Bible Study Dividing the Word of Truth

[Brother Mike]

You are most definitely correct in that sentiment, it is a condition of the heart. What is the condition of our heart when we study. Do we stand with pride and self-righteousness in our hearts that cause us to hear the word of God as if we are the one's delivering the condemnation, or has our hearts been prepared that we might be able to receive the word of God as the one receiving the condemnation?

Well, the question you asked is "HOW" to rightly divide the Word of Truth. The other part of that scripture was to be a Workman. They are connected.

Looking at the responses, you see the normal human reasoning involved as with lots of responses on the forum. If you want the answer, I'll give it to you. If you want it. I have learned more and more not to expound to those who do not seek, or reveal to those who do not care. Jesus actually told us. How to divide the Word of truth correctly, how to know what is right?

So, it's the condition of the heart "BEFORE" we study. Any person can increase in knowledge, but still be lost to the power of the knowledge gained. There is certainly no power to use knowledge to condemn someone or use scripture against them that does not lift up and help them.

Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
(2Ti 3:7)

There is a blindness the comes on those who do not meet the Lord's One condition. You will see it in their lives, the way they talk, and conduct themselves. When you see bad doctrine, this will always be present in their life. You will notice it right away, once you know what your looking for.

Unless this is changed, no amount of Hermeneutics, human reasoning, and study will help. It also explains why there are bad places people call church and always will be.

Be blessed, thank you for responding.

 

[ezrider]

Well, the question you asked is "HOW" to rightly divide the Word of Truth. The other part of that scripture was to be a Workman. They are connected.

Looking at the responses, you see the normal human reasoning involved as with lots of responses on the forum. If you want the answer, I'll give it to you. If you want it. I have learned more and more not to expound to those who do not seek, or reveal to those who do not care. Jesus actually told us. How to divide the Word of truth correctly, how to know what is right?

Thank you Brother Mike, I asked the question how? not that I would have someone to teach me, but rather to start a discussion about what people think it means to them to rightly divide the word of truth. How lightly do they take it, or to what depths are they conscious of when they study the scripture to rightly divide the word of truth. I have found most often people are not open to receiving truth if it differs from their own beliefs and dogmas, and so I simply ask the question so that in their desire to share their wisdom, they might begin to question their own beliefs in light of what is said.

You are 100% correct in that it begins with the heart, and truthfully, it ends with the heart as well. But outside of the heart, I am talking about rightly diving the word of truth in a sense as a historical document. You must understand the history to give it proper context. As night was divided from the day, the old covenant was divide from the new covenant, the works of the law divide from the righteousness of Faith through Grace. As Israel was divided apart from the Gentile and separated unto God only to be brought to their destruction for their disobedience, where they are sown again with the seed of man and the seed of beast, no different than the Gentiles they held themselves above, subject to the Kingdom of Christ.

When we study the scripture to show ourselves approved, by rightly dividing the word of truth, do we do so by listening to the Word as it comes from Mt Sinai, or do we hear the Word as it comes forth form Mt. Zion?

 

[Brother Mike]

Thank you Brother Mike, I asked the question how? not that I would have someone to teach me, but rather to start a discussion about what people think it means to them to rightly divide the word of truth. How lightly do they take it, or to what depths are they conscious of when they study the scripture to rightly divide the word of truth. I have found most often people are not open to receiving truth if it differs from their own beliefs and dogmas, and so I simply ask the question so that in their desire to share their wisdom, they might begin to question their own beliefs in light of what is said.

You are 100% correct in that it begins with the heart, and truthfully, it ends with the heart as well. But outside of the heart, I am talking about rightly diving the word of truth in a sense as a historical document. You must understand the history to give it proper context. As night was divided from the day, the old covenant was divide from the new covenant, the works of the law divide from the righteousness of Faith through Grace. As Israel was divided apart from the Gentile and separated unto God only to be brought to their destruction for their disobedience, where they are sown again with the seed of man and the seed of beast, no different than the Gentiles they held themselves above, subject to the Kingdom of Christ.

When we study the scripture to show ourselves approved, by rightly dividing the word of truth, do we do so by listening to the Word as it comes from Mt Sinai, or do we hear the Word as it comes forth form Mt. Zion?

Well, you have that right. MOST don't receive past their wrong thinking, Nor accept if it requires them to change and believe something.
If you wanted to discuss this with others, then I can bale out of it. Lot's of times I post and folks don't post because they don't want busted out on a scripture or they feel they might not word something correct. Even Reba here recently asked me to stay out and let the folks talk which is a good thing. I don't want to mess your discussion up, so let me know.

