Church words - are they legit or is there problems?

[Eternally Grateful]

One poster gave church speak definitions, church long thriving and surviving on skimming the surface. In plain speech as an alternative...

Grace: With no expectation of gain or reason to bow to expectations. eg. God opened the door to the Kingdom, a way past the previous barrier of death. Our expectations or attempts to find a way past served no purpose. It was simply a gift, not a compromise with our will.

a good church defenition

Eternal Life: Awareness or part of an eternal consciousness eg. the 'life' (personal awareness) expected in the new Kingdom regardless of form.

Here we go again. Eternal life. Literally Jesus said we will never perish (die) but we will live forever.

This is exactly what I mean about taking a word or a phrase out of context and making it appear as if it is saying something other what it literally says

Church: Jesus made it clear at the Gates of hell that His 'church' (a word unknown in His time) would be His movement based only upon the truth from the Father, not a government nor an institution, not ritual or tradition. Those latter are human concepts. Truth from the Father is only Kingdom related with no concepts of mankind involved.

a few thoughts.

1. Yes. the gates of hell will will not prevail. A gate is a defensive weapon, it is used to keep the enemy out. We are the enemy of Hell. and God promised the gates of hell will not keep us out. we will go into the world and make disciples of all nations. and these gates will not stop us.

2. Church, comes from the word Ekklesia - it was a well known word at the time, it was used to denote an assembly of citizens regularly summuned , it was used of the legislative assembly, A contingent, A congregation, A gathering.

when the jews gathered at the synagogue, they were an assembly, or church, or ekklesia, The jewish nation was gathered together in one place. And given Gods word and were called Gods people. they would have been considered the church of the OT.

Saved or rescued: Not a get out of jail free card. Beyond this realm - Previous to Jesus, death was the end all. We were saved/rescued from this finality by the Kingdom, previously unavailable. Within this realm - We are prisoners in a world built upon the notion of self, the cause of all sin we experience here. Understanding of God's will being better than our own selfish will is the beginning of repentance and showing a willingness to reject this world in favour of the Kingdom and God's absolute rule. We are saved/rescued if we are willing to change, from the traditional ways of adversarial mankind which only lead to death.

so your saying Adam was not saved? Noah was not saved? Abraham was not saved?

What do you mean by a get out of jail free card? No one gets out of hell for free. it came with a cost. the cost was the cross.

We are dead in trespasses and sin, we are without hope. we are doomed, as Jesus said, we are condemned.

That is what we are rescued from. eternal death. Thats why we are told if we believe we will NEVER PERISH (we have been born again, made alive, we who were dead) and have eternal life (we will live forever)

 

[SabbathBlessings]

That is what we are rescued from. eternal death. Thats why we are told if we believe we will NEVER PERISH (we have been born again, made alive, we who were dead) and have eternal life (we will live forever)

What is the biblical definition of believe?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

You're not paying attention to what I've said. You've also shown that you're either inconsistent in your praxis, or perhaps contradictory in your recognition of 'HOW' any of us determine the meaning of a biblical word/term.

Go back to my first few posts wherein a gave some hints on 'HOW' we can begin to understand the possibly intended meaning of a biblical word.

Thanks.

this is what you said

Right. In the field of Philosophy and Linguistics, there is the study of what is known as the "Religious Language Problem." And we each attempt to work through this problem and shore up whatever deficits that biblical language may have between our biblical terms and their intended referents.

What deficit is there in the following words.

14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.
18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God

Is there an issue with any reader readi9ng this and understanding what is said here

1. Jesus came not to judge, but came to save (new birth)
2. One is born again by looking to the cross in faith, as the people in Moses day looked to the serpent in faith
3. whoever looks in faith is saved.
4. They will never die (never perish)
5. They will live forever (eternal life)

I mean this is my point about a church word. it is plain as day when Jesus meant.

they are saved
they will never die
they will live forever.

if they do not have faith, they will remain in a condemned state.

