tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post4420458272670029139..comments2023-09-23T06:32:35.421-07:00Comments on Thoughts from the Reformed Perspective: PuritanCalvinisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03285973808564103125noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-38400995748430466472008-01-10T13:59:00.000-08:002008-01-10T13:59:00.000-08:00I agree, RedKnight, that the clergy "should be abl...I agree, RedKnight, that the clergy "should be able to understand the grammatical context, in order to establish a clear and accurate exegesis." I emphatically concur that if a man has made pastoring his career, he should be appropriately educated for that role.<BR/><BR/>Just as I've studied various aspect of "communication" for years, pastors should be expected to have studied Scripture -- in its original languages -- for years. They should be fluent in them.<BR/><BR/>RedKnight -- I think there's been a misunderstanding that started with my first post. I concur that pastors and other "spiritual leaders" should know Scripture, and that the best and most responsible way for them to know such is to know it in its original languages.<BR/><BR/>I was getting the sense, perhaps mistakenly, that Adam (and you) were saying that anyone who references Scripture in their communication is unqualified to do so unless they know it in its original language.<BR/><BR/>I look to Scripture as the primary source of truth, and therefore reference it in what I write. My authors reference Scripture in what they write. I don't expect exegesis from Hebrew or Greek from my writers, though I do expect them to interpret Scripture in a manner consistent with sound, established doctrine. I'm Reformed, so that would be the position I come from.<BR/><BR/>Again, I was getting the impression that you and Adam were looking down on those who don't read Scripture in ancient Greek and Hebrew, and that those who only read it in English are simply unable to grasp a passage's true meaning and unqualified to speak on it.<BR/><BR/>I apologize for misunderstanding, and for building such a caustic argument against such a misunderstanding.Ted Slaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09446192140516822732noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-66302231127909026632008-01-10T07:42:00.000-08:002008-01-10T07:42:00.000-08:00What do my socio-political and/or socio-economic v...What do my socio-political and/or socio-economic views have to do with anything? Actually I only speak one language fluently (English), and another unfluently (Spanish). Both Adam and I agree that the laity may only need to use use the vernacular. It's only the clergy which we feel should be able to understand the grammatical context, in order to establish a clear and accurate exegesis. It was against my better judgement to even check out Ted Slater's reply to my comment.I knew that at this point in an arguement a person always resorts to personal attacks. If Adam wishes to add anything he may. But I shall not be answering a fool according to his folly anymore in this thread.RedKnighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08428813816495738684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-11047180265521140252008-01-09T08:55:00.000-08:002008-01-09T08:55:00.000-08:00An anarchist/socialist fluent in both ancient Hebr...An anarchist/socialist fluent in both ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek, whose understanding of God trumps mine because I only speak two languages (none of them ancient). You're remarkable, RedKnight.<BR/><BR/>I do appreciate your clarification of your low opinion of Scripture, how the process of making this apparently impotent document available to people who don't speak ancient Hebrew and Greek strips it of any significant meaning. You seem to share the same opinion as Adam.<BR/><BR/>God's Word is only understandable by the highly educated. Like Jesus' Apostles, for example.Ted Slaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09446192140516822732noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-89228111980420483782008-01-09T08:08:00.000-08:002008-01-09T08:08:00.000-08:00The thing is however that the scriptures where not...The thing is however that the scriptures where not originaly written in English. Hebrew and Greek are linguisticly very different from English. English is a germanic language. I encourage all christians to learn Hebrew and/or at least Greek, in order to understand the complete meaning. The Bible can not be translated word for word into English. The best one can do is to interpret it. Even muslims require non-arab converts to learn arabic, instead of just relying on the vernacular. Arabic as well as Hebrew, as semitic languages, are quite dissimilar from germanic languages like English.RedKnighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08428813816495738684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-58829661657068585512008-01-08T15:58:00.000-08:002008-01-08T15:58:00.000-08:00RedKnight -- I'm disappointed that you have such a...RedKnight -- I'm disappointed that you have such a low view of Scripture, that you think that it can only serve those who are fluent in Greek and Hebrew.<BR/><BR/>I, on the other hand, agree with the Reformers, who insisted that the Bible be published in the language of the people, for they recognized that we laity are able to draw meaning from it.