering it.
ChristianScholar -

Who has been teaching you this false history? Please do NOT tell me it is a college professor, for he/she should be booted from their job. Your facts are inaccurate and Mr. Gonzales book is NOT the definitive history book. For goodness sakes...History 101 starts here:

You might want to check your history of the first church again. There are plenty of books and reference materials out there with letters from the 1st Church elders and other citizens about the early church and their beliefs/behavior.

Take your comment on women in the early Church. It is extremely inaccurate. It is WELL KNOWN that women in the early church did NOT speak up during the worship time nor did they hold any authority over the Christian men. This has long been established by historians (real ones) and written about in letters passed between the early church Elders. Christians today are very naive about women and religion in the 1st Century. Did you know that majority of new converts were from pagan religions? If so, why don't you study up on the pagan religions of that time. Guess what you will find out? Yep, most of them were ran by FEMALE PRIESTS. In fact, one of the first heretical movements was started by women. GASP!!!!???? So Paul wasn't talking to a bunch of repressed women but women that were used to leading religious ceremonies. SHOCK!!!! So guess what? The old "it wasn't meant for women today" just doesn't work.

And guess what! The Churches were VERY, VERY, VERY concerned with keeping to the ONE TRUTH. Nope, not different styles or thoughts but ONE TRUTH. They wrote letters back and forth to make sure they were on the same page. Christian's travelling to another city carried letters from their church Elders verifying they were a true Christian. They remained steadfast for several hundred years until heretics like Augustine and others began making up their own rules. So, again your facts are very wrong.

I am shocked at your conclusions as I did not realize that our members were so unaware of the history of the Church. Sad...

I beg you to read up on some of the letters from the Church Elders (1st and 2nd centuries). You will find a REMARKABLE likeness to the c of C.

Oh, and guess what else? The early churches had copies of the Apostles' letters that the church Elders read and re-read on Sundays and discussed over and over again. These letters were later found and turned into a book. Can you guess which one? Amazingly enough, the letters of the early elders are WORD FOR WORD translations of the scrolls found in the Dead Sea caves. Hmm..imagine that?

There is so much more I could tell you about the early Church which would make you run far and fast from a group like Madison. But since you seemed to have closed your mind to the truth, why don't you check out some of the early letters from the Elders. David Bercot has a dictionary that will start you on your way to finding out who the early church Elders were and where to look for their letters/apologies/etc.

Good luck and hope you enjoy reading their letters as much as I do.

Quote
Share

PPB
PPB

September 13th, 2005, 3:04 am #37

Unfortunatly you are wrong

When The KJV was originally created it used the latin text, for the NT, because that was the bible that was used and they also used the Greek, The issue is not over what bible was used its the fact that they made a translation that could be read by the masses which as you may know the church in rome rejected. Just as you reject all versions but the KJV and your right Jesus did not speak out of the Septuigent thatsa because he spoke Aramaic. It does not make it less valid, The Septuigent was just as valid as the Hebrew OT considering it was translated by the Jews. You being a christian really have no authority over the OT considering the OT we have came from the Jews so you cannot be an expert. But this not the issue. The issue is how you deny the fact that your way is not the only way. When jesus said the way is short and narrow he did not mean that only group of christians would make it, He meant that many would not believe or follow his teachings. He did not mean only CofC would go to heaven. Thats the real issue not some petty argument over Bible Translation
ChristianScholar -

Actually, the KJV only relied on some of the prior Latin text but relied more heavily on the Tyndale's translation or the Byzantium text which was Greek. "The New Testament writers wrote in Koine Greek, the language of the common man in the first century A.D. A major step in the development of the English Bible was Tyndale's translation of the New Testament published in 1526 and portions of the Old Testament published later. Tyndale's version was significant because it was translated from a newly published Greek New Testament rather than from the Vulgate."

Tyndale used a Greek text for his translation. The first published Greek New Testament appeared in the year 1516. It was edited by Erasmus, a Dutch scholar. Erasmus had at his disposal no more than six Greek manuscripts (we have thousands at our disposal today). These manuscripts were part of what is called the Byzantine text family.