Some terms aren't objective in the sense that they have any empirically obvious referent but are rather abstract terms that have to be evaluated rationally. From human experience, we know what 'jet lag' is; we don't really know what 'eternal life' is other than what we find abstractly in prophetic speech from the writers of the biblical corpus.

This may be true. but again, Does God make his word void? God tells us to study to show ourselves approved, rightly dividing the word. is not work meaning one of the things we can use, a tool God gave us.

Some statements in the Bible are clearer and more distinct than others, would you agree?

well of course. thats why we need to study. what do we do in these areas?

And while we might be able to come to a general consensus about a basic definition of Grace, our doing so won't by necessity help us to fully understand the complete way in which God will administer that very Grace. The reason for this is that we humans are limited in our understanding of superlative terms and we can go on and on asking interrogative questions about the extent and nature of whatever terms are under our scrutiny.

But God tells us

1. It is not of works
2. It is not a wage, it is not a reward
3. It is freely given
4. It can not be earned
5. it is a gift.

so if we see it appear to say grace can be earned, or it is channeled through a work we must do. should we not automatically question this thinking, since it contradicts what the bible says about Grace?

or do we say it is too hard. I need to ask someone more mature or more spiritual than me (say like my pastor or priest) and follow what he says no matter what?

So, what does this mean to me? It means that in my applied hermeneutics, I'm not going to attempt to be overly dogmatic and assured that, even after I've put in 1,000 hours of study, I fully comprehend what knowledge God has designated as being within His own sovereign jurisdiction alone.

You can study a million hours

eternal will always mean forever
Never will always mean never

unless it is specified in the context of the words being use.

an example would be. If you believe in me you will have eternal life, as long as you follow my commands, stop your sin, and continue to believe.

If there is no (unless you do this) then we should take the words by their meaning.

It also means I'll give other Trinitarian Christians some grace in the argument over the meaning and administration of grace.

Unfortunately, I am not sure what you mean here so I will hold off a response.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Here is your proof you stated - If I do not confess in my heart the gospel and here also I am confessing his truth based on my faith​

Thank you, You just made my point for me

You accused me of saying faith or belief equals confession

There you playing games, trying to make the word confession mean belief.

If you read my comment, I stated I confess BASED on my faith, I did not say that one means another.

The word believe can go there in your sentence exactly where confess is. So you are equating confession with belief.

Your twisting the words. sorry bro. this is not correct.

But that is not what Romans 10:9 states (a confessing in the heart) the verse states to confess with the mouth.

again, I confess with my mouth to God when I ask him for salvation.

romans 10 is about eternal salvation. Not saved in this world.. We are not saved in this world., we still suffer. we still have tribulation and trial. we are hated of all men.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

this is what you said

What deficit is there in the following words.

14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.
18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God

Is there an issue with any reader readi9ng this and understanding what is said here

1. Jesus came not to judge, but came to save (new birth)
2. One is born again by looking to the cross in faith, as the people in Moses day looked to the serpent in faith
3. whoever looks in faith is saved.
4. They will never die (never perish)
5. They will live forever (eternal life)

I mean this is my point about a church word. it is plain as day when Jesus meant.

they are saved
they will never die
they will live forever.

if they do not have faith, they will remain in a condemned state.



This may be true. but again, Does God make his word void? God tells us to study to show ourselves approved, rightly dividing the word. is not work meaning one of the things we can use, a tool God gave us.



well of course. thats why we need to study. what do we do in these areas?

But God tells us

1. It is not of works
2. It is not a wage, it is not a reward
3. It is freely given
4. It can not be earned
5. it is a gift.

so if we see it appear to say grace can be earned, or it is channeled through a work we must do. should we not automatically question this thinking, since it contradicts what the bible says about Grace?

or do we say it is too hard. I need to ask someone more mature or more spiritual than me (say like my pastor or priest) and follow what he says no matter what?