<BR/><BR/>Does the work of Bible translators, RedKnight, result in more harm being done, or more help being done? Is the ESV a satanic work, facilitating doctrinal error?<BR/><BR/>I confess that I'm not an expert. I would hope that people not consider me an expert. But I have learned a few things along the way that may be of some value to those a few years behind me.Ted Slaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09446192140516822732noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-27947909607102236832008-01-08T15:15:00.000-08:002008-01-08T15:15:00.000-08:00Yes, maybe he should. When the blind lead the blin...Yes, maybe he should. When the blind lead the blind, they all fall into a ditch. One must be an authority in the subject he is commenting on. Or else why is his position any more valid than mine? Why would we even need ordained ministers, if we are all supposedly equally qualified to address matters of scripture? Thank you for informing us all about this irresponsible blog.RedKnighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08428813816495738684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-62486672194565716052008-01-08T10:36:00.000-08:002008-01-08T10:36:00.000-08:00Adam, I read the following blog post and thought o...Adam, I read the following blog post and thought of you: http://tallskinnykiwi.typepad.com/tallskinnykiwi/2008/01/tim-challies-ap.html<BR/><BR/>My impression is that you believe only biblical scholars and priests are qualified to correctly understand Scripture, something with which Tim Challies and other Reformed Christians seem to disagree.<BR/><BR/>You may want to leave a comment on that blog, noting that they're not qualified to speak of anything related to Scripture since they're not pursuing MAs in Old Testament and Semitic studies. You may also want to post a blog trashing these naive men for thinking it possible to understand Scripture, though they are not "credentialled."Ted Slaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09446192140516822732noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-71223973592517530402007-12-28T11:41:00.000-08:002007-12-28T11:41:00.000-08:00Hey Songbird,Ya, I read both of them. She had the ...Hey Songbird,<BR/><BR/>Ya, I read both of them. She had the right idea in the first two, but completely read something into the text that wasn't there on this one. Is there anything imparticular that you are thinking that I missed in those two articles that would be relevant to what I wrote here?<BR/><BR/>As far as my perspective, I agree that men are to be the leaders, but I think there are a lot of unbiblical ideas that we have on what that means. I have been listening to the arguments for intiation, and it seems like there are some unwarranted assumptions, namely, that the terms "head" or "submission" have something to do with initiation. They simply do not.<BR/><BR/>Redknight [aka Jason],<BR/><BR/>Hey, how are you doing? I wanted to see you at Christmas, but we got there really late.<BR/><BR/>As for my comments on what Amy wrote, let me first of all say that Proverbs 18:22 is not talking about initiation or intention. The Hebrew term masa' does not have as its primary meaning some intention on the person who performs the action. It does not even require the meaning "to seek." Consider some of these other usages:<BR/><BR/><B>Genesis 4:15</B> So the LORD said to him, "Therefore whoever kills Cain, vengeance will be taken on him sevenfold." And the LORD appointed a sign for Cain, so that no one finding [masa'] him would slay him.<BR/><BR/>Obviously, we are not to believe that the giving of the mark was only for those who would attack him after they intentionally looked for him. It was also for protection against those who might accidentally find him, and attempt to kill him.<BR/><BR/><B>Genesis 37:32</B> and they sent the varicolored tunic and brought it to their father and said, "We found this; please examine it to see whether it is your son's tunic or not."<BR/><BR/>Obviously, it would have been suicide to suggest that they had gone out looking for the coat. What reason would they have to go out looking for it when they didn't even know Joseph was coming?<BR/><BR/><B>Proverbs 6:31</B> But when he is found, he must repay sevenfold; He must give all the substance of his house.<BR/><BR/>Is this text to suggest that only those poor thieves who are caught when someone seeks out to find them are to repay sevenfold?<BR/><BR/><B>Proverbs 6:33</B> Wounds and disgrace he will find, And his reproach will not be blotted out.<BR/><BR/>Are we to suggest that this person went out looking for wounds and dishonor?<BR/><BR/>Most every lexicon I am aware of will not say that masa' implies initiation. <BR/><BR/>Also, I am confused about how you are connecting the headship of man and the creation of man to initiation. Indeed, the term "head" definitely implies preminence, and authority, but it does not imply initiation. For instance:<BR/><BR/>Ezekiel 38:2-3 Son of man, set your face against Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief [rosh] prince of Meshech and Tubal; prophesy against him 3 and say: 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal. <BR/><BR/>Obviously, he was not the initiating prince of Meshech and Tubal, as those cities had already been there for hundreds of before the existance of Gog and Magog.