A Peculiar Kind of Gospel

[Sozo]

Originally posted by godrulz

Which translation uses 'offence'?

KJV, NASB, ASV, YLT, DT, among others (you really should invest in a Bible, and please don't tell me you have an NIV... I said "a Bible")

The Rock is either our foundation or that which people break themselves on through rejection of Him.

Wow... you continue to amaze me with your distortions. The Rock is indeed our foundation, but He is also that which breaks us.

"And he who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust."


Jesus is a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense because He requires that we set aside our own righteousness for His. The Jews put their confidence in the Law to please God, and because of their rejection of Christ, He became the very cornerstone.

"The stone which the builders rejected, This became the chief corner stone"

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Sozo

KJV, NASB, ASV, YLT, DT, among others (you really should invest in a Bible, and please don't tell me you have an NIV... I said "a Bible") Wow... you continue to amaze me with your distortions. The Rock is indeed our foundation, but He is also that which breaks us.

"And he who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust."


Jesus is a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense because He requires that we set aside our own righteousness for His. The Jews put their confidence in the Law to please God, and because of their rejection of Christ, He became the very cornerstone.

"The stone which the builders rejected, This became the chief corner stone"

I fully agree with your observations. The NIV captures the same essence as the other translations on this point (see a thesaurus or Greek dictionary).

I Peter 2:8 KJV "And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient..."

NIV "A stone that causes men to stumble, and a rock that makes them fall. They stumble because they disobey the message..."

Greek interlinear " ...and a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence (from the same root as 'scandalous'= Gk.), who stumble at the word disobeying..."

offence...In the NT it is always used metaphorically (Vine)...'skandalon'...hindrance, arouses prejudice, causes them to fall away...

stumble ('proskopto')...strike against, used physically (Jn. 11:9,10) or metaphorically (Rom. 9:23; I Peter 2:8)...of Israel in regard to Christ, whose person, teaching, and atoning death, and the Gospel relating thereto, were contrary to all their ideas as to the means of righteousness in God."

See, you like Vine's when he agrees with you, and I like it when I agree with you. Quit straining at translational gnats. I was not familiar with 'offence' (KJV) and readily accepted the verse given.

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by godrulz

See, you like Vine's when he agrees with you, and I like it when I agree with you.

What? Do you honestly think that I go to other sources to argue my points? I may have done that 15 years ago, and I occasionally use them to confirm something if someone like you says I'm wrong about something, but I stick to the bible for my arguments, and my understanding comes out of relationship with God, and not with theologins.

 

[godrulz]

As I pointed out, I did not go to Shank or Vine until I wrote what I thought the Bible said. I am not an expert on math or medicine, so I think on my own and go to others who have more expertise. I cannot master theology despite reading English Bibles for years. I would consider it arrogant and superspiritual to just read the Bible given the issues with translation and original languages and cultures that are removed from the 20th century North American mindset. Study to show yourself approved. Paul called for his books before death. There is nothing unspiritual about using Bible tools to rightly divide the Word. We should take human opinions with a grain of salt and not be unduly influenced by them.

You cannot defend the correct translation of John 1:1 to a JW who has a NWT that distorts the meaning. This verse alone means there salvation or damnation. The only way to support 'the Word was God' vs 'the Word was a god' apart from other verses, is to know some first year Greek grammar. It is well worth the research in order to see a JW set free from deception. Merely quoting the KJV will not change their mind on the correct translation. Explaining the grammatical intricacies can and will be used by the Spirit to set them free.

Many people claim to just use the Bible and their relationship with God for understanding. This can lead to many religions, cults, denominations, winds of doctrine, etc. We all claim the same Word, Spirit, and relationship with God, yet honestly interpret specific verses differently. Some commentators will agree with us, some will not. Those with a Calvinistic bias will read Scripture a certain way. Those with an anti-charismatic bent will interpret I Cor. 13 as cessation of gifts, while a Pentecostal does not see that at all.

My desire is the same as yours. What does the text say in context? What is the application for our lives?

Tools can be a help. They do not have to be a hindrance. They must be used properly. It is good to prayerfully search the Scriptures, and then go to aids as confirmation or correction when needed.

 

[Sozo]

godrulz... YOU have lost your mind!

READ MY LIPS...

I do not need anything beyond the the bible and the ministry of the Holy Spirit to be able to preach the gospel to anyone!

Please stop proving yourself the fool.

I am not an expert on math or medicine, so I think on my own and go to others who have more expertise.

That's the difference between you and I... I have the Spirit of God and you have Hank Hannegraff.

I cannot master theology despite reading English Bibles for years.

How very, very, sad for you

I would consider it arrogant and superspiritual to just read the Bible given the issues with translation and original languages and cultures that are removed from the 20th century North American mindset.

You are a pathetic :loser:

Study to show yourself approved.

I have a bible, thank you.

Paul called for his books before death.

What freakin' books do you think he was speaking of? :doh:

We should take human opinions with a grain of salt and not be unduly influenced by them.

We should take yours and bury them in a septic tank.

You cannot defend the correct translation of John 1:1 to a JW who has a NWT that distorts the meaning.

