Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Text types

Expand Messages
  • Jim Pellegrini
    What about the doctrine of providential preservation? Has not God preserved His word for the church throughout all generations? In reading this debate, I have
    Message 1 of 24 , Apr 30, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      What about the doctrine of providential preservation? Has not God preserved His word for the church throughout all generations? In reading this debate, I have not heard someone mention this doctrine, which is a key piece of the puzzle in this debate.

      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      http://mail.yahoo.com

    • timmopussycat
      ... preserved His word for the church throughout all generations? In reading this debate, I have not heard someone mention this doctrine, which is a key piece
      Message 2 of 24 , May 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Jim Pellegrini
        <falcon5064@y...> wrote:
        > What about the doctrine of providential preservation? Has not God
        preserved His word for the church throughout all generations? In
        reading this debate, I have not heard someone mention this doctrine,
        which is a key piece of the puzzle in this debate.
        >

        Tim-All sides agree that God providently preserved the text. The
        question in debate is, which ms or mss type among all the mss availble
        to us is the closest to the human writer's mss.

        Unless anybody can show a clear case of doctrine loss where relying on
        one text family or false doctine gained when relying on another, I am
        enending my contributions to this thread.

        Tim


        > __________________________________________________
        > Do You Yahoo!?
        > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
        > http://mail.yahoo.com
      • bucerian
        ... preserved His word for the church throughout all generations? In reading this debate, I have not heard someone mention this doctrine, which is a key piece
        Message 3 of 24 , May 3, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Jim Pellegrini
          <falcon5064@y...> wrote:
          > What about the doctrine of providential preservation? Has not God
          preserved His word for the church throughout all generations? In
          reading this debate, I have not heard someone mention this doctrine,
          which is a key piece of the puzzle in this debate.


          First Things first! Let's deal with this error before proceeding.

          TPL
        • Theodore Letis
          Now, let s get on to this doctrine of Providential Preservation. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I have written two rather important essays addressing how
          Message 4 of 24 , May 4, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Now, let's get on to this doctrine of Providential Preservation. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I have written two rather important essays addressing how both Theodore Beza, and John Owen, understood the doctrine of Providential Preservation, as worked out in practical terms with reference to the actual data of the manuscripts; and both of these essays are found in my book, The Majority Text: Essays and Reviews in the Continuing Debate:
             

            Click here for a synopsis.
            Click here for a review

            Furthermore, I go into even more detail on this in another essay which first appeared in the The Scottish Bulletin of Evangelcial Theology (July 1989), and is called:"The Protestant Dogmaticians and the Late Princeton School on the Status of the Sacred Apographa." This can now be found in my book titled: The Ecclesiastical Text: Text Criticism, Biblical Authority and the Popular Mind:


            The Ecclesiastical Text

            Click here for a synopsis.
            Click here for a review

            The Teaching of the WCF on the doctrine of Providential Preservation was destroyed by B.B. Warfield (in the early 20th century about the same time that the statement on the Antichrist was taken out of the WCF), who wanted to introduce Westcott and Hort into the Presbyterian Church in America and in order to do it he changed the teaching of the WCF from Providential Preservation, to Providential RESTORATION. THIS MEANT THE CHURCH HAD LOST THE TRUE TEXT, FOR NEARLY 1500 YEARS, BUT WESTCOTT AND HORT HAD RE-DISCOVERED IT IN CODEX VATICANUS AND CODEX SINAITICUS. He was able to take folks away from the Confession by the introduction of a different paradigm:

            "inerrant autographs"

            instead of

            "infallible copies [apographs]"

            Soon after he introduced these ideas at Princeton Seminary, Princeton fell to higher criticism! Rread a synopsis of this thesis here:

            http://www.kuyper.org/main/publish/journal/printer_67.shtml

            Jim Pellegrini <falcon5064@...> wrote:

            What about the doctrine of providential preservation? Has not God preserved His word for the church throughout all generations? In reading this debate, I have not heard someone mention this doctrine, which is a key piece of the puzzle in this debate.

            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com

            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com

          • Daniel
            Dr. Letus, The doctrine of God s preservation of the scriptures is assumed in this debate. But maybe we are missing something. What are we missing? In Christ,
            Message 5 of 24 , May 4, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Dr. Letus,

              The doctrine of God's preservation of the scriptures is assumed in this
              debate. But maybe we are missing something. What are we missing?

              In Christ,

              Daniel Drost
            • keith dotzler
              One thing I would like to say is that I agree with you that no translation of the original languages is at all pure.... Careful, Dan. What about Joseph s
              Message 6 of 24 , May 5, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                One thing I would like to say is that I agree with you that no translation of the original languages is at all pure....
                 
                Careful, Dan.  What about Joseph's conversation with his brethren, prior to their recognizing him as their long-lost brother?  He spoke to them in Egyptian, using an interpreter (Gen. 42:23), yet the whole account appears in the "original language" of Hebrew.  Does that constitute a "pure" translation, or not? 
                 
                It never ceases to amaze me how a translation from Greek and Hebrew into English can't possibly be pure, yet a translation from Egyptian (Joseph, Pharaoh, Moses) and Chaldean (Nebuchadnezzar, Daniel) into Hebrew CAN.
                 
                The notion that the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures can't be purely translated into the English tongue is a lie from the pit of hell, and wreaks of Popery.
                 
                   
                 
                Keith
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                 
                ----- Original Message -----
                From: Daniel
                Sent: 5/4/2005 11:31:12 PM
                Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Text types

                Chris,

                One thing I would like to say is that I agree with you that no
                translation of the original languages is at all pure and also that
                they still can in some sense be called the word of God. In other
                words if the only translation I had was the NIV, then I would use it,
                as corrupt as it is.

                And I see what you are saying about the fact that the spirit assures
                us that the Bible is the word of God so that what is debated is not
                the authority of scripture but which text type most accurately
                reflects the original. But to me it seems like the same thing as
                questioning God's word but on a different level. Yes, the original is
                inspired but if we don't know what the original is then we are back
                to square one (square one being that we don't really know what the
                word of God is yet). What good is it simply to know that there is an
                original out there somewhere? Because, if the means by which we get
                back to the original is by textual criticism, which is by definition
                uncertain, then we still have that layer of doubt to pass through to
                get to God's word. It might be true that all of the text types agree
                in most places but is that why we should be sure that those
                particular words are inspired? The only reason why we know that is
                because the textual critics say it and as faithfull as the RPNA is
                (and I would say that they are one of the most faithfull
                denominations) I cannot rely of there testimony because they are
                still mere men.

                I actually believe that Textual Criticism can be used to guide us,
                just like we can use church history to guide us to find the right
                cannon of scripture, but I firmly believe that God has to give a
                direct witness in order to be completely sure. Just as we wouldn't
                say the the authority of Scripture rests on the church we should also
                say that it doesn't rest on the testimony of textual critics. For
                instance, I don't believe that John 3:16 is there simply because all
                of the text types have it, but because the spirit assures it to my
                heart. What I am against is modern textual criticism which seems to
                confuse that order of importance. So, I don't believe that the Spirit
                first guides us to the Bible and then leaves us to find out which
                text is right, because even the places that agree can only be found
                out to be so by those who see the texts first hand (and even that
                doesn't remove the uncertainty) but that the Spirits work always
                logically precedes the uncertainty of science on any level.

                Some, I guess, could argue that I am missrepresenting the arguement
                by saying that we rely on textual CRITICS as opposed to saying
                textual CRITICISM. Putting aside the fact that textual criticism
                wouldn't be certain anyway, I think that we can safely say that the
                church would have to rely on the actual fallible CRITICS themselve
                because only they are qualified enough to make such an inquiry
                leaving the rest of the church to move with them as they get blown to
                and fro by every wind of scientific discovery and human error.

                It is good to discuss this with you and God bless.

