 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > help with john 6 and exegesis | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Hobbes
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 63
| Posted 5/29/2004 9:29 PM (GMT -6) |   | Larris - what church DO you go to? Are there any left?
Albert - still looking for a response to:
So let's assume for the sake of argument that you're right. What now? How would you propose that WE interpret scripture? If we can't NECESSARILY take immediate and historical context into account - if God has hidden a meaning in the text that cannot be arrived at through “normal” means, what do you propose to do to arrive at that meaning, and having arrived at it, how would you propose to communicate that meaning using proof texts the immediate and historical contexts of which have no necessary connection to said meaning?
- Hobbes | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 5/30/2004 6:43 AM (GMT -6) | | Albert,
quote:
Jefscott: The Israelites had a DUTY to treat those idolaters in the land with less than kindness - just as those in authority today have the DUTY to bear God's sword of vengeance.
Albert: Not just in the land. Read carefully the instructions on warefare in Deuteronomy 20. There are two sets of instructions. One is for how they are to treat the inhabitants of the land, i.e. exterminate them (verses 16-18). However, the earlier portion pertains to warefare against other nations which are not in the land and are "very far from you" (see verse 15 where this is made explicit). Now read the description of warefare against other nations. Does it sound very loving to you? The issue of the dispersion is irrelevant, because, as I said, there aren't any instructions about how to behave in the dispersion.
The distinction exists in this chapter, also. First, verse 1 says "when thou goest out to battle against thine enemies." A Christian king/president could rightfully go to battle against an enemy nation. Second, vv. 16-17 compared to 10-12&15 seem to be saying that the cities outside of the land were to get a chance for peace, whereas the cities WITHIN the land were to have no mercy. Thus, the issue of the dispersion is relevant.
quote:
Jefscott: Aye, but He went on to explain what he meant by that; He meant there were things that needed to be fulfilled of Him that THEY did not yet understand - i.e, "all" was implicitly being contrasted with "some". They knew SOME of the prophecies but not ALL.
Albert: I disagree. He is clearly saying in context that ALL that was written about him was fulfilled in the events of his death and resurrection. They did not understand the prophecies as they pertained to his death and resurrection, so he had to explain them to them. But the statement that when his death and resurrection occurred, EVERYTHING written about him in the OT would be fulfilled is clear. As to OT prophecy of the second coming, it depends on how you understand the nature of OT prophecy and the second coming.
First of all, to claim that there are no prophecies in the OT about Christ's parousia is new to me. Could you explain? Second, as I have already mentioned, Matt. 5 says "until all be fulfilled," NOT until all be fulfilled about Christ. There were other OT prophecies such as the one about "the abomination of the desolation" which were yet to be fulfilled after Christ's ressurection. To add the qualifier "about Christ" is eisegesis. Indeed, it would imply that the "heaven and earth passed away" at Christ's ressurection, which I've never heard anyone hold to. Is that your position? And if so, could you explain it?
quote:
Jefscott: The same greek word is used in the phrase "until heaven and earth pass away," which is the FIRST (and most clear!) time qualifier in the passage. When do you think that will happen/happened?
Albert: And which is clearly qualified by the second and very clear qualifier. If I say, "until hell freezes over, I will not leave this place, until I have finished my assignment", how do you understand that?
The phrase "until hell freezes over" means "it ain't gonna happen." It is not a REAL time qualifier. The Matt. passage is perfectly intelligible as saying that ALL things will have come to pass WHEN the heaven and earth pass away. BOTH "until" phrases give REAL, intelligible qualifiers as to the duration of the applicability of the Law.
quote:
Jefscott: The ressurection was later than John, anyway - so the law would have had to have been kept AFTER John's death even by your view.
Albert: If you expect precision down to the exact year in his statement, which I don't.
Christ's emphatic words as to the importance of keeping the Law would argue to the contrary. Besides, the Matthew 11 passage shows no clear idea of saying the Law would pass away after John. Christ just said that the Law and prophets had prophesied all the way up until John. How do you get from that statement that he was giving a time limit on the applicability of the Law? The incident with Paul and James in Acts 21 makes it clear to me that the believing Jews did NOT think the Law was inapplicable to them.
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hobbes
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 63
| Posted 5/30/2004 7:00 AM (GMT -6) | | Albert,
Don’t worry about the delay, Albert, I understand. You wrote:
1) So I'd say for the Old Testament we should read it in a Christocentric manner, i.e. as pointing to Christ. I think we can find that deeper meaning there.
2) As for the New Testament, however, I don't think we should assume that it should be interpreted in the same way. If the revelation of God was in the person of Christ, and the apostles and other NT authors wrote down their reflections on him in the light of the Old Testament, without God "inspiring" what they wrote in any direct sense, then we can just take what they say at face value, although we may not want to accept every jot and tittle.
Response: If the NT authors wrote their reflections without God directly inspiring them then why should we take their “creative” Christ-centric interpretations of OT passages as a template for how to “creatively” interpret the OT?
It seems to me that my approach, that the NT authors many times are using the OT passages in parallel, allegorical, &/or metaphorical applications and not literal “this-is-that” type applications more satisfactorily solves the problems we’re discussing. In speaking metaphorically, one might SAY, “this is that” but that is not what is really meant. A not so subtle example would be, “I am a rose of Sharon.” Now one could say, “It doesn’t say, ‘I am LIKE a rose of Sharon’ it says ‘I AM a rose of Sharon.” And, technically, they would be right, but they’re missing the point. This is the way you argue when you say,
Verse 6 says "But of the righteousness that comes from faith says", not "But of something similar to the righteousness of faith says", and "that is, to bring Christ down", not "that is, similar to bringing Christ down". The text just doesn't read as you interpret it.
Response: It does if Paul is not being literal, but merely making a comparison or using the OT allegorically, as he does in Galatians.
Again, I think that we think too literally and that this is the result of our modern rationalistic way of thinking. It is my contention that the NT authors did not think this way.
Jesus rebuked Nicodemus for his too-literal interpretation of Jesus’ “you must be born again” statement. All we’ve done is insert the word “spiritually” - as in “you must be spiritually born again” – making Jesus say something He did NOT say - and continued merrily on our literal way, all the while thanking God that WE’RE not like Nicodemus, WE know what Jesus meant – He literally meant “born again ---spiritually.”
I think that we are just as literal as Nicodemus. Someone has said that many who are “operating out of a system of epistemology that is deeply rooted in modernism fail to see how detached from the world of the Bible they really are.”
I agree with that statement.
Albert: I honestly don't think the Hebrew/Greek thing is at issue. I read the original Old Testament texts carefully in a "Hebrew mindset", and find them meaning one thing. I read Paul carefully, and see that he finds a deeper meaning in the texts that is not the author's intended meaning. What am I to conclude?
Response: Perhaps Hebrew/Greek is a misnomer. I am thinking Hebrew = more balanced or integrated in terms of rational/intuitive and Greek = imbalanced or overbalanced on the rational, literal, sequential side of the equation. I think Larris has a point when she says the Hebrews had been Hellenized by NT times. Nicodemus would be an example of that. In a previous post to Larris I listed several characteristics of the way of thinking that I am putting under the category “intuitive.” The characteristics I listed (there are others as well) are what I am saying that we are deficient in. This deficiency in our way of thinking adversely affects our Bible reading because the Bible authors were NOT deficient in their ways of thinking, and so we do not get, many times, what they were really saying. Discerning and understanding metaphorical relationships is one of those characteristics.
Albert: In fact, aren't you imposing a Greek mindset by implying that Paul has to understand Old Testament texts in terms of the author's intended meaning? Aren't you forcing Paul into a rationalistic mold?
Response: That’s a good question – and I am very sensitive to charges that I am being rationalistic etc. In my personal growth I have rooted out a great deal of overly rationalistic and literalistic thinking. So any charge like what you’ve stated above hits a sensitive scar in me and causes me to reassess what I’m saying. However, my answer is, “No, I’m not forcing Paul into a rationalistic mold.” I’m giving Paul the freedom to understand the OT texts in their original, intended meaning, and to USE them in an allegorical, metaphorical, &/or parallel manner in a way that does not contradict the original meaning and supports what PAUL is saying, which can be (but not always) different than the original meaning.
- Hobbes
| | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 5/30/2004 9:23 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Hobbes,
You asked:
Larris - what church DO you go to? Are there any left?
"Are there any left?"
Answer:With great regret and sorrow I say NO. The following verse shoud answer the first question.
2 John 1:Whosoever transgresses, and abides not in the doctrine of Christ, has not God, He that abides in the doctrine of Christ, he has both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, nether bid him God speed: For he that bidds him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
Jeremiah 9:1 Oh that my head were waters, and mine eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people! Oh that I had in the wilderness a lodging place of wayfaring men; that I might leave my people, and go from them! for they be all adulterers, an assembly of treacherous men And they bend their tongues like their bow for lies: but they are not valiant for the truth upon the earth; for they proceed from evil to evil, and they know not me, saith the LORD.
I believe that this scripture has a double application, first to Isreal of the flesh and then of Isreal of the spirt, i.e. the Gentiles who would as Christians, as a whole in the Churches go apostate from Christ, just as Isreal of the flesh went apostate from Moses. Therefore I do what it says to do regarding this people.
