Does opinion superceed Scripture

[ebia]

No, I haven't contradicted myself in the least.

In that case I don't think I've understood what you are trying to say.

I believe they are one and the same thing.

The Bible and The Word of God are not the same thing. The Word of God is Christ, and Christ most certainly is not the bible.

It's one thing to refer to the bible as God's word, or the word of God, but one must then be very careful not make unfounded statements from that. The Word of God is far, far greater than the bible, which is at best one small expression of that word.

 

[ebia]

How could ALL be wrong defining a scripture. Isn't there always a right and a wrong?

Usually there are several wrong and several right, and it's perfectly possible to have 67 wrong interpretations and no-one to have found a right one.

And who defines "wrong" anyway?

Nobody. It just is. Unless you want to get all post-modern.

Jesus Himself says there is a way that is narrow and a way that is wide. It is either one way or the other. So what could between narrow and wide?

You are pushing the metaphore beyone it's bounds.

 

[Eleora]

I think its all prophetic, the falling away from the truth, itching ears heaping teachers to scratch them, calling good evil and evil Good.

What really bothers me, is the sheer volume of "Christians" Quickly, eagerly , and wholy embracing so much of it, its heartbreaking.

Yes, it is heartbreaking. The problem is that sin is fun for the flesh, otherwise it wouldn't be tempting. So, the next step is to try to justify the sin by twisting scriptures, ignoring them altogether, and even making excuses concerning translations and such.

Galatians 5:17 For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law. 19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control.

 

[davedjy]

The Bible and The Word of God are not the same thing. The Word of God is Christ, and Christ most certainly is not the bible.

You are confusing two points I am making. The Scriptures, I believe are God-breathed words, that the Lord used. They are still His Words, I am not saying the Words ARE Christ, I am saying the Words are the Bible, that were written down. The Lord said He holds his Word above His Name...that Word I believe is in the Scriptures, that is written down.

It's one thing to refer to the bible as God's word, or the word of God, but one must then be very careful not make unfounded statements from that. The Word of God is far, far greater than the bible, which is at best one small expression of that word.

No, that is not Scriptural. The Word of God, as a Protestant, I believe is the Bible. Jesus did not quote himself when he was tempted, he said "It is written", furthermore, everytime Satan wants to address something or twist it, even he refers to the Bible. It is the law, and the God Breathed scripture we use, is the Word of God, they are His Words used through man as a tool.

 

[chris777]

Defining your own morality does not, in any way, make you some sort of "god".

if you place your own morality above his what does that make you? when you claim your opinion matters more than Gods word

As Ebia said, you can have different people thinking the Scripture says different things, and they all be wrong.

Both Ebia, and you miss the point

It doesnt matter what their opinion of it is. It matters What it actually says.

 

[Chie]

In that case I don't think I've understood what you are trying to say.


The Bible and The Word of God are not the same thing. The Word of God is Christ, and Christ most certainly is not the bible.

It's one thing to refer to the bible as God's word, or the word of God, but one must then be very careful not make unfounded statements from that. The Word of God is far, far greater than the bible, which is at best one small expression of that word.

I too speak of the Word of God and or bible. It is the expressed image of the mind of God concerning his people. Jesus was called the Word, and the scriptures as well.
Those who are spiritually minded have no doubt to what the Word "Word" is refering to in the content it's beinging used.

 

[davedjy]

In that case I don't think I've understood what you are trying to say.


The Bible and The Word of God are not the same thing. The Word of God is Christ, and Christ most certainly is not the bible.

It's one thing to refer to the bible as God's word, or the word of God, but one must then be very careful not make unfounded statements from that. The Word of God is far, far greater than the bible, which is at best one small expression of that word.

Unfounded statements? I think what you are saying is truly unfounded. They are one and the same, and what I am saying is backed by Scripture.
Again, the Bible was not written at the time, so He used the 12 Apostles as preaching His Word as a vessel

John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning


John 1:14-15

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is preferred before me, for He was before me.’”

Mark 13:31

Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

2 Timothy 3:15-17

and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

1 Corinthians 2:12-13

12We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.

 

[artybloke]

How could ALL be wrong defining a scripture. Isn't there always a right and a wrong?

Just because there's always a wrong and a right doesn't mean that anyone has found it yet. And sometimes there's a right in that circumstance that's wrong in this circumstance.

 

[4Christ2]

OK, let's take the Ten Commandments. These are God's Laws handed down to the people to define "sin". Without the 'law', we the people would have no idea of what is wrong and right? So the written word has defined what is wrong or right! Right? But are you now saying that our opinions (interpretations) of the Commandments would supercede what they actually mean?

 

[Dannager]

OK, let's take the Ten Commandments. These are God's Laws handed down to the people to define "sin". Without the 'law', we the people would have no idea of what is wrong and right? So the written word has defined what is wrong or right! Right? But are you now saying that our opinions (interpretations) of the Commandments would supercede what they actually mean?

Our interpretations determine what they actually mean. There's no superceding involved. It is not possible to separate one's interpretation from the reading of it.

If you're having trouble understanding this, realize for a second that by reading this very sentence, you are interpreting it. The last sentence was composed of nothing more than pixels arranged in certain shapes. Your interpretation of that sentence is that those shapes mean something - they form letters and words. Furthermore, since your interpretation includes knowledge of the English language, you further interpret that sentence to hold meaning within the English language - the letters and words mean something when combined in the way they were.

