Scripture vs. Philosophy

Vince53 · Dec 8, 2009

Brethren, I've noticed that some sincere Christians on this forum have hurt themselves by mixing philosophy with Scripture. They believe that they should study various men, decide which system they believe, and hold to that system regardless of what God tells them.

When confronted with a verse that shows their error, they respond that "the whole of Scripture" shows the verse to be false.

They insist on naming and categorizing each group, believing that it is impossible to obey the Biblical command to stay out of groups.

In the following posts, I am going to show from Scripture how to understand the Scriptures, how to stay out of groups, and why God's people need to avoid philosophy in understanding His Word.

BBAS 64 · Dec 8, 2009

Vince53 said:
Brethren, I've noticed that some sincere Christians on this forum have hurt themselves by mixing philosophy with Scripture. They believe that they should study various men, decide which system they believe, and hold to that system regardless of what God tells them.

When confronted with a verse that shows their error, they respond that "the whole of Scripture" shows the verse to be false.

They insist on naming and categorizing each group, believing that it is impossible to obey the Biblical command to stay out of groups.

In the following posts, I am going to show from Scripture how to understand the Scriptures, how to stay out of groups, and why God's people need to avoid philosophy in understanding His Word.

Good Day, Vince

Before you go and do that please in accordance with this text:

Eph 4:8 Therefore it says, "When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men."
Eph 4:9 (In saying, "He ascended," what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower parts of the earth?
Eph 4:10 He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.)
Eph 4:11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers,
Eph 4:12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ,
Eph 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ,

I your mind list the teachers that Christ gave for the express purpose to equip the saints and bild up the body.... list 8-10 people in all of history that you consider to be teachers if you could start in the 3 rd century that would be most helpful.

In Him,

Bill

JacobHall86 · Dec 8, 2009

Vince,

Do you believe in Free Will?

SpiritualAntiseptic · Dec 8, 2009

Vince53 said:
Brethren, I've noticed that some sincere Christians on this forum have hurt themselves by mixing philosophy with Scripture. They believe that they should study various men, decide which system they believe, and hold to that system regardless of what God tells them.

When confronted with a verse that shows their error, they respond that "the whole of Scripture" shows the verse to be false.

They insist on naming and categorizing each group, believing that it is impossible to obey the Biblical command to stay out of groups.

In the following posts, I am going to show from Scripture how to understand the Scriptures, how to stay out of groups, and why God's people need to avoid philosophy in understanding His Word.

The problem is that you are always going to apply philosophy to scripture. Ignoring it doesn't make it go away. It is much better to know what philosophy you are being influenced by and what philosophies were in the minds of the bible's human authors.

You can't avoid philosophy. Even in your post it is obvious that you have an Aristotelian view of words/ideas that you are applying to scripture mixed with a nominalist view of reality and a Hobbesian approach to God. These ideas are with us, they are part of our culture. But we don't teach philosophy, we pretend it doesn't exist, so we have no way of making sense of how we think abou things- which is determined by how we were taught.

JohnDB · Dec 8, 2009

JacobHall86 said:
Vince,

Do you believe in Free Will?

Why is this important?

Does the wrong answer mean that Vince is not a baptist?

If that is in the rules somewhere I have yet to see that. Please show me where it is in the Rules that Vince must hold to a specific beleif about free will in order to be a Baptist.

IN the meantime I am very much interested in hearing out what Vince here has to offer on this subject.

Hammster · Dec 8, 2009

Vince53 said:
Brethren, I've noticed that some sincere Christians on this forum have hurt themselves by mixing philosophy with Scripture. They believe that they should study various men, decide which system they believe, and hold to that system regardless of what God tells them.

When confronted with a verse that shows their error, they respond that "the whole of Scripture" shows the verse to be false.

They insist on naming and categorizing each group, believing that it is impossible to obey the Biblical command to stay out of groups.

In the following posts, I am going to show from Scripture how to understand the Scriptures, how to stay out of groups, and why God's people need to avoid philosophy in understanding His Word.

I guess the irony of this is still lost on you. :doh:

MatthewDiscipleofGod · Dec 8, 2009

I agree with Vince. I see to much philosphy in Christians circles and not enough scripture. That can be seen on these forums, in Christian organizations such as STR and from pulpits across the world.

SpiritualAntiseptic · Dec 8, 2009

MatthewDiscipleofGod said:
I agree with Vince. I see to much philosphy in Christians circles and not enough scripture. That can be seen on these forums, in Christian organizations such as STR and from pulpits across the world.

