Methods the devil uses to destroy Morality

[bkMitchell]

Besides, is not this a forum? Can not one talk about what he clearly sees as Bible truth or does he have to follow old denominational traditional of the so-called established doctrines?

Sure, of course you can but please keep in mind....

BibleWorks(software) and these forums are used by a very board range of users. There are Jewish users, Presbyterians, Eastern Orthodox, Methodist, Mormons, Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, Baptist, pentecostal, non-denominational users, church of Christ, and the list goes on.
There is no one denominational tradition represented here nor are there an so called established doctrines represented here!

As, you can imagine, not everyone here shares the same canon of scripture!
Notice:

The Jewish Bible has 24 books
The Orthodox Church has 76 books
Catholic (and Anglican) Bibles have 73 books
Mainline Protestant Bibles have 66 books

So, when you say "the Bible" it is better if you clearly define which canon you are talking about? Which Bible or Holy Scriptures do you accept? And, there is no such thing as "Biblical Truth" without regard to canon, and ecclesiastic heritage.

Most, here I would imagine use BibleWorks(software) for the task of exegesis of the original text but of course we all redact and apply that text (Or whatever Canon we hold to) differently.

I still do not yet understand which hermeneutic or method you use to interpret scripture? And, as mentioned above, which canon of scripture and community of faith you are from?

[dalemac]

Sure, of course you can but please keep in mind....

BibleWorks(software) and these forums are used by a very board range of users. There are Jewish users, Presbyterians, Eastern Orthodox, Methodist, Mormons, Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, Baptist, pentecostal, non-denominational users, church of Christ, and the list goes on.
There is no one denominational tradition represented here nor are there an so called established doctrines represented here!

As, you can imagine, not everyone here shares the same canon of scripture!
Notice:

The Jewish Bible has 24 books
The Orthodox Church has 76 books
Catholic (and Anglican) Bibles have 73 books
Mainline Protestant Bibles have 66 books

So, when you say "the Bible" it is better if you clearly define which canon you are talking about? Which Bible or Holy Scriptures do you accept? And, there is no such thing as "Biblical Truth" without regard to canon, and ecclesiastic heritage.

Most, here I would imagine use BibleWorks(software) for the task of exegesis of the original text but of course we all redact and apply that text (Or whatever Canon we hold to) differently.

I still do not yet understand which hermeneutic or method you use to interpret scripture? And, as mentioned above, which canon of scripture and community of faith you are from?

Thank you, but I perceive that this is not the place to debate and share with others the wonderful truths I have experienced from the word of God (the cannon of the 39 OT books of Masoretic text and the 27 books of the original Greek NT (NESTLES, UBS, etc). I have not gotten a single response of like kind or wanting to know more or debate but criticism as it seems to be too marvelous for them, and I, apparently, can’t share truth that will step on the toes of other faiths that use the forums as it will contradict what they believe. I will go elsewhere. Thank you. I don’t follow any particular established method of hermeneutics. My faith is Christian (born-again), non denomination that believes in following God’s Word whole heartily and there is only one Bible (God’s word), and we know what the cannon of scripture is, and God will be continuing revealing new truth and revelations about himself to his church that constitutes the bride of Christ in these last days. Thank you for your time.

Dalemac

[bkMitchell]

I have not gotten a single response of like kind or wanting to know more or debate ...and I, apparently, can’t share truth that will step on the toes of other faiths that use the forums as it will contradict what they believe...

What did you want to debate about?
If you'd like to talk about the Masoretic text and Masorah I would be happy to discuss it with you here.

Don't worry about you can share 'truth or data on the forums of course. However, my point was inform you that there is no one point of view shared by everyone on the forums.

Remember earlier when you asked:

does he have to follow old denominational traditional of the so-called established doctrines?

I wanted to let you know that there are no 'doctrines' that everyone on these forums must hold to.

In general these forums have very little to do with 'theology' or 'doctrine' and a lot more do with a commerical software program for morphological and grammatical analysis original language texts.Of course this section of the forums is for any type of topic so you are in the right place.

[bobvenem]

Please refrain from referring to DaleMac as a representative of Fundamentalists. Some of us can spell.

Besides, if he was a REAL fundamentalist, he'd use Scrivener's TR

[Dale A. Brueggemann]

If [DaleMac] was a REAL fundamentalist, he'd use Scrivener's TR

Good way to start off my day, with a BibleWorks circle laugh.

