Results 3541 - 3560 of 4232
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
3541 | "That's just your interpretation."(?) | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 117008 | ||
"God gave me a verse today." 'Scripture Twisting: Read me First! 'by Daniel B. Wallace, Ph.D. 'This is the first in a series of occasional short essays on "Scripture Twisting." The purpose of these very brief essays is to challenge certain popular interpretations of the Bible that really have little or no basis. 'Abusing Scripture, Abusing God (...) 'One of the curious phenomena of recent times is how Christians have been using the Bible. Rather than recognize that it is a book made up of 66 books, each written to a specific people for a specific reason, we tend to wrench verses right out of their contexts because the words agree with what we already believe. 'Sometimes believers say silly things like, "God gave me a verse today." What's wrong with that? Two things: First, this approach to Scripture does not honor the divine authorship of Scripture. God gave the verse at least 1900 years ago. You may have discovered it today, but it's been there all along. To say that God gave a verse today is really an existential statement, as though the Bible didn't become alive until we read it a certain way. But revelation has ceased. It's all there in the Book. This manner of speaking almost sounds as if revelation continues. But the work of the Spirit today is decidedly not on the cognitive level: he is not bringing us new revelation. His work in relation to the Bible is primarily in the realm of conviction: he helps to drive home the message of the Bible, once it is properly understood. 'Second, this approach (i.e., the "God gave me a verse today" approach) to Scripture does not honor the human authorship of the Bible. When Paul wrote to the Galatians, he wrote a coherent, holistic message. He never intended for someone a couple millennia later to rip verses out of their context and wield them any way they so chose! Certainly we have a right to quote verses of Scripture; but we do not have a right to ignore the context, or to make them say what the language cannot say. Otherwise, someone could come along and say "Judas hanged himself"; "Go and do likewise"! Hence, one reason for the abuse of Scripture is due to a lack of respect for the Bible as a divine and human work. In this approach it becomes a magical incantation book--almost a book of unconnected fortune cookie sayings!' (http://www.bible.org/docs/soapbox/twist1.htm) |
||||||
3542 | "That's just your interpretation."(?) | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 117011 | ||
Repost of ID# 105607 Kalos: Until I stumbled upon this Forum nearly three years ago, I'd never been exposed to the idea that one really need not study the Bible, because God personally and individually reveals (in dreams, visions, seances, trances, hunches, and in various other esoteric ways) what He wants His people to know. Which, if true, would lead one to wonder why He troubled Himself to inspire Scripture in the first place. This claim to personal revelation might have some degree of credibility except for one thing. Among those persons who have appeared on the Forum and claimed to have been the recipients of personal divine revelation, no two have been in agreement. This fact certainly gives one pause and causes him to ponder whether God reveals Himself one-on-one. If He does, not only did He waste His time in revealing Himself to man through the common medium of the Scriptures, but He gives conflicting revelation as well. Who could imagine God wasting His time or being divided against Himself? Both propositions are preposterous. In view of the pandemic ignorance of Scripture in our time, even among professing Christians, one cannot help but wonder why Scripture is held in such low regard, as it must be, for what other explanation can be offered for such widespread ignorance? The Bible, to be sure, is not mute on the necessity of searching the Scriptures. What geometrician Euclid said centuries ago still applies to learning today: "There is no royal road to learning." And what applies to learning in general applies to learning the Bible in particular. There is no evidence given in Scripture that God exempts His people from studying and learning His eternal word, or that He causes His word to be superfluous and redundant by revealing Himself privately to individual Christians. It really doesn't take much savvy to determine which members of this Forum read and study the Bible and which do not. "By their fruits, ye shall know them." --Hank |
||||||
3543 | "That's just your interpretation."(?) | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 117012 | ||
