Christ - the Place of Redemption

@sonship said

Do you ever learn something so well that it kind of is accumulated in your memory and you can be conversant about it rather easily ?

So you didn't simply copy it from:

www.ministrybooks.org/books.cfm?xid=3MG6M3IIBQ52J

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I have no problem with sonship posting stuff that I disagree with. (Indeed, it would be mighty boring if people only expressed opinions her that I was in agreement with).

No, the only issue here is sonship posting material that clearly isn't his own and yet for which he gives no reference to his source. (Yes, it's a safe bet that it comes from either that Witness o ...[text shortened]... en the Watchman and Witness chap wouldn't be at all happy with the way their work is being treated).

Plagiarism- in the strictest sense would be copying verbatim another's words, but rephrasing certain terms to convey ideas or concepts relative to biblical truths isn't the same as taking someone else's copyrighted material and pass it off as ones own.

In the world of biblical expository teaching many thousands of pastor/teachers use much of the same materials that are readily available to all. The Bible being the main source, but really good teachers do a lot of research in the areas of history, archeology and languages among other sources.

If one were to take a particular sermon or teaching from someone like Spurgeon, Whitfield or Graham and stood in a pulpit or recorded a radio program quoting that teaching without citing the source, that would be plagiarism.

I've heard it said that taking the words of one other is plagiarism, but taking the words of many others is research.

Now, if it can be proven that sonship took direct quotes from books or publications of any other and wrote them here without citing the source, then that would be plagiarism, but if sonship merely rephrased and/or put into his own words the doctrinal truths of scripture, then that's not plagiarism.

There are simply far too many Bible expositors/teachers and far too few verses in the Bible for there not to be some apparent copycat sounding teachings.

@fmf said
My ideas and my responses are my own.

And you sound like and say the same things every other atheist says the world over.

Tell me you haven't read The God Delusion!

@fmf said
No. You are mistaken. I am being myself. Genuinely so. I am not imitating anyone.

Except for the fact that you are conforming to a pattern shared by so many others that say the exact same things that atheists say.

Just because you are uniquely you doesn't negate the fact that you share the same world view relative to atheism as so many others.

In that sense you are imitating others.

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

THE ARK OF THE TESTIMONY
(6)
Scripture Reading: Exo. 25:17-22
THE PLACE OF PROPITIATION
Not many Christians have seen that Christ is the place of propitiation. Speaking of Christ Jesus, Paul says in Romans 3:25, “Whom God set forth a propitiation-cover through faith in His blood.” Here the Greek word for propitiation-cover is hilasterion, which means the place of propitiation. In Hebrews 9:5 this word is used for the cover, the lid of the ark within the Holy of Holies. In Exodus 25:17-22 and Leviticus 16:12-16, the Septuagint also uses this word for the cover of the ark. The King James Version adopts the rendering “mercy seat.” This indicates that those translators regarded the place of propitiation as a seat, realizing that Christ as the place of propitiation was a seat for God to grant mercy to us.

It is important to see that propitiation is not only an act; it is also Christ Himself as a place. According to Romans 3:25, God set up Christ Himself, the Person, to be a propitiation-cover. It is upon this Person that God can meet with us and we can meet with God.

In the book of Hebrews Paul speaks of the propitiation-cover as the throne of grace: “Let us therefore come forward with boldness to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and may find grace for timely help” (4:16). Hebrews 10:19 and 20 say, “Having therefore, brothers, boldness for entering the Holy of Holies by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which He dedicated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh.” The throne of grace is in the Holy of Holies, for it is the cover of the ark, which is in the Holy of Holies. Thus, the cover of the ark is a place where God gives us grace. For this reason, the place where God gives grace to us is surely the throne of grace. Now we must see that this throne of grace, the place where God gives us grace, is actually Christ Himself.

What I wrote:

Post #1

Paul ever faithful to Jesus Christ, taught that the very place where God can justify man is Christ. He is not only the propitiation or the One who propitiates. He is the propitiation place.

Could you locate these words verbatim in your link?

The word here in Greek is hilasterion. [transliterated]. The KJV called this place "the mercy seat". It was the lid on the ark of the covenant - the place where in the holy of holies in the temple God said he would meet with the high priest.

How about these verbatim?

Christ is a place where redeemed sinful man is qualified to meet with the God of glory who is absolutely perfect in righteousness and absolutely holy in being distinct from all other things in existence.

Verbatim? Show where I cut and pasted.
I said some things I learned well and am conversant on just having the Bible opened.

The word hilasterion is the noun form of a word used both as a verb meaning "to appease, to reconcile one by satisfying the other's demand.

That is hilaskomai. Christ is the place - hilasterion where the reconciling two estranged parties takes place. Man fell into sin and was joined to God's enemy, the Devil. The demand upon humans of God's glory, God's righteousness, and God's holiness made a chasm of enmity between the two parties.

Man had joined the opposition party against the Creator. And this made human beings estranged and alienated from contacting God and receiving the life of God.

The symbolism of the ark of the covenant and all the furniture in the tabernacle (and then the temple) spoke of the salvation to cause the two parties to be brought back together in reconciliation.