                In Christ,

                Daniel Drost


              • Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                Keith, ... translated into the English tongue is a lie from the pit of hell, and wreaks of Popery. ... Now, if you are so dogmatic and emphatic to make this
                Message 7 of 24 , May 5, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Keith,

                  You wrote:
                  > The notion that the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures can't be purely
                  translated into the English tongue is a lie from the pit of hell,
                  and wreaks of Popery.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Keith

                  Now, if you are so dogmatic and emphatic to make this judgment on
                  this issue, then why are you not more emphatic to condemn will-
                  worship, i.e. singing man-made hymns, use of instruments in public
                  worship, celebrating holy-days (xmas & easter), and etc.?

                  I understand that you and I rightly understand & agree that the
                  Papacy is the Anit-Christ and for the right reasons, but you are yet
                  to give up the very foundation that makes all people follow after
                  the Beast, which is WILL-WORSHIP, that is truly from the very depths
                  of the pit of hell (to use your imagery). It's funny and ironic
                  that Lutherans and Baptists rail against the Church of Rome and that
                  whore named the Pope, yet follow her steps when it comes to worship.

                  It is easy to bash the Pope, but it is very hard to get off the
                  Appian Way, when you don't realize that you are walking the same
                  path that Rome would have all people on, namely the road that leads
                  to worshipping the Beast. Will-Worship leads to that.

                  Keith and Dr, Letis, when will you really begin to lay the ax to the
                  root of the Anti-Christ to make true and deep cuts into her? In
                  other words, when will you give up your will-worship and truly
                  worship God as He has commanded, i.e. singing using the 150 Psalms
                  alone without the use of instruments, observing the Lord's Day alone
                  & not other "holy"-days, not having pictures of hippies anywhere and
                  call those pictures of hippies, "Jesus", and other religious symbols
                  that cause veneration, abandoning the false notions of
                  Consusbtantation (which is Rome in disguise), and etc.

                  The LORD God of Hosts MUST be first, then comes our desires, as
                  long as they do not clash with God's will and Law towards us.

                  You MUST die to self...mortify your flesh...you are not yours, but
                  have been BOUGHT with a price and are now a SLAVE to righteousness
                  and will-worship is NOT righteousness...be faithful to your Master
                  and Friend.


                  Let God be true though every man a liar.


                  For His Crown & Glory,

                  Edgar


                  --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "keith dotzler"
                  <kdotz@e...> wrote:
                  > One thing I would like to say is that I agree with you that no
                  translation of the original languages is at all pure....
                  >
                  > Careful, Dan. What about Joseph's conversation with his brethren,
                  prior to their recognizing him as their long-lost brother? He spoke
                  to them in Egyptian, using an interpreter (Gen. 42:23), yet the
                  whole account appears in the "original language" of Hebrew. Does
                  that constitute a "pure" translation, or not?
                  >
                  > It never ceases to amaze me how a translation from Greek and
                  Hebrew into English can't possibly be pure, yet a translation from
                  Egyptian (Joseph, Pharaoh, Moses) and Chaldean (Nebuchadnezzar,
                  Daniel) into Hebrew CAN.
                  >
                  > The notion that the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures can't be purely
                  translated into the English tongue is a lie from the pit of hell,
                  and wreaks of Popery.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Keith
                  >
                • Daniel
                  Keith, I can t rule that out I guess. God could do that if he wanted to. So do you believe that (a) certain translation(s) is (or are) actually completely
                  Message 8 of 24 , May 5, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Keith,

                    I can't rule that out I guess. God could do that if he wanted to. So
                    do you believe that (a) certain translation(s) is (or are) actually
                    completely inspired? I don't see why that couldn't be the case! I
                    guess I spoke to soon.

                    Dan Drost
                  • keith dotzler
                    Bro Edgar, I am neither Lutheran NOR Baptist. I WAS Baptist for 11 years, and, prior to that, Roman Catholic from childhood. Since my eyes were opened to the
                    Message 9 of 24 , May 5, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                       
                      Bro Edgar,
                       
                      I am neither Lutheran NOR Baptist. 
                       
                      I WAS Baptist for 11 years, and, prior to that, Roman Catholic from childhood.  Since my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace and the Papal Antichrist, I now consider myself an elect child of God (who has mercy on whom He will have mercy...leaving vast multitudes yet blinded to things I, by His grace alone, now see), and proudly consider myself Reformed and truly Protestant.    
                       
                       
                      "...when will you give up your will-worship and truly worship God as He has commanded, i.e. singing using the 150 Psalms alone without the use of instruments, observing the Lord's Day alone & not other "holy"-days, not having pictures of hippies anywhere and call those pictures of hippies, "Jesus", and other religious symbols that cause veneration, abandoning the false notions of Consubstantiation (which is Rome in disguise), and etc."
                       
                       
                      What makes you think I am a will-worshipper, sing to instruments at "church," observe "holy" days, have pictures of Jesus hanging on my walls, and venerate crosses and other religious symbols? 
                       
                      Regarding pictures of Jesus and other religious symbols, I whole-heartedly agree with Claude of Turin (9th century), when he states:
                       
                       
                      "God commands us to bear our cross, and not to worship it; but these are all for worshipping it; whereas they do not bear it at all, neither will they bear it either corporally or spiritually: to serve God after this manner is to go a whoring from him. For if we ought to adore the cross, because Christ was fastened to it, how many other things are there which touched Jesus Christ, and which he made according to the flesh? Did not he continue nine months in the womb of the Virgin? Why do not they then on the same score worship all that are virgins, because a virgin brought forth Jesus Christ? Why do not they adore mangers and old clouts, because he was laid in a manger, and wrapped in swaddling clothes? Why do not they adore fisher-boats, because he slept in one of them, and preached to the multitudes, and caused a net to be cast out, wherewith was caught a miraculous quantity of fish? Let them adore asses, because he entered into Jerusalem upon the foal of an ass; and lambs, because it is written of him, Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world. But these sort of men would rather eat live lambs than worship their images. Why do not they worship lions, because he is called the Lion of the tribe of Judah? Or rocks, because it is said, And the Rock was Christ? or thorns, because he was crowned with them? or lances, because one of them pierced his side?" (Claude of Turin - 9th century witness against the Papacy, cited by Peter Allix in The Ecclesiastical History of the Ancient Churches of the Piedmont and the Albigenses, chap. 9)

                      Keith
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: 5/5/2005 4:50:13 PM
                      Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Text types

                      Keith,

                         You wrote:
                      > The notion that the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures can't be purely
                      translated into the English tongue is a lie from the pit of hell,
                      and wreaks of Popery.
                      >
                      >   
                      >
                      > Keith

                      Now, if you are so dogmatic and emphatic to make this judgment on
                      this issue, then why are you not more emphatic to condemn will-
                      worship, i.e. singing man-made hymns, use of instruments in public
                      worship, celebrating holy-days (xmas & easter), and etc.?

                        I understand that you and I rightly understand & agree that the
                      Papacy is the Anit-Christ and for the right reasons, but you are yet
                      to give up the very foundation that makes all people follow after
                      the Beast, which is WILL-WORSHIP, that is truly from the very depths
                      of the pit of hell (to use your imagery).  It's funny and ironic
                      that Lutherans and Baptists rail against the Church of Rome and that
                      whore named the Pope, yet follow her steps when it comes to worship.

                        It is easy to bash the Pope, but it is very hard to get off the
                      Appian Way, when you don't realize that you are walking the same
                      path that Rome would have all people on, namely the road that leads
                      to worshipping the Beast.  Will-Worship leads to that.

                      Keith and Dr, Letis, when will you really begin to lay the ax to the
                      root of the Anti-Christ to make true and deep cuts into her?  In
                      other words, when will you give up your will-worship and truly
                      worship God as He has commanded, i.e. singing using the 150 Psalms
                      alone without the use of instruments, observing the Lord's Day alone
                      & not other "holy"-days, not having pictures of hippies anywhere and
                      call those pictures of hippies, "Jesus", and other religious symbols
                      that cause veneration, abandoning the false notions of
                      Consusbtantation (which is Rome in disguise), and etc.