"What does this text say to us, anyway?" - - - - - - - - - - - - - "Avoid adlibbing in Bible interpretation. Avoid free wheeling in Bible interpretation." - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'Avoid superficial interpretation...avoid superficial interpretation. One of the common problems in interpreting the Bible is this little phrase, "This verse means to me...." so forth and so forth and so forth. Let me tell you something. It doesn't matter what it means to you, the question is what would it mean if you didn't live? What would it mean if you didn't exist? What does it mean period is the issue, not what does it mean to you. 'Sometimes you'll hear people get together and supposedly have a Bible study which is little more than a pooling of ignorance. People say, "Well, I look at this verse and I feel this verse is saying..." It doesn't matter what you feel. That has nothing to do with it. It's not a matter of how you feel about the verse, it's not a matter of what you think it means to you. Avoid adlibbing in Bible interpretation. Avoid free wheeling in Bible interpretation. Haphazard handling of God's Word. 'We all want to acknowledge the priesthood of the believer...yes, we all want to acknowledge that we have anointing from God, the Spirit of God who dwells within us and the Spirit of God who dwells within us is the teacher who teaches us. We all want to acknowledge that. But that is not justification for flippancy dealing with Scripture. That's why in 1 Timothy 5:17 it says, "The elders who work hard in the Scripture are worthy of double honor." It is hard work. 'Avoid superficial interpretation. Avoid "this means to me." That is not a statement that should preface any interpretation of Scripture. The question is, what does it mean if you don't exist? What did it mean before you were born? And what will mean it after you're dead? What does it mean to people who will never meet you? What does it mean period, is the issue' (www.gty.org). |
||||||
3544 | To Post or Not to Post? | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 119295 | ||
Mommapbs: I am very glad to see you back from Florida. I have missed reading your posts. Welcome back! Grace and shalom, kalos |
||||||
3545 | Ordaining Others... | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 121584 | ||
Justme: Good post. You are right. Individuals do not ordain ministers. Churches ordain ministers. That is, the authority to ordain does not come from an individual. It comes from a church. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
3546 | Read the verse in context | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 135333 | ||
"Please search for your question... ...before asking it" is what StudyBibleForum.com suggests. Perhaps StudyBibleForum.com should also suggest: Before asking a question about a verse, READ it in its context in the Bible. Often a question about a Bible verse is answered in the rest of that same verse or in the one following it. |
||||||
3547 | FREE online - recommended resource | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 135868 | ||
FREE online - Holman Bible Dictionary (http://studylight.org/dic/hbd/) 'The product of over 6 years of work by hundreds of people, the Holman Bible Dictionary manages to be readable and easy to use, yet take advantage of the finest modern Bible scholarship without heavy technical language.' 'It provides exhaustive definitions and articles, illustrations, charts, maps, pronunciation guide, and alphabetized entries from seven translations: NKJV, NIV, RSV, NRSV, REB, NAS, and TEV.' |
||||||
3548 | What is dispensationalism? | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 138030 | ||
What is dispensationalism? ['The following "Question" was asked by a member of the congregation at Grace Community Church in Panorama City, California, and "Answered" by their pastor, John MacArthur.'] 'Question 'What is dispensationalism? And what is your position, from Scripture, on the subject? 'Answer 'I will try to condense this because I don't want to get too bogged down. Dispensationalism is a system. It is a system that got, sort of, out of control. I think it started out with a right understanding. The earliest and most foundational and helpful comprehension of dispensationalism was: '"That the Bible taught a unique place for Israel and that the Church could not fulfill God's promises to Israel, therefore, there is still a future and a kingdom involving the salvation and the restoration and the reign of the nation Israel (historical Jews)."' (...) The part of dispensationalism I affirm with all my heart is this: '"That there is a real future for Israel," and that has nothing to do with some kind of extrabiblical system. That has nothing to do with some developed sort of grid placed over Scripture. The reason that I believe you have to have a future for Israel is because that is what God promised. (...) 