Mike
-
Posts
6,834 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Everything posted by Mike
-
I am plodding along 19 hours behind all the latest posting. Thanks for the links again. I skim read the links, just for old time's sake, and came up with this opening paragraph [w my bold fonts] to fully read. It's from the last link, The Formation of the New Testament Canon. "The term 'canon' used with reference to the Bible means the collection of books which are received as divinely inspired and therefore authoritative for faith and life. The recognition of the canon of the New Testament is one of the most important developments in the thought and practice of the early church; yet history is silent as to how, when, and by whom it was brought about. It is possible, however, to reconstruct some of the influences that must have contributed to the emergence of the New Testament canon." I find that when this route it taken, in very short order, the divine inspiration part gets thrown under the bus, and it starts looking like lots of other inspirations mar the original attitude of meekness to the Author. It’s like watch sausage being made at the factory, and very uninspiring of trust in the scriptures. History is silent on the canon formation. This I found out very fast in 1972. No one took notes while it was happening. There was persecution, and with every passing year, believers were mixing their believing in Paul’s writings with other influences. The church was reprobate, and being persecuted, so the history of the Apostles’ Canon (according to my theory) went unrecorded. But it survived. The Top-Down approach, as I call it, looks for evidence of the forming canon. They find some evidence, but most is lost… efficiently destroyed by the devil. This approach is scientific and relies on what evidence is still findable, spared by the devil. It is at best a partial understanding of how and when the canon formed. It relies on logic, postulates, and lucky evidence finds. Meanwhile, I am taking the “Bottom Up” approach. If the scriptures in the canon we have now were divinely inspired, then God tracked with the, having a special interest in preserving them. In His foreknowledge, He would see ahead at our difficulties in re-constructing the originals from fragments and wondering which books belong in His divine canon. He could leave hints for us in the scriptures for us, to encourage us that He watched over and guided the whole process. He could encourage us that the LACK of a historical record need not deter our trust in the canon that survived to today. He could encourage us with scriptural deposits that we could cash in on to see a BIGGER picture of the canon formation and protection than what partial knowing the Top-Down scientific/historical can supply. I am asking you to think outside the theological box that the Top-Down approach has become. The Bottom-Up approach, from within the scriptures, is a new way to look at this canon problem. I think you or someone said that Bible verses are a part of the traditional approaches to the canon. I would like to see them. Are any of the links you supplied above going to bring me to a trove of Bible verses? If not, do you have any links like that?
-
I give up. The Starbucks reason those words are in Llamsa's Aramaic is because Llamsa's verse was translated from an earlier Greek text, which was translated from an earlier Aramaic text. That means it went Aramaic to Greek to Aramaic. To me that said manuscript analysis for canon history is way too uncertain for me. I was willing to bet in 1972 that God put hints in His revelations to teach us how He guided the canon process. I won that bet.
-
I don't know. I've told you that I have not invested time or enthusiasm in this type of research. If you are looking for academic info from me, forget it. That is not my approach to this topic. If you are keen on the languages, then why is your curiosity not up for those bold fonted words in that Llamsa verse on Eli, Eli. They just should not be there, yet they are there. Do you remember from PFAL why those same basic words are UNDERSTANDABLE in the Greek, but why are they there in the Aramaic?
-
I said that would end it, the Starbucks answer I got. Meanwhile, have you had a chance to see your earlier question answered? The question on what's the canon connection for that ababababab structure in the Timothy text I posted in two installments, so far. Did you see how that scripture party Paul was calling for at the end of 2 Timmoty had a building context?
-
I took an early one taught by Donna Randall. I think they beefed it up in the 1980s, but I missed that. Was the Harmony of the Gospels tape set a part of that? I have them, but not listened to them. I pretty much felt satisfied with what I had seen in the canon verses by the early 80s, and so I did not seek any teaching on it when that class was beefed up.
