Religion III

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by dnlgfnk

Don't spend much time on this, Porchy. It's been done before...

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...ostcount=18722

The last link is expired, but the late Dr. Young spoke from his Reformed tradition...

https://medalumni.upstate.edu/file/p...FrankYoung.pdf

...when arriving at a different conclusion than Dr. Boomsma utilizing the same method as Boomsma, and for that matter, Boxcar.

Of course Sola Scriptura is taught in the bible! Are you kidding?

Deut 4:2
2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.
NIV

And,

Deut 12:32
32 See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.
NIV

And,

Prov 30:5-6
5 "Every word of God is flawless;
he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.
6 Do not add to his words,
or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.
NIV

And,

Rev 22:18-19
18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19 And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
NIV

And then we have this from Jesus' mouth:

Matt 4:4
4 But He answered and said, "It is written, 'Man shall not live on bread alone , but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.'"
NASB

"Out of the mouth of God" -- not out of the mouths men!

Can the scriptures possibly be any clearer than this!?

And have you so soon forgotten what the single biggest problem with religious establishment of Jesus' day was? Was it not that the Pharisees, scribes, lawyers, etc. added to God's Word!? And didn't Jesus rebuke them sharply for this great sin!?

Mark 7:1-8
7:1 The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and 2 saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were "unclean," that is, unwashed. 3(The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. 4 When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions , such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.)

5 So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with 'unclean' hands?"

6 He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

"'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
7 They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.'

8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men."
NIV

[Light]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Finally, at the end of the day the bible is self-interpretive.

Liar, Liar pants in fire.

You don't believe that for one second and have vehemently demonstrated that in Religion I,II and III. OOH I can't wait for the sequel, Religion IV. I wonder what you'll lie about then.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Light

Liar, Liar pants in fire.

You don't believe that for one second and have vehemently demonstrated that in Religion I,II and III. OOH I can't wait for the sequel, Religion IV. I wonder what you'll lie about then.

It most certainly is self-interpretative to all those who follow common-sense hermeneutical rules of which five such rules come immediately to mind:

Scripture interprets itself

1. in the immediate context of the passage or
2. in the intermediate context of the book in which a given passage is found or
3. in the macro context of the entire bible or
4. where specific key terms or phrases have been used previously or
5. in the cultural-historical context in which a passage was written.

Furthermore, the over-arching hermeneutical rule is that since scripture teaches that God cannot lie then an interpretation of a passage cannot contradict any other passage in scripture. In other words, any given interpretation cannot violate the Law of Noncontradiction.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by porchy44

My brother is a Baptist Minister. He has never met a "straw man" he can't knock down !.

If this is true, your brother would be a man after me own heart.

I wonder what your brother would do with Jer 31:36 wherein God promises that Israel would never cease to be a nation before Him; yet, as we all know Israel did cease to be a nation in 70 A.D. Did God promise fail?

And what would your brother have to say about Jer 33:18 wherein God promised that the levitical priesthood would continue forever; yet, again, the levitical priesthood ceased to exist at the same time the second temple did in 70 A.D. Another failed promise?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by boxcar

If this is true, your brother would be a man after me own heart.

I wonder what your brother would do with Jer 31:36 wherein God promises that Israel would never cease to be a nation before Him; yet, as we all know Israel did cease to be a nation in 70 A.D. Did God promise fail?

And what would your brother have to say about Jer 33:18 wherein God promised that the levitical priesthood would continue forever; yet, again, the levitical priesthood ceased to exist at the same time the second temple did in 70 A.D. Another failed promise?

If Hcap had made those two promises...I bet you'd have no problem calling him a "LIAR!".

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

If Hcap had made those two promises...I bet you'd have no problem calling him a "LIAR!".

Not only that -- BUT if IFS and BUTS were candy and nuts, everyday would be Christmas.

[Light]

Originally Posted by boxcar

It most certainly is self-interpretative to all those who follow common-sense hermeneutical rules of which five such rules come immediately to mind:

Scripture interprets itself

1. in the immediate context of the passage or
2. in the intermediate context of the book in which a given passage is found or
3. in the macro context of the entire bible or
4. where specific key terms or phrases have been used previously or
5. in the cultural-historical context in which a passage was written.

Furthermore, the over-arching hermeneutical rule is that since scripture teaches that God cannot lie then an interpretation of a passage cannot contradict any other passage in scripture. In other words, any given interpretation cannot violate the Law of Noncontradiction.

NOW you say IF one uses "hermeneutical rules" to interpret the Bible then its acceptable. Then say THAT instead of saying "the Bible is self-interpretive".

Continuously moving the goal posts and continuously contradicting yourself to protect your fragile ego are signs of a lost soul.

[porchy44]

Originally Posted by boxcar

It most certainly is self-interpretative to all those who follow common-sense hermeneutical rules......

If the Bible were indeed clear, how can we account for the fact that Protestants who have taken it as their only authentic guide have so failed to agree among themselves as to what it means that they have split up into over four hundred different and conflicting sects?

Hard to grasp, that the Holy Spirit has anything to do with such a host of contradictory interpretations.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Light

NOW you say IF one uses "hermeneutical rules" to interpret the Bible then its acceptable. Then say THAT instead of saying "the Bible is self-interpretive".

Continuously moving the goal posts and continuously contradicting yourself to protect your fragile ego are signs of a lost soul.

I didn't say that. I didn't say anything about "acceptable". Interpretation is work. Our understanding is inextricably linked to interpretation. If we want the scriptures to speak plainly to our understanding, then there must be rules to guide us in our work. (Elementary, Dr. Watson.) Consistent use of sound hermeneutical rules will reveal that scripture interprets itself. Scripture bears witness to God's truthfulness and faithfulness.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by porchy44

If the Bible were indeed clear, how can we account for the fact that Protestants who have taken it as their only authentic guide have so failed to agree among themselves as to what it means that they have split up into over four hundred different and conflicting sects?

Hard to grasp, that the Holy Spirit has anything to do with such a host of contradictory interpretations.

Scripture could be likened to the Law of Moses. Please pay close attention to the principles Paul lays out for us in the following passage:

Rom 7:3-21
4 Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, that we might bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter. 7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be!

Commentary: Substitute Scriptures for "Law" and the term "sin" for such terms as ambiguous, obscure, difficult, unclear, murky, etc. in the above question. Since the bible itself claims the perspicuity of scripture, we might not want to be too quick to lay blame on God's Word for man's natural propensity to butcher it.

On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "You shall not covet." 8 But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. 9 And I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive, and I died; 10 and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; 11 for sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, deceived me, and through it killed me. 12 So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

Second Principle: Doesn't your very objection give affirmation to v. 11? "If the bible were indeed clear...". Your flesh (sinful nature) has deceived you into wording your objection and question as you have! We all have indwelling sin within us. And it's this indwelling sin that casts aspersions upon the Word of God and even the ministry of the Holy Spirit. So...just as the Law of Moses is holy, righteous and good, so too is all the Word of God. People, even well-meaning, pious Christians reach different interpretations for any number of reasons. But that's because we're fallible in more ways than one!

13 Therefore did that which is good become a cause of death for me? May it never be! Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by effecting my death through that which is good, that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful. 14 For we know that the Law is spiritual; but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. 15 For that which I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. 16 But if I do the very thing I do not wish to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that it is good. 17 So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which indwells me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the wishing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. 19 For the good that I wish, I do not do; but I practice the very evil that I do not wish. 20 But if I am doing the very thing I do not wish, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 21 I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wishes to do good.
NASB

Pay close attention to the bolded parts! So, before any of us pick up stones to cast at the Word of God or at the Holy Spirit in his ministerial work, we might want to humble ourselves and consider our own spiritual condition.