'So my dispensationalism, if you want to use that term, is only that which can be defended exegetically or expositionally out of the Scripture, and by a simple clear interpretation of the Old Testament--it is obvious God promised a future kingdom to Israel. And when somebody comes along and says all the promises of the kingdom to Israel are fulfilled in the Church, the burden of proof is not on me, it's on them. The simplest way that I would answer someone, who is...believing that there is one covenant and the Church is the new Israel, and Israel is gone, and there is no future for Israel... 'My answer to them is simply this, "You show me that verse, in the Old Testament, which promises a kingdom to Israel, where it says that it really means the Church--show me!" Where does it say that? On what exegetical basis, what historical, grammatical, literal, interpretative basis of the Scripture can you tell me that when God says "Israel" He means the "Church"? Where does it say that? That's where the burden of proof really lies. A straightforward understanding of the Old Testament leads to only one conclusion and that is that there is a kingdom for Israel. One way to understand that is to ask yourself a question. In the Old Testament . . . and if you wanted to get sort of a general sense of what the Old Testament is about, it's simply about this--it reveals God and His Law, and it tells what's going to happen to you if you obey it, and what's going to happen to you if you don't--and then it gives you a whole lot of illustrations of that--right? It reveals God and His Law and it tells you what's going to happen to you if you obey it, and if you don't--blessings and cursing. (...) '...the literal interpretation of Scripture. Listen folks, once you're not literal, then who's to say? Right? I mean, then why not just say, "Well, Israel really means 'left-handed Texans'? If it's not exegetical--if it's not in the text, it could mean 'Canadians'" How can you say, if you can't say what's literally there? ____________________ To read more go to: www.biblebb.com/files/macqa/70-16-9.htm |
||||||
3549 | It's time to raise the bar. | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 141995 | ||
Lionheart: You may also want to check out the following websites. This short list is the result of four years and literally thousands of hours of online experience researching Bible questions and answers. For the complete list of my website recommendations, do a Quick Search for ID# 120051. You may already be familiar with one or more of the following sites, but I'll include them here anyway. --kalos www.studylight.org - Look at this one first! 'You must check out this incredible online Bible resource site. It is packed with the most Bibles and study resources found on the net, everything needed to help you in your study of God's Word.' www.carm.org Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry Nonprofit organization aims to provide a central repository of documents about a range of religious doctrines. www.bible.org/ NET Bible: Biblical Studies Foundation The NET Bible (New English Translation) is a completely new translation of the Bible. Use and print out the NET Bible without cost for personal study. www.oneplace.com Live and archived Christian broadcasts from radio stations across the country and from top speakers such as James Dobson, Chuck Swindoll, and Charles Stanley. www.solagroup.org Sola Scriptura Features a glossary of terms related to the biblical end times, plus answers to common questions about the false prophet and second coming. [NOTE: If any of the above links do not work, please reply to this Note and let me know. I can then make corrections.] |
||||||
3550 | It's time to raise the bar. | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 149042 | ||
Updated List of Recommended Websites This short list (updated) is the result of four years and literally thousands of hours of online experience researching Bible questions and answers. For the complete list of my website recommendations, do a Quick Search for ID# 120051. www.studylight.org - Very Highly Recommended! 'You must check out this incredible online Bible resource site. It is packed with the most Bibles and study resources found on the net, everything needed to help you in your study of God's Word.' www.bible.org/ NET Bible: Biblical Studies Foundation The NET Bible (New English Translation) is a completely new translation of the Bible. Use and print out the NET Bible without cost for personal study. www.carm.org Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry Nonprofit organization aims to provide a central repository of documents about a range of religious doctrines. www.gotquestions.org Bible Questions Answered Bible Questions Answered by GotQuestions.org! Fast and accurate answers to all your Bible Questions! ... 