Dividing the Word of Truth, to be a Workman and having it correct as God intended comes to one thing. I'll explain it to you.

First, wanting to be a Workman is a requirement to rightly dividing the Word of Truth.

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
(2Ti 2:15)

A workman is a job title here. Just like the Sower sows the Word, the job is sowing. He that is able to minister seed to the "Sower" and multiply your seed sown......... That is someone who lives on Giving to the Kingdom and receiving.

So the first qualification is to be sold out to the Lord Jesus and He must be Lord over everything you do in Life. His disciple, His Workman.
Many here fall way short here and their doctrine and belief system shows that. Jesus is not first, scripture is just a hobby, and they do what the want to do with their life. A lot here don't even care to go to church, so no wonder their doctrine is off because they don't qualify to be able to rightly divide the Word of Truth.

Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.
(Joh 7:16-17)

The qualification to know truth is to first get it set in your heart to do the Will of God. If that part in a persons heart is right, Jesus said HE SHALL KNOW.

If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
(Luk 14:26-27)

He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
(Joh 14:21)

To get something precious as revelation knowledge in the Word, you have to honor and put above all else the person giving the revelation.

You cant tell's who is first in someone's life by just looking through their check book. You can have only one first.

Believers for the most part Marry who they want, Go to School for what they want, Take whatever Job they want, will move and buy a house when the want. Then they go find a church close by.

They don't qualify as a Workman or to get revelation.

If a person is set to serve and only do what the Lord says do, then no matter how bad a church they start in, the Lord is always faithful to get them to the right place. They qualify for what Jesus said.

Even those in Ministry are doing their own thing, not what the Lord actually called them to do. They start up food pantries, but did the Lord say start up a food pantry? They start up bible study groups, but did the Lord say start up bible study groups.Their works are burned up, and their knowledge is tainted.

People tell kids they can be whatever they want to be when they grow up........ NO, NO, NO, they are suppose to find out what God would have them do when they grow up.

I think you get the point. It has nothing to do with study, or how you study. Jesus said, if a man will do the will of God, the shall know sound doctrine.

Be blessed.

 

[reba]

Even Reba here recently asked me to stay out and let the folks talk which is a good thing. I don't want to mess your discussion up, so let me know.

NO Mike i ask you to back off .. you understood me to say "stay out " so i made it clear and tagged you... That was misunderstanding your post above a misrepresentation .

A section of 2.4 It is a violation to misquote or misrepresent another member. Do not flood a forum or thread with similar posts, or many posts in succession. Allow others a chance to speak and be heard. If you are responding to multiple posts in the same thread, please consider using the multi-quote feature. Please refrain from taking a thread too far off topic.

 

[Brother Mike]

NO Mike i ask you to back off .. you understood me to say "stay out " so i made it clear and tagged you... That was misunderstanding your post above a misrepresentation .

A section of 2.4 It is a violation to misquote or misrepresent another member. Do not flood a forum or thread with similar posts, or many posts in succession. Allow others a chance to speak and be heard. If you are responding to multiple posts in the same thread, please consider using the multi-quote feature. Please refrain from taking a thread too far off topic.

Your wish is always my command, you know that.

 

[reba]

Your wish is always my command, you know that.

OK good to know, my wish is you drop the snarky remarks.

 

[ezrider]

I am not seeking a debate in this thread to say I am right or someone else is wrong, and I am not here to argue over doctrine. We are all individuals with our own unique relationship with the Lord, and in saying that, then there is no need to feel like we should judge one another over doctrine, our Salvation is in the Lord; your salvation is not in my hands, but your own, and your own relationship with the Lord. There is no need for me to question that. I only seek a friendly discussion about how and why we might or would divide the word of truth.

Getting back to the topic of dividing the word of truth. Are you able to divide the old covenant from the new covenant. I think Jethro Bodine was more on target with the approach that he cited, and for simplicities sake, that is to say that scripture should be examined in light of all other scripture. With this I do not disagree. But with that, I feel there is a much greater depth to rightly dividing the word of truth.

There are some who would say that there are discrepancies within the scripture, while others say that there are no discrepancies, you just don't understand it correctly. I would say the Bible might appear to have discrepancies, because it has not been rightly divided. If I were to say is is daytime in the world right now, someone on the other side of the world might say I am crazy, for it is nighttime in the world. As the night was divided from the day, so to has wrath been divided from salvation.

Maybe you can offer you thoughts Jethro Bodine, but it seems to me that in trying to make one scripture stand up to all the rest of the scripture creates an environment where one might begin to feel compelled, consciously or unconsciously, to begin twisting certain of the scripture that it might reinforce their own doctrines? So when we are viewing one scripture in light of the rest of the scripture, how do we rightly divide those scriptures that so we might understand it under its proper light?

The commandment of the Father was to Hear His Son. Jesus said my sheep hear my voice. There are many voices to be heard when reading the scriptures, whom do you listen to? Do you listen to the spirit of Moses? Do you listen to the spirit of Elijah? Or do you listen to and hear the Spirit of Christ?

 

[dianegcook]

I am not seeking a debate in this thread to say I am right or someone else is wrong, and I am not here to argue over doctrine. We are all individuals with our own unique relationship with the Lord, and in saying that, then there is no need to feel like we should judge one another over doctrine, our Salvation is in the Lord; your salvation is not in my hands, but your own, and your own relationship with the Lord. There is no need for me to question that. I only seek a friendly discussion about how and why we might or would divide the word of truth.

Getting back to the topic of dividing the word of truth. Are you able to divide the old covenant from the new covenant. I think Jethro Bodine was more on target with the approach that he cited, and for simplicities sake, that is to say that scripture should be examined in light of all other scripture. With this I do not disagree. But with that, I feel there is a much greater depth to rightly dividing the word of truth.

There are some who would say that there are discrepancies within the scripture, while others say that there are no discrepancies, you just don't understand it correctly. I would say the Bible might appear to have discrepancies, because it has not been rightly divided. If I were to say is is daytime in the world right now, someone on the other side of the world might say I am crazy, for it is nighttime in the world. As the night was divided from the day, so to has wrath been divided from salvation.

Maybe you can offer you thoughts Jethro Bodine, but it seems to me that in trying to make one scripture stand up to all the rest of the scripture creates an environment where one might begin to feel compelled, consciously or unconsciously, to begin twisting certain of the scripture that it might reinforce their own doctrines? So when we are viewing one scripture in light of the rest of the scripture, how do we rightly divide those scriptures that so we might understand it under its proper light?

The commandment of the Father was to Hear His Son. Jesus said my sheep hear my voice. There are many voices to be heard when reading the scriptures, whom do you listen to? Do you listen to the spirit of Moses? Do you listen to the spirit of Elijah? Or do you listen to and hear the Spirit of Christ?

Isn't all scripture from the Spirit of God, be it the old or the new?
Jesus Quoted from the old.
But I do like the Word of Christ better.

 

[TimothyW]

Copy and paste from Strong's for "rightly dividing"

G3718
ὀρθοτομέω
orthotomeō
or-thot-om-eh'-o
From a compound of G3717 and the base of G5114; to make a straight cut, that is, (figuratively) to dissect (expound) correctly (the divine message): - rightly divide.

G3717
ὀρθός
orthos
or-thos'
Probably from the base of G3735; right (as rising), that is, (perpendicularly) erect (figuratively honest), or (horizontally) level or direct: - straight, upright.

G3735
ὄρος
oros
or'-os
Probably a from an obsolete word ὄρω orō (to rise or “rear”; perhaps akin to G142; compare G3733); a mountain (as lifting itself above the plain): - hill, mount (-ain).

G142
αἴρω
airō
ah'ee-ro
A primary verb; to lift; by implication to take up or away; figuratively to raise (the voice), keep in suspense (the mind); specifically to sail away (that is, weigh anchor); by Hebraism (compare [H5375]) to expiate sin: - away with, bear (up), carry, lift up, loose, make to doubt, put away, remove, take (away, up).

G3733
ὄρνις
ornis
or'-nis
Probably from a prolonged form of the base of G3735; a bird (as rising in the air), that is, (specifically) a hen (or female domestic fowl): - hen.
H5375
נסה נשׂא
nâśâ' nâsâh
naw-saw', naw-saw'
A primitive root; to lift, in a great variety of applications, literally and figuratively, absolutely and relatively: - accept, advance, arise, (able to, [armour], suffer to) bear (-er, up), bring (forth), burn, carry (away), cast, contain, desire, ease, exact, exalt (self), extol, fetch, forgive, furnish, further, give, go on, help, high, hold up, honourable (+ man), lade, lay, lift (self) up, lofty, marry, magnify, X needs, obtain, pardon, raise (up), receive, regard, respect, set (up), spare, stir up, + swear, take (away, up), X utterly, wear, yield.