Take ye heed every one of his neighbour, and trust ye not in any brother: for every brother will utterly supplant, and every neighbour will walk with slanders. And they will deceive every one his neighbour, and will not speak the truth: they have taught their tongue to speak lies, and weary themselves to commit iniquity.
That is not to say that among Christianity that there are not those who are vallient for truth, and that are in the process of recovering the orignal gospel. But as a WHOLE Christianity is apostate. If you remember the Jews of Jesus time, also studied the scriptures and spoke them, and seemed to love God, and were very religious. Yet they knew not the truth, and had perverted the ways of Moses, just as today "The Church" has perverted the ways of Christ. They have become for the most part an assembly of treacherous men. And though there are individuals who are not such, I believe ALL the Churches as corporate intities are corrupt. I also believe that together they will eventually form into Babylon the mother of Harlots and abominations of the earth, to whom it will be said, "COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE", before she is judged harshly. For it will take a harsh judgement to shake any more loose from the deceit they are wallowing in.
"Thine habitation is in the midst of deceit; through deceit they refuse to know me, saith the LORD. Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts, Behold, I will melt them, and try them; for how shall I do for the daughter of my people?
It's sad to say, that many are going to suffer unspeakable things as these prophecys come to pass, simply because they did not receive a LOVE OF THE TRUTH, that they might be saved durring this time. That is why we , must always pray that we are acounted worthy to escape these things that shall come to pass, and that God will ALLOW us to be led into an accurate knowledge of the truth. If so that we can be alive and stand before the son of man when he comes. OR if we happen to already have gone to sleep by that time, that we will be accounted worthy to be called to life and join those still alive and be with the Lord, as judgement comes to pass, and this world is taken over for the reign of Christ.
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hobbes
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 63
| Posted 5/30/2004 9:43 AM (GMT -6) | | Larris,
So I take you to mean that you do not attend ANY church - perhaps I should say, "institutional" or "organized" church? Am I reading you correctly?
- Hobbes | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 5/30/2004 1:44 PM (GMT -6) | | Hobbes, and Albert,
Regarding the manner in which the aposles interpreted the Old Testament, here is something to think about.
Paul instucted in 2 Tim. 2:14- Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
Here we have Paul speaking of "rightly dividing the Word of truth", and on the other hand speaking of two guys who did not "rightly divide the Word of truth." And what was it they did when they WRONGLY divided the word of truth? The wrongly divided THE TIME in which something was to take place.
"Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection IS PAST already; and overthrow the faith of some.
The Resurrection was prophecy and it was something that would happen in the FUTURE when Jesus taught it. It had not as yet occured by the time Paul wrote this, but SOMEHOW two GREEK believers, Hymenaeus and Philetus through some "creative" means of interpretation,(which probably came out of say...Aristotle's poetics) came up with the idea that not only was it NOT in the FUTURE, it had ALREADY TAKEN PLACE.
This just goes to show you how IMPORTANT is the argument of which you two are making regarding how the apostles looked at the TIMING of prophecy in the Old Testament. Because to Paul all interpretation of prophecy and of the Word of God in general revolved around rightly dividingthe TIME to which something applied.
Notice something else about what Paul said concerning this teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus;
"But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
Rather than nipping this thing in the bud, and being able to stop it, Paul assures Timothy that this type of thing that Hymenaes and Philetus are doing will in fact not only INCREASE, but that it will EAT AS DOTH A CANKER.
Paul is talking to Timothy who's father was a Greek and his Mother was a Jew. You might say that he knew both modes of though (Hebrew, Greek), but he had also been taught the original and true faith of Christ, being Pauls own son in the faith, and so besides understanding Greek and Hebrew thought, he also was "CHRIST minded". That is he knew the truth and therefore what ever Paul wrote to him, would immediately be associated with the truth Paul taught. In short, unlike us, he knew exactly what Paul was referring to in everything he said.
Since Timothy was half Greek, he knew what "profane and vain babblings were", namely Greek philosophy on how history and writings should be interpreted. And he knew that they did not accurately represent and interpret history, that in a lot of cases the REVISED it. Which is just Hymenaeus and Philetus did in revising or RE-VISON-ING HIS-STORY (i.e. Jesus teaching on what would happen historically in the future, relegating it to being already done.)
Now since Timothy was also half Jew and also specifically taught the truth in Christ, when Paul spoke of this same type of historical revisionism interpretation of scripture, THAT it would EAT AS DOTH A CANKER, his mind went IMMEDIATELY to the teaching on the BODY OF CHRIST. And the image that was presented to him by Paul because of his understanding was a CANKER IN THE BODY OF CHRIST, in the form of the use and teaching of Greek philosophic methods of interpretation, THAT would produce false doctrines and pawn themselves off as the gospel to the WHOLE BODY.
A "canker" is "gangrene" defined as that which spreads and eats away or consumes by putrification the neighboring parts of the body. Gangrene will eventually consume the entire body if not cut of. Paul is saying that this type of wrongly dividing of God's word, by not rightly dividing the TIME and thus attributing prophecy having come to pass when it has NOT will eventually eat away and infest the whole body of Christ in their doctrine.
Now where as you fellows are basically seeing and discussing the actual effects of this taking place, and debating as to WHY the apostles seemed to see something in the OT that at this time is hard for you to see, just WHY they did it.
The problem is that you both as part of the BODY have also been infected with the same gangrene that was started by Hymenaeus and Philetus. For you are not only dealing with the aspect of deceptive methods of interpretation, you are dealing with the result of them, which is the false doctrine that began with Hymenaeus and Philetus, namely that "The resurrection was PAST already, and over threw the faith of some."
Now I know that YOU KNOW today that the resurrection is NOT past already. But much of what you have been taught to believe about the Old Testament, in that certain records are read, historical events are attributed to them, and then those prophecies are deemed as having come to pass already. However many of the prophecies that are said to have come to pass by Biblical Scholars, have actually NOT come to pass as yet. They have wrongly divided the TIME and atributed historical events that were SIMILAR and LOOKED LIKE what was written as the prophecy coming to pass when it has not.
Think of this. Hymenaeus and Philetus over threw the faith of some, by saying that the resurrection was past already. IF you believe that the resurrection is PAST, then what are you still doing here? Or what then is the next event to take place in prophecy?
IF you believe that all those who have died in Christ have already been risen and are with the Lord in their glorified bodies, the next step in prophecy is the Kingdom of God coming to pass on the earth. The problem is that Jesus is not there in the flesh or in person so to speak, therefore you must now start giving ALLEGORICAL interpretations to those scriptures that say he will come in person.
This now becomes that he comes in person SPIRITUALLY, and rules through his BODY. What is his BODY? His body are the Christians. This therefore sets the precidient that Christians must somehow become the victors of this earth and put the devil under their feet et. Did you know that when Constantine became emperior of Rome that the Christians thought the Kingdom of God had come to pass on earth and that the return of the Lord was then right around the corner?
However he did not come and so more allegorical interpretations had to be given, and the next thing you know the CHRUCH is ruling through Christ's rep. the Pope. This same senerio is played over and over throughout Christian history. Because once you accept one aspect of prophecy wrongly divided and deligated as having come to pass, you must then twist other aspects of the Word, and also attribute more prophecy as having come to pass when it has not.
However then IF and WHEN it dose start to come to pass, if you think it has already come to pass, you will not recognize what may be the signs of it.
Another major problem is that Biblical Scholars have twisted and actaully LIED about historical events, attributing them as prophecy come to pass, just to PROVE that the Bible is somehow genuine to unbelievers. They think if they can quote biblical prophecy and then point back to something that seemed to happen, that people will believe the bible more. But they have also purposely ignored real history and lied to believers concerning it.
To me, it dose not matter one iota if not one thing other than Jesus coming the first time has come to pass in all the prophecy that is written. I'm going to believe the bible anyway. Back in the first century false teachers looked at Nero and made him the antichrist and Rome the Harlot because there were similar historical events taking place that LOOKED like what Jesus said would happen. However Jesus warned this would happen.
Matt. 3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
People look around at historical events and say see there that prophecy came to pass, they've been doing it all along. When the disciples asked Jesus what would be the sign of his coming and the end of the world, the FIRST thing he told them was that people would come in his name, they would talk about this war and that war and say it was the prophecy happening. Yet these events were only SIMILAR to what would take place when the real deal began.
7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows.
Similar things have taken place over and over and over for the last 2000 years. Jesus said they would take place but they were not the sign of his coming, nor of the time of the end. But he said men would come and deceive people into thinking it was.
At the same time, Paul stated the same thing when he warned the believers in Thessalonica not to get all shook up thinking that the day of Christ was at hand, meaning presently upon them. Then he told them that day would not come until there had come a falling away first, that is an apostasy. Men like Hymenaeus and Philetus were the BEGINNING of that apostasy, that falling away from Christ, to ANOTHER CHRIST, that is a perverted interpretation of the gospel, through the wrongly dividing of TIME concerning prophecy.
What started with Hymenaeus and Philetus would continue until the whole world was deceived by it, and the entire gospel was perverted into just about the opposite of everything Jesus actually taught. WHEN this perversion was completely fulfilled THEN the end would come, and the actual prophecy would come to pass. This of course will be a big SHOCK for those who have believed and are teaching that almost all of it has already come to pass. There will be MASS confusion within Christianity when prophecy hits them square in the face and they are on the receiving end of it for believing and teaching contrary to what the scripture actually states.
