Mr. Dispy wrote:
So why do we APPOINT elders and deacons, when God has provided his Holy Spirit to guide us?

Huh?

Perhaps the Holy Spirit will alight upon the perspective candidate in the form of a dove?

DisplacedMaritimer (Bert) wrote:
John UK,
Why are you so hung up on Priests?

So .............. it's NOT *John UK* who is "hung up" on priests; rather, it is the RC church which has badly distorted the entire NT conception of the "priesthood of believers."

1Pet 2:9
"But ye [are] a chosen generation, A ROYAL PRIESTHOOD, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light"

Mr. Dispy wrote:
A] You can be a Christian and accept the fundamentals of the faith AND STILL BE MISTAKEN about eschatology.

B] There are many misinformed believers who experience unnecessary anxiety thinking that they will go through the horrors of the day of the Lord.

C] Then there are those who deny the millenium altogether.

D] ... then I think separation is wise

B] Such were those poor, unfortunate, "misinformed" believers/martyrs of the early Church. Guess they were unaware that they shouldn't have experienced any of the horrors of persecution and brutality under the Caesars of Rome!

C] That be me!!!

Reading Rev 20 in a literal sense is a BIG mistake. The whole church KNEW that FACT prior to J.N. Darby and his cabal inventing present-day pre-trib/pre-mill Dizzy Spin Sationalism.

Mr. Dispy wrote:
What is unbiblical is the fact that there are denominations. That does not mean we should have fellowship with those who teach wrong doctrine regarding Jesus

John UK wrote:
{{{RE: http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/rootevil.htm..}}}

What an excellent scholarly, biblically accurate and detailed argument for the CORRECT translation of our text in hand. Magnificent!

Come on DJ, have a read, and learn something today about how good the translators of the King James Bible really were. Their product was nothing short of incredible, which no modern scholar can even get close to

And please don't be embarassed about being wrong, but in humility, accept the truth and make more progress in one day than you've made in ten years. I'm not kidding, eh?

_____

John UK wrote:
... New Age tendencies of the NASB ...

John UK wrote:
But DJ

I never said that the KJV is not perfect

I said "I've never said that the KJV is a perfect translation"

But that doesn't mean I don't believe the KJV is a perfect translation, does it?

I said "it is without error", and I'm right about that, if you understand what error means

There is a world of difference between a translation which is perfect, a translation which has no errors, and a translation which is translated from a text which has been doctored for the purpose of leading men into false doctrines such as unitarianism

And you have the bold as brass nerve to promote and encourage folks to read the NASB, which is one of the worst "Bibles" ever invented by modern man TO PROMOTE THE NEW AGE ETHIC AND DOCTRINES

Be at peace DJ and get a hold of a King James Bible and BELIEVE YOU HAVE THE WORD OF GOD IN YOUR HAND. It is revolutionary, and will TRANSFORM your life, because you will start to apply God's word with confidence!

Amen!

Are you sure that you don't work with Winston Smith in the "Ministry of Truth"? [ George Orwell's '1984' ]
Talk about doublespeak!

_

The NASB "promotes the New Age ethic and doctrines"???
HA! ... that's patent nonsense.

John UK wrote:
Well Mike, you know a tree has a tap root, the big one, with many smaller roots coming off it?
Money/mammon/power/authority is the tap root from which all other roots come.

Bottom line: the KJV rendition of 1 Tim 6:10 is inferior and needed improving upon. The love of money is the root of ALL KINDS of evil; but not the root of ***ALL*** evil.

_____

John UK wrote:
#4 I've never said the KJV is a PERFECT translation.

#5 The document is called "The Translators to the Reader" and is an excellent document which I own and have read from first word to last. It is this document which thoroughly endeared me to the translation team, a group of humble Christian men whose intention was to make a better Bible than the previous translations available. This they accomplished, producing the most amazing Bible in English this world has ever seen. Unsurpassed with no equal, and WITH NO ERRORS

[ ]

John UK --
We BOTH know what "money" means and there is no "deeper meaning" given the context! You KJVOs will just NOT be honest about your idolatry. The KJV is NOT God, nor is it a perfect translation of the greek. Even the translators themselves admitted as much in their "Preface to the Readers."
Give it a read.

