-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 22:30:03 -0700
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Belief
Mk 11:26 omission. A parallel passage is found in Matt 6:14-15. Apparently there is not good mss evidence for the passage in Mk 11. None of this bothers me , Dave.
DAVEH: I appreciate your explanation, John.....thanx.
It would bother me if I had a book as important as the Bible without the kind of evidence that does exist - as you probably know, the most witnessed book in history. I do not believe in revelation that is something other than personal.
DAVEH: May I assume that means you believe the heavens were sealed sometime in the early first few centuries? Is there Biblical support that you would offer to support your position on this?
This assumption has meaning to you - I am afraid your question is not understood by me. Just as I beleive that had Christ come in this modern time - His mission would have failed - so i believe the biblical message was completed by or near the end of the first century. The Bible has a wide ranging acceptance that would not be afforded to any other "scripture" offered at another time.
I do not believe in the continued appointment of apostles,
DAVEH: Yet isn't that what happened in the early years....witness Paul & Barnabas?
As important as Paul is, he is not one of the 12. The Chruch of Jesus Christ was founded on the work and mission of the original 12 and their names appear on the 12 foundation stones in The City from Heaven for that very reason. I do not confuse Paul and Barnabas with the 12.
if we are using that word in the same vein as the "12." So - there is much that remains, not the lest of which is the ancient message. I have yet to see any accepted doctrine effected by textual problems. I am sure we disagree on much of what I have said above --- Why are you concerned by such an "omission?"
DAVEH: I've been criticized for my belief in the Bible as far as it is translated correctly. Yet it seems there is a vast difference between some translations. Why some folks would be bothered by my comment seems strange when one looks at some of the differences between the various translations.
Again, you have a received teaching that is differenct from mine. I see not a single imprtant variation in translation that proport to be language translations as opposed to thought translations.
Just a few days ago, somebody who didn't know me other than I am LDS suggested I read the last few paragraphs of the Bible, trying to get me to realize that one should not add to or subtract from the Word of God. (In fact, I think Izzy has made similar remarks in the past here on TT.) I do not understand the thinking of many people -- Linda Shields, Kevin, Judy and DM are only a few of the many who remain a mystery to me. The prohibition against adding to the "words of this book" have to do with the Revelation only, IMO. At the same time, I believe the biblical message to bear the mark of inspiration and providential protection and supply. It contains God's message, His spoken word, for us today. More than that -- it is a part of the vehicle God uses to cause spiritual growth and maturity -- victory over personal and destructive error. I need nothing else, in terms of revelation, than this ancient message and its confirmation in the lives of those with whom I fellowship.
I wonder if folks who think like that are bothered when some versions remove entire passages. People like that are obviously bothered by just about anything one might offer in terms of shared instruction and doctrinal benefit. But God can save us all -- even a midget in the faith.
JD
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
