Agreements and Rebuttals

sermonindex Jul 6, 2011

Yes but

This is where the problem started.

The "yes but", or the "I agree, however" is the same thing that Serpent said to Eve, "Yes, but".

The agreement followed by a rebuttal weakens the agreement, unless the agreement has clauses or stipulations.

It's like saying, I agree with Noah and the flood BUT I don't "think" that it was worldwide. My opinion is my clause not the scriptures therefore my opinion is faulty and not valid.

An agreement is an agreement, the "but" is an added opinion to liquefy the strength of that agreement, even though the rebuttal may be true, it still works the same affect, it weakens it.

"I believe God can heal, but".

"God created the world in seven days, but".

"Men and women are not equal, but".

"Jesus turned water into wine, but".

"God poured out the Holy Ghost, but".

The first part is strong and binding, the second part casts doubt and is a breeding ground for dissension and disagreements.

Of all the words of the English language the word "But" is loathsome.

A man said to Jesus after being called, "Let me first go and bury my father and then I'll follow you".

"Sure I'll follow you Jesus, but".

S

sarahsdream Jul 6, 2011

That sounds like so many modern Greek and Hebrew "scholars" regarding God's Word (AV).

"Yes, but it is not in the earliest manuscripts".

Hath God said? "Yes, however, most of that verse is missing in the earliest manuscripts".

When we are taught to doubt God's Word, we will then learn to doubt what we are left with after all their scholarly subtractions.

Sarah

A

ArtB Jul 7, 2011

Sarah, if it is not in the earliest manuscripts, I would discard it. like that stupid verse someone added on to one of the gospels about if all the things Jesus spoke or did were written down, it would fill up the entire earth.

If you had a gospel of Mark from the 15th century AD that states Jesus married Mary Magdalene, would you still believe that even though all the early Manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark did not have that verse?

S

savedtoserve Jul 7, 2011

Amen, Sarah. Exactly so.

S

savedtoserve Jul 7, 2011

ArtB, it doesn't have to do with the earliest manuscripts, but with the majority of them. And the majority (the Textus Receptus) is what was used for the AV.

If an early manuscript said something that all the rest (do you know how many that is?) disagreed with, which would you believe? There can be corruption in any time of history, no matter how close to Jesus' time it was. Paul said, We are not as many which corrupt the word of God. So there were many in his time in the business of corrupting.

M

mguldner Jul 7, 2011

I had a friend of mine who is somewhat of a scholar and he said he had a problem with the Dead sea scrolls.

He went on to explain they found the scrolls in a cave and then said "and you know what they use to do with their garbage? Bury it in caves. He still uses versions that use the dead sea scrolls but is leary of them.

sermonindex Jul 7, 2011

"But" is loathsome.

It would seem that the problem isn't the coordinating conjunction itself but the initial clause that that seeks to weakly agree with the original statement though a contradicting opinion is yet forthcoming. Perhaps one's loathing should be saved for the rhetorical weakness of the speaker who cannot forcefully say "but you are incorrect" or "but I disgree". Or saved for the speaker him/herself, who clings to their false opinion in the light of evidence and reason.

"But" can be the beginning of the correction of error as well as the beginning of the statement of error: Four of Luther's theses begin with "But". And Jesus himself contradicted with "But I say..."

The word is not the issue, but the speaker using it incorrectly.

S

savedtoserve Jul 7, 2011

Good point, aaronhobbs.

Right, mguldner. Just like they believed it wrong to burn even corrupt manuscripts, so they buried them instead. Continuing Sarah's idea, "God does have a Bible today, but it is not altogether; rather, just somewhere in the midst of all the manuscripts." A terrible conclusion, indeed.

S

sarahsdream Jul 7, 2011

Amen, savedtoserve,

There were those that corrupted the Word of God very early on, so it is not about early manuscripts being the most correct. It is about corruption of manuscripts whether it happened early or later.

This will explain what I am saying.
http://www.angelfire.com/la2/prophet1/kjv1.html

With love,
Sarah

S

sarahsdream Jul 7, 2011

Aaronhobbs,

Very well put.

Sarah