| Poster | Thread |
| | Re: | | Quote:
good men have been matyred to get that Word to us.
Yea.. it's interesting that the most famous martyrs for the Word were translating the text into English... that later became the KJV.
I doubt that you have studied the issue of Biblical texts... so any further discussion on that point is ... well, pointless until you do. If I'm wrong, and you have studied the issue, and know the underlying textual issues behind the Received Text and the texts used to produce the modern versions, and have a basic understanding of textual critisism... then correct me, please. And we'll discuss it. In a friendly way... if you can overcome your indignation toward me. :-)
I did not call you satanic... that is a leap that you made, not me.
As to the rest of your post, it's hardly worth a response from me. Until you can calm yourself and respond in a reasonable way, I'll ignore ya... and love ya at the same time.
Krispy |
|  2005/3/8 8:17 | |
| | Re: | | Let me just say something about my comments concerning Zondervan...
I'm not saying that we should never buy anything from any corporation that supports something wordly... that would be impossible. My point was only concerning a repeated railing against having any type of TV at all ever in a believers household. No one will get an argument from me about the filth on most TV, and the fact that we should avoid that filth. However, to suggest that anyone who has a TV in their house was not qualified to discuss the issue of Refuel Buble, while supporting Bible versions copyrighted by a company (Zondervan) who puts money in the pockets of those who bring all that TV filth to the table strikes me as a bit... well, hypocritical. Strong words? Yes... but lets not beat around the bush.
Am I saying we shouldnt purchase material from Zondervan? No... thats a matter of personal choice, and how the Holy Spirit convicts individuals. I wont support Zondervan personally, but I wont point a finger at someone who does. I just cant stand the duplicity that I saw going on in this thread.
White is white and black is black.
Krispy |
| | 2005/3/8 8:28 | | Agent001
Member
Joined: 2003/9/30
Posts: 386
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | Re: Contents are not *that* bad | | Hi all,
In my previous post I suggested that the criticisms in the first post concerning the content are overly exaggerated. I stand by my statement.
I invite you to read the [b]full context[/b] of "Radical Faith on 1 Cor. 4:10" --
Quote:
[i]Like everybody else, Christians can sometimes act dumb. They come in all shapes and sizesBible thumpers, Scripture-screamers, unforgivers, grace-stealers-the kind of people you wouldnt want to be in a group with because theyre ruining it for the rest of us.[/i] But there's a whole category of Christians that Paul calls "fools for Christ's sake." The apostles were laughed at and thought of as fools. Their relationship with Christ was so real, but so unusual, that some people laughed at them. [b]Is it possible that some of the "nerds" get ridiculed because they really are trying to live like Jesus -- pursuing purity and holiness, giving grace? If that's the case, sign us all up. Let people call you anything as long as God calls you faithful.[/b]
[b]a. Excerpt on "Radical Faith"[/b]
I personally find this piece quite well-written. It is important to encourage teenage boys to stand up for their faith even if they are ridiculed. I do not understand why the initial post quotes only the first line: "Like everybody else...for the rest of us," (just the italicized part) and then proceed to say:Quote:
(Wow... guess if your serious about the Lord and contending for the faith, you're [b]not[/b] invited to Refuel's party! Oh, but wait... earlier they didnt seem to have a problem with teenagers going to parties where everyone is sloshing beers! - Krispy)
It seems to me that the italicized statement was [b]taken out of context[/b] and the conclusion seems to be just the [b]opposite[/b] of what the passage is making!
I would add that I understand "Bible-thumpers, Scripture-screamers, ..., grace-stealers" as those who misapply the Bible in a rigid and legalistic manner in order bludgeon other people, including Christians. In light of the [b]full context[/b], I would not understand the note in Refuel as referring to "Bible believers! Preachers! Those who take a strong stand for holiness." (Krispy's interpretation).
[b]b. Excerpt on "Gambling"[/b]
The first post failed to mention its somewhat tongue-in-cheek title, [b]How (Not) to Gamble Away Your Life's Savings[/b]. Now that gives the following text a whole different meaning!
In light of this, I honestly do not think the text is meant to endorse gambling as a casual entertainment. [i]"Okay, [b]some[/b] Christians see casual gambling as a form of entertainment. [b]If[/b] thats where youre at..."[/i]
[b]c. Excerpt on "Godliness" [/b]
That column is intended to be humourous. Note the title says, "[b]Random[/b] Things to Know About Being a Godly Guy". I have no problem with a little humour. Jesus was a rather humourous person himself.
[b]d. Excerpt on Littering [/b]
There is nothing wrong with that excerpt. The only problem cited was that "the entire magazine does it address, condemn or warn about homosexuality.I find that interesting... and weak. - Krispy ". Is that implying that the publisher is pro-gay or something?
Arguing from silence is weak. And you seem to have ignored the various references to the need for sexual purity wihtin the book. I do not think the notes of a Bible need to contain an exhaustive "sin list". And do not forget that the New Century Version is quite clear on its stand against homosexuality. See its Romans 1:26-27 --
Quote:
Because people did those things, God left them and let them do the shameful things they wanted to do. Women stopped having natural sex and started having sex with other women. In the same way, men stopped having natural sex and began wanting each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and in their bodies they received the punishment for those wrongs.
