Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Wearing the clothes of the Priests? | Lev 19:19 | MJH | 193494 | ||
Doc, Thanks for the response. See my other note about the Acts verses. Colossians 2:16 and on. (I have my Bible now). vs. 16 says “Therefore”, and proceeds to mention four things prescribed by the Torah and says that they ought not to let others Judge them on these things because they are a shadow of things to come, the reality being Jesus. (ie. this isn't a Plato shadow theory. Paul is using the shadow in the since that Jesus casts a shadow, and these things are that shadow.) THEN Paul mentions two things that are taught against in the Torah (worshiping Angels and false humility) and claims these things are "based on human commands and teachings" as opposed to God's commands and teachings. Then he ends it in Chapter 3:2 with, "Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things." The two are here again, heavenly things (ie things from God0 and Earthly things (ie things form man--which would include the "works of the law" that Paul mentions in Galatians") I see the two as separate and not a part of the same line of thinking. Paul is contrasting. I do not see Paul saying that both worship of Angels is bad and following God's appointed times is bad. What do you think? (please disregard my original question that started all of this.) MJH |
||||||
2 | Wearing the clothes of the Priests? | Lev 19:19 | DocTrinsograce | 193520 | ||
Dear MJH, I mean no disrespect, but I think your hope to arrive at a specific conclusions has caused you to interpret this book only in that single light. An inductive study of an epistle, seeking a sound historico-grammatical interpretation (see post #156918), always begins with a set of questions. Who wrote the epistle? When was it written? To whom was it written? Why was it written? The answers to all of these questions, along with context and grammar, influence how we interpret any given passage. After that's done, of course, the conclusions should also balance with other passages of Scripture that discuss the same topic, since the Word is coherent and self-consistent. Therefore, in answer to your question, I think that the verse cannot bear the weight of your interpretation. Again, no disrespect is intended, but this sounds like reading something into a text rather than reading something out of it. Note that I'm not arguing with the correctness of your conclusion (although I don't agree with it). I'm just saying that, in my opinion, if you are to support that conclusion, you'll need to do so from some other text -- preferably one that is speaking directly to the point. In Him, Doc |
||||||