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, ya, God blessed me richly with Sarah, and I love her more and more each day. Planning weddings are hard though. We are praying for God's provision through it all. <BR/><BR/>God Bless,<BR/>AdamPuritanCalvinisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03285973808564103125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-36673040442708366942007-12-18T02:36:00.000-08:002007-12-18T02:36:00.000-08:00Yet, redknight, the hebrew in the verse in Proverb...Yet, redknight, the hebrew in the verse in Proverbs about "finding a wife" is the word "find" in the sense of coming upon something and finding it, not "finding" it because you went looking for it. Perhaps PC can help us out with a clearer exegesis of that. <BR/><BR/>I grant of course that pragmaticaly it is better when women feel pursued - but when will we see teaching from FoF that explicitly allows this without treating them as predators (e.g. having to go through some other man, again supposedly a "biblical" thing)<BR/><BR/>singlechristianmansinglechristianmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15739950907900387049noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-77566973011690106332007-12-15T12:53:00.000-08:002007-12-15T12:53:00.000-08:00Since my sister, Amy, does not have a google accou...Since my sister, Amy, does not have a google account, she asked me to post this reply to your blog. My sister is a student at a Church of God Bible college, studying to become a minister. These are her opinions, not mine. "First of all, scripture says it plainly. "He who finds a wife finds a good thing, and attains favor from the Lord." Prov.18:22 NAS<BR/>In the Amp.it has true in brackets in front of wife,showing it can'y be just any woman.(Prov.19:14;31:10;12:4)<BR/>Notice the first five words of the verse.It says,"He who finds a wife",not,she who finds a husband.Another thing scripture says plainly is that the man is head over his wife.<BR/>"But I want you to understand that Christ is the heaed of every man,and the man is the head of the woman,and God is the head of Christ."(1 Cor.11:3)<BR/>The Amp.words it,"the head of a woman is her husband."<BR/>When a man won't take t5he initiative in relationship,it causes me to think he won't take the initiative in the marriage and be head over his wife.I can only pray that won't be the case.Also,it is possible the woman won't let him be head over her.Other verses I want to highlight in this chapter is 8&9.<BR/>'For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man. For indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's". NASB When the woman takes the initiative it makes it appear that she believes that man was created for her. As we can see from this scripture, and the Genesis account, that isn't the case. (Gen.2:18-23) Also if Adam had been a good head over Eve, the fall of man may not have been so great or had happened at all. (Gen 3) Notice in verse 6 of the chapter that Adam was with her. He could have spoken up and said, "Eve what are you doing? God said not to eat it. I told you that." At any point he could have refused the fruit and/or stopped his wife. But he let her lead, and be the head. And look at how great it cost not just him but all of us.Though this is just the start of women trying to be over men, and men letting them. Now I don't believe that a man should be a dictator, or treat his wife badly. They should work as a team, but he should have the final call. There may be times he may fall into trouble by not listening to his wife. But he needs to apologise, and try to correct his error. The wife shouldn't act superior when this happens, but say something to the effect of " I forgive you. We'll get this fixed together. Now I do believe strongly in women being friends with men. This gives the guy a chance to see if he is really interested in her, if he likes what he sees inwardly. Also it helps him feel more at ease, if and when he does ask her out. She also gets to see who he really is, and decide if she really does want to date him. What I have a problem with is girls asking the guy out, or telling him they'd like to get to know him. Good for you! Get to know him by going where he likes to go. But don't tell him. That to me would be taking the initiative, and as we just saw, goes against scripture." Well that's what Amy thinks. We both are fond of Sarah though. You are very fortunate to have met her, eventhough she had to get your attention, before you noticed her.;)RedKnighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08428813816495738684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-34145370036384828992007-12-14T16:12:00.000-08:002007-12-14T16:12:00.000-08:00Are you a complimentarian or a egalitarian in term...Are you a complimentarian or a egalitarian in terms of romantic relationships between men and women? I personally don't fully agree with either side on certain areas. Have you read "Men and Women in the Church" by Dr. Sarah Sumner? It's pretty good.Songbirdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14261877343224166511noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29472599.post-53056741302075997512007-12-14T15:24:00.000-08:002007-12-14T15:24:00.000-08:00Have you read Candice's articles "Pull the Ruth pa...Have you read Candice's articles "Pull the Ruth part one and two" before reading "Ruth Revised"? I suggest writing about "Pull the Ruth Pt.1 and 2" first before this one.Songbirdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14261877343224166511noreply@blogger.com