Your interpretation =/= What the scripture means

A71

Well-Known Member
Mar 8, 2017
777
265
57
Europe
✟30,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
That's interesting, because one of the main JW doctrines is that Jesus may be the Son of God but He is not God, therefore is not divine but a lesser created being.
Hmmm...I needed to drill deeper clearly. I had a dream of two friendly bubbly dogs, but then when they left I saw they had rat's tails. This tells me they had real faith, (dog symbol of fidelity), perhaps untrusting naive faith, (dogs are very trusting), but there was a sting in the tail, through false doctrine, (rat a symbol of poison,). I have also heard that JWs take people's money...so maybe that is the schtick, fleecing gullible people.
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,814
10,795
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟833,237.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
The question I have been having while reading this thread is, "Whose interpretation is the correct one?" Some might say that because they are in tune with the Holy Spirit, their interpretation is correct, putting Spiritual authority on what might be just their own personal opinion about the Scriptural reference. I know that I am more opinionated than most and I am not backward in giving a strong opinion about an issue and I will dig my toes in and defend it to the last. I have conceded only once on this forum and that was after weeks of debate in which he finally convinced me that he was right and I was wrong. But I will never ascribe any of my opinions as coming directly from the Holy Spirit. To me, that would be arrogance.

This Scripture came to mind when I was thinking about these things: "Knowledge puffs up but Love builds up." So there is a difference in these two attitudes when sharing opinions and interpretations of Scripture. Why are we interpreting Scripture in the way we are? Is it because we are puffed up in our knowledge and want others to know it. or are we seeking to build one another up in love? Worth thinking about.
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,814
10,795
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟833,237.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Hmmm...I needed to drill deeper clearly. I had a dream of two friendly bubbly dogs, but then when they left I saw they had rat's tails. This tells me they had real faith, (dog symbol of fidelity), perhaps untrusting naive faith, (dogs are very trusting), but there was a sting in the tail, through false doctrine, (rat a symbol of poison,). I have also heard that JWs take people's money...so maybe that is the schtick, fleecing gullible people.
The origin of the JW church is a guy called Russell. They used to be called the Russellites. You might get some background information about them on Wikipedia. Here is a link:
Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs - Wikipedia
 
Upvote 0

A71

Well-Known Member
Mar 8, 2017
777
265
57
Europe
✟30,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The question I have been having while reading this thread is, "Whose interpretation is the correct one?" Some might say that because they are in tune with the Holy Spirit, their interpretation is correct, putting Spiritual authority on what might be just their own personal opinion about the Scriptural reference. I know that I am more opinionated than most and I am not backward in giving a strong opinion about an issue and I will dig my toes in and defend it to the last. I have conceded only once on this forum and that was after weeks of debate in which he finally convinced me that he was right and I was wrong. But I will never ascribe any of my opinions as coming directly from the Holy Spirit. To me, that would be arrogance.

This Scripture came to mind when I was thinking about these things: "Knowledge puffs up but Love builds up." So there is a difference in these two attitudes when sharing opinions and interpretations of Scripture. Why are we interpreting Scripture in the way we are? Is it because we are puffed up in our knowledge and want others to know it. or are we seeking to build one another up in love? Worth thinking about.
the point Paul was making is that we all are on a learning curve, with imperfect knowledge. Knowing more than the next guy is academic if you still know very little. But he makes the point in reference to idols, not all things..
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,814
10,795
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟833,237.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
the point Paul was making is that we all are on a learning curve, with imperfect knowledge. Knowing more than the next guy is academic if you still know very little. But he makes the point in reference to idols, not all things..
People make a mistake when they look for a sub-text in Scripture when it is the "face-value" literal text is what is meant. Except the apocalyptic books which contain symbolism where certain keys are required for interpretation, which have now been largely lost through the passage of time and change of cultures. The histories are merely events and about who does what and when, just like any other history, and contain examples of when folks did it right and when they went wrong. Jesus spoke in parables, and explained the meaning of them to His disciples.

When it comes to the letters of the Apostles, I take them literally, because these guys said what they meant, so what is said is self-interpreting, in the sense that, for example, what Paul actually says is the actual interpretation. Peter says in his second letter that there are some who try to twist Paul's writing to mean what they want it to mean and that is to their own destruction. I guess it is because Paul's says things straight to the point and some can't bear straight talk like that.

