tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3888890053009864274.post8915223433130990547..comments2023-06-05T08:19:47.484-07:00Comments on Thoughts of a Christian: Pisseth on the Wall by Steven L. AndersonKen Cookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18228085189578058819noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3888890053009864274.post-25991107778400979022009-03-16T12:20:00.000-07:002009-03-16T12:20:00.000-07:00you documented the following verses: 1 Timothy 3:1...you documented the following verses: 1 Timothy 3:16, Revelation 1:11, 1 John 5:7, Mark 9:46, Mark 6:11, and Acts 8:37 as being erroneous, but you do not document how these verses are erroneously translated. I can document specifically many others in the KJV that are erroneous. in John 3:16, the favorite verse of most christians, the KJV reads "only begotten son" but history and the rest of scripture teaches us that believing that Jesus was begotten of the father and not incarnated miraculously by the father is heretical. Thus this reading of John 3:16 of Jesus being begotten (implied by the father) is erroneous. Also the greek word used for "Only Begotten" is "mnongenes" meaning "one of a kind, original, there is nothing like this thing it is so 'one'" and thus the modern translation is superior reading "...one and only son...". If you would be so kind as to further document the errors of the verses you provided as erroneously translated by modern versions, (really I'll try and keep this easy for you, pick a version that's modern and that you think is erroneous that is not a paraphrase (i.e. it's cheating to use the message) and demonstrate that that modern version's readings of the verses are erroneous. Thank you.Gino Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03722121470460386025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3888890053009864274.post-81325278661986848142008-08-29T17:25:00.000-07:002008-08-29T17:25:00.000-07:00You sure have to give me a better Scripture refere...You sure have to give me a better Scripture reference to prove to me the KJV isn't the best Bible out there in circulation still.<BR/>How about all the scores of passages flawed in the newer versions? 1 Timothy 3:16, Revelation 1:11, 1 John 5:7, Mark 9:46, Mark 6:11, Acts 8:37, etc etc etc<BR/>I challenge you to read D.A Waite's book defending the KJ Bible, and see if it doesn't stir you up a bit. Especially the superior theology section.<BR/><BR/>I dare ya...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3888890053009864274.post-10083533404106156642008-07-16T17:00:00.000-07:002008-07-16T17:00:00.000-07:00Well, I agree and disagree. If the local church tr...Well, I agree and disagree. If the local church trained men to be leaders then they would have a form of formal training. I think that this Pastor Anderson does need some formal training as it is clear that he is in error in several areas, such as KJV only, his stance on Bible Colleges, His view of the Local and Universal Church.Ken Cookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18228085189578058819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3888890053009864274.post-36416673235999420502008-07-16T12:22:00.000-07:002008-07-16T12:22:00.000-07:00Perhaps the issue, then, is not a pastor's lack of...Perhaps the issue, then, is not a pastor's lack of formal scholastic training, but that our modern churches lack the vision or resources to equip the flock adequately. I believe it comes back to discipleship.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3888890053009864274.post-43899689205517669312008-07-15T16:13:00.000-07:002008-07-15T16:13:00.000-07:00I understand your contention, but allow me to defe...I understand your contention, but allow me to defend my statement. First, while spurgeon didn't have a degree he was VERY well read in puritan theology. Also the Church was different then, I believe that your average member was taught exegesis... And while I do strongly believe in Formal Training, My comments were more born from the idea that Pastor Anderson believes Formal Theological Education to be Sin ala his article on that very topic. (http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/biblecollege.html). <BR/>Also, while someone like Rob Bell holds a degree it is from Fuller Theological Sem. Which rejects full biblical inerracy... Even still I would think that Rob Bell Could or should be able to exegete a text better then this guy... maybe not.Ken Cookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18228085189578058819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3888890053009864274.post-7738202176515001142008-07-15T12:55:00.000-07:002008-07-15T12:55:00.000-07:00As promised, you posted Pastor Anderson's sermon! ...As promised, you posted Pastor Anderson's sermon! I appreciated your comments...although I would take issue with your contention that Mr. Anderson's poor exegesis is the result of no seminary training. Mark Driscoll planted and pastored Mars Hill for many years with no Bible college or seminary training. I believe he has yet to complete such a degree. Other preachers such as Charles Spurgeon, DL Moody, and AW Tozer had no formal pastoral training. Were these men not qualified to pastor and preach? There are many "average joes" who have a deep passion to shepherd God's people and teach His word, including many good elders and perhaps...you and I. Let us not forget that God quite enjoys working through the average joes of the world. <BR/>I believe it would be prudent to qualify based upon calling and competance rather than worldly standards. After all, Rob Bell holds an Mdiv!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com