Why do the self taught preach an incomplete gospel?

[Paul Christensen]

Right! Now you listen carefully!

The word " BELIEVE" , in that passage is pisteuo in the Greek.

Strong's , " pisteuo means NOT just to believe."

Vines ," pisteuo is a personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender."

Acts 16:30 should read,
And they said, surrender your life and will to God and live a life inspired by that surrender, and the shall be saved, and thy household.

The word " believe" is a mistranslation!

It depends on your definition of "believe". There is a difference between mental assent involving lip-service to a person, and putting complete trust in the person resulting in appropriate action.

You have repeated the need to live a life of surrender, but I have yet to see what you mean by it, and a list of the actions that you think is involved.

 

[Faither]

Actually, Matthew 26:13 doesn't say that, at all. (Put your mouse on the verse I posted) You really should not try to add things that are not in the Bible.

Every translation of scripture says something a little different. I was taught by the original Greek manuscripts owned by my instructor.
The closest translation to the originals is the KJV, what ever that's worth to you.

I stand by the op.

 

[Faither]

It depends on your definition of "believe". There is a difference between mental assent involving lip-service to a person, and putting complete trust in the person resulting in appropriate action.

You have repeated the need to live a life of surrender, but I have yet to see what you mean by it, and a list of the actions that you think is involved.

Sorry Paul you left me hanging, you'll have to go to my posting history for that now.

There's many times I address that. If you have any questions after you read them let me know.

 

[DNB]

When Christ said this, He was elevating what this woman did on par with His work on the Cross. He made it just as important as His work on the Cross.

You know, it's always by the OP that one can tell how utterly incompetent the rest of the thread is going to go.
Whenever someone starts a thread by criticizing another group, they invariably end up doing the same thing that they are protesting against, namely incompetent exegesis.
How in the world do you place the woman's offer of perfume and honour to Christ, equivocal to his sacrifice for the sins of mankind?
She was revered for her faith in Jesus' messiahship and her obeisance towards him. And, for her being an example of the appreciation that a notorious sinner will have, once they realize the grace that has been offered to them (Luke 7:37-50). Nothing more!

Others have shown more devotion, effort and faith than this women, namely Paul, Peter & James, and all the other theologians, evangels and martyrs that have sacrificed their lives for their convictions in the Gospel of Christ. And even they themselves, couldn't possibly hold a candle to Christ's unequaled love and obedience towards his Father, which made him worthy to be our Passover lamb. No other person in history has ever come close to this magnificent, and awe inspiring feat, making him worthy of worship throughout eternity.

Have you considered some tutorship by a 'gifted teacher'?

 

[DNB]

Every translation of scripture says something a little different. I was taught by the original Greek manuscripts owned by my instructor.
The closest translation to the originals is the KJV, what ever that's worth to you.

I stand by the op.

There are no original Greek manuscripts, and if you think that the majority, or byzantine texts are that fidel to the originals, the earliest is medieval for arguments sake.
...either way, you instructor owns the 'original Greek manuscript', and that the KJV is the closest translation?
You know that the KJVO's are looney tunes eh? I'm not being gratuitously critical, I'm very serious. There is not a rational argument under the sun, to defend or justify their position. I'm trying to assist, not abuse.

My point is, by your OP, and the quote above, you have a very strange comprehension of theological matters. ...especially when you started of your OP by criticizing others about the same issue.

 

[Faither]

There are no original Greek manuscripts, and if you think that the majority, or byzantine texts are that fidel to the originals, the earliest is medieval for arguments sake.
...either way, you instructor owns the 'original Greek manuscript', and that the KJV is the closest translation?
You know that the KJVO's are looney tunes eh? I'm not being gratuitously critical, I'm very serious. There is not a rational argument under the sun, to defend or justify their position. I'm trying to assist, not abuse.

My point is, by your OP, and the quote above, you have a very strange comprehension of theological matters. ...especially when you started of your OP by criticizing others about the same issue.

Then be on your way.
You have nothing to add or challenge this topic.

 

[DNB]

Then be on your way.
You have nothing to add or challenge this topic.

Oh, I'm afraid that I already did. Post #64 was a very competent and acceptable exposition of the topic at hand.