-
Ok, nothing much has changed in 50 years there. There may be pieces of that I picked up along the way. But ALL of it I am familiar with. It is exactly what I said it was: a looking back in history and confirming the search with artifacts and other physical evidence. It is the scientific-historical approach. Been there, done that. I am taking an entirely different approach. I am limiting myself to the Biblical record, JUST TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS. Actuality, I did that long ago, but now it can be your turn. BOTH methods have a soundness, and each has its limitations. I'm telling you GOD left some hints for us moderns in His revelations to the ancients about the canon process that are very comforting and supportive for believing in the scriptures. */*/* And I am telling you, that Llamsa anomaly DOES bear on the canon, and in a surprising way. I will highlight the anomaly, and you can see if you are able to explain it Here is the verse, with no PFAL anomaly, no problems, we got taught it right. Matthew 27:46 KJV “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” And now here is the same verse with the anomaly in bold fonts: Matthew 27:46 Llamsa “And about the ninth hour, Jesus cried out with a loud voice and said, Eli, Eli, lamna shabachthani! Which means, My God, My God, for this I was kept?” It took me over 20 years to answer this anomaly, and it ties in with the canon, FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE. That is, it says a lot about the oldest Aramaic manuscripts, and it is actually discouraging. I was surprised, and it downgraded my wondering about how much effort should I put in Aramaic materials. But first you got to understand why those words are an anomaly, and then the Starbucks answer I got will be the end of this.
-
No, I'm grabbing at verses. Or, I was grabbing at them, and collecting them, for 10 years. You have not seen 10% of my verses, so you are not in a position to rate my theory, and how well it is based on scripture. Be patient. I am scanning and doing the OCR editing on lots of old papers for posting soon.
-
Yes, that does help. I can bookmark them and check them when the rains come. I did look into all that long ago, so maybe some new data was added. I am still suspicious of their techniques or Postulates. */*/*/* While I was thinking of it, somewhere you were complaining that I was not doing a solo research project, but totally using the techniques and perspectives in PFAL. I just realized YOU ARE RIGHT ! The techniques and perspectives from PFAL constitute a major part of my Postulates. So, of course you are right there. That shows me that you didn't quite understand that my Postulates are my fundamental assumptions, and that, of course, my assumptions are that the PFAL techniques and perspectives are true and from God. But what I DID mean by this canon project being my solo effort is this: I never heard VPW teach on the canon topic. Sure, I used the PFAL the techniques and perspectives I was taught to find results that were new. VPW only helped me a minimum, by telling me personally he never teaches on the canon, except for the invariant order of the church epistles. He also told me he tried to fit the Apocrypha in, but could not make it fit. Walter helped me greatly with encouragement, and confirmation of what I had found on my own. He read my papers, and gave me discussion time, and tips for the next paper. He also said I was on thin ice for an item or two. I’ll be finished posting my 2 Timothy paper soon.
-
Actually, I am not sure I saw those definitions. Can you find the thread and timestamp so I can check? Meanwhile, my text explaining how the abababab structure has to do with the EARLY work on the canon by the writers the NT themselves. My theory is simple: The NT writers started the collecting together of the canon, and they finished the job. It took centuries for people to line up with the ORIGINAL version of the canon, but they did. The church was both under lots of persecution, and drifting reprobate, in that they had rejected Paul. There is no record of Timothy in history. No one recognized him because they had "moved on" from Paul. God protected and guided the canon the apostles settled, but the adversary made sure this was not to be found in historical artifacts. A couple hundred years later and it was settled.... somewhat. It is a very slippery subject, after the apostles are out of the picture. But the picture that is portrayed in the NT writings about their own collection together is WAY more than I ever expected to find when I started.
-
No. You are looking at the official process that took place long after the apostles. I am looking at a much earlier process, that the NT text shows us. It is all in my paper, which you only have one third of here so far.
-
I get that. But if the Bible is really from God, then He has foreknowledge of how His Word will be collected to gether. I am looking at the BEGINNING of the process, you and T-Bone are picking up the story a couple centuries later. It is revolutionary to consider that the Bible can write about itself. MORE SPECIFICALLY, it can show the attitudes and procedures the writers had. Paul and his helpers had NO IDEA how their writings would be handled after them, BUT they could get revelation from God as to what they must do to get the ball rolling on preserving the unofficial 1st Century formation of the canon. You are looking at the OFFICIAL organized religion story of how they eventually recognized what the apostles assembled.
-
I see that the text is on page 8 at abour 9 am Pacific time.