[Lee]

. . . the word of God (the cannon of the 39 OT books of Masoretic text and the 27 books of the original Greek NT (NESTLES, UBS, etc). . . . believes in following God’s Word whole heartily and there is only one Bible (God’s word), and we know what the cannon of scripture is, and God will be continuing revealing new truth and revelations about himself to his church that constitutes the bride of Christ in these last days.

Sir, you do realize the portion of your statement in boldface above completely contradicts what precedes it, do you not?

[dalemac]

What did you want to debate about?
If you'd like to talk about the Masoretic text and Masorah I would be happy to discuss it with you here.

Don't worry about you can share 'truth or data on the forums of course. However, my point was inform you that there is no one point of view shared by everyone on the forums.

Remember earlier when you asked:
I wanted to let you know that there are no 'doctrines' that everyone on these forums must hold to.

In general these forums have very little to do with 'theology' or 'doctrine' and a lot more do with a commerical software program for morphological and grammatical analysis original language texts.Of course this section of the forums is for any type of topic so you are in the right place.

Thank you for your response.

Then, I will feel free to share truth as I see it from my understanding of what constitutes the Bible without mentioning any particular faith or denomination out of respect of Bible Works users but if it contradicts or offends anyone’s belief, I can not help that as this is what I believe and am not purposely trying to offend anyone – just looking for those who can see the same as I do or at least question it or want to know more about it themselves for I know I’m not the only one who believe these marvelous and wonderful things!

I’m not sure what was meant by different methods of hermeneutics unless talking about literal, allegorical, spiritual, etc., interpretation of scripture. I take principals of hermeneutics and add other principals not found in the books. I have a somewhat large library and have found almost every book off in areas when it comes to theology; good for background information but horrible on Christian theology (referring to the group that believes in being born-again).

My religion is born-again believer, Pentecostal (that is, speak or pray in tongues), non-denominational that believes in following the Word of God whole heartedly and that God will reveal more and more Truth in the days up ahead. I have gone to Bible College and earned a Master of theology but don’t claim to be some genius as I’m not. I’m presently restudying Greek to the best of my ability, doing personal and complex Bible studies, and helping one Bible teacher.

I was not aware of the different cannons of scriptures. My understanding there is really only one Bible (or more properly one inspired Word of God) composing of the 39 books of the OT of basically the Massoretic text and of the 27 books of the Greek NT (Matt through Revelation) of the various English Bibles such as Rotherham, Numeric, Amplified, New World, Berkley, Concordant Literal, (NLT) (both versions), and the 1977 version of (NAS), all being the more literal to the Greek of UBS and Nestles texts and other texts). The (NLT) is good in most spots but sometime is way off the known original Greek because they translate certain verses according to the theology of the translators and abandon the Greek text. This is easily proven by an exegesis in BW. I hope this explains what you requested to know as I’m not fully sure how to respond.

Will share more later, if I can. For now, I have to stop.

Dalemac

[dalemac]

Sir, you do realize the portion of your statement in boldface above completely contradicts what precedes it, do you not?

No, I do not see how it contradicts, please explain?

The Bible is not a complete revelation of God nor was it ever intended to be for God continues to give new revelation and understanding to his church but what God chose to write down as the cannon of scripture is complete. It is not a complete book on all the revelations and understanding God intended his church to have. God has revealed many things not found in the Bible (directly), but they do not contradict what is written in the bible.

Dalemac

[Lee]

No, I do not see how it contradicts, please explain?

The Bible is not a complete revelation of God nor was it ever intended to be for God continues to give new revelation and understanding to his church but what God chose to write down as the cannon of scripture is complete. It is not a complete book on all the revelations and understanding God intended his church to have. God has revealed many things not found in the Bible (directly), but they do not contradict what is written in the bible.

Dalemac

If God continues to give new revelation, why would it not be appended to the Bible? Why would He give "new understanding" of the Bible if one can fully understand what is written simply by reading? (Eph. 3:3-4).

[bobvenem]

No, I do not see how it contradicts, please explain?

The Bible is not a complete revelation of God nor was it ever intended to be for God continues to give new revelation and understanding to his church but what God chose to write down as the cannon of scripture is complete. It is not a complete book on all the revelations and understanding God intended his church to have. God has revealed many things not found in the Bible (directly), but they do not contradict what is written in the bible.

Dalemac

Now it makes sense. Your initial post was freshly-minted revelation. No wonder it was inscrutable.