 

[Faither]

There are no original Greek manuscripts, and if you think that the majority, or byzantine texts are that fidel to the originals, the earliest is medieval for arguments sake.
...either way, you instructor owns the 'original Greek manuscript', and that the KJV is the closest translation?
You know that the KJVO's are looney tunes eh? I'm not being gratuitously critical, I'm very serious. There is not a rational argument under the sun, to defend or justify their position. I'm trying to assist, not abuse.

My point is, by your OP, and the quote above, you have a very strange comprehension of theological matters. ...especially when you started of your OP by criticizing others about the same issue.

He owned the largest collection of biblical manuscripts in private hands behind the Vatican. Greek texts, Hebrews texts , dead sea scrolls, many of them original texts,Bible's in more than a dozen different languages. This is what he taught from.

He taught nearly every day of the year for 35 years. Being a Dr. Of theology from Stanford University and a Dr. In education, he was a teachers teacher.

You know and I know, your not qualified to make any statement concerning Faith and God's word from strictly English translations and Google!

 

[Faither]

Oh, I'm afraid that I already did. Post #64 was a very competent and acceptable exposition of the topic at hand.

Christ elevated what she did with His work on the Cross, not me!

,HE said," wherever this gospel is preached, tell what this woman did".

He didn't say what Peter, James, or anyone else did! He said tell what this woman did! I guess you don't do that when you preach your gospel?

 

[DNB]

He owned the largest collection of biblical manuscripts in private hands behind the Vatican. Greek texts, Hebrews texts , dead sea scrolls, many of them original texts,Bible's in more than a dozen different languages. This is what he taught from.

He taught nearly every day of the year for 35 years. Being a Dr. Of theology from Stanford University and a Dr. In education, he was a teachers teacher.

You know and I know, your not qualified to make any statement concerning Faith and God's word from strictly English translations and Google!

If what you say is true about your teacher, then yes, he sounds extremely qualified.
But, please, you are not under the impression that scholarship is a guarantee for truth or comprehension, are you?
How many scholars do we have that even worked on the ancient manuscripts, as in Origen, Jerome, Tyndale, Wycliffe, Erasmus, Luther, etc... Would you care to explain their divergent theologies?
I can appreciate your tutorship, but don't flaunt it, or try and pull rank, as though it implicitly gives you insight and wisdom into God's Word. That requires more than scholarship.

 

[DNB]

Christ elevated what she did with His work on the Cross, not me!

,HE said," wherever this gospel is preached, tell what this woman did".

He didn't say what Peter, James, or anyone else did! He said tell what this woman did! I guess you don't do that when you preach your gospel?

Well, there you go, showing what a faulty translation can do, coupled with lack of insight, that no scholarship can repair.
Jesus said that '...it will be mentioned...', not that '...it must..' as though it were a mandate, ...but rather simply a memorial, as it states.
Just as Elizabeth said to Mary, '...you will be exalted for believing in what has been prophesied about you... Her exaltation did not reach the level of worship or matriarch.

 

[Faither]

If what you say is true about your teacher, then yes, he sounds extremely qualified.
But, please, you are not under the impression that scholarship is a guarantee for truth or comprehension, are you?
How many scholars do we have that even worked on the ancient manuscripts, as in Origen, Jerome, Tyndale, Wycliffe, Erasmus, Luther, etc... Would you care to explain their divergent theologies?
I can appreciate your tutorship, but don't flaunt it, or try and pull rank, as though it implicitly gives you insight and wisdom into God's Word. That requires more than scholarship.

I agree. The Spirit of Christ, what your referring to was received in a different way through a different person just prior to hearing this teacher.

The fact that I was having a text book born again experience and this teacher was teaching what I was experiencing, after I had experienced it, is the reason I learned the deeper things of Gods ways and His word for the last 33 years by him.
This is why a correct application of Faith is required.

 

[Faither]

Well, there you go, showing what a faulty translation can do, coupled with lack of insight, that no scholarship can repair.
Jesus said that '...it will be mentioned...', not that '...it must..' as though it were a mandate, ...but rather simply a memorial, as it states.
Just as Elizabeth said to Mary, '...you will be exalted for believing in what has been prophesied about you... Her exaltation did not reach the level of worship or matriarch.

So your elevating what Elizabeth said to Mary on par with what Jesus said about the woman with the alabaster box?

This is why I don't discuss scripture with anyone who doesn't at least know what Faith and faithing is in relationship to the living God. You just can't skirt the altar and expect to discern the deeper things of God.