BULL*... well, you know.

The only way to support 'the Word was God' vs 'the Word was a god' apart from other verses, is to know some first year Greek grammar.

More BULL*... well, you know.

It is well worth the research in order to see a JW set free from deception. Merely quoting the KJV will not change their mind on the correct translation. Explaining the grammatical intricacies can and will be used by the Spirit to set them free.

I have shared the gospel with plenty of JW's and never mentioned one thing that they believe, and they went away arguing among themselves perplexed by what I said.

Many people claim to just use the Bible and their relationship with God for understanding. This can lead to many religions, cults, denominations, winds of doctrine, etc.

That may be true if they do not know Christ, and YOU are a perfect example of listening to a plethera of false teachers who have crept into the church, and written books to tickle your ears.

I feel sorry for you. I really do.

 

[godrulz]

Well, I guess you missed my simple point.

For the record, I do not read Hank H. (he has had some financial controversy).

I have the Bible and Spirit. I have shared Scripture in the power of the Spirit and seen conviction come on them. With the more informed ones, it took reasoning from the Scriptures and other sources to show their error. They have misquoted Christian scholars to support their views. By quoting them in context, we fulfill our mandate to defend and proclaim the faith. Apologetics is a legitimate discipline when dealing with those who mistranslate and distort the Bible. A godly intellect like Paul had was used by God. There is no premium on ignorance and misinformation. Why do you think the Bible believing Christians end up as JWs and Mormons? We need to know what we believe and why we believe it.

Sooner or later, you will come to a wrong interpretation based on a mistranslation of a word or text. Would you rather perpetuate error or find out the correct translation and interpretation?

I can preach the Gospel with the Bible and the Spirit alone. To debate Calvinism, Arminianism, foreknowledge, etc. may require a study of doctrinal development, Scripture, and Hebrew/Greek grammar. Why is that so unspiritual? Paul was used because he of his education and background. The Holy Spirit did not empty his brain and use him as a sock puppet.

The Bible and Spirit are our main tools. However, to effectively reach a Muslim, we need some working knowledge of what they believe. A JW and Mormon uses the Bible, but they define terms differently. You can quote a verse and they will nod that they believe it. Meanwhile, the JW thinks Jesus is Michael the Archangel and the Mormon thinks there are many gods, based on the same Bible. Going beyond the text when necessary is good proclamation and defense of the Gospel. It is not undermining the necessity and authority of Scripture and the Spirit.

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by godrulz

Well, I guess you missed my simple point.

Oh... I heard you, loud and clear.

For the record, I do not read Hank H. (he has had some financial controversy).

It was simply the first name to come to mind. Would you prefer I said Winkie Pratney?

The Bible and Spirit are our main tools. However, to effectively reach a Muslim, we need some working knowledge of what they believe.

No... you don't. As someone once said "We need to know what we believe and why we believe it."

A JW and Mormon uses the Bible, but they define terms differently. You can quote a verse and they will nod that they believe it. Meanwhile, the JW thinks Jesus is Michael the Archangel and the Mormon thinks there are many gods, based on the same Bible.

If you are reasoning with cultists about their beliefs, then you are not preaching the gospel.

 

[godrulz]

Are cultists not people whom Christ died for who need the truth to escape from the trap of the enemy? How many former cultists are now genuine Christians because someone loved them and reached out to them with the truth of Scripture in the power of the Spirit.

The best antidote to false teaching is proclaiming the truth of the Gospel. This is our responsibility and mandate. Do you only preach to those who have no religion?

I agree that if we know the genuine Christianity, we do not need to know all about the various counterfeits. However, we are able to communicate more effectively if we understand the semantical barriers involved.

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by godrulz

Are cultists not people whom Christ died for who need the truth to escape from the trap of the enemy? How many former cultists are now genuine Christians because someone loved them and reached out to them with the truth of Scripture in the power of the Spirit.

The best antidote to false teaching is proclaiming the truth of the Gospel. This is our responsibility and mandate. Do you only preach to those who have no religion?

Where in the heck (notice, I said "heck"), did that come from?

I said nothing to warrant that response.

I agree that if we know the genuine Christianity, we do not need to know all about the various counterfeits.

That's what I said.

 

[OMEGA]

Sozo,

PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH .

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Sozo

If you are reasoning with cultists about their beliefs, then you are not preaching the gospel.

Paul reasoned from Scripture with those in false religions. He went from their belief in the unknown god, for example, and preached Christ and Him crucified, risen from the dead.

I misunderstood your sentence as meaning that we should not preach truth to those in cults. I think part of it is exposing their lies and sources of their false doctrine.

2+2=4 Do you agree? (I am desperate to find something we can agree on

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by godrulz

Paul reasoned from Scripture with those in false religions.

Correct, and that is my point! He did not reason with them from their scriptures.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Sozo

Correct, and that is my point! He did not reason with them from their scriptures.

It also does not say when Paul got a haircut. Scripture gives us principles, but does not deal with every situation in the world. Paul was familiar with their beliefs and may have done things not explicitly recorded in Scripture. He was able to quote their pagan poets (and did so as recorded in Acts) and build Christian truth from that starting point.