How you read scripture is determined by philosophy. Even what you are saying now is a philosophy.

JacobHall86 · Dec 8, 2009

JohnDB said:
Why is this important?

Does the wrong answer mean that Vince is not a baptist?

If that is in the rules somewhere I have yet to see that. Please show me where it is in the Rules that Vince must hold to a specific beleif about free will in order to be a Baptist.

IN the meantime I am very much interested in hearing out what Vince here has to offer on this subject.

WOW. I ask a question, which never once refers to someone as a Baptist or not, and you go on a rant. Be an adult, I have my reasons for asking his view on free will. I did not want to assume anything on Vince's position, so I was allowing him to respond to the question as he sees fit.

Calm down.

Vince53 · Dec 9, 2009

In 1 Corinthians 1:12, Paul writes: Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or "I am of Christ."

What's wrong with any of that? Specifically, what's wrong with being "of Paul"? In addition to his inspired Scriptures, Paul taught on many occasions. Was it wrong to listen to Paul teach?

Paul goes on to explain: Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

If the Apostle Paul wasn't good enough to have his own disciples, what man is? Get away from John Calvin and Jacob Arminius, from Saint Augustine and the Church Fathers, from the Protestant Reformers and the Westminster Confession of Faith, and follow Christ.

Tzaousios · Dec 9, 2009

Vince53 said:
Get away from John Calvin and Jacob Arminius, from Saint Augustine and the Church Fathers, from the Protestant Reformers and the Westminster Confession of Faith, and follow Christ.

So none of these people and groups were following Christ?

JacobHall86 · Dec 9, 2009

Vince, I'll ask again. Do you believe in Free Will?

Hammster · Dec 9, 2009

Vince53 said:
In 1 Corinthians 1:12, Paul writes: Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or "I am of Christ."

What's wrong with any of that? Specifically, what's wrong with being "of Paul"? In addition to his inspired Scriptures, Paul taught on many occasions. Was it wrong to listen to Paul teach?

Paul goes on to explain: Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

If the Apostle Paul wasn't good enough to have his own disciples, what man is? Get away from John Calvin and Jacob Arminius, from Saint Augustine and the Church Fathers, from the Protestant Reformers and the Westminster Confession of Faith, and follow Christ.

Irony alert! Did Paul expect his readers to follow him? Wasn't that the purpose of the letter? I must assume that you have never sat under a pastor, and that you are a lone ranger Christian.

JacobHall86 · Dec 9, 2009

Also, the definition of Philosophy is: the rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct.

If you do not have some sort of philosophy (such as a hermeneutic) you will be UNABLE to read the Bible with any level of context or competency. The issue is not whether or not you use a philosophy, but that you disagree with the philosophy that some use.

For instance, I am a 5 Point Calvinist Baptist. This means that I see Jesus in all aspects of Scripture, and that it all points to him. God is sovereign over all that I read in scripture and his Glory is the most important part of Scripture. More than just that though, is that man is evil sinful and enslaved to sin. I read the context of man as being that, and am never surprised at how bad man acts, because, to quote scripture, "There was no king in Israel, and everyone did what was right in their own eyes".

Thats my philosophy in reading scripture. What is yours?

MatthewDiscipleofGod · Dec 9, 2009

SpiritualAntiseptic said:
How you read scripture is determined by philosophy. Even what you are saying now is a philosophy.

Depending how you define philosophy that can be correct. I personally approach the Bible in a literal manner like people would with most writings. What is a historical account should be read that way. What is a parable, and Jesus points out when he is giving one, needs to be taken that way. My problem is when people bring in outside philosphy and use it to try to make the Bible support their philosophy instead of letting the Bible speak for itself.

Randomaster · Dec 9, 2009

The point Paul was trying to make was not that one can't "follow" the teachings/interpretations of a specific learned person, but that we follow it to the point of exclusion and contention with our bretheren. In a way I agree with you that the seperation into various sects of Christianity and subsequent following of those is a problem that God will deal with in due time, but the real problem comes from the fact that the Bible can be interpretted in multiple ways through the mind of man. We can both study the same Bible in two seperate caves for the greater part of our natural lives (assuming that we have an unlimited supply of sustinance and no outside interaction), and then come out to discuss what we feel is the truth with each other and find at LEAST one thing to disagree about because God or Jesus is not here physically to correct us on the proper and exact interpretation that was intended (as much as some of us would like to say otherwise).

It isn't wrong to read works of great pastors, priests, saints, and men; it isn't wrong to believe that the way these people interpret the Bible is right either. What is wrong is to not study and see if you can't come to the same conclusions as those before us, through a personal relationship with our Heavenly Father. In the end of days, no matter what your interpretation of the Holy Word is, we will all have to account for our shortcomings, and we will all learn the full and exact Truth without a shadow of a doubt.

I pray that the Lord continue to receive all praise and that we, His children, can continue to strive to seek His Face and know His Ways through fellowship and study.

Hammster · Dec 9, 2009

MatthewDiscipleofGod said:
Depending how you define philosophy that can be correct. I personally approach the Bible in a literal manner like people would with most writings. What is a historical account should be read that way. What is a parable, and Jesus points out when he is giving one, needs to be taken that way. My problem is when people bring in outside philosphy and use it to try to make the Bible support their philosophy instead of letting the Bible speak for itself.

What do you consideroutside philosophy?

MatthewDiscipleofGod · Dec 9, 2009

Hammster said:
What do you consideroutside philosophy?

Webster gives 4 different definitions with various sub definitions. I'm mainly viewing it in this context as a worldview. Often I see a lot of political philosophy being forced into Christianity. I also often see ministries, pastors or lay Christians pushing a "morality" philosophy that is lacking the gospel message. We wonder why people don't have a problem with gay marriage or abortion. We come up with philosophical arguments against them without the Bible. They argue that the non Christian will reject the Bible anyways so why use the Bible. I say give the gospel message and if this person comes to Christ the morality will follow afterward. I'm not saying Christians should not be involved in politics. I'm not saying laws against abortion or gay marriage are bad. I'm saying we should not be tossing the Bible and the gospel message when it comes to things such as politics and morality in the public forum.

Hammster · Dec 9, 2009

MatthewDiscipleofGod said:
Webster gives 4 different definitions with various sub definitions. I'm mainly viewing it in this context as a worldview. Often I see a lot of political philosophy being forced into Christianity. I also often see ministries, pastors or lay Christians pushing a "morality" philosophy that is lacking the gospel message. We wonder why people don't have a problem with gay marriage or abortion. We come up with philosophical arguments against them without the Bible. They argue that the non Christian will reject the Bible anyways so why use the Bible. I say give the gospel message and if this person comes to Christ the morality will follow afterward. I'm not saying Christians should not be involved in politics. I'm not saying laws against abortion or gay marriage are bad. I'm saying we should not be tossing the Bible and the gospel message when it comes to things such as politics and morality in the public forum.

I agree with this.

Vince53 · Dec 10, 2009

Colossians 2 asks us:

20 Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations ---
21 "Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,"
22 which all concern things which perish with the using --- according to the commandments and doctrines of men?
23 These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.

During the 1960s and 1970s, independent fundamentalist Baptists (I am one) hit their heyday. The largest church in 17 states was IFB, and in another 17 states, the largest Sunday School was IFB. As the Southern Baptist Convention, which believed the same doctrines, declined, IFBs were booming.

They attributed their success to two causes: their strong adherence to the Word of God and to a list of man-made rules. But in the 1970s, a series of sex scandals hit their leadership, and many of them turned to Ruckmanism. Rejecting the Word of God in favor of the King James Version, Ruckmanites kept the strict rules, and their numbers have steadily shrunk while they divide into hostile camps that spy on and accuse each other. Sex scandals among their leadership continue unabated.

Other IFBs either joined the Convention, dropped "Baptist" from their names, or held true, and they continue to do well. They kept the Word of God but rejected the rules.

Speaking ONLY for myself, why did I continue to insist on the man-made rules when I knew that the Bible forbad this? I was looking at the good results we got, and attributed God's blessings to our group's philosophy. When the philosophy collapsed, I rejected it, and God is still blessing me.

Scripture vs. Philosophy

Junior Member

Contributor

Calvin is 500 years old, Calvinism is eternal!

SpiritualAntiseptic

Guest

Regular Member

Psalm 144:1

Senior Veteran

SpiritualAntiseptic

Guest

Calvin is 500 years old, Calvinism is eternal!

Junior Member

Αυγουστινιανικός Χριστιανός

Calvin is 500 years old, Calvinism is eternal!

Psalm 144:1

Calvin is 500 years old, Calvinism is eternal!

Senior Veteran

Junior Member

Psalm 144:1

Senior Veteran

Psalm 144:1

Junior Member

Similar threads