goddardbe@netscape.net wrote...
>
> peter.gibbs@charter.net wrote:
>
> > You guys crack me up with your insistence on "right understanding",
> > "correct doctrine", and, for Christ's sake, proper spelling?!
>
> > b) it really isn't all that important, as neither right understanding,
> > correct doctrine, nor proper spelling will save you (except perhaps in
> > a spelling bee.)
>
> What cracks me up is illogical pontificators who 1. insist on their
> own doctrine and yet say doctrine is not important and 2. act as
> if doctrine was different from the faith.
>
> Faith comes by hearing the Word, and people won't hear the Word
> if it isn't preached. And if your doctrine isn't correct, then
> you're not preaching the Word. Doctrine IS the vehicle by which
> we hear about God and strengthen our faith.
>
> > Only by the grace of God, which is a free gift, are we saved.
>
> This is true. It's also a bit of doctrine.

And as a bit of doctrine, the big difference between it and what
'today' is supposed to mean is that it's one we can all agree on.

But go back to arguing about where a comma is supposed to be inserted
when translating from a source language that doesn't even have them.

--
There's no place like 127.0.0.1

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

wrote:

> Bob Felts wrote:
> > wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Your "god" has no basis for "love." Love require interpersonal
> > > relationships.
> >
> > Does it? Does the Scripture not say that we are to love ourselves? Love
> > of self, while personal, doesn't seem to me to fit the definition of
> > interpersonal.
> >
> > If this is true, then the same can be said of a monolithic god. Right?
> >
> "If" is the correct way of answering. It is interesting that this phrase
> is quoted 7 times in the NT. "You shall agape your neighbor as your
> self."
>
> I think it pertainent to note that a counselor must know the telos of
> every passage that he uses in counseling. It is not enough to understand
> the grammatical-historical, biblical-theological or systematic, and
> rhetorical aspects of a passage. These are essential, and I should be the
> last one to say anything to undermine such work, for each of these
> elements plays a vital part in biblical exegesis. Yet it is possible to
> have all of these matters in mind in exegesis and still misuse a portion
> of Scripture in preaching or counseling. Thus,