Comments for Consider IT pure joy...

Comment on Tornado Warning by Von Kloberdanz

Von Kloberdanz — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 19:33:08 +0000

An individual self-sufficient words with NBC within the Tv show. He includes a genuinely tough immigration law quote. He managed to graduate for the Harvard Collage. Today he provides his a single Broadcast Show. He did not like any American president.

Comment on Are all Christians called to be missionaries? / Does a dog have four legs? by Paul Shaddick

Paul Shaddick — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:16:30 +0000

Thanks for your good comments Johnathan. I was asking the question, precisely because many Christians have a view that mission is for professional ‘missionaries’. You have probably seen my comment there:
The reason I asked the question is that I am increasingly uncomfortable with the word “missionary” in the way in which it is usually used. I am not convinced that mission (or proclamation for that matter) is a vocation to which only some are called. As Chris Wright has shown so well, God is on a mission, he has sent Christ into the world and all Christians by definition must be his followers.

Comment on Are all Christians called to be missionaries? / Does a dog have four legs? by Johnathan

Johnathan — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:46:55 +0000

nope they are not. Some are called to be bakers and politicians and accountants etc. Missionaries are specially trained people. If you mean all christians are called to be a witness to Christ thats fine but ‘missionaries’ is a whole different matter. Most protestants in america think that only ‘fulltime ministry’ is Godly so you have millions of protestants who have NO effect on the culture (because being a missionary is more important than being a movie producer or a screenwriter), NO effect on politics (because being a missionary is more important then being a senator or a congresswoman), NO effect in science (because being a missionary is more important then being a biologist etc), NO effect … well you get the idea. Im sure there will be many people who will condemn me for not being ‘christian’ enough but my question to YOU is are you happy with giving the socalled ’secular’ world over to satan? If not then DO SOMETHING about it. Do you know there are over 50 million evangelicals in america and not one is a supreme court justice? 4 supreme court justices are catholics thank GOD for that otherwise we would have NO effect there. WAKE UP –PAUL DID NOT CALL YOU ALL TO BE MISSIONARIES STOP LYING TO YOURSELVES.

Comment on The problems of literal translations by The Matrix Bible? « Consider IT pure joy…

The Matrix Bible? « Consider IT pure joy… — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:30:55 +0000

[...] The problems of literal translations Tags books humour Africa missional pray music ICCM translation tv scribblings Profile film reviews church Kenya web software video AIM Bible Islam Google travel theology mission Archives [...]

Comment on Burning Bibles for Halloween! by Tim Tillinghast

Tim Tillinghast — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:12:48 +0000

oh my! Makes me embarrassed to be from the same country.
Looks like I need to clean out my WHOLE library.
Do these people not condone any books other than the KJV?

If you check back on their site now, they tell about what a great event it was.

Comment on ‘John Doe’ found in Bethlehem by Tim Tillinghast

Tim Tillinghast — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:01:47 +0000

“John Doe” would not pass for me in American English. Not in addressing a living person who was conscious and able to tell their name.
Occasionally you see people who have amnesia or who are in a coma and unidentified referred to as “John Doe”.

Comment on Christmas can [still] change the World by Tim

Tim — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 19:44:52 +0000

We’ll use this on 13th – great
I’ve enjoyed a few minutes browsing your blog

Comment on The problems of literal translations by Yusuf Garba

Yusuf Garba — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 06:40:52 +0000

this is a good attempt

Comment on The problems of literal translations by Paul Shaddick

Paul Shaddick — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:04:44 +0000

It’s a very good point Peter and an ongoing challenge for translators. Each idiom needs to be considered carefully in the light of its original and current readers. In the case of Saul “covering his feet” the likelihood of non-comprehension is high if the idiom is retained, but the original idiom seems likely to have been euphemistic so its purpose might better be retained by use of a modern euphemism, but “Saul went into the cave to use the bathroom” has some problems

In the Hebrews example I would want to consider the evidence for the Greek being an idiom, but I suspect that removing the tripartite reference might generate more heat than light among contemporary theologians.

Comment on The problems of literal translations by Peter Parslow

Peter Parslow — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:03:30 +0000

But how do we know which things are idioms, and what the idioms mean?

I’m happy enough that “covered his feet” is unlikely to be literal, and the contexts mean it doesn’t matter too much, but “urinate” seems likely.

But what about say Heb 4:12 – is Paul using an idiom from contemporary Greek, or does he accept the Greek idea that man has body, soul & spirit? I’ve heard there isn’t much support for that in the Hebrew scriptures.