YOU are Satan...

[Seth]

The Spirit itSELF bears witness with our seat of emotions, frame of mind, that we are children of God.

The Holy Spirit is invisible. So it bears witness with our renewed frame of mind that we have become begotten of it as his Children.

The word "spirit" is used in both parts of that verse.  So the word "spirit" there has to mean the same thing.  Don't you agree?

So if we take what your saying and substitute for the first word spirit as the definition of the word spirit you gave for the second instance we would have:

The seat of emotions, frame of mind, bears witness with our seat of emotions, frame of mind, that we are the Children of God.

Isn't that correct?

Paul

Not necessarily. In your opinion, why are there multiple entries in a dictionary?

But let's get down to specifics here Seth.  Because it is the specifics that can't reveal falsehood.  I am going to use your words to debate you.  I often use this tactic.  Now let's get more specific.  You say that the words might "not necessarily" mean the same in that verse.  So please define each one.  Refer to the first instance as "spirit definition1" and "spirit definition2" respectively for the occurences in that verse so we can better understand.  Because this verse is VERY important because as I READ it - there are TWO spirits being mentioned there and I understand them in a manner that is potentially very different than what you may preach to others and if we are about mutual edification into the Faith so that we all are of the same mind (that which is in Jesus Christ) then we can't all have opposing views and should work this out to eliminate the darkness that we may possess.

So please define those as you see them in concise but to the point descriptions if you will.

Paul

Paul, what you are asking me to do is actually contrary to 2 Peter 1:20.

I cannot hold one verse up as a solo interpretation. I have acknowledge ALL the Bible's definition of "spirit." The word spirit comes from the world "breath" or "life." The Bible says "God IS spirit."

It is impossible, therefore, to interpret a verse self-contained, apply an opinion from within that verse, then expand that definition as applying to ALL occurrences of "spirit."

Do you understand why I would want to stick with 2 Peter 1:20?

[jabcat]

Addendum to my previous post:  Thus the forum title "Discussion Forum" rather than "Debate Forum".  And I'd rather not have to debate that  .

[trettep]

This is not applied to willie or seth, but going along with what jabcat and sparrow is saying.

People are going to be afraid to ask questions and share their points of view if the authority attitude of knowing "all" is what they're going to get. People want answers, but they want to know that they are not the only one's with hard questions about our Father. Most of us have been through a lot to be where we are now. The babylonian church systems, false teachings that seem to be burned in our minds, loss of fellowship, etc. I think for the most part we do a good job of nurturing people hear. But it's definitely something we need to stay diligent in. Let's just make this a reminder of that.

Grace and peace,

Brandon

Amen Brandon.

Also Brother Paul (not picking on you, using as an example) , you mention "this is how debate works".  We probably mostly have either missed it, or many of us (all/me) forget it.  But as a general "rule", debate is actually discouraged on TM since approximately the past 6-8 months.  PERSONALLY, MY PERSONAL opinion is, there is VERY little room for all-out debate in the body of Christ.  I think it's WAY too easy to either get into the wrong spirit, come across as a bad witness (let not your good be evil spoken of/give no occasion to stumble), or at least be perceived that way.  We are indeed to contend for sound doctrine, to "declare and teach these things", etc., but (there may be and I just don't know it) I know of no place in scripture where actual debate is encouraged.

In my opinion, when I dig my heels in and debate, I'm very likely going to end up eventually making a fool of myself.  Because many of the things I'm so adamant and dogmatic about today (even to the point of forgetting that my main task is to love you as myself) I will be corrected on later by the Father and shown a more accurate, excellent way.  And bottom line, even though we often act as if it's not the case, as Sparrow said, we ALL see through a glass darkly.

Maybe because I've been so guilty (to use a Paulinian phrase, the "chiefest of sinners") my personal reaction to someone coming across as a "know-it-all"/a teacher/there's just no possiblity I could be wrong here, etc., is actually quite negative.  I walk away with a bad taste in my mouth, and actually may end up giving less credence (or paying less attention) to what they (I) do say.  When I do it myself, I've usually painted myself into a corner, end up needing to apologize, and "eat crow".  Not very appetizing.  

There's a whole feast spread before us is we share and partake in the love and gentleness of our Example.

What kind of debate is disapproved of Jabcat?  Deliberation or confrontation?  Each is a debate.  Maybe those things need to be more specifically defined.  I would think we are deliberating or "considering" each others opposing opinions in the effort to be more unified or edified in the Faith.  I could understand if the type of debate not allowed here is the confrontation type.

Paul

[trettep]

The Spirit itSELF bears witness with our seat of emotions, frame of mind, that we are children of God.

The Holy Spirit is invisible. So it bears witness with our renewed frame of mind that we have become begotten of it as his Children.

