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

Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Text types

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 24 , May 4 9:28 AM
    • 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 2 of 24 , May 4 8:37 PM
      • 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 3 of 24 , May 5 10:43 AM
        • 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 4 of 24 , May 5 1:49 PM
          • 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 5 of 24 , May 5 4:06 PM
            • 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 6 of 24 , May 5 6:04 PM
              • 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 7 of 24 , May 5 7:20 PM
                • 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 8 of 24 , May 5 7:58 PM
                  • 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 9 of 24 , May 6 4:16 AM
                    • 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 10 of 24 , May 6 11:54 AM
                      • 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 11 of 24 , May 7 5:26 AM
                        • 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 12 of 24 , May 7 11:33 AM
                          • 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 13 of 24 , May 14 6:12 PM
                            • 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 14 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 15 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 16 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 17 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 18 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.