Dan I was making light about your and Mark's desire for folks to quit quoting Jones and Waggoner, EGW, Fifield and C.S. Lewis....Can't figure out why you feel this way.

It's like having a Baseball forum and banning quoting Ruth, Mays and DiMaggio.

(Preminger spoke fine English and German...I don't get the "dead or etheral languages" comment"...Oh well.

I know you were making light, but for me the is a most serious issue. I don't mean that you shouldn't have made light of it. I'm grateful anyone pays attention at all. I think a baseball expert could explain baseball without using baseball terms by breaking it down in terms a person uses in everyday life, even though that person was totally ignorant of baseball. Of course I'm stuck with the fact that Jesus quoted the old testament a lot. But I believe that He spoke in a contemporary way to those who could here his words. I don't think He communicated his message by using inside language and terms found in theological circles.

For example. I see this word faith get thrown around a lot. It is used sometimes in a contemporary setting but is often not used the same way in a religious setting. Another word is spiritual. How often do you say spiritual when you go the the bank or grocery store of anywhere else in your daily life.

This opens up a whole other can of worms I'd like to chew on. Are we looking for God to do His magic? Magically give us a new heart. There was a lot going on with David that brought him to the point when he asked for that. We sometimes use the medical profession to explain how our healing takes place. We want to go to the doctor and get a new heart, or whatever. We want the doctor to do his magic or give us a pill to do it. A quick magical fix healing. But what we need is to understand the principles of health that would prevent us form needing a doctor in the first place. So don't tell me about needing faith in the doctor so he can heal me. Talk to me about what I'm doing wrong and what I need to do so I don't need to be healed. God told us (A&E) to stay away from the TOKOGAE. I think God wants us to follow his natural solutions, the ones he gives us first. But our theology suggests that it has to be a magical one that only the great magician can perform. That is to cultish for me. To much Satan's methods of magic, deceit and slight of hand.

As far as these folks >>ones and Waggoner, EGW, Fifield and C.S. Lewis>>, if we understand the real meaning of their message, we should be able to explain it in our own words using contemporary language without the crutch (baseball or theological term or quote) which is a tip off we don't know how to walk very well.

That's what happened when Jesus came. Oh, they knew the jargon inside and out, forwards and backwards and could quote anyone. But they didn't really have a clue as to what it meant. When the real meaning came a long, they wanted to snuff it out (crucify it).

End of Rant

I'm all for practical religion, stripping away jargon and tossing "catchwords" in the shredder, but we all are not genuises and fully polished thinkers (even if we think we are) and learning from older and dead brethern is a healthy thing...IF one learns. If one is chasing his tail or showing off, that's another matter.

I don't know what business you're in Dan, but you had to be schooled, learn from others and use reference materials to get where you are, right. You have a jargon among co-workers.

Sure... in mundane things, (like baseball) I have actually been able to explain to non-Americans what a "balk" is or a "bunt" without quoting Harry Carey.

But the hugest subject in the Universe (God) tends to make us dependent on souls that God has instructed on things that we haven't learned yet. That's what revelation is, and inspiration. That's why Gos wants churches, groups, family....He reaches different minds at different levels for different needs.

Christ taught in parables; it was easy to understand, but hard to fathom in practical terms to many. Look at Nicodemus' confusion, the disciples that left Him, when He spoke of drinking His blood and eating His flesh. Simple needs explanation , too.

That's what's great about HS: we can hash things out, boil them down to their elements and apply them real-time IF we want to.

Or we can talk about transubstitutionalism...if ya like...

So......who made it to the tour?????

Was it great or what??

Luv,
Marg

Koffee,

I'm just trying to nudge, hopefully in a better direction. It's fine to quote anyone. But if I quoted ideas to you in Chinese, it might not convey much. It would be better if I could understand Chinese and than say it to you in a language you could understand. At times in some discussions, I felt I was having a discussion with a recording.

I don't know of anyone better at doing this than Graham Maxwell. He could challenge the most sophisticated complex theological subjects, and then turn around and present them in the most simple to understand language, and then discuss them on that level. He was the first one to bring to my attention the dark speech elephant in the room. He was able to break the dark speech barrier.

BTW, I think you are very understandable, as well as some others here.

Quote by: koffee_anon It's like having a Baseball forum and banning quoting Ruth, Mays and DiMaggio.

I submit that it is more like having a baseball training camp and spending the entire time TALKING about Ruth, Mays and DiMaggio rather than actually going out on the field and playing baseball! And since Jesus is our ultimate example maybe a quote from him (since he is NOT dead ) would be appropriate: "Let the dead bury the dead!"

Just having fun back. But seriously, no one ever recommended that we ban quoting dead people. Sleeping with them on the other hand...

Mark

Quote by: Dan

BTW, I think you are very understandable, as well as some others here.

Whew! That's a relief. I admit: I hate "Bible Frisbee" (tossing verses back and forth with no personal comments) and "Fuller than U. Theological Seminary Pictionary" ('I'll baffle you with my hermeneutic skills faster than you can say 'sacramentarianal pedobaptistm')

Simple is good, but not always the same kind of simple works with everyone.

There is a time for Bible, SOP and other thumping. I think a lot more mileage gets covered in a free flow contemporary language discussion in the context of what the picture looks like. If we start off nit piking about individual puzzle pieces or brush strokes, the painting never gets completed. A piece (passage) might seem to fit in a particular spot, but when you stand back, you find some green grass in the middle of a patch of blue sky. After the picture is completed, then is the time to go back and see what the source is if something seems out of place.

You will never see above the clouds of confusion if don't board the plane. And you'll never board the plane if you don't get out of your car.

Dan good points.
Mark But this is a forum, not a real-time camp of any kind. Most folks here will never meet, except the fortunate few who make it to GNTours.

When I hear of Keith's work, or Martin's mission in Africa, Brad and Dorothee's publishing of Fifield's book, I am heartened; but how many here literally HELPED them?

That's practical godliness, and all the yap means zip if no one does anything.

Discussion continued here:
April 23 2007 @ 04:58 AM
http://www.heavenlysanctuary.com/forum/viewtopic.php?showtopic=35842