Perspicuity of Scripture

[mondar]

Hi Mondar,

I understand this is not the forum to debate, so I hope that my response will not come across as contentious but merely highlighting another perspective on a surely difficult topic. My hope is for fruitful discussion.

From the dawn of Christianity even beforehand among the Jews there has always been "competing" interpretations for different texts. For example, a literal versus metaphorical interpretation of Genesis, Arminianism versus Calvinism, Pre-Millennialism vs Amillenialism vs Post Millenialism, Reformed View of Justification vs NPP view of Justification vs Roman Catholic perspective on Justification vs Eastern Orthodox View of Justification, Adult vs Infant Baptism, etc. etc. etc.

We also must recognize that we as Christians are not Pluralists, we do not accept the idea that the Arminians and Calvinists for example are both right, either one is wrong both are wrong or they both are right on certain points. However, when you have two opposing views that directly conflict with each other you do not have two true views however valid each may be. Yet, we have some of the godliest and learned of theologians, Pastors, etc. who have accepted all kinds of the different positions I briefly mentioned above.

What this results in, is when someone claims to have come to a conclusion about the Scripture as a direct result of the Holy Spirit this effectively accomplishes the following:

1. It marginalizes other points of view as not from God, despite the fact that people from both perspectives claim to have received revelation from God.
2. It removes the possibility for discussion and criticism of that view. If God is the one who revealed it to you, then it will appear to those who disagree (often for good reasons) are going against God's will.
3. It is a claim to absolute knowledge on a matter that has been in great dispute for centuries, and one's subjective spiritual experience then supersedes the scholarly work of hundreds of people.
4. People who take this view generally are not critical of their own views. So convinced of their revelation experience they do not call into doubt it's origin and thus take any outside criticism as a personal offense against their faith and would not dare call into question their own perspective and presuppositions on the matter.
5. It does not take into account the many intricacies of interpreting this ancient book such as the translational challenges from the original Koine Greek and Hebrew, or the difficulty of understanding the author of the given text (for example understanding Paul correctly in the 1st Century) in addition to his audience and the occasion for writing the book, etc. Many of these challenges have only had great progress in our advancing in knowledge in the last Century with the discovery of so many ancient documents from the period. Giving us a fresh perspective of how these people thought and believed.

My first point is probably the chief of my contentions, as when one who holds to the perspicuity of Scripture talks about those who have different perspectives they begin to talk about how people "misunderstand", "misuse", or "misinterpret" the Scriptures. Yet it appears they themselves are immune to this charge because all of Scripture is laid bare to their enlightened eyes.

No claim to inerrancy was intended on my part. If I made such a claim, that would violate what I was saying in the sola scriptura thread.

So my perspective on this issue, which I grant may be incorrect but I believe justifiable is that we should not entrust an elite set of people such as scholars or Church authorities as the RCC did. Rather, we should have a healthy dose of humility, compassion and open mindedness to perspectives different from our own. To appreciate that people even more passionate for God, more intelligent, more learned than you or I have come to various different conclusions and we ourselves are not the plumb line of truth. These matters can indeed be difficult to figure out, be respectful of the process, be open to discussion and criticism but do so in a patient and gentle way. Try to understand that you as a fallible human being are subject emotional prejudices and presuppositions and it is not until both parties acknowledge that they can be wrong.. that true and fruitful discussion can be had.

I appreciate you taking your time to read this, and I hope you do not view my differences as an attack against Scripture, but rather my humble appreciation of what I have observed not only in my discussions but throughout Christian history.

Thank you,
Doulos Iesou

 

[Doulos Iesou]

No claim to inerrancy was intended on my part. If I made such a claim, that would violate what I was saying in the sola scriptura thread.

I understand that, that was not my point. My point was that a person effectively makes a belief unfalisfiable by claiming divine revelation for their coming to hold such a doctrine. Or that it is really clear to them, and everyone else is misusing the text.

