Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Rowdy, Rowdy, are you sure? | 1 Tim 2:9 | Aixen7z4 | 132462 | ||
The idea of evaluating all available traditions in order to accept or jettison them, I am not sure of. I am not sure that it is worth the time, or necessary. The other idea, that knowledge is necessary for obedience is so obvious; I am surprised we find the need to mention it. When we obey God, it is with an awareness of him and our relationship to him. It is also clear that we must understand what he has asked us to do. Thank God for thus revealing himself, our relationship with him, and his will for us, thus motivating us to obey him. When God gave the Ten Commandments, he began by saying who he is. “I am the Lord they God” (Exodus 20:2). The people knew who was giving the commandments. Though they did not have the literature and the scholarship with which to discuss him, God had given then a show with sound and light (Exodus 19) to give them an idea of his presence and nature. This came after the ten plagues, the crossing of the Red Sea and other examples of his love and power. They were aware of who he was that was commanding them, and that was enough. “And all the people answered together, and said, ‘All that the LORD hath spoken we will do’” (Exodus 19:8). It is consistently clear and obvious that God tells us who he is and who we are before he tells us what he wants. As you say, we see it in the epistles. We see it also in the Revelation. “These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand … ‘Repent, and do the first works’”. And the sheep hear his voice, and they follow him. What I find is the Lord saying, “Behold your God” Isaiah 40:9. He delights that we would seek him (Acts 17:27) and that we should know him (Jeremiah 9:24). He says we should know his will (Ephesians 5:17). He says, “If you know these things, happy are you if you do them” (John 13:17). “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein” (Revelation 1:3). What I do not find is the Lord saying, “Study your God”. I find it sad that people would be discussing evidences for the existence of God and strange the people would be trying to analyze him for his omniscience, his omnipresence, his omnipotence, etc. Notice that these characteristics are not the ones listed in Jeremiah 9 (loving-kindness, judgment, and righteousness) or the ones in Exodus 34 (merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth). What is the difference? In one case, man is the scientist and God is the object. In the other case God is the sovereign and we are his subjects. What I do not find is the Lord saying to study his words. It is a fine point, because some equate searching the word with studying the word. Some scholars, incredibly, use “Study to shew thyself approved” to mean to make the word of God the object of intellectual exercises. Some believers read the word “Go” and they know what the Lord is saying, and they go. Some spend a lifetime studying words such as “Go” and they never get around to going. I never cease to be amazed at those who can analyze and explain the word “Love” to the nth degree, and yet they do not love. Their very presentations are characterized with so much pride and arrogance and aloofness, attitudes that one would not associate with love. The best experts in the word can also be so rude, so impatient, so dismissive, in their interactions. Yet they can explain the details of 1 Corinthians 13: that love is patient, love is kind. They do not show that they have learned to practice love. Yet they can explain why the simple expectations of our hearts are off base. Knowledge is necessary to obedience, but it seems that we can go too far in seeking knowledge, and forget to obey. God wants us to know him well enough to worship and to obey him. But it seems that it is the very awareness that God is too much for our minds that causes us to worship him. It may be, as Solomon says that study leaves us tired and too much study leaves us too tired to worship or obey. Yes, I know that some will say the more we understand God the more we will worship him. Some people never had a Bible. That includes Abraham back then, and the illiterate man in the jungle today. Some have only limited portions of the Bible in their language. Yet they have learned enough to respond to God. Thank God for the scriptures. We should read them. We should saturate our minds with them. We should seek the Lord and his will in them. But we can go too far. Some of us have gone to school to study the Bible. (It is not clear that we should have done that). But some have gone beyond that, to attach ourselves to particular schools of thought. That may be going too far. In so far as it fosters and maintains division within the church, it is clearly not desirable. The study of the word of God would have led to clear disobedience of the word. Surely they have studied the exhortation that there should be no schism in the body. |
||||||
2 | Rowdy, Rowdy, are you sure? | 1 Tim 2:9 | DocTrinsograce | 132492 | ||
Thank you again for taking time to reply, Nobel. I could go into details about how to narrow down our study, but I do not think that that is something you are really interested in discussing. Especiallly considering your fundamental presuppositions. By the way, this topic is one that has been deliberated many times by many believers. I recall an anecdote that showed this difference very well. I had thought I had posted it here in the past, but I do not find it now. Perhaps you would find it interesting: A Quaker went to a barber. The barber, while cutting his hair, comments on how he has obtained a book on Algebra and has begun to study this area of mathematics. The Quaker laughs and declares that he has no need for such knowledge. He that explains that he does not need Algebra to plow his fields or raise his livestock. All that is needed, declares the quaker, is the Bible. A Puritan went to this same barber. The barber, while cutting his hair, comments on how he has obtained a book on Algebra and has begun to study this area of mathematics. The Puritan commends the barber for his diligence and industry. As he continues the conversation the Puritan comments that God must be the greatest Algebrarian of them all! I am very curious about this notion that God does not command us to study Him nor to study His Word. Nobel, have you ever been in love? I'm sorry, I don't mean to get personal -- that question was rhetorical. You may have heard me speak of my far-better-half. Karen is quite a lady! Being in love with her, I find myself fascinated by everything that is Karen. I delight in finding out about her thoughts, her ideas, her ways, her opinions, her habits, her history, her hopes, her dreams, etc. etc. Finding out something new about her is a great delight! I listen carefully to what she says and how she says it. Even the simplest of comments is a delight. She is my beloved! I have this same experience with my God. Every little nuance of Who He is is of significance to me. Everything He has said, or done, or planned, or thought -- to the degree that I am able to comprehend -- is a delight. The incredible thing is that since He is infinite, no matter how many of us are with Him in paradise, we will never exhaust all that there is to know about Him! One day, a million years from now, maybe I'll come running up to one of the brothers here on the forum and exclaim, "Brother! You'll never guess what I found out about the Lord!" Regarding the "fostering and maintaining of divisions in the church" I think you will find very strong agreement and great unity in the essentials of the faith in orthodoxy. (The cries against divisiveness are most common outside of the conservative, old-time-religion circles. For example, liberals are always throwing this up -- along with the lack of love stuff -- as a means of avoiding the actual theological issues in question.) However -- and I do not mean this to sound sarcastic -- you will never be able to verify the veracity of these statements since you will not be learning anything about us or what we believe. Well, Nobel, I could go on and on about theology proper and hermeneutics. I love the Lord so much! I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Besides, since all of these topics have their roots in theology, we aren't going to get very far, are we? :-) Thanks again for taking the time to think through -- or at least talk -- about these things. I wish we could have been of greater assistance to one another. In Him, Doc |
||||||
3 | Rowdy, Rowdy, are you sure? | 1 Tim 2:9 | Aixen7z4 | 132568 | ||
My Dear Friend: I am constantly amazed at our ability as humans to simply miss the point. This exchange reminds me of an experience with a Seventh Day Adventist who came to my house as a member of my wife’s family and proceeded to try to convince me that I should join his sect. After hearing for at least the twentieth time that I had no interest in his tradition or any other human tradition, he thanked me for listening. Now, I try to be kind and patient and all, but the fact is I had not listened to his spiel at all. I have said here that I have no interest in any human tradition. Yet I read, “Thanks again for taking the time to think through -- or at least talk -- about these things”. I am left with the question: “What things?”. I had already decided a long time ago that denominations are a wrong, bad, unscriptural thing. I had felt no need to give any more thought to that. I can understand why there is a wish that “we could have been of greater assistance to one another”. But again, I had I have no felt need for assistance in this matter. I am certain everyone realizes when they come to this forum that the forum is not interested in having anyone to advocate any tradition. It says at the top: “Pushing one's denominational bias and engaging in debates, such as Calvinism/Arminianism, are strictly forbidden on this Forum”. But I understand how someone can keep edging toward that, and itching to do just that. The chance came when someone mentioned that conversion was gradual. It is apparent that one tradition or another does not agree with that. Instead of producing scripture to show that conversion is not gradual, one may choose instead to suggest that the person was wrong simply because they are in the wrong tradition, with the wrong set of rules of thumb and wrong principles of interpretation. Now, I suppose one might wish they would change that person’s mind, not only about their view of the time it takes to be converted, but about their whole tradition. They were supposed to examine the way they arrived at doctrines in general. And of course, one would recommend one’s own tradition because one thinks it is correct and using the correct way to arrive at doctrines. Someone else might point out that they arrive at their beliefs by considering all of scripture. But one who is eager to