A Thought on Understanding Holy Scripture

[Eddie42]

It is too common in discussing Scripture, that different understandings of a verse or passage end up in a debate to prove oneself right, rather than to use the opposing view as a reason to study deeper. We all hate to be wrong, it is human nature, but if we truly seek the truth of God, we do injustice to ourselves not to consider the opposing view and look at one's one interpretation and explain both sides of a seemingly or apparent contradiction. I have found several obvious, violations of common sense we make. I'll mention one for consideration.

Paul in Gal. 3:16 makes a profound statement based on one single word, "seed" instead of "seeds". It is often said "Words have meaning!" and in the Scripture we must pay attention to this. An example is when dealing with the Watchtower organization which knocks on your door and tries to teach that the Son of God is a created being. They will use the revered KJV and point out that in Col. 1:15 it reads "firstborn of every creature" so he is a creature thay say... then they go to Rev. 3:14 "the beginning of creation", to bolster their deceit. When using the KJV, it pays to use the 1828 Webster's since it is close to the time period, the 1769 revision of the KJV. In the Webster's it is "first-born" and with our Bible software it is so easy to see the definition of first-born that fits the context of Col.1:15 and likewise about "beginning" in Rev. 3:14. (If not in your Bible software, use 'onelook.com' for the 1828 Webster's.)

FIRST'-BORN, a.
1. First brought forth; first in the order of nativity; eldest; as the first-born son.
2. Most excellent; most distinguished or exalted. Christ is called the first-born of every creature. Col 1.

BEGIN'NING, n. The first cause; origin.
I am the beginning and the ending. Rev 1.

The Watchtower is notorious for deceitful, improper definition by ignoring the biblical context. They then assemble fraudulent 'proof texts', each of which is taken out of context, to support their lies.

Among professed Christians a similar problem can be solved by using a dictionary. It helps with this verse: "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." (Jas 2:24, KJV) While in most NT cases "justification" is God declaring one just, there is another use of the word. The 1828 Webster's defines thus:

JUST'IFY, v.t. [L. justus, just,and facio, to make.]
1. To prove or show to be just, or conformable to law, right, justice, propriety or duty; to defend or maintain; to vindicate as right.

By going into the context we find the preceding definition fits: "Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works." (Jas 2:18, KJV) "Justified" is used in this manner in Rom. 3:4. Then, the example given about Abraham proves this understanding. It reads: "But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?" (Jas 2:20-21, KJV)

This proves the point because Abraham was declared righteous by faith in chapter 15, "And he [Abram] believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness." (Gen 15:6, KJV) Then the offering of Isaac as a sacrifice came later in chapter 22, after he was then called "Abraham". His offering of Isaac showed, proved he was righteous or justified.

On occasion there can be a difference in the Hebrew or Greek that our English is based upon, or where competent Bible scholars differ on the proper meaning and definition of a word where there is no manuscript difference. These do not effect cardinal doctrines, but are very risky to be dogmatic about in other matters. Maybe this is where things like in Romans 14 come into play.

 

[eddif]

Ok.

I will allow you to decide who I am or what group you think I belong,

One seed placed in the ground with genetic information, can come to life and have growth itself and provide other seeds of the same type. The plant may provide nourishment also,

Jesus being the one seed ( Word become flesh) ultimately became a quickening spirit that seeks to knock on our door.



The physical seed of creation teaches the concept in the physical context.

The hearts of men are where the seed of the Word is planted. More spiritual context but the same concept.

Perhaps we will not debate but see the ultimate concept in a host of context areas. Romans 1:20

Mississippi redneck
eddif

 

[choir loft]

It is too common in discussing Scripture, that different understandings of a verse or passage end up in a debate to prove oneself right, rather than to use the opposing view as a reason to study deeper. We all hate to be wrong, it is human nature, but if we truly seek the truth of God, we do injustice to ourselves not to consider the opposing view and look at one's one interpretation and explain both sides of a seemingly or apparent contradiction. I have found several obvious, violations of common sense we make. I'll mention one for consideration.

Paul in Gal. 3:16 makes a profound statement based on one single word, "seed" instead of "seeds". It is often said "Words have meaning!" and in the Scripture we must pay attention to this. An example is when dealing with the Watchtower organization which knocks on your door and tries to teach that the Son of God is a created being. They will use the revered KJV and point out that in Col. 1:15 it reads "firstborn of every creature" so he is a creature thay say... then they go to Rev. 3:14 "the beginning of creation", to bolster their deceit. When using the KJV, it pays to use the 1828 Webster's since it is close to the time period, the 1769 revision of the KJV. In the Webster's it is "first-born" and with our Bible software it is so easy to see the definition of first-born that fits the context of Col.1:15 and likewise about "beginning" in Rev. 3:14. (If not in your Bible software, use 'onelook.com' for the 1828 Webster's.)

