Bill Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek Vocabulary Cards (2nd Edition):
28.) autos (αὐτός, -ή, -ό): he, she, it; him, her; they, them; same
Note that the different endings in parenthesis are different forms of the word, depending on the gender. The masculine is autos, the feminine is autē, the neuter is auto.
Mnemonics / Memory Aids:
A.) "They hire all sorts of people to work at the auto factory: he, she, it, him, her, they, and them. The boss told me himself! There are three buildings, but they all manufacture the same thing."
B.) "An automobile is a vehicle that runs under the power of the 'same' vehicle. It isn't pulled by a horse. An autobiography is a biography written by that 'same' man, not another. An autotransformer transforms voltage using the 'same' winding, not two separate primary and secondary windings. And so on. In Greek, it refers to the 'same' person or entity just mentioned." (GarthDWiebe)
C.) Picture an AUTOmobile picking up everyone: Imagine a car (an "automobile") picking up a group of people: "he," "she," "it," "him," "her," "them." And they're all going to the same place. αὐτός is the vehicle for all these meanings. (Google Gemini)
D.) "Observe the autos. Art Icicle is close by in the rumble seat since the endings of αὐτός parallel closely the endings of the article." (Cullen & J. Lyle Story, Greek To Me, p. 61.)
E.) "Auto-matic transmission is what 'he' prefers." (Danny Zacharias, FlashGreek Lite)
F.) The mechanic ordered the same auto parts for him, her, and it. (ChatGPT, adapted)
G.) They all drive the same autos to church. (ChatGPT, adapted)
H.) He fixed the automobile himself. (ChatGPT, adapted)
I.) They came to see it at the auto show. (ChatGPT)
J.) The auto club has the same members each year. (ChatGPT)
K.) An autodidact is self-taught. (Tanner Huss)
L.) "Ow, Taws! Mom, he hit himself with the same brick again!" (AWOL)
What do you think of open-tent alliances like the Free Grace Alliance? I myself don't have anything specifically against the people working for the FGA, however I remain somewhat reserved in the broadness of the coalition, since it does not require more than affirming Free Grace theology and the basic doctrines such as inerrancy and the trinity. However, what worries me is that such a narrow statement would allow extreme forms of punitive Bema/outer darkness, nondispensational views and such still within the alliance.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you personally think of such parachurch organizations, and is it also common for DTS Free Gracers to be "Independendents", not technically part of any alliance?
Just to answer your question generally before getting into more of the specifics, I would say that parachurch organizations can be good. Some people are against the whole idea of parachurch organizations because they are not the New Testament model, the local church is. But to me that thinking is flawed because there are a lot of things that are not specifically prescribed nor even described in the New Testament, but that doesn't mean they are bad or that they cannot be used by God. I mean, for example, the whole idea of "church membership" is nowhere found in the NT. Yet I would bet that those same people who are against parachurch organizations because they are not found in the Bible have no problem with church membership. They might say, well that's the point; church membership has to do with the local church. It's a function of the local church. My response to that would be to say okay, let me give another example: gospel tracts. Did your church print them? Some churches do, but many do not. So guess what? A parachurch ministry printed your church's gospel tracts! But those people who are supposedly against parachurch organizations apparently have no problem with getting their gospel tracts from a parachurch organization! I would also ask them: And what about your church's missionaries? What mission agency are they going with? It's probably another parachurch ministry, whichever mission board they choose to go with. Oh, and what about all those books your pastor has? Most if not all of them are probably printed by a Christian publisher or a Christian publishing house: all parachurch organizations! Oh, and here's the kicker: Where did your church's pastor get his college degree? A Bible school? A seminary? Another parachurch organization! You see what I mean? Unless these people live under a rock or do everything "in house" via their own local church (or another local church), they are obviously utilizing the services of parachurch organizations. Someone might say, well that doesn't make it right. Well, I would say, that doesn't make it wrong either. You see what I mean? It's like a Christian liberty. One Christian has one view, and another Christian has another view. The Bible doesn't specifically address the issue. So just to summarize, parachurch organizations can be helpful. They should assist the local church, not replace the local church. Some examples of parachurch organizations would be:
ReplyDelete1. Mission agencies / Mission boards
2. Christian colleges and seminaries
3. Christian book publishers
4. Evangelistic ministries (Evantell, GraceLife Ministries, etc.)
5. Pro-Life ministries
6. I'm sure we could add to the list!
[Continued below...]
So those are my thoughts just in general about parachurch organizations. I think each parachurch organization needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine if it's a ministry that I could support or not and to see if it is upholding biblical values or not. I'm mainly thinking in terms of their beliefs and their practices in general. So for example, would you agree with their doctrinal statement? Are they accredited by the ECFA (Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability, which is another parachurch organization!) or a similar 3rd-party verification group to make sure that the organization or ministry is operating in a financially responsible way and that it's not a scam. I think that the argument that says "Parachurch organizations are not in the Bible therefore they are bad or unbiblical" is just not helpful because as I mentioned, there are a lot of things that are not specifically mentioned or addressed in the Bible but that doesn't make them wrong. That way of thinking is very superficial and really just legalistic because the people who say that or think that way are imposing a standard that is over and above what the Bible actually says. I think a more helpful way to think about it or to approach the issue is to ask if the parachurch organization's beliefs are biblical and are their practices in-line with biblical principles? And as I mentioned, 3rd-party verification of fiscal responsibility by a group such as the ECFA would also be helpful (though not absolutely necessary in my view). Those are just my initial thoughts about parachurch organizations to preface my response to your more specific questions.
