My struggles here

[Sinthesis]

Keeping yourself from a situation where you know that you have lost perspective is not being self indulgent, nor is it anything negative; rather it is an act of strength. Every one's energy gets sapped when there are irrational responses so when we back off to regroup amd focus priorities we return stronger.

Theology is a breeding ground for irrational responses. It is easy to get frustrated with the limitations and derivative reflexes of others' doctrinal paths. We can't really force the issue; better then to make a case and not take offense if some are not receptive for whatever reason.

 

[jasonc]

You sound, much, like a Prof. I once debated that finally shut down on me. To many words and to ittle belief was his issue. I have a very simple theological construct, "If god had it recorded in the scriptures, I believe it." Life as a Christ Follower ks just like my life in the military. S3 would send a runner to my bunk to arouse me at three in the am, I got up, threw my boots on, slept in my uniform, and got my ship ready to fly. I never asked why nor where, my Pilot and Peter-Pilot were being briefed as I and our gunner prepared the craft and then we flew because we needed to. Faith is exactly like duty in this respect, Jesus/God told me to so I do.

s3, gah I hate them.

 

[th1b.taylor]

s3, gah I hate them.

LOL! If some one had not been getting their rears shot off I could have and may have given the runner some sweet, sweet, phrases getting me out of bed, drunk, 2 or 3 hours after I had hit the rack from patching the holes from the day so we could fly without the Old Man hemorrhaging. And you would think a good man would know not to disturb a sleeping alcoholic but... go figure.

 

[Gregg]

Perhaps balance is not to be sought after between loving others and truth [or systematic theology]. Love should always be present, but we present and withhold truth according to the situation.

 

[By Grace]

You have, with inverted logic, answered your own question. You are now being illogical and attempting to befuddle me, why?

Hopefully this will clarify things for you.

1) I made a lengthy quote from C. Hodges to explain what systematic theology is. Remember that the OP is about an experience that I had here three months ago.

2 This is what you stated in reply (emphasis added)

th1b.taylor said: ↑
"You sound, much, like a Prof. I once debated that finally shut down on me."

3) Rather than think that you were insulting me, I chose to believe that you were complimenting me. That is why I posted:

"Professor Hodge and I are two different people, so how could I "sound like him" when it was his words that I quoted? No. I am not offended by such an honor to be compared to him."

Perhaps I am being obtuse here, but I cannot determine your point in your replies; please restate what you mean.

OTOH it may be my own writing that is obtuse. I posted that C. Hodges quote to explain what systematic theology is; because I believe it is an accurate definition. There are some on all boards who have a dislike for any academic studies in any area pertaining to the Bible. They usually resort to this retort, "The Bible alone is all I need." and then condemn those who have been privileged to have an ability to study theology, and its parts, snidely condemning such things as "doctrines of men".

At any rate, I hope I have clarified things

 

[By Grace]

Perhaps balance is not to be sought after between loving others and truth [or systematic theology]. Love should always be present, but we present and withhold truth according to the situation.

That is easier said than done my friend, especially here, where the official position is to be neutral and not condemn another's beliefs. I have been told that the closest we can come to saying, "You are wrong!" is to state something like this: "That position does not have any support in the Bible."

You see, through my accredited studies, and my software, I am able to use the languages and grammars of Hebrew and Greek as well as study the number to times and ways that a particular word (or its cognate) is used, how it is used, and things like that. That does not make me a know-it-all, but it DOES permit me to speak with authority on some things, and that is what really bugs me.

Really, I am not a person with an inflated ego; rather I view myself as a servant, who has been permitted to study on a graduate level. That means that I also have a responsibility before God as a steward of that knowledge to explain why this is so, and why that cannot be possible. Therein lies the crux of my dilemma.

 

[Obadiah]

That is easier said than done my friend, especially here, where the official position is to be neutral and not condemn another's beliefs. I have been told that the closest we can come to saying, "You are wrong!" is to state something like this: "That position does not have any support in the Bible."

That is a misquote of what you were told.

These are the rules that apply:

2.4: No Trolling. Do not make an inflammatory remark just to get a response. Address issues not personalities. Respect where people are in their spiritual walk, and respect all others in general. Respect where others are in their spiritual walk, do not disrupt the flow of discussion or act in a way that affects others negatively including when debating doctrinal issues, in the defense of the Christian faith, and in offering unwelcome spiritual advice.

and

2.8: Do not share the contents of private conversation. This includes personal information, contents of a PM or private conversations with the staff.