FIRST'-BORN, a.
1. First brought forth; first in the order of nativity; eldest; as the first-born son.
2. Most excellent; most distinguished or exalted. Christ is called the first-born of every creature. Col 1.

BEGIN'NING, n. The first cause; origin.
I am the beginning and the ending. Rev 1.

The Watchtower is notorious for deceitful, improper definition by ignoring the biblical context. They then assemble fraudulent 'proof texts', each of which is taken out of context, to support their lies.

Among professed Christians a similar problem can be solved by using a dictionary. It helps with this verse: "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." (Jas 2:24, KJV) While in most NT cases "justification" is God declaring one just, there is another use of the word. The 1828 Webster's defines thus:

JUST'IFY, v.t. [L. justus, just,and facio, to make.]
1. To prove or show to be just, or conformable to law, right, justice, propriety or duty; to defend or maintain; to vindicate as right.

By going into the context we find the preceding definition fits: "Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works." (Jas 2:18, KJV) "Justified" is used in this manner in Rom. 3:4. Then, the example given about Abraham proves this understanding. It reads: "But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?" (Jas 2:20-21, KJV)

This proves the point because Abraham was declared righteous by faith in chapter 15, "And he [Abram] believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness." (Gen 15:6, KJV) Then the offering of Isaac as a sacrifice came later in chapter 22, after he was then called "Abraham". His offering of Isaac showed, proved he was righteous or justified.

On occasion there can be a difference in the Hebrew or Greek that our English is based upon, or where competent Bible scholars differ on the proper meaning and definition of a word where there is no manuscript difference. These do not effect cardinal doctrines, but are very risky to be dogmatic about in other matters. Maybe this is where things like in Romans 14 come into play.

I agree with your observation that errors in Biblical interpretation are due to a lack of common sense. Common sense isn't very common these days. Therefore other reasons for false interpretation must be identified.

In my experience there are two major reasons for heretical interpretations of scripture. One is a lack of religious education and the other is a centuries old anti-semitic attitude. Both are rooted in Roman Catholic dogma, both deny the impact of Jewish LAW and culture on scripture and both are pandemic in American Protestant Churches.

There are numerous doctrines rooted in RCC doctrine which are held near and dear by sincere misguided Protestants. When one attempts to explain the root of these false doctrines, Biblical illiteracy shines forth and any evidence contrary to these Christian myths is denounced with fanatic rhetoric. In other words, they don't want to identify with the Vatican even though they march in lock step with it. Education would shed light on such issues, but as Jesus said, most people prefer to live in the darkness of their own OPINION. (John 3:19)

According to the PEW statistical organization, American Protestants are less educated in the history and meaning of their Christian point of view than ANY OTHER RELIGION. Muslims know more about Christianity that most American Christians as well as Hindus, LDS, Jews and many others. Everybody seems to know more about Christianity than American Christians. Unfortunately this ignorance does not and over the last seventy years has not inspired so much as a modicum of effort to correct the situation.

Case in point: Count the number of cars in the church parking lot on Sunday morning and compare that number to the count on Wednesday evening (or any other evening when an adult Bible study is offered). The observer will inevitably discover more cars parked at church on Sunday morning than any other time. In addition an examination of the intellectual content of adult Bible studies will reveal that most of them are delivered at the middle-school level. Any intelligent adult will be bored to tears when they attend one of these sessions. In addition, Bible study or religious education targeting middle-school and high school students is virtually non-existent. Classes for this group of young people are only baby sitting venues teaching nothing of substance.

The subject of Biblical misinterpretation is a black hole shrouded in the mists of demonic confusion and human laziness. People simply do not want to be told how to live their lives or why. This hubris reveals the root of the American conundrum. We hold our OPINIONs more highly than those of God or the good of the nation.

We cannot agree on an unchanging objective view of scripture or politics. As a result our castles of sand are being washed away by the tides of history. (Luke 6:48-49)

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...

 

[Eddie42]

Ok.

I will allow you to decide who I am or what group you think I belong,

One seed placed in the ground with genetic information, can come to life and have growth itself and provide other seeds of the same type. The plant may provide nourishment also,

Jesus being the one seed ( Word become flesh) ultimately became a quickening spirit that seeks to knock on our door.