Well, that's all for now,
In the love of christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 5/30/2004 2:18 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Response: That’s a good question – and I am very sensitive to charges that I am being rationalistic etc. In my personal growth I have rooted out a great deal of overly rationalistic and literalistic thinking. So any charge like what you’ve stated above hits a sensitive scar in me and causes me to reassess what I’m saying. However, my answer is, “No, I’m not forcing Paul into a rationalistic mold.” I’m giving Paul the freedom to understand the OT texts in their original, intended meaning, and to USE them in an allegorical, metaphorical, &/or parallel manner in a way that does not contradict the original meaning and supports what PAUL is saying, which can be (but not always) different than the original meaning.
It seems to me that the "original meaning" would have been as GOD meant it, even IF no one understood it at the time. Therefore if you wind up having something DIFFERENT than the original meaning, you wind up giving it a different meaning than the AUTHOR GOD intended.
Also in regards to rightly dividing the time, not only have we been influenced by corrupted chrisitian relegation of prophecy coming to pass when it has NOT. But we have also inherited a LOT of that same thing from the Jews regarding their interpretaton of the Old Testament.
I mean you aren't going to find very many Jewish Scholars today, who are going to want to think that all that being thrust out of the land stuff and bonked on the head for corrupting God's Word, is able to or likely to happen again. They look at all those prophecys and they say "WHEW, I'M GLAD THAT'S OVER WITH".
But see, it's for them like it is for us. What happened to them with Nebuchadnezzar was only SIMILAR to what's really going to happen in the end. Just like all the wars, famines et. that have taken place over the years, that Christain scholars attributed to prophecy coming to pass was only SIMILAR to what's really going to take place when it does take place.
In Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 5/30/2004 2:50 PM (GMT -6) | | For 10 years now God has been slowly leading me out of the indoctrination of a completely false gospel. And in doing that, over time as I studied the scripture, I found many verses that I did not understand rightly that contributed to my false understanding. As the true understanding of those verses came to light, and I saw them differently, a different picture began to emerge of what the gospel was all about, including but not limited to what would take place in the last days, what theologians call “eschatology”.
One day my attention was directed to the very first thing Jesus said in Revelation.
Rev. 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John.
Now how do you understand this verse? I’ll tell you how it’s taught in most theological circles. It’s taught that the words “things which must shortly come to pass”, mean that the things written there in would start taking place almost immediately. Then translated down to our time, it’s taught that those things started taking place way back then almost 2000 years ago and have been continuing up to our time. This is taught in correlation with certain things in Matt. 24, in teachings things, for instance, like the prophecies Jesus gave there were fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem.
However Jesus said in Matt. 24 “not one stone would be left upon another that would not be thrown down.” And this made me suspicious since there is a great big retaining wall still there, called the Wailing Wall. Definitely one stone is still left upon another, though there are some who try and explain that away through various means, but we won’t go into that now.
For some reason several years ago, what Rev. 1:1 said, just caught my eye, and bugged me. Bugged me enough to look up the passage in the Interlinear and study out the Greek there. And when I did I started to see a very different picture of what the words were actually saying. (Now Albert I know you think my Greek is ...."wanting", but maybe I'm on to something here.)
Rev. 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must SHORTLY come to pass.
The Greek arrangement of the words, in the Interlinear are:
Revelation of Jesus Christ, which gave to him God, to show to his bondmen what things must take place SHORTLY,
And the actual Greek words caught my eye, look at just the last part here:
a dei genesthai EN TAXEI
what things must take place SHORTLY
Now as you look at those last two words “EN TAXEI”, I want you to notice the word “EN”, because they did not actually put the word in the translations of either the KJV or the Interlinear translation of the Greek Text. And not putting that word in the translation, changes the actual meaning. All they put was the word “shortly”.
The word “EN” is a Greek Preposition. To describe what it means, I would have you picture a circle with that word IN there. When that word is used it means IN and totally remaining with IN. Now let me ask you how can something happen “IN SHORTLY”. That just dose not make any sense dose it? So if this word TAXEI which is translated shortly dose not actually mean that, then what dose it mean?
TAXEI, according to Moulton’s Analytical Greek Lexicon means:
TAXEI is what is called the Dative, Singular of the word TAXOS, which has the meaning of swiftness, speed, quickness; with speed, quickly, speedily; Now it can also mean soon shortly, hastily and immediately. BUT when it is used in the latter manner, it never has the preposition IN with it. What we have here in Rev. 1:1, is not a sentence telling us WHEN these things will take place. But a sentence telling us HOW these things will take place. But they translated it, because of their “theology”, as WHEN instead of HOW, since by the time they translated this into English the "Historical" interpretation of Revelaiton was that it began happening back then, and was continuing up to the time of the translatoin. To them the RCC and the Pope were the Harlot and the beast or antichrist. Are you understanding what I am saying here? That is WHY they translated it as "which things must shorty take place", BECAUSE of what they already believed about it.
By leaving out the preposition “IN”, they turned the sentence to fit with their theology that, the events of the book of Revelation would start taking place shortly after the book was written, rather than just describing and aspect of HOW those events would take place, when in fact they did begin to come to pass.
TAXIE, is the DATIVE CASE, and SINGULAR in number.
In this case the DATIVE CASE, is used to show INSTRUMENTALITY, in essence the means by which one dose something, or accompaniment, the ideas conveyed by the English prepositions by, with or in, such as they would be used in the phrases, hit by the car, written with a pencil, done in a hurry.
Rev. 1:1 is showing us HOW the revelation of Jesus Christ will take place, when the time comes. All those things written in the book of Revelation, concerning when the Lord will reveal himself, will take place HOW? IN QUICKNESS, meaning that when they start, they will come quickly and suddenly, then they will take place one event after the other, with no breaks, and in order as they are written, bam, bam, bam. And as we know from what Jesus said regarding the same period of time in Matt. 24, "this GENERATION shall not pass till all be fulfilled." MEANING the 'generation alive AT THE TIME WHEN these things began to take place.' That is, those in the generation which is alive at the time these things begin to come to pass, will, if they live through them, also see the completion of them.
In other words, these events are not going to DRUG OUT through the centuries, continuing on up to and through our time, to when ever the final end comes, as what is called “Historical Interpretation” would have us believe. However neither is it alegorical for they are REAL events. Historical interpretatoin looks around for something in history that it can allegorize to fit with something in the prophecy and says, “See here, that prophecy came to pass, when such and such happened. Therefore if you follow that theology, you then wind up believing that certain prophecies have come to pass when they have not. Therefore you wind up wrongly dividing the Word of truth.
Once you understand that the truth of what John said was lost and that people have been misunderstanding the prophecies for almost 2000 years, then you can properly understand this next verse.
Rev. 1:3 Blessed is he that reads, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein; for the time is at hand.
Now the Interlinear says “the time is NEAR”, and again that might make one think that these things did start to take place back in Johns time, SHORTLY after he received it. But here is the thing, the truth of the Word of God was already by the time John wrote this, pretty much corrupted already in all the Churches scattered around in Asia and else where. ONLY 7 which are written to in the book of Rev. still held on to any semblance of the truth, and there is no evidence that they kept it, or that they repented as instructed.
The truth was lost before the end of the first century, and therefore what John wrote has not been truly understood for almost 2000 years. So that by the TIME someone actually read it and understood the whole of Revelation again then the TIME REALLY WOULD BE AT HAND.
Rev. 1:3 Blessed is he that reads, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein; for the time is at hand.
The GENERATION that recovers the gospel that was once delivered unto the saints, will be the generation that will see these things come to pass. i.e. "many shall run to and fro and knowledge will be increased."
Jesus knew that the truth would be lost, perverted and corrupted into something else. And therefore he also knew that by the time his people would recover it COMPLETELY that THEN the TIME for those things to take place really would be NEAR. But they were not “near” in Johns time, because the "apostasy" of Gentile Christianity had to come first.
So that’s my opinion, and I too think I have the spirit of God.
In Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 5/31/2004 5:07 AM (GMT -6) | | Albert,
quote:
Jefscott: The distinction exists in this chapter, also. First, verse 1 says "when thou goest out to battle against thine enemies." A Christian king/president could rightfully go to battle against an enemy nation.
Albert: I don't agree that a Christian can fight in war; I think that's part of the point which Christ is making.
Then how do you explain the fact that John the Baptist told the repentant soldiers to be satisfied with their wages? If one can be a soldier, doesn't that suggest they can be in war? Can a Christian authority not have a criminal hanged?
quote:
Jefscott: Second, vv. 16-17 compared to 10-12&15 seem to be saying that the cities outside of the land were to get a chance for peace, whereas the cities WITHIN the land were to have no mercy. Thus, the issue of the dispersion is relevant.
Albert: Yes, but what did this "peace" involve? Verse 11: "If it accepts your terms of peace and surrenders to you, then all the people in it shall serve you at forced labor". Wow, lots of love there!
There can never be "lots of love," geopolitically speaking, for enemies. Just as there can never be "lots of love" for criminals - we punish them, and rightly so. True, Paul says Christians can't take one another to law, but he DOESN'T say we can't take unbelievers to law to get justice. That's the whole point of Romans 13 - WE don't have the right to avenge ourselves, but the "authorities" DO. And it is their DUTY to do so. So if a Christian is such an "authority" it is also his/her duty to do so.
quote:
Christ is addressing the law, written in the context of the people in the land. The issue of the dispersion is irrelevant.