 

[reba]

I read this thread to heading outside the zone of the intention of the forums purpose. Moderator

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I read this thread to heading outside the zone of the intention of the forums purpose. Moderator

Is discussing the perspicuity of Scripture outside of the forum's scope? It would just be nice to have some clarification on what the Moderators deem is within and outside of the forum's intention so that we can alter our discussion as necessary.

Thank you,
Doulos Iesou

 

[reba]

Let me try again in a way more normal to my verbiage ... a friendly reminder ... Dont' let this get personal guys. thanks Moderator

 

[mondar]

I think Reba is trying to say that debates are not allowed in this forum.

Slave of Jesus, when you disagreed with the OP, I did give a reply to what I thought was your disagreement. I think that is what Reba was cautioning us about. By the way, are you a first year greek student? Interesting nick.

Reba, if I am wrong, you can correct me about your intent.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I think Reba is trying to say that debates are not allowed in this forum.

My point wasn't to win an argument but put forward another perspective. Also it appears according to the forum rules that debate is allowed but in a controlled and decent way, which I believe we have conducted ourselves accordingly.

See the MUST READ:

In the Focus on Scripture Forum, members will be held to the standards of disciplined debate and discussion.

Slave of Jesus,

I prefer Servant* of Jesus, slave has a derogatory meaning in our modern society.

when you disagreed with the OP, I did give a reply to what I thought was your disagreement. I think that is what Reba was cautioning us about.

Her last remark seems to indicate a fear of this dialogue turning personal, perhaps my words are coming across a little differently than I intend but I assure all of you that I mean nothing personal in my disagreement.

Nor do I hope to convince anyone of my ideology in this regard but to offer what I believe to be a valid and justifiable point of view of Scripture. As well as some of the dangers I find with claiming the Perspicuity of Scripture.

By the way, are you a first year greek student?

I learned Greek a bit ago now, I am out of school and work as an Engineer.

 

[reba]

You guys are fine... Should have stayed in my vernacular ... Dont let the debate go to argument

 

[Doulos Iesou]

You guys are fine... Should have stayed in my vernacular ... Dont let the debate go to argument

Will do Reba, thanks!

 

[Sparkey]

I think Reba is trying to say that debates are not allowed in this forum.

Slave of Jesus, when you disagreed with the OP, I did give a reply to what I thought was your disagreement. I think that is what Reba was cautioning us about. By the way, are you a first year greek student? Interesting nick.

Reba, if I am wrong, you can correct me about your intent.

This too is an interesting and vital part of our learning process because when we look at the function and the purpose of the Focus on Scripture forum, yes, in part it is designed to disallow the often thorny discussions encountered in Ye Ol' Apologetics and Theology forum, also called affectionately as "The Snakepit" as well as "The Wilderness" by some. But the idea and concept that was included in the creation of FoS, includes that debates (given that they remain respectful of all contributors, as Children of the Most high) are indeed allowed so long as they retain their focus, rightly founded on Scripture and the Word of Truth, both as written in the Holy Writ and as written upon the hearts of them that love Him.

We may have difference of opinion here. We also encourage the respectful discussion of such things as much as we are able.

Or as reba says:

You guys are fine... Should have stayed in my vernacular ... Dont let the debate go to argument

There is agreement there. By one and by all, it is hoped. There is so often difficulty in communication and this too is part of what FoS is all about. I particularly regard this little thread as being quite a profound place to ponder such things, both wide, large in scope as it applies to the word, found in the bible, and also at it applies to the Word, found in each heart here. Edify, edify, edify. Be blessed to do so knowing that other may glean from a field they have not planted.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

This means that the bible can be understood by people who diligently work at understanding the scriptures with the help of the Holy Spirit. It does not mean everyone is right in claiming to understand the scriptures, many err. Not every single part has to be perfectly clear, but its message is understandable. This aspect of the scripture might be assumed by some, but there has been many who rejected the doctrine.