The word "spirit" is used in both parts of that verse.  So the word "spirit" there has to mean the same thing.  Don't you agree?

So if we take what your saying and substitute for the first word spirit as the definition of the word spirit you gave for the second instance we would have:

The seat of emotions, frame of mind, bears witness with our seat of emotions, frame of mind, that we are the Children of God.

Isn't that correct?

Paul

Not necessarily. In your opinion, why are there multiple entries in a dictionary?

But let's get down to specifics here Seth.  Because it is the specifics that can't reveal falsehood.  I am going to use your words to debate you.  I often use this tactic.  Now let's get more specific.  You say that the words might "not necessarily" mean the same in that verse.  So please define each one.  Refer to the first instance as "spirit definition1" and "spirit definition2" respectively for the occurences in that verse so we can better understand.  Because this verse is VERY important because as I READ it - there are TWO spirits being mentioned there and I understand them in a manner that is potentially very different than what you may preach to others and if we are about mutual edification into the Faith so that we all are of the same mind (that which is in Jesus Christ) then we can't all have opposing views and should work this out to eliminate the darkness that we may possess.

So please define those as you see them in concise but to the point descriptions if you will.

Paul

Paul, what you are asking me to do is actually contrary to 2 Peter 1:20.

I cannot hold one verse up as a solo interpretation. I have acknowledge ALL the Bible's definition of "spirit." The word spirit comes from the world "breath" or "life." The Bible says "God IS spirit."

It is impossible, therefore, to interpret a verse self-contained, apply an opinion from within that verse, then expand that definition as applying to ALL occurrences of "spirit."

Do you understand why I would want to stick with 2 Peter 1:20?

I'm not asking you for ALL occurences.  I'm asking you for the one specific verse.

Rom 8:16  The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

I'm only asking you to explain to define the word "spirit" there in both of those cases and HOW you came to understand the definitions you supply.  I don't think that is unreasonable or irrational even from the perspective of God's Word.

Paul

[trettep]

The Spirit itSELF bears witness with our seat of emotions, frame of mind, that we are children of God.

The Holy Spirit is invisible. So it bears witness with our renewed frame of mind that we have become begotten of it as his Children.

The word "spirit" is used in both parts of that verse.  So the word "spirit" there has to mean the same thing.  Don't you agree?

So if we take what your saying and substitute for the first word spirit as the definition of the word spirit you gave for the second instance we would have:

The seat of emotions, frame of mind, bears witness with our seat of emotions, frame of mind, that we are the Children of God.

Isn't that correct?

Paul

Paul, tell me your thoughts on this statement: "These boxes are not very light. Can you turn on the light?"

Sorry Seth, almost missed this.  I would say that both of the words "light" there mean two different meanings but I already know where the meanings come from and can understand the sentence.  I asked you to explain to define the words in the verse I provided.  I can provide a definition for each word "light" in the statement above:

light in occurence #1 would refer to something of little weight.
light in occurence #2 would refer to something that displaces darkness.

Paul

[Seth]

Ok, as long as you don't wish to confine my answers to that single verse, but allow that I am able to use the full Word. I'll research it look at many things and I'll provide an opinion ASAP (which may be tonight). Sound good?

[jabcat]

Hi Paul.  THIS ISN'T JUST FOR YOU!  IT'S FOR EVERYONE, INCLUDING ME...probably especially ME ["we are the world, we are the children, we are the ones that make a brighter day, so let's start giving"...nod to the MJ thread]  .

I could go into definitions of debate, including logical premises, conclusions, then the technical definitions of argument (part of debate), etc.  Let me speak from the "heart" though, rather than just the mind.

Even though it's a bit of a joke, because I'm often not very good at it myself, let me share it as this;

I can tell you what I believe, what I believe God is currently showing me or allowing me to see;  understanding and presenting it as I am seeing through a glass darkly, and that I only currently know in part.  That is all God is allowing any of us.  I can share that with you, do it in love, then accept that you either see it that way as God may shine a light on it for you, or that He isn't as yet revealing it to you;  and anyway, He may show me something different about it as well, SO MAYBE IT'S A GOOD THING YOU DIDN'T SWALLOW WHAT I WAS DISHING AT THE TIME, BECAUSE IT WAS YET VEILED!

Or, I can state a case, re-state it, argue it, be adamant that I am right, use your words against you, find multiple ways to try to convince you that you are wrong and I am right...then, perhaps in a worse case scenario, begin to belittle you, mock you, make slurring comments about you, who you've been listening to, become angry, say things I shouldn't say, wound you, harm others who are observing, and generally make a rear end out of myself and cast negative aspersions on the ways of the Lord.  All in the name of trying to present what I believe is sound doctrine, righteous teaching (when it's often about my "being right", saving face, but in the end, being judgmental, self-righteous, and a bad witness).  Been there, done that, sign the dotted line if you want to be in the club. 