[b]Testimony[/b]
I personally find Refuel a little too elementary for use with the kids at my church. However, I have an opportunity to talk to a youth leader who organized an evangelistic "coffee house" event for youth, many of whom from broken families and were totally turned off by church. Refuel was one of the resources used.
The youth leader also emphasized to me that while they are using all kinds of resources, they want everyone in the church to engage in serious spiritual battle. All the volunteers have spent much time over the weeks to pray for the event, because they understand that true conversion is ultimately brought about by the Holy Spirit.
I was quite moved that night. I thought the Spirit was really moving. The packaging of Refuel to a certain degree disarmed these kids from their disgust of the Word and I thank God for this resource, but of course, I know it is the Spirit who sowed the seed of the gospel in these youthful hearts.
God can draw a straight line from a crooked stick.
_________________
Sam
|
| | 2005/3/8 10:24 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Agent... we radically disagree on this issue. But I do appreciate the way you've approached it with me. That was a good demonstration of how brothers can disagree without letting it get out of hand.
I disagree with your take on the gambling article.
I disagree with your take on the Bible "thumper" comments. I feel it was not necessary in order to make their point. To the world you, Agent, are a Bible thumper. To most kids today, that word does not represent what your trying to say it does, and thats my issue with it.
Again, I dont disagree with the littering blurb. However, kids today face some very real issue with purity and sexuality... and the gay agenda is being pushed in schools, TV, music, and clothing designers. Dont you think that since that is a HUGE issue today... Refuel should at least have some side bar blurbs concerning that too? But it's not... it's silent.
As far as humor... I dont really want to get into that. Some folks on here already have their minds made up about me, and my personality without even having a private conversation with me. But I dont think godliness is a joke.
You hit the nail on the head. Refuel is elementary. It's really a shame that we feel we have to dumb everything down. In dumbing it down... we weaken it. This wasnt a problem 100, 80... or even 50 years ago.
Thank you for your testimony.
Krispy |
| | 2005/3/8 11:53 | | PTywama3
Member
Joined: 2005/3/1
Posts: 156
Tacoma, WA
| | Re: | | Yes, sir, Godliness is not a joke.
But the point was that humor can be involved, not ever that it should be all of it (the former not implying the latter).
In my particular opinion, this statement is not without its merit or proper place.
_________________
David Reynolds
|
| | 2005/3/8 13:00 | Profile | Agent001
Member
Joined: 2003/9/30
Posts: 386
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | Re: | | KrispyKittr,
Thanks for your comments.
The biggest problem I have about the "Bible-thumpers" quote is not what you think it means, but the fact that you took the sentence [b]completely out of context[/b]. You can legitimately question what "Bible-thumpers" mean, but in light of the [b]full quote[/b] (which somehow got left out in your original post) in my previous message, I still find it hard to understand why you chose to take issue with one obscure line from a great passage that concludes with [i]"Is it possible that some of the "nerds" get ridiculed because they really are trying to live like Jesus -- pursuing purity and holiness, giving grace? If that's the case, sign us all up. [b]Let people call you anything as long as God calls you faithful[/b],"[/i] yet you conclude with: [i]"guess if your serious about the Lord and contending for the faith, you're not invited to Refuel's party!"[/i] Now that [b]completely[/b] contradicts with what was actually said in the passage!
This is very puzzling to me, to say the least.
_________________
Sam
|
| | 2005/3/8 13:10 | Profile |
| | Re: | | I think it's a matter of interpretation, Agent. I didnt feel I was taking anything out of context... you do. I didnt think the latter portion justified the first portion, therefore, I did not see the need to include it.
If I made a mistake in doing so, so be it. I didnt intentionally leave anything out in order to bolster my own position. Everyone is free to read Refuel for themselves and test whether my own conclusions are correct.
Krispy |
| | 2005/3/8 13:16 | | Agent001
Member
Joined: 2003/9/30
Posts: 386
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | Re: | | [i]"Like everybody else, Christians can sometimes act dumb. They come in all shapes and sizesBible thumpers, Scripture-screamers, unforgivers, grace-stealers-the kind of people you wouldnt want to be in a group with because theyre ruining it for the rest of us. But there's a whole category of Christians that Paul calls "fools for Christ's sake." The apostles were laughed at and thought of as fools. Their relationship with Christ was so real, but so unusual, that some people laughed at them. Is it possible that some of the "nerds" get ridiculed because they really are trying to live like Jesus -- pursuing purity and holiness, giving grace? If that's the case, sign us all up. Let people call you anything as long as God calls you faithful.[/i] (Refuel, "Radical Faith" column on 1 Cor. 4:10)
Perhaps others can read the above quote and provide some feedback on whether it is really that problematic?
[b]KrispyKittr[/b]:
I take your word for it that you did not do so intentionally -- and I was certainly not inferring that you did in my last post. I'm sorry if my words caused such misunderstanding.
God bless!
_________________
Sam
|
| | 2005/3/9 12:37 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Quote:
I take your word for it that you did not do so intentionally -- and I was certainly not inferring that you did in my last post. I'm sorry if my words caused such misunderstanding.
Aw shucks, Agent... it's all kool! :-)
Krispy |
| | 2005/3/9 14:29 | |
|