I like this.
There is one more part of "orthotomeo" to consider,
τομώτερος, to cut.
In 2 Timothy 2:15, Paul tells Timothy to be a good worker, one who cuts straight. Handle the scriptures like a good carpenter, a good carpenter make straight cuts in the wood, so that the house will not be crooked. This is the same advice Paul gives in 1 Corinthians 3:12,
"Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;"
A good worker will build using "gold, silver, precious stones", maybe wood.
A poor worker will use hay or stubble.

Cut straight, and build well.

 

[JLB]

,

Example: Matt.24:
Whom, speaking to disciples
Where, buildings of the temple
What, when shall these things be, what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the world.

Here is an example of needing to rightly divide the word in Matthew 24.

Matthew 24 starts off in the Temple area and then shifts to a private discussion on the Mount of Olives, which is a privates teaching with His disciples, the future leaders of the Church.

1 Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple.
2 And Jesus said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

These statements took place in the Temple area.

After that, verse 3 defines for us specifically, that they were now on the Mount of Olives, in which Jesus was seated and speaking privately to His Disciples.

3Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"

Luke gives us a more detailed perspective of what was said in the Temple area.


1 And He looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury,
2 and He saw also a certain poor widow putting in two mites.
3 So He said, "Truly I say to you that this poor widow has put in more than all;
4 for all these out of their abundance have put in offerings for God, but she out of her poverty put in all the livelihood that she had."
5 Then, as some spoke of the temple, how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations, He said,
6 "These things which you see--the days will come in which not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down."
7So they asked Him, saying, "Teacher, but when will these things be? And what sign will there be when these things are about to take place?" Luke 21:1-7

These words were clearly spoken while in the Temple area, and in context were about the Temple.

The private discussion shifts the focus to His Coming and the end of the age, as prophesied by Zechariah.


JLB

 

[reba]

Even been in the living room talking about the kitchen, or been in the store talking about your home... Ever been in your local church talking about your town?
JLB Who What and Where is Jesus talking about here?
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Do we 'rightly divide ' the Scriptures differently for different passages ?

 

[dianegcook]

Here is an example of needing to rightly divide the word in Matthew 24.

Matthew 24 starts off in the Temple area and then shifts to a private discussion on the Mount of Olives, which is a privates teaching with His disciples, the future leaders of the Church.

1 Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple.
2 And Jesus said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

These statements took place in the Temple area.

After that, verse 3 defines for us specifically, that they were now on the Mount of Olives, in which Jesus was seated and speaking privately to His Disciples.

3Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"

Luke gives us a more detailed perspective of what was said in the Temple area.


1 And He looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury,
2 and He saw also a certain poor widow putting in two mites.
3 So He said, "Truly I say to you that this poor widow has put in more than all;
4 for all these out of their abundance have put in offerings for God, but she out of her poverty put in all the livelihood that she had."
5 Then, as some spoke of the temple, how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations, He said,
6 "These things which you see--the days will come in which not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down."
7So they asked Him, saying, "Teacher, but when will these things be? And what sign will there be when these things are about to take place?" Luke 21:1-7

These words were clearly spoken while in the Temple area, and in context were about the Temple.

The private discussion shifts the focus to His Coming and the end of the age, as prophesied by Zechariah.


JLB

Yep, better than my short example!

 

[dianegcook]

Even been in the living room talking about the kitchen, or been in the store talking about your home... Ever been in your local church talking about your town?
JLB Who What and Where is Jesus talking about here?
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Do we 'rightly divide ' the Scriptures differently for different passages ?

Good question Reba
I go back to verse 16, when Simon Peter answered Jesus, to whom does He think I am.
Peter (movable rock) answered, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Now, some believe that the rock, which He spoke of was Peter, which Jesus said, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock, I will build my church.
But it is in my belief, that what Peter said was what the Rock meant, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
So the whom was Peter, the what is about Whom He is, and upon this, He builds His church. Where, coast of Caesarea Philippi, where He asked His disciples, whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

Luke 9:20
Peter answered The Christ of God.
John 6:65
Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come to me, except it were given unto him of My Father.
69, Peter said , And we believe and are sure that Thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
Heb.12:28
Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear,
For our God is a consuming fire.

The song of Moses: Deut.32:4
He is the Rock, His work is perfect, for all His ways are judgment, a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is He.