There's only general guidelines, mainly "don't argue" and "have a Christ-like attitude and spirit".

So, bottom line, the encouragement is to share, discuss, and stay away from arguing/debate, however one may define it.  State how we see it at the moment, wish each other well, and let God do the job He has promised He will do...("you have no need that any man teach you...after the Spirit comes He will lead you into all truth").

God's blessing, James.

[Splitting this off into its own thread]  You are Satan (not YOU specifically Paul  ] can then carry on as its own topic. 

[Seth]

Paul, out of respect for Jabcats wishes I will follow what he is saying. We could do this PM style if you want.

[trettep]

Ok, as long as you don't wish to confine my answers to that single verse, but allow that I am able to use the full Word. I'll research it look at many things and I'll provide an opinion ASAP (which may be tonight). Sound good?

Take your time Seth.

Paul

[jabcat]

Please discuss Seth and Paul.  THAT's encouraged...please, that's why we're here.  But hopefully for fellowship rather than fellowhip  .

[trettep]

Hi Paul.  THIS ISN'T JUST FOR YOU!  IT'S FOR EVERYONE, INCLUDING ME...probably especially ME ["we are the world, we are the children, we are the ones that make a brighter day, so let's start giving"...nod to the MJ thread]  .

I could go into definitions of debate, including logical premises, conclusions, then the technical definitions of argument (part of debate), etc.  Let me speak from the "heart" though, rather than just the mind.

Even though it's a bit of a joke, because I'm often not very good at it myself, let me share it as this;

I can tell you what I believe, what I believe God is currently showing me or allowing me to see;  understanding and presenting it as I am seeing through a glass darkly, and that I only currently know in part.  That is all God is allowing any of us.  I can share that with you, do it in love, then accept that you either see it that way as God may shine a light on it for you, or that He isn't as yet revealing it to you;  and anyway, He may show me something different about it as well, SO MAYBE IT'S A GOOD THING YOU DIDN'T SWALLOW WHAT I WAS DISHING AT THE TIME, BECAUSE IT WAS YET VEILED!

Or, I can state a case, re-state it, argue it, be adamant that I am right, use your words against you, find multiple ways to try to convince you that you are wrong and I am right...then, perhaps in a worse case scenario, begin to belittle you, mock you, make slurring comments about you, who you've been listening to, become angry, say things I shouldn't say, wound you, harm others who are observing, and generally make a rear end out of myself and cast negative aspersions on the ways of the Lord.  All in the name of trying to present what I believe is sound doctrine, righteous teaching (when it's often about my "being right", saving face, but in the end, being judgmental, self-righteous, and a bad witness).  Been there, done that, sign the dotted line if you want to be in the club. 

There's only general guidelines, mainly "don't argue" and "have a Christ-like attitude and spirit".

So, bottom line, the encouragement is to share, discuss, and stay away from arguing/debate, however one may define it.  State how we see it at the moment, wish each other well, and let God do the job He has promised He will do...("you have no need that any man teach you...after the Spirit comes He will lead you into all truth").

God's blessing, James.

[Splitting this off into its own thread]  You are Satan (not YOU specifically Paul  ] can then carry on as its own topic. 

Thanks  Jabcat.

Paul

[trettep]

Paul, out of respect for Jabcats wishes I will follow what he is saying. We could do this PM style if you want.

Seth, I think Jabcat was essentially saying the same thing I was saying that there is multiple meanings to debating and that discussion relative to helping each other is highly encouraged.

Paul

[Seth]

Ok, It's just that I know how it is, being a former mod. 

[Seth]

Sorry Seth, almost missed this.  I would say that both of the words "light" there mean two different meanings but I already know where the meanings come from and can understand the sentence.  I asked you to explain to define the words in the verse I provided.  I can provide a definition for each word "light" in the statement above:

light in occurence #1 would refer to something of little weight.
light in occurence #2 would refer to something that displaces darkness.

Paul

Ok, so you had said this earlier: "The word "spirit" is used in both parts of that verse.  So the word "spirit" there has to mean the same thing.  Don't you agree?" So then we agree that this would not necessarily be true, especially of "light." Now what you did was make an INTUITIVE decision based on the context of what my use of "light" was right?

You said "But I know where the meanings come from."

But what if I told you that the boxes not being "light" meant that they were "dark gray" and the speaker asked for "white." You would have been wrong about what he was saying about the boxes right? However, you would have been functioning from a very reasonable interpretation.

So what we must do is all come to decisions based on context and in regard to our intuition of meaning right?

[Beloved Servant]

I pray you refer to Spiritual Intuition and not the mind of man.

[Seth]

ABSOLUTELY. I, yet not I as Apostle Paul would say.