56,117 Bible Questions Answered! www.gotquestions.org/archive.html Frequently Asked Bible Questions Frequently Asked Bible Questions - our most commonly asked questions divided by topic ... Frequently Asked Bible Questions. This is by no means an exhaustive list of our ... www.oneplace.com Live and archived Christian broadcasts from radio stations across the country and from top speakers such as James Dobson, Chuck Swindoll, and Charles Stanley. www.seekfind.org Christian Search Engine The mission of SeekFind.org is to provide God-honoring, Biblically-based, and theologically-sound Christian search engine results in a highly accurate and well-organized format. www.solagroup.org Sola Scriptura Features a glossary of terms related to the biblical end times, plus answers to common questions about the false prophet and second coming. Includes Revelation Commentary, an online verse-by-verse commentary on the book of Revelation. [NOTE: If any of the above links do not work, please reply to this Note and let me know. I can then make corrections.] Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
3551 | What is dispensationalism? | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 152526 | ||
What is dispensationalism? (The following Question was asked by a member of the congregation at Grace Community Church in Panorama City, California, and Answered by their pastor, John MacArthur Jr.) 'Question 'What is dispensationalism? And what is your position, from Scripture, on the subject? 'Answer 'I will try to condense this because I don't want to get too bogged down. Dispensationalism is a system. It is a system that got, sort of, out of control. I think it started out with a right understanding. The earliest and most foundational and helpful comprehension of dispensationalism was: '"That the Bible taught a unique place for Israel and that the Church could not fulfill God's promises to Israel, therefore, there is a still a future and a kingdom involving the salvation and the restoration and the reign of the nation Israel (historical Jews)." 'Dispensationalism at that level, (if we just take that much of it, and that's all I want to take of it, that's where I am on that), dispensationalism became the term for something that grew out of that and got carried away because it got more, and more, and more compounded. Not only was there a distinction between the Church and Israel, but there was a distinction between the new covenant for the Church, and the new covenant for Israel. And then there could become a distinction between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven; and there could become a distinction in the teaching of Jesus, between what He said for this age and what He said for the Millennial Age; and they started to even go beyond that; and then there were some books in the New Testament for the Church and some books in the New Testament for the Jews, and it just kept going and going and going until it became this very confounded kind of system... 'I really believe that they got carried away and started imposing on Scripture things that aren't in Scripture. For example, traditionally, dispensationalism says, "The Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) has nothing to do with us, so we don't need to worry about it." When I went through the Sermon on the Mount in writing my commentary, as well, I pointed out how foolish that is.' (...) There Is A Real Future For Israel 'If you take a literal approach to Scripture, then you cannot conclude anything other than that God has a future for Israel. What that means is that the Church is distinct from Israel, and when God is through with the Church, and takes the church to glory then He brings that time of Jacob's distress, that we read about earlier, purges, redeems Israel, and the kingdom comes. 'I don't want to say any more than that about dispensationalism. I don't believe there are two different kinds of salvation. I don't believe there are two different covenants. I don't believe there is a difference between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven. I don't believe the Sermon on the Mount is for some future age. I don't believe that you can hack up New Testament books--some for the Jews and some for the Church. I think that the only thing the Bible really holds up in that kind of system is that there is a future for Israel, and that's an exegetical issue. 'It is probably more than you wanted to know, but it is very, very important, because it preserves the literal interpretation of Scripture. Listen folks, once you're not literal, then who's to say? Right? I mean, then why not just say, "Well, Israel really means 'left-handed Texans'--if it's not exegetical--if it's not in the text, it could mean 'Canadians'" How can you say, if you can't say what's literally there?' ____________________ To read more go to: www.biblebb.com/files/macqa/70-16-9.htm |
||||||
3552 | Feel-good faith that has no convictions | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 155660 | ||