You can study a million hours

eternal will always mean forever
Never will always mean never

unless it is specified in the context of the words being use.

an example would be. If you believe in me you will have eternal life, as long as you follow my commands, stop your sin, and continue to believe.

If there is no (unless you do this) then we should take the words by their meaning.

Unfortunately, I am not sure what you mean here so I will hold off a response.

Tell me, have you been to bible college or seminary at all?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

That’s true, he holds both the teacher and the follower accountable, so we need to be careful what we teach and who we listen to.

Mat 15:3 He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ 5 But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God”— 6 then he need not honor his father [a]or mother.’ Thus you have made the [b]commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. 7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:

8 ‘These people [c]draw near to Me with their mouth,
And honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
9 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ ”
10 When He had called the multitude to Himself, He said to them, “Hear and understand: 11 Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.”

12 Then His disciples came and said to Him, “Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?”

13 But He answered and said, “Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. 14 Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.”

I believe a teacher will be held double accountable. especially if he preaches something false.

but it is still the persons responsibility to test the teacher and not follow blindly as sadly many do (i did myself for a few decades)

that was hopefully going to be a purpose of this thread. one of the tools God gives us is language, we should be able to use language as a tool to determine our belief or what we are taught.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

What is the biblical definition of believe?

the English words means that you believe something is true.
the biblical term or definition is faith, a trust, an assurance.

I can believe something may be true, but not have a trust or assurance of that thing.

a good example I heard was given a few years ago. I do nto know if you have ever been to the Niagara falls. but there is a spot in the Niagara river where there is some great falls. On one side is the united states on the other side is Canada. (see picture)

- Now imagine someone places a tight rope from one side to another
- This person then takes a wheel barrow and inside the wheel barrow he puts in large rocks, with a combined weight that would be equal to a normal human being
- This person then pushes the wheel barrow across the falls without falling in, He does this multiple times from one side to the other and back.
- the whole time he is doing this, a crowd gathers in awe of what he is doing.
- After a few trip. the person asks the crowd if they BELIEVE he can carry a human across in the wheel barrow.
- The crowed cheers, they all BELIEVE he can do it.
- then he asks if there are any volunteers.
- No one raises their hands, they get quiet.

You see. they believe he can do it
But they do not have any assurance of faith that he will make it to the other side if they get in.

they belief,
but they lack action, because they lacked faith

This is what it is with Christ.

Many believe (even demons believe)
but not every trusts God or has an assurance of God or are convinced in their minds That God will do what he promised.

so when push came to shove and God offers to take us to the other side of life, Only certain people raise their hands. they rest are quiet. or worse yet, they get angry and fight it..

we see this in the world and in our chatrooms today.

its sad really.

I hope this helps you to understand.

ps, the greek word in John 3 is Pisteuon - it means to trust, to have confidence in, to have faith to think to be true, to be confident about.

The best biblical example I can think of is in romans 4. And how abrahams faith was.

18 who, contrary to hope, in hope believed, so that he became the father of many nations, according to what was spoken, “So shall your descendants be.” 19 And not being weak in faith, he did not consider his own body, already dead (since he was about a hundred years old), and the deadness of Sarah’s womb. 20 He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, 21 and being fully convinced that what He had promised He was also able to perform. 22 And therefore “it was accounted to him for righteousness.”

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Tell me, have you been to bible college or seminary at all?

No,

But neither was Paul, Or peter. Or James or John.

so I am not sure what bearing this has.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

No,

But neither was Paul

Wrong.

Or peter. Or James or John.

They had the full teaching of Jesus directly. You and don't.

so I am not sure what bearing this has.

You'll figure it out. Maybe. If you can't, I'd suggest you pick up a copy of D.A. Carson's book, "Exegetical Fallacies" and go from there.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Wrong.

They had the full teaching of Jesus directly. You and don't.


You'll figure it out. Maybe. If you can't, I'd suggest you pick up a copy of D.A. Carson's book, "Exegetical Fallacies" and go from there.

lol.

well I see you are not up for discussion.

I am just asking about definition of common words. If you do not want to participate. that is fine.

I know about hermeneutics, exegesis and the like. I have only being doing it for years as a teacher in my church. I also studied under a few pastor teachers who graduated from the dallas theological seminary. Who themselves taught how to study the word using proper hermeneuics, proper exegesis, and how we should take historical perspective in studying, not to mention, using the original languages

Sadly, what I have witnessed over many years is people using eisegesis when interpreting the word.

Again. My goal in this thread is to help us from making this mistake when we see words or phrases used. and how we can look at what they really mean, to help prevent this eisegesis.

But that has no bearing on this thread. i am talking about words that many in the church are giving a definition which has no familiarity with the words actual definition.

Ie eternal does nto mean eternal
Never does not mean never
Grace does not mean grace
Repent means more than just to change ones mind, it means to repent of your sins
and many other words I see mutilated by church dogma,

but thank you for the guidance.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

lol.

well I see you are not up for discussion.

I am just asking about definition of common words. If you do not want to participate. that is fine.

I already implied earlier on that words in the Bible can't simply be "defined" without recourse to lexicons which the Bible itself is not.

I know about hermeneutics, exegesis and the like. I have only being doing it for years as a teacher in my church. I also studied under a few pastor teachers who graduated from the dallas theological seminary. Who themselves taught how to study the word using proper hermeneuics, proper exegesis, and how we should take historical perspective in studying, not to mention, using the original languages

Sadly, what I have witnessed over many years is people using eisegesis when interpreting the word.

Yes, I understand that. But there's more in the mix of full exegesis and applied hermeneutics than simply spotting and "defining" a biblical term in the context of the verse or local verses in which we find it.

Again. My goal in this thread is to help us from making this mistake when we see words or phrases used. and how we can look at what they really mean, to help prevent this eisegesis.

But that has no bearing on this thread. i am talking about words that many in the church are giving a definition which has no familiarity with the words actual definition.

Ie eternal does nto mean eternal
Never does not mean never
Grace does not mean grace
Repent means more than just to change ones mind, it means to repent of your sins
and many other words I see mutilated by church dogma,

Yes, I agree, but the problem is that the Bible itself does not provide the overall PRAXIS by which any one of us is to know how to apply full hermeneutical study. Do you understand what I'm saying?

but thank you for the guidance.

I have a lot more where that comes from, brother. And my insinuated point is that it's not necessarily clear, in all cases, that Protestants always do a better job of defining biblical terms and forming their dogmatics than Catholics (or Orthodox) do.

 

[timothyu]

Here we go again. Eternal life. Literally Jesus said we will never perish (die) but we will live forever.

In what form? What is the sense in continuing in a world we were cast into because we were no longer worthy of the garden. The Kingdom is of the flesh? I assume that an institution that abandoned the Kingdom to re-join the world of man, might want us to believe that.

 

[timothyu]

1. Yes. the gates of hell will will not prevail. A gate is a defensive weapon, it is used to keep the enemy out. We are the enemy of Hell. and God promised the gates of hell will not keep us out. we will go into the world and make disciples of all nations. and these gates will not stop us.

What is used to keep the enemy out is death itself. That is why it was said death would be the result of not following the will of God. We as a whole are the enemy/adversaries. That has been overcome with Jesus' resurrection. We were/are the enemy who now have a chance to repent of our adversarial ways and gain access to the Kingdom.

so your saying Adam was not saved? Noah was not saved? Abraham was not saved?

Saved to what at the time. No resurrection, no Kingdom.

That is what we are rescued from. eternal death. Thats why we are told if we believe we will NEVER PERISH (we have been born again, made alive, we who were dead) and have eternal life (we will live forever)

If we reject the selfish self serving ways of the flesh and become of the Kingdom of God with our focus instead upon the needs of all as Jesus said in His two commandments

 

[timothyu]

so when push came to shove and God offers to take us to the other side of life, Only certain people raise their hands. they rest are quiet. or worse yet, they get angry and fight it..

we see this in the world and in our chatrooms today.

its sad really.

