Abused texts of Scripture: What is your example?

[Gregory Thompson]

Strawman. We do not worship the Blessed Virgin Mary (who is Mother of God - calling her Mother of Jesus has the effect of denying the full deity of our Lord, his status as God the Son, the incarnate Logos, and anything that interferes with the doctrine of the Incarnation is to be rejected as an error. Furthermore, worshipping the Theotokos is Collyridianism, which, along with failing to venerate her - Antidicomarianism, is an error, as defined by the early church fathers (see the Fount of Wisdom of St. John of Damascus, and the Panarion of St. Epiphanius of Salamis).

Now, if we modified your argument to say “venerate” instead of “worship”, it would still eisegesis, which is a common thread to all abuses of scriptural verses in this thread. Go back and read Luke 1, and read the Magnificat - the only way of interpreting Luke 11:28 exegetically, that is to say, without contradicting Luke ch. 1, is the orthodox interpretation I presented. This is why Martin Luther prayed a version of the “Ave Maria.”

There's a distinct difference between veneration and worship.

Unlike most people who protest this element of Catholic/Orthodox theology, I do accept a certain level of veneration.

Since the issue is regarding the scripture's direction regarding Mary's role and the role ascribed post mortem - I just tend to get like Jesus and the money changers about it when Mary seems to take up the place Jesus should in the discussion.

Mary became a distraction from the attention God should be given.

In consistency, I react the same way when post reformation groups replace the role of the Holy Spirit with the bible.

I appreciate you sharing terms I haven't seen before.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

In terms of the inerrancy of scripture has anyone considered what Jeremiah 8:8 has to say on the matter?

“’How can you say, “We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD,” when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?

Since the pen was lying back in the time of Jeremiah, then all texts are corrupted.

When Jesus was born on the Earth, he was the only one on earth who knew the proper rendition of the text.

 

[okay]

I apologize for the tone of my post. It was uncalled for. I should have either just said “inerrancy” or not posted at all. Please forgive me!

 

[Matt5]

Matthew 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Matthew 25:42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink,
Matthew 25:43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
Matthew 25:44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
Matthew 25:45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

Matthew 25 is designed to confound. And it does an excellent job.

Who was Jesus talking to right there? The people on his left. They had taken the mark of the beast only a few years earlier. Some of those were Christians. If you are a Christian who takes the mark of the beast, then you have a serious and fundamental misunderstanding of the Bible.

You only get credit if you voluntarily give to those in need and don't talk about it. Demanding money from others under threat of force is probably not going to get you credit. Sorry, atheists.

 

[David Lamb]

Matthew 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Matthew 25:42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink,
Matthew 25:43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
Matthew 25:44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
Matthew 25:45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

Matthew 25 is designed to confound. And it does an excellent job.

Who was Jesus talking to right there? The people on his left. They had taken the mark of the beast only a few years earlier. Some of those were Christians. If you are a Christian who takes the mark of the beast, then you have a serious and fundamental misunderstanding of the Bible.

You only get credit if you voluntarily give to those in need and don't talk about it. Demanding money from others under threat of force is probably not going to get you credit. Sorry, atheists.

I don't understand why you talk about Christians having the mark of the beast. This mark is spoken of just twice in the bible:

“1 ¶ Then I heard a loud voice from the temple saying to the seven angels, "Go and pour out the bowls of the wrath of God on the earth." 2 So the first went and poured out his bowl upon the earth, and a foul and loathsome sore came upon the men who had the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image.” (Re 16:1-2 NKJV)

“Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.” (Re 19:20 NKJV)

In the context, it is clear that those who have the mark of the beast are not Christians. Christians, those who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ are certainly not destined for the lake of fire. Jesus said:

“"Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life.” (Joh 6:47 NKJV)

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Isaiah 55:8-9 ASV
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith Jehovah.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

It is used as general proof that God may have thoughts and ways that "transcend" the human concept of good and evil. Some suggest that God's higher ways could be evil, and His thoughts justify perpetrating injustice and sin. Yet a simple reading to the end of the chapter proves the exact opposite.

Isaiah 55:10-13 ASV
10 For as the rain cometh down and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, and giveth seed to the sower and bread to the eater;
11 so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
12 For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing; and all the trees of the fields shall clap their hands.
13 Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir-tree; and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle-tree: and it shall be to Jehovah for a name, for an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Judge not, lest ye be judged (Matthew 7:1)

In vain do they worship me teaching as doctrines, the commandments of men.’ (Mark 7:7)

Where there is no vision, the people perish. – Proverbs 29:18

So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James 2:17

I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.” 2 Sam. 7:23

I think it's difficult to easily cite verses as being necessarily abused when there is, and often has been historically, a diverse spread of approaches to the act of reading and understanding the Bible, affecting what any one of us thinks its books and letters are saying.

Even so, I'm going to offer that John 14:13-14 (and any similar verses) goes in for a certain amount of liberated abuse these days.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I apologize for the tone of my post. It was uncalled for. I should have either just said “inerrancy” or not posted at all. Please forgive me!

Not sure who that was directed at, but I just kept seeing the word inerrancy. Perhaps in light of Jeremiah 8:8, 2nd Timothy 3:16 is an abused text.

 

[Rose_bud]

1 Corinthians 14:34, Ephesians 6:5 abused texts, to justify abuse.

 

[trophy33]

From our previous dialogue in the Flat Earth thread it appears you are deeply bothered by what are frankly very minor differences in wording, and you are doing this while ignoring a thorough study of Patristics and the writings of the Lutheran reformers, both groups having addressed this issue thoroughly.