Feel-good faith that has no convictions ____________________ "The God we worship today no longer resembles the God of the Bible." ____________________ 'Final conclusion: Even with the proliferation of Bibles today, Christians are reading their Bibles less and less. I believe the evangelical church has only 50 years of life left. 50 years left of evangelicalism because of marginalization of the Word of God. We need another Reformation! 'The enemy of the gospel now is not religious hierarchy but moral anarchy, not tradition but entertainment. The enemy of the gospel is Protestantism run amock; it is an anti-intellectual, anti-knowledge, feel-good faith that has no content and no convictions. Part of the communal repentance that is needed is a repentance about the text. 'And even more importantly, there must be a repentance with regard to Christ our Lord. Just as the Bible has been marginalized, Jesus Christ has been ‘buddy-ized.’ His transcendence and majesty are only winked at, as we turn him into the genie in the bottle, beseeching God for more conveniences, more luxury, less hassle, and a life without worries or lack of comfort. 'He no longer wears the face that the apostles recognized. Or, as Erasmus remarked, “When you read the Greek New Testament, you can see the face of Jesus more clearly than if you were one of his disciplesâ€! A bit of hyperbole, but the point is worth underscoring: The God we worship today no longer resembles the God of the Bible. Unless we return to him through a reading and digesting of the scriptures—through a commitment to the text, the evangelical church will become irrelevant, useless, dead.' ____________________ www.bible.org/page.asp?page_idequals1825 (Where the word equals appears in the above web address, delete equals and in its place type in the equals sign (two parallel horizontal lines - the last key on the right in the numbers row on your keyboard).) |
||||||
3553 | What is dispensationalism? | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 160057 | ||
What is dispensationalism? (Repost) (The following Question was asked by a member of the congregation at Grace Community Church in Panorama City, California, and Answered by their pastor, John MacArthur Jr.) 'Question 'What is dispensationalism? And what is your position, from Scripture, on the subject? 'Answer 'I will try to condense this because I don't want to get too bogged down. Dispensationalism is a system. It is a system that got, sort of, out of control. I think it started out with a right understanding. The earliest and most foundational and helpful comprehension of dispensationalism was: '"That the Bible taught a unique place for Israel and that the Church could not fulfill God's promises to Israel, therefore, there is a still a future and a kingdom involving the salvation and the restoration and the reign of the nation Israel (historical Jews)." 'Dispensationalism at that level, (if we just take that much of it, and that's all I want to take of it, that's where I am on that), dispensationalism became the term for something that grew out of that and got carried away because it got more, and more, and more compounded. Not only was there a distinction between the Church and Israel, but there was a distinction between the new covenant for the Church, and the new covenant for Israel. And then there could become a distinction between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven; and there could become a distinction in the teaching of Jesus, between what He said for this age and what He said for the Millennial Age; and they started to even go beyond that; and then there were some books in the New Testament for the Church and some books in the New Testament for the Jews, and it just kept going and going and going until it became this very confounded kind of system... 'I really believe that they got carried away and started imposing on Scripture things that aren't in Scripture. For example, traditionally, dispensationalism says, "The Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) has nothing to do with us, so we don't need to worry about it." When I went through the Sermon on the Mount in writing my commentary, as well, I pointed out how foolish that is.' (...) There Is A Real Future For Israel 'If you take a literal approach to Scripture, then you cannot conclude anything other than that God has a future for Israel. What that means is that the Church is distinct from Israel, and when God is through with the Church, and takes the church to glory then He brings that time of Jacob's distress, that we read about earlier, purges, redeems Israel, and the kingdom comes. 'I don't want to say any more than that about dispensationalism. I don't believe there are two different kinds of salvation. I don't believe there are two different covenants. I don't believe there is a difference between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven. I don't believe the Sermon on the Mount is for some future age. I don't believe that you can hack up New Testament books--some for the Jews and some for the Church. I think that the only thing the Bible really holds up in that kind of system is that there is a future for Israel, and that's an exegetical issue. 'It is probably more than you wanted to know, but it is very, very important, because it preserves the literal interpretation of Scripture. Listen folks, once you're not literal, then who's to say? Right? I mean, then why not just say, "Well, Israel really means 'left-handed Texans'--if it's not exegetical--if it's not in the text, it could mean 'Canadians'" How can you say, if you can't say what's literally there?' ____________________ To read more go to: www.biblebb.com/files/macqa/70-16-9.htm |
