Civil Religious Discussions : all things Christianity II

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    18,134
    113
    I thought Jamil had entered the chat until I realized I was still scrolling
    and scrolling
    and scrolling.


    I don’t think I’m smart enough to be Orthodox.
    It doesn't take smarts. The reality is once one commits to being Orthodox, one can just focus on working oneself. It's freeing in one sense to know its no longer just up to you to figure it all out. It does require one to think differently. It is tangentially related to our discussion of sinning and the Christians response to sin in one's life.

    I recently had the occasion to revisit something I wrote in the past, over a decade ago, I believe.. I put it here, slightly edited and updated. I think I will work on it some more :)

    Living a New Life

    I have neither the experience or spiritual knowledge to lead others. So I write the following simple thoughts more for others to read and correct me in my misthought. Each of us has a methodology to our lives whether we reflect on it much or not. This is my first attempt to formally put to paper my methodology and I am sure it will be greatly revised, modified and in some aspects completely changed. Because I believe in cause and effect, my model is based on the consequences of living in linear time. With that brief introduction, I dive in.

    Second by Second

    This is the smallest time frame I consider. To be technically correct, I should title this “from the most infinitesimally measurable unit of time to one second” but that would be much too scholastic of me. These brief moments in time are the realm of thoughts. There are various schools of thought but I offer my own synthesis for consideration. Remembering my penchant for both the absolute and apophatic theology, I eliminate the possibility of arguing the neutral if I were to say thoughts can be for good or evil by saying thoughts can be for good or not. The Christian should strive to fill the mind with good thoughts. I believe this is one reason and actually the primary reason for the need of prayer without ceasing. The more we fill our thoughts with contemplation of the good, the less chance evil has to enter in. At one point in my life, I was practicing the Jesus Prayer, an Orthodox tradition that involves the repetition of a simple prayer. Two common variants are the following:

    “Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.”

    “Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me.”

    Say it upon arising and while going through the automatic motions of the shower and dressing that require little conscious thought. Recite it while walking to and from the car, around the farm or office, and say while preparing for sleep. Make it the first thing said when awakening. Make the sign of the cross often.

    The question to really consider is: are thoughts sins? Some say thoughts are not sins but rather temptations until we begin to dwell on them or even worse to act upon them. I will not presume to know any answers to the question, but offer my own thoughts on the matter. Many thoughts or temptations come to us because we have experienced the “pleasure” of them in the past. If I had lived as I ought I would not have knowledge of or recall the sensations of pleasure that acting upon such thoughts brings to myself. So even if thoughts are not sins in themselves, they are temporal punishments for the sins of our past because many times they recall past sins. My prayer, O Lord, Use these thoughts to create humility, for I have fallen before, use these thoughts for repentance because I have not filled my thoughts with good things, use these thoughts for thanksgiving for I have been forgiven, Amen.

    Minute by Minute

    We move from the realm of thought to action. It is here we must consider the butterfly effect of our actions on others. No action is truly isolated. All action we take must be for the good in the framework as established above with assumption that no thought can be both good and not good at the same time so with actions. The Christian should strive to fill his life with good actions. In the realm of minutes is where so many sins are committed for me. Most of us don't spend hours, days, months or years planning to sin, I sin minute by minute. Most often these sins are expressed verbally. I tear down my fellow man, I share others failings with a third party. I fail to perceive the needs of my brother and meet them. I set my own needs above all others and meet them unfailingly. Actions are decisions made based on thoughts whether conscious or unconscious. As I began my Christian walk, most sins I committed were based on unconscious thought manifesting itself in actions because I was simply acting out the desires of the heart. Most good actions resulted from conscious thought as I began the struggle against the habitual actions of the past. Here is a real danger for as I begin to consciously change, the sin of pride can easily creep in as I admire the new changes in my life and want to take credit for them. Here we encounter the first need for Confession. As a young Christian, I see and begin to identify, through the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, the unconscious thoughts that lead me to sin and I begin to struggle to uproot them using the weapons of prayer, fasting, confession, the eucharist, reading of scripture and the lives of the saints. The filling of the mind with spiritual thoughts and the action of dwelling upon them.

