Scriptural fundamentalism & literal interpretation

[reba]

Exactly the point of my report..

 

[JohnDB]

Exactly the point of my report..

That's why we are trying desperately to keep things as generic as possible but state truth.

Should we avoid truth because of bruised feelings?
Of course not.
But at the same time let those with ears hear the words of wisdom.

 

[Cygnus]

There is spiritual truth which lies beneath the surface, but it is not necessarily secret or esoteric. For example how did Abraham know that God would provide Himself a Lamb? Abraham is deemed to be a prophet, and while he may not initially have been aware of a lamb caught in a thicket beside him, he was aware of the Lamb of God slain from before the foundation of the world. He also looked for a city which has foundations, who builder and maker is God, yet this is not disclosed in the OT. How did Abraham know that even if he killed Isaac, his beloved son would be resurrected in order to fulfil the Abrahamic Covenant? How did Abraham rejoice to see Christ's day?

Perhaps it was like this:
Matt 16 15 “But what about you?” Jesus asked. “Who do you say I am?” 16Simon Peter answered, “You are theChrist, the Son of the living God.” 17Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by My Father in heaven

 

[OzSpen]

Who here has?

What's the deeper knowledge of a Scripture that some are talking about?

 

[reba]

That's why we are trying desperately to keep things as generic as possible but state truth.

Should we avoid truth because of bruised feelings?
Of course not.
But at the same time let those with ears hear the words of wisdom.

Absolutely not..

 

[reba]

What's the deeper knowledge of a Scripture that some are talking about?

Why ask me about what other are thinking or saying?

 

[OzSpen]

13This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words.c14The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit." (1 Corinthians 2:13-14 NIV)

Christianity is definitely esoteric. What I resist is calling people who have this God given power of knowledge and discernment 'Gnostics', when all we really are is, by definition, 'gnostic' (little 'g').

Christianity is definitely NOT esoteric. It requires the literal interpretation of Scripture, application of these Scriptures to life, and the gifts of the Spirit in operation when the local church gathers.

See the brief article, 'What is Christian Gnosticism?' (Got Questions?), which demonstrates that the 'deeper knowledge', i.e. esoteric knowledge, is not Christianity at all.

I fully support the continuing gifts of the Spirit in the church or church group gathering. However, that is not esoteric knowledge. That is gifting of details by the Holy Spirit's power. It is NOT a meaning of getting to the 'deeper meaning' of Scripture. Like it or not, that latter emphasis is Gnostic and it is a heresy that had to be addressed in the first 3 centuries of the church's existence and it has re-emerged in recent decades. You are promoting it on this forum.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Why ask me about what other are thinking or saying?

You are an Administrator and you are participating in this thread. That's why I asked you to discern what others are saying.

 

[reba]

Thank you i understand .

 

[OzSpen]

Surely you are aware of how it was Paul's gleaning of spiritual truth beneath the plain words of the law that devastated Judaism. Yet you reject that altogether as a valid source of learning. What you should be rejecting is erroneous esoteric learning, not esotericism altogether. I shared an example of Paul's esotericism already in this thread. Did you catch it? Turns out not muzzling the oxen wasn't really about the oxen after all. But if we listen to you we should never allow such interpretation to creep into the church.

Jethro,

You claim to have given an example of Paul's gleaning spiritual truth from beneath the plain words. I'm still waiting for your exegesis and exposition of the passage you gave: 1 Corinthians 2:13-14 NIV

You want this to mean esoteric knowledge, spiritual truths beneath the words, but you have not demonstrated that this is what Paul was teaching. I'll wait for your exegesis.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Then Paul was a gnostic.
Your essential problem is you are tainted by the connotation that 'esoteric' has attached to it. The Bible is FULL of esoteric knowledge. Only the person with the Holy Spirit is entitled to see and understand that knowledge. That is by pure definition 'esoteric':

"intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest."
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1GIWA_enUS585US585&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=esoteric definition​

No, you have made him a Gnostic by your understanding of esoteric knowledge. The Bible is not full of esoteric knowledge. The Bible is full of information that needs to be interpreted literally. The Holy Spirit gives gifts in the congregation but they are not gifts of esoteric knowledge to get behind Scripture. They are words of knowledge, words of wisdom - but that is not esoteric knowledge of Scripture.

 

[for_his_glory]

Wow, what a thread. As has been posted, spiritual matters are spiritually discerned. The Holy Spirit helps us with this. Scriptures back this up.

