Knowing "Truth"

[Nancy]

Question, do you not approve of exegesis in Bible study? Or am I hearing this wrong?

Much love!
Mark

Amen to the rest!

Lol...I think he was being tongue and cheek??

 

[marks]

The spirit of the words is not frightening. It is freeing.

. . . hang in there, I'm coming back to you! Persistant one, aren't you!

:cool:

 

[marks]

I hoped you would follow that one.

That passage comes right after The Rich Young Ruler scene...…. So, as has happened many times to other people, poor old Joe closes his Bible, thinking he has just been told he has to sell everything he has.

See, try as you may, it still comes back to not being able to rely upon the pat answer that every passage can mean only one thing to all people. (Most "Joes" don't usually read a lot past the point where they have been thoroughly discouraged.)

We may be talking about two different things.

I'm not saying that passages only mean one thing to everyone, since people often come away with different undertandings.

I'm saying that Scriptures mean only one thing. That there is an objective truth taught in the Bible, that if everyone were to understand the Bible correctly, then we would all have exactly the same understanding.

One commom error is to come the the Bible seeking to find yourself in it. Someone reads of Jesus telling a man to sell everything he has and give it to the poor.

Is that what we should think from this passage?

What about the fact that there were many people to whom Jesus did not say to sell their stuff and give to the poor? I remember a bit of expensive perfume, Jesus actually defended it NOT being sold.

We all know where pulling verses out of context leads, " . . . and he went and hung himself".

This isn't that we should all go and hang ourselves. But can we agree that the passage actually means that there was man who hanged himself? This was a real man, and he really did that dasturdly deed? Do we agree that anyone who reads this verse should understand from it that Judas committed suicide by hanging?

Jesus told the rich young ruler one thing he lacked. He, that is, the rich young ruler. So, the rich young ruler had a lack, and what he needed to do was sell everything, give it all away, and follow Jesus. The rich young ruler.

We can preach it well, we can apply it broadly, we can put ourselves into it, but at the end of the day, does anything we do actually change the the meanings of the Words God wrote?

Much love!
Mark

 

[marks]

@stunnedbygrace

There! You've got me from murder to suicide!

 

[marks]

Do you believe there is a given, certain meaning to each passage of Scripture?

That's tricky. Define murder.

Hi stunnedbygrace,

Let's go back to the start, shall we?

I'm noticing you don't want to answer the question, and I'm wondering why. Perhaps if I'm more clear in how I'm asking it.

Does Scripture have a single meaning as intended by God, in the same way that we write when we want to say something in particular, for instance, on this forum?

Let me give a little turnabout. You've said this is tricky, which reminds me of halloween, trick or treat, so, you're saying that if we pursue this question, some mischief will be visited upon us?

I guess we should be careful!

Much love!
mark

 

[Taken]

MURDERER ~ MURDERESS ~

One whose intent is to Kill the Bodily life of the innocent.

Taken

 

[marks]

Yes. That is why the average "Joe" should never be studying on his own, with no other Sisters and Brothers to bounce his "discouragement" (or elation) off of for a Reality Check.

Seriously? I guess I'd better stop. Wait. I'm not going to stop!

Why give up all this constant elation? God told us to rejoice always, and the best way I've found to rejoice always is to accept as true the statements of Scripture. Who wouldn't rejoice? That is, if you think He actually meant that we were to be joyful at all times. Maybe He meant something else. If that's true . . . Oops!

 

[Marymog]

He also "didn't say" His kingdom is three kangaroos and a yo-yo. So, does that, then, give us liberty to decide His kingdom is three kangaroos and a yo-yo? "No", we are still constrained to say it is only what He DID say it was.... "not of this world."

OK......

 

[Willie T]

Seriously? I guess I'd better stop. Wait. I'm not going to stop!

Why give up all this constant elation? God told us to rejoice always, and the best way I've found to rejoice always is to accept as true the statements of Scripture. Who wouldn't rejoice? That is, if you think He actually meant that we were to be joyful at all times. Maybe He meant something else. If that's true . . . Oops!