I have Calvin's commentaries, Spurgeon's Expository Encylopedia, several texts on OT and NT theology, some texts from the Banner of Truth Trust Geneva commentary series, and I find that these commentaries basically agree on the agreed sound doctrine that is consistent with the Westminster Confession, and that is good enough for me.
 
Upvote 0

Blade

Veteran
Site Supporter
Dec 29, 2002
8,167
3,992
USA
✟630,797.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I agree OP. One can read in this thread some are doing just what the OP was talking about. Jesus is real.. the Father is real. The sweet sweet Holy Spirit is real. You can pray and ask and He will tell you. I have had problems with what I just said is when let's say we are talking about "caught up" we then quote this or that verse. We then say.. I see how you can believe that but I disagree :) The part I have trouble with is when someone says "Jesus or the Holy Spirit told me that verse really means"..when they play the GOD CARD. So now if you disagree your disagreeing with GOD.

I have asked my Father about verses I didn't understand. Yet.. what He told me..I would NEVER tell you that's what that verse means. Understand? Well like when Jesus said the person finds something ..some treasure and sells all to keep it. "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field."

I was waiting for my kids from School reading the word. I asked...what in the world does that mean? I have read it SO many times. I didn't expect to hear anything.. was just asking like I am sure you have. He said, "I am the treasure". Is that what that verse means? Oh I know what HE said. But.. that was for me. And if we were studying.. I won't say this. One it points to ME. This GOD IS SO REAL! I am not the answer. What I say is NOT HIS WORD.

We can read John 3:16 and each see hear something different. All, for the most part, are right. Some just take what HE told them.. as if its for ALL. Not always like this. There is ONE BODY. I can hear from Baptist to Word of Faith preach and I can SEE MY JESUS! Your personal view your group is NOT the real one the only one. He does not see the way we do. There is ONE BODY. See the GOOD in them. Look for the GOOD not what you personally don't like. Get over it.. He is with them as He is with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Antig
Upvote 0

A71

Well-Known Member
Mar 8, 2017
777
265
57
Europe
✟30,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
People make a mistake when they look for a sub-text in Scripture when it is the "face-value" literal text is what is meant. Except the apocalyptic books which contain symbolism where certain keys are required for interpretation, which have now been largely lost through the passage of time and change of cultures. The histories are merely events and about who does what and when, just like any other history, and contain examples of when folks did it right and when they went wrong. Jesus spoke in parables, and explained the meaning of them to His disciples.

When it comes to the letters of the Apostles, I take them literally, because these guys said what they meant, so what is said is self-interpreting, in the sense that, for example, what Paul actually says is the actual interpretation. Peter says in his second letter that there are some who try to twist Paul's writing to mean what they want it to mean and that is to their own destruction. I guess it is because Paul's says things straight to the point and some can't bear straight talk like that.

I have Calvin's commentaries, Spurgeon's Expository Encylopedia, several texts on OT and NT theology, some texts from the Banner of Truth Trust Geneva commentary series, and I find that these commentaries basically agree on the agreed sound doctrine that is consistent with the Westminster Confession, and that is good enough for me.
1 Corinthians 8 causes a lot of confusion, but if you think Paul is decrying knowledge then you will have to think again, as he is not against knowledge at all.
 
Upvote 0

Antig

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2017
453
278
Dublin
✟8,390.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Interpretation; a word that points to ones own idea of what is said, therefore this leaves much to be desired when it comes to finding the truth of a subject.

Denominations in the churches of today were formed by interpretations. There is no interpretation to what Jesus said and what His apostles taught,there is only what they stated that should be adhered to. Therein lies the problem in religion, man's interpretation.

2Ti_2:15 Study to shew yourself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

This then brings up the question: How is the word rightly divided? It is rightly divided by prayer to God through His Christ Jesus that the Holy Spirit be granted to guide the individual that truly desires to understand how to divide the word of truth.

This writer has been doing this for over 50 years. I am just now beginning to see the deep things that lie in front of the eyes of one that read the Bible scriptures. Praise be to God for His guidance and to His Jesus Christ.

Andy Centek
Falsechristianity.com

Thing is, how do you know that what you interpret from scripture is the correct interpretation? Because you feel all fuzzy and warm inside? 100 people could state the same. Which one is correct?
 
Upvote 0

Andy centek

Seeker of Deep Truth
Site Supporter
Jan 6, 2018
470
95
86
mich
✟68,247.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Everyone can have their own interpretation. Not everyone can have the correct interpretation!
REPLY TO – EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN INTERPRETATION



Yes, indeed, those outside the Body of Christ have their own interpretations. HOWEVER, Those who are the Elect of God have only His way and not man's interpretations of it. The reply may be: So isn't what you are about to write your interpretation. To which I would reply, read what the apostle Paul says about understanding the word of God and the New Testament; which began with him, not the gospels.