If anyone feels they can no longer abide by the rules they originally agreed to, they are free to not post any further.

 

[Gregg]

That is easier said than done my friend, especially here, where the official position is to be neutral and not condemn another's beliefs. I have been told that the closest we can come to saying, "You are wrong!" is to state something like this: "That position does not have any support in the Bible."

You see, through my accredited studies, and my software, I am able to use the languages and grammars of Hebrew and Greek as well as study the number to times and ways that a particular word (or its cognate) is used, how it is used, and things like that. That does not make me a know-it-all, but it DOES permit me to speak with authority on some things, and that is what really bugs me.

Really, I am not a person with an inflated ego; rather I view myself as a servant, who has been permitted to study on a graduate level. That means that I also have a responsibility before God as a steward of that knowledge to explain why this is so, and why that cannot be possible. Therein lies the crux of my dilemma.

Many accredited theologians disagree with one another - to one degree or another [no pun intended]. And then there is 'street knowledge' learned by personal experience, walking and living, applying knowledge and understanding.

If the eyes of your heart have been enlightened, then pray "that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the full knowledge of Him" (Eph 1:17), and "that you may be filled with the full knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding" (Col 1:9).

By the way, I had to look up 'cognate.'

 

[By Grace]

Many accredited theologians disagree with one another - to one degree or another [no pun intended]. And then there is 'street knowledge' learned by personal experience, walking and living, applying knowledge and understanding.

If the eyes of your heart have been enlightened, then pray "that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the full knowledge of Him" (Eph 1:17), and "that you may be filled with the full knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding" (Col 1:9).

By the way, I had to look up 'cognate.'

What I am referring to iis NOT the difference between Calvinism and Arminianism. To me they are inconsequential because both groups agree that the words of Scripture state "thus and such" and are not based upon a "faulty" translation of a verse in the KJV. The fault lies not with the KJV translators, but rather with us modern readers of English.

So a particular modern group states "The KJV Bible says This about that." and then they proceed to find other verses to support that belief. Instead, a good way to determine of a word means what they say it does, is to compare its usage in other verses. The way to do that is to get an Englishman's Greek of an Englishman's Hebrew concordance. The better ones will give the original word, and then list the verses in which that word is used in the OT or NT.

For example, (hypothetically) the Greek word "APPLE" is translated in the NT as "red delicious" in 24 out of 25 times, but that one time it is translated as "navel orange" then there is something amiss, which needs to be studied further. Makes sense, right?

What that modern group does instead is to take that meaning "navel orange" and then find "justification" for pushing their agenda of "APPLE" means ":navel orange" and they create a pseudo doctrine based upon their unsupported idea. What I did, and what got me in trouble was that I copied and pasted every verse that contained the Greek word "APPLE" and said that there was no support in the Bible for their "navel orange" theology.

Can you see the distinction I made?

It was not based upon philosophy, nor upon interpretation, because they are all subjective. Instead it was based upon facts that "APPLE" was translated as "red delicious" in 24 out of 25 times. Even in that one "exception" the differences in meaning of the translated English words was insignificant, almost synonyms. Based upon that great difference, I pushed against their "navel orange" doctrine.

Because I promised that I would not go to specific Greek words, or "stir up" old issues, you will not know the exact words of which I used then. And even if you find them somewhere, and bring it up here, I will not discuss the issue with anyone, OK?

So now you know the essence of my struggles here, but not the specifics.

BTW I am glad that you looked up cognate; it demonstrates that you are a curious person, and not afraid to admit not having knowledge of something. That is the mark of an intelligent, and secure person.
Since I used to be an English teacher, I ask "Are you able to use cognate in a sentence?"

 

[Willie T]

Uh.................................... "My brother, sister, and I are cognate." (Thought I'd throw a twist in there fer ya.)

 

[Obadiah]

Once again we have someone mis-stating what got them "in trouble" here on this forum after being told not to do this. This is is a violation of the ToS. In fact, the entire subject of this thread of what got a member in trouble is not a subject of theology or apologetics. This thread is closed.