"Yes", seriously. You only have to look as far as a few isolated groups such as the Westboro Baptists or the Appalachian Snake Handlers to see how both extremes of depression and elation can quickly depart far from the intent of the Word of God through their narrow view of study. It is not a wise man who refuses to listen to any opposing thoughts.

 

[marks]

"Yes", seriously. You only have to look as far as a few isolated groups such as the Westboro Baptists or the Appalachian Snake Handlers to see how both extremes of depression and elation can quickly depart far from the intent of the Word of God through their narrow view of study. It is not a wise man who refuses to listen to any opposing thoughts.

Two extemes, my friend!

Reading and studying on your own does not = refusing to listen to opposing thoughts.

Let's look at Westboro if you like, or the snake handlers, and let's see if what they claim is truly found in the reading and study of the Bible, or if it's found in the corruption of the flesh, by those who cherry pick to serve their own ends.

In all my reading of the Bible, I've never seen it. You may say they did. I say they go against the plain reading of Scripture, for instance the snake people, they choose to put the Lord to the test. The Bible says don't. It seems pretty simple to me.

Even though I attend on Sunday, and participate in small groups, and listen to Bible studies on the radio, and read things here and there, the real work is with my Bible alone in my room.

Alone, I say, but I'm not alone, for He has proven that to me beyond any doubting so many times. And I find that all I need is a few good translations, and a mind to know God, and a searching heart, and it is so very true, Ask of Me, and I will show you great and mighty things which you did not know.

There is no better teacher in my life than the Holy Spirit.

Much love!
Mark

 

[Willie T]

Two extemes, my friend!

Reading and studying on your own does not = refusing to listen to opposing thoughts.

Let's look at Westboro if you like, or the snake handlers, and let's see if what they claim is truly found in the reading and study of the Bible, or if it's found in the corruption of the flesh, by those who cherry pick to serve their own ends.

In all my reading of the Bible, I've never seen it. You may say they did. I say they go against the plain reading of Scripture, for instance the snake people, they choose to put the Lord to the test. The Bible says don't. It seems pretty simple to me.

Even though I attend on Sunday, and participate in small groups, and listen to Bible studies on the radio, and read things here and there, the real work is with my Bible alone in my room.

Alone, I say, but I'm not alone, for He has proven that to me beyond any doubting so many times. And I find that all I need is a few good translations, and a mind to know God, and a searching heart, and it is so very true, Ask of Me, and I will show you great and mighty things which you did not know.

There is no better teacher in my life than the Holy Spirit.

Much love!
Mark

You plainly made my point when you said, "it seems pretty simple to me." It also "seems pretty simple" to every other person who interprets the Bible differently than you or I may.

 

[marks]

You plainly made my point when you said, "it seems pretty simple to me." It also "seems pretty simple" to every other person who interprets the Bible differently than you or I may.

So let's talk specifics, and see if what seems simple to me seems that simple to you?

In your reading of Scripture, do you see what we are told to make a display of our faith by handling poisonous snakes? In my reading, I'm told to not try to make God prove Himself with these kinds of stunts.

Do you see the same? Otherwise? Is this not plain?

If we say it's not because others do different things, does that mean that God's Word cannot be understood?

Much love!
mark

 

[Willie T]

So let's talk specifics, and see if what seems simple to me seems that simple to you?

In your reading of Scripture, do you see what we are told to make a display of our faith by handling poisonous snakes? In my reading, I'm told to not try to make God prove Himself with these kinds of stunts.

Do you see the same? Otherwise? Is this not plain?

If we say it's not because others do different things, does that mean that God's Word cannot be understood?

Much love!
mark

The passage is plain to you and it is plain to me, but, obviously those guys would not be handling poisonous snakes if the same passage was not also plain to them. So, do we reserve the right to declare that what WE see as plain overrides what THEY see as plain?