Erasmus' Greek text was reworked and reprinted by others including Robert Estienne who divided the text into verses. Theodore Beza then built upon Estienne's work, and his Greek text provided one of the major foundations for the King James Bible. The term Textus Receptus, or Received Text, came from a blurb in another Greek text produced in the early seventeenth century by the Elzevir brothers."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Just for the record...Did you read Ephesians 4? I believe it should answer your question on why we believe only a member of Christ's church will enter the Kingdom:

1] I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, [2] With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; [3] Endeavouring to keep the UNITY of the Spirit in the bond of peace. [4] [There is] ONE body, and ONE Spirit, even as ye are called in ONE hope of your calling; [5] ONE Lord, ONE faith, ONE baptism, [6] ONE God and Father of all, ONE [is] above all, and through all, and in you all.

[13] Till we all come in the UNITY of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: [14] That we [henceforth] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; [15] But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, [even] Christ: [16] From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

[23] And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; [24] And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. [25] Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. [26] Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: [27] Neither give place to the devil. [28] Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with [his] hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth. [29] Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. [30] And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. [31] Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: [32] And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. (Eph 4:1-32 KJV)

What about ALL of the verses? The ones on Unity and One body, One faith, One baptism? That we are not to listen to deception? That we are not to give place to the Devil? As much as he talks about being kind, gentle and peaceful...he also talks about standing fast and in the One faith. Not many faiths, several faiths, etc...ONE.

Unity of faith cannot happen with different beliefs and baptisms. It is not possible. Division is the opposite of Unity.

If we are not to listen to deception or give the Devil a footing, how are we to stop it? By being quiet? Ignoring the false teachings? Allowing division?

Are you asking us to obey only part of Ephesians 4 - the easy, sweet part and ignore the obligations we must bare?






Quote
Share

ChristianScholar
ChristianScholar

September 13th, 2005, 5:55 am #38

ChristianScholar -

Who has been teaching you this false history? Please do NOT tell me it is a college professor, for he/she should be booted from their job. Your facts are inaccurate and Mr. Gonzales book is NOT the definitive history book. For goodness sakes...History 101 starts here:

You might want to check your history of the first church again. There are plenty of books and reference materials out there with letters from the 1st Church elders and other citizens about the early church and their beliefs/behavior.

Take your comment on women in the early Church. It is extremely inaccurate. It is WELL KNOWN that women in the early church did NOT speak up during the worship time nor did they hold any authority over the Christian men. This has long been established by historians (real ones) and written about in letters passed between the early church Elders. Christians today are very naive about women and religion in the 1st Century. Did you know that majority of new converts were from pagan religions? If so, why don't you study up on the pagan religions of that time. Guess what you will find out? Yep, most of them were ran by FEMALE PRIESTS. In fact, one of the first heretical movements was started by women. GASP!!!!???? So Paul wasn't talking to a bunch of repressed women but women that were used to leading religious ceremonies. SHOCK!!!! So guess what? The old "it wasn't meant for women today" just doesn't work.

And guess what! The Churches were VERY, VERY, VERY concerned with keeping to the ONE TRUTH. Nope, not different styles or thoughts but ONE TRUTH. They wrote letters back and forth to make sure they were on the same page. Christian's travelling to another city carried letters from their church Elders verifying they were a true Christian. They remained steadfast for several hundred years until heretics like Augustine and others began making up their own rules. So, again your facts are very wrong.

I am shocked at your conclusions as I did not realize that our members were so unaware of the history of the Church. Sad...

I beg you to read up on some of the letters from the Church Elders (1st and 2nd centuries). You will find a REMARKABLE likeness to the c of C.

Oh, and guess what else? The early churches had copies of the Apostles' letters that the church Elders read and re-read on Sundays and discussed over and over again. These letters were later found and turned into a book. Can you guess which one? Amazingly enough, the letters of the early elders are WORD FOR WORD translations of the scrolls found in the Dead Sea caves. Hmm..imagine that?

There is so much more I could tell you about the early Church which would make you run far and fast from a group like Madison. But since you seemed to have closed your mind to the truth, why don't you check out some of the early letters from the Elders. David Bercot has a dictionary that will start you on your way to finding out who the early church Elders were and where to look for their letters/apologies/etc.