Another Jeff --
Sorry, but the word "money" spoken of in 1 Tim 6:10 is NOT the same as the word "mammon" found elsewhere in the Scriptures! Nice try, though.
__

Hidemi Willige wrote:
1Ti 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows

Can anyone honestly say that this is a good translation of the greek? Is the love of money REALLY the root of ***ALL*** evil? Or isn't it more accurate to have this verse translated from the greek rendered as:

"For the love of money is a root of all KINDS OF evil..." [NKJV]

"For the love of money is a root of all KINDS OF evil." [NIV]

"For the love of money is a root of all KINDS OF evils." [ESV]

"For the love of money is a root of all SORTS OF evil..." [NASB]

"For the love of money is a root of all KINDS OF evil..." [ASV]

_____

1 Tim 6:10 is one of those KJV verses which needed improvement and clarification. If the KJV were correct, then money -- being the root of ***ALL*** evil (according to the KJV) -- would be the root and motivation for all lying, all murder, all fornication, and etc.

Tony Lopez-Cisneros wrote:
God Bless You John UK. I Thank Almighty GOD That Some Who Post On This "Infiltrated" Sermonaudio Website (I Say "Infiltrated" Because Only "Jesuitized" Websites Would Dare To Call The Satanic 2nd/Post-2nd Century Arian-Alexandrian Manuscripts, Codex-"Vaticanus" & Codex-"Sinaticus" The ' Historic "Holy" Bible ') Still Have The TRUE Authorized Biblical-Literalist Discernment Of The TRUE Holy Spirit Of The One-&-Only Holy Triune-GOD (The Holy Triad [aka Holy Trinity] Of I John 5:7, Matthew 28:29, II Corinthians 13:14, Etc.)!

It Makes You Wonder What "Educated Fools" Like Some Who Post On This website (Hint: "djc49", "Jim Lincoln", Etc.) Would Say About Many Of Albrecht Durer's Wood-Carvings/Cuttings Showing Martin Luther "Flatulating" At The "Pope" And His "Proclamations" & "Canon Laws". . . . . . .

Hmmm? "nothing short of NASTY...quite vulgar...crude...ribald"?

What They Forgot To Say Was UNADULTERATED TRUTH ! ! ! ! ! !

Albrecht Durer NEVER made any such wood-carvings, paintings, or engravings of Martin Luther flatulating at the Pope.

Perhaps your imaginary friend "JV" (who goes on secret missions to hell) has been "talking to you" again, huh.

John UK wrote:
Does that mean you're not seconding the motion?
Awwww, DJ

John UK wrote:
Post of the month award nomination!

__________

*Michael Hranek* --
Sorry to hear of your loss.
I can empathize with you totally.
My mother passed away 4 years ago as a faithful Roman Catholic receiving Extreme Unction. I don't know (for certain) what her relationship was with the Lord; PERHAPS she came to be "born again" in her final days. That's my hope.

Mike wrote:
An eternal and necessary act?

An act whereby He is a ground of a second personal subsistence?

The procession is His personal property?

they put the third person in possession of the divine essence?

Sounds a bit like a mystery religion.

Maybe it's just gibberish

Maybe it's just that human language is much too weak a tool to express and communicate the complexities of THE DEEPEST object of investigation, namely, God Himself ... the NATURE of the Trinity.

Indeed, it is a HUGE mystery; a mystery which the elect will be looking into and contemplating for eternity even in their glorified state. It's an inexhaustible mystery.

So we finite humans shouldn't get all that "hung up" on words (such as *generation*) knowing that all the efforts of Church Councils and written Confessions, OF NECESSITY, must fall short in their attempts to define the undefinable.