Jesus Christ appointed Paul as an apostle to the Gentiles whom Jesus did not go to or talk to.



John_1:11 He came unto His own, and His own received Him not.



John_10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.



By not observing these verses man has created many Denominations which each take the parts of scripture they like and ignore the others. Then each group teaches only that which suits their program. Hence, division is created.



Rom_12:16 Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.


Then too, is the teaching that each Denomination is the correct one. Denominations are this, divisions. My way is better than their way, say they. We have the correct path to follow. Beware, there is only one path, that is, the path by the Holy Spirit through Christ Jesus. This is not something that is earned by following someones saying, it is a gift that is given by God only. The Ones who receive this gift are the Elect of God.



Those who have gone before altar calls have nothing more; as a rule, then speaking words that have little meaning.



A man can not spiritually save a man with his own words. Jesus Christ had to die in His physical life in order to have spiritual salvation given to mankind. Then too, that by His total Father's will, and not His own. There is a message here also. Follow your will and loose your spiritual salvation; follow the will of the Holy Spirit and live again in the spiritual plain.



Andy Centek
 
Upvote 0

Andy centek

Seeker of Deep Truth
Site Supporter
Jan 6, 2018
470
95
86
mich
✟68,247.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
REPLY TO – EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN INTERPRETATION



Yes, indeed, those outside the Body of Christ have their own interpretations. HOWEVER, Those who are the Elect of God have only His way and not man's interpretations of it. The reply may be: So isn't what you are about to write your interpretation. To which I would reply, read what the apostle Paul says about understanding the word of God and the New Testament; which began with him, not the gospels.



Jesus Christ appointed Paul as an apostle to the Gentiles whom Jesus did not go to or talk to.



John_1:11 He came unto His own, and His own received Him not.



John_10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.



By not observing these verses man has created many Denominations which each take the parts of scripture they like and ignore the others. Then each group teaches only that which suits their program. Hence, division is created.



Rom_12:16 Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.


Then too, is the teaching that each Denomination is the correct one. Denominations are this, divisions. My way is better than their way, say they. We have the correct path to follow. Beware, there is only one path, that is, the path by the Holy Spirit through Christ Jesus. This is not something that is earned by following someones saying, it is a gift that is given by God only. The Ones who receive this gift are the Elect of God.



Those who have gone before altar calls have nothing more; as a rule, then speaking words that have little meaning.



A man can not spiritually save a man with his own words. Jesus Christ had to die in His physical life in order to have spiritual salvation given to mankind. Then too, that by His total Father's will, and not His own. There is a message here also. Follow your will and loose your spiritual salvation; follow the will of the Holy Spirit and live again in the spiritual plain.



Andy Centek
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Antig

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2017
453
278
Dublin
✟8,390.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
REPLY TO – EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN INTERPRETATION



Yes, indeed, those outside the Body of Christ have their own interpretations. HOWEVER, Those who are the Elect of God have only His way and not man's interpretations of it. The reply may be: So isn't what you are about to write your interpretation. To which I would reply, read what the apostle Paul says about understanding the word of God and the New Testament; which began with him, not the gospels.



Jesus Christ appointed Paul as an apostle to the Gentiles whom Jesus did not go to or talk to.



John_1:11 He came unto His own, and His own received Him not.



John_10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.



By not observing these verses man has created many Denominations which each take the parts of scripture they like and ignore the others. Then each group teaches only that which suits their program. Hence, division is created.



Rom_12:16 Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.


Then too, is the teaching that each Denomination is the correct one. Denominations are this, divisions. My way is better than their way, say they. We have the correct path to follow. Beware, there is only one path, that is, the path by the Holy Spirit through Christ Jesus. This is not something that is earned by following someones saying, it is a gift that is given by God only. The Ones who receive this gift are the Elect of God.



Those who have gone before altar calls have nothing more; as a rule, then speaking words that have little meaning.



A man can not spiritually save a man with his own words. Jesus Christ had to die in His physical life in order to have spiritual salvation given to mankind. Then too, that by His total Father's will, and not His own. There is a message here also. Follow your will and loose your spiritual salvation; follow the will of the Holy Spirit and live again in the spiritual plain.



