Practical Theological Word Division

[smaller]

Trying to make this as simple as possible.

We all know that the Word has be be divided, and done so properly.

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

Jesus said as much here as well:

Luke 12:51
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:

and His 'effect' on the people was also division:

John 7:43
So there was a division among the people because of him.

John 9:16
Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.

If we look at the actions of any of us today at any Christian posting board what do we find?

Uh, yeah, read John 9:16 again. The Pharisee's are still divided aren't they? I'm not saying that's a bad thing. That is exactly as Jesus Himself planned.

When division is required some are going to have it wrong and some are going to have it right. That's all there is to it.

So, how might one take to measure if their division is 'right?'

There are several appraoches to this subject matter. I'm going to lay out a fast track from one aspect of how to approach this subject matter, and a lot of believers who stopped and thought for just a little time, should be able to come to some very simple agreements. We'll see.

First of all, one notion that has to be set aside is that only 'some' of Gods Words apply to us as believers. Jesus utterly dispels this notion here:

Luke 4:4
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Jesus did in fact speak that same Word in the Old Testament, and in the New Testament He spoke it to Satan. Satan might seem to have then what? Yes, an opposite or opposing view.

For the purposes of this thread I am taking the approach that we as believers shall live by every Word of God, exactly as Jesus said.

A couple of matters will then instantly come to the fore on how to divide and apply that fact, and the methods employed by 'theology' when using these 'non working' methods have to be eliminated from the formulas OR the Word spoken has to be eliminated, which is the usual theological path that is taken by theological academia.

A. Eliminate Jesus' statement based on numerous eradication methods.
1. eliminate on the basis of elapsed time
2. eliminate on the basis of completion in history
3. eliminate on the basis of speaking to someone else

The above is just a brief starter on the vast array of methods of elimination of Gods Words.

I don't believe that is required to come to understandings.

For example, if Jesus did speak those Words to Satan and Satan still exists and is still operating, then that statement to Satan might still seem to apply. This is merely one example. You see not 'all' Gods Words were spoken to MAN only. God Himself also directed His Own Words to SATAN.

So, one notion that can be scratched off the list is that Gods Words are only unto and for MAN. That is just not the factual case. And if this is true, that God in Christ did also speak to Satan, then elimination of Gods Words on the basis of 'man's (Jewish) history is faulty methodology. And elimination of God speaking in man's time (the Old Testament) is also faulty methodology.

You getting the picture here yet?

Paul told us exactly that the method of elimination of any Word of God is in fact faulty, right here:

2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

I don't see 'elimination' of Gods Words on the list by either Jesus or by Paul.

So, in this thread, these are the first measures or 'principles' laid down in this thread:

>That Jesus and Paul were speaking factually.

>That every Word of God is applicable to believers.

>That all scripture is profitable and therefore all scripture is applicable to believers.

>That elimination of scripture is a non-viable method of theological approach.

Will stop here for now. Hopefully by the time this exercise is completed there will be some really interesting avenues that will come forth. If any want to dispute any particular >[statement] you are welcome to reference it here in this thread, but if it gets too cumbersome I might politely ask you for a separate thread on the matter in which I will also participate. So thanks in advance.

enjoy!

smaller

 

[chessman]

For the purposes of this thread I am taking the approach that we as believers shall live by every Word of God, exactly as Jesus said.

How would you implement Mark 9:43 If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off;

 

[smaller]

For the purposes of this thread I am taking the approach that we as believers shall live by every Word of God, exactly as Jesus said.

How would you implement Mark 9:43 If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off;

We know from that particular chain of text that many allegorical statements are made. For example we are not going to be 'seeing' this 'worm' in the physical sense from Mark 9:

46 Where their worm dieth not,

Eternal worms? Please spare me.

And no one is going to be shaking a physical salt shaker over us or salting us with physical fire either, from that same stretch

49 For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.

There is in short, no question these are parable or allegory conveyances of spiritual matters.

The connection with salt for example is spiritually speaking a type of PEACE preservative, the link given right here:

50 Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his saltness, wherewith will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another.

Catching the allegorical symphony here? We are not going to become more peaceable by eating SALT.

How blessed are the FEET that bring the Good News? Does that mean we have talking feet? No.

The real coup de tat on allegory connects excellently right here:

47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:

Jesus gives us very much of an 'internal view' of the evil eye as well:

Matthew 6:23
But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

Neither the LIGHT nor the DARKNESS nor the EVIL EYE in that statement concerns physical light or a physical eye, unless one wants to fall into the gnostic 'evil flesh' view. If there is 'allegorical' light and darkness, then there is an allegorical evil eye.

And again where is said eye?

Mark 7:
21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:
23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

You should see that there is an internal EVIL eye. It has ZERO to do with an external physical eye.

If a man has 'eyes full of adultery' are there people in his physical eyes doing that? Uh....no. If someone did evil in the 'eyes of the Lord' are they standing in His physical eye doing so? Uh...no.

It's the same with the hand. Jesus said the kingdom of Heaven is at hand. Do we hold physical heaven in our physical hand? Uh....no.