I posted this thread to show the believe and recieve crowd that they are not preaching a complete gospel. Even if we don't agree on the purpose of why Christ said this, You should still be doing it regardless. And because you don't, it's an incomplete gospel.

I'm sorry you are seeing me in your perspective as an authority. I'm in reality just a servant. No better than anyone else.

 

[Paul Christensen]

You know, it's always by the OP that one can tell how utterly incompetent the rest of the thread is going to go.
Whenever someone starts a thread by criticizing another group, they invariably end up doing the same thing that they are protesting against, namely incompetent exegesis.
How in the world do you place the woman's offer of perfume and honour to Christ, equivocal to his sacrifice for the sins of mankind?
She was revered for her faith in Jesus' messiahship and her obeisance towards him. And, for her being an example of the appreciation that a notorious sinner will have, once they realize the grace that has been offered to them (Luke 7:37-50). Nothing more!

Others have shown more devotion, effort and faith than this women, namely Paul, Peter & James, and all the other theologians, evangels and martyrs that have sacrificed their lives for their convictions in the Gospel of Christ. And even they themselves, couldn't possibly hold a candle to Christ's unequaled love and obedience towards his Father, which made him worthy to be our Passover lamb. No other person in history has ever come close to this magnificent, and awe inspiring feat, making him worthy of worship throughout eternity.

Have you considered some tutorship by a 'gifted teacher'?

In the area of music teaching, the phrase is: "The person who is self-taught has a fool for a teacher". How true is that for those who maintain that they can teach themselves the Bible without referring to others who through maturity and experience can contribute so much to their Bible knowledge? They miss the item in Paul's five fold ministry list - "teacher". Why do we have teachers in the body of Christ, if we are to always be self taught to discover what the Bible is really showing us about the nature of God and His ways, and His plan of salvation for mankind?

Actually, upon viewing some contentious exchanges on these threads, those who are self-taught become very obvious in their clear lack of sound Bible knowledge and doctrine.

 

[Faither]

In the area of music teaching, the phrase is: "The person who is self-taught has a fool for a teacher". How true is that for those who maintain that they can teach themselves the Bible without referring to others who through maturity and experience can contribute so much to their Bible knowledge? They miss the item in Paul's five fold ministry list - "teacher". Why do we have teachers in the body of Christ, if we are to always be self taught to discover what the Bible is really showing us about the nature of God and His ways, and His plan of salvation for mankind?

Actually, upon viewing some contentious exchanges on these threads, those who are self-taught become very obvious in their clear lack of sound Bible knowledge and doctrine.

Being lazy is worse.

 

[Faither]

In the area of music teaching, the phrase is: "The person who is self-taught has a fool for a teacher". How true is that for those who maintain that they can teach themselves the Bible without referring to others who through maturity and experience can contribute so much to their Bible knowledge? They miss the item in Paul's five fold ministry list - "teacher". Why do we have teachers in the body of Christ, if we are to always be self taught to discover what the Bible is really showing us about the nature of God and His ways, and His plan of salvation for mankind?

Actually, upon viewing some contentious exchanges on these threads, those who are self-taught become very obvious in their clear lack of sound Bible knowledge and doctrine.

Cart before the horse here, understanding, fulfilling, and maintaining Faith first, (pisteuo) then having sound doctrine.

 

[mailmandan]

You have just contradicted Strong's. Which means you have no credibility.

You are simply inventing ANOTHER GOSPEL. A false gospel.

So it's not just me.

It depends on your definition of "believe". There is a difference between mental assent involving lip-service to a person, and putting complete trust in the person resulting in appropriate action.

Amen! In James 2:19, we see that the demons "believe" (pisteuo) "mental assent" that "there is one God," but they do not have faith in/confidence in/trust in/reliance upon Jesus Christ for salvation. In other words, they do not believe (pisteuo) on the Lord Jesus Christ and are not saved. (Acts 16:31)

You have repeated the need to live a life of surrender, but I have yet to see what you mean by it, and a list of the actions that you think is involved.

Pisteuo in the Strongs Concordance #4100 says - to have faith (in, upon, or with respect to, a person or thing), to entrust (especially one's spiritual well being to Christ). It goes on to say, Pisteuo means not just to believe, but also to be persuaded of; and hence, to place confidence in, to trust, and signifies, in this sense of the word, reliance upon. Those who promote salvation by believing + works seem to be very fond of the Vines definition and turn "a personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender" into works salvation.

