Preaching vs. Teaching

[completedbeliever1]

16 hours ago, MorningGlory said:

But, in order to teach, one must be qualified.  None of us can teach our opinions.

It is quite obvious that a person must be well equipped to teach.  Must have the correct information, and truth.  

If we know the worth of baptism, and understand why Yashua was baptized, and why each of us MUST be "born again", and understand the importance of the resurrection, then we are well "qualified" to teach.

But, on the other hand, if we do not have a firm grasp of these simple, but very important, truths, we need to really think about what "gospel" (death, burial, and resurrection, this is the REAL gospel) we are teaching...

There has never been a time where I brought information that was bent by bias.

 

[Guest Teditis]

Teaching is an art, a skill and gift of God... it shouldn't be taken up by just anyone.

Having truths from the Bible isn't enough in my opinion... although anyone can pass on

a little knowledge, it takes more to be a teacher.

[FresnoJoe]

This

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. Psalms 119:160

Is What

Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee. Psalms 119:11

I Believe, So Believe It

And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. Luke 4:4

Or Not

And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. 2 Timothy 3:15-17

Love, Your Brother Joe

[thereselittleflower]

On 1/16/2016 at 10:33 AM, completedbeliever1 said:

It is quite obvious that a person must be well equipped to teach.  Must have the correct information, and truth.  

If we know the worth of baptism, and understand why Yashua was baptized, and why each of us MUST be "born again", and understand the importance of the resurrection, then we are well "qualified" to teach.

But, on the other hand, if we do not have a firm grasp of these simple, but very important, truths, we need to really think about what "gospel" (death, burial, and resurrection, this is the REAL gospel) we are teaching...

There has never been a time where I brought information that was bent by bias.

 

 

This comment is highly revealing:

• Quote

  There has never been a time where I brought information that was bent by bias.

   

We all have biases, and we all bring our biases to what we understand and share.

To say there has never been a time bias has bent the information one brings reveals a very deep error in judgment about your own self and your own limitations and your own bias about yourself.

When one is blind to their own biases, then it is a fairly sure given what they are bringing to the table is indeed bent by their biases.

I can only hope and pray that you come to understand the folly of such a position and strive to remove this blindness to your own biases and assumptions.

 

[thereselittleflower]

On 1/16/2016 at 10:37 AM, Teditis said:

Teaching is an art, a skill and gift of God... it shouldn't be taken up by just anyone.

Having truths from the Bible isn't enough in my opinion... although anyone can pass on

a little knowledge, it takes more to be a teacher.

I agree.

[MorningGlory]

On 1/16/2016 at 0:37 PM, Teditis said:

Teaching is an art, a skill and gift of God... it shouldn't be taken up by just anyone.

Having truths from the Bible isn't enough in my opinion... although anyone can pass on

a little knowledge, it takes more to be a teacher.

I agree and also believe that taking seriously the 'teachings' of those who think they have special knowledge is not a good thing.  On a forum such as this there are many who come with reams of prewritten text and flood the threads with that.  Some of it may be Biblical but a lot of it is sheer opinion.  We just need to be careful who and what we listen to.

[completedbeliever1]

On 1/21/2016 at 4:39 PM, thereselittleflower said:

 

This comment is highly revealing:

•  

We all have biases, and we all bring our biases to what we understand and share.

To say there has never been a time bias has bent the information one brings reveals a very deep error in judgment about your own self and your own limitations and your own bias about yourself.

When one is blind to their own biases, then it is a fairly sure given what they are bringing to the table is indeed bent by their biases.

I can only hope and pray that you come to understand the folly of such a position and strive to remove this blindness to your own biases and assumptions.

 

Again, it is interesting to see that you skip over the entire post, copy the piece where I am defending myself, just to attack my integrity.

If anything is HIGHLY revealing...

Do you ever just say to yourself, "you know what, Im going to respond to the post, and not attack this individual personally."?  

[thereselittleflower]

8 minutes ago, completedbeliever1 said:

Again, it is interesting to see that you skip over the entire post, copy the piece where I am defending myself, just to attack my integrity.

If anything is HIGHLY revealing...

Do you ever just say to yourself, "you know what, Im going to respond to the post, and not attack this individual personally."?  

You weren't attacked.   You made a claim and I examined that claim and pointed out the error of that claim.   You made your self claim, that bias never affects the information you share, a subject of discussion.  Trying to show you the error of such a claim is not a personal attack.   The error means you have blinded yourself to a state we all are subjected to - being influenced by our biases.   When we are unaware of their influence, we are even more influenced by them.  To address the rest of your post in any meaningful way, it seems to me this self claim needs to be addressed first. 

you said:

Quote

But, on the other hand, if we do not have a firm grasp of these simple, but very important, truths, we need to really think about what "gospel" (death, burial, and resurrection, this is the REAL gospel) we are teaching...

What gospel is it when one is affected by biases they aren't even aware of?

 

 

[completedbeliever1]

14 hours ago, thereselittleflower said:

You weren't attacked.   You made a claim and I examined that claim and pointed out the error of that claim.   You made your self claim, that bias never affects the information you share, a subject of discussion.  Trying to show you the error of such a claim is not a personal attack.   The error means you have blinded yourself to a state we all are subjected to - being influenced by our biases.   When we are unaware of their influence, we are even more influenced by them.  To address the rest of your post in any meaningful way, it seems to me this self claim needs to be addressed first. 

you said:

What gospel is it when one is affected by biases they aren't even aware of?