This subject makes me wonder if the claim of knowing and understanding the scriptures is one ANYBODY can even make in a way that can be substantiated. Personally, I THINK I know the scriptures better than most, but there are others that feel they know the scriptures better than I and we tend to have divergent understandings of some things and some of those things are major. How can one objectively tell who is right and who is wrong as it pertains to understanding the scriptures?

 

[reba]

TOT True there are pharisees old and new.... I would suggest 'different' instead of 'better'...

Anyone can read a recipe follow the directions and still not make it like Mom...IMO God speaks to us where we are ... as individuals... groups..

 

[Doulos Iesou]

This subject makes me wonder if the claim of knowing and understanding the scriptures is one ANYBODY can even make in a way that can be substantiated. Personally, I THINK I know the scriptures better than most, but there are others that feel they know the scriptures better than I and we tend to have divergent understandings of some things and some of those things are major. How can one objectively tell who is right and who is wrong as it pertains to understanding the scriptures?

I believe the merits of any given interpretation can be weighed by the different criteria. Such as, does the interpretation take into account the historical context? Is the interpretation guilty of an anachronism? Is the interpretation coherent with a correct understanding of the original language? Does the interpretation take into account who is writing the passage and who is the audience and indeed the occasion for writing?

People often treat Scripture as if each individual passage can be taken and applied to whatever we make the words to mean to convey. Rather I find the most justifiable interpretations do their best to appreciate the various contexts in which the text is couched and draw out those observations to then build a full exegesis of the given passage.

However, I do not think this is an easy thing to do and often requires more work and more often then not.. getting things wrong. This shouldn't drive us to throw our hands up and say, "well we just can't know anything then!" Instead it should drive us to be more compassionate, patient and able to be taught as we each can appreciate the intricacies of what goes into interpreting the text.

Hope this helps,
Doulos Iesou

 

[Sparkey]

How can one objectively tell who is right and who is wrong as it pertains to understanding the scriptures?

There is one way. It is the only way that I know. Dubbed originally "The Way" by those who helped to found it. A way that gives way, gives way to others after the manner seen in Phil 2:3, even as we are reminded by the Spirit of Truth Himself, that there are many who may join, reminded that we may allow others to join, even though they might not, at this time, be seen as fully qualified for the truth is found, instructed by the Master toward those who have sat at his feet, his disciples who wondered and pondered this very question, recorded by that Spirit of Inspiration, the Holy Spirit thorough them, those later seen as sent ones and apostles of God - they came and asked their master, Jesus, about some who also were seen to "cast out demons". They came with a question and were told, "Those who are not against us are with us," because a house divided against itself may not stand, and none who have so recently joined themselves in effort may soon say, "Bah, humbug," about the house they have had their efforts joined toward.

No, they who were pondered and who the Disciples who inquired about had not yet formally put their head on the doorpost, had not yet had their ear pierced, placing their blood to be mingled forever with the blood of the Lamb, marked there, yet it was with wisdom and gracious acceptance that their Lord, Master and Teacher instructed that it was okay.

We may be further intrigued and drawn into the lesson taught by the More Sure Word as we consider and ponder the questions underlying and found by comparison here a little, there a little, line upon line and precept upon precept, ie., cf “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and a divided household falls. And if Satan also is divided against himself, how will his kingdom stand? For you say that I cast out demons by Beelzebul. (Luke 11:17-18, ESV) and On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ (Matthew 7:22-23, ESV)

But that particular discussion is better fitted to another discussion, another thread...

 

[Doulos Iesou]

There is one way. It is the only way that I know. Dubbed originally "The Way" by those who helped to found it. A way that gives way, gives way to others after the manner seen in Phil 2:3, even as we are reminded by the Spirit of Truth Himself, that there are many who may join, reminded that we may allow others to join, even though they might not, at this time, be seen as fully qualified for the truth is found, instructed by the Master toward those who have sat at his feet, his disciples who wondered and pondered this very question, recorded by that Spirit of Inspiration, the Holy Spirit thorough them, those later seen as sent ones and apostles of God - they came and asked their master, Jesus, about some who also were seen to "cast out demons". They came with a question and were told, "Those who are not against us are with us," because a house divided against itself may not stand, and none who have so recently joined themselves in effort may soon say, "Bah, humbug," about the house they have had their efforts joined toward.