Andy Centek

Equally, as a non-denomination, you yourself are talking the same as people who belong to a denomination! Its contradictory!
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,814
10,795
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟833,237.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
1 Corinthians 8 causes a lot of confusion, but if you think Paul is decrying knowledge then you will have to think again, as he is not against knowledge at all.
Here is my take on that chapter:
8 Now concerning things sacrificed to idols: We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth.

2 If any man thinketh that he knoweth anything, he knoweth not yet as he ought to know; 3 but if any man loveth God, the same is known by him.
It seems to me that Paul is saying that if a person is basing everything on his knowledge, he doesn't have the knowledge that he ought to have. But if a person loves God, then God knows him. Jesus said to those who called him Lord, Lord, "Depart from Me, I never knew you." These ones knew all about prophecy and spiritual warfare, but Jesus didn't know them and so they perished in spite of their knowledge.

4 Concerning therefore the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that no idol is [anything] in the world, and that there is no God but one.

5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth; as there are gods many, and lords many; 6 yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him.
This is the knowledge that is most important and that we can be secure in that knowledge, and know that idols have no real significance at all.
7 Howbeit there is not in all men that knowledge: but some, being used until now to the idol, eat as [of] a thing sacrificed to an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
But there are some who have a weak conscience about doing anything that is connect with idolatory, and would feel guilty and condemned if they ate anything sacrificed to an idol. It would seriously damage their faith in Christ. Their conscience is not strong enough to know that Jesus said it is not what goes into a person by way of food, but what comes out in the way of conduct, speech and behaviour.

8 But food will not commend us to God: neither, if we eat not, are we the worse; nor, if we eat, are we the better.
Paul is saying that eating or not eating has no real moral value to God. We are no worse or better off either way.

9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to the weak.
But what is more important is that we who are strong in our consciences and know that what we eat and where the food comes from makes no difference to our standing with God, need to be careful that our freedom is not a stumbling block to those who have weak consciences.
10 For if a man see thee who hast knowledge sitting at meat in an idol's temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be emboldened to eat things sacrificed to idols?
So, because we might be able to eat anything, no matter where it comes from, without any twinge of conscience, not being in any way sinful to us, a person with a weaker conscience may think that it is okay for them to eat food sacrificed to idols, and in doing so experiences guilt and condemnation.

11 For through thy knowledge he that is weak perisheth, the brother for whose sake Christ died.
This means that a weaker brother may fail in his faith and fall into the quicksand of guilt and condemnation and end up losing his faith in Christ. Christ died for the one with the weak conscience as the one with the stronger conscience.

12 And thus, sinning against the brethren, and wounding their conscience when it is weak, ye sin against Christ.
Paul is saying that if we do something out of our freedom in Christ, and in doing so, causes a weaker brother to sin against his conscience, we are actually sinning against Christ, not for the deed that we do, but for using our freedom in front of a brother who does not sense the same freedom.

13 Wherefore, if meat causeth my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh for evermore, that I cause not my brother to stumble.
So Paul is saying that if the type of food he eats causes another believer to stumble in his faith, then he will stop eating that food. It is not that eating the food is wrong, but causing another believer to stumble in his faith by copying what he does is wrong.

I think this goes for any action that might be right for us, but could be wrong for others. This often happens with the drinking of alcohol. What could be right for me to have a couple of wines every now and again, might be a sin for another. So if I advocate drinking, and a weaker brother copies me and then falls into guilt and condemnation, then I have sinned against him by causing him to stumble and therefore I have sinned against Christ. Therefore it would be right for me to stick with diet coke in social situations to ensure that I don't wound another brother's conscience.

There have been debates in churches and on this forum about what is right or wrong and I am not sure that those who have strongly advocated that some controversial actions are right because of our freedom in Christ, have seriously considered that there are good believers who have a weaker conscience about these things and who may be given a false confidence that they can drink alcohol or eat food from a Hindu temple; and then fail in their faith through guilt and condemnation.
 
Upvote 0

Citizen of the Kingdom

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 31, 2006
44,350
14,508
Vancouver
Visit site
✟335,689.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Here is my take on that chapter:
8 Now concerning things sacrificed to idols: We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth.

2 If any man thinketh that he knoweth anything, he knoweth not yet as he ought to know; 3 but if any man loveth God, the same is known by him.
It seems to me that Paul is saying that if a person is basing everything on his knowledge, he doesn't have the knowledge that he ought to have. But if a person loves God, then God knows him. Jesus said to those who called him Lord, Lord, "Depart from Me, I never knew you." These ones knew all about prophecy and spiritual warfare, but Jesus didn't know them and so they perished in spite of their knowledge.