Good luck and hope you enjoy reading their letters as much as I do.
Funny how whenever anyone decided to quote a book that may dispute what you say it becomes wrong or not accurate enough for you liking. Actually Gonzalez is the leading authority on Church History. HIs book is the best selling Church History book, and is used in most collegiate level history classes. First off its interesting you say that Women remained Silent and you have no facts to back that up in the original church. Actually The women were very involved, There were deaconesses in churches and paul thanks women for thier leadership in the church. Thats interesting though if they remain silent and subserviant at all times how do women become leaders?? Hmmm interesting. Unfortunatly again for you your wrong. The churches were very split and i dont even need a history book for this one. Just look at the the epistles of Paul. Every letter is to a church trying to get it back to what Paul taught originally because of the vast differences in teachings. When he speaks of false prophets he is not talking about the 21st century he is talking about Judiazers of the 1st Century, but im sure you knew that huh. Funny again that you say the apostolic fathers were very much like CofC, which again is far from the truth. If they were why were most Bishops of the city the belonged to? Most worried more about being Martyered for thier faith than they did over instruments in the church as we waste our time with. How come we have centered our attention on the sermon when the true focus of service was the Taking of bread and wine? How come we also believe that the Eucherist is only a memorial when the original apostolic fathers believed that Jesus was inherenently present in the bread and wine also known as Transubstantiation which we deny? What fathers do you know that were like CofC because obviously they were not that influential. Im sorry CofC is not the only church that will enter the kingdom of heaven. The one faith you speak of is not one faith in CofC its one faith in Jesus and one church is the church of believers. Not the church of Christ. We are believers of Jesus and that is the one faith. Know what is even better is you claim that the Dead Sea Scrolls have something to do with NT letters when in actuality that is so far from the truth. The Dead Sea Scrolls were written by the Asines that had fled Jeruselem because they did not want to become part of the Roman Culture. The Scrolls contained comentary on that and the Hebrew bible, which is the OT and some of the Apocrypha, Not a single letter of Paul or from a church that Paul had set up. If you want to get on here and tell me how wrong I am you better check your facts i will even link you to a site that has the entire Dead Sea Scrolls http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/deadsea.scr ... brary.html. If you find a letter from an elder in these let me know. I am very interested to see where you got your information. You can continue to pick and chose which parts of my messages you respond to but when you are ready to get into the real breadth of what im saying you can respond. Stop picking the petty issues and speak about important issues such as how our "church" is corrupting christianity and sending many away from the faith when we are called to welcome those in with open arms. We can debate christian history all day and i can promise you that even though you claim to have some knowledge if you continue with the line of thinking you had in the last post i will have a rebuttle for whatever you say and i promise if anyone in here would be willing to an objective study i would be proven right, But im sure you have some more things to say that are probably not the truth. I am a History/Biblical Studies Scholar. I Have taken basic world history classes and specialized world history classes along with Survey Church History Classes and Specialized Church History Classes. Trust me I know my material and if you want to continue this debate we can, but i think the real issue is why the American Body of believers is dying. It is not the fault of Culture but our own faults and until we examine ourselves and start to deny these arrogant thoughts that we are the only right way and that we have had some devine intervention that has given us the ability to accurately decipher the mysteries of the NT the church will continue to shrink
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

September 13th, 2005, 1:48 pm #39

i'm not afraid over on that site, many say a lot of things there you might find offensive, but the moderator over there understands free speech
So if pictures could be posted at the Ex-C of C site and someone posted the blasphemous photo of a cross immersed in a jar of urine (it received high acclaim from the artistic world), then no one would object there. It would be a form of "free speech" -- free expression. If that's true, and if the moderator there allows all kinds of abusive language ("free speech"), then the statement to register there is false and totally meaningless.

Yes, many over there do use quite a lot of "strong language." There's even a thread that deals with cursing. Surprisingly, many of the posters believe that there's nothing wrong with using profanity, vulgarity, obscene language, for God surely will not hold them accountable for their right to "free speech."

The Ex-C of C site states that one does not need to be a Christian to post there. I can believe that. The New Testament tells the Christian not to be conformed to this world (Romans 12:2 KJV), which means not to behave and act like the rest of the non-Christian folks in the world, who curse and use profanity/vulgarity, etc. The Christian life is not governed by "free speech" but by the commandments of Christ. The Christian is more concerned with pleasing Christ and fulfilling those commandments rather than being "one of the boys" by being adept at cursing and swearing.