                        The LORD God of Hosts MUST be first, then comes our desires, as
                      long as they do not clash with God's will and Law towards us.

                        You MUST die to self...mortify your flesh...you are not yours, but
                      have been BOUGHT with a price and are now a SLAVE to righteousness
                      and will-worship is NOT righteousness...be faithful to your Master
                      and Friend.


                      Let God be true though every man a liar.


                      For His Crown & Glory,

                      Edgar


                      --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "keith dotzler"
                      <kdotz@e...> wrote:
                      > One thing I would like to say is that I agree with you that no
                      translation of the original languages is at all pure....
                      >
                      > Careful, Dan.  What about Joseph's conversation with his brethren,
                      prior to their recognizing him as their long-lost brother?  He spoke
                      to them in Egyptian, using an interpreter (Gen. 42:23), yet the
                      whole account appears in the "original language" of Hebrew.  Does
                      that constitute a "pure" translation, or not? 
                      >
                      > It never ceases to amaze me how a translation from Greek and
                      Hebrew into English can't possibly be pure, yet a translation from
                      Egyptian (Joseph, Pharaoh, Moses) and Chaldean (Nebuchadnezzar,
                      Daniel) into Hebrew CAN.
                      >
                      > The notion that the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures can't be purely
                      translated into the English tongue is a lie from the pit of hell,
                      and wreaks of Popery.
                      >
                      >   
                      >
                      > Keith
                      >



                    • Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                      Brother Keith, ... I know you are not a Lutheran, but I believed you were/are a Reformed Baptist from the profile I saw on you. If I was wrong here, please
                      Message 10 of 24 , May 5, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Brother Keith,

                        > I am neither Lutheran NOR Baptist.
                        >

                        I know you are not a Lutheran, but I believed you were/are a
                        Reformed Baptist from the profile I saw on you. If I was wrong here,
                        please forgive me.

                        > I WAS Baptist for 11 years, and, prior to that, Roman Catholic
                        from childhood. Since my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace
                        and the Papal Antichrist, I now consider myself an elect child of
                        God (who has mercy on whom He will have mercy...leaving vast
                        multitudes yet blinded to things I, by His grace alone, now see),
                        and proudly consider myself Reformed and truly Protestant.
                        >

                        I praise God with you that you are Reformed and that the LORD has
                        made you His!

                        As for the rest of my comments, they were directed in a more general
                        sense, although addressed to you and Dr. Letis as well. Now, if you
                        do in fact worship God as He has commanded and do not employ the use
                        of man-made hymns and etc., then I praise God and rejoice that He
                        has freed you from this idolatry, and if I perceived that you were
                        still trapped in that idolatry from my lack of memory, then I also
                        ask for you forgiveness here. But, you must also admit that the
                        great majority of Protestants, including those calling themselves
                        Reformed, have drunk from the cup of idolatry when it comes to the
                        public worship of God and engage in will-worship and have followed
                        Rome in this instance. Many hack at the branches of Romanism, while
                        not going after the root, lest they find themselves chopping at the
                        root that they themselves share with Rome.

                        If I misunderstood you, Keith in this regards, my humble apologies.

                        Yours in Christ,

                        Edgar

                        --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "keith dotzler"
                        <kdotz@e...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Bro Edgar,
                        >
                        > I am neither Lutheran NOR Baptist.
                        >
                        > I WAS Baptist for 11 years, and, prior to that, Roman Catholic
                        from childhood. Since my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace
                        and the Papal Antichrist, I now consider myself an elect child of
                        God (who has mercy on whom He will have mercy...leaving vast
                        multitudes yet blinded to things I, by His grace alone, now see),
                        and proudly consider myself Reformed and truly Protestant.
                        >
                        >
                        > "...when will you give up your will-worship and truly worship God
                        as He has commanded, i.e. singing using the 150 Psalms alone without
                        the use of instruments, observing the Lord's Day alone & not
                        other "holy"-days, not having pictures of hippies anywhere and call
                        those pictures of hippies, "Jesus", and other religious symbols that
                        cause veneration, abandoning the false notions of Consubstantiation
                        (which is Rome in disguise), and etc."
                        >
                        >
                        > What makes you think I am a will-worshipper, sing to instruments
                        at "church," observe "holy" days, have pictures of Jesus hanging on
                        my walls, and venerate crosses and other religious symbols?
                        >
                        > Regarding pictures of Jesus and other religious symbols, I whole-
                        heartedly agree with Claude of Turin (9th century), when he states:
                        >
                        >
                        > "God commands us to bear our cross, and not to worship it; but
                        these are all for worshipping it; whereas they do not bear it at
                        all, neither will they bear it either corporally or spiritually: to
                        serve God after this manner is to go a whoring from him. For if we
                        ought to adore the cross, because Christ was fastened to it, how
                        many other things are there which touched Jesus Christ, and which he
                        made according to the flesh? Did not he continue nine months in the
                        womb of the Virgin? Why do not they then on the same score worship
                        all that are virgins, because a virgin brought forth Jesus Christ?
                        Why do not they adore mangers and old clouts, because he was laid in
                        a manger, and wrapped in swaddling clothes? Why do not they adore
                        fisher-boats, because he slept in one of them, and preached to the
                        multitudes, and caused a net to be cast out, wherewith was caught a
                        miraculous quantity of fish? Let them adore asses, because he
                        entered into Jerusalem upon the foal of an ass; and lambs, because
                        it is written of him, Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the
                        sins of the world. But these sort of men would rather eat live lambs
                        than worship their images. Why do not they worship lions, because he
                        is called the Lion of the tribe of Judah? Or rocks, because it is
                        said, And the Rock was Christ? or thorns, because he was crowned
                        with them? or lances, because one of them pierced his side?" (Claude
                        of Turin - 9th century witness against the Papacy, cited by Peter
                        Allix in The Ecclesiastical History of the Ancient Churches of the
                        Piedmont and the Albigenses, chap. 9)
                        >
                        >
                        > Keith
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                        > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                        > Sent: 5/5/2005 4:50:13 PM
                        > Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Text types
                        >
                        >
                        > Keith,
                        >
                        > You wrote:
                        > > The notion that the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures can't be purely
                        > translated into the English tongue is a lie from the pit of hell,
                        > and wreaks of Popery.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > Keith
                        >
                        > Now, if you are so dogmatic and emphatic to make this judgment on
                        > this issue, then why are you not more emphatic to condemn will-
                        > worship, i.e. singing man-made hymns, use of instruments in public
                        > worship, celebrating holy-days (xmas & easter), and etc.?
                        >
                        > I understand that you and I rightly understand & agree that the
                        > Papacy is the Anit-Christ and for the right reasons, but you are
                        yet
                        > to give up the very foundation that makes all people follow after
                        > the Beast, which is WILL-WORSHIP, that is truly from the very
                        depths
                        > of the pit of hell (to use your imagery). It's funny and ironic
                        > that Lutherans and Baptists rail against the Church of Rome and
                        that
                        > whore named the Pope, yet follow her steps when it comes to
                        worship.
                        >
                        > It is easy to bash the Pope, but it is very hard to get off the
                        > Appian Way, when you don't realize that you are walking the same
                        > path that Rome would have all people on, namely the road that
                        leads
                        > to worshipping the Beast. Will-Worship leads to that.
                        >
                        > Keith and Dr, Letis, when will you really begin to lay the ax to
                        the
                        > root of the Anti-Christ to make true and deep cuts into her? In
                        > other words, when will you give up your will-worship and truly
                        > worship God as He has commanded, i.e. singing using the 150 Psalms
                        > alone without the use of instruments, observing the Lord's Day
                        alone
                        > & not other "holy"-days, not having pictures of hippies anywhere
                        and
                        > call those pictures of hippies, "Jesus", and other religious
                        symbols
                        > that cause veneration, abandoning the false notions of
                        > Consusbtantation (which is Rome in disguise), and etc.
                        >
                        > The LORD God of Hosts MUST be first, then comes our desires, as
                        > long as they do not clash with God's will and Law towards us.
                        >
                        > You MUST die to self...mortify your flesh...you are not yours,
                        but
                        > have been BOUGHT with a price and are now a SLAVE to righteousness
                        > and will-worship is NOT righteousness...be faithful to your Master
                        > and Friend.
                        >
                        >
                        > Let God be true though every man a liar.
                        >
                        >
                        > For His Crown & Glory,
                        >
                        > Edgar
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "keith dotzler"
                        > <kdotz@e...> wrote:
                        > > One thing I would like to say is that I agree with you that no
                        > translation of the original languages is at all pure....
                        > >
                        > > Careful, Dan. What about Joseph's conversation with his
                        brethren,
                        > prior to their recognizing him as their long-lost brother? He
                        spoke
                        > to them in Egyptian, using an interpreter (Gen. 42:23), yet the
                        > whole account appears in the "original language" of Hebrew. Does
                        > that constitute a "pure" translation, or not?
                        > >
                        > > It never ceases to amaze me how a translation from Greek and
                        > Hebrew into English can't possibly be pure, yet a translation from
                        > Egyptian (Joseph, Pharaoh, Moses) and Chaldean (Nebuchadnezzar,
                        > Daniel) into Hebrew CAN.
                        > >
                        > > The notion that the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures can't be purely
                        > translated into the English tongue is a lie from the pit of hell,
                        > and wreaks of Popery.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > Keith
                        > >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        > To visit your group on the web, go to:
                        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/covenantedreformationclub/
                        >
                        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        > covenantedreformationclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                        >
                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                        Service.
                      • keith dotzler
                        I know you are not a Lutheran, but I believed you were/are a Reformed Baptist from the profile I saw on you. If I was wrong here, please forgive me. Yes, I
                        Message 11 of 24 , May 5, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I know you are not a Lutheran, but I believed you were/are a
                          Reformed Baptist from the profile I saw on you. If I was wrong here,
                          please forgive me.

