Cross Reference
New member
If to study to show yourself approved by God was completely understood to mean one is to study to learn His ways by the living Word, there would be no need for seminaries.
ECT A question from a Muslim
- Thread starter theophilus
- Start date
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Doubtful, for there is something to be gained by sitting under the instruction of those gifted to teach to facilitate the learning process. It also makes learning the Biblical languages much, much, easier. Not to mention the fellowship between like-minded in the classroom that fosters contention for the truth. Not all are accomplished autodidacts, e.g., Spurgeon. That said, some autodidacts just got things terribly wrong.
AMR
Last edited:
Whatever we learn in private study must be sanctioned in the assembly
theophilus
Well-known member
That would depend on the assembly.
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Many who have formally studied the ancient Biblical languages would disagree with you. Among that community the saying "If it is in Strong's it must be wrong" has much truth to it.
For Hebrew, you will want: HALOT.
For the Greek, you will want: BDAG. That said, if you have the older edition, BAGD, then you are probably just as safe, given some concerns about the newer edition.
Now, if you are really serious about the underlying languages of the Scripture, your library will include for the New Testament: BDAG, TDNT, NIDNTTE, TLNT, LN, and EDNT. For the Old Testament, you would need BDB, HALOT, NIDOTTE, TDOT, TLOT, TWOT, and DCH. (Just google these acronyms along with Greek or Hebrew added to each entry see their full names.)
AMR
Last edited:
Cross Reference
New member
Doubtful, for there is something to be gained by sitting under the instruction of those gifted to teach to facilitate the learning process. It also makes learning the Biblical languages much, much, easier. Not to mention the fellowship between like-minded in the classroom that fosters contention for the truth. Not all are accomplished autodidacts, e.g., Spurgeon. That said, some autodidacts just got things terribly wrong.
AMR
Of course. That is the way the Disciples learned. I would say that if the Holy Spirit was doing the teaching anywhere, He would be sufficient. . . as Jesus spoke He would be.
How many seminaries of different denominational stripes are in the land? Which one is the right one?
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Of course. We interpret in community of the saints, always seeking to follow the sound patterns of the teachings within Scripture by good and necessary consequence. Contrary to much that we find on this site and elsewhere, there is no such thing as the Lone Ranger, Just Me and My Bible, believer.
AMR
Last edited:
Doubtful, for there is something to be gained by sitting under the instruction of those gifted to teach to facilitate the learning process. It also makes learning the Biblical languages much, much, easier. Not to mention the fellowship between like-minded in the classroom that fosters contention for the truth. Not all are accomplished autodidacts, e.g., Spurgeon. That said, some autodidacts just got things terribly wrong.
AMR
Respectfully, I'd have to differ on that, to a point.
That a thing asserted by another makes sense to us, does not right off mean it does because it is actually sound.
Far too often, a teaching or assertion that appears sound only does in the absence of information which, were it also considered, might reveal the assertion is anything but sound.
And men have been building entire schools of thought on such shakey ground, not only since the Adversary first uttered the words "Yea; hath God said?" but to a point where "what makes sense" has ended up what said off-based edifice now determines as to "what is sound, or not."
One walks into that, unaware it only makes sense to one due to the very same kind of hole in one's logic that one tends to look at things from unawares, in general, and next thing you know; one more convert asserting that same "this here is sound, that over there is not."
Its why I prefer to remain open minded though I adhere to a Mid-Acts Perspective, more or less.
As one, rare within Mid-Acts, Pastor is fond of asserting "opposition is good for you; it makes you think things through a bit more."
I find that a quality few welcome, not only in life in general, but within Christendom in general, regardless of faction.
Mostly what one encounters is either "that's not the tradition" or "that's not what this or that passage is talking about - end of discussion!"
At least, this is the sense I make of the various extremes, lol
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
What is the "to a point" exactly in one sentence?
Is it just the usual, well, the majority has been wrong in the past and will likely be in the future, so I will just rest comfortably aligned with the minority until shown otherwise?
Is it, well, the majority is hobbled by not having considered new information that would relieve them of their following blind guides?
Is it, well, I like to have an open mind about any and all matters of the faith?
Is it, well, given the that not a few are close-minded about many matters of their doctrine, I assume they are wrong at the outset?
I just want to know exactly what you are advocating and not try to parse words that seem to bolster why you believe what you believe at the present.
AMR
Last edited:
Consider that you've just made my point.
But anyway, I just keep an open mind in all matters in life in general.
As for doing so within the faith; mostly as to the minors. The majors being the Fundamentals of the Faith we all appear to hold as Protestants.
And if we say assembly that would surely include assemblies of saints who have weighed matters in past times
The Logic (Word) became flesh and dwelt among us. And in doing so, he came in the likeness of sinful flesh. Once he asked, "who touched me". There is nothing to hide from with it. You present it as it is. And another time he said "the man you are with is not your husband". The Holy Spirit needed him to know that info.
Doubtful, for there is something to be gained by sitting under the instruction of those gifted to teach to facilitate the learning process. It also makes learning the Biblical languages much, much, easier. Not to mention the fellowship between like-minded in the classroom that fosters contention for the truth. Not all are accomplished autodidacts, e.g., Spurgeon. That said, some autodidacts just got things terribly wrong.
AMR
You are going to have to get off that fence sooner or later if you don't want splinters.
Cross Reference
New member
I can't help but notice you ducked post 62 ...
He ignored this one as well:
#69
Pride is always recognizable when academia is preferred above the anointed, inspired, word of God by revelation. He can squirm at that all he wants but it won't take away the fact he offers burnt toast for fresh bread.
Well, AMR has made his disdain for those that have availed themselves of the benefits to be had from following James 1:5, Prov 2:6, John 16: 12-15, 1 Cor 2: 12-13, 1 Sam 3:21 and the like well known over the years. I don't think that is necessarily pernicious ... I just think that most of us think that the way we came to embrace the word of God is the best way ... and some think it the only way.
On the occasion of my last move the local Baptist college payed well for my library. You are just a teenie bit presumptuous my friend.
:nono: