Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | StudyBibleForum or MyOpinionForum? | 2 Tim 3:16 | Hank | 113959 | ||
Ed, I begin with a disclaimer, for I readily admit to the possibility of being in error regarding my sense of what you and Rowdy seem to be saying in regard to the inclusion, or exclusion, of biblical references in posts to this Forum. Accordingly I stand ready to be corrected in my critique of your positions if I err or do either of you an injustice when I endeavor to offer a summary statement of these positions. Both you and Rowdy appear to embrace the position that it is better to paint in broad strokes on the canvas of the "whole Bible" than to cite a specific passage or passages as support for one's views. Proceeding on the assumption that that is your stand and his, I offer the following observations. I view as most unwise any move to try to circumvent the stated rules of the Forum, which state clearly that users, whenever possible, are to substantiate the views they promulgate on this Forum by scriptural references. I think it a grievous error to adopt a policy of laissez-faire in which it would become inappropriate to require of a user solid scriptural support for his position on any given theological subject. For a user to assert that the "whole Bible" supports this or that proposition is patently vague and nebulous and actually says nothing. In the absence of specific biblical reference, his proposition remains unproved, lacks substance, and is worthless in a Bible study environment. To give as support for one's views the "reference" that the Bible as a whole teaches thus and so is no reference at all. It is essentially tantamount to citing "they say" as an authority for anything under the sun. Now, there is no one who abhors more than I the use of isolated bits of Scripture pulled out of context and entered as "proof texts" to support some foolish theological position. But even so, when this is done, we have something concrete to talk about, some basis on which to build a rebuttal. On the other hand, when we permit post upon post which contain no scriptural references and which, in fact, contain nothing else but the user's own personal opinions and conclusions, where can we find a pivotal point on which to lodge a disagreement or by which to point out error? In the absence of chapter and verse, what can we use as talking points? How can exegetical error be pointed out if no Scripture is ever cited? Of course, the Bible can be adulterated and abused -- and often is -- when people foolishly and often ignorantly quote passages out of context in a effort to lend a semblence of credence to a pre-conceived idea or belief. But the fact that this unsavory practice occurs from time to time on this Forum does not exempt anyone from accompanying his post with appropriate scriptural references. If we, in spite of Lockman's guidelines, adopt and encourage the practice of making posts ostensibly based on the "whole Bible" but lacking specificity, we are issuing to users what amounts to a de facto carte blanche, i.e., the unrestricted power to post virtually anything at one's own discretion with disregard to Lockman's injunction: To enter posts that are biblically based and whenever possible, to support those posts with Bible references. If I assess fairly and correctly the positions of you and Rowdy on this matter, then I must confess that I oppose them, because I hold that they will have the effect of encouraging even more opinion- and speculation-ridden posts and take us even farther away from a sound, exegetical examination of the actual words of Scripture. A post on this Forum, even though it may be on a biblical topic, is hollow and unconvincing, to me at least, unless the author shows he knows enough and cares enough about the word of God to take the pains to cite its very words as authority for the content of his post. Opinions are a dime a dozen. The word of God is precious beyond price. It behoves all of us to stand always in awe, in wonder, and in utmost and deepest respect for this peerless old Book. --Hank | ||||||
2 | StudyBibleForum or MyOpinionForum? | 2 Tim 3:16 | EdB | 113984 | ||
Hank I hope I made no suggestion of circumventing any forum rules or intent of the forum. The point I was trying to make that verses can be ripped from scripture and made to say most anything. And even utilization of exegesis of the possibly the whole chapter will not reveal the error of this until the supposed doctrine is held in the light of the whole Bible. For instance in the story of David was see polygamy and even when read within context of the whole of Samuel we see not condemnation of the act and in fact there is a hint of God saying had David wanted more wives God would have supplied them. Yet when we take the subject of polygamy and hold it to the light of the whole Bible we see it is definitely out of the will of God. My concern is this, correct doctrine can not be based on a verse, nor a paragraph, nor a chapter, nor a book, correct doctrine can only be rooted in the whole of the Bible. Therefore one verse or two or even a score of verses does not prove or disprove the truth of a doctrine, it is not until we hold that doctrine to the light of the whole Bible can we see if it in fact is proven or disproved. Many people are reluctant to accept that, they love to take their favorite proof texts to justify outlandish theology and when confronted with the truth of the whole Bible stand rigidly on their verse. Therefore it was my suggestion as I think it is Lockman’s that we refrain from trying to establish, defend or promote denominational doctrine on the forum. Since this is a Bible study forum let us limit our discussion to what the Bible is telling us within a passage. If that then leads to a doctrinal discussion the truth of that doctrine must then be established by all of scripture not just a favorite passage or two. What I’m trying to say is not to suggest we avoid providing supporting scripture but rather to ask and answer questions in way as to not attempting to establish denominational positions using a verse or two as proof texts for that position unless that position will stand in light of the whole Bible. EdB |
||||||