What makes any given branch of Christianity an authority over my life?

[StanJ]

I could not be more specific that to give you all the verses that spoke of Elders in the New Testament Church context which is the period that I was studying.

When a writer is studying the book of Acts say, they don't usually add a commentary on the book of Job.

The POINT is that quoting a scripture is not EXEGETING it, as you have been told many times. Now you're just being obtuse but I'm not really sure if it's on purpose or you really don't understand?
When one is studying a book, one should be able to expound on it....which YOU have not been able to do.

 

[StanJ]

​I don't consider referring to the original Greek as taking things out of context. Just as matter of interest, have you done an in depth study of the New Testament Church?

If you don't KNOW Greek or understand the Greek, how would you know if you are not taking it out of context? I'm dealing with the English as I have no problem with the way it is properly translated in the modern English versions. As you only use OLD English versions, you probably have a lot of problems understanding it. I am part of the LIVING NT church body, so yes I understand it very well. I wish I could say the same for you.

 

[StanJ]

I would cite a few but I don't think that it would achieve anything. Your cynical attitude to my studies is very obvious so it would only give you another opportunity to rubbish my work and study.

Why am I not surprised you would answer this way. I'm pretty sure everyone else saw that answer coming.

 

[StanJ]

I wasn't aware that I was trying to form a precedent or rule.

So you admit you have no idea what you are posting about?

 

[StanJ]

Your first comment I have no idea what you are eluding to.

I do not base my view of women on one verse.

​I don't understand abstracts as in "this"

I didn't make it an abstract type of wage.

Now you are being deliberately obtuse.

Apparently you do seeing as it's the only one you use.

You mean you don't know grammar?

You did, as you tried to assert it was something other than a salary.

 

[StanJ]

Why don't you cite a few for us anyhow?
Perhaps someone else could learn something. Why be so selfish?

opcorn: LOL....I wait with bated breath for this response.

 

[marksman]

I answered your question a long time ago.
I see no problem at all with a group of people having a building to meet in.
I see no problem with them spending a reasonable amount of money to have a building that meets their needs, and that they can enjoy meeting in.
Now, when you say "millions of dollars" I cringe. I suppose having to work so hard for most of my life just to make ends meet might have something to do with that. However, it is not for me to judge how a congregation decides to spend their own money.
It isn't up to you, either.

​But you said if it is not in scripture you are not interested? So which is it? In scripture so it is OK or not in scripture so it is OK as long as I am comfortable with it?

 

[marksman]

Why don't you cite a few for us anyhow?
Perhaps someone else could learn something. Why be so selfish?

For the reasons I have stated.

 

[marksman]

Claiming that and proving it are not the same thing...a fact you should be well aware of.

I don't have to prove anything to you, especially as you have got so cynical.

 

[marksman]

Kinda funny that it is actually used 8 times in the gospels, I in Matthew and Mark and 7 in Luke, and you say you didn't use it from there? You contradict yourself, unsurprisingly. You do seem to have a problem following your own posts?

​In your previous post you said it was 88 times. And saying I didn't study the apostles in the gospels is contradicting nothing as I didn't.

 

[marksman]

The POINT is that quoting a scripture is not EXEGETING it, as you have been told many times. Now you're just being obtuse but I'm not really sure if it's on purpose or you really don't understand?
When one is studying a book, one should be able to expound on it....which YOU have not been able to do.

I did not expand on the verses as most of them were self explanatory. if you cannot see this you need to back off and do some study of the subject. I note that you have not apologised for saying that Elders were not leaders in the NTC when the verses clearly show they were.

 

[marksman]

If you don't KNOW Greek or understand the Greek, how would you know if you are not taking it out of context? I'm dealing with the English as I have no problem with the way it is properly translated in the modern English versions. As you only use OLD English versions, you probably have a lot of problems understanding it. I am part of the LIVING NT church body, so yes I understand it very well. I wish I could say the same for you.

​So I take it that you have NOT done an indepth study of the NTC.

 

[marksman]

So you admit you have no idea what you are posting about?

No. I was not aware that I was creating a precedent or rule. or to put it another way. I have not created a precedent or rule.

 

[marksman]

Now you are being deliberately obtuse.

Not that I am aware of. I just told the truth.

 

[marksman]

Apparently you do seeing as it's the only one you use.

My understanding is based on a two year study of the NTC and reading 40 books on the subject.

 

[marksman]

You mean you don't know grammar?

I mean that being autistic, I cannot decipher an abstract comment.

 

[marksman]

You did, as you tried to assert it was something other than a salary.

As I have no idea what an abstract type of wage is, It would be very difficult for me to assert anything.

 

[StanJ]

My understanding is based on a two year study of the NTC and reading 40 books on the subject.

Clearly you wasted all that time, and you sound like a politician trying to stay on point, but you're NOT getting my vote or most of those here.

 

[StanJ]

I mean that being autistic, I cannot decipher an abstract comment.

As you already have, I don't believe that.

 

[StanJ]

As I have no idea what an abstract type of wage is, It would be very difficult for me to assert anything.

Then why use it in an abstract fashion? A wage is a salary and yet you asserted that Paul meant honour was a workers wage. Seems you have a very good idea of the abstract, otherwise how would you be able to identify what is or isn't an abstract?
opcorn: