Theology without the bible? ....

[OzSpen]

2Timothy 3 comes to mind.
The whole chapter.
Especially vs 16.
Now Paul at this point is talking about the Old Testament...he really didn't think that he was writing over a third of the New Testament.

As scripture is obviously written by men it really is a wonder how ordinary men were inspired by God.

And it's an important part of why scripture is scripture. I'd even go so far as to say that certain hymns that are known today are "God Breathed". Amazing Grace is one of those.

It has to do with holy truth and the Holy Spirit.

John,

We are told how ordinary people could write God-breathed Scripture:

16 For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eye-witnesses of his majesty. 17 He received honour and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, ‘This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.’ 18 We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.​

​

19 We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:16-21 NIV).​

It happened because of the work of the Holy Spirit in causing frail human beings to write prophetic Scriptures. The origin is the Holy Spirit but the means is through people.

That relates to the mystery of the ministry of the Holy Spirit. I don't expect unbelievers or doubters to understand or accept it. I'm not being naive but accepting God, based on what he has told us.

There is potential for typos (called variants) with hand copying but that doesn't affect the God-breathed nature of the originals.

Oz

 

[KevinK]

Kevin,

Would you please help me to understand which criteria you use to help you determine distortions in the Scriptures?

Could you give some examples from the word of God of what you consider are distortions?

Are you using the meaning of 'distortion' according to a dictionary such as the Oxford Dictionary: 'The action of giving a misleading account or impression' (Lexico 2019. s.v. distortion)?

Oz

I had an out-of-body experience that involved reincarnation.

 

[OzSpen]

On another forum site there's a Christian who holds a lot of respect for theology and writes articles for that site's responses. But he shows more and more on every article and comment that he doesn't count the bible as the foundation of a Christian's faith.

I bring up this topic because my responses to this person have been blunt and harsh. A growing attitude I don't want to keep growing and have it become habitual adversarial like to those I don't agree with or don't understand. Therefore I ask for anyone willing to discuss what it means to be a commited Christian without the bible.

Here are some points I've gleaned from this person that might explain or strength his views that the bible is not literal or a foundation for a Christian.
-------------------------------
•He does not believe in miracles. To him God works in natural ways and that is enough. This position is part of his approach to coming to nonchristians and seem sane while bringing a theology to them. But it also means he doesn't think Jesus was reserected physically only spiritually. (Among other miracles recorded that are ignored or "not taken literally.")

•He holds the church as the interpretator of the bible instead of encouraging individual study of the bible. In that way individuals aren't prone to develop wrong interpretations and cherry pick verses to support their already formed views. In his view it's better to study theology, from the rich history, traditions and thinkers of the church; while privite study of the bible is dangerous to Christians.

•He holds the view that the bible is not trustworthy but has been mistranslated and edited throughout history. That the bible is not God's word, but that it is man's writtings not God's. One point he made I've heard here on cf.net. That the bible is not the word of God. However unlike the point made here that we should seek to hear God for ourselves and to pray and listen, this individual takes the view that the bible is not God's word as a point to trust church theologians and study church theologies.
--------------------------------
I don't know if you guys have met anyone like this, or hold some of the same views yourself. If you have and have some insight to Christians that disregard the bible, then I ask for your help. So that Christianity is not being divided and divisive among our brothers and sisters, instead of loving and welcoming to fellow Christians.

(In the defense of the person I'm referring to, he has a lot of well written articles with a lot of thoughtful theological understanding, along with the intent to deepen a Christian's faith, or to reach nonbelievers that don't believe in anything Christian).

NNS,

I'm coming into this topic very late. I hope that's OK.

You are dealing with a person who is promoting his presuppositions. I'll deal with 2 examples you gave: (1) Miracles don't happen; (2) Jesus' resurrection was not bodily.

Here is a technical article that explains 'Presuppositions as beliefs'. You have noted two of his beliefs: (1) Against miracles, and (2) Against bodily resurrection. However, we need to remember that you, he and I also have presuppositions that need to be supported by facts.

I would begin by asking him, gently and with an open-mind:

1. What caused him not to believe in miracles and for God's only working through natural means? What evidence does he have for that belief?
2. With 'the church as the interpretator (sic) of the bible instead of encouraging individual study of the bible', from where did he obtain that information? Which 'church' does he prefer and why?
3. As for his belief that 'the bible is not trustworthy but has been mistranslated and edited throughout history', what are the facts that drive him to that belief?
4. What belief has led him to know 'that the bible is not God's word, but that it is man's writtings (sic) not God's'. What evidence causes him reach such a belief?

I'd recommend you only deal with one point at a time and try to get behind how he knows this to be true. Which church/denomination does he follow? In what people write, look for the factive verb, 'know', vs the non-factive verbs such as 'think' or 'feel'.

I often encounter people with such views whose presuppositions are those of theological liberalism which has a very low view of biblical authority. Thus, miracles don't or didn't happen and that applies to Jesus' resurrection.

On CFnet I meet those who denigrate or deny the authority of written Scripture in favour of experiential hearing God from the inner voice - which I don't know if it's of God or the person's own thoughts.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

I had an out-of-body experience that involved reincarnation.

Kevin,

How do you define/understand reincarnation?

As a Christian, are you confident the Bible teaches reincarnation?

Or is that a wrong view by me to assume you view reincarnation as a biblical teaching?

Oz

 

[KevinK]

I define reincarnation (not resurrection) as repeating corporeal life by being born in a completely different body. Pretty much the standard definition.

No, I do not think the Bible teaches reincarnation. In fact, I have a strong suspicion that Scripture was "sanitized" of nearly all references to it.

Most people point to a single passage that seems to rule out reincarnation. That is, of course, Hebrews 9:27. I thought that, too, until one day I realized that passage could have another interpretation.

 

[for_his_glory]

I define reincarnation (not resurrection) as repeating corporeal life by being born in a completely different body. Pretty much the standard definition.

No, I do not think the Bible teaches reincarnation. In fact, I have a strong suspicion that Scripture was "sanitized" of nearly all references to it.

Most people point to a single passage that seems to rule out reincarnation. That is, of course, Hebrews 9:27. I thought that, too, until one day I realized that passage could have another interpretation.

What other interpretation can you possibly see in Hebrews 9:27? It's pretty clear in what is said there.

It's Asian religions like Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism that believe in reincarnation. Christ never taught it and God never spoke of it as it is appointed unto us that we only die once then comes judgement.

 

[KevinK]

What other interpretation can you possibly see in Hebrews 9:27? It's pretty clear in what is said there.

Yes, that's what I originally thought as well. Then I realized that all that passage may be saying is that after each life, there is a mandatory life review. It doesn't necessarily say that you only get one life.

Furthermore, it's just the kind of passage that a manipulative editor might leave in knowing very few if anyone would pick up on the inherent ambiguity.

I know how conspiracy theory this all sounds, but I am trying to resolve some of the things I experienced in my OBE.

 

[OzSpen]

I define reincarnation (not resurrection) as repeating corporeal life by being born in a completely different body. Pretty much the standard definition.

No, I do not think the Bible teaches reincarnation. In fact, I have a strong suspicion that Scripture was "sanitized" of nearly all references to it.

Most people point to a single passage that seems to rule out reincarnation. That is, of course, Hebrews 9:27. I thought that, too, until one day I realized that passage could have another interpretation.

Kevin,

'Scripture "sanitized"'? That's a call that needs substantiation.

See my article, Is reincarnation taught in the Bible?

In addition to Heb 9:27 I quote a verse from the OT that opposes reincarnation. I also provide two links to other articles that demonstrate reincarnation is not a biblical doctrine, even though some Jewish Rabbis promote it.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

What other interpretation can you possibly see in Hebrews 9:27? It's pretty clear in what is said there.

It's Asian religions like Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism that believe in reincarnation. Christ never taught it and God never spoke of it as it is appointed unto us that we only die once then comes judgement.

FHG,

It's important for us to understand the Greek word, hapax, in Heb 9:27, 'It is appointed for people to die hapax‘. What is the meaning of hapax? Does it mean to die multiple times, 10 times, twice or once?

See my article for an explanation of hapax, Is reincarnation taught in the Bible?

Oz

 

[KevinK]

'Scripture "sanitized"'? That's a call that needs substantiation.

Well, I'm very suspicious of the first Nicene Council as a start.

 

[KevinK]

See my article for an explanation of hapax, Is reincarnation taught in the Bible?

I'm reviewing it right now. You didn't tell me that I was the Christian reincarnationist.

 

[KevinK]

First comment, no I don't know Greek or what hapax means. That is why I asked on this very forum if someone could provide some translation support.

And actually it still doesn't matter. Whether Greek or English, 9:27 can still be interpreted as a conditional statement. You die once, and then the judgement.

 

[KevinK]

Another point, I know 9:27 does not say, "only". I said I was paraphrasing. I used that exact word. Yes?

 

[KevinK]

There sure is a lot in that article that I was never given a chance to respond to. Another, you said "Heb 9:27 doesn’t necessarily say dying only once. How does he know that?"

I'm not even sure what you arguing here. If it doesn't say that, then it supports my view of reincarnation. So you're agreeing with me?

 

[KevinK]

I'm sure there's more, but that's enough for now. It sure is easy to dismantle someone's views when you don't give them a chance to respond.

 

[OzSpen]

First comment, no I don't know Greek or what hapax means. That is why I asked on this very forum if someone could provide some translation support.

And actually it still doesn't matter. Whether Greek or English, 9:27 can still be interpreted as a conditional statement. You die once, and then the judgement.

Kevin,

I do read and understand Greek. In my article I show that hapax means the numeral 1, meaning once.

Heb 9:27 demonstrates the we die once (except for people like Lazarus) and there is no Christian reincarnation found anywhere in Scripture.

It's very dangerous making your interpreted out-of-body experience to promote a theology of Christian reincarnation.

The Bible is our standard and it confirms we die once, one single time.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Well, I'm very suspicious of the first Nicene Council as a start.

What decisions of the Council are you suspicious about?

 

[OzSpen]

First comment, no I don't know Greek or what hapax means. That is why I asked on this very forum if someone could provide some translation support.

And actually it still doesn't matter. Whether Greek or English, 9:27 can still be interpreted as a conditional statement. You die once, and then the judgement.

Who said? What is your Greek exegesis to support your conclusion?

 

[OzSpen]

There sure is a lot in that article that I was never given a chance to respond to. Another, you said "Heb 9:27 doesn’t necessarily say dying only once. How does he know that?"

I'm not even sure what you arguing here. If it doesn't say that, then it supports my view of reincarnation. So you're agreeing with me?

I'm giving you an example from Greek exegesis of Heb 9:27 that demonstrates hapax means the numeral one, meaning once. Heb 9:27 proves that reincarnation is not a biblical doctrine.

We are spinning the wheels in this discussion.

One of leading Greek grammarians of the 20th century was Dr A. T. Robertson. In his Word Pictures in the New Testament, his exegesis of Heb 9:27 was:

It is appointed (apokeitai). Present middle (or passive) of apokeimai, "is laid away" for men. Cf. same verb in Luke 19:20 ; Colossians 1:5 ; 2 Timothy 4:8 (Paul's crown). Once to die (apax apoqanein). Once for all to die, as once for all to live here. No reincarnation here. After this cometh judgement (meta touto krisi). Death is not all. Man has to meet Christ as Judge as Jesus himself graphically pictures ( Matthew 25:31-46 ; John 5:25-29 ) [source].​

​

Oz

 

[KevinK]

One question, when you referenced your article, did you not realize that I was the Christian reincarnationist you quoted therein?