Until you have anulled my arguments above, it still seems perfectly relevant.
quote:
The phrase "until heaven and earth pass away" serves exactly the same function as "until hell freezes over" does in my example. It's just an idiomatic way of saying NEVER. The real temporal qualifier is the phrase "until all is fulfilled". No, I don't think heaven and earth passed away when all was fulfilled, anymore than my example implies that hell freezes over when I do my assignment.
That leads to a contradiction - consider the passage that way:
5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them. 5:18 I tell you the truth, until "hell freezes over" not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law until everything takes place.
The passage, spoken in that way, is saying the law WILL pass away and WON'T pass away. Moreover, the time qualifier "until heaven and earth pass away" is a REAL time qualifier, because the Revelation says that this heaven and earth WILL pass away.
quote:
Jefscott: There were other OT prophecies such as the one about "the abomination of the desolation" which were yet to be fulfilled after Christ's ressurection.
Albert: The abomination of desolation was fulfilled well before Jesus' even was born, at the time of Antiochus Epiphanes.
Matthew 24 says otherwise. There may have been AN application of it "at the time of Antiochus Epiphanes," but Matt. 24 proves it was not FULFILLED yet.
quote:
Jefscott: The phrase "until hell freezes over" means "it ain't gonna happen." It is not a REAL time qualifier.
Albert: Which is precisely what "until heaven and earth pass away" functions as.
I've showed above the contradiction that produces.
quote:
Jefscott: Christ's emphatic words as to the importance of keeping the Law would argue to the contrary.
Albert: Your whole case here rests on assuming that "these commandments" in verse 19 refers to the law rather than to Jesus' own commandments in the Sermon on the Mount. But that is entirely debatable; I'm not going into a detailed argument here, but Banks argues it in detail.
Since Christ uses the phrase "law and the prophets," it seems very counter-intuitive to suppose he was not talking about THE law of the Hebrew scriptures.
quote:
Jefscott: Besides, the Matthew 11 passage shows no clear idea of saying the Law would pass away after John.
Albert: In context, he is not just making an innane historical observation. He is talking about applicability. He is contrasting the Kingdom of God with the era of the law and the prophets.
The passage is about the fact that John the Baptist WAS a prophet and the greatest of those born of women. I don't see how that's "an innane historical observation." What words in the text indicate to you that Christ is talking about the applicability of the Mosaic Law?
quote:
Jefscott: The incident with Paul and James in Acts 21 makes it clear to me that the believing Jews did NOT think the Law was inapplicable to them.
Albert: Yes, but this assumes that whatever the apostles did in Acts was right. I think that it took the apostles, being Jewish, some time to appreciate the fact that the law had been abolished. Peter was still keeping the Jewish food laws right up at least until he had the "rise Peter, kill and eat" vision. I don't think we can assume that something the apostles did was good unless the text explicitly says so. Especially when there are numerous clear and emphatic statements that the law is abolished and done away with in the rest of the New Testament.
The OT said that a "prophet" who turned the people from the Law (called apostasy) was to be deemed as a false prophet evenif he did signs/wonders/predictions. Matt. 5 is saying in no uncertain terms that Christ was not such a false prophet. You say there are "numerous clear and emphatic statements" declaring that the Law was abolished. I know of NO such verse written during the Acts period. There were plenty of verses saying the Gentiles did not have to keep the Law, but James admitted that much in Acts 21. Indeed, he alluded to the council in Acts 15 which answered that very question. But he did NOT see that council as touching the believing Jews - nor did Acts 15 portray that council as touching that question.
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 5/31/2004 5:26 AM (GMT -6) | | larris: Also in regards to rightly dividing the time, not only have we been influenced by corrupted chrisitian relegation of prophecy coming to pass when it has NOT. But we have also inherited a LOT of that same thing from the Jews regarding their interpretaton of the Old Testament.
Then Albert stated: The abomination of desolation was fulfilled well before Jesus' even was born, at the time of Antiochus Epiphanes.
That is EXACTLY what I am talking about (but which no one is probably reading). WHY in the world would Jesus say the following to his disciples IF this was already fulfilled?
Matt. 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and THEN the end shall come. WHEN therefore SHALL SEE THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION SPOKEN OF BY DANIEL THE PROPHET, stand in the holy place, (whosoever readeth let him understand) THEN let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. (21) FOR THEN (at that time) shall be GREAT TRIBULATION, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no nor ever shall be. And except THOSE DAYS should be shortened no flesh shall be saved, BUT for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
The Abomination of desolation has NOT as yet been fulfilled. And here you are doing exactly what I said they have gotten us to do. Relegating what is FUTURE to having already taken place. The same error of Hymeneaus and Philitus who concerning the resurrection said that it was PAST already.
Jefscott: The phrase "until hell freezes over" means "it ain't gonna happen." It is not a REAL time qualifier.
Albert: Which is precisely what "until heaven and earth pass away" functions as.
larris: Matt. 24:35 Heaven and earth SHALL PASS AWAY, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour (when heaven and earth shall pass away.) knoweth no man, no, not hte angles of heaven, but my Father only.
2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a theif in the night: in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat (sever global warming by God), the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
It kind of looks like the term "till heaven and earth passes away" does not mean till "hell freezes over", since heaven and earth will in fact pass away, as stated many times in scripture. Havnen't you ever heard of the New the Third heaven and earth? We are in the second one now, the first being destroyed by water. The second will be destroyed buy fire, and the thrid will rise up out of the ashes cleansed and ready for it's KING.
In the love of Christ,
larris
In the love of Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hobbes
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 63
| Posted 5/31/2004 7:19 AM (GMT -6) | | Larris: That is EXACTLY what I am talking about (but which no one is probably reading)…
Response: I’m reading Larris. I think others are as well. The problem – at least MY problem – is that most of your posts are too lengthy. I have a hard time picking something out to respond to and so I don’t respond at all. Is there any way you could be more succinct, and maybe concentrate on one line of thought?
Larris: How about you Hobbes do you go to Church?
Response: NOPE.
- Hobbes
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Hobbes
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 63
| Posted 5/31/2004 1:58 PM (GMT -6) | | Albert,
I’m disappointed that you have to bail but I understand. I will respond anyway and perhaps we can pick it up again when and if you return.
Hobbes: It seems to me that my approach, that the NT authors many times are using the OT passages in parallel, allegorical, &/or metaphorical applications and not literal “this-is-that” type applications more satisfactorily solves the problems we’re discussing.
Albert: I agree with you. The point is, though, that the parallel, allegorical, and/or metaphorical meanings *were not understood by the writer of the Old Testament texts they were using*. So if the interpretations are valid, then a meaning is present in the text that the writer was not aware of.
Response: No, there is no hidden meaning in the text AT THE TIME OF THE WRITING that the writer was not aware of. The NT author is using the original meaning to support something that he is saying. What the NT writer is saying is different than, but supported by, the original meaning. The parallel, allegorical, &/or metaphorical meanings are not inherent in the text, they come later, and are still coming. The OT text is being USED, not exegeted, by the NT author. What the NT author is saying could be understood WITHOUT the OT text being referred to at all. Let me give you a modern and more personal example of this being done today.
My wife and I are dealing with a young woman who is temporarily living with us and coming off of methamphetamine addiction as well as two different proscribed psych meds, and has been horrifically abused and brutalized due to her lifestyle situation. We have seen God do some amazing things. My wife has taught her to knit. The young woman found it to be very therapeutic. Then she was given some knitting needles that had belonged to her Grandmother. This was very significant but I won’t go into that here. The Lord revealed to my wife that the knitting was a metaphor, given by God to this young woman as a picture of God knitting her soul, her psyche, her personality, her spirit, and all the various parts of this young woman’s being, which had been fractured and traumatized from abuse and drug use, back together in the image and form that HE desired. As she knits, so is she being knitted. She is truly becoming a new creature in Christ. Then one day, this young woman read in Ephesians 4 where it says, “…speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into Him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every joint with which it is supplied…” The young woman was exited and weeping and saying, “God is talking to me! Did you see? It uses the word, “KNIT”, did you see that? God is telling me something! You’re right, He’s given me a picture of what He’s doing with me!” Now am I going to tell this young woman that she was taking the word, “knit” out of context? That it’s not used in the text to refer to a person but is referring to the body of Christ? No way am I going to say that! That would very much be missing the point, wouldn't it. In fact, God is using that verse to say something to her that is real and true and valid – and has nothing to do with the original context of that verse. The “meaning” for this young woman is not in the original context but in the Spirit’s application. There was no meaning in the text that the original writer wasn’t aware of – until the Spirit applied the text in a specific situation. The “creative” meaning is not inherent within the text, but is in the Spirit. We agree with this young woman that God is speaking to her, and using scriptures in “creative” ways and at the same time, pointing her to other “knitting” scriptures to reinforce the metaphor and it’s application to her deliverance and healing. This is what I mean when I talk about a way of thinking that sees non-linear, metaphorical relationships.