Does it have meaning calling it inerrant, then, if there are "minor" differences (like whole chapters different, different citations of Jesus, different chronology of events...)?

If so, do you define inerrancy only in some regard? Like in the main theological points?

 

[trophy33]

What part of each gospel contain the Word of God and which passages of each Gospel do not contain the Word of God. Be specific.

Few examples:

The centurion who wanted Jesus to heal his servant approached Jesus in person (Matthew 8:5) or sent intermediaries (Luke 7:3)

Mark 5:21-24 indicates that Jairus approaches Jesus while his daughter is still alive and requests healing. Matthew 9:18 states that Jairus approaches Jesus after his daughter has already died, asking Him to raise her.

When Jesus came into Peter’s home, He saw his mother-in-law lying sick in bed with a fever. 15 He touched her hand, and the fever left her; and she got up and waited on Him. (Mt 8:14)
And He came to her and raised her up, taking her by the hand, and the fever left her, and she waited on them. (Mk 1:31)
And standing over her, He rebuked the fever, and it left her; and she immediately got up and waited on them. (Lk 4:39)

Healing the paralytic:

Jesus said to the paralytic, “Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven.” (Mt 9:2)
Jesus seeing their faith said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” (Mk 2:5)
Seeing their faith, He said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven you.” (Lk 5:20)

And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, “Why are you thinking evil in your hearts? (Mt 9:4)
Immediately Jesus, aware in His spirit that they were reasoning that way within themselves, said to them, “Why are you reasoning about these things in your hearts? (Mk 2:8)

And Jesus said to them, “The attendants of the bridegroom cannot mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them, can they? (Mt 9:15)
And Jesus said to them, “While the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they? (Mk 2:19)
And Jesus said to them, “You cannot make the attendants of the bridegroom fast while the bridegroom is with them, can you? (Lk 5:34)

You can easily source other examples by just reading the gospels together, for example on biblehub.com: 46. The Call of Matthew (Levi) and His Reception in Honor of Jesus

 

[okay]

Not sure who that was directed at, but I just kept seeing the word inerrancy. Perhaps in light of Jeremiah 8:8, 2nd Timothy 3:16 is an abused text.

It was directed at my post:

used as a club to try and bludgeon those of is who don’t happen to believe in inerrancy.

That was not a gracious post.

Cheers!

 

[Clare73]

Which version of Scripture is inerrant? And in that version, which of the three synoptic gospels is inerrant?

What causes you to think any one of them is errant?

 

[Clare73]

There's a distinct difference between veneration and worship.
Unlike most people who protest this element of Catholic/Orthodox theology, I do accept a certain level of veneration.
Since the issue is regarding the scripture's direction regarding Mary's role and the role ascribed post mortem - I just tend to get like Jesus and the money changers about it when Mary seems to take up the place Jesus should in the discussion.
Mary became a distraction from the attention God should be given.
In consistency, I react the same way when post reformation groups replace the role of the Holy Spirit with the bible.

The Bible is (of) the Holy Spirit.

"All Scripture is God-breathed. . ." (2 Tim 3:16)

 

[okay]

The Bible is the Holy Spirit.

Could you please explain this?

It sounds like you would be comfortable with a triune God consisting of the Father, the Son and the Bible. That can’t be right, so I think I am misunderstanding?

 

[Clare73]

Could you please explain this?

It sounds like you would be comfortable with a triune God consisting of the Father, the Son and the Bible. That can’t be right, so I think I am misunderstanding?

The Bible is God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16), the word of the Holy Spirit.

 

[The Liturgist]

It’s one thing to say that Scripture is divinely inspired (although it must be stressed, the inspired Scripture includes the inspired interpretation of the Church, since no prophecy is an exposition of itself, to quote St. Peter), and quite another to say that the Holy Spirit is Scripture.

Indeed if the view you take were correct, there would be no heresies resulting from divergent interpretations of Scripture, since we would all automatically agree on the correct interpretation of Scripture without having to rely upon the guidance provided by the Church and the Creeds and other confessional documents, for example, the Roman Catholic magisterium, the Lutheran Book of Concord or the Calvinist Confessions, or in the case of the Orthodox Church the writings of the Church Fathers.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

It’s one thing to say that Scripture is divinely inspired (although it must be stressed, the inspired Scripture includes the inspired interpretation of the Church, since no prophecy is an exposition of itself, to quote St. Peter), and quite another to say that the Holy Spirit is Scripture.

Indeed if the view you take were correct, there would be no heresies resulting from divergent interpretations of Scripture, since we would all automatically agree on the correct interpretation of Scripture without having to rely upon the guidance provided by the Church and the Creeds and other confessional documents, for example, the Roman Catholic magisterium, the Lutheran Book of Concord or the Calvinist Confessions, or in the case of the Orthodox Church the writings of the Church Fathers.

Jesus said the workers are few, the doctrines created to manage the too many .. seems to imply he was kidding.

 

[trophy33]

What causes you to think any one of them is errant?

They contradict each other. So logically, there are errors in them.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

They contradict each other. So logically, there are errors in them.

Any variation of the Gospel accounts is contradiction and not be believed. Any similarity of Gospel accounts is collusion and not to be believed. Such is the way of the world.