Purpose Driven Life Question

It would be more helpful if you could dispute it with some information, scripture, or something that would take your post from opinion to possible founded assertion. </font>[/QUOTE]I'm the one who asked for Scripture first. One Scripture which does not fit the description of what I asked for doesn't work. I will not succumb to your demands unless you can post what I asked. If not... </font>[/QUOTE]That's fine. If all you can muster is "No it's not!" then I'm quite comfortable with your departure.

 

I never said "no it's not", I believe it was guitarpreacher that beat me to it that the verse you supplied was not out of context. The fact you did not agree with his point does not mean you are right that it was used out of context. Was that the only one? If it was, you proved nothing.

 

Then show me, either with examples from the book or with scripture, how I was wrong. I'm not one of those people who think I'm right no matter what, and if you can prove to me that I was wrong then so be it. However, just saying I am wrong (with the same example here that you use) doesn't make it so.

You asked for something, it was given, now you can refute it in kind. I'm ready to be proven wrong if it is the case.

 

You make the accusation. It's not for us to prove you wrong, you need to prove you're right.

 

Exactly. You guys claim that "RW uses inferior translations and rips verses out of context to distort his brand of truth".

I say "show Scripture RW has quoted being taken out of context from inferior translations".

I get from broshane a hefty ONE verse that he claims is taken out of context, and is shown that it was not. He then replies with "you need to prove me wrong, I don't need to prove I'm right".



This along with a exegesis of no Scripture, but RW's PDL book by jannee about wording and writing style. I thought you guys' could do better than that!

 

webdog


BIBLE VERSES PLEASE


please...pretty please....with sugar on top...

Make an effort

 

webdog,
You have been asked to offer something, anything to the table. You rejected my proof because you say R.W. didn't use an inferior translation in PDL.

Let's go thru the process to prove you are right. Here is just one of the examples I offered you.


Pg 86 "He is a God who is passionate about his relationship with you" Exodus 34:14 NLT

(Insert webdog's bible's verse & identify the bible)

"Do not worship any other God, for the Lord, whose name is Jelous, is a Jelous God" Exodus 34: 14 NIV
(For you shall worship no ther God, for the Lord, whose name is Jelous, is a Jelous God" Exodus 43:14 KJV

Is the point of this verse (in your bible) similar to my translations?
When you look at the verse above, and the two below, which does it closely resemble?

Is the main point of the verse that God has commanded us not to worship other gods or is it a descriptive verse like R.W translation describing God's desire to have a passionate relationship with us?

 

So, then you have nothing?

So, then you have nothing?

I have offered to discuss this and have been gracious enought to offer, genuinely, to acknowledge being wrong. I still mean it.

You can do better than, "Aw, shucks, that just ain't right."

 

Actually, it's you who has nothing.

 

Then show me how I'm wrong.

 

Learn to debate...then come back.
1. You make the claim.
2. I ask for you to back it with Scripture.
3. You then tell me to prove you wrong. Nooooooo....you need to prove YOU ARE RIGHT...not the other way around. Failure to back your claim is an admission it was either faulty, made from ignorance, or made due to your personal feelings about RW and PDL...and not the Scripture he took out of context, which was your initial claim. Put up or shut up.

 

You know, it's funny that I did prove my claim, and the fact that you are now falling back on claiming that I didn't (without showing why I didn't), and going the the rules of debate (and not even getting that right, by the way) as if that, somehow, diminishes the inability of you to refute that claim, shows you have nothing.

If you have nothing you could have saved us both a some time by just saying so.

 

You proved no such thing with your ONE Scripture, which by the way, guitarpreacher pointed out was not taken out of context. If your view of PDL is based on ONE Scripture, your view cannot be counted as accurate. You have nothing. I don't agree that the Scripture is taken out of context, so there is nothing for me to "have". Your argument if foolish.

 

BroShane put guitarpreacher back on track. He misunderstood from what I read, but HE DID back it up with his knowledge from the bible. That is what counts. There is no grading system here, no right or wrong. We just ALL must be willing to participate in the discussion. Debtaing with believers in a discussion allows us to learn the truth. Iron Sharpens Iron.

Often people, especially people involved in cults are told to NOT debate with other believers and instead they "label them and the issue secondary as not worthy of their time" This can be an excuse to put others down. A Pastor places so much emphasis on persecution that he feels, or the church as a whole, they just label anyone (believers) under this heading as excuses not to debate. They prefer to talk with new seekers who really don't have this skill yet. Then they can remain "right"

WWJD?

The validity in the biblical translations are not secondary issues.

 

I meant to say there is no grading system here, with no points gained. I accidently said no right or wrong.

Here is an article I cut and pasted from R.W. purposedriven.com website.


Why does Pastor Rick use so many different Bible translations?

Translating the Bible out of the original Hebrew and Greek languages is a complex challenge. Most Bible translations are the work of a large committee of highly trained scholars. When Dr. Warren speaks or writes, he deliberately chooses the translation that will best communicate God's Word to that specific audience. This allows him to benefit from the work of many biblical scholars who have worked for years to bring God’s Word into modern English.

As an evangelist, Pastor Rick is constantly looking for ways to build bridges that will lead people into a relationship with Jesus Christ. Sometimes the wording of one translation is better suited for reaching someone with the gospel than the other translations. The point is to draw his readers and listeners into the gospel message, knowing that once they begin the process of discipleship, they will become immersed in the Bible and be able to determine which translation is best for them.

In addition, many people – believers and non-believers – have become so accustomed to hearing certain Scripture passages that a different translation may give them a fresh understanding of their favorite Bible verses. They can take this fresh understanding and return to their preferred biblical translation with a renewed passion for God’s Word.

New or updated translations of the Bible become necessary when people no longer understand the language of another time and place. As we stand at the beginning of the 21st century, language is changing at an incredible speed. That’s why you’re seeing so many new and updated translations in use.

 

Not that anyone needs to be reminded of this, but The Message is not a translation. It is one man's intepretation of Scripture. It is the word of man.

 

That's fine. That sems to be the norm for some people here - "I'm right and nothing anyone esle says has any merit. Why? Because I said so."

The only thing foolish so far as been the unwillingness/inability of you and others to give any kind of argument based on anything other than your statement that something must be so. If you will go back to my original post on this I asked if anyone wanted more than what I gave. No one ever said more was needed, it was all dismissed out of hand with no real discussion and no real evidence to refute it which, by the way, is one of the rules of debate you managed to forget.

So, seeing as how you either have nothing or are willing to defend your position with nothing other than unfounded assertions, I will bow out of this for now.

 

And all through PDL RW calls it a "paraphrase" I was watching to see what he said.

 

I second that.