Arguments from silence are weak.

When dealing with JWs or Mormons, we should use a sound Bible translation. However, I have familiarity with their writings to show where they differ from the biblical teaching. This is wise, effective soul winning. Joseph Smith taught the plurality of gods in the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Mr. Mormon. You claim to be Christian. Judeo-Christianity is strictly monotheistic. Smith taught polytheism. Here is what the oldest revelation says about the one true God. Your supposed new revelations contradict this, etc. etc.

There is a place for apologetics when dealing with an atheist. They do not accept the Bible as authoritative or the existence of God. Quoting Scripture at former famous atheist Anthony Flew did not lead him to theism. The evidence of intelligent design led him there. Now the Holy Spirit will use Scripture and biblical evidence to reveal Christ.

Romans talks about general revelation through creation. There is also special revelation in Christ and Scripture. IF the Holy Spirit will use creation to stir conscience, and if people were saved before the closing of the canon of Scripture, do you think God's creativity might be an example for us? The Gospel and Scripture is paramount. However, if a testimony of a changed life is read by someone to open their mind to consider Christianity and Scripture, is this not a rudimentary tool used by the Spirit (cf. gospel tracts that have resulted in steps toward Christ)?

 

[Sozo]

godrulz... your logic is beyond ALL reason, and the evidence of a mind that is void of the Spirit of God.

Those abundant missionary trips to remote areas of the world were filled with futility because of the ministers ignorance of anything but the gospel of Jesus Christ.

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek."

"For the word of the cross is to those who are perishing foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

"For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling. And my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God. "

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Sozo

godrulz... your logic is beyond ALL reason, and the evidence of a mind that is void of the Spirit of God.

Those abundant missionary trips to remote areas of the world were filled with futility because of the ministers ignorance of anything but the gospel of Jesus Christ.

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek."

"For the word of the cross is to those who are perishing foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

"For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling. And my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God. "

I absolutely agree with all those Scriptures. I have quoted and lived them many times.

There was a man in our city who used to stand on the street corner and quote Scripture and preach what sounded like the gospel. People thought he sounded like a brainwashed robot. He had no impact except to turn people off Christianity. When I talked to him to find out what he believed, it turns out he denied the Deity of Christ and thought he was one of the two witnesses in Revelation. He got a young girl pregnant who stood on the corner and quoted Scripture in a monotone voice with him. They read the Bible and sounded like they were preaching the Gospel. I could stand there and preach Christ and quote Scripture to no effect. We had to interact with other ideas to get the message home. He would agree with my Scriptures, while believing something diametrically opposed to what I understood.

So, I think you are being stubborn to think my logic is futile and I am void of the Spirit. I have preached Christ and the Word and sensed the anointing of God. I have also interacted with unbelievers without spouting Scripture verses like a cultist and talking about other things besides Christ. This dialogue opened the doors to preaching Christ. You are being difficult to not see my basic point. The former evangelical who ended up with mental illness and demonization standing on the street corner might appear to fit your criteria for preaching (on the surface). My common sense dialogue might not seem spiritual enough for you if that is the only part of the divine appointment you snapshot. Preaching Christ and the Gospel is not just standing on a street corner quoting verses.

I just do not get your nit picking over every little point. Can't you think beyond the surface and see the principles that every believer I know operates under and that is not contradicted by the methodology in Scripture? Don't proof text Paul and make it sound like he never talked about the weather or the clothes people wore before or during his Gospel preaching. Is it wrong to testify (Paul did) or to use an illustration in sharing the Gospel? Is it wrong to show why 'a god' is a damnable translation of Jn. 1:1?

Quit being a jerk!

 

[OMEGA]

I think that Godrulz is the last voice of Christian Soundness on this Forum .

 

[godrulz]

I think that Godrulz is the last voice of Christian Soundness on this Forum .

That is a hyperbole. It is also funny since you and I differ in our views. I try to be fair, informed, and balanced, and do get impatient with people who are dogmatic when they should not be. The goal is to speak the truth in love. We also need to be teachable to teach. In the end, most of us are sincere and desire to know God and truth. Sometimes we should be more supportive of each other's journey and less antagonistic.

 

[OMEGA]

Godrulz,

Even though my exegeses and eschatology are not the same as yours,

I know a good Christian Attitude and Heartfelt sincerity when I see it and you have it.

And that is what Jesus is looking for .

 

[godrulz]

Godrulz,

Even though my exegeses and eschatology are not the same as yours,

I know a good Christian Attitude and Heartfelt sincerity when I see it and you have it.

And that is what Jesus is looking for .

I appreciate your kind comment. I value character more than knowledge, but also love truth and hate error. It is easier for me to understand doctrine than it is to live a godly life pleasing to the Lord and a life of love for others. I trust we all are sincere, though sincerity does not create truth. Let us continue to seek to know Him in spirit and in truth and to love one another as we journey together.

The Moravian motto is helpful:

In essentials, unity

In non-essentials, diversity

In all things, love/charity.

Let us speak the truth in love...