When we choose to believe in/have faith in Christ for salvation (Acts 16:31; Ephesians 2:8) we are entrusting our spiritual well being to Christ, along with placing confidence, trust and reliance in Him for salvation. That would be a personal surrender to Him, resulting in justification (Acts 10:39; Romans 5:1) and that is the ROOT of salvation. We must not confuse cause with effect.

The FRUIT would be living by or "out of" faith, as we see 2 Corinthians 5:7 attached with "a conduct inspired by such surrender" in Vine's definition, which reads - For we walk/live by faith and not by sight. This is our continued walk with the Lord by which by or "out of" faith, believers bear fruit/produce works. So faith in Christ is the ROOT of salvation and "a conduct inspired by surrender" which FOLLOWS and results in producing good works would be the FRUIT. We are saved FOR good works and NOT BY good works. (Ephesians 2:8-10)

The Greek words for "pistis" and "pisteuo" are two forms of the same word. "Pistis" is the noun form, "pisteuo" is the verb form. *Nothing in the root meaning of either word carries any concept of works. If we believe in Christ for salvation, then we are trusting in Him as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. This belief results in actions appropriate to the belief (to one degree or the other/all genuine believers are fruitful, yet not all are equally fruitful - Matthew 13:23) - but the fruit/actions/works are NOT INHERENT in the belief.

 

[mailmandan]

Why is your false "believe and recieve" understanding exempt from your works salvation?

There is nothing false about believing and receiving. John 1:12 - But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name. If you truly believed then you would understand this. I don't teach works salvation.

You "choose" to believe, and then engage your will to follow that belief.

As I have said numerous times, This belief results in actions appropriate to the belief (to one degree or the other/all genuine believers are fruitful, yet not all are equally fruitful - Matthew 13:23) - but the fruit/actions/works are NOT INHERENT in the belief.

No different than a surrendered life followed by that belief.

When we choose to believe in/have faith in Christ for salvation (Acts 16:31; Ephesians 2:8) we are entrusting our spiritual well being to Christ, along with placing confidence, trust and reliance in Him for salvation. (cause) That would be a personal surrender to Him. A conduct inspired by such surrender, which involves actions/fruit/works appropriate to that belief would be the (effect).

No work intended to try and fulfill the law here, which we can attempt to do if we wanted to. I wouldn't advise that, but God gives us the choice to faithe into what we desire.

Loving one another fulfills the law. (Romans 13:8) The word "faithe" is an obsolete spelling of faith.

You desire to faithe into God's word by believing in God's word, your choice! I desire to faithe into God Himself, a real living person, my choice!

I believe in Christ unto salvation, my choice. You believe in obsolete words and works salvation, your choice.

The English language supports your stance on the mistranslated words believe, believer, and believing. My stance is supported by the Greek language and their Greek language experts, lexicons, dictionarys, Stanford University theological props.

You are very confused, proud and misguided. You also sound like a troll. I will continue to pray for you.

 

[DNB]

I agree. The Spirit of Christ, what your referring to was received in a different way through a different person just prior to hearing this teacher.

The fact that I was having a text book born again experience and this teacher was teaching what I was experiencing, after I had experienced it, is the reason I learned the deeper things of Gods ways and His word for the last 33 years by him.
This is why a correct application of Faith is required.

Hmmm, not sure what the implications of your statement is? Learning the deeper things of God is not a given, due to whichever approach a person has gone through in order to become saved. We have many born-again people on this site, that have been converted, I'm sure, in extremely remarkable ways, but that have rather questionable understandings of God's Word.
But again, I'm not sure if I understood you point on this post quoted above?

 

[DNB]

So your elevating what Elizabeth said to Mary on par with what Jesus said about the woman with the alabaster box?

Yes, but not elevating, simply regarding their exemplary faith as something to be aspired to, and emulated. Not as a requisite conviction or awareness for salvation.

'....faithing....'

Seriously?

I'm sorry you are seeing me in your perspective as an authority. I'm in reality just a servant. No better than anyone else.

Yes, I am perceiving you as claiming to have an authority, ...that is unwarranted. You are differentiating between your faith, and that of others, claiming that theirs is deficient to yours, due to your conversion process.
Thus, your impression of your Biblical comprehension is rather audacious, misguided, and undeniably fallacious!