The worst thing one could do is to reject the esoteric revelations of the Holy Spirit. Personally, I'd be scared to reject the Holy Spirit.

The only reason that the Holy Spirit would reveal spiritual insight to a believer, is because they're ready for it. To receive it, to grow, to mature.

To outright reject the works of the Holy Spirit... is to reject the scriptures too. It's arrogant, and seems like it'd be a slap in the face of the Holy Spirit.

It's like Jethro said. Scriptures are both literal and metaphor. For our Lord to write it this way was necessary, as well as being conducive to our personal growth of faith in Him.

Where's the like button...................OK Edward, you get all of these

 

[OzSpen]

Oz,
I'm sorry I avoided this one so long. I am a Scriptural Fundamentalist. I know not what the other person meant but from a week or so after my salvation, I have called myself a Biblicist because if the Bible says it, I believe it. But there is one error in your question.

The Bible has been interpreted for all but a hand-full of languages and in English, there can be no more interpretation, that is over. I was recently informed that no man can know God's will but I informed him that is not true and it is not.

Over the past twenty-six years of study, God, through the Holy Spirit has taught me everything I know of the scriptures. When I was nearing my time of submission I purchased a small KJV and, on my own, tried to read it. Except for chapter three of John, the dumb thing was gibberish!

The night I walked off stage and I knew that a Spirit had just entered into my life, everything changed. After I had stowed my Amp and my Guitars I opened the little book and it fell open, as I recall it, to Isaiah 53, Isaiah's Gospel, as it is known and I fell on my face in worship... what had been impossible to comprehend, the Holy Spirit had just made as clear to me as "See Dick run."

I, now, pray for understanding and at some point, in a variety of manors, the Spirit teaches me what I cannot understand. But, and lad, what a but with only a single T. But I can read a given passage and I can understand perfectly what the Spirit has taught me and then He will teach me something else.

This can be disconcerting but after doing as the scriptures teach us and meditating and praying over the Word, the Spirit of God teaches me how they fit, hand in glove like. This has taught not to act to stupid to quickly but rather to seek understanding before I blow up on a bloke.

To this day I teach folks to give up the perfectly stupid practice of interpreting God's Word, save the former English Witch Ic led to the foot of the cross that now, a linguist, translates the scriptures for tribes in Africa.

Bill,

I can agree with much of what you wrote, but not this teaching: 'To this day I teach folks to give up the perfectly stupid practice of interpreting God's Word'.

The biblical teaching is that we MUST NOT give up biblical interpretation because of 2 Tim 2:15 (NET Bible), 'Make every effort to present yourself before God as a proven worker who does not need to be ashamed, teaching the message of truth accurately'.

'Teaching the message of truth accurately' means we have to interpret Scriptures accurately. So I insist that nobody gives up on biblical interpretation - literal interpretation as I've described in this thread.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

There is spiritual truth which lies beneath the surface, but it is not necessarily secret or esoteric. For example how did Abraham know that God would provide Himself a Lamb? Abraham is deemed to be a prophet, and while he may not initially have been aware of a lamb caught in a thicket beside him, he was aware of the Lamb of God slain from before the foundation of the world. He also looked for a city which has foundations, who builder and maker is God, yet this is not disclosed in the OT. How did Abraham know that even if he killed Isaac, his beloved son would be resurrected in order to fulfil the Abrahamic Covenant? How did Abraham rejoice to see Christ's day?

God speaking to a person (Abraham) about what God was going to do is not extra-biblical spiritual truth gleaned from 'beneath' Scripture. You are correct in assessing prophetic insight that Abraham experienced. But this is NOT secret knowledge gained from beneath the Scriptures. The latter is Gnosticism.

 

[OzSpen]

Is God literal that we can physically see Him or is He spirit that we can only understand who He is by metaphors that are used to describe His attributes? If all things are literal in scripture why do we need the Holy Spirit to teach us of spiritual things of Gods word if they are just all literal. Even our carnal mind cannot understand the literal in scripture so how could it ever understand the spiritual heavenly things that Jesus has already taught us. John 3:12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

Again, you are not dealing with the portion I wrote that you quoted. So, sadly, it's another red herring.

 

[OzSpen]

Am I a Gnostic (large 'G') by suggesting that much more than just literal scales fell from his eyes when Ananias laid hands on him?