    At the beginning of the walk, the mountain of unconscious thoughts that lead to sin would seem insurmountable, but I believe that the true magnitude of our sinfulness is concealed from ourselves to some degree to keep us from despair. The joy though, is that God forgives and does not give us more work than we can handle at one time. As we mature as Christians, I believe our conscious thoughts and actions towards the good become unconscious as we become more habitual Christians than habitual sinners. Slowly, the sinfulness of our unconscious thoughts and actions are supplanted as our conscious thoughts and actions towards the good move into the realm of unconsciousness and become habitual. And slowly God imparts to us more knowledge of things in our lives that still need work. I believe this is why some saints consider themselves so sinful. At any moment in time, we struggle against the passions and we see some successes and failures, but we keep on pressing towards the good.

    Hour by Hour

    Here we encounter goals. Our thoughts move into actions but the linking of multiple actions contribute to the realization of a goal. Here we have the beginning of reflection. The conscious often lets us know immediately of any wrongdoing and how I choose to react says a lot about my spiritual health. Do I know that I have wronged someone, but hesitate to apologize? I am in need of humility and forfeit the blessing promised to the meek. Do I hesitate to apologize because there are too many people around who may hear? I not only need humility but am suffering from pride and thus breaking the second commandment by making myself a god. Forgiveness should fit the crime. Ideally, if I sin, I confess and ask forgiveness in front of everyone who saw or heard the deed immediately. As a Christian my goal is to love the Lord my God with all my heart, and with all my soul, and with all my mind and to love my neighbor as myself. To achieve this completely I must orient all my thoughts and actions towards this goal. The first hours of the day are often spent getting ready for the days labors. Do I thank God upon awakening that I have been blessed to draw breath another day, or do I believe I am self-sustaining? Do I set aside a time for prayer asking for guidance throughout the day, or do I rely on my own judgment? Do I look around me and thank God for all the comforts He has blessed me with, or do I lust after the one thing I don't have breaking the tenth commandment? Do I use the drive to work as a time for prayer and reflection or do I already feel the seeds of anger at the person slowing me down thus robbing myself of the blessing given to the pure in heart? Do I thank God that I have a job to go to, or do I grumble because the parking spot I normally use closer to the door has been taken? At work, the spiritual goal becomes even more distant, but is still there, psychology tells us that repetitive tasks take little conscious thought. Do I thank God upon arriving at work that I have gainful employment, or do I grumble about the boss's ingratitude? Do I ask His help to accomplish whatever task is set before me each time I begin my work? Do I use this to my advantage and remain in prayer or do I yield to the temptation to engage in gossip thus breaking the ninth commandment? Do I take a spare moment to read a spiritually nourishing poem or short article or do I engage in disparaging the work of a coworker depriving myself of the blessing of the peacemakers? Even more abstract, is the ultimate goal of work. Do I ask God to make me a good steward of all that He has blessed me with, or do I squander a portion of my wages because I deserve a break thus breaking the first commandment and losing the blessing promised to the poor in spirit? At the end of the work day, do I thank God for the opportunity to work, or do I congratulate myself for making it through another day? Do I exhibit love and patience to my fellow man on my way home or do I break the second commandment of Christ? Upon arriving at home, do I choose to watch TV and give up the blessing promised to those who hunger and thirst after righteousness or do I choose to read and meditate on scripture? Do I read my latest magazine or do I read about the life of the saint of the day? It is easiest to recognize that spiritual goals “compete” for my leisure time, but there is chore time around the house, as I mow the yard. Do I choose to listen to secular music on the mp3 player or do I say the Jesus Prayer? As the hour for sleep approaches do I thank God for his blessings of the day and the enjoyment of good health? Do I ask for his safekeeping of myself and my possessions that he has given me? Do I let the cares of the world weigh down my mind as I lay upon my bed or do I pray unceasingly?

    Day by Day

    The period of a day gives us the first real opportunity for reflection. At the end of each day, how I answered each question above offer a telling view into whether or not I made any spiritual progress. The morning should be spent in thankfulness for a restful sleep and requesting God's mercy to come upon us to allow the work of the day at hand to be fruitful for the kingdom. The evening should be spent examining the day and asking forgiveness for shortcomings. This cyclical cleansing is very important for if I forget that each day is a fresh start, I am open to the sin of dispair and despondency because I deny God forgives me. The realm of the individual resides mostly in the second to second, minute to minute, and hour to hour in my view, as we move into the longer timespans, the influence of the corporate aspect of Salvation becomes more apparent. The Day marks the beginning of a formal structure that can be applied to our lives based on the witness of the Church. The daily cycle of worship.