Below is a link to a short article that speaks to the doctrine of perspicuity. . Two passages that teach this doctrine is Ps 119:105 and 2Pet 1:19.

https://www.ligonier.org/learn/artic...ity-scripture/

[Light]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I didn't say that. I didn't say anything about "acceptable". Interpretation is work. Our understanding is inextricably linked to interpretation. If we want the scriptures to speak plainly to our understanding, then there must be rules to guide us in our work. (Elementary, Dr. Watson.) Consistent use of sound hermeneutical rules will reveal that scripture interprets itself. Scripture bears witness to God's truthfulness and faithfulness.

If you have to rely on Hermeneutics to know God, then you definitely don't know God, You simply have an "idea" of God which is nothing but an idea like any other idea.

The vastly superior interpretation of the Bible and God is experiential simply because God is an experience not a discussion for interpretation and analysis.

When Jesus said "I and my Father are one" he did not say it from Hermeneutics but from experience because God flows through him.

I and God are one, as well as we all are one with God. Through experiences in my life I have found God within. I know it 100%.

Your job is to KNOW that which is hidden within you, not play intellectual games with "Hermeneutics" which does nothing to bring God into your heart but to distance God from yourself through the defense of your intellect.

When you stand in front of God, with your heart broken and you have nothing, you will know what futility it is to speak words or think thoughts. There is something much greater.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Light

If you have to rely on Hermeneutics to know God, then you definitely don't know God, You simply have an "idea" of God which is nothing but an idea like any other idea.

The vastly superior interpretation of the Bible and God is experiential simply because God is an experience not a discussion for interpretation and analysis.

When Jesus said "I and my Father are one" he did not say it from Hermeneutics but from experience because God flows through him.

I and God are one, as well as we all are one with God. Through experiences in my life I have found God within. I know it 100%.

Your job is to KNOW that which is hidden within you, not play intellectual games with "Hermeneutics" which does nothing to bring God into your heart but to distance God from yourself through the defense of your intellect.

When you stand in front of God, with your heart broken and you have nothing, you will know what futility it is to speak words or think thoughts. There is something much greater.

The hermeneutics I rely upon are biblical, as I follow how the prophets, the apostles and Jesus himself interpreted the scriptures. But you? You are rebel and were that way from birth. You follow no one save for your profane theories, philosophies and worldly religions.

[Light]

Originally Posted by boxcar

The hermeneutics I rely upon are biblical, as I follow how the prophets, the apostles and Jesus himself interpreted the scriptures. But you? You are rebel and were that way from birth. You follow no one save for your profane theories, philosophies and worldly religions.

As I told you, Jesus did not follow hermeneutics which is for the clueless like you.

If you listened to Jesus when he said "the Kingdom of God is within you", then you would come to KNOW GOD IS IN YOU. You don't need hermeneutics.

Nor would you need a priest nor a church nor a pope nor an idiot like you who doesn't even have a clue who he is to tell you how to "interpret God" which is the most stupidest thing anyone can ever say. That is clearly the definition of an imbecile.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by boxcar

The hermeneutics I rely upon are biblical, as I follow how the prophets, the apostles and Jesus himself interpreted the scriptures. But you?

The truth is that you have no idea about how the prophets, the apostles and Jesus "truly" interpreted the scriptures; your "knowledge" rests entirely upon some heavily-edited documents which the Roman Catholic Church has compiled in order to further some future agenda. Do some investigation on the "integrity" of the Roman Catholic Church, and when you've learned of its checkered past...then come back and tell us how much credence we should place on its religious dogma.

Actions speak louder than words, friend.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Light

As I told you, Jesus did not follow hermeneutics which is for the clueless like you.

If you listened to Jesus when he said "the Kingdom of God is within you", then you would come to KNOW GOD IS IN YOU. You don't need hermeneutics.

Nor would you need a priest nor a church nor a pope nor an idiot like you who doesn't even have a clue who he is to tell you how to "interpret God" which is the most stupidest thing anyone can ever say. That is clearly the definition of an imbecile.

But WHY would I listen to anything by Jesus since it's all about the "experience"?

You keep forgetting that Jesus also told the same Pharisees that the kingdom would be taken from them and given to another nation.