-
I can see that you have not been paying attention to my posts. I explained that several times already. Did you read the text I have been posting, starting on page 7, yesterday at 02:11 PM Pacific Time. Paul was starting the formation of the canon as he wrote to Timothy. Read the Epistle and the text I posted. This is just the beginning. I found evidence that Paul, Timothy, Mark, and Luke started the ball rolling in that writing which is in the ababababaab style. It is ALL explained, what "a" is and what "b" is. I could re-post it here, but you are able to go back and see what you missed. Try to remember that original, genuine fascination you had and posted. It was that fascination that started this thread. Maybe you should go back and read your posts in the past, as well as mine.
-
It fits into my ALTERNATE THEORY of how the Biblical canon was formed, which you found fascinating, and you started this thread, as a place for me to post my alternate research. .... remember?
-
-
I insist they DO have a lot to do with the NT Canon. I'm not talking of how scholars have found EVIDENCE in history, and from the evidence concluded the most likely history of how the Bible was assembled. I am NOT talking about the VIEW that can be developed using recognized academic approaches from history and artifacts. What I am talking about is a DIFFERENT VIEW of the canon process that one can have from INSIDE the Bible. Picture it instead of asking history how the canon formed, and asking God by searching for clues He left in there for us. Nowhere did VPW teach this, that I am aware of. I thought of it from the internal Bible EVIDENCE that I found with my own critical thinking skills. I wrote it up and Walter said he was onto the same main idea. So your perception of irrelevance is due to your ignorance of my approach. Hang in there, I will continue to post my evidence that I found almost 50 years ago.
-
I forgot to put in the "abababababa" listing in text form above that "abababababa" was the figure of speech Approximitzio, meaning it was approximately like "abababababa." <cough> Please remember this text was freshly scanned from writing I did in the 70s, early to mid 70s. Some of this is nearly 50 years old. I think the LITERAL, exact, structure may be a little like this: ababbabababaaba I can't remember if I got an exact "abababababa" if the verse text listings above are folded together. That's a little COLOR project I might do later.
-
We shall see. Meanwhile, did you happen to notice another question from me to you you seem to be avoiding? I almost forgot all about it myself: The strange anomaly in the Llamsa Bible in the Eli, Eli verse. I first noticed it with my critical thinking skills around 1975, and asked a few people about it. But no one ever knew, and it remained a mystery to me for decades. It was answered unexpectedly at an chance encounter at Starbucks. This person was an "expert." Their answer floored me. It will you too, when you integrate into the big picture..... with my Postulate set. So, that's two "critical thinking skills" drills for you to cut your teeth on: 1- Who fathered Jesus? 2- What is "wrong" with the Llamsa verse? By "wrong" I mean it does NOT FIT with my Postulates. It does not fit with what we were taught in PFAL. It violates PFAL, in a most subtle way. Or at least that's what my critical thinking skills picked up in the mid 70s. I spotted it right away, but I had the advantage there. I was hearing the original film class numerous times per year, because I was the branch A.V. guy for several years. I can give you hints on the Llamsa Anomaly, to overcome any handicap you may have due to PFAL film class transcript memories fading. But I can't give you hints on who fathered Jesus. I already quoted 3 verses that answer it. It solves the Holy Spirit mystery pretty neatly in my book, with my Postulates.
-
That's it. REJECT what i write before i write it. You may be surprised at seeing the whole argument.