These are some of the simplest lessons in allegory. But a huge number of believers will wallow around in this stuff and never 'understand' in their whole lifetimes. Such need to be 'led in' by God in Christ for a few simple lessons, one on One. It doesn't take long to come around to 'solid ground' of understandings and OFF purely literal nonsensical views.

s

 

[chessman]

We know from that particular chain of text that many allegorical statements are made.

I agree. I thought Mark 9:43 was a good passage to prove your OP point (at least as I understood the point) That is, you cannot simply take a single verse out of the Bible and understand its message (correctly anyway) without first reading and understanding the entire train of thought/topic. Sometimes that takes a few verses, sometimes it takes more than a chapter. Sometimes several chapters or more are needed. But simply taking one verse or even a portion of one verse and building a doctrine around it, is a terrible idea and leads to all kinds of stinky theology. When in fact, the whole thing is not really that complicated. Just read it!

WRT Mark 9:43. The message(s) I get from the verse (and frankly do not see how anyone else could see it otherwise), when seen in context, is:
1) that God is going to consider it better for us, in the long run, that we suffer a little here for His sake than if we had it perfect while in this first life.
2) That eventually we’ll see that same benefit in our suffering
3) That God pretty much knows our future destination and what is “better” for us now. He’s not guessing our futures and hoping things will all work out for our benefit in the end.

But I also get from this same section of Scripture:

Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another. (Mark 9:50 ESV)
​

Which does kind of speak for itself in any context. Might sting a little at times, sometimes it's very painful indeed. But eitherway. Be peaceful with one another. Not that "peace" means not standing up for what's right.

Good points you made.

 

[smaller]

If it dawns on any believer that they will live by every Word of God, matters of theology become much more interesting.

All the various wranglings about what Word applies to us and what doesn't goes away immediately. Those who seek to defray any Word of God away from themselves personally merely show they do not understand 'good theology.' And have erected numerous false theological edifices.

Law and Grace is the exemplary of false edifice. Are believers under Grace? Of course. Are believers under the LAW? Yes, in disobedient fashions.

The indwelling sin and evil present within any of us is both under the Law and condemned under the Law. There is no escaping this conclusion. Grace has not authorized and condoned sin and evil in anyone, least of all in believers. It is we ourselves who come to understand that the condemnation of indwelling sin and evil present is JUST AND GOOD and in our behalves. Trying to run away from that Godly conclusion is lunacy in the spiritual sense.

In other words it is not a BAD THING to have our own indwelling sin and evil present condemned under the LAW. That is exactly where 'we should want it to be' as believers.

In this measure then do we find LIFE in Gods Words of Law? Absolutely we do, even in condemnation.

Get the picture? It's quite easy. All ya have to do is see that the judgment of Law is TRUE and against sin and evil in YOU.

And you should be GLAD that God stands against those things in us.

Do we 'rid' ourselves of that constantly pressing judgment? Never while we are here, factually planted in weakness, corruption and dishonor.

It's only a matter of 'truthfully' facing the facts. And when anyone does what comes into them?

THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH.

Was the Law then BAD in bringing you to this conclusion? No. You have been equipped by that condemnation and ushered into TRUTH.

Perspective is everything. Is there then life in the Law? If one considers the rightful condemnation of sin and evil in us, then YES, even though it's condemnation it is RIGHT, TRUE AND JUST. And we should always be for what is RIGHT, TRUE AND JUST.

s

 

[dadof10]

Trying to make this as simple as possible.

We all know that the Word has be be divided, and done so properly.

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

Jesus said as much here as well:

Luke 12:51
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:

and His 'effect' on the people was also division:

John 7:43
So there was a division among the people because of him.

John 9:16
Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.

If we look at the actions of any of us today at any Christian posting board what do we find?

Uh, yeah, read John 9:16 again. The Pharisee's are still divided aren't they? I'm not saying that's a bad thing. That is exactly as Jesus Himself planned.

I'm having trouble following you. Are you saying that "rightly dividing the word of truth" is the same thing as doctrinal divisions, as in John 9? Are you saying that Jesus "planned" doctrinal divisions?

 

[smaller]

Trying to make this as simple as possible.

We all know that the Word has be be divided, and done so properly.

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

Jesus said as much here as well:

Luke 12:51
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:

and His 'effect' on the people was also division:

John 7:43
So there was a division among the people because of him.

John 9:16
Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.

If we look at the actions of any of us today at any Christian posting board what do we find?

Uh, yeah, read John 9:16 again. The Pharisee's are still divided aren't they? I'm not saying that's a bad thing. That is exactly as Jesus Himself planned.

I'm having trouble following you. Are you saying that "rightly dividing the word of truth" is the same thing as doctrinal divisions, as in John 9? Are you saying that Jesus "planned" doctrinal divisions?

The first post presents that every Word of God applies to every believer.

s

 

[dadof10]

Trying to make this as simple as possible.

We all know that the Word has be be divided, and done so properly.

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

Jesus said as much here as well:

Luke 12:51
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:

and His 'effect' on the people was also division:

John 7:43
So there was a division among the people because of him.

John 9:16
Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.

If we look at the actions of any of us today at any Christian posting board what do we find?