The writer of Hebrews speaks a bit about the ark of the covenant in the central section of the tabernacle God instructed Moses to erect according to strict details.

Hopefully the content is the same. But you cannot see where I verbatim cut and pasted. Can you?

How about here?

Central to the tabernacle was a piece of furniture called an ark. Two cherubim of gold faced each other on the top of it. They were like angelic creatures representing the glory of God.


Between them a lid on which atoning blood from various offerings was to be sprinkled. Inside the compartment of the ark was the the tablets of the ten commandments, the rod of Aaron the budded miraculously, and a sample of the mann or bread from heaven by which the Israelites were sustained forty years in the wilderness.

This lid was the place where God's voice would speak from between the cheribum of glory over top of the blood sprinkled hilasterion or "propitiation-cover".

Now Paul teaches that the Person of Jesus Christ is the reality to which this peculiar Old Testament symbolically pointed. The "place" in the universe where God can meet with man is the man Jesus.

I think my point is made.

Incidently, I WELCOME you ... WELCOME you to double check the contents of my posts to locate either cut and pastes, if I have not indicated one, OR where I said things somewhat different from what you may find at that website.

I do not always say "Now this is my analysis which I do not know if Brother Lee or Brother Nee has taught exactly like this."

I think if should go without saying for someone who is constantly studying the word of God, that she or he has many of his or her own thoughts.

C'mon guy. How can anyone be 100% the same as someone else ??

@secondson said
Now, if it can be proven that sonship took direct quotes from books or publications of any other and wrote them here without citing the source, then that would be plagiarism, but if sonship merely rephrased and/or put into his own words the doctrinal truths of scripture, then that's not plagiarism.

So If I were to link to where he 'took direct quotes from books or publications of any other and wrote them here without citing the source' you would equally accuse him of plagiarism?

The verse references are the same as the messages because my favorite Bible is the Recovery Version Bible which contains sidebar of references connecting verses along with footnotes available to me.

Have I ever concealed that fact?

I often make references to other translations. Ever see something in my posts like this?
Romans 3:25a -

English Standard Version
whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.

Berean Study Bible
God presented Him as an atoning sacrifice through faith in His blood,

Berean Literal Bible
whom God set forth as a propitiation through faith in His blood,

New American Standard Bible
whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith.

King James Bible
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood,

Well I praise the Lord that some renderings are faithful to indicate that in the Greek it is a PLACE that is meant there by Paul.

NET Bible
God publicly displayed him at his death as the mercy seat accessible through faith.

New Heart English Bible
whom God set forth whom God displayed publicly as a mercy seat, through faith in his blood,

GOD'S WORD® Translation
God showed that Christ is the throne of mercy where God's approval is given through faith in Christ's blood.

Darby Bible Translation
whom God has set forth a mercy-seat, through faith in his blood,

Weymouth New Testament
He it is whom God put forward as a Mercy-seat, rendered efficacious through faith in His blood,

Young's Literal Translation
whom God did set forth a mercy seat, through the faith in his blood,

Last but not least the Recovery Version

Recovery Version NT
Whom God set forth a propitiation-cover through faith in His blood, ...

@secondson said
Except for the fact that you are conforming to a pattern shared by so many others that say the exact same things that atheists say.

Just because you are uniquely you doesn't negate the fact that you share the same world view relative to atheism as so many others.

In that sense you are imitating others.

No I am in no sense copying or imitating anyone.

@secondson said
I recommend you give an example of where sonship presented an idea that was not his own.

Has it been established - that he has in fact presented ideas that are not his own - to your satisfaction now?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
So If I were to link to where he 'took direct quotes from books or publications of any other and wrote them here without citing the source' you would equally accuse him of plagiarism?

If he did I wouldn't need to make the accusation. The evidence would speak for itself.

@fmf said
No I am in no sense copying or imitating anyone.

I don't really care.

As for me, imitation is the highest form of flattery. I seek to imitate my Lord and savior Jesus Christ. One day soon I will meet Him face to face and I will know Him even as I am known of Him.

1 Corinthians 13:12
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

I know it's just religious stuff to you, but it will be no matter what you think you know.

@secondson said
As for me, imitation is the highest form of flattery. I seek to imitate my Lord and savior Jesus Christ.

In your demeanour on this forum are we seeing what you believe is imitation of Jesus Christ?

@secondson said
If he did I wouldn't need to make the accusation. The evidence would speak for itself.

Splendid.

It does.


(To be clear, there is nothing wrong with using sources. You just need to cite them).

@fmf said
Has it been established - that he has in fact presented ideas that are not his own - to your satisfaction now?

We all have ideas that didn't originate with us. As long as sonship didn't copy/paste it's not plagiarism. Especially in this format.

We're all here saying things and expressing thoughts and ideas that didn't originate in our own minds that someone somewhere hasn't already said. We just add our own flavor to it.

You'll need to produce hard evidence before I'll be satisfied you're not just blowing smoke.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Splendid.

It does.

Where? Post the original quote, and show where sonship copy/pasted it without citing the source.

You don't mind me asking for the evidence do you? I need to see specific and irrefutable evidence.