promote his tradition might try to suggest that he not use, say, narrative, to derive doctrine, because ones own tradition does not do that. Meanwhile, the person may not have done that at all, no even said they would do that, but one who is anxious to promote one’s tradition that one might have seen an opportunity, an opening. If one is trying to seize an opportunity to promote one’s tradition, it will be very difficult to do that on this forum. It might be said that one should not do that at all, since it is divisive and contrary to scripture, but that one should endeavor to keep the unity in the bond of peace, as saith the Scripture. But the very name one chooses for this forum may tend to do that. Listen, my friend, I think that many of us come to this or any other forum with an agenda. Mine happens to be to promote discussion of practical applications for the knowledge of the word which the participants here so clearly have. I try to convince them that knowledge alone is not enough, that we should be talking about ways to implement the word. More than that, I say we should be more careful to practice what we know, even here. We can practice kindness and peace and unity even as we discuss the scriptures. I have said repeatedly that I understand, because my own agenda has met resistance in light of the stated goal of this forum, to discuss the Scriptures. I think that each of us will have to take stock whether it is worth the pain and the pains to try to get our agenda adopted. I frankly have never understood what the goal is in getting a tradition accepted. I think the actual result is schism and tension in the body. I dare not suggest that a subconscious goal is to make one feel good to know that his point of view is accepted, especially if one is not completely comfortable with it. But the psychologist in me may lead me to say that. I guess that for myself there is no feeling better, because actually practicing the word of God can bring pain. I may well feel guilty for having led a particular someone into that. But I do that, and I believe that the God of peace will be with them (Philippians 4:9). So I am pleased to leave them with him. And it may be time to leave this with you as well. Consider what I say, and may the Lord give you understanding in all things. |
||||||
4 | Rowdy, Rowdy, are you sure? | 1 Tim 2:9 | DocTrinsograce | 132580 | ||
Dear Aixen, you wrote 'I have said here that I have no interest in any human tradition. Yet I read, 'Thanks again for taking the time to think through -- or at least talk -- about these things'. I am left with the question: 'What things?'. I had already decided a long time ago that denominations are a wrong, bad, unscriptural thing. I had felt no need to give any more thought to that." Please excuse me, I do get confused easily, and all of this really has me befuddled. The "things" were the ideas of ignoring or considering what you call "human tradition." The "things" were not human traditions themselves. Regarding the thought part: Since you had brought up the subject I had assumed that you had given it thought. I was thanking you for sharing those thoughts and taking additional thought to respond to my own comments. I am not too certain how one writes anything without taking thought. This is another assumption of mine, I'm afriad, but thought is a pretty fundamental aspect of communication. Your explanation and anecdote have, I believe, clarified your ... Sorry, I'm trying not to call them thoughts ... whatever you call them. Please consider my gratitude withdrawn for your having taken thought when no thought was intended. (Gosh that sounds weird!) I didn't mean to provoke you ... to thought or otherwise. Since the rest of your post had to do with a not uncommon tradition of rejecting other traditions in lieu of ones own (it actually goes back to Genesis 3), I am a bit at a loss as to what to say... and since it is a human tradition, you wouldn't want to talk or think about it anyway. One last thing, you concluded with the words "Consider what I say, and may the Lord give you understanding in all things." Although this statement in and of itself is scriptural, again I am perplexed. Why would you want me to do something that you are unwilling to do? Why would you ask the Lord to give me an understanding of all things? Do you mean that you wish Him to give me an understanding of all things except the traditions of men? In fact ... something else very puzzling ... you use the word "understand" several times in your post which, in turn, is about an unwillingness to learn, study, or take thought for something else. I have an anecdote to relate as well. I am reminded of a fellow I met in an airport. He spent quite some time trying to demonstrate the irrationality of logic. He, in fact, denied the validity of logic altogether. He argued about this at length, but -- much to his disappointment -- I was never quite able to grasp his position. I couldn't quite see how logical argument can be used to demolish the validity of logical arguments. Oh... you've got my head aching! I do not know how to discuss these things with you. How about we just forget it? What do you think? Er... I mean, how does that sound? Let's get on with the study of the Word! In Perfect Perplexity, Doc PS I'm a Reformed Baptist... we don't like denominations either... that's why we aren't one. :-) PSS I don't have an agenda except to preach -- Deo volente -- Christ, and Him crucified. |
||||||