                           
                          Yes, I have to change my profile...one of these days. 
                           
                          I couldn't remain a Baptist, even as a new Calvinist, once my eyes were opened to the Biblical mode and subjects of Christian Baptism.
                           
                          Furthermore, I mentioned in a post to Robbie, I think, that the phrase "Reformed Baptist" is an oxy-moron.  The Reformers baptized infants, and certainly did not restrict Christian baptism to immersion alone.  Baptists, therefore, are guilty of schism. 
                           
                          BTW, there is nothing to forgive, Edgar.  Don't fret.  ;-)
                           
                           
                          Now, if you do in fact worship God as He has commanded and do not employ the use of man-made hymns and etc., then I praise God and rejoice that He has freed you from this idolatry, and if I perceived that you were still trapped in that idolatry from my lack of memory, then I also
                          ask for you forgiveness here.
                           
                           
                           
                          Again, there's nothing to forgive, Edgar, but you certainly have it.
                           
                          I'm far from perfect, but I do read a good amount of the posts here, as well as the stuff on the Reformation Bookshelf CDs.  Prior to getting those CDs, and joining this club, I had no idea about the hymn issue.   ;-)
                           
                          I'd like to mention something.  You might notice my mentioning of "having my eyes opened" to more than just a few issues.  Believe me, it didn't all come at once, nor was it via some Pentecostal state of ecstasy.  Once the Lord revealed the truth regarding my salvation, I began studying the various doctrines of the Reformation with an intensity I've never before experienced.  From the Doctrines of grace, to the Papal antichrist, to Baptism.....I delved into everything I could get my hands on, from the 16th century forward, and inhaled it all like a gust of fresh air.  Truly the wind bloweth where it listeth, and the works of the dead who have died in the Lord, whom Christ calls "blessed," do follow them...... 
                           
                           
                           
                          Keith

                           
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          Sent: 5/5/2005 10:20:36 PM
                          Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Text types

                          Brother Keith,

                          > I am neither Lutheran NOR Baptist.
                          >

                          I know you are not a Lutheran, but I believed you were/are a
                          Reformed Baptist from the profile I saw on you. If I was wrong here,
                          please forgive me.

                          > I WAS Baptist for 11 years, and, prior to that, Roman Catholic
                          from childhood.  Since my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace
                          and the Papal Antichrist, I now consider myself an elect child of
                          God (who has mercy on whom He will have mercy...leaving vast
                          multitudes yet blinded to things I, by His grace alone, now see),
                          and proudly consider myself Reformed and truly Protestant.    
                          >

                          I praise God with you that you are Reformed and that the LORD has
                          made you His!

                          As for the rest of my comments, they were directed in a more general
                          sense, although addressed to you and Dr. Letis as well. Now, if you
                          do in fact worship God as He has commanded and do not employ the use
                          of man-made hymns and etc., then I praise God and rejoice that He
                          has freed you from this idolatry, and if I perceived that you were
                          still trapped in that idolatry from my lack of memory, then I also
                          ask for you forgiveness here.  But, you must also admit that the
                          great majority of Protestants, including those calling themselves
                          Reformed, have drunk from the cup of idolatry when it comes to the
                          public worship of God and engage in will-worship and have followed
                          Rome in this instance.  Many hack at the branches of Romanism, while
                          not going after the root, lest they find themselves chopping at the
                          root that they themselves share with Rome.

                            If I misunderstood you, Keith in this regards, my humble apologies.