Uh, yeah, read John 9:16 again. The Pharisee's are still divided aren't they? I'm not saying that's a bad thing. That is exactly as Jesus Himself planned.

I'm having trouble following you. Are you saying that "rightly dividing the word of truth" is the same thing as doctrinal divisions, as in John 9? Are you saying that Jesus "planned" doctrinal divisions?

The first post presents that every Word of God applies to every believer.

s

What does this fact have to do with division?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[smaller]

What does this fact have to do with division?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

First principle of division is to 'find out' how much Word applies to every believer.

Just giving the opportunity for those who want to nit pik to do so before posting more.

s

 

[dadof10]

What does this fact have to do with division?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

First principle of division is to 'find out' how much Word applies to every believer.

Just giving the opportunity for those who want to nit pik to do so before posting more.

s

OK, Carry on...

 

[smaller]

OK, Carry on...

Uh, yeah.

If every Word of God applies to every believer, what's left to divide?

That question probably hasn't hit home with you yet.

s

 

[dadof10]

OK, Carry on...

Uh, yeah.

If every Word of God applies to every believer, what's left to divide?

That question probably hasn't hit home with you yet.

s

What do you think "rightly dividing the word of truth" means? I thought it meant rightly interpreting Scripture to you.

By "divide" above do you mean reject?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[smaller]

What do you think "rightly dividing the word of truth" means? I thought it meant rightly interpreting Scripture to you.

Part 1 of 'rightly' dividing means understanding that every Word of God applies to every believer.

By "divide" above do you mean reject?

Well, let's see? I've said many times now that every Word of God applies to every believer and cited text for same.

So, how is it you came up with the above?

pretty funny...

 

[Elijah674]

What do you think "rightly dividing the word of truth" means? I thought it meant rightly interpreting Scripture to you.

Part 1 of 'rightly' dividing means understanding that every Word of God applies to every believer.

By "divide" above do you mean reject?

Well, let's see? I've said many times now that every Word of God applies to every believer and cited text for same.

So, how is it you came up with the above?

pretty funny...

Not funny, just not with understanding.
But carry on, so far 'i' agree. The 7 Th Day Sabbath started from day one.

--Elijah

 

[dadof10]

What do you think "rightly dividing the word of truth" means? I thought it meant rightly interpreting Scripture to you.

Part 1 of 'rightly' dividing means understanding that every Word of God applies to every believer.

By "divide" above do you mean reject?

Well, let's see? I've said many times now that every Word of God applies to every believer and cited text for same.

So, how is it you came up with the above?

pretty funny...

Forget it, it's not worth it. All I'm trying to do is get you to clarify what you mean here. If you are unable or unwilling to do this I've got better things to do.

 

[smaller]

Not funny, just not with understanding.
But carry on, so far 'i' agree. The 7 Th Day Sabbath started from day one.

--Elijah

The Law against the lawless came on day 1 of man as well E.

If you want the fast track on division it's shown on the first day of man and all laid on 1 man, Adam who received both blessing and the law containing the curse of death.

How might Adam have found life under the threat of death? (Man will LIVE by Every Word of God)

Wherefore the DEATH THREAT?

Bolded for your attentions.

For morning salt you might add in the flavor of Mark 4:15 to understand that it was not merely Adam there in his dust pile even though both blessing and potential curse was laid upon only one man according to FLESH EYES.

s

 

[smaller]

Forget it, it's not worth it. All I'm trying to do is get you to clarify what you mean here. If you are unable or unwilling to do this I've got better things to do.

Fine with me. Obviously we're not communicating well.

s

 

[smaller]

Moving on with the general observations in this thread, I take it that Jesus was speaking truth when He said, in effect, that man shall live by every Word of God in Luke 4:4.

Obviously this fact will bring difficulties to the table as there are floods of alternatives floated as speculations within Christianity.

Some of the classics used to, in effect, eradicate the Word of God from being applicable to believers are:

A. The Word of the Old Testament was only applicable to the people of Israel of the Old Testament
B. The Word of God is only applicable to those to whom it is actually spoken
C. The New Testament Words of God are in conflict with the Old Testament Words of God (yes, some seriously try to make this incredible claim.)

None of the above are remotely true or possible if we take Jesus' facts of the matter are they?

Are there other possibilities then? Uh, yeah. Part of the reasons various camps head down the dead end theological roads revolves around the failure to understand THE DIVINE NATURE of the Word of God.

We know for example that the WORD is both spirit and spiritual. Where we see Jesus saying "I AM THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD" (John 9:5) Jesus is not a ball of firey sunlight. That 'kind' of LIGHT, HIS KIND, Him, is spiritual light. What then can we say about HIS LIGHT? Most obviously it's a DIFFERENT KIND OF LIGHT than 'physical light.'

Some of these observations used to eradicate Gods Words I consider to be so inane to even bring them up as the concepts to 'get over it' are so entirely simplistic and easy to do, yet there are believers everywhere who still insist on running Gods Word through historical sifters or statement in time sifters in order to what? To what? Yeah. Eradicate The Word of God. And they think they make sense?

Maybe to themselves, they do.

There really are better ways to see.

s