When you say, “So if the interpretations are valid, then a meaning is present in the text that the writer was not aware of” you’re assuming that AN ORIGINALLY UNKNOWN MEANING IS PRESENT IN THE TEXT. The ONLY meaning that inherently exists in the text is the original meaning in the original context. God subsequently uses the text for all kinds of different applications, parallels, metaphors, and situations as needed, all the while never negating the original meaning, nor contradicting it. You are also assuming that if the “creative” interpretation was not inherent in the text to begin with, then it’s not valid. You take the original meaning and juxtaposition it against the NT author’s use of it and make it an either/or situation. In my opinion, that is a false dichotomy.
We agree that, “…the parallel, allegorical, and/or metaphorical meanings were not understood by the writer of the Old Testament texts they were using” but I’m saying that the parallel, allegorical, &/or metaphorical meanings didn’t EXIST until expounded by the NT writers. The “creative” parallel, metaphorical meaning of Eph 4 did not exist until the Spirit applied it to the young woman I spoke of. The difference between this young woman’s interpretation and the NT writers “creative” interpretations of OT texts is that the meaning of the young woman’s interpretation is for her, and her alone. Maybe in the future, she will be dealing with someone for whom that specific application will be valid and will be able to draw on her uniquely personal application, but it’s basically just for her. A very unique, special, and personally healing gift from a loving Father to a beloved daughter, to be BELIEVED and cherished. I would point out that the knitting metaphor could be understood without any reference to Eph 4 whatsoever, JUST LIKE the fact that the word of faith in Christ is in our hearts and mouths can be understood without any reference whatsoever to Deuteronomy. And this unique and personal application does not negate or contradict the original author’s intended meaning whatsoever. THAT meaning is to be understood in the “normal” way.
- Hobbes
| | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/1/2004 1:53 AM (GMT -6) | | Hey Fella's,
I'll try and keep things shorter and stay more to a point.
Am I an open viewer?
Well I haven't delved into it very much, never actually heard of it till I came here and read a bit. I know one thing and that is I flat don't believe in Calvins twist of fate. I think his interpretation was influenced by his previous education in philosophy in the area of pagan beliefs and practices. In that, he took the belief of "The Fates"....................OH MY GOSH, there's another PUN!
"In that Calvin mistook "The FATES for the FAITH." Gee whiz I sure amust myself sometimes.
"The threads which the Fates spin are so unchageable, that, even if they decreed to someone a kingdom which at the moment belonged to another, and even if that other slew the man of destiny, to save himself from ever being deprived by him of his throne, nevertheless the dead man would come to life again in order to fulfil the decree of the Fates ... He who is destined to become a carpenter, will become one even if his hands have been cut off: and he who has been destined to carry off the prize for running in the Olympic games, will not fail to win even if he broke his leg: and a man to whom the Fates have decreed that he shall be an eminent archer, will not miss the mark, even though he lost his eyesight." [Flavius Philostratus, Life of Apollonius of Tyana 8.7]
Calvin mistook the FATES for the FAITH.
Ha, to hallarious. Have a great day!
In the love of Christ,
larris
PS. Have either of you studied any of Bullingers or any other authors works on figures of speech used in the Bible?
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hobbes
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 63
| Posted 6/2/2004 8:20 AM (GMT -6) | | Larris,
You never told me whether or not YOU went to church.
- Hobbes | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/2/2004 3:07 PM (GMT -6) | | Hobbes,
No, I don't go to Church any longer. EXCEPT if I happen to get stuck with my inlaws who are still in great bondage in that area. Now considering that I was wholly adicted to having to go to church and meeting at least 3 to 4 times a week for over 10 years, I'm just really thankful that as I learned the truth of the deception within Christian educataion, that God was able to deliver me from the GUILT of attending meetings.
NOT that I do not long to fellowship with other like minded believers who have the love of God in their hearts and souls, as well as the truth of the Word of God. But I cannot with a good conscience support any organization be it, Chruch Chruch or "home" Church who's theology stems from Greek philosophy, and since ALL of them do to one degree or another, for me it would actually be "sin" to continue going, since I KNOW what lies behind many of the doctrines being taught.
Not that there are not many loving good, God fearing people in Church. But I truly believe that God is going to punish the pastors and scatter the flocks when the time comes for his son to return. Only with great affliction will God's people, both Jew and Gentile be shook loose from the deception which has crept in durring the last 2000 years. The hammer is going to come down on the house of God first as "judgment begins at that house of God", WHEN it begins.
I don't think I'm better, or that I can't be deceived, or that I'm saved and anyone who goes to Church is not. I am in the same basic boat as everyone else, except for one aspect, and that is I fully recognize Greek philosophy aka Greek theology baptised Christian, in all it's many diguises and forms, and have done pretty well at untangling myself from it. Therefore in being for the most part "unleavened", I have the ability to come to a knowledge of the truth. Not that I will, but I now have the "ability", where as when one is leavened with philosoph and theology it keeps them ever learning and NEVER ABLE to come to a knowldge of the truth in ALL areas.
People can hold to the truth in one area and be off on another. That is why this whole thing is somewhat confusing at times. I really believe that in the end, there will be some that manage to break free from the teachings and traditions of the philosophy in the Churches, and finally come to a full and whole knowledge of the truth. Now I DON"T KNOW HOW GOD WILL PULL THAT ONE OFF? But since he says in Daniel that there will be "SOME" that do know the truth durring that time, I just have to believe it. Also a certain number have to recover the original gospel, so that when the Lord comes they will be accounted worthy to be caught up alive and changed along with the dead in Christ. This has to be, so that the prophecy "Death where is they sting, and Oh grave where is they victory can be fulfilled.
However I am of the experienced opinion, that this miricle of any number of humans recovering the truth and then even hanging on to it for more than a week or two, will be a greater feat in terms of difficulty than the incarnation of Christ.
In Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hobbes
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 63
| Posted 6/3/2004 11:44 AM (GMT -6) | | Larris,
So what do you do with the many scriptures that presuppose the validity of some kind of Church structure to which the believer is exhorted to attend on a regular basis? I.e. “Do not forsake the assembling of yourselves together” etc. As well as the instructions in Timothy and Titus for choosing bishops and elders?
If the Bible is “scripture” as you say, and is “God’s Word”, then surely God would have foreseen the falling away that you’ve described (or did He?) and so then why were the instructions and exhortations to commit to “church” as well as instructions for choosing bishops and elders retained as scripture when for 2,000+ years “church” would be FALSE? Or do those scriptures not apply to those who properly discern the times?
- Hobbes
| | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/3/2004 6:09 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Hobbes, (sorry this might be a little long but it stays right on the subject.)
Those scriptures do not apply to those who discern the times. Paul saw those times coming and starting even in his time. Where was Timothy when he wrote to him?
1Tim. 1:3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went unto Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach NO OTHER DOCTRINE.
Timothy was in Ephesus ordaining Bishop’s etc. Yet Paul also speaks in 1 and 2nd Timothy of doctrinal corruption, more than any of his other letters. And in Acts when Paul called the elders of Ephesus to him, he flatly stated that after his departing, that grievous wolves would enter in not sparing the flock and that even of their own selves men would arise speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after themselves. By his second letter to Timothy he has this to say.
2 Tim. 1:15 This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermongenes. The Lord have mercy on the house of Onesiphorus; for he oft refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chain: But when he was in Rome, he sought me out very diligently, and found me. The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day: and in how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus, thou knowest very well.
Even this good believer Onesiphorus was carried away from the faith. That is why Paul asked the Lord to have mercy on him in that day, because of how he had ministered to Paul before he got carried away from the true faith.
Paul spoke of the time, when they would ALL eventually turn away.
2 Tim. 4: I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season and out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when THEY (the ones Timothy was preaching to) will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
POOR TIMOTHY! Because besides the fact that Paul is telling him that even though he preaches the word, eventually they will all turn away from it just like they have in Asia. And in the next sentences Paul told Timothy that he was about to die, and so here's poor Timothy basically standing at Ephesus alone.
2 Tim 4:5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry. For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord the righteous judge shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.
Now he tells Timothy about all the other people that have forsaken him.
9. Do thy diligence to come unto me: For Demas has forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia. Only Luke is with me. He goes on to speak of a few faithful believers and that's about it. And as I said speaks much in these epistles about believers corrupting the understanding of the gospel.
As to the matter of the scripture where it says not to forsake the assembling of yourselves together, this is what I do with that.
1. I get REAL irritated that they read that verse out of context, as a means to keep people in bondage to going to Church!
2. By "out of context", I mean that they sure like to quote that one, but you will NEVER hear them quote the one immediately preceding it.
Heb. 10:24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and GOOD WORKS.
They might assemble together but it's sure not to encourage one another to "GOOD WORKS". Yes they talk about "love" a lot, but I don't believe it's the true love of God, which is based in DOING GOOD and DOING THE WORD, and keeping his commandments, that is, the commandments of Christ and the apostles though Christ.
The whole context of that verse on not forsaking the assembling of yourselves together is in the context of encouraging one another to love and good works, to repentance of sin.
24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works; not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another; and so much the more , as you see the day approaching. FOR if we sin willfully after that we have receive the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
We are not to encourage one another to GO TO CHURCH, as they make it sound by quoting it out of context, we are to EXHORT one another towards love and good works. Jesus saw the day coming when you would be hard pressed to find anyone following the true gospel. That is why he said, wherever two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them. I have one friend that holds with me 100 percent in the truth, and has for 15 years now. We both came out of the same type of deception were in the same ministry. Well that makes TWO.
Even in Revelation in the letters to the 7 churches, Jesus saw that they would not repent, and therefore he made it available for one individual to come and fellowship with him. After every exhortation to the "Churches" he makes the following statement.
Ephesus, 2:7 He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear what the Sprit sayeth unto the churches: To HIM (the individual) that overcomes will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.
Smyrna, 2:11 He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcomes shall not be hurt of the second death.
Pergamos, 2:17 He that hath an ear to hear let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcomes will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knows saving he that receives it.
Thyatira, 2:26 And he that overcomes, and keeps my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers; even as I received of my Father. And I will give him the morning star. He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
Sardis, 3:5 He that overcomes the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels. He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
Philadelphia, 3:11 Behold I come quickly (how he comes not WHEN) hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown. Him that overcomes will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name. He that has an ear to hear let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
Laodiceans, 3:19 As many as I love I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore and repent. Behold I stand at the door, and knock: IF ANY MAN hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. To him that overcomes will I grant to sit with my in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. He that has an ear, let him hear what the spirit saith unto the churches.
Jesus knew that every one of those Churches would not listen would not repent as a whole. So he worded things in such as way as to reprove the churches, and to also make promises to any INDIVIDUAL who would manage to do as he commanded to do. There hasn't been one church in almost 2000 years that taught the original truth of the original gospel. I even question if there has been one individual.
However I do know that at the time of the end, there will be a generation that contains a certain number of individuals (not in a CHURCH, but spread out over the earth.) that recover the truth. That is the number that Daniel speaks of.
Dan. 11:32 And such as do wickedly against the covenant (of which there shall be MANY Christians) shall he corrupt by flatteries (they are told what they want to hear, typical gospel being preached today.) But the people that do know their God shall be strong and do (that is they are DOERS of the Word, not hearers only hearing what they want to hear.) And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days. Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with little help (this will really test their faith in God's word.) but many shall cleave to them with flatteries. And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.
I frankly hope I'm dead before this time, because I don't really want to live through it. Don't really know if I could handle it, since I get upset over really stupid trivial things now. So when everything hits the fan, what am I going to do, I don't even trust myself.
Here's what Satan dose. He gets the believers to DISOBEY the word, mix philosophy with it and give it a hokey antichrist interpretation. Then after the understanding of the word is corrupted he gets them to OBEY scriptures especially like the ones that say not to forsake the assembling of themselves together. Or better yet once they are believing a corrupt doctrine as the truth, then when someone comes along and speaks the truth to them, the obey verses of scripture that say things like "mark and avoid those who teach things contrary to the doctrine you have learned."
So they are believing a corrupt doctrine and obeying the word at the same time. However the doctrine they learned is a lie, and when someone comes telling them the truth, they think that's the lie, and the mark them out and avoid them or kick them out of the Church. Even if I did go to church how long do you think they'd let me stay if I really told them what I believe? Do you think the pastors going to like what I have to say about his education?
In the love of Christ,
larris
PS...
Hobbes, I forgot the one real thing that delivered me from going to Church and from being obsessed with trying to find a Church. That was when I learned the truth of what Jude taught. Jude was also the book that began my dissent from the Church, SIMPLY because I asked God the question "Who's this talking about God"? Watch out what you ask for!
Well if you are interested here's my understanding of Jude.
Jude 1
1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called: Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied. Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
These men came into the various ecclesias or assemblies that Jude wrote to feigning themselves to be just regular believers, but they were actually men who had left or gotten kicked out of other assemblies for believing and teaching perverted gospel. While Jude is over hear warning believers about these certain men coming in. John on the other hand is speaking to those he's writing to about certain men going OUT. The ones going OUT from the assemblies John wrote to were going in to the ones Jude was writing to.
1 John 1:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as you have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. THEY WENT OUT FROM US, but they were not of us, for if they had been of us, they would no doubt continued with us.
Yes they went out all right, went out to some fellowship or believers home that was unsuspecting of the poison they were bringing. John later realized this when he wrote his second epistle.
2 John 6 And this is love, that we walk after his commandments, This is the commandment, that as ye have heard from the beginning you should walk in it, FOR MANY DECEIVERS ARE ENTERED INTO THE WORLD. (9) Whosoever transgresses and abides not in the doctrine of Christ, has not God, He that abides in the doctrine of Christ, he has both the Father and the Son. If there COME ANY UNTO YOU, and BRING NOT THIS DOCTRINE, receive him not, neither bid him God speed: For he that bids him God speed is a partaker of his evil deeds.
As I said, they were leaving one assembly and going to others trying to spread their false understanding of the Word among the believers. They were taking advantage of the commandment, to be given to hospitality. And as the believers let them into their homes, WHICH WERE WHERE THE CHURCH WAS HELD, they infested them with their quirky interpretations.
So Jude says that the main thing about these interpretations are that they turn the grace of God into lasciviousness, that is they take the gospel of grace and turn it into a license to sin. That is the SAME false gospel of grace that is taught in most of the Churches today in one guise or another. After warning them of these men coming in unawares, Jude then reminds those he is writing to, that God will in fact JUDGE even "Christians" for practicing evil. The main aspect of the false doctrine of grace was that God would never judge you no matter what you did.
Jude
5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not. And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Now he goes on to describe those people who were going out of Johns assemblies and into the ones he had charge over. These were believers who had left the truth of what the apostles taught.
8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.
These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear:
"spots", is the word spilas meaning a cliff, breaker, on which vessels are wrecked, craggy rocks. A man of God who hold the truth of scripture is like a ship thoroughly equipped for its voyage. But these people are like craggy rocks hidden just below the surface of the water, waiting for the ship to hit them and sink. This is the effect they have, you don't expect them in your feast of charity, which is the meeting of believers who are truly filled with the love of God, because they keep his commandments and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
clouds they are without water, carried about of winds;
"clouds without water", they promise much but deliver little, and then after they've wrecked you their gone.
trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
These ARE CHRISTIANS, true Christians who have left the right way and gone astray. They have no fruit, because they are teaching you don't really have to DO the Word. They are twice dead because they were born dead in trespasses and sins, they believed on the Lord Jesus and receive the opportunity for eternal life through sanctification of the spirit and belief of the truth. Yet they turned away from the truth and turned unto fables, thus now they are TWICE DEAD, and even their roots are plucked up.
13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.
This is really sad, because these are REAL CHRISTIANS, these were men like those elders of Ephesus, who turned away from the truth to speak perverse things and draw away disciples after themselves. As you remember Ephesians was written to the SAINTS in Ephesus and FAITHFUL in Christ Jesus. These men knew the truth from the get go and turned away from it, that is PERVERTED IT. We are different in that we were taught a bunch of lies from the GET GO, and now we are simply trying to recover the understanding of what was lost. This is sad because to these types the mists of the gloom of darkness is reserved FOR EVER.
14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
We have to stop right here because this is a MISTRANSLATION. This is not saying he comes WITH ten thousands of his saints, it says he comes AMIDST ten thousands of his saints. This is his coming in judgment, this is the judgment seat, referring to the judgment of the saints that have perverted his word. And you really see that when you read it in context.
14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh AMIDST ten thousands of his saints,
To execute judgment upon all (his saints), and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
This is talking about the judgment of the saint, and the conviction of the ungodly AMONG THEM.
16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.
Now after describing these men coming in and turning the grace of God into lasciviousness, Jude gently warns the believers he writing to on how to handle these perverters.
But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.
These perverts he spoke of were believers who had left the right way. And he encourages those he's writing to to keep themselves in the love of God, which a big part of was keeping the commandments of the Lord Jesus Christ. Now he tell them how to handle these people when they come. And here is a big mistranslation, that was translated wrongly because it actually tells you to SEPARATE YOURSELF from them. And when this was translated, and the high ups in the Church knew the common man was about to be reading it, they could not have anything that seemed to say it was OK for you to separate yourself from the Church.
22 And of some have compassion, making a difference:
those words "making a difference" ultimately in the Greek mean to "separate yourself". I don't have time to tell you exactly how that works out right now, it's rather extensive. But what it's saying is:
And of some have pity, separating yourself from them.
You have pity, because there is NOTHING YOU CAN DO FOR THEM. And this is excruciating if you are a believer filled with the love of God. You love your brother and sisters in Christ, and naturally want to reach out and help them. But Jude is saying that some of them are simply to be pitied, because they are not going to change, you MUST separate yourself from them to protect yourself.
23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.
There are others you might be able to help. But the terminology he uses here is one of being exceptionally careful when dealing with these people. For to endeavor to save them, is like reaching into a burning fire, YOU CAN GET BURNED. And in other cases it's like touching clothing that has been contaminated by a contagious terminal disease. The wording is very graphic as to the DANGER of dealing with these people.
And the next words are also whacked out. Because the word "YOU" is the Greek word for THEM, and Jude is still talking about THEM, meaning the deceived and deceiving ones, the ones coming in and he says.
24 BUT to him that is able to keep THEM from falling, and to present THEM faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, To the only wise God our Savior, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
I'll have to work these words again to show you, but what I go from them was that at first Jude was warning them how to deal with some of them. Some they were to pity knowing they could do nothing for them, and so separate themselves from them. Some they were to help with FEAR, being careful not to get burned and not to catch the contagious rebellion and false teachings they held to. But then it was almost as if he had second thoughts, as to these beloved even trying to help these people at all, and instead says "BUT RATHER give them UNTO GOD who is ABLE to keep them without stumbling." Meaning God could get in there and work with them without stumbling, where as the beloved believers he was writing to may not have been able to do that.