The physical seed of creation teaches the concept in the physical context.

The hearts of men are where the seed of the Word is planted. More spiritual context but the same concept.

Perhaps we will not debate but see the ultimate concept in a host of context areas. Romans 1:20

Mississippi redneck
eddif

Hello,
I will respond briefly to the one Scripture reference that you give, Rom 1:20 and I'll add v19 to it.

"Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:" (Rom 1:19-20, KJV)

The RV & ASV continue with the preposition "in" and that is how I understand the verse. I do not believe a man is born with a blank slate or screen in his brain. Just as a computer has an Operation System which makes the software work, it seems that God give man a basic logic or knowledge for which he is responsible, as in:

"But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding." (Job 32:8, KJV)

"When Gentiles, who do not possess the law, do instinctively what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, to which their own conscience also bears witness; and their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps excuse them" (Rom 2:14-15, NRSV)

Man is born conscious of God and only by self-deceit in his perceived wisdom, he becomes a fool by denying how his inner being can see the creation as God's work. Man is not born an atheist, his sinful nature works at making him so.

 

[Eddie42]

I agree with your observation that errors in Biblical interpretation are due to a lack of common sense. Common sense isn't very common these days. Therefore other reasons for false interpretation must be identified.

In my experience there are two major reasons for heretical interpretations of scripture. One is a lack of religious education and the other is a centuries old anti-semitic attitude. Both are rooted in Roman Catholic dogma, both deny the impact of Jewish LAW and culture on scripture and both are pandemic in American Protestant Churches.

There are numerous doctrines rooted in RCC doctrine which are held near and dear by sincere misguided Protestants. When one attempts to explain the root of these false doctrines, Biblical illiteracy shines forth and any evidence contrary to these Christian myths is denounced with fanatic rhetoric. In other words, they don't want to identify with the Vatican even though they march in lock step with it. Education would shed light on such issues, but as Jesus said, most people prefer to live in the darkness of their own OPINION. (John 3:19)

According to the PEW statistical organization, American Protestants are less educated in the history and meaning of their Christian point of view than ANY OTHER RELIGION. Muslims know more about Christianity that most American Christians as well as Hindus, LDS, Jews and many others. Everybody seems to know more about Christianity than American Christians. Unfortunately this ignorance does not and over the last seventy years has not inspired so much as a modicum of effort to correct the situation.

Case in point: Count the number of cars in the church parking lot on Sunday morning and compare that number to the count on Wednesday evening (or any other evening when an adult Bible study is offered). The observer will inevitably discover more cars parked at church on Sunday morning than any other time. In addition an examination of the intellectual content of adult Bible studies will reveal that most of them are delivered at the middle-school level. Any intelligent adult will be bored to tears when they attend one of these sessions. In addition, Bible study or religious education targeting middle-school and high school students is virtually non-existent. Classes for this group of young people are only baby sitting venues teaching nothing of substance.

The subject of Biblical misinterpretation is a black hole shrouded in the mists of demonic confusion and human laziness. People simply do not want to be told how to live their lives or why. This hubris reveals the root of the American conundrum. We hold our OPINIONs more highly than those of God or the good of the nation.

We cannot agree on an unchanging objective view of scripture or politics. As a result our castles of sand are being washed away by the tides of history. (Luke 6:48-49)

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...

I agree. Many years ago I was reading in a Roman Catholic Encyclopedia where they made the claim that Protestants of today have reverted back to agreement with them on matters of free will and predestination. I've found it striking how that when reading Martin Luther's 'Bondage of the Will', the arguments Luther is responding to, are the same ones we hear so often by the Protestants, evangelicals and fundamentalists of today. I've heard the gospel that is preached today termed "decisional regeneration" or being born again by man's free will rather than God's sovereign will. When the churches quit teaching a catechism and a solid confession of faith, it seems anything goes. The misleading statement "No Creed but the Bible!" means you are merely being fed the creed of the individual pastor in the pulpit whether it is truth or heresy. I generally discount religious movements and denominations that began to mushroom in the 1800's. Give me the old paths... "Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein." (Jer 6:16, KJV)

 

[eddif]

Hello,
I will respond briefly to the one Scripture reference that you give, Rom 1:20 and I'll add v19 to it.

"Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:" (Rom 1:19-20, KJV)

The RV & ASV continue with the preposition "in" and that is how I understand the verse. I do not believe a man is born with a blank slate or screen in his brain. Just as a computer has an Operation System which makes the software work, it seems that God give man a basic logic or knowledge for which he is responsible, as in:

"But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding." (Job 32:8, KJV)

"When Gentiles, who do not possess the law, do instinctively what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, to which their own conscience also bears witness; and their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps excuse them" (Rom 2:14-15, NRSV)

Man is born conscious of God and only by self-deceit in his perceived wisdom, he becomes a fool by denying how his inner being can see the creation as God's work. Man is not born an atheist, his sinful nature works at making him so.

Look for the hidden man of the heart.

Cardiac conduction system - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

eddif

 

[Eddie42]

You cause me to think back when I heard a visiting youth Pastor speaking to the church young people and he proudly proclaimed that now science has proven the Bible true, that God did indeed harden Pharaoh's heart. He then quoted an article similar to this about the pharaohs and the heart disease atherosclerosis, hardening of the arteries:

Artery disease in some very old patients

Doctors scanned Egyptian mummies and found signs of atherosclerosis, a disease typically thought of as a modern ill.

www.goupstate.com

LOL

 

[eddif]

You cause me to think back when I heard a visiting youth Pastor speaking to the church young people and he proudly proclaimed that now science has proven the Bible true, that God did indeed harden Pharaoh's heart. He then quoted an article similar to this about the pharaohs and the heart disease atherosclerosis, hardening of the arteries:

Artery disease in some very old patients

Doctors scanned Egyptian mummies and found signs of atherosclerosis, a disease typically thought of as a modern ill.

www.goupstate.com

LOL

LOL
2nd witness youth pastor.
The parable of the sower takes physical seeds and compared them to the Word of God.

The stony heart is replaced by a heart of flesh.

A good preacher being paid is compared to an ox treading out corn, a plowman. a thresher,
I Corinthians 9:9-10

The hidden man of heart is crucified, beaten, his beard is plucked out, all his bones are out ofj joint, a crown of thorns were on his head, he was marred beyond the semblance of man, and a spear pierced his side, not to mention spikes in his hands and feet.

Mississippi redneck
eddif

 

[hawkman]

When using the KJV, it pays to use the 1828 Webster's since it is close to the time period, the 1769 revision of the KJV.

I once heard someone say they had grown weary of using the KJV because they found themselves translating english to english so often . I have spent a lot of time here in the deep south and we still speak using the " kings english " , I wonder why .

I generally discount religious movements and denominations that began to mushroom in the 1800's.

Why ?

 

[eddif]

I Corinthians 1:12 kjv
12. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
13. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

Matthew 13:52 kjv
52. Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.

I guess I look for agreement in; Creation, pre Law, Law, Prophets, Jesus speaking, the Apostles, modern times.

A lot of times a passage is a shadow of things to come. Once I would have thought do not muzzle the ox was about animal husbandry (which it is) but more specifically it is about pay the preacher. Or most specifically we bring the sacrifice of praise to Jesus.


A lot of times I find parts of truth in a lot of places. The letters to the churches show some churches have good and bad. I sometimes find truth where I think it would never be. Does that make me condone the error? No.

eddif

 

[Eddie42]

I once heard someone say they had grown weary of using the KJV because they found themselves translating english to english so often . I have spent a lot of time here in the deep south and we still speak using the " kings english " , I wonder why .

Why ?

Hi Hawkman! I recognize there has been progress in dogma through the centuries to refine and put into systemized form biblical teachings so that they are better understood and defended, maybe the doctrine of the Trinity is a good early example. But, I see no new revelation since the 1st century and truth does not change. In the 1800s the cults began to pop up, Mormons, the Jehovah *s, etc. I also find the revivalism and the Charles G. Finney new measures approach as well as Dispensationalism appear which are heretical, and I was dispensationalist until age 30. The 1800's seemed to be when the drift away from catechisms or solid theological approaches to the faith began. Then the humanism began to change a gospel powered postmillennialism into the social gospel perversion of the biblical doctrine. I believe the downfall of the USA actually began in the latter 1800's with humanism and extreme 'individualism' beginning to infect the biblical faith. But, I don't expect do be covered up with thumbs-up agreements on this though.

 

[eddif]

Philippians 1:15 kjv
15. Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:
16. The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
17. But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
18. What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.

While I do have some issues, I do try and believe that some are first introduced to Jesus in those places ( which you mentioned the 30 years).

I guess Finney could draw a crowd. I think Paul preached in Jewish areas.

Me. Well I may drive more away than I attract. If I left off human anatomy that might help, but I do feel a need to do Pardes at times.

eddif

 

[JLB]

use the opposing view as a reason to study deeper.

Amen


I have used this strategy here in this Forum for many years to study deeper into God’s word.