                          Yours in Christ,

                          Edgar

                          --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "keith dotzler"
                          <kdotz@e...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Bro Edgar,
                          >
                          > I am neither Lutheran NOR Baptist.
                          >
                          > I WAS Baptist for 11 years, and, prior to that, Roman Catholic
                          from childhood.  Since my eyes were opened to the Doctrines of Grace
                          and the Papal Antichrist, I now consider myself an elect child of
                          God (who has mercy on whom He will have mercy...leaving vast
                          multitudes yet blinded to things I, by His grace alone, now see),
                          and proudly consider myself Reformed and truly Protestant.    
                          >
                          >
                          > "...when will you give up your will-worship and truly worship God
                          as He has commanded, i.e. singing using the 150 Psalms alone without
                          the use of instruments, observing the Lord's Day alone & not
                          other "holy"-days, not having pictures of hippies anywhere and call
                          those pictures of hippies, "Jesus", and other religious symbols that
                          cause veneration, abandoning the false notions of Consubstantiation
                          (which is Rome in disguise), and etc."
                          >
                          >
                          > What makes you think I am a will-worshipper, sing to instruments
                          at "church," observe "holy" days, have pictures of Jesus hanging on
                          my walls, and venerate crosses and other religious symbols? 
                          >
                          > Regarding pictures of Jesus and other religious symbols, I whole-
                          heartedly agree with Claude of Turin (9th century), when he states:
                          >
                          >
                          > "God commands us to bear our cross, and not to worship it; but
                          these are all for worshipping it; whereas they do not bear it at
                          all, neither will they bear it either corporally or spiritually: to
                          serve God after this manner is to go a whoring from him. For if we
                          ought to adore the cross, because Christ was fastened to it, how
                          many other things are there which touched Jesus Christ, and which he
                          made according to the flesh? Did not he continue nine months in the
                          womb of the Virgin? Why do not they then on the same score worship
                          all that are virgins, because a virgin brought forth Jesus Christ?
                          Why do not they adore mangers and old clouts, because he was laid in
                          a manger, and wrapped in swaddling clothes? Why do not they adore
                          fisher-boats, because he slept in one of them, and preached to the
                          multitudes, and caused a net to be cast out, wherewith was caught a
                          miraculous quantity of fish? Let them adore asses, because he
                          entered into Jerusalem upon the foal of an ass; and lambs, because
                          it is written of him, Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the
                          sins of the world. But these sort of men would rather eat live lambs
                          than worship their images. Why do not they worship lions, because he
                          is called the Lion of the tribe of Judah? Or rocks, because it is
                          said, And the Rock was Christ? or thorns, because he was crowned
                          with them? or lances, because one of them pierced his side?" (Claude
                          of Turin - 9th century witness against the Papacy, cited by Peter
                          Allix in The Ecclesiastical History of the Ancient Churches of the
                          Piedmont and the Albigenses, chap. 9)
                          >
                          >
                          > Keith
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > ----- Original Message -----
                          > From: Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                          > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                          > Sent: 5/5/2005 4:50:13 PM
                          > Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Text types
                          >
                          >
                          > Keith,
                          >
                          >    You wrote:
                          > > The notion that the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures can't be purely
                          > translated into the English tongue is a lie from the pit of hell,
                          > and wreaks of Popery.
                          > >
                          > >   
                          > >
                          > > Keith
                          >
                          > Now, if you are so dogmatic and emphatic to make this judgment on
                          > this issue, then why are you not more emphatic to condemn will-
                          > worship, i.e. singing man-made hymns, use of instruments in public
                          > worship, celebrating holy-days (xmas & easter), and etc.?
                          >
                          >   I understand that you and I rightly understand & agree that the
                          > Papacy is the Anit-Christ and for the right reasons, but you are
                          yet
                          > to give up the very foundation that makes all people follow after
                          > the Beast, which is WILL-WORSHIP, that is truly from the very
                          depths
                          > of the pit of hell (to use your imagery).  It's funny and ironic
                          > that Lutherans and Baptists rail against the Church of Rome and
                          that
                          > whore named the Pope, yet follow her steps when it comes to
                          worship.
                          >
                          >   It is easy to bash the Pope, but it is very hard to get off the
                          > Appian Way, when you don't realize that you are walking the same
                          > path that Rome would have all people on, namely the road that
                          leads
                          > to worshipping the Beast.  Will-Worship leads to that.
                          >
                          > Keith and Dr, Letis, when will you really begin to lay the ax to
                          the
                          > root of the Anti-Christ to make true and deep cuts into her?  In
                          > other words, when will you give up your will-worship and truly
                          > worship God as He has commanded, i.e. singing using the 150 Psalms
                          > alone without the use of instruments, observing the Lord's Day
                          alone
                          > & not other "holy"-days, not having pictures of hippies anywhere
                          and
                          > call those pictures of hippies, "Jesus", and other religious
                          symbols
                          > that cause veneration, abandoning the false notions of
                          > Consusbtantation (which is Rome in disguise), and etc.
                          >
                          >   The LORD God of Hosts MUST be first, then comes our desires, as
                          > long as they do not clash with God's will and Law towards us.
                          >
                          >   You MUST die to self...mortify your flesh...you are not yours,
                          but
                          > have been BOUGHT with a price and are now a SLAVE to righteousness
                          > and will-worship is NOT righteousness...be faithful to your Master
                          > and Friend.
                          >
                          >
                          > Let God be true though every man a liar.
                          >
                          >
                          > For His Crown & Glory,
                          >
                          > Edgar
                          >
                          >
                          > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "keith dotzler"
                          > <kdotz@e...> wrote:
                          > > One thing I would like to say is that I agree with you that no
                          > translation of the original languages is at all pure....
                          > >
                          > > Careful, Dan.  What about Joseph's conversation with his
                          brethren,
                          > prior to their recognizing him as their long-lost brother?  He
                          spoke
                          > to them in Egyptian, using an interpreter (Gen. 42:23), yet the
                          > whole account appears in the "original language" of Hebrew.  Does
                          > that constitute a "pure" translation, or not? 
                          > >
                          > > It never ceases to amaze me how a translation from Greek and
                          > Hebrew into English can't possibly be pure, yet a translation from
                          > Egyptian (Joseph, Pharaoh, Moses) and Chaldean (Nebuchadnezzar,
                          > Daniel) into Hebrew CAN.
                          > >
                          > > The notion that the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures can't be purely
                          > translated into the English tongue is a lie from the pit of hell,
                          > and wreaks of Popery.
                          > >
                          > >   
                          > >
                          > > Keith
                          > >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          > To visit your group on the web, go to:
                          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/covenantedreformationclub/
                          >  
                          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                          > covenantedreformationclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                          >  
                          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                          Service.


                        • Ben Hart
                          3 questions for you Keith: 1 - Do you know any other languages well enough to have grappled with the issue of translation? 2 - What exactly would a pure
                          Message 12 of 24 , May 6, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            3 questions for you Keith:

                            1 - Do you know any other languages well enough to have grappled with
                            the issue of translation?

                            2 - What exactly would a 'pure' translation be?

                            3 - How does Dan's statement commit him to Popery?

                            > Careful, Dan. What about Joseph's conversation with his brethren,
                            prior to their recognizing him as their long-lost brother? He spoke
                            to them in Egyptian, using an interpreter (Gen. 42:23), yet the whole
                            account appears in the "original language" of Hebrew. Does that
                            constitute a "pure" translation, or not?
                            >
                          • keith dotzler
                            1 - Do you know any other languages well enough to have grappled with the issue of translation? What does that have to do with anything, other than being a red
                            Message 13 of 24 , May 6, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              1 - Do you know any other languages well enough to have grappled with the issue of translation? 
                               
                               
                              What does that have to do with anything, other than being a red herring?  Are you here to tell us that we must all speak Greek and Hebrew to have the pure word of God? 
                               
                              What I have seen, as I've been studying Church history these last 3 years, is innumerable multitudes of witnesses like the Waldenses, Albigenses, Henricians, Arnoldistae, Paulicians, Lollards - along with the Reformers and Puritans - ALL believing that what they had in their day, and in their language.....be it the Romaunt translations of the ancient Christians, or the English translations, beginning with Wycliffe's,  was inspired and pure Scripture
                               
                              You won't find them questioning the purity of the Scriptures they had in their hands, and with which they refuted the blasphemous teachings of the Church of Rome, at all!  They never "grappled" with the mistaken notion that Hebrew and Greek words couldn't be translated into their language, without those inspired words losing their purity.
                               
                              I don't see any "grappling" on Moses' part, when he translated and wrote all of Joseph's Egyptian words to his brethren in HEBREW. 
                               
                              I also don't see any "grappling" on Daniel's part, when he translated Nebuchadnezzar's Chaldean words into HEBREW. 
                               
                              In fact, I don't see Moses or Daniel (or any other prophet or Apostle in the word of God) asking the Lord about the issue at all.  Unlike the intellectual elite of today, Moses and Daniel weren't indoctrinated with the silly notion that inspired Scripture loses its purity and inspiration when translated into another tongue.  Such is a Popish notion, because it was the Papacy that kept the Bible hidden from the people for centuries, as well as restricting the Scriptures to the Latin tongue alone.  William Tyndale was strangled and burned at the stake by the Papal beast, not only for his anti-papal stance, but for daring to translate the Scriptures into the English tongue.  Tyndale is one more, in a long line of witnesses, who never "grappled" with the purity, or lack thereof, of the Scriptures he had just translated from Hebrew and Greek into the English tongue. 
                               
                              Are you of the mind that English speakers can never know PRECISELY what God originally said to Moses at the top of Mt. Sinai, and must settle, instead, for the "impure" English translation of the Hebrew account?  
                               
                               
                              2 - What exactly would a 'pure' translation be?
                               
                              I provided one in the very post you are responding to
                               
                              Why is it that Joseph and Nebuchadnezzar's "ORIGINAL" words (Egyptian and Chaldean), translated into Hebrew, are considered pure.....but translating those pure Hebrew words into English IS NOT? 
                               