    The Orthodox day runs from sunset to sunset so the first service of the day is vespers, a sunset service. During vespers we offer thanks for God's mercy during the day and ask for His blessing throughout the evening. The service contrasts the coming darkness with the arrival of the light of the world. We read Psalm 102 calling to mind that it is God's creation of which we are a part and it is God who sustains us. Using Psalms 140, 141, and 116 we cry out to God for His mercy and praise Him. We sing the hymn “O Gladsome Light” which is the oldest known hymn of the Church outside the bible and we ask for a peaceful and sinless evening.

    Then the Complines service which is meant as an after dinner prayer before retiring to sleep. Here we thank God for rest from our labors and call to mind death through the metaphor of sleep, asking God to keep us by praying the Psalms 50, 69, 142 which have a penitential quality, especially 50.

    The Midnight Office, usually observed in monasteries only, at midnight can also be observed by the lay person upon awakening. Here we welcome the Bridegroom and glorify the Resurrection. We call to mind Christ who prayed at midnight. We are reminded of the unceasing prayer and praise of the angels. We read Psalm 50 and then on Monday through Friday read Psalm 118 in its entirety. Other Psalms are selected for Saturday. Midnight should not be taken literally, for it can be at 4 or 5 am, ie in the middle of the night.

    Matins, or morning prayers, begin with six Psalms 3, 37, 62, 87, 102, and 142. We open the day praising God using Psalms 148, 149, and 150.

    First Hour, an opportunity to pray before any activity of the day.

    The Third Hour, prayer of thanks for Pentecost and reflection on Christ was condemned by Pilate.

    The Sixth Hour, we recall the handing over of Jesus to the Jews and his crucifixion and sacrifice for our sins.

    The Ninth Hour, the death of our Savior upon the cross.

    At each hour, the following pray is prayed.

    Thou who at every season and every hour, in Heaven and on earth art worshipped and glorified, O Christ God; long-suffering, merciful and compassionate; Who lovest the just and showest mercy upon the sinner; Who callest all to salvation through the promise of blessings to come. O Lord, in this hour receive our supplications, and direct our lives according to Thy commandments.

    Sanctify our souls. Purify our bodies. Correct our minds; cleanse our thoughts; and deliver us from all tribulations, evil, and distress. Surround us with Thy holy angels; that, guided and guarded by them, we may attain to the unity of the faith, and unto the knowledge of Thine unapproachable glory. For Thou art blessed unto ages of ages. Amen.


    All of these services can be done as a reader service either by purchasing a book or downloading one of the texts available on the internet.

    There are even abbreviated services which are really just short selections of prayers specific to each hour.

    My next sections will be Week by Week, In those I will cover the specific dedication of each week and why we fast on Wed and Fri. Sunday as the 1st and 8th day, The 11 week cycle of resurrectional readings and the 8 weekly tone cycle. Finally, I hope to write about the Yearly Cycle including the feasting and fasting sessions (Nativity, Lent, etc), the 12 Great Feasts of the Church and Pascha, or the Feast of Feasts. Those sections will be more interesting to people with more than a casual interest in Orthodoxy so I won't be posting them here, but I thought the above might be relevant to our discussions.
     

    foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    18,134
    113
    1 John 3:8-9 NKJV
    He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil.
    [9] Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

    Clipped other versions for brevity

    I was searching through my library for some relevant commentary that you might find interesting, as you read about Wesley. He was influenced by the Eastern Fathers much more so than the other reformers and one that stands out is St Maximos the Confessor, a 7th century Christian who died in the 600s AD.

    Confessor is a formal title. Martyr, which originally means witness, eventually becomes one who died for the faith. A confessor is one who suffers physical torments for the faith but does not die. St Maximos had his tongue cut out and his right hand cut off defending Christianity.

    An interesting tidbit about Saints. Prior to Christianity, Saints were often tormented/killed by pagans and Jews but once Christianity becomes legal many saints are tormented by heretics that infest the Church. There are times that it seems the church itself will fall but God always raises a few who stand in the gap and refuse to compromise. You can read about him on Wikipedia.

    Here is his response to a question on 1 Jn. Can you see the possible influences of St Maximos on John Wesley's theology? I left the footnotes in for completeness.