JLB

 

[WIP]

I agree with your observation that errors in Biblical interpretation are due to a lack of common sense. Common sense isn't very common these days. Therefore other reasons for false interpretation must be identified.

One thing people forget is that common sense is not inborn. Common sense is a learned skill and/or the application of wisdom.

 

[Eddie42]

Philippians 1:15 kjv
15. Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:
16. The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
17. But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
18. What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.

While I do have some issues, I do try and believe that some are first introduced to Jesus in those places ( which you mentioned the 30 years).

I guess Finney could draw a crowd. I think Paul preached in Jewish areas.

Me. Well I may drive more away than I attract. If I left off human anatomy that might help, but I do feel a need to do Pardes at times.

eddif

Hi Eddif, I have no doubt about my salvation back then and I heard the gospel when under dispensationalist teachings. The main reason I used the harsh word 'heresy' about dispensationalism, is the idea that the 1000 year reign seems to revert back to the Old Covenant, and is Jewish rather than New Covenant and Christian (I'm post-mil but have no fuss with historic pre-mils or a-mils, I can fellowship with 'em). The main point that drives me to be harsh on dispensationalism is the insistence that sacrifices are renewed in this 1000 year kingdom. I find that blasphemous in light of:

"For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." (Heb 9:26, KJV)

I find the reasoning that the sacrifices in the 1000 years are a "memorial" silly because memorial means looking back in history at something or someone. In the 1000 years, Jesus is there present, so "memorial" does not fit when He is there in person. There are many teachings in dispensational footnotes that are flatly contradicted by the Scriptures themselves, for example:

"And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein. And the LORD gave them rest round about, according to all that he sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; the LORD delivered all their enemies into their hand. There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass." (Josh 21:43-45, KJV)

That flatly states that Israel did indeed possess all the land given to her by the Almighty. The evasions in attempts to avoid the clear language fall flat when they are examined.

 

[jaybo]

I once heard someone say they had grown weary of using the KJV because they found themselves translating english to english so often . I have spent a lot of time here in the deep south and we still speak using the " kings english " , I wonder why .

Why ?

Do you really use thee, thou, and other archaic pronouns, as well as the obsolete words, grammar and sentence structure of 17th Century England.

For all the years I lived in Florida I never heard anyone use archaic language.

 

[hawkman]

The main point that drives me to be harsh on dispensationalism is the insistence that sacrifices are renewed in this 1000 year kingdom.

2 The group I would most fit in would be dispensationalist . But I in NO WAY believe sacrifices will be renewed and I have not heard that taught by the men of God I have heard speak . We have the same problem with this teaching .

 

[hawkman]

Do you really use thee, thou, and other archaic pronouns, as well as the obsolete words, grammar and sentence structure of 17th Century England.

For all the years I lived in Florida I never heard anyone use archaic language.

This is Alabama in the Bible belt and some of the KJV words will slip in now and then .

I find Florida to be much different from Alabama in that there are a lot of yankees that are transplants there and not so in Alabama .

My drawl is so thick it speaks of cornbread , blacked eyed peas and turnip greens ,oh I forgot I need buttermilk and a slice of onion on that plate too .

I may have travelled the world but I have spent many years in the rural areas of Alabama and it shows .

jaybo do you have an accent that hints of your upbringing ?

 

[2ndRateMind]

It is too common in discussing Scripture, that different understandings of a verse or passage end up in a debate to prove oneself right, rather than to use the opposing view as a reason to study deeper. We all hate to be wrong, it is human nature, but if we truly seek the truth of God, we do injustice to ourselves not to consider the opposing view and look at one's one interpretation and explain both sides of a seemingly or apparent contradiction. I have found several obvious, violations of common sense we make.

Couldn't agree more with this. Seems to me we need to be gentle with those we disagree with, for they often have the most important things to say to us. If life is a puzzle, God gives each of us a piece of that puzzle, and to assemble the complete picture involves collecting from each his or her piece of wisdom.

Best wishes, 2RM.

 

[jaybo]

This is Alabama in the Bible belt and some of the KJV words will slip in now and then .

I find Florida to be much different from Alabama in that there are a lot of yankees that are transplants there and not so in Alabama .

My drawl is so thick it speaks of cornbread , blacked eyed peas and turnip greens ,oh I forgot I need buttermilk and a slice of onion on that plate too .

I may have travelled the world but I have spent many years in the rural areas of Alabama and it shows .

jaybo do you have an accent that hints of your upbringing ?

Not that I know of. Nobody has ever mentioned that I have an accent.