This is why I said study should not be done in isolation. All they have ever known is others who also read that passage the same way they do.

We (both Protestants & Catholics) do the same thing with Revelation... and with the rapture... and with Dispensations... and with Calvinism… and with Peter being the first Pope... and with men having the power to declare things into being in heaven simply by speaking them... and with transubstantiation.. and with Cessationism, etc. and et al.

 

[marks]

The passage is plain to you and it is plain to me, but, obviously those guys would not be handling poisonous snakes if the same passage was not also plain to them. So, do we reserve the right to declare that what WE see as plain overrides what THEY see as plain?

Hi Willie,

Maybe you prove my point. The way I understand it, the passages are plain, but the people listen to those who tell them what it means instead of finding out for themselves.

You're bringing us back to the beginning, confidence, or arrogance?

But you have to understand, I'm right! ;)

All they have ever known is others who also read that passage the same way they do.

But to the exclusion of other passages which would instruct them correctly, is that not true? And wouldn't that be addressed by those who are hearing this message to read the Bible for themselves?

I agree, that you can take a passage out of context, and apply it to yourself or something else in a way that God did not intend, but I also maintain that this can be corrected by continuing to read the Book.

And agreed, having someone more mature in Christ to help you stay pointed in the right direction is great! I don't discount that.

But I'm convinced that all I really need is the right heart, and a good translation or two, and the Holy Spirit will teach me.

We (both Protestants & Catholics) do the same thing with Revelation... and with the rapture... and with Dispensations... and with Calvinism… and with Peter being the first Pope... and with men having the power to declare things into being in heaven simply by speaking them... and with transubstantiation.. and with Cessationism, etc. and et al.

And this is where again I'll say, if we look at the Scriptures, we'll find the answers to these questions in what the Bible says and does not say.

Calvinism, the rapture, 'Pope Peter', Words of Power, Transubstantiation, Cessationism, each of these are answered, so far as I can see it, by reading the words of Scripture and only going with the normal standard understanding of these words at the time they were spoken and written.

Revelation is an extremely interesting book to study in this regard. I feel there is much that we won't know exactly until it happens, but that was a lot like some of the OT prophecies.

I find that when I disagree with someone over a doctrine, generally speaking, one of us or both of us are not taking the Words seriously for only and everything that they say. And if it's me, and I can see that, then I learn, and gain, and grow.

But in order to be certain, I need to see it in the words of the text.

And the truth is, certain questions, such as are there more gifts of the Spirit than those listed, I cannot answer, as I've yet to find a conclusive answer in Scripture.

I only want to say what I can point to the words. And there are always those who will dispute over the meanings of words.

Much love!

Mark

 

[Willie T]

Hi Willie,
Maybe you prove my point. The way I understand it, the passages are plain, but the people listen to those who tell them what it means instead of finding out for themselves.
You're bringing us back to the beginning, confidence, or arrogance?
But you have to understand, I'm right! ;)
But to the exclusion of other passages which would instruct them correctly, is that not true? And wouldn't that be addressed by those who are hearing this message to read the Bible for themselves?
I agree, that you can take a passage out of context, and apply it to yourself or something else in a way that God did not intend, but I also maintain that this can be corrected by continuing to read the Book.
And agreed, having someone more mature in Christ to help you stay pointed in the right direction is great! I don't discount that.
But I'm convinced that all I really need is the right heart, and a good translation or two, and the Holy Spirit will teach me.
And this is where again I'll say, if we look at the Scriptures, we'll find the answers to these questions in what the Bible says and does not say.
Calvinism, the rapture, 'Pope Peter', Words of Power, Transubstantiation, Cessationism, each of these are answered, so far as I can see it, by reading the words of Scripture and only going with the normal standard understanding of these words at the time they were spoken and written.
Revelation is an extremely interesting book to study in this regard. I feel there is much that we won't know exactly until it happens, but that was a lot like some of the OT prophecies.
I find that when I disagree with someone over a doctrine, generally speaking, one of us or both of us are not taking the Words seriously for only and everything that they say. And if it's me, and I can see that, then I learn, and gain, and grow.
But in order to be certain, I need to see it in the words of the text.