    QUESTION 6

    If, according to Saint John, “he who is born of God does not sin, because God’s seed is in him, and he cannot sin,”1 and if he who is “born of water and Spirit” is himself born of God,2 then how are we who are born of God through baptism still able to sin?3

    Response from Maximos

    6.2. The mode of our spiritual birth from God is twofold.[1] The first bestows on those born in God the entire grace of adoption, which is entirely present in potential;4 the second ushers in this grace as entirely present in actuality, transforming voluntarily the entire free choice5 of the one being born so that it conforms to the God who gives birth. The first possesses this grace in potential according to faith alone;[2] the second, in addition to faith, realizes on the level of knowledge the active, most divine likeness of the God who is known in the one who knows Him.6 In those whom the first mode of birth is observed, it happens that—because the disposition of their will has not yet been fully extracted from its passionate fixation on the flesh, and because they have not been completely imbued by the Spirit with active participation in the divine mysteries that have taken place—it happens, I say, that their inclination to sin is never very far away for the simple reason that they continue to will it. For the Spirit does not give birth to a disposition of the will without the consent of that will, but to the extent that the will is willing, He transforms and divinizes it. Whoever has shared in this divinization through experience and knowledge is incapable of reverting from what he, once and for all, truly and precisely became cognizant of in actual deed, to something else besides this, which merely pretends to be the same thing—no more than the eye, once it has seen the sun, could ever mistake it for the moon or any of the other stars in the heavens. In those, on the other hand, undergoing the second mode of birth, the Holy Spirit takes the whole of their free choice and transposes it completely from earth to heaven, and, through true knowledge realized in actual deed, refashions the intellect with the blessed beams of light of God the Father, so that it is deemed another God, experiencing, through a permanent state obtained by grace, that which God does not experience but simply is according to His essence. In them, their free choice clearly becomes sinless in conformity with their state of virtue and knowledge, since they are unable to negate what they have become cognizant of through actual experience. So even if we should possess the Spirit of adoption—which is a life-giving seed that bestows the likeness of the Sower upon those who are born of it—but do not offer Him a disposition of the will pure of any propensity or inclination toward something else, we will, as a result, willingly sin even after “being born through water and the Spirit.”7 But if, to the contrary, we were to prepare the disposition of our will to receive cognitively the operations of the water and the Spirit, then, through our ascetic practice, the mystical water would cleanse our conscience, and the life-creating Spirit would actualize in us the unchanging perfection of the good through knowledge acquired in experience. What is lacking, therefore, in each of us who is still able to sin, is the unequivocal desire to surrender our whole selves, in the disposition of our will, to the Spirit.

    1 1 Jn 3:9.

    2 Cf. Jn 3:5–6.

    3 Maximos’s response is indebted to Mark the Monk, On Baptism, which is a series of Questions and Answers on the problem of sin after baptism (SC 445:297–397); and Diadochos of Photike, Gnostic Chapters 89 (SC 5:149–50); cf. Jean-Claude Larchet, “Le baptême selon Maxime le Confesseur,” Revue des sciences religieuses 65 (1991): 51–70.

    4 Cf. Rom 8:15.

    5 In this response, Maximos shows a decided preference for the words “free choice” (προαίρεσις) and “voluntary intention” (γνώμη), and not “will” (θέλησις), the former terms expressing actual choices and decisions of the will, and not volition as an abstract possibility.

    6 Here “knowledge” renders the Greek word ἐπίγνωσις, which in this context also means “recognition,” in the sense that those born through baptism come to resemble the one who gave them birth (i.e., God) by receiving His characteristics, on which see Amb. 10.43 (DOML 1:215–17).

    7 Jn 3:5.

    St. Maximos the Confessor. 2018. On Difficulties in Sacred Scripture: The Responses to Thalassios. Translated by Maximos Constas. Vol. 136. The Fathers of the Church. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press.
     

    45sRfun

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    I keep seeing comments about how and when the books of the New Testament were decided. But if we go outside God's Word to decide the cannon, we are on thin ice. But thankfully, to quote Dr. Kayser:
    The Bible’s self-referential statements are sufficient to completely settle the question of canonicity. There can be no higher authority by which Scripture is judged than itself, or the Scripture would cease to be the highest authority.

    Full book (397 pages):

    58-page introduction:
     

    foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    18,134
    113
    I keep seeing comments about how and when the books of the New Testament were decided. But if we go outside God's Word to decide the cannon, we are on thin ice. But thankfully, to quote Dr. Kayser:


    Full book (397 pages):

    58-page introduction:
    I admit I haven't read this book. I have listened to Dr Kayser speak.
    Anytime I hear the word presuppositional, I wonder if what I am about to encounter is an eisegetical theology.