 

[JLB]

Even been in the living room talking about the kitchen, or been in the store talking about your home... Ever been in your local church talking about your town?
JLB Who What and Where is Jesus talking about here?
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Do we 'rightly divide ' the Scriptures differently for different passages ?

The discussion in the Temple area was specifically about the buildings of the Temple.

The question asked to Jesus privately about His Coming and the end of the age, was on the mount of Olives, hence the name "The Olivet Discourse".

People don't call it the "Temple Discourse" because it did not take place in the Temple area, unlike the first two verses of Matthew 24.

The Olivet Discourse, which takes place on the Mount of Olives, makes no mention what so ever, of the events of 70 AD.

How could anyone come to the conclusion that everything in Matthew 24 & 25 is about the events of 70 AD, could only be the result of not rightly dividing the word of truth.

Here are the final words of the Plivet Discourse.

Do you honestly believe this happened in 70 AD?

31 "When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory.
32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats.
33 And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, 'Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in;
36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.'
37 Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink?
38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You?
39 Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?'
40 And the King will answer and say to them, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.'
41 Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink;
43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.'
44 Then they also will answer Him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?'
45Then He will answer them, saying, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.'
46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."


Do you honestly believe Jesus has returned with His angels and cast the unrighteousness into hell with the devil and his angels?


JLB

 

[twinc]

as stated in one of the posts 'ever learning but never coming to the knowledge of the truth['2 Tim3:7] as stated by Peter 'thou art the Christ the son of the living God" for everything that is written is written so that we may[continue to] simply simply believe that Jesus is the Christ the son of God [Jn.20:31] and simply simply believing this we may have life in His name - twinc

 

[reba]

Again JLB you dont answer..

 

[reba]

Good question Reba
I go back to verse 16, when Simon Peter answered Jesus, to whom does He think I am.
Peter (movable rock) answered, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Now, some believe that the rock, which He spoke of was Peter, which Jesus said, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock, I will build my church.
But it is in my belief, that what Peter said was what the Rock meant, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
So the whom was Peter, the what is about Whom He is, and upon this, He builds His church. Where, coast of Caesarea Philippi, where He asked His disciples, whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

I agree Dianegcook... that was my point...

 

[ezrider]

Isn't all scripture from the Spirit of God, be it the old or the new?
Jesus Quoted from the old.
But I do like the Word of Christ better.

That is the point of this thread. Yes all scripture is inspired by the Spirit of God. But the question is; which voice?

For example, it is written that John the Baptist came in the Spirit of Elijah. Was the Spirit of Elijah of the Spirit of God?

We find a story in Luke 9:54-55 where the Jesus and the disciples were turned away from a certain town, and the disciples asked if he would call down fire from heaven as Elijah, to which Jesus rebuked them saying know you not what Spirit you are of?

 

[ezrider]

Here is an example of needing to rightly divide the word in Matthew 24.

Matthew 24 starts off in the Temple area and then shifts to a private discussion on the Mount of Olives, which is a privates teaching with His disciples, the future leaders of the Church.

1 Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple.
2 And Jesus said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

These statements took place in the Temple area.

After that, verse 3 defines for us specifically, that they were now on the Mount of Olives, in which Jesus was seated and speaking privately to His Disciples.

Yep, better than my short example!

Before I make my comment, I would like to remind everyone that this a Bible study forum, this is not a debate forum. The focus of this OP and study is more on how we study the Bible in rightly dividing the word of truth, not in what we actually believe a scripture to say. With that said, JLB has given you his example of "rightly dividing" the word of truth. But I ask in all seriousness if you actually payed attention to the reasoning that JLB gave for dividing this particular passage? Because they left the temple and walked to the mount.

So let me ask you a question Diane, if I were to ask you out for a movie and dinner, and we had just left the theater commenting to one another on how good we thought the movie was, and that it had made and impression upon us, that after we take a short drive we sit down for dinner at a nice quiet restaurant where we continue to discuss the movie we had just seen. Maybe one of us says that they would enjoy seeing it again, to which the other of us says when are you going? Now, because we started talking about the movie as we left the theater, and continued talking about the movie when we sat down to dinner, did the context of our conversation change? Did we start talking about a different movie just because of our location? I'm sorry, but that sounds kind of silly to me.

So lets look at the scripture for a moment that JLB cited for his example.

The subject begins with the temple, and the destruction of the temple. So let me ask you a question, was the temple being discussed of service to the Old Covenant of Laws and Ordinances in the service of God, or are they talking of the temple of God under the New Covenant according to the promise made with Abraham?