And the truth is, certain questions, such as are there more gifts of the Spirit than those listed, I cannot answer, as I've yet to find a conclusive answer in Scripture.
I only want to say what I can point to the words. And there are always those who will dispute over the meanings of words.

Much love!
Mark

The BOLDED part of your quote is all I ever said. We NEED the teachers God gave us. That is the very reason He made sure they were in our lives.... to teach us when The Holy Spirit led us to them.

 

[marks]

@Willie T

That's cool!

Seeing as Jesus gave them to us and all! And everything aside, the snake handlers sure could use some!

Much love!

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Do you believe there is a given, certain meaning to each passage of Scripture?




Hi stunnedbygrace,

Let's go back to the start, shall we?

I'm noticing you don't want to answer the question, and I'm wondering why. Perhaps if I'm more clear in how I'm asking it.

Does Scripture have a single meaning as intended by God, in the same way that we write when we want to say something in particular, for instance, on this forum?

Let me give a little turnabout. You've said this is tricky, which reminds me of halloween, trick or treat, so, you're saying that if we pursue this question, some mischief will be visited upon us?

I guess we should be careful!

Much love!
mark

No...no mischief will ensue. But since you are afraid to define murder, I will lay out my point without a discussion with you. ( Maybe you will lose your fear of me and see that I am not trying to harm you. )

To say we shouldn't murder anyone is to say we should not bludgeon or stab them or strangle or shoot them to death. And so is this the objective truth you were talking about? To define murder should mean the same to all of us?

That is the letter of the word. Everyone who sees the letter of the word should be able to agree on it.

However, how did Jesus define murder? His definition is that you can murder someone even if you DONT murder them by the letter.

So you see, in that case, men would approve of a man as not being a murderer while God would say he WAS a murderer.

Now because I know that to have anger in my heart (the "without cause" clause would require more thought) is to murder, I no longer think the objective letter is an apt definition of murder if I agree with God.

So...do you see my point? Do you see I was not trying to trip, trap or harm you? Do you see why I said your statements were tricky to answer?

 

[marks]

No...no mischief will ensue. But since you are afraid to define murder, I will lay out my point without a discussion with you. ( Maybe you will lose your fear of me and see that I am not trying to harm you. )

Hi stunnedbygrace,

It's hard to understand why you think of me as afraid of you. Why is that?

Why do you think of me as afraid to define murder? I mean, I've seen this sort of presentation a number of times, so when we're talking about interpreting Scripture, and you ask me to define murder, well, I have a pretty good idea of where this is leading.

But it doesn't in my opinion lead to back to the discussion. We're talking about the objective or subjective nature of the truths in Scripture. I claim Scriptural truth is objective, there to be found, and when found, can be seen by any who are yielded and subject to the text.

In talking about how some people see murder as a physical act only, while Jesus explained murder as including the intent, we're not illuminating the question of whether Scripture is knowable, we're simply showing an example of when people form an understanding of something without looking at what Scripture has to say on the matter.

And if we're talking then about people taking things away from their full context, then of course, there will be misunderstandings.

This was why I did not with to pursue the "murder definition", preferring instead to hopefully examine a passage which you feel is "tricky".

But that lead me back . . .

So...do you see my point? Do you see I was not trying to trip, trap or harm you? Do you see why I said your statements were tricky to answer?

See . . . you said my statements were tricky, yet you say no mischief will ensue. That makes no sense!

Much love!
Mark

 

[marks]

@stunnedbygrace

It's OK, come on in . . . the water is fine! Explain how it makes sense.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

I think you are very young in the Lord. I am sure you will settle down a bit and we will be able to have good conversations together. :)