                              Furthermore, did their words lose some of their purity, as they were translated from their original tongue into Hebrew? 
                               
                               
                              3 - How does Dan's statement commit him to Popery?
                               
                               
                              I didn't commit Dan to Popery.  I should have noted that the first paragraph ALONE was directed at him.
                               
                              I then redirected my attention to the ridiculous arguments made by the proponents of the modern perversions, which I've encountered countless times over the last 5 years, having previously been heavily involved in the Bible version debate. 
                               
                               
                              Here's a question for you:  Is the following inspired and pure, as it stands in the English of the KJV?
                               
                              John 11:35  Jesus wept.
                               
                               
                              Keith 
                               
                               
                               
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: Ben Hart
                              Sent: 5/6/2005 7:18:40 AM
                              Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Text types

                              3 questions for you Keith:

                              1 - Do you know any other languages well enough to have grappled with
                              the issue of translation? 

                              2 - What exactly would a 'pure' translation be?

                              3 - How does Dan's statement commit him to Popery?

                              > Careful, Dan.  What about Joseph's conversation with his brethren,
                              prior to their recognizing him as their long-lost brother?  He spoke
                              to them in Egyptian, using an interpreter (Gen. 42:23), yet the whole
                              account appears in the "original language" of Hebrew.  Does that
                              constitute a "pure" translation, or not? 
                              >



                            • Ben Hart
                              ... with the issue of translation? ... herring? Are you here to tell us that we must all speak Greek and Hebrew to have the pure word of God? Don t assume
                              Message 14 of 24 , May 7, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                > 1 - Do you know any other languages well enough to have grappled
                                with the issue of translation?
                                >
                                >
                                > What does that have to do with anything, other than being a red
                                herring? Are you here to tell us that we must all speak Greek and
                                Hebrew to have the pure word of God?

                                Don't assume more in my question than what's in there. I'm not
                                saying we don't have a good translation. My question was if you
                                know any language - doesn't matter what one. I ask only because you
                                might have some appreciation for the fact that it's not always a 1
                                to 1 relationship between languages. At times (though not usually)
                                there is a bit lost, but of course the overall meaning is preserved,
                                although an emphasis may be lost. In that way I don't think it was
                                a red herring; it was ad hominem though, and you may take issue with
                                that if you'd like. I was questioning your credentials and
                                experience to make such a claim, because if you knew any other
                                language, you might be quick to at least qualify your statements.


                                >
                                > Are you of the mind that English speakers can never know PRECISELY
                                what God originally said to Moses at the top of Mt. Sinai, and must
                                settle, instead, for the "impure" English translation of the Hebrew
                                account?

                                Umm...yes and no; see below.

                                >
                                > 2 - What exactly would a 'pure' translation be?
                                >
                                >
                                > I provided one in the very post you are responding to!
                                >
                                > Why is it that Joseph and Nebuchadnezzar's "ORIGINAL" words
                                (Egyptian and Chaldean), translated into Hebrew, are considered
                                pure.....but translating those pure Hebrew words into English IS
                                NOT?
                                >
                                > Furthermore, did their words lose some of their purity, as they
                                were translated from their original tongue into Hebrew?

                                Where does it say the translation was 'pure' and just what do you
                                mean by pure? I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just trying to
                                understnad what you mean. Do you mean idiomatically pure? Pure
                                with respect to sense? Pure with respect to the verbal tokens? Or
                                maybe something else? You didn't answer my question which is why I
                                asked it.

                                > Here's a question for you: Is the following inspired and pure, as
                                it stands in the English of the KJV?
                                >
                                > John 11:35 Jesus wept.

                                As I see it - it's probably pure (I haven't looked up the Greek),
                                but I'll implicitly believe the translators and textual critics
                                along with the compilers of the canon that it's in the Bible and
                                correctly translated. Anyone who knows Greek please comment here,
                                but as I looked it up, the verb is in the aorist tense, which if I
                                remember correctly is difficult to get exactly the perfect sense
                                into English because we only have the imperfect and the perfect
                                tense, but not something corresponding to a tenseless completed
                                action.

                                Inspired? Well, sort of. In the strictest sense, no. It's neither
                                Greek nor is it one of the autographs; in a slightly looser sense,
                                it is inspired in that it correctly reflects the autographs
                                faithfully translated into English and maintains the original sense
                                and therefore weight.

                                A caveat - please don't jump on me and start telling me I'm
                                committing myself to some Popish position or something like that.
                                I've just begun thinking about this, so allow a man a degree of
                                ignorance you obviously lack. IOW, if I don't come to the perfect
                                position right away, have patience with your brother; Rome wasn't
                                built in a day, nor are great theologians.

                                -Ben
                              • Cheryl
                                Ben said, en francais:
                                Message 15 of 24 , May 7, 2005
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Ben said, en francais:
                                   
                                  <<N'assumez pas plus en ma question que ce qui est dedans là.  Je suis ne disant pas nous n'ai pas une bonne traduction.  Ma question était si vous savez n'importe quelle langue - n'importe pas ce qui une.  Je demande seulement parce que vous pourriez avoir une certaine appréciation pour le fait que ce n'est pas toujours un rapport 1 à 1 entre les langues.  Parfois (cependant pas habituellement) il y a un peu perdu, mais naturellement la signification globale est préservée, bien qu'une emphase puisse être perdue.  De cette façon je ne pense pas que c'était un hareng rouge;  c'était hominem d'annonce cependant, et vous pouvez contester cela si vous voudriez.  J'interrogeais vos qualifications et expérience pour faire une telle réclamation, parce que si vous saviez n'importe quelle autre langue, vous pourriez être rapide pour qualifier au moins vos rapports.>>
                                   
                                  Which being translated back to English says:
                                   
                                  <<Do not assume more in my question that what is inside there.  I am not saying do not have us a good translation.  My question was if you know any language - does not import what one.  I ask only because you could have a certain appreciation for the fact that it is not always a relationship 1 to 1 between the languages.  Sometimes (however not usually) it lost a little there, but naturally the total significance is preserved, although a emphase can be lost.  In this way I do not think that it was a red herring;  it was hominem of advertisement however, and you can dispute that if you would like.  I questioned your qualifications and experiment to make such a complaint, because if you knew any other language, you could be fast to qualify at least your reports/ratios.>>
                                   
                                  Original quote:
                                   
                                  <<Don't assume more in my question than what's in there.  I'm not
                                  saying we don't have a good translation.  My question was if you
                                  know any language - doesn't matter what one.  I ask only because you
                                  might have some appreciation for the fact that it's not always a 1
                                  to 1 relationship between languages.  At times (though not usually)
                                  there is a bit lost, but of course the overall meaning is preserved,
                                  although an emphasis may be lost.  In that way I don't think it was
                                  a red herring; it was ad hominem though, and you may take issue with
                                  that if you'd like.  I was questioning your credentials and
                                  experience to make such a claim, because if you knew any other
                                  language, you might be quick to at least qualify your statements.>>
                                   
                                  Just having a bit of fun translating things back and forth on Google...
                                   
                                  Cheryl
                                • bsuden@juno.com
                                  12823From: Jim Pellegrini Date: Sat Apr 30, 2005 10:22pm Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Text types falcon5064 What about the
                                  Message 16 of 24 , May 14, 2005
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    12823From: Jim Pellegrini <falcon5064@...>
                                    Date: Sat Apr 30, 2005 10:22pm
                                    Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Text types
                                    falcon5064


                                    What about the doctrine of providential preservation?
                                    Has not God preserved His word for the church
                                    throughout all generations? In reading this debate, I
                                    have not heard someone mention this doctrine, which is
                                    a key piece of the puzzle in this debate.