Heresies, down through the centuries, have FORCED the Church to at least make a valliant effort to undertake such a task.

Biblicist wrote:
If you really are not djc49 (and I have my doubts) then let me ask you something. What have you written for my benefit that entitles you to say that you have been "trying to straighten out" my theology?

Your last 2 posts demonstrate sufficiently how poor your grasp is of the Bible and of theology and therefore I think I'll pass on any lessons from you!!
_______________________________

John UK

No good asking djc49 questions like that. He thinks that "reason" is enough to "flesh out" where the Scripture is silent! After all "reason" is superior to the Bible!!

Please cease and desist from posting anything about me.

Live up to your word that you are DONE with me.

Thanks.

John UK wrote:
Hi DJ

Say, if you're right, and these doctrines are not fully fleshed out in scripture (which is God's completed revelation to mankind), then why does mankind seek to flesh them out themselves? Is this not obnoxious to God? And a proof that man still wants to BE God? And why try to combat heresy with information that the Lord has not himself given?

All this heresy-hunting with half-baked ideas and doctrines just is not on, is it?

It is NOT obnoxious to God!

He WANTS us to use the reasoning abilities he endowed us with. Needless to say, this reasoning MUST be guided by and have its foundation upon the Scriptures. I do NOT advocate the use of bare, naked Reason to arrive at theology. Reason MUST be informed by Scripture!

You ask: "why does mankind seek to flesh them out themselves?"

Simple answer: Because faith seeks understanding.

And by thoroughly studying the WHOLE of Biblical revelation, believing men can arrive at theologies not FULLY dealt with by individual parts of the Bible. NOWHERE in the Scriptures do you find, for example, the definition for the Trinity. YET ... man can come to an understanding of the truth of God as triune by piecing together various scriptures ... using REASON.

Biblicist wrote:
Ha! DJC49 don't you feel even a little ashamed using a different moniker every time you feel like taking a shot at me?! I guess not!

I know one thing for certain: whoever posted under those monikers knows -- along with myself -- that you are prone to making quick, false accusations without proof.

_____

Back on point ...
It remains a FACT that the Bible does NOT fully flesh-out such deep doctrines as the NATURE of the Trinity and the hypostatic union of Christ. Scriptures point to and indicate such truths and realities, but they are NOT dealt with in any great depth in Scripture. If such things were so obvious from Scripture, there would be no argument whatsoever from detractors that the Trinity, for example, even exists let alone the very NATURE of said triune Godhead!
_____

And since when have I ever declared having a superior faith??? I suppose that sort of accusation is just more nonsense from a false accuser who CLAIMS to be nothing but Biblical ... and truthful.

Ha!

Those who have no part in the "first resurrection" have NOT been born again; never had eternal life; have been DEAD only to face the second death at their BODILY resurrection on the LAST DAY.

And as Rev 20:6 proclaims:
"Blessed and holy IS HE that HATH part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, BUT THEY SHALL BE PRIESTS of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years."

Are you NOW not a priest of God and of Christ, *Mr. Dispy*? Do you NOW not enjoy all the benefits "in the heavenlies" including reigning with Christ over sin and death because of your union with Him in and by His resurrection?

Give Ephesians 1 a REAL good and thorough read! And while you're at it, go on to read and digest Eph 2. These two chapters of Scripture should clear out the Dizzy Spin Sational cobwebs as far as the indicitive of "who you are in Christ" and what it means to be united with Him -- NOW -- in His resurrection, i.e., "having a part in the FIRST resurrection" viz. Rev 20:5,6.

Mr. Dispy wrote:
And the spiritualizing interpretation continues, I'm sure, in this passage, since the Holy Spirit (according to amills) has no idea what he's talking about when he refers to the 'first resurrection' (which implies at least one other, separate resurrection - but maybe his grammar is poor, too).
Rev. 20:4-6
... But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years