||||||
3554 | agreed? | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 160512 | ||
"What we have here is a failure to communicate." -- The warden in the film "Cool Hank Luke" Repost: My advice to you is to lighten up on other forum users. You don't have to make personal remarks whenever someone disagrees with you. Posting to the forum is not a right; it's a privilege. To abuse it is to lose it. I kid you not. --Kalos |
||||||
3555 | agreed? | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 160516 | ||
Correction! The name of the film from which I quoted is "Cool Hand Luke." Cool HAND Luke -- not Cool HANK Luke. Grace to all, Kalos |
||||||
3556 | Using Love as Jesus | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 160521 | ||
You write: "Don't worry, you don't have to be a bible scholar to use the forum and benefit from it (although there are those types on the forum who believe differently)." Jeff, who are the forum users who "believe differently"? Name them. --Kalos |
||||||
3557 | 30 minute fun bible study for couples | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 168207 | ||
Hank: To "supply each person with a Bible in a translation common to all". Now that is a unique idea! Revolutionary, even. :-) Kalos |
||||||
3558 | Why is "literal interpretation" the best | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 168481 | ||
Why is "literal interpretation" the best way to view Scripture? [The following is quoted from the website www.gotquestions.org] '"Literal interpretation" means giving each word the meaning it would commonly have in everyday usage. Symbols, figures of speech and types are all interpreted plainly in this method and they are in no way contrary to literal interpretation. Even symbolisms and figurative sayings have literal meanings behind them. 'There are [two] reasons why I believe this is the best way to view scripture. First, philosophically, the purpose of language itself seems to require that we interpret it literally. Language was given by God for the purpose of being able to communicate with man. 'The second reason is Biblical. Every prophesy about Jesus Christ in the Old Testament was fulfilled literally. Jesus' birth, Jesus' ministry, Jesus' death, and Jesus' resurrection all occurred exactly and literally as the Old Testament predicted. There is no non-literal fulfillment of these prophecies in the New Testament. This argues strongly for the literal method. 'If literal interpretation is not used in studying the Scriptures, there is no objective standard by which to understand the Bible. Each and every person would be able to interpret the Bible as they saw fit. Biblical interpretation would denigrate into "what this passage says to me..." instead of "the Bible says..." Sadly, this is already the case in much of what is called Biblical interpretation today.' ____________________ www.gotquestions.org |
||||||
3559 | Why is "literal interpretation" the best | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 168518 | ||
"Plain interpretation does not exclude the use of figures of speech." 'The basic principle of interpretation is to interpret plainly. The word *literal* is avoided here because it creates connotations which have to be corrected. Plain, straight-foward interpretation includes at least the following concepts: (...) '(2) Plain interpretation does not exclude the use of figures of speech. Indeed, a figure of speech may communicate more clearly, but what it communicates is plain. In other words, behind every figure of speech is a plain meaning, and that is what the interpreter seeks.' (From "A Survey of Bible Doctrine, by Charles C. Ryrie." Ryrie Study Bible, pp. 1959-1960, Moody, 1976, 1978) |
||||||
3560 | Why is "literal interpretation" the best | 2 Tim 2:15 | kalos | 168520 | ||
Yes, John, context is important! 'Words have different meanings in different contexts (that's what makes puns work). When we consider a verse in isolation, one meaning may occur to us. But how do we know it's the right one? Help won't come from the dictionary. Dictionaries only complicate the issue, giving us more choices, not fewer. Help must come from somewhere else close by: the surrounding paragraph. 'With the larger context now in view, you can narrow your focus and speculate on the meaning of the verse itself.' (www.str.org) Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 ] Next > Last [212] >> |