                                    While we are a day late and a dollar or two short on this, Mr. Pellegrini and Dr. Letis are entirely
                                    too correct.
                                    The discussion from message 12814 has entirely neglected the doctrine of providential
                                    preservation. Or at least a proper exposition of it, which is the same thing.
                                    The whole argument that nothing is lost whatever family of manuscripts is used is bogus.
                                    If we buy into the modern eclectic text critical opinion here, the one doctrine lost, the one
                                    doctrine sacrificed, is that of God's providential preservation of faithful and infallible copies of
                                    the autographa in the common usage of the Greek speaking church.
                                    And when that happens, the Reformation doctrine of the Word of God as set forth in Chapt. 1 of
                                    the WCF starts to unravel. And as WCF 1 goes, so goes the rest of the WCF and the other
                                    subordinate standards built upon it.
                                    If we do not have, if the church of Jesus Christ has not always had, since the close of canon, a
                                    pure text providentially preserved in Greek and Hebrew, faithful infallible copies of the original
                                    manuscripts, it makes no difference if the Bible is inspired, perspicuous, infallible etc. because
                                    we can't be sure we have a faithful copy of the Bible to begin with. Every paragraph in the WCF is an integral and irreplaceable
                                    part of the whole; a facet in the diamond, a rung in Jacob's ladder.
                                    You cannot pick and choose. You cannot put the Alexandrian or "Neutral" or Western text along
                                    side of the Byzantine and say they all represent the same essential text, that nothing is lost etc.
                                    etc. because prov. preservation/WCF 1:8 IS lost and we are then at the mercy of the textual
                                    scholars, eclectism and the latest discovery of a new manuscript.
                                    You might as well go the whole route and allow for the Book of Mormon to be added to the
                                    canon because Joe Smith just found it and yes, the Lord must have let his church limp along on
                                    five or six cylinders for 18 centuries, even the great Reformation church, until modern times and
                                    modern scholars like Westcott, Hort, Joseph Smith and who else, Fred Flintstone?
                                    In other words, providential preservation is an integral part of WCF Chapt. 1 and WCF Chapt. 1
                                    is all or nothing affair. Take out any paragraph you like, whether 1:8 or not and it all crumbles.
                                    Even further, it is embarassing when Dr. Letis has to come on and clean up people's abc's on this forum when the WCF is not even a subordinate standard in his church.

                                    cordially in Christ
                                    Bob Suden
                                    Lynden, Wa.
                                    RPNA,GM
                                  • Theodore Letis
                                    The following was received by me this morning. Keep you eyes on Warren...but at a distance! TPL Lighthouse Trails Publishing Responds to Rick Warren June 17,
                                    Message 17 of 24 , Jun 20, 2005
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      The following was received by me this morning. Keep you eyes on Warren...but at a distance!
                                       
                                      TPL
                                       
                                      Lighthouse Trails Publishing Responds to Rick Warren
                                       
                                       
                                      June 17, 2005
                                       
                                      On May 31st, 2005 we received an email from Rick Warren. Within hours of receiving this email, we learned that the email had been posted on the Internet. After prayerful consideration, we have come to the conclusion that we will not provide a personal response to Rick Warren regarding the email we received. However, we are compelled to address this situation publicly.

                                      While in the process of preparing a response, we soon realized that the contents of the email sent to us by Rick Warren were misleading and contained much misinformation. And having now witnessed the mocking tone by those involved with Rick Warren, we have decided we cannot, in good conscience, engage with people who go to such great lengths to hide the truth.

                                      On April 20th, 2005 Lighthouse Trails Publishing issued a press release, showing the connections between Rick Warren and New Age sympathizer Ken Blanchard. In our release we used a line from George Mair's book A Life With Purpose (a biography of Rick Warren). While the press release was not at all contingent on the quote by Mair (it being used only as a qualifier), Rick Warren's email to us focused primarily on George Mair. The assumption was that if Mair could be discredited then our press release would be invalid. However, the evidence we provided is solid, and we therefore stand behind our press release.

                                      The real issue addressed in the press release was concerning Ken Blanchard—a man who, according to Rick Warren, has "signed on" to help implement Warren's global Peace Plan. Both in the press release and on our research web site, we have provided numerous instances where Blanchard has shown his endorsement and promotion of the New Age such as in the Foreword of the 2001 book, What Would Buddha Do At Work?, in which Ken Blanchard states:

                                      Buddha points to the path and invites us to begin our journey to enlightenment. I point to this little jewel of a book and invite you to begin (or continue) your journey to enlightened work.  

                                      Blanchard's latest endorsement of the New Age centers around Vijay Eswaran's book, In the Sphere of SILENCE, a June 2005 release that promotes the inner silence through mystical prayer practices, i.e. contemplative prayer. Of the book, Ken Blanchard states:

                                      This book is a wonderful guide on how to enter the realm of silence and draw closer to God.

                                      Such comments speak for themselves. And yet, this same Ken Blanchard will, later this summer, share a speaking platform with Rick Warren in the Leadership Summit 2005, which will be broadcast to 100 cities and over 50,000 leaders throughout North America!

                                      What has baffled us most is that Rick Warren and those affiliated with him would spend more time contending with a small Christian publishing company than they do contending for the faith. With New Age doctrines influencing millions of people worldwide and within the Christian church, Rick Warren seems more intent on discrediting his critics than in exposing spiritual deception.

                                      As for Lighthouse Trails Publishing, we will continue researching pertinent issues, while publishing books that minister to and assist the body of Christ and reach out to the lost with the true message of salvation, which is through Jesus Christ alone.  

                                      We want to thank the faithful ministries, churches, and brothers and sisters who have committed themselves to defending the precious faith and say to you:

                                      In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ (I Peter 1:6-7) .

                                      May God bless each of you who is truly contending for the faith. We appreciate you and feel privileged to stand with you.

                                      David and Deborah Dombrowski
                                      Lighthouse Trails Publishing
                                      Lighthouse Trails Research Project
                                      email: editor@...
                                      phone: (503) 873-9092
                                       
                                      P.S. Because the private email we received from Rick Warren was made public on the Internet and because there is so much misinformation in that email we have provided some additional documentation and resources that may be helpful to you.

                                      Click Here for Additional Information
                                      Including:
                                      Email from Rick Warren
                                      A Closer Look at the Email
                                      and much more.
                                       
                                      [Reformatted & Reprinted by Permission of Lighthouse Trails Publishing]  
                                       
                                      Theodore P. Letis


                                      Yahoo! Mail Mobile
                                      Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
                                    • Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                                      Who is Rick Warren? ... Warren...but at a distance! ... hours of receiving this email, we learned that the email had been posted on the Internet. After
                                      Message 18 of 24 , Jun 20, 2005
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Who is Rick Warren?