-
Here is the next installment on my old paper on the NT Canon, with a little overlap. This is the "ababababa" structure I mentioned several times before and tried a color graphics way to depict it. I think this way with words shows it better. */*/*/* There is even recorded in the Word an exciting drama concerning one of the final compilations of the books of the Bible. The finishing touches on this collection process took place late in the first century, and we can read an account of some of the men involved and circumstances surrounding their work. In II Timothy 4;13, we read a verse, which at first glance, can seem very unimportant: The cloak that I Paul left at Troas with Carpus, when thou Timothy comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments. Without looking too deeply a verse like this would suggest that Paul wanted some bedtime reading material, and his favorite overcoat he forgot at Carpus’ house. But let’s apply some of our PFAL keys to this verse and examine the context to see how it fits in. II Timothy was written at a time when the first century church was in a state of collapse, the ministry of the mystery given to the Apostle Paul being rejected. The greatest revelation of God’s Word given to the church was already forgotten by most of the people at the time this epistle was written. The context of the entire epistle is twofold: a) Timothy’s responsibility to preserve the integrity of the Word, and b) Satan’s attacks on the Word, the Mystery and Paul. Let’s look at this expanded out a little, and then get back to the word “cloak” later. A) Timothy’s Battle to Preserve the Integrity of the Word And the Ministry of the Mystery Found in Paul’s Epistles 1:08 Don’t be ashamed of the Word and the ministry. 1:13 “Hold fast the form of sound words” (the mystery). 2:02 Pass the Word on to faithful men. 2:02 Endure hardness, be a soldier. 2:05 Strive for masteries. 2:14 “Strive not about words to no profit.” 2:15 Study and rightly divide the Word. 2:16 Avoid profane and vain babblings. 2:19 Depart from (stand away from) iniquity. 2:23 Avoid foolish questions. 2:24 Teach. 2: 25 Instruct. 3:14 Continue in the scriptures. 3;16 Purpose for the God-breathed scriptures . 4:02 “Preach the Word.” 4:05 “Do the work of an evangelist.” 4:11 Gather together profitable ministers. 4:13 Gather together books and parchments. B) Satan’s Attacks on the Word, the Mystery and the Man of God 1:08 Paul shamed, imprisoned and afflicted. l:12 Paul suffering “these things.” 1:15 “all they which are in Asia be turned away from me.” 1:16 Paul chained. 2:03 “hardness” or pressures. 2:04 There was a spiritual war going on. 2:09 Paul treated “as an evil doer.” 2:14 Strife over words and subverting of hearers. 2:16 Profane and vain babblings, increasing ungodliness. 2:18 Hymenaeus and Philetus overthrowing believing of some. 2:26 Snare of the devil taking captives. 3:0l (through v.9) Perilous times coming, many 1ies, no truth. 3:11 Persecutions and afflictions on Paul and believers. 4:03 No sound doctrine, turned away from truth, turned to fa.b1es. 4:06 Paul about to die . 4:10 Demas, Crescens, and Titus forsaken Paul . 4:14 Alexander doing Paul much evi1. 4:16 All forsaken Paul.
-
BINGO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Here is the opening segment of my first paper that I wrote circa 1972,73. after my hand written letter to Walter got a good review. This, following, was very similar to my letter, with a few additions. The Bible is the most wonderful book to ever come into existence, because it was produced by God, Himself . His purpose is stated in II Timothy 3:17: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. God produced it for us so that we could receive and manifest lives that are more than abundant, and the primary key to our successful utilization of this book lies in developing a living realization of the integrity of God’s Word. The production of the Bib1e was entirely overseen by God, and we need to put that fact foremost in our thinking. II Peter l:20,21: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. By searching exclusively within God’s Word, avoiding outside secular sources and historical writings, and by applying simple principles we learned in the PFAL c1ass, we can come to realize this powerful idea: that the collecting and compiling of the various books of the Bible was carried out by the SAME men to whom God entrusted the original revelations. It is often heard that the Bible was a product of various ecclesiastical councils or canonization committees, or that the compiling of its contents is basically an historical accident. These tricks of the Adversary regarding the origin of the Bible should never be tolerated, for God knew what He was doing when He chose His word workers and delivered His Word to them. One demonstration of the divine inspiration involved in the compiling of the Bible is simply noting that many passages of scripture refer to and vouch for the authenticity of other books of the Bible. Self-referential? Yes, but it’s a start. Such scriptures as II Peter 3:15,16 and Romans 15:4 clearly indicate God’s willingness and ability to give revelation to His men concerning the contents of various other books of the Bible. Another example of this is where one scripture (like John 15:7-9 or Mark 12t24-26) will quote from other books of the Bible and explicitly state their divine inspiration, thus including them in the collection. We can also see from records such as Jeremiah 36 that when the Adversary tries in some way to obstruct the preservation of divine writings, God is right there with total awareness, willing and able to suppl the needed replacement. Therefore, rest assured that we haven’t lost any of the books of the Bible intended for our use by God. In addition to the mechanism of direct revelation for preserving the integrity of God’s Word, we can stretch our imagination a litt1e bit to see another mechanism whereby an attempt to insert a counterfeit writing into God’s authorized collection would fail . If somehow some profane writing were to find its way into the assemblage, God (either in His foreknowledge or after the fact) could inspire one of His men to write in such a way as to point a big, red arrow at the insertion, and thus alert future compilers of their error. Detecting changes and distortion from within the text of the Bible falls under the category of Biblical research, but even here God has His hand in the matter by blessing us again with men having gift ministries, so that we are not carried about with every wind of doctrine (Ephesians 4: 11-14). God wants us to know that His Word is protected and that we can rely on it. This is why He says things like the Word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword (Hebrews 4:12), and “the word of the Lord endureth for ever (I Peter l:25). He wants us to trust His Word, so He shares with us enough information to assure us as to its divine inspiration, compilation and preservation. There is even recorded in the Word an exciting drama concerning one of the final compilations of the books of the Bible. The finishing touches on this collection process took place late in the first century, and we can read an account of some of the men involved and circumstances surrounding their work. In II Timothy 4;13, we read a verse, which at first glance, can seem very unimportant: "The cloak that I Paul left at Troas with Carpus, when thou Timothy comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments." Without looking too deeply a verse like this would suggest that Paul wanted some bedtime reading material, and his favorite overcoat he forgot at Carpus’ house. But let’s apply some of our PFAL keys to this verse and examine the context to see how it fits in.