    Anyway, I have heard him on multiple occasions say the Council of Trent added 6 books to the canon in the 16th century. The following is from the Council of Florence in 1442. These are accepted Ecumenical councils by the Roman Catholic Church. Neither is accepted by Eastern Orthodoxy.

    SESSION 11 4 February 1442

    Most firmly it believes, professes and preaches that the one true God, Father, Son and holy Spirit, is the creator of all things that are, visible and invisible, who, when he willed it, made from his own goodness all creatures, both spiritual and corporeal, good indeed because they are made by the supreme good, but mutable because they are made from nothing, and it asserts that there is no nature of evil because every nature, in so far as it is a nature, is good. It professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testament — that is, the law and the prophets, and the gospel — since the saints of both testaments spoke under the inspiration of the same Spirit. It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows.

    Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; two books of the Maccabees; the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; fourteen letters of Paul, to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two letters of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; Acts of the Apostles; Apocalypse of John.


    Other Secondary Sources

    The Renaissance return to original sources paved the way for the Reformation which challenged the Catholic understanding of revelation and the rule of faith. Trent’s decree, cited above, was purposely vague about what “traditions” meant, since many of the bishops present were themselves divided on the question, but it also avoided making Scripture and tradition separate sources (Jedin 1961:2.86–94). The council, moreover, formally defined the canon of Scripture—the same books listed at the Council of Florence in 1442.

    Fogarty, Gerald. 1992. “Scriptural Authority: Biblical Authority in Roman Catholicism.” In The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary, edited by David Noel Freedman, 5:1024. New York: Doubleday.


    This is not the only appearance of this error. In the book, The Reformation and the Right Reading of Scripture, Iain Provan makes the same error.

    By presenting reformers like Luther as merely returning to the consensus patrem regarding the shorter canon, Provan argues that they “provoked the Counter-Reformational Council of Trent (1546) to produce a list of Scriptures that removed any distinction between these two groups of texts,” namely, the deuterocanonical books and the remainder of the Hebrew Bible. In fact, the fourth session of the council simply reaffirmed the wider canon ratified at the Council of Florence (1442).

    Reimer, Jonathan. 2020. “Tobit or Not Tobit. Review of The Reformation and the Right Reading of Scripture by Iain Provan.” First Things, no. 303: 61.


    Based on that alone, a fairly easy fact to determine, I wonder if he is writing to a receptive audience that is hearing what they want to hear instead of a critical appraisal.

    Now an objection could be raised that the word "canon" itself is not present, however, the word "inspired is". Furthermore, that is how the ancient Church did function. Theology was apophatic not cataphatic. There is freedom in the ancient Church. Dogma/Doctrine/Canonical were not proclaimed until questions of heresy/authenticity arose.

    Since your posts were more of a recommendation that a citation, I am curious and hope you can answer some of the following questions from reading the book.

    1.His main thrust seems to be the Bible is self authenticating. If so, how does he explain the exclusion of books in the Septuagint from the canon that the New Testament writers were quoting? Is there more to it than the Council of Trent assertion?
    2. How does he explain manuscript variations? He makes the claim that Prophets alone enscripturate scripture that it was scripture as it was being written. We have no originals only copies and variations of copies. By my understanding of that definition, no scripture survived.
    3. How does he provide evidence for the doctrine of Sola Scriptura from AD 33 to 1600?
    4. If I understood him right, no scripture could be written after AD70, is that right? If so when does he claim the book of Revelation was written and what evidence does he provide? Most believe it was written after AD 70 so curious what evidence he cites.
    5. He says he cites several Church Fathers in support of his thesis. Can you provide a couple?
    6. How does he explain the use of the "added" books in the lectionary before the reformation?
    7. How does he explain the quotations of the Church Fathers from the Books of the Septuagint?
    8. How does he explain that most NT quotations of the OT use the language of the Septuagint?

    From what I have heard, he follows in the footsteps of Van Til. I do know that he basically lumps the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics together.

    One thing I noticed was he talks of the Pope and ex cathedra doctrines. Ex cathedra wasn't proclaimed as a doctrine until the 1800s.

    He defines Cult as a deviation from a Historical standard and makes the claim that by that definition the Roman Catholic is a Cult. I would submit by that definition Protestantism is a Cult. Now I would call neither a cult, for the record.