ReplyDelete[Continued below...]
You asked about what I think of "open-tent alliances like the Free Grace Alliance"? I don't have a problem with them necessarily and in fact I think they can be helpful, as I mentioned above. Provided of course that everything about the ministry checks out, as far as their beliefs and practices are concerned. For example: Do I agree with their doctrinal statement? Do I support their cause? (Ask questions like that.) And as far as a doctrinal statement goes, I don't have a problem with the parachurch ministry having a more general or concise affirmation of beliefs. I think everything I said would still apply. Namely, do I agree with whatever set of beliefs that they do have or that they do adhere to? Obviously you can tell more specifically what a parachurch ministry believes just by looking at who is on the leadership team and who endorses the organization, etc. So it's likely sort of obvious what the more specific beliefs are, even if they are not codified in an official statement. You said, "However, what worries me is that such a narrow statement would allow extreme forms of punitive Bema/outer darkness, nondispensational views and such still within the alliance." I would say you are correct, but that's just the nature of Free Grace Theology. That is not specific to the FGA. That is Free Grace Theology in general. I mean, I think every group is going to have elements in it that some people may not agree with 100%. I mean, if I remember correctly, even the disciples of Jesus were arguing about different things on various occassions! So I think it may be a little naive to think that you can get away from that. That is just life in general I would say. I would say those are more peripheral issues. That doesn't mean those things are not important, but I would say they are not the most important. I would ask: do we agree on the core issues: e.g. the gospel of the grace of God, salvation by grace alone through faith alone and not by works, the eternal security of the believer, assurance of salvation based on the promises in God's Word and not the believer's walk (behavior), rewards as a motivation for godly living, the judgment seat of Christ and the possibilty that believers can have all their works burned up, God loves everyone not just the "elect", Christ died for all people not just the "elect", etc. Someone might say that is compromising on the other issues. I would say no, because you don't have to agree on those other issues: you can still hold your beliefs and not compromise them. Someone may say that's unity in error. I would say find me a church where everyone agrees with everyone 100% are you just identified a cult! As I mentioned previously, even the disciples of Jesus disagreed on certain things! That doesn't mean that should be a goal, but it is a reality. And to pretend that it's not is naive and unbiblical. In regards to when you asked: "What do you personally think of such parachurch organizations, and is it also common for DTS Free Gracers to be 'Independendents', not technically part of any alliance?" I would say that I think such parachurch organizations can be helpful. They can be helpful in spreading the grace message. They can be helpful in networking. They can be helpful in building up the body of Christ. Are they perfect? No one is perfect; so that's an impossible standard that no one and no church could ever meet. I'm sure you've heard the quip about how if you find the "perfect church", leave! Because once you start attending it won't be perfect anymore!
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the question you had about is it common for DTS Free Gracers to be "Independents", I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that. If you mean Independent Baptist, I would say it's not impossible. As I mentioned, Charles Ryrie was a Baptist as far as I know. I'm not sure what variety of Baptist. In his younger years, Ryrie was a member of the First Baptist Church in Alton, Illinois. He was the fifth generation of his family to be members there. Later in his life, Ryrie was a member of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas. I'm not sure if he was officially a member of the FGA, but by all accounts he approved of it as far as I know. Consider that Ryrie was the 2008 recipient of the FGA's "Trophy of Grace" award. And he spoke at the conferences, and in particular he spoke at the 2015 FGA conference (which was just a year before Ryrie passed away). I would guess that if Ryrie was a featured speaker at the FGA conferences, he was also a member of it. Ryrie also wrote the Foreword to Charlie Bing's book Simply By Grace, which shows he approved of it. They were "on the same page" as far as Free Grace Theology is concerned. And by implication as far as the FGA is concerned as well. (Charlie Bing has been part of the leader of the FGA for years.) Again, as far as I know Ryrie supported it. Whether he was specifically a "member" of the FGA or not, I'm not entirely sure about. I'd have to do more research on that. But in light of everything I've said, it seems like a moot point because Ryrie obviously (or at least apparently) supported it. I'm not sure if I entirely answered your question. But I would say yes, it's probably common for DTS Free Gracers to be "Independents", and not technically part of any alliance. I don't know if I represent the norm or not, but just to use myself as an example, I'm not officially part of any alliance. I'm not saying that I won't be or that I would never be, but currently I'm not. That doesn't mean I don't support it; I do support it. I mean, I support the cause that they stand for and I support what they believe in. Pray about it and see how the Lord leads you. Maybe email Charlie Bing about it and see what he says. I hope what I've shared helps to answer your questions. If I missed something or if you want me to elaborate on something in more detail, just let me know. God Bless!
ReplyDelete