[trettep]

Sorry Seth, almost missed this.  I would say that both of the words "light" there mean two different meanings but I already know where the meanings come from and can understand the sentence.  I asked you to explain to define the words in the verse I provided.  I can provide a definition for each word "light" in the statement above:

light in occurence #1 would refer to something of little weight.
light in occurence #2 would refer to something that displaces darkness.

Paul

Ok, so you had said this earlier: "The word "spirit" is used in both parts of that verse.  So the word "spirit" there has to mean the same thing.  Don't you agree?" So then we agree that this would not necessarily be true, especially of "light." Now what you did was make an INTUITIVE decision based on the context of what my use of "light" was right?

You said "But I know where the meanings come from."

But what if I told you that the boxes not being "light" meant that they were "dark gray" and the speaker asked for "white." You would have been wrong about what he was saying about the boxes right? However, you would have been functioning from a very reasonable interpretation.

So what we must do is all come to decisions based on context and in regard to our intuition of meaning right?

No, my decision was based on the fact that the word "spirit" was based on the Greek and that in the Greek a word doesn't have multiple meanings. 

Paul

[Beloved Servant]

I think this thread has its own spirit.
And much of it does not seem heavenly inspired.

[Seth]

Ok, so your stated reason "that they occur twice in the same verse" is then not the reasoning to establish it having same meaning, right? You said, the word "The word "spirit" is used in both parts of that verse.  So the word "spirit" there has to mean the same thing." You had led me to believe that the reason they have the same meaning is BECAUSE they occur twice in the same verse. Your understanding of same meaning of "spirit" is not based on it's frequency in the same verse.

What do you base your understanding that a word in the Greek language does not have multiple meanings? Do mean to say that a word's meaning in the Greek is never modified by the context?

[trettep]

Ok, so your stated reason "that they occur twice in the same verse" is then not the reasoning to establish it having same meaning, right? You said, the word "The word "spirit" is used in both parts of that verse.  So the word "spirit" there has to mean the same thing." You had led me to believe that the reason they have the same meaning is BECAUSE they occur twice in the same verse. Your understanding of same meaning of "spirit" is not based on it's frequency in the same verse.

What do you base your understanding that a word in the Greek language does not have multiple meanings? Do mean to say that a word's meaning in the Greek is never modified by the context?

Yes, a word in the Greek has the same meaning no matter where it is used.  Word are not modified by context - words are used to create context.  One of the strengths of the concordant method is in taking advantage of this fact and adhering to it.  Consider this:

"Greek is not like English, having many words spelled the same, but with totally different meanings. Such homonyms as occur are clearly distinguished in usage and are treated as separate words. Thus, in English, a horse may run fast, may be tied fast, and may fast from lack of food. No such confusion occurs in the Greek."

That is from this link:

http://www.scripture4all.org/ISA2_help/Articles/Concordant_Method2/Concordant_Method2.htm

Paul

[Seth]

Thanks for the link, I'll check it out. Do we agree that there is a difference between "meaning" and "definition."

A definition is a statment of a words exact statement of how a word should be understood
A meaning is an intention to convey.

For example, the word "bad" had definitions in the dictionary. But on the street, the word took on a different meaning (intended use) which actually set it opposite to the standard definitions (STATEMENTS of meaning).

So are you saying that "INTENDED use" is always the same as DEFINITION in the Greek? Can you use the example of Hades?

[jabcat]

I've thought about that, Paul, how the CLT used one word and one word only.  That's an interesting discussion.  Personally, I don't know if it's true or not, but I know that's how Knoch did it.  If it's not an accurate way of doing it, then IMO, that would cause some problems for me with the concordant version and its methods.  But maybe it is accurate.  I'm going to look at this more.

Obviously, to some folks' chagrine, I am one for context...it's an interesting statement that in the Greek it's the particular words that are used that create the context....hmmm.  Something to ponder.

[trettep]

Thanks for the link, I'll check it out. Do we agree that there is a difference between "meaning" and "definition."

A definition is a statment of a words exact statement of how a word should be understood
A meaning is an intention to convey.

For example, the word "bad" had definitions in the dictionary. But on the street, the word took on a different meaning (intended use) which actually set it opposite to the standard definitions (STATEMENTS of meaning).

So are you saying that "INTENDED use" is always the same as DEFINITION in the Greek? Can you use the example of Hades?

No, I see a definition and meaning as the same thing.

Paul

[Seth]

AH. Ok, so I am glad we talked about that. Who decides the definition? Also, can you please discuss the seemingly two different definitions or meanings of "hades?"

[peacemaker]

The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:  (Romans 8:16)

"Spirit is spirit, even without the essence of the body."

And despite the appearance of things, it is the lifeblood of the heart; Spirit. 

peacemaker