4 Concerning therefore the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that no idol is [anything] in the world, and that there is no God but one.

5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth; as there are gods many, and lords many; 6 yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him.
This is the knowledge that is most important and that we can be secure in that knowledge, and know that idols have no real significance at all.
7 Howbeit there is not in all men that knowledge: but some, being used until now to the idol, eat as [of] a thing sacrificed to an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
But there are some who have a weak conscience about doing anything that is connect with idolatory, and would feel guilty and condemned if they ate anything sacrificed to an idol. It would seriously damage their faith in Christ. Their conscience is not strong enough to know that Jesus said it is not what goes into a person by way of food, but what comes out in the way of conduct, speech and behaviour.

8 But food will not commend us to God: neither, if we eat not, are we the worse; nor, if we eat, are we the better.
Paul is saying that eating or not eating has no real moral value to God. We are no worse or better off either way.

9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to the weak.
But what is more important is that we who are strong in our consciences and know that what we eat and where the food comes from makes no difference to our standing with God, need to be careful that our freedom is not a stumbling block to those who have weak consciences.
10 For if a man see thee who hast knowledge sitting at meat in an idol's temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be emboldened to eat things sacrificed to idols?
So, because we might be able to eat anything, no matter where it comes from, without any twinge of conscience, not being in any way sinful to us, a person with a weaker conscience may think that it is okay for them to eat food sacrificed to idols, and in doing so experiences guilt and condemnation.

11 For through thy knowledge he that is weak perisheth, the brother for whose sake Christ died.
This means that a weaker brother may fail in his faith and fall into the quicksand of guilt and condemnation and end up losing his faith in Christ. Christ died for the one with the weak conscience as the one with the stronger conscience.

12 And thus, sinning against the brethren, and wounding their conscience when it is weak, ye sin against Christ.
Paul is saying that if we do something out of our freedom in Christ, and in doing so, causes a weaker brother to sin against his conscience, we are actually sinning against Christ, not for the deed that we do, but for using our freedom in front of a brother who does not sense the same freedom.

13 Wherefore, if meat causeth my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh for evermore, that I cause not my brother to stumble.
So Paul is saying that if the type of food he eats causes another believer to stumble in his faith, then he will stop eating that food. It is not that eating the food is wrong, but causing another believer to stumble in his faith by copying what he does is wrong.

I think this goes for any action that might be right for us, but could be wrong for others. This often happens with the drinking of alcohol. What could be right for me to have a couple of wines every now and again, might be a sin for another. So if I advocate drinking, and a weaker brother copies me and then falls into guilt and condemnation, then I have sinned against him by causing him to stumble and therefore I have sinned against Christ. Therefore it would be right for me to stick with diet coke in social situations to ensure that I don't wound another brother's conscience.

There have been debates in churches and on this forum about what is right or wrong and I am not sure that those who have strongly advocated that some controversial actions are right because of our freedom in Christ, have seriously considered that there are good believers who have a weaker conscience about these things and who may be given a false confidence that they can drink alcohol or eat food from a Hindu temple; and then fail in their faith through guilt and condemnation.
The problem with that logic is the same people will turn and call you effeminate for being vegan.
 
Upvote 0

A71

Well-Known Member
Mar 8, 2017
777
265
57
Europe
✟30,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Yes Oscar, but you are misunderstanding Paul.

What he is saying is that all the Christians know that the meat is sacrificed to idols. In this context, knowledge will cause the Church to become aloof from the non-christians.

Rather than that happen, he says let love govern your actions. I.E. eat and drink with the sinners for the sake of the gospel, rather than be aloof and segregated on account of the knowledge that the meat is sacrificed to idols.
So knowledge puffing up has a very specific application, in the context of idol worship, as Paul clearly states in the first verse.

If all knowledge puffed up, then why bother with it? But no, knowledge is a gift of the spirit.
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,814
10,795
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟833,237.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
The problem with that logic is the same people will turn and call you effeminate for being vegan.
So what? I might get called a wowser for drinking diet coke when my mates are drinking whiskey and beer. Doesn't make any difference to me what people might call me when I know that I am doing the right thing and not causing weaker Christian brethren offence through what I eat and drink.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,814
10,795
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟833,237.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Yes Oscar, but you are misunderstanding Paul.