-
-
I get it. I saw many doing that. I partially did it, both in time and topic, but never fully. I was too scared to go all the way, Corps that is. That was from 1972 to 1984ish Then things went crazy, and I was up and down on lots of things for a decade. In 1998 I started fully accepting the written forms of PFAL, but STILL reserved the right to notice occasional errors in his taped teachings. That is where I stand today, exactly. That is one of my big postulates. Before I 1998 I tinkered with that Postulate. My earliest Postulate in 1972 was again PARTIAL, but in full acceptance was the vague notion that there were passages in the film class that were “straight prophecy.” I didn't have a way to identify exactly where these passages were, though. I was often very fearful that maybe the whole ministry was a money making sham, or worse, a trick of the devil. I got over that after I worked a few years at HQ. But I still held a lot of reservations and would be unhappy with VPW’s teaching tapes once in a while, so it took me eleven years before I went out WoW. */*/*/* T-Bone I noticed in your two posts above a mention that you value acting the Word now more than knowing the Word. I can relate to that. I do it too. My Wow year convinced me enough in PFAL that I totally took the ending seriously, where they taught us to be WoWs for life. I did that all the way, and here I am doing it now. I saw it help people, and it helped me. As for taking every word VPW spoke on the Corps Tapes, absolutely never did I see them as God-breathed, but at times they could be, here and there. But even today it is face to face action on what simple things we were taught in the class, and NOT the Corps training. I am so glad my suspicions about the Corps were NEVER quenched. Instead they got bigger and bigger as the 1980s progressed. */*/*/ LoL, you could have saved me a lot of typing, had I known your were taking the Trinitarian view of the PFAL model of the absent Christ. THAT explains a lot of things that you objected to, like me calling the Trinity a debilitating set of ideas. So, if I adopt the Trinity Postulate, then you’re right, the absent Christ sucks. I never took it the way you described above, though. It sounds like you were in the Corps. I can do a more detailed response tomorrow, to your 2 posts above. */*/*/*/* The way I took it, the absent Christ, with my PFAL Postulates, was he was NOT absent IN ME! He wasn’t absent IN YOU! It was only for others, not born again that he was absent. The Word explained to me that it is BETTER to have “him” in me spiritually (gift of holy spirit) all the time, than for me to have Jesus present on Earth OUTSIDE of me. The way I get to know my Lord Jesus is I get the chance to play him in a stage production of Real Life, in the way I help people close at hand… and even sometimes on the Internet, but I prefer the local face-to-face helping if it is available. Here I am substituting the idea of an actor for an ambassador. I was playing “what would Jesus do” in a way. I was learning Jesus’s character like Hal Holbrook got to know Mark Twain’s character, by playing the writer on stage for decades. */*/* Is there any way you can handle the "who fathered Jesus" question? OR, can you at least see WHY I am comfortable thinking that The Holy Spirit did the act of fathering Jesus? It pretty plainly states it 3 times in scripture. So, I am totally comfortable with this: the Holy Spirit is a description of God, and the Father is a role that God plays. And we get to call God by the term of endearment, Daddy.
-