Jesus was also considered a prophet, and a prophet is always sent before the judgement comes to proclaim it, and give them space to repent of their ways. The Judgement of God had been proclaimed in the destruction of the Temple, their place of worship under the Old Covenant Law. It was to this Judgement that the disciples were questioning when they asked what would be the sign of his coming. What is the sign of your coming judgement?

Now consider this for just a moment. When the disciples asked Jesus this question, what will be the sign of thy coming? They still did not understand that he was leaving them and that he would be crucified. The concept of the disciples asking about a "second" coming is inconceivable when the disciples supposed that Jesus was to take his place upon throne of David at that time. You can read of their misunderstanding in Luke 24.

Again, please do no make this a debate about our interpretations of these scriptures. JLB has shared with you how he thought to rightly divide the word of truth. I have given you some food for thought that you might consider for yourself.

 

[JLB]

Before I make my comment, I would like to remind everyone that this a Bible study forum, this is not a debate forum. The focus of this OP and study is more on how we study the Bible in rightly dividing the word of truth, not in what we actually believe a scripture to say. With that said, JLB has given you his example of "rightly dividing" the word of truth. But I ask in all seriousness if you actually payed attention to the reasoning that JLB gave for dividing this particular passage? Because they left the temple and walked to the mount.

So let me ask you a question Diane, if I were to ask you out for a movie and dinner, and we had just left the theater commenting to one another on how good we thought the movie was, and that it had made and impression upon us, that after we take a short drive we sit down for dinner at a nice quiet restaurant where we continue to discuss the movie we had just seen. Maybe one of us says that they would enjoy seeing it again, to which the other of us says when are you going? Now, because we started talking about the movie as we left the theater, and continued talking about the movie when we sat down to dinner, did the context of our conversation change? Did we start talking about a different movie just because of our location? I'm sorry, but that sounds kind of silly to me.

So lets look at the scripture for a moment that JLB cited for his example.

The subject begins with the temple, and the destruction of the temple. So let me ask you a question, was the temple being discussed of service to the Old Covenant of Laws and Ordinances in the service of God, or are they talking of the temple of God under the New Covenant according to the promise made with Abraham?

Jesus was also considered a prophet, and a prophet is always sent before the judgement comes to proclaim it, and give them space to repent of their ways. The Judgement of God had been proclaimed in the destruction of the Temple, their place of worship under the Old Covenant Law. It was to this Judgement that the disciples were questioning when they asked what would be the sign of his coming. What is the sign of your coming judgement?

Now consider this for just a moment. When the disciples asked Jesus this question, what will be the sign of thy coming? They still did not understand that he was leaving them and that he would be crucified. The concept of the disciples asking about a "second" coming is inconceivable when the disciples supposed that Jesus was to take his place upon throne of David at that time. You can read of their misunderstanding in Luke 24.

Again, please do no make this a debate about our interpretations of these scriptures. JLB has shared with you how he thought to rightly divide the word of truth. I have given you some food for thought that you might consider for yourself.

Your food for thought assumes many things that were not mentioned in the Olivet Discourse by Jesus.

There is simply no mention of the events of 70 AD in the Olivet Discourse at all, the reason being, Jesus is referring to the prophecy of Zechariah, which clearly has nothing to do with the events of 70 AD, and everything to do with the return of Jesus Christ, in which "every eye will see Him"...

And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn. Zechariah 12:10

And again

And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, Which faces Jerusalem on the east...Zechariah 14:4

Again -

Thus the Lord my God will come, And all the saints with You. Zechariah 14:6


By rightly dividing the word, and seeing the discussion about the Temple in the Temple area, and the question that was asked of Him on the Mount of Olives about His Coming, we can easily rule out the Olivet Discourse was about the events of 70 AD.

Then when you add the irrefutable fact that Jesus only comes a second time, according to Hebrews 9:28, and the fact that the resurrection of the dead takes place when He comes again, and the fact that the wicked will be removed from the earth when He comes again, it becomes crystal clear that the Olivet Discourse is clearly not about the events of 70 AD, even though Jesus returns to the same city, that the Romans destroyed in 70 AD.

Rightly dividing the events that took place in Jerusalem in 70 AD, and the events that will take place at the Coming of the Lord back to Jerusalem at the end of the age, is how we can understand that Full Preterism is Heresy, just like this Forum Staff has declared.

JLB