Subj : Fear of Witnessing To : George Pope From : Newborn Date : Wed Oct 19 2005 01:02:00 Re: Fear of Witnessing By: George Pope to Newborn on Sun Oct 16 2005 02:29 pm > N> > Section 1 has been misinterpreted through the ages as "MAKE" disciples > N> > they want/like it or not!) when what it really means is "accept studen > N> > regardless of their ethnic origins" > N> > > N> And what makes your interpretation accurate in translation? I see you > N> expounding your version, but, don't see any evidence of your credentia > N> I accept the intrepretation of the majority scholars if you don't mind > > The clear context is there for anyone to understand in every legitimate(albe > somewhat inaccurate) translation! > The operative word is 'legitimate' and you clearly accept many different translations as valid even if they contridict themselves. God is NOT the author of confusion and their ARE corrupted texts and versions. You, however have made up your mind that only those that you agree with are valid. > Jesus himself never "MADE" disciples("students") and, in fact, would leave a > area where there weren't enough people spontaneously expressing interest in > teachings. Peter made it clear in his teachings, deriving from a > divinely-inspired vision, that one may not be prejudiced against non-Jews in > teaching the gospel. > > N> The Berean call was to 'search' the Scriptures daily NOT correct them. > > First you have to search the established Scripture to verify any claim to NE > scriptures! > And at what point do you define the ESTABLISHED Scriptures? We have had the completed authorized canon of Scriptures (Bible), both old and new testaments for over 2000 years now. It is a comparison of validity of changes that man had made to what the fathers have accepted as Scriptural truth. > Yuo do know that in Timothy, where it says, "all scripture is inspired" does > not say "all Scripture"(capitalized)? It says "omni scriptura"(ie. "all > things-written") so all "things-written"(the context is a time when written > documents were laboriously created over time, with much time for the Spirit > influence one (one just didn't commit one's self to writing unless it was wo > the value/cost of papyrus/etc.! What you are claiming is that ALL written records are inspired by the Holy Spirit. You know this isn't true. There are many scrolls that were corrupted and discarded by the scribes. Others were falsified by men and formed the basis for extra-biblical books that were never inspired by the Holy Spirit. > This is a far cry from claiming that all Stephen King's works are inspired, > although I'd still say they are worthy of instruction _for the believer_ (as > the beilever, with a believing teacher, will learn that certain > statements/ideas in King's books only have their value as a NEGATIVE > instruction (just like there are positive AND negative commandments & lesson > to be had in the Bible) > You are comparing secular works with the inspired Scriptures? > The Roman Church granted special canonical status to certain documents > circulating purporting to be God-inspired. . . > Of course they did, that doesn't make it so. The Catholoc Church also uses corrupted texts in their Bible. So? > Aesop's Fables have had a certain benefit to all mankind, too -- the Church > even usurped one of the pagan morals ("the gods help those who help > themselves", just translating it to "God helps those...") which is deemed pr > of God's acceptance of other Church precepts. > The Church is the body of believers and not some worldly organization. I think the Holy Spirit within is able to help us discern the truth. It simply amazes me how so many of your beliefs non-biblical. And you once accused me of near-blasphmay? Newborn Christianity is a personal relationship, not a religion --- þ Synchronet þ Origin: The Hard Drive Cafe - Montgomery Al USA - www.hdcbbs.net .