Yes people like their lives in the world we have made in our own image and are hesitant to leave it. The basis of this entire world is selfishness and people see it in crimes, sin, authoritarianism, etc but self justify their own selfishness, using the ol' knowledge of good and evil to set their own definitions of each to suit their purposes. They are hesitant to leave the societal notion of self entitlement and instead serve each other in need without gain at their expense. They most often die focused on the wrong world and it's politics and ways rather than on the Kingdom and its ways, sating lord lord all the way.

 

[timothyu]

No,

But neither was Paul, Or peter. Or James or John.

so I am not sure what bearing this has.

Some people think this is necessary to learn theology and perhaps that is so but that is to learn the rules of a governmental institution using God to form their own kingdoms. To learn the will of God is a totally different path that even a child can understand. Jesus' first followers were not theologians but servants, slaves, women, the oppressed, all of whom readily understood His teachings of the Gospel of the Kingdom and needed no middlemen to dictate or rule over them and oppress them with institutional rules.

 

[Clare73]

I am just asking about definition of common words.

The meaning of "common" words is determined by their use in Scripture.

That requires more than a dictionary, it requires correct understanding of Scripture; i.e., in harmony with the rest of Scripture.
The best way to know the meaning of Scriptural words is to study the Scriptures in their own light.
Nothing else can equal it.

 

[timothyu]

Nothing else can equal it.

But man tries

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

They had the full teaching of Jesus directly. You and don't.

This is an interesting comment. Is it a simple oversight or something else?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I already implied earlier on that words in the Bible can't simply be "defined" without recourse to lexicons which the Bible itself is not.

And I agreed, in some cases that may be true, but not in all cases

Yes, I understand that. But there's more in the mix of full exegesis and applied hermeneutics than simply spotting and "defining" a biblical term in the context of the verse or local verses in which we find it.

Again, I said this is true also

But when i see what word (eternal) I do not need hermeneutics to understand what the word means. And if someone is telling me the word means something other than eternal. well I can know that they have made an err somewhere.

Yes, I agree, but the problem is that the Bible itself does not provide the overall PRAXIS by which any one of us is to know how to apply full hermeneutical study. Do you understand what I'm saying?

I think your reading way to deep in this.

Jesus said I will never die, and I will live forever (eternal life)

I do not need hermenuetics to understand what Jesus said.

Now. I have seen many a person eisegete this passage to make Jesus say something else.

Other passages may be more difficult. and need more understanding to understand the message (which is where hermenuetics and other stuff come in) but there are some words or phrases we should just take at face value.

I fully believe people do this on some of these words or passages, because taking them at face value would go against what they believe. so it is a cheap easy way to make it appear their belief lines up with that they make these words or phrases say.

I have a lot more where that comes from, brother. And my insinuated point is that it's not necessarily clear, in all cases, that Protestants always do a better job of defining biblical terms and forming their dogmatics than Catholics (or Orthodox) do.

This is not a protestant vs catholic issue.

this is a word issue,

I do not have to be protestant or catholic to look at a word and know what it means.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

In what form? What is the sense in continuing in a world we were cast into because we were no longer worthy of the garden. The Kingdom is of the flesh? I assume that an institution that abandoned the Kingdom to re-join the world of man, might want us to believe that.

Honestly my friend. I do not know what you are asking

Jesus said he did nto come to judge, He came to save

He said this salvation consists of being born again, That whoever is born again through faith will never die, and they will live forever.

He then made it clear. condemnation is what is at stake. he who believes is not condemned, he who does not believe is condemned already.

so what is the problem. what is so hard to determine what Jesus is saying.

It has nothing to do with continuing in the world. it has everything to do with our eternal state

will we stand condemned, dead in trespasses and sin.

or will we stand born again, alive in christ. not under judgment or condemnation. but saved.