No, they who were pondered and who the Disciples who inquired about had not yet formally put their head on the doorpost, had not yet had their ear pierced, placing their blood to be mingled forever with the blood of the Lamb, marked there, yet it was with wisdom and gracious acceptance that their Lord, Master and Teacher instructed that it was okay.

We may be further intrigued and drawn into the lesson taught by the More Sure Word as we consider and ponder the questions underlying and found by comparison here a little, there a little, line upon line and precept upon precept, ie., cf “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and a divided household falls. And if Satan also is divided against himself, how will his kingdom stand? For you say that I cast out demons by Beelzebul. (Luke 11:17-18, ESV) and On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ (Matthew 7:22-23, ESV)

But that particular discussion is better fitted to another discussion, another thread...

Curious Sparrow, what do you do when two people who claim to have come to a particular interpretation due to the leading of the Holy Spirit arrive at contradictory perspectives?

Is one of them wrong? If so, how do we determine that? Would it be unacceptable to say one is wrong since they claim to have been enlightened by God himself?

 

[Sparkey]

Curious Sparrow, what do you do when two people who claim to have come to a particular interpretation due to the leading of the Holy Spirit arrive at contradictory perspectives?

Is one of them wrong? If so, how do we determine that? Would it be unacceptable to say one is wrong since they claim to have been enlightened by God himself?

Me personally? I pray and ask God about it.

Me as a moderator on a forum? There are rules that govern the admittance of various vehicles onto our nations infrastructures, called Freeways. They do have limited access and one-way divisions. That is set up to allow high speed driving from one place to another while placing a median strip in between opposing lanes of traffic. On the slower surface streets there are stop signs and traffic signals and on the even more congested areas especially in urban districts and cities, one may see traffic cops who moderate the traffic flow.

As a moderator? I like to think of FoS as a free way, a place of literal liberty where all traffic flows in different lanes and at differing speeds in the same general direction. Moderator hat goes on only to avoid the damage to those who appear for a moment to be headed for a head-on collision. That is a very brief touch, a signal, if you like - to brothers and sisters anointed in that same ministry, given toward the Phil 2:3 instruction and yielded one to another even as our larger group is yielded (like cars on onway ramps) to a larger and greater spirit that guides, lifts, ponders alongside of (how marvelous is our God(!)) those who love him and energetically give chase while seeking maturity in Christ Jesus, who demonstrate the Mind of Christ, given to each.

 

[Knotical]

There is one way. It is the only way that I know. Dubbed originally "The Way" by those who helped to found it. A way that gives way, gives way to others after the manner seen in Phil 2:3, even as we are reminded by the Spirit of Truth Himself, that there are many who may join, reminded that we may allow others to join, even though they might not, at this time, be seen as fully qualified for the truth is found, instructed by the Master toward those who have sat at his feet, his disciples who wondered and pondered this very question, recorded by that Spirit of Inspiration, the Holy Spirit thorough them, those later seen as sent ones and apostles of God - they came and asked their master, Jesus, about some who also were seen to "cast out demons". They came with a question and were told, "Those who are not against us are with us," because a house divided against itself may not stand, and none who have so recently joined themselves in effort may soon say, "Bah, humbug," about the house they have had their efforts joined toward.

No, they who were pondered and who the Disciples who inquired about had not yet formally put their head on the doorpost, had not yet had their ear pierced, placing their blood to be mingled forever with the blood of the Lamb, marked there, yet it was with wisdom and gracious acceptance that their Lord, Master and Teacher instructed that it was okay.