If the Ex-C of C site allows and even condones profanity/vulgarity, then it has become a friend of the world, for the world surely is adept at cursing and swearing. James 4:4 (KJV) states that the friend of the world is the enemy of God.

So you just continue to enjoy your "free speech" at Ex-C of C. That site has already shown itself for what it is.
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

September 13th, 2005, 2:15 pm #40

Funny how whenever anyone decided to quote a book that may dispute what you say it becomes wrong or not accurate enough for you liking. Actually Gonzalez is the leading authority on Church History. HIs book is the best selling Church History book, and is used in most collegiate level history classes. First off its interesting you say that Women remained Silent and you have no facts to back that up in the original church. Actually The women were very involved, There were deaconesses in churches and paul thanks women for thier leadership in the church. Thats interesting though if they remain silent and subserviant at all times how do women become leaders?? Hmmm interesting. Unfortunatly again for you your wrong. The churches were very split and i dont even need a history book for this one. Just look at the the epistles of Paul. Every letter is to a church trying to get it back to what Paul taught originally because of the vast differences in teachings. When he speaks of false prophets he is not talking about the 21st century he is talking about Judiazers of the 1st Century, but im sure you knew that huh. Funny again that you say the apostolic fathers were very much like CofC, which again is far from the truth. If they were why were most Bishops of the city the belonged to? Most worried more about being Martyered for thier faith than they did over instruments in the church as we waste our time with. How come we have centered our attention on the sermon when the true focus of service was the Taking of bread and wine? How come we also believe that the Eucherist is only a memorial when the original apostolic fathers believed that Jesus was inherenently present in the bread and wine also known as Transubstantiation which we deny? What fathers do you know that were like CofC because obviously they were not that influential. Im sorry CofC is not the only church that will enter the kingdom of heaven. The one faith you speak of is not one faith in CofC its one faith in Jesus and one church is the church of believers. Not the church of Christ. We are believers of Jesus and that is the one faith. Know what is even better is you claim that the Dead Sea Scrolls have something to do with NT letters when in actuality that is so far from the truth. The Dead Sea Scrolls were written by the Asines that had fled Jeruselem because they did not want to become part of the Roman Culture. The Scrolls contained comentary on that and the Hebrew bible, which is the OT and some of the Apocrypha, Not a single letter of Paul or from a church that Paul had set up. If you want to get on here and tell me how wrong I am you better check your facts i will even link you to a site that has the entire Dead Sea Scrolls http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/deadsea.scr ... brary.html. If you find a letter from an elder in these let me know. I am very interested to see where you got your information. You can continue to pick and chose which parts of my messages you respond to but when you are ready to get into the real breadth of what im saying you can respond. Stop picking the petty issues and speak about important issues such as how our "church" is corrupting christianity and sending many away from the faith when we are called to welcome those in with open arms. We can debate christian history all day and i can promise you that even though you claim to have some knowledge if you continue with the line of thinking you had in the last post i will have a rebuttle for whatever you say and i promise if anyone in here would be willing to an objective study i would be proven right, But im sure you have some more things to say that are probably not the truth. I am a History/Biblical Studies Scholar. I Have taken basic world history classes and specialized world history classes along with Survey Church History Classes and Specialized Church History Classes. Trust me I know my material and if you want to continue this debate we can, but i think the real issue is why the American Body of believers is dying. It is not the fault of Culture but our own faults and until we examine ourselves and start to deny these arrogant thoughts that we are the only right way and that we have had some devine intervention that has given us the ability to accurately decipher the mysteries of the NT the church will continue to shrink
Christian Scholar has given much rhetoric and cited his/her credentials as being a Bible scholar. S/he started out by saying that the KJV translation of the New Testament is “far from accurate.” Now s/he states, "The point of my critisism is not to say that KJV is an invalid version of the Bible." If a version is "far from accurate," it must be inaccurate, which means that it is invalid and cannot be trusted. If the KJV NT doesn't fall right in line with the Greek, it is invalid and cannot be trusted. So which is it, Scholar?

Through all of Scholar's rhetoric, s/he still hasn't presented 12 or more New Testament verses which prove how blatantly "inaccurate" the KJV NT is when compared with the Greek.


Quote
Share