24 BUT unto him that is able to keep THEM without stumbling, and to present THEM faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, To the only wise God our Savior, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.
God is fully able to get in and save his own people without stumbling, or getting burned, or getting some nasty disease full of all uncleanness and devil spirit. Where as we ARE NOT. You deal with these people and you are not just dealing with a person, you are dealing with a nest of devils and they can slap one on you in a second before you know what hit you. I've had them put spirits on me over the phone, let alone in person. Not only are they deceived they are DANGEROUS. One has only to look at church history to see that. Look at Michael Servetus. He thought that he could go into Calvin's territory, and he got literally BURNED for it.
God would really like his people to LIVE. Yes we live in a country where it's pretty hard for one Christian group to kill you, but don't think they'd stop for a minute if the laws were not the way there are. I've seen the MURDER in their eyes and filling their whole bodies, and were it not for the laws of this country they would in fact KILL YOU. And someday they are going to be able to do it again, even in this country. That is what the ecumenical movement is all about.
You know what the new "F" word is? Its "FUNDAMENTALIST". It use to be that a fundamentalist, was just one that took the Bible more literally, but the term has changed meaning in the ecumenical circle. Now it means not just one who takes the Bible literally, but anyone who dose not follow ecumenical doctrine. Those people who want to be separate and do not believe that you should just join up with any old church or religion regardless of differences in doctrine.
I tell you if you want to read something interesting you should read this whole essay that the Pontifical Biblical Commission wrote on all the different schools of Interpretation. They have accepted EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, except that is for what they call the "fundamentalist" interpretation. And you can just feel the venom coming out of them on that one. Of course they would say the same of me.
Quote: Finally, in its attachment to the principle "Scripture alone," fundamentalism separates the interpretation of the Bible from the tradition, which, guided by the Spirit, has authentically developed in union with Scripture in the heart of the community of faith.(in truer words, people possessed by devil spirits, who get false revelations on how to interpret scripture.) It fails to realize that the New Testament took form within the Christian church and that it is the Holy Scripture of this church, the existence of which preceded the composition of the texts. (They are saying that THE CHURCH has pre-eminence over the scripture.) Because of this, fundamentalism is often anti-church, it considers of little importance the creeds, the doctrines and liturgical practices which have become part of church tradition, as well as the teaching function of the church itself. It presents itself as a form of private interpretation which does not acknowledge that the church is founded on the Bible and draws its life and inspiration from Scripture. Pontifical biblical commission.
You can read it at: http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/PBCINTER.HTM#3
I mean they even accept the FEMINIST INTERPRETATION. They accept any interpretation as long as it doesn't deny the Churches right to rule over your life. I just have to add this part.
Quote: The fundamentalist approach is dangerous, for it is attractive to people who look to the Bible for ready answers to the problems of life. It can deceive these people, offering them interpretations that are pious but illusory, instead of telling them that the Bible does not necessarily contain an immediate answer to each and every problem. Without saying as much in so many words, fundamentalism actually invites people to a kind of intellectual suicide. It injects into life a false certitude, for it unwittingly confuses the divine substance of the biblical message with what are in fact its human limitations. pontifical biblical commision
I'll tell you what INTELLECTUAL SUICIDE is. It's letting these jerk wads interpret scripture for you. You see their big beef is PRIVATE INTERPRETATION, you are not supposed to read the bible and interpret it for yourself, your supposed to let them do it for you. I haven't hardly met a Catholic running who knows squat about the bible. In the town where I live it's mostly Catholic, all my neighbors are Catholic, and they know NOTHING of History in general, nor of the bible, nor even of Catholic history and they've gone to Church all their lives. Now they are good people, and I'm surrounded here by Marys in a bathtubs, and maicured lawns, but they are totally ignorant of what kind of thing they are really following. And what's worse is those bathtubs are worth some real money these days on the antique bathroom fixture market, and they're just rotting away half burried in the ground, with the statue of a dead woman in them. (I'm joking there by the way.)
Sorry but I don't think I'm the one that's DANGEROUS here. They will absolutely have to KILL me, before I would ever step foot in an ecumenical Church or support them in anyway.
In Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hobbes
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 63
| Posted 6/4/2004 5:20 AM (GMT -6) | | Larris,
You have thrown too much scripture out for me to respond to all this - I think that in general you connect scriptures and books that may not have any relationship to each other, like whether Jude was writing about the same men that had been kicked out of John's churches. That is not verifiable and there's no connection made in the books themselves. Plus the authorship of 2nd John is very debateable, it may be a century or more later than 1 John, we just don't know. BUT I basically agree with your conclusion. Remember that I previously wrote:
My contention is that, because of CENTURIES of the evolution of the Greek mode of thinking especially in the West, we have arrived at an overly rationalistic and literal way of thinking that makes it EXTREMELY difficult (if not impossible) for most of us to think like a Hebrew of Paul’s time, not to mention the centuries of Hebrew writing before the NT era. And so we have CENTURIES of philosophy and theology the content of which is applying Greek modes of thought to Hebrew texts – CENTURIES of arrogance, chauvinism, and just plain stupidity – even with the best of intentions and sincere seeking – masquerading as Truth. The result is an institution – Christianity – that is corrupt and rotten to the core. The nature of the problem is systemic and cannot be righted from within. Paul had to deal with God’s rejection of Israel and in so doing he stated, “…they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel…” Perhaps in the future, some apostle-like person will have to explain how “…not all Church is Church…”
This is one reason (there are others) why I don't go to church. It's systemically corrupted, and all the good, God-fearing people that are in it cannot change it. I have not attended anywhere since 1991. I think it would encourage you to know that there are vast numbers of people who have come to the same conclusion and have removed themselves. I personally know of hundreds. You remind me of Elijah - "Lord they have killed all your prophets and I alone am left." But what does the Lord say? "I have kept 7000 men for myself who have not bowed the knee to Baal."
- Hobbes | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/4/2004 10:32 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Hobbes,
I could not agree with you more about the corruption of the Church, the why and how. Right down the line there I agree with you whole heartedly.
By the way THANKYOU for accusing me of using TOO MUCH SCRIPTURE. That's a first. (I hope you know I'm kidding here, in a serioue way.)
You stated:You have thrown too much scripture out for me to respond to all this - I think that in general you connect scriptures and books that may not have any relationship to each other, like whether Jude was writing about the same men that had been kicked out of John's churches.
That's the word "MAY" not have any relationship, you can't prove it dose and you can't prove it dosen't. I don't expect you to believe me, but I KNOW it dose.
You stated:That is not verifiable and there's no connection made in the books themselves. Plus the authorship of 2nd John is very debateable, it may be a century or more later than 1 John, we just don't know.
Again you use the word "may", it "may" have been written a century or more later. You are going to have a lot of problems coming to a full knowledge of the truth since you have become fairly convinced that the cannon is corrupted. They try and feed you about what book may and what book may not have been written or should be there or not etc.
What you are dealing with in all this "cut the book out" stuff is the ultimate final form of Dispensational Interpretation. By interpretation they cut out most of the book anyway, except for the Pauline Epistles as being the ONLY ones written and APPLIED to anyone in this day and time. Then they figgured out a way to develope their own "textual criticism", and convince people that the actual books themselves didn't even belong in the bible.
What's more they still I don't think have the actual GUTS to flat out tell you the books they don't like are totally false and then print their own Bibles without them. They just plant the thought of "MAY NOT" in your head, and then every time you read them, IF you read them, you are questioning their authenticity. That is EXACTLY what they want, and these are the very same people, that you don't want to go to Church with.
I have a question for you. You said: "it EXTREMELY difficult (if not impossible) for most of us to think like a Hebrew of Paul’s time, not to mention the centuries of Hebrew writing before the NT era."
My question is WHY would you want to think like a "Hebrew durring Pauls time"? Weren't they the ones who's thinking was so screwed up they crucified their own messiah?
Weren't they the ones that also persecuted Paul?
My contention is that what you really want to do, is THINK like those who were originally initiated into the gospel of Christ, and who were both Jew and Gentile, Hebrew and Greek. Those people came out of the deception of BOTH SIDES. I can see that you are searching for the TRUTH, and the TRUTH lies no more in Hebrew thought than it dose in Greek thought, it lies in CHRIST. Once you know him really well, by knowing his teachings really well, it opens up the entire bible to you. Now HE was the true Hebrew, and his thoughts were RIGHT ON, where as his brethren were all kinds of messed up. He knew the Torah rightly and so he's the one to study.
In the love of Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hobbes
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2003
Total Posts : 63
| Posted 6/4/2004 2:02 PM (GMT -6) | | Larris: You are going to have a lot of problems coming to a full knowledge of the truth since you have become fairly convinced that the cannon is corrupted. They try and feed you about what book may and what book may not have been written or should be there or not etc.