We may be further intrigued and drawn into the lesson taught by the More Sure Word as we consider and ponder the questions underlying and found by comparison here a little, there a little, line upon line and precept upon precept, ie., cf “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and a divided household falls. And if Satan also is divided against himself, how will his kingdom stand? For you say that I cast out demons by Beelzebul. (Luke 11:17-18, ESV) and On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ (Matthew 7:22-23, ESV)

But that particular discussion is better fitted to another discussion, another thread...

Curious Sparrow, what do you do when two people who claim to have come to a particular interpretation due to the leading of the Holy Spirit arrive at contradictory perspectives?

Is one of them wrong? If so, how do we determine that? Would it be unacceptable to say one is wrong since they claim to have been enlightened by God himself?

By testing it against scripture. Anyone can say, to their own peril, they their understanding of a specific passage came from a revelation by the Holy Spirit, yet if it does not hold up to scrutiny against the scripture you have to question where this "enlightenment" came from.

The three most important words when it comes to interpreting scripture are: context, context, and context.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Me personally? I pray and ask God about it.

Me as a moderator on a forum? There are rules that govern the admittance of various vehicles onto our nations infrastructures, called Freeways. They do have limited access and one-way divisions. That is set up to allow high speed driving from one place to another while placing a median strip in between opposing lanes of traffic. On the slower surface streets there are stop signs and traffic signals and on the even more congested areas especially in urban districts and cities, one may see traffic cops who moderate the traffic flow.

As a moderator? I like to think of FoS as a free way, a place of literal liberty where all traffic flows in different lanes and at differing speeds in the same general direction. Moderator hat goes on only to avoid the damage to those who appear for a moment to be headed for a head-on collision. That is a very brief touch, a signal, if you like - to brothers and sisters anointed in that same ministry, given toward the Phil 2:3 instruction and yielded one to another even as our larger group is yielded (like cars on onway ramps) to a larger and greater spirit that guides, lifts, ponders alongside of (how marvelous is our God(!)) those who love him and energetically give chase while seeking maturity in Christ Jesus, who demonstrate the Mind of Christ, given to each.

Let's use a scenario to demonstrate my point.

Say we have two people, one who holds to an Arminian perspective of Scripture and the other who holds to a Calvinistic interpretation of Scripture. They are debating on Romans 9 and what the chapter actually means, and both mean claim to have received the Holy Spirit's guidance in coming to the respective positions.

Is your going to pray to God an ultimate arbiter to the truth on that matter, which one is accurate and which one is not?

 

[mondar]

I prefer Servant* of Jesus, slave has a derogatory meaning in our modern society.

Do you realize that the term "doulos" does indeed imply slavery? There are other terms for servant, such as diaknoia which would not have that implication.

 

[Sparkey]

Is your going to pray to God an ultimate arbiter to the truth on that matter, which one is accurate and which one is not?

Yes, I say, yes indeed. While I do understand that somethings, like plants, do take time, and that according to wine and grape cultivators of some fame, Ernest and Julio Gallo, "No wine shall be served before its time," I also know in whom I place my trust and know as well whose words mine echo as I petition Him daily, "They have no wine."

I also understand, to one degree or another, the response given, "Woman? What is that to me?" made by the one who was about his father's business, and I think, from the time of the womb as the Holy Spirit signaled to the woman, to her child, to another who was also blessed to become a friend of the bridegroom, that God is on the throne.

It is with great hope that I see your waters, given to you by your roots, sunk down and enjoyed as the very living waters, tasted, tested and found true, with great joy that I see your leaves, green in my sight, offered and containing healing, also provided by that self-same Spirit of truth that inspires wonder in me, that same hope that recalls how roots themselves may intermingle and may break up rocks and boulders unseen - and yes, I do sip this water, offered and blessed and to taste the joy unbounded as my spirit soars to spiritual places that we are drawn to.

Yes indeed. 'Tis true. I have it on great authority. He will cause it to happen.