 

 

Good grief...

You know what, since you cant see your error, I will show it to you.

A way to distract from the issue is to bring up an issue inside an issue that is not ORIGINALLY part of the argument.  

 

On 1/16/2016 at 0:33 PM, completedbeliever1 said:

But, in order to teach, one must be qualified.  None of us can teach our opinions.

This was Morning Glory.  And why did she say this?

Because I said this...
"Preaching is standing and giving something to a group of people without anything in return.  That is why I like teaching.  Because it is interactive, and the student asks questions, and there is a genuine respect derived from that."  

And this...
"What I wrote was a snippet of the whole meaning.  Just making it known that I would rather teach, than preach.  That is all.

I love input, questions, and debate even."

Now, was I teaching my "opinion" as she said?

Kerux = Preacher =  "One who discourses publicly on religious subjects."  
Didaskalos = Teacher = " An instructor; a preceptor; a tutor"     1828 Noah Webster Dictionary


Preaching is proclaiming, heralding and announcing news to people – the gospel – especially (but not exclusively) to those who haven’t heard it before. Teaching is explaining things about the gospel that people don’t understand, and instructing them on how to live in light of it.

Preaching Example...  “Hear ye! Hear ye! The Emperor has declared an amnesty to all slaves!” 
 
Teaching Example...   explaining the implications of the news, helping people with concepts and ideas they don’t understand, and telling people what they need to do in response, given their various situations.   

Andrew Wilson,  elder at Kings Church in Eastbourn. 

The problem with that is it WAS a personal attack.  How do I know?

A personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at the person making the claim and not the claim itself.

Was what Morning Glory said "abusive"?  

Defamation can take one of two forms: slander or libel. Slander covers oral defamatory statements while libel addresses the written version. Defamation is an abusive attack on a person's character or good name.

Now, was what she said abuse of character?  Saying that something is my opinion is not abusing my character.  Did she attack my integrity?  No.

Was what you said a personal attack/abusive?  YES! You dont just say I am biased, you attack my integrity.

 

"To say there has never been a time bias has bent the information one brings reveals a very deep error in judgment about your own self and your own limitations and your own bias about yourself.

When one is blind to their own biases, then it is a fairly sure given what they are bringing to the table is indeed bent by their biases.

I can only hope and pray that you come to understand the folly of such a position and strive to remove this blindness to your own biases and assumptions."

That is uncalled for.  

In earlier posts, I have said that you lack a fundamental understanding of the MEANING of the Old Testament, because you are not able to show proof against my arguments, (ie. sin, baptism, the trinity, and on and on).

That is not abusive in that I attacked your integrity, but your UNDERSTANDING of what something means. If you were to have said that I do not understand something, I would see my error and change my mind, or look for proof that sustains my belief.  I wouldnt be happy about it, but at least you wouldnt be attacking me PERSONALLY.

You say that my judgement is in error, and my motives are in error, just like another person here. That is disrespectful, defamation of character, libel.  

I am asking you to stop calling my INTEGRITY into question, because I know where my heart is!

You need to be held accountable for your words here in this forum...

[Omegaman 3.0]

On 1/22/2016 at 3:52 PM, completedbeliever1 said:

Again, it is interesting to see that you skip over the entire post, copy the piece where I am defending myself, just to attack my integrity.

Perhaps, completed believer, people do not feel a need to respond to things you say, with which they agree, but think it is important, to point out things that are errors or potential trouble spots. 

If I said: "I have perfect discernment, never makes mistakes, everything I say is always true, you can trust me as a fair judge, almost inerrant", should people let a comment like that just slide by? I sure hope not. They would rightfully call me on the carpet and tell me that I am blinded by my own opinion of myself.

Of course, you did not say what I just said, and if I were to accuse you of that, that would be a straw man argument. Of course, what you did say was:

"There has never been a time where I brought information that was bent by bias."

Really? Never, not once, in all of the years of your life, have you ever imported a bias to information that you have presented?

If so, you are a far, far better person than I, just short of Jesus, I would imagine. Quite impressive indeed. You should not be suprized, when people react as they do, to things that you say like this. Oh wait, weren't you the person that just got bent out of shape, when you implied that a passage said that an overseer had to be married only once? Nah, that had to have been someone else I guess, because that would have been a case of bringing bias in your information, something that you never do.

Maybe, stop, think about what you say, before saying it. Think about what others are pointing out about the things you say, and consider it. Then, having done that, consider if it is possible, that how they replied and or reacted, might actually be reasonable, and expected. When you do that, you might be able to participate in this sort of forum, where people express opinions, and not react as though you are a victim of attacks on your integrity. In fact, if you were to think carefully about what you say, before you say it, I would bet that you might not find any criticism at all!

People here are not perfect, they are not without the prejudices and opinions that come with the territory of being imperfect. If you cannot live with that fact, you will find that you skin is too thin to be comfortable.

Has it occurred to you, that when you comment on what you think is an attack on your integrity, you are commenting on their integrity in the same fashion?

Think about it.