    Finally, my biggest concern about what I have heard from Dr Kayser, is what appears to be a denial of salvation history that we find in the Bible.

    Basically what I mean is this. From Genesis to Revelaton, God interacts with Human beings to bring about the salvation of mankind, he does not interact with Robots, including the ultimate human being who was like us in every way except sin.
     
    Last edited:

    DadSmith

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Oct 21, 2018
    26,712
    113
    Ripley County
    Haven't heard of him.
     

    DadSmith

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Oct 21, 2018
    26,712
    113
    Ripley County
    Ok,
    You guys are deep I am struggling.

    One big God and his son.

    Where I am going.
    I've only been a Christian since October 2021. I just decided to dig in and man its a never ending learning experience.
    I suggest you just start studying for yourself and not rely on other's, but let the Holy Spirit guide you.
    Not saying don't listen to other's. But make sure you research it yourself, pray, and ask for guidance.
     

    foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    18,134
    113
    In general, I don't have an issue with translations. I didn't really get much insight into Alter himself from the article. I wouldn't buy the translation based on the article, but I wouldn't reject it out of hand. I have the textbooks to begin studying Hebrew, but have yet to wade in the pool.

    That said, that article, mentions David Bentley Hart. I wouldn't buy or read anything he writes. I read one of his books a decade or so ago that was a response to Bart Ehrman's nonsense. I would still read a Bart Ehrman book and have read several and he is a Christian turned Agnostic. David Bentley Hart became Orthodox several years ago but his recent works have espoused Universal Salvation. At the best, I believe he is teaching heresy at worst, he is a heretic, but the latter is up to his Bishop. One may hold a private hope that there is universal salvation, I suppose.

    I have read it was condemned at the 5th Ecumenical Council, but I haven't read the canons myself. I certainly wouldn't write books trying to convince others that there is universal salvation.

    That said, if you are not strongly rooted in the Christian faith, I wouldn't read Bart Ehrman either.
     
    Last edited:

    foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    18,134
    113
    Ok,
    You guys are deep I am struggling.

    One big God and his son.

    Where I am going.
    If you mean where am I going in the ultimate sense you are asking the wrong people.
    Don't compare yourself to any of us.

    Both of those are looking laterally.

    You need to look up.

    Are you praying daily? Are you reading from the Gospel Daily? Are you putting anything into practice as you read? Don't answer to me, answer to yourself and begin there. You can come to know God with any translation. Some are just better than others.

    In short if you are struggling with the subjects we are addressing. Don't worry about it. If you are struggling to pray, read, practice what you learn, ask forgiveness in the evening and resolve to start afresh every morning and ask God to show mercy if he comes overnight.
     

    foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    18,134
    113
    This is my advice on versions in general. You are welcome to take it or leave it :)

    I wouldn't spend too much time or money trying and finding and buying new versions but its definitely biased, opinionated, and personal!

    I was raised on the KJV. I now read the NKJV as my daily bible. When I was young, I went to bible school. I memorized several psalms and other passages from the bible. When I hear Bible verses or read them in other translations, they don't "sound" right.

    If I was to make a KJV only argument that's the one I would start with. All these versions cause a loss of community. It's like way back when we had 3 networks and you wanted to talk a football game or last nights Cheers episode or something, Everyone else was familiar. Now we watch 15 million different things and there is a loss of community, if that makes sense.

    I would find one verson for daily reading and bible memorization. If there is a passage that is difficult to understand, I MAY read a couple of other versions to see how its rendered. My choices, when I do that, is the NET, NASB, AMP, RSV, and ESV,

    To anyone else who wants an attitional version or two to read, if they want it in print, I would buy a parallel Bible. Mine is KJV, AMP, NASB, and NIV. It was bought in the 80s. I would get a NET because of the translator notes if I was going to buy ONLY one other version.

    Since we are spending so much time here on versions. I will offer a suggestion so you sound "scholarly" when talking to pastors or others with theological degrees, you can take it or leave it also :)

    There is English Translation and there are versions.

    It is correct to say the bible in english translation according the the KJ Version or NI Version. But they aren't really English translation they are all Versions. Thats why they get called versions and they put the V at the end. It is technically incorrect to refer to the NIV, KJV, ESV, etc as different translations, they are different versions.

    That's my tangent for the evening.
     
    Last edited:
    Top Bottom