"17So Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he got up and was baptized; 19and he took food and was strengthened." (Acts 9:17-19 NASB)

We know Jesus came to open the eyes of the blind (Isaiah 35:5 NASB). He did that quite literally, but he also did that quite spiritually. Do you disagree with my esoteric, gnostic interpretation of Acts 9:17-19 above? Do you feel it has zero Biblical support for me to discern and interpret it that way? (Actually, I'm not totally certain that later in Acts Paul himself does not refer to this being a spiritual eye-opening encounter).

Don't you think a pastor could make a spiritual application of Paul's experience of having his literal eyes opened, and taking in literal food and being literally strengthened after having Ananias pray for him? Like for_his_glory pointed out, Jesus himself set the precedent for using the literal natural things we know well to teach unseen, not so easily understood spiritual things. In fact, John 3:8,12 NASB is probably the single best place in the Bible that gives me the confidence to do that.

This is another red herring fallacy because you are not answering the content you quoted of what I wrote. If you do this again, I will not respond because when you use logical fallacies, we cannot have a logical conversation. Why? Because logical fallacies involve erroneous reasoning, thus preventing reasonable dialogue.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Wow, what a thread. As has been posted, spiritual matters are spiritually discerned. The Holy Spirit helps us with this. Scriptures back this up.

The worst thing one could do is to reject the esoteric revelations of the Holy Spirit. Personally, I'd be scared to reject the Holy Spirit.

The only reason that the Holy Spirit would reveal spiritual insight to a believer, is because they're ready for it. To receive it, to grow, to mature.

To outright reject the works of the Holy Spirit... is to reject the scriptures too. It's arrogant, and seems like it'd be a slap in the face of the Holy Spirit.

It's like Jethro said. Scriptures are both literal and metaphor. For our Lord to write it this way was necessary, as well as being conducive to our personal growth of faith in Him.

Edward,

Nowhere does Scripture call the spiritual insight from Holy Spirit gifts or revelation to be 'esoteric knowledge'.

You seem to be wanting to go under the radar by not addressing me directly. I find this to be subversive. I do not reject the works of the Holy Spirit. I fully submit to the Holy Spirit's ministry. However, I do not accept what you seem to be promoting as 'esoteric knowledge', which you claim the Scripture supports. The Bible does not support 'esoteric knowledge'. That is language from Gnosticism, Theosophy and even the occult. See HERE.

So are you accusing me of slapping the Holy Spirit in the face?

Oz

 

[for_his_glory]

Bill,

I can agree with much of what you wrote, but not this teaching: 'To this day I teach folks to give up the perfectly stupid practice of interpreting God's Word'.

The biblical teaching is that we MUST NOT give up biblical interpretation because of 2 Tim 2:15 (NET Bible), 'Make every effort to present yourself before God as a proven worker who does not need to be ashamed, teaching the message of truth accurately'.

'Teaching the message of truth accurately' means we have to interpret Scriptures accurately. So I insist that nobody gives up on biblical interpretation - literal interpretation as I've described in this thread.

Oz

If all of Gods word is literal as you say then why would it ever need interpretation? Would we not read it like a simple story like Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water (not saying the Bible is just a simple story). Take the book of Revelations as one example. Why would John have to be caught up in the Spirit if the angel was only speaking and showing him literal things. Couldn't the angel just sit and speak to John face to face?

 

[OzSpen]

If all of Gods word is literal as you say then why would it ever need interpretation? Would we not read it like a simple story like Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water (not saying the Bible is just a simple story).

What is the theme of this thread? 'Literal interpretation'. You seem to be confusing literalism with literal interpretation.

The problem is that we are not reading a story like Jack and Jill. Try that approach with the Book of Leviticus or the Book of Revelation. The fact is that we are dealing with a book that has been translated from Hebrew-Aramaic (OT) and Greek (NT) and the culture is Middle-Eastern. There are way too many nuances of language to read it like a Jack & Jill story. Take a simple word translated as 'love' and its 6 different words for the ancient Greeks.

Oz

 

[for_his_glory]

Again, you are not dealing with the portion I wrote that you quoted. So, sadly, it's another red herring.

Ya, I'm dealing with it, but you refuse to see it as you have a closed mind to what many of us have been showing you especially with scripture how literal and spiritual Gods word can be in parts. Did you start this thread to get a rise out of people or do you actually want to discuss that of what and how others believe to be truth to them by how they study?