                                        --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Theodore Letis
                                        <bucerian@y...> wrote:
                                        > The following was received by me this morning. Keep you eyes on
                                        Warren...but at a distance!
                                        >
                                        > TPL
                                        >
                                        > Lighthouse Trails Publishing Responds to Rick Warren
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > June 17, 2005
                                        >
                                        > On May 31st, 2005 we received an email from Rick Warren. Within
                                        hours of receiving this email, we learned that the email had been
                                        posted on the Internet. After prayerful consideration, we have come
                                        to the conclusion that we will not provide a personal response to
                                        Rick Warren regarding the email we received. However, we are
                                        compelled to address this situation publicly.
                                        >
                                        > While in the process of preparing a response, we soon realized
                                        that the contents of the email sent to us by Rick Warren were
                                        misleading and contained much misinformation. And having now
                                        witnessed the mocking tone by those involved with Rick Warren, we
                                        have decided we cannot, in good conscience, engage with people who
                                        go to such great lengths to hide the truth.
                                        >
                                        > On April 20th, 2005 Lighthouse Trails Publishing issued a press
                                        release, showing the connections between Rick Warren and New Age
                                        sympathizer Ken Blanchard. In our release we used a line from George
                                        Mair's book A Life With Purpose (a biography of Rick Warren). While
                                        the press release was not at all contingent on the quote by Mair (it
                                        being used only as a qualifier), Rick Warren's email to us focused
                                        primarily on George Mair. The assumption was that if Mair could be
                                        discredited then our press release would be invalid. However, the
                                        evidence we provided is solid, and we therefore stand behind our
                                        press release.
                                        >
                                        > The real issue addressed in the press release was concerning Ken
                                        Blanchard—a man who, according to Rick Warren, has "signed on" to
                                        help implement Warren's global Peace Plan. Both in the press release
                                        and on our research web site, we have provided numerous instances
                                        where Blanchard has shown his endorsement and promotion of the New
                                        Age such as in the Foreword of the 2001 book, What Would Buddha Do
                                        At Work?, in which Ken Blanchard states:
                                        >
                                        > Buddha points to the path and invites us to begin our journey to
                                        enlightenment. I point to this little jewel of a book and invite you
                                        to begin (or continue) your journey to enlightened work.
                                        >
                                        > Blanchard's latest endorsement of the New Age centers around Vijay
                                        Eswaran's book, In the Sphere of SILENCE, a June 2005 release that
                                        promotes the inner silence through mystical prayer practices, i.e.
                                        contemplative prayer. Of the book, Ken Blanchard states:
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > This book is a wonderful guide on how to enter the realm of
                                        silence and draw closer to God.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Such comments speak for themselves. And yet, this same Ken
                                        Blanchard will, later this summer, share a speaking platform with
                                        Rick Warren in the Leadership Summit 2005, which will be broadcast
                                        to 100 cities and over 50,000 leaders throughout North America!
                                        >
                                        > What has baffled us most is that Rick Warren and those affiliated
                                        with him would spend more time contending with a small Christian
                                        publishing company than they do contending for the faith. With New
                                        Age doctrines influencing millions of people worldwide and within
                                        the Christian church, Rick Warren seems more intent on discrediting
                                        his critics than in exposing spiritual deception.
                                        >
                                        > As for Lighthouse Trails Publishing, we will continue researching
                                        pertinent issues, while publishing books that minister to and assist
                                        the body of Christ and reach out to the lost with the true message
                                        of salvation, which is through Jesus Christ alone.
                                        >
                                        > We want to thank the faithful ministries, churches, and brothers
                                        and sisters who have committed themselves to defending the precious
                                        faith and say to you:
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if
                                        need be, you have been grieved by various trials, that the
                                        genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that
                                        perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise,
                                        honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ (I Peter 1:6-7) .
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > May God bless each of you who is truly contending for the faith.
                                        We appreciate you and feel privileged to stand with you.
                                        > David and Deborah Dombrowski
                                        > Lighthouse Trails Publishing
                                        > Lighthouse Trails Research Project
                                        > email: editor@l...
                                        > phone: (503) 873-9092
                                        >
                                        > P.S. Because the private email we received from Rick Warren was
                                        made public on the Internet and because there is so much
                                        misinformation in that email we have provided some additional
                                        documentation and resources that may be helpful to you.
                                        >
                                        > Click Here for Additional Information
                                        > Including:
                                        > Email from Rick Warren
                                        > A Closer Look at the Email and much more.
                                        >
                                        > [Reformatted & Reprinted by Permission of Lighthouse Trails
                                        Publishing]
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Theodore P. Letis
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > ---------------------------------
                                        > Yahoo! Mail Mobile
                                        > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
                                      • Kevin Guillory
                                        On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:57:06 -0400, Edgar A. Ibarra Jr. ... That you have to ask indicates that you are indeed blessed. Seriously! Rick Warren is a pastor
                                        Message 19 of 24 , Jun 20, 2005
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:57:06 -0400, Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                                          <puritanpresbyterian@...> wrote:

                                          > Who is Rick Warren?

                                          That you have to ask indicates that you are indeed blessed. Seriously!
                                          Rick Warren is a "pastor" of a megachurch (Saddleback). He's also the
                                          author of a "how to grow a megachurch" book ("The Purpose Driven Church")
                                          that describes in detail how one is to cater to the whims, fancies,
                                          trends, fads, and perceived needs of a local population in order to found
                                          a "church" that will attract them.
                                          He also authored the tremendously popular book "The Purpose Driven Life"
                                          wherein he has made himself the godlet of many pastors who worship him.
                                          The book has also spawned the inevitable market for purpose-driven-kitch.
                                          Now we know he is deeply involved with the new age movement.
                                          IMO the man is an obvious wolf in sheep's clothing. Someone to be
                                          avoided, but prayed for.

                                          Kevin Guilory
                                        • Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                                          Kevin, Thank you for explaining who he is. Now I remember, I have heard of his church and seen his books, but his name just didn t click with me. He must be
                                          Message 20 of 24 , Jun 20, 2005
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Kevin,

                                            Thank you for explaining who he is. Now I remember, I have heard
                                            of his church and seen his books, but his name just didn't click
                                            with me. He must be on par with the Willow Creek guy (who's name
                                            also now slips my memory). Yeah, said day when we ask fallen
                                            wretched & sinful man who is in enmity against our God, how to best
                                            worship God so that they will come to church, so that they can get
                                            their ticket to paradise...

                                            Now Tetsel I do remember...


                                            Thanks again Kevin!

                                            Yours in Christ,

                                            Edgar


                                            --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Guillory"
                                            <staphlobob@v...> wrote:
                                            > On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:57:06 -0400, Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                                            > <puritanpresbyterian@y...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            > > Who is Rick Warren?
                                            >
                                            > That you have to ask indicates that you are indeed blessed.
                                            Seriously!
                                            > Rick Warren is a "pastor" of a megachurch (Saddleback).
                                            He's also the
                                            > author of a "how to grow a megachurch" book ("The Purpose Driven
                                            Church")
                                            > that describes in detail how one is to cater to the whims,
                                            fancies,
                                            > trends, fads, and perceived needs of a local population in order
                                            to found
                                            > a "church" that will attract them.
                                            > He also authored the tremendously popular book "The Purpose
                                            Driven Life"
                                            > wherein he has made himself the godlet of many pastors who worship
                                            him.
                                            > The book has also spawned the inevitable market for purpose-driven-
                                            kitch.
                                            > Now we know he is deeply involved with the new age movement.
                                            > IMO the man is an obvious wolf in sheep's clothing. Someone
                                            to be
                                            > avoided, but prayed for.
                                            >
                                            > Kevin Guilory
                                          • Theodore Letis
                                            Very well put, Kevin Ted Kevin Guillory wrote: On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:57:06 -0400, Edgar A. Ibarra Jr. ... That you have to ask
                                            Message 21 of 24 , Jun 23, 2005
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Very well put, Kevin
                                               
                                              Ted

                                              Kevin Guillory <staphlobob@...> wrote:
                                              On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:57:06 -0400, Edgar A. Ibarra Jr.
                                              wrote:

                                              > Who is Rick Warren?

                                              That you have to ask indicates that you are indeed blessed. Seriously!
                                              Rick Warren is a "pastor" of a megachurch (Saddleback). He's also the
                                              author of a "how to grow a megachurch" book ("The Purpose Driven Church")
                                              that describes in detail how one is to cater to the whims, fancies,
                                              trends, fads, and perceived needs of a local population in order to found
                                              a "church" that will attract them.
                                              He also authored the tremendously popular book "The Purpose Driven Life"
                                              wherein he has made himself the godlet of many pastors who worship him.
                                              The book has also spawned the inevitable market for purpose-driven-kitch.
                                              Now we know he is deeply involved with the new age movement.
                                              IMO the man is an obvious wolf in sheep's clothing. Someone to be
                                              avoided, but prayed for.

                                              Kevin Guilory




                                              Yahoo! Groups Links

                                              <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                                              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/covenantedreformationclub/

                                              <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                              covenantedreformationclub-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                              <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                                              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                                              Do you Yahoo!?
                                              Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.

                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.