Response: How would you respond to the following argument? The canon you speak of is the result of the choices of the corrupt church. It was not even defined until about 400AD. The very Greek-philosophy-influenced fathers –Eusebius, Augustine, and Jerome etc – that you reject defined it. It seems to me that you rail against their corrupting influence yet you accept a canon that THEY defined!?!?!? You assume that the WHOLE process of corruption that began while the apostles were still alive, that has permeated the church for 20 centuries, that has affected the church to the point where it is entirely and systemically corrupt, HAD NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER ON THE DEVELOPMENT AND DEFINITION OF THE PROTESTANT, (not Catholic, not Eastern Orthodox, not Ethiopian – which BTW includes the book of Enoch) CANON, WHICH IS THE ONE AND ONLY CANON PRESERVED BY GOD. I’m sorry, Larris, but it seems self-evident to me that the proposition that the canon is corrupt is the more logical, the more historically supportable, and the more reasonable assumption to hold. As far as I’m concerned the burden of proof is on the inerrantist, and you and I both know that inerrancy is not provable. You said, “…you can’t prove it does and you can’t prove it doesn’t.” Well, neither can you.
Larris: That's the word "MAY" not have any relationship, you can't prove it dose and you can't prove it doesn’t. I don't expect you to believe me, but I KNOW it does.
Response: Hello? That’s why I used the word, “MAY” – because nothing is provable or verifiable. You “KNOW” that you know. How do you know, Larris? I suspect you will say something like: “…the anointing you have received from Him remains within you, and you stand in no need of teaching from anyone; but as His anointing instructs you about everything and is true and is no lie…” I am sympathetic to you Larris but you must realize when you take a position like this all argument and dialog ceases. I am so sympathetic that I take it a step further than you do. I would make the same argument for discerning what is authentic or not, what passages have been interpolated, what is corrupt and what is not, etc.
Larris: My question is WHY would you want to think like a "Hebrew during Paul’s time"? Weren't they the ones who's thinking was so screwed up they crucified their own messiah?
Weren't they the ones that also persecuted Paul?
My contention is that what you really want to do, is THINK like those who were originally initiated into the gospel of Christ, and who were both Jew and Gentile, Hebrew and Greek. Those people came out of the deception of BOTH SIDES. I can see that you are searching for the TRUTH, and the TRUTH lies no more in Hebrew thought than it dose in Greek thought, it lies in CHRIST. Once you know him really well, by knowing his teachings really well, it opens up the entire bible to you. Now HE was the true Hebrew, and his thoughts were RIGHT ON, where as his brethren were all kinds of messed up. He knew the Torah rightly and so he's the one to study.
Response: In a previous response to Albert I said,
Perhaps Hebrew/Greek is a misnomer. I am thinking Hebrew = more balanced or integrated in terms of rational/intuitive and Greek = imbalanced or overbalanced on the rational, literal, sequential side of the equation. I think Larris has a point when she says the Hebrews had been Hellenized by NT times. Nicodemus would be an example of that. In a previous post to Larris I listed several characteristics of the way of thinking that I am putting under the category “intuitive.” The characteristics I listed (there are others as well) are what I am saying that we are deficient in. This deficiency in our way of thinking adversely affects our Bible reading because the Bible authors were NOT deficient in their ways of thinking, and so we do not get, many times, what they were really saying. Discerning and understanding metaphorical relationships is one of those characteristics.
I think that you and I are saying the same thing. I will retract the Hebrew/Greek nomenclature and redefine thusly:
Jesus’ way of thinking = balanced or integrated in terms of rational/intuitive. (I think when it comes to reading the Apostles we need to be very careful. I think they had a lot of residual crap in their thinking. Read Acts. Read how screwed up and hypocritical Peter is in Galatians. Read how amazed the apostles were when the Spirit fell on the Gentiles – which indicates Jewish chauvinism etc.)
Greek and Hellenized Hebrew way of thinking = imbalanced or overbalanced on the rational, literal, sequential side of the equation.
Would you agree with my redefinitions?
- Hobbes
| | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/4/2004 4:50 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Hobbes,
You said: This is one reason (there are others) why I don't go to church. It's systemically corrupted, and all the good, God-fearing people that are in it cannot change it. I have not attended anywhere since 1991. I think it would encourage you to know that there are vast numbers of people who have come to the same conclusion and have removed themselves. I personally know of hundreds. You remind me of Elijah - "Lord they have killed all your prophets and I alone am left." But what does the Lord say? "I have kept 7000 men for myself who have not bowed the knee to Baal."
Yes I know or have known many also, and also it was about 1991 that I left the ministry I had been in for 11 years. However though I sought a Church or somewhere to go I found nothing coming to the same conclusions as you. However I also found out that just because someone leaves the Chruch is no sign that they are not just as screwed up in their own way. They are in fact something to beware of just as those in the Church. Leaving the Church is no guarentee that you've found the truth. I leaned this the hard way, both from myself, and many of the things I thought and fell into and from those I came into contack with.
As for God having any amount whatsoever that have not bowed the knee to Baal so to speak, well there just aren't any. WE have ALL bowed the knee, howbeit we thought Baal was Christ, thought the lie was the truth. There is NOT ONE person on the face of the earth, that started out knowing the truth, everyone has been deceived.
As I state, we are in the process of simply recovering truth that has already been revealed and lost in the first century. As to cannon, I don't care if you combine all three, but one thing I know, that God is able to present us with enough of his accurate scripture to come to a knowledge of the truth be it Protestant, Orthodox or Catholic cannon. After all the Jews durring Jesus time had a cannon, that had been copied and recopied and didn't have one original manuscript. On top of that they had been taken into captivity, had adopted Greek thought, perverted the understanding just like the Gentiles did afterwards. YET Jesus trusted the scriptures he had.
For that matter we could throw the entire New Testament away IF we knew or kept what Jesus taught and then find what the apostles taught out of the Old Testament. After all that's what they preached Christ out of.
BUT if God was able to give Jesus and those in the first century all those books of the Torah and they thought that they were good enough and accurate enough to come to a knowledge of the truth, then WHY is it so hard to believe that God could do the same for us? REGARDLESS of the corruption of Greek philosophy in the Chruch Fathers, which was no different than the corruption in the Pharisees, Saducees and Scribes.
FOR ME, it's really a matter of believing that God is ABLE, and he did it. Then once I accept and believe that God is able to give me enough writings to come to an accurate knowledge of the truth, THEN as I emerse myself in those writings, leaning to remember and do as they say, those writings become alive and living and do exactly what Jesus said they would do.
The true word of God is POWERFUL it causes and effect when it's understood and believed. IF there's more word out there, then GREAT, but I know FOR ME, that just having the protestant cannon, has given my GREAT LIFE. In fact some of the very books they question have led me to the greatest understandng and given me the greatest personal deliverance. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the WORD of God. The scriptures have always been the primary WORD OF GOD after they were once given to holy men who spoke as they were moved by the holy spirit. The words Jesus spoke were spirit and they were life, those same words WRITTEN down, and believed and acted upon produce the SAME LIFE that they produced when he spoke them in person.
I love them I respect them, I believe them. That's not something you can't convince someone else of though. I can't prove them to you, I believe because I want to believe. And I'm just glad I do. That's not to say that there is not a "word" hear and there that hasn't been corrupted or added or taken out et. But on the whole they present a lovely consistent message.
Peter was a man subject to like passons as we are, and yet unlike Jesus, and more like us he sinned. I doubt if you or I would have responded any differently that he did when under the social governmental pressure of the Jews. But in the end he held it all together. Paul also constantly went against his mission, which was to the Gentiles, because of his weakness for his brethren according to the flesh. Yet God managed to work in failing human beings to leave a message that as far as I am concerned jells together with everything else in the bible once it is understood properly. I have to use a LOT of scripture because as far as I've seen it ALL fits perfectly.
I don't believe that Greek thought and Greek philosophy actually changed the Scriptures in and of themselves. They didn't have to, because their methods of interpretation allowed one to change the meaning without actually changing the words themselves. So I'm not really overly concerned with to much error in that manner. Even thou those men who helped put the cannon together were infested with Greek philosophy, they had one thing going for them, in essence they had a reverence for the documents themselves. They just messed up in interpreting them.
You said: Greek and Hellenized Hebrew way of thinking = imbalanced or overbalanced on the rational, literal, sequential side of the equation. Would you agree with my redefinitions?
No, I'm sorry I don't think they really did that, though they made it LOOK like they did that. They were literal on what they wanted to be literal on and they were allegorical on what they wanted to be allegorical on. It just depended on what the wanted to believe and what they were trying to prove was "RATIONAL" to them. As I have said a few times "Aristotle" was not as logical and rational as he tried to make and succeeded in making people believe when it came to spiritual matters.
I tell you I really think you would enjoy Bullinger's Figures of Speech used in the bible. Many times what seems to be "figuritive" or allegorical symbolic language is nothing more than a way of expressing something LITERAL, something REAL in discriptive language so as to EMPHISIZE certain aspects of it. Often in prophecy God used similies and metiphors to describe things of which there was no word for yet, and did not as yet exist. Like the apostate CHURCH for instance. That things all over the Old Testament if you know what to look for, the word used to describe a "word" and an "organism", that did not as yet exist.
I really have enjoyed our conversations Hobbes, and I have a lot of respect for your knowledge and the fact that you understand just how much Greek thought has influenced not only the way we think about the bible but our culture in general. Not many people understand that. I always say that if you were in Rome doing as the Romans do, you would actually be doing as the Greeks did.
In the love of christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
| 102 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:46 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|