What he is saying is that all the Christians know that the meat is sacrificed to idols. In this context, knowledge will cause the Church to become aloof from the non-christians.

Rather than that happen, he says let love govern your actions. I.E. eat and drink with the sinners for the sake of the gospel, rather than be aloof and segregated on account of the knowledge that the meat is sacrificed to idols.
So knowledge puffing up has a very specific application, in the context of idol worship, as Paul clearly states in the first verse.

If all knowledge puffed up, then why bother with it? But no, knowledge is a gift of the spirit.
That's not what the context is saying and you are ignoring that Paul is talking about brethren in Christ with weaker consciences. He does not mention non-Christians in the chapter. And he is not talking about knowledge in general because he starts off by saying that he is going to speak about eating food offered to idols. He speaks about the knowledge that it doesn't make any difference at all whether we eat food sacrificed to idols or any other food, because idols are nothing and they add nothing to the food being consumed. What he is talking about are those Christian brethren who think that eating food offered to idols is sinful and if they eat it, they will feel that they have sinned before God.

Although what you are saying is generally correct, it is not in the context of what Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians 8. But this is the problem with a lot of Christians - they read stuff into chapters that are not there and put words into Paul's mouth that he never said.
 
Upvote 0

Citizen of the Kingdom

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 31, 2006
44,350
14,508
Vancouver
Visit site
✟335,689.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So what? I might get called a wowser for drinking diet coke when my mates are drinking whiskey and beer. Doesn't make any difference to me what people might call me when I know that I am doing the right thing and not causing weaker Christian brethren offence through what I eat and drink.
Ditto
 
Upvote 0

Buzz_B

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2017
894
161
70
Northwest Ohio
✟13,943.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
As a point of humility, it is important to note to self that what ever conclusions you come to are not equal to scripture. Therefore, your interpretation may be invalidated, but scripture remains not so.
GREEK

Contributed to the cause by the one buzzing around as, Buzz_B :)

We can make all sorts of claims, such as that all we need do is read our Bibles and trust God to do his part via the holy spirit and reveal the meaning to us he desires us to see. But what we are really doing is trusting in men, indeed, trusting in the men, not only the men who did the translating into our preferred language but also trusting in the men who then chose how those translated words would be placed together in an ordered exegeses more fitting to our preferred language.

The above fact alone creates huge problems for us but that problem is worsened when we lack faith that he who is in us is stronger than he who is in the world, so that we fear and shun learning from sources just because we fear those sources. Yet that is understandable to a degree when we are speaking of babes in Christ. Let those of us who have matured, be mature and dispense with that fear, knowing it is a poor substitute for faithfulness. Always we rightly advise the exercise of caution for the sake of our babes but we are not babes. He who is in us IS stronger than he who is in the world.

There are also other factors involved with our own immediate interpretations which can either allow or disallow us to build truth. An example would be as simple as the phrase “doth not commit sin” which occurs at 1 John 3:9 in the KJV. This particular case calls attention to the need for our translators to have a good understanding of the Koine' (the common non-literary type) Greek tenses which was used in the early Hellenist period when our New Testament writings were first being composed. So let us take a quick look at that. Rather than to doggedly search out my own wording I will quote from reference sources in places within them that I have tested and found to be reliable. If anyone desires further education in the Greek I would recommend the Phillip's Academy located at 180 Main St, Andover, Massachusetts, United States , 01810, located about 25 miles North of Boston.

The following excerpt, which I have determined to be very reliable, is from *** it-1 pp. 1006-1010 Greek *** (it = Insight on the Scriptures published in 1988 by the WTBTS)

Quote: “Tenses. Another important and distinctive characteristic of Greek, contributing to its exactness, is its use of verb tenses. Verbs and their tenses involve two elements: kind of action (the more important) and time of action (of less importance). There are three principal points of viewing action in the Greek language, each with modifying characteristics: (1) action as continuous (“to be doing”), represented basically in the present tense, the primary force of which is progressive action or that which habitually or successively recurs; (2) action as perfected or completed (“to have done”), the principal tense here being the perfect; (3) action as punctiliar, or momentary (“to do”), represented in the aorist. There are, of course, other tenses, such as the imperfect, the past perfect, and the future.

To illustrate the difference in the Greek tenses: At 1 John 2:1, the apostle John says: “If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father” (KJ). The Greek verb for “sin” is in the aorist tense, hence the time of the action is punctiliar, or momentary. The aorist tense here points to one act of sinning, whereas the present infinitive would denote the condition of being a sinner or the continuous or progressive action in sinning. So John does not speak of someone carrying on a practice of sinning, but of one who does “commit a sin.” (Compare Mt 4:9, where the aorist indicates that the Devil did not ask Jesus to do constant or continuous worship to him, but “an act of worship.”)

But, if 1 John 3:6, 9 is read without taking into account the fact that the verb there is in the present tense, John seems to contradict his words above noted. The King James Version reads: “Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not,” and, “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin.” These renderings fail to carry over into English the continuous action denoted by the present tense of the Greek verbs used. Some modern translations, instead of saying here, “sinneth not” and “doth not commit sin,” take note of the continuous action and render the verbs accordingly: “does not practice sin,” “does not carry on sin” (NW); “practices sin,” “makes a practice of sinning” (CB); “does not habitually sin,” “does not practice sin” (Ph); “does not continue to sin” (TEV). Jesus commanded his followers at Matthew 6:33: “Keep on, then, seeking first the kingdom,” indicating continuous effort, rather than merely “seek ye first the kingdom” (KJ).

In prohibitions, the present and aorist tenses are likewise distinctly different. In the present tense a prohibition means more than not to do a thing. It means to stop doing it. Jesus Christ, in route to Golgotha, did not merely tell the women following him, “Do not weep,” but, rather, since they were already weeping, he said: “Stop weeping for me.” (Lu 23:28) Likewise to those selling doves in the temple, Jesus said: “Stop making the house of my Father a house of merchandise!” (Joh 2:16) In the Sermon on the Mount he said: “Stop being anxious” about what you will eat, drink, or wear. (Mt 6:25) On the other hand, in the aorist a prohibition was a command against doing something at any given time or moment. Jesus is shown as telling his hearers: “So, never be anxious [that is, do not be anxious at any moment] about the next day.” (Mt 6:34) Here the aorist is used in order to indicate that the disciples should not be anxious at any time.

Another example of the need to take into consideration the Greek tense in translating is found at Hebrews 11:17. Some translations ignore the special significance in the tense of the verb. With reference to Abraham, the King James Version says: “He that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son.” The Greek verb here translated “offered up” is in the imperfect tense, which may carry the thought that the action was intended or attempted, but not realized or accomplished. Hence, in harmony with what actually happened, the Greek verb is more appropriately rendered “attempted to offer up.” Likewise, in Luke 1:59, speaking of the time of circumcision of the son of Zechariah and Elizabeth, the imperfect tense used indicates that instead of the rendering, “They called him Zacharias, after the name of his father” (KJ), the passage should read “They were going to call [the young child] by the name of its father, Zechariah” (NW). This is in harmony with what actually took place, namely, that he was given the name John, according to the angel Gabriel’s instructions.—Lu 1:13.” End Quote.


For your convenience:

Bible Translations

AB The Amplified Bible (1965), Zondervan Publishing House

An The Anchor Bible (1964 and following years), W. F. Albright and D. N. Freedman, general editors

AS American Standard Version (1901; as printed in 1944), American Revision Committee

AT The Complete Bible—An American Translation (1939; as printed in 1951), J. M. Powis Smith and Edgar J. Goodspeed

BC Sagrada Biblia (1947), José María Bover and Francisco Cantera Burgos, Madrid, Spain

BE The Bible in Basic English (1949), Cambridge University Press

By The Bible in Living English (1972), Steven T. Byington

CB The New Testament—A Translation in the Language of the People (1937; as printed in 1950), Charles B. Williams

CC The New Testament (1941; as printed in 1947), Confraternity of Christian Doctrine Revision

CK The New Testament—A New Translation in Plain English (1963), Charles K. Williams

Da The ‘Holy Scriptures’ (1949 Edition), J. N. Darby

Dy Challoner-Douay Version (c. 1750; as printed in 1942)

ED The Emphatic Diaglott (1864; as printed in 1942), Benjamin Wilson

ER English Revised Version (1885; as printed in 1893), Cambridge University Press

Fn The Holy Bible in Modern English (1903; as printed in 1935), Ferrar Fenton

Int The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures (1985 Edition)

JB The Jerusalem Bible (1966), Alexander Jones, general editor

JP The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text (1917; as printed in 1952), The Jewish Publication Society of America

KJ King James Version (1611; as printed in 1942)

Kx The Holy Bible (1956), Ronald A. Knox

La The Holy Bible From Ancient Eastern Manuscripts (1957), George M. Lamsa

Le The Twenty-Four Books of the Holy Scriptures (1853; as printed in 1914), Isaac Leeser

LXX Greek Septuagint (originally produced in the third and second centuries B.C.E.), as edited by Alfred Rahlfs (1935)

LXX, Bagster The Septuagint With Apocrypha: Greek and English (translation by L. C. L. Brenton, 1851; as printed in 1986)

LXX, Thomson The Septuagint Bible (translation by Charles Thomson, 1808; revised by C. A. Muses, 1954)

Mo A New Translation of the Bible (1935; as printed in 1954), James Moffatt

MR The Modern Reader’s Bible (1907; as printed in 1924), Richard G. Moulton, editor

NAB The New American Bible (1970), Catholic Biblical Association of America

NAS New American Standard Bible (1971), Lockman Foundation

NC Sagrada Biblia (1944; as printed in 1972), Eloíno Nácar Fuster and Alberto Colunga

NE The New English Bible (1970)

NIV The Holy Bible—New International Version (1978)

NW New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures—With References (1984)

Ph The New Testament in Modern English (1958; as printed in 1976), J. B. Phillips

Ro The Emphasised Bible (1902), Joseph B. Rotherham

RS Revised Standard Version (1952; as printed in 1971)

Sd The Authentic New Testament (1958), Hugh J. Schonfield

Sh The Holy Bible (1892), Samuel Sharpe

Sp The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (1937; as printed in 1948), Francis Aloysius Spencer

Sy Syriac Peshitta, originally produced in the fifth century C.E. (edited by S. Lee, London, 1826, and reprinted by United Bible Societies, 1979)

TC The Twentieth Century New Testament, Revised Edition (1904)

TEV Today’s English Version (1976)

Vg Latin Vulgate (originally produced c. 400 C.E. by Jerome; edited by R. Weber, Stuttgart, Germany, 1975)

VM La Santa Biblia, Versión Moderna (1966), Sociedades Bíblicas en América Latina

We The New Testament in Modern Speech (Fifth Edition, 1943; as printed in 1944), R. F. Weymouth; revised by J. A. Robertson

Yg The Holy Bible (Revised Edition of 1887), Robert Young


(I have only provided one subheading from that article. The entire article is a worthwhile read for those who desire to consider the subject further.)
 
Upvote 0

A71

Well-Known Member
Mar 8, 2017
777
265
57
Europe
✟30,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
You are making out knowledge to be a bad thing, a stumbling block, which is because you are doing the things you accuse others of, i.e not taking Paul at face value, and taking things out of context.

1 Corinthians 1
4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;
5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;
6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:
7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:


It would be very bizarre if not totally illogical for Paul to say that knowledge is a bad thing having just proclaimed it as a gift of God. So then if you agree with me we can try and study the chapter bit by bit. Up to you.

That's not what the context is saying and you are ignoring that Paul is talking about brethren in Christ with weaker consciences. He does not mention non-Christians in the chapter. And he is not talking about knowledge in general because he starts off by saying that he is going to speak about eating food offered to idols. He speaks about the knowledge that it doesn't make any difference at all whether we eat food sacrificed to idols or any other food, because idols are nothing and they add nothing to the food being consumed. What he is talking about are those Christian brethren who think that eating food offered to idols is sinful and if they eat it, they will feel that they have sinned before God.

Although what you are saying is generally correct, it is not in the context of what Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians 8. But this is the problem with a lot of Christians - they read stuff into chapters that are not there and put words into Paul's mouth that he never said.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,814
10,795
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟833,237.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
You are making out knowledge to be a bad thing, a stumbling block, which is because you are doing the things you accuse others of, i.e not taking Paul at face value, and taking things out of context.

1 Corinthians 1
4 I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;
5 That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;
6 Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:
7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:


It would be very bizarre if not totally illogical for Paul to say that knowledge is a bad thing having just proclaimed it as a gift of God. So then if you agree with me we can try and study the chapter bit by bit. Up to you.
What Paul is actually saying, in a nutshell, is that it would be sinning against Christ if a believer used his superior knowledge about his ability to eat food offered to idols without condemnation, to give the motivation of another believer to sin against his more sensitive conscience by eating the food. Paul says that if a person sins against his conscience then it is sin to him. So if a believer motivates another believer to sin against his conscience then that believer is actually sinning against Christ by wounding his brother's conscience.
 
Upvote 0