Is this too much compromise?

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Amanah

It brings it to the point of being ridiculous if we can't trust the translations of scripture, but must research the meaning in the original languages, but need the original languages interpreted, but can't trust the lexicons and dictionaries. We also can't rely on history, because history was written by the catholic church for the most part.

which leads us to semiotics, if words are signs that signify constantly changing interpretations, how can we discern universal truths?
and leads us to Jacques Derrida, and post modernism, its a slippery slope.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Amanah

It brings it to the point of being ridiculous if we can't trust the translations of scripture, but must research the meaning in the original languages, but need the original languages interpreted, but can't trust the lexicons and dictionaries. We also can't rely on history, because history was written by the catholic church for the most part.

Originally Posted by Amanah

which leads us to semiotics, if words are signs that signify constantly changing interpretations, how can we discern universal truths? and leads us to Jacques Derrida, and post modernism, its a slippery slope.

Originally Posted by Amanah

Listen to your Pastor.

OK, Amen.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Amanah

OK, Amen.

Jeremiah 6:16 "Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein."

Anything else is unproven!

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Jeremiah 6:16 "Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein."

Anything else is unproven!

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Amanah

It brings it to the point of being ridiculous if we can't trust the translations of scripture, but must research the meaning in the original languages, but need the original languages interpreted, but can't trust the lexicons and dictionaries. We also can't rely on history, because history was written by the catholic church for the most part.

Pretty quick observation, but Derrida and the Deconstructionists aren't that far off. While I don't agree with of lot of their philosophical mayhem. I do understand how each generation over time changes word definition. In a song called the Cowboy's Lament (also known as the streets' of Laredo) there is a line which goes like this, "in the saddle I use to go dashing in the saddle I use to go gay." Now if I play this for youth today, they might get the totally wrong idea. But if I know the culture of which the song lyrics were written. Also know how other groups used that word within that culture. I will come up with the correct meaning. Lexicon, dictionary definition is checked by using a wide variety of dictionaries which aren't exclusive to just that one religion. History isn't all under the power of the Catholics. It was recorded when before them by other religions, and after them by different groups. Truth is out there. All I'm saying that we need to make sure we look well to our going.

[berkeley]

Dashing in the saddle... gay.

So much wrong with that song.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by berkeley

Dashing in the saddle... gay.

So much wrong with that song.

That’s my point.

That is because you know longer see the song in its original intent.
The definition of gay wasn’t the same as it is now.

[Bro Flame]

Originally Posted by consapente89

Why is everyone arguing over the SOF? If the SOF spelled out every point of Apostolic doctrine, the man would still be a compromiser!

Precisely what I'm thinking. Even if this Statement of Faith had somehow been able to include every single angle that falls under any self-identifying Apostolic believer's individual beliefs, someone here would still have found some issue that they were compromising, even if every single thing they said was backed up.

[consapente89]

Originally Posted by Holy Roller

Precisely what I'm thinking. Even if this Statement of Faith had somehow been able to include every single angle that falls under any self-identifying Apostolic believer's individual beliefs, someone here would still have found some issue that they were compromising, even if every single thing they said was backed up.

He is still a compromiser regardless of what the SOF says.

[consapente89]

Originally Posted by Holy Roller

Precisely what I'm thinking. Even if this Statement of Faith had somehow been able to include every single angle that falls under any self-identifying Apostolic believer's individual beliefs, someone here would still have found some issue that they were compromising, even if every single thing they said was backed up.

He is still a compromiser regardless of what the SOF says.