Your interpretation defines the meaning of the Scriptures. The only way to be accurate about one's reading of the Bible is to attempt to adopt the position of one reading the Bible in the time it was written, and that requires contextual analysis.

 

[4Christ2]

Our interpretations determine what they actually mean. There's no superceding involved. It is not possible to separate one's interpretation from the reading of it.

If you're having trouble understanding this, realize for a second that by reading this very sentence, you are interpreting it. The last sentence was composed of nothing more than pixels arranged in certain shapes. Your interpretation of that sentence is that those shapes mean something - they form letters and words. Furthermore, since your interpretation includes knowledge of the English language, you further interpret that sentence to hold meaning within the English language - the letters and words mean something when combined in the way they were.

Your interpretation defines the meaning of the Scriptures. The only way to be accurate about one's reading of the Bible is to attempt to adopt the position of one reading the Bible in the time it was written, and that requires contextual analysis.

I think I understand what you are saying. I'm having trouble believing however that I must become a Bible scholar in contextual analysis in order to understand God's Word. Isn't that why we as Believers have the Holy Spirit? To lead us and guide us into all truth? Logically, it seems to me confusion and mis-understanding of scripture involves too much contextual analysis and not enough prayer and reliance on the Holy Spirit. But then again, God does tell us to study to show ourselves approved ... hmmm, I'm gonna leave this alone!! LOL Thanks for the explanation..it helped.

 

[ebia]

I too speak of the Word of God and or bible. It is the expressed image of the mind of God concerning his people. Jesus was called the Word, and the scriptures as well.
Those who are spiritually minded have no doubt to what the Word "Word" is refering to in the content it's beinging used.

One can usually tell what is meant in the context of normal conversation. What concerns me is how commonly people assume that references in the bible to the 'word of God' can be taken as talking about the bible when there is nothing in the context to support that. Scripture itself uses the phrase 'word of God' and equivalent in far more suble and nuanced ways than that.

 

[ebia]

Unfounded statements? I think what you are saying is truly unfounded. They are one and the same, and what I am saying is backed by Scripture.
Again, the Bible was not written at the time, so He used the 12 Apostles as preaching His Word as a vessel.

So the bible isn't the word of God but a means for communication about the word of God, just as the Apostles were.

John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning


John 1:14-15

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is preferred before me, for He was before me.’”

Mark 13:31

Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

I'm not sure how you think posting a set a verses that are not about the bible supports your point.

2 Timothy 3:15-17

and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work

.
"Scripture is God-breathed", so is creation, so is human life, so is all who have received the Holy Spirit. That's not the same as being the Word of God.

1 Corinthians 2:12-13

12We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.

Again, it's not actually talking about the bible but something much more suble than that - the collective teaching and conversations of the people of God, some of which are recorded within the bible. The word of God is something far bigger than the bible.

 

[ebia]

I think I understand what you are saying. I'm having trouble believing however that I must become a Bible scholar in contextual analysis in order to understand God's Word. Isn't that why we as Believers have the Holy Spirit? To lead us and guide us into all truth?

And one of the ways he can do that is through careful study - including contextual analysis. Having the assistance of the Holy Ghost doesn't mean one can avoid the hard graft.

Logically, it seems to me confusion and mis-understanding of scripture involves too much contextual analysis and not enough prayer and reliance on the Holy Spirit.

One needs all of those. Much disagreement is also produced by those who don't do the hard graft and assume that the Holy Spirit will bail them out.

 

[ebia]

OK, let's take the Ten Commandments. These are God's Laws handed down to the people to define "sin". Without the 'law', we the people would have no idea of what is wrong and right? So the written word has defined what is wrong or right! Right? But are you now saying that our opinions (interpretations) of the Commandments would supercede what they actually mean?

Dannager explained interpretation very well above, so I would repeat that.

But I did want to add that the law does not define sin. People already had some idea of what was right and wrong before then, and still had an incomplete understanding after. The law isn't a definition of sin, but a step towards improving people's understanding of it.

 

[davedjy]

Dannager explained interpretation very well above, so I would repeat that.

But I did want to add that the law does not define sin. People already had some idea of what was right and wrong before then, and still had an incomplete understanding after. The law isn't a definition of sin, but a step towards improving people's understanding of it.

That basically would directly imply that sins are subject to change based upon our interpretations of the Scriptures? how could that even be possible?

 

[UBERROGO]

I was looking through the forum, and noticed all of the opinions and advice given, that just plain out is not of the scripture.
Are we to rely more on our own peceptions of morality over those that the scriptures give us?

have any examples?

 

[Dannager]

I think I understand what you are saying. I'm having trouble believing however that I must become a Bible scholar in contextual analysis in order to understand God's Word.

You don't need to be a Bible scholar to understand the important parts of the Bible: the moral and spiritual messages. Those were purposefully made very clear. The only places you require contextual analysis is when you're trying to determine the factual accuracy of certain parts of the Bible. It helps to keep in mind that, during the time period in which the Bible was written, the concept of a literal account of history hadn't been accepted yet.

Isn't that why we as Believers have the Holy Spirit? To lead us and guide us into all truth?

Yes, it is.

Logically, it seems to me confusion and mis-understanding of scripture involves too much contextual analysis and not enough prayer and reliance on the Holy Spirit. But then again, God does tell us to study to show ourselves approved ... hmmm, I'm gonna leave this alone!! LOL Thanks for the explanation..it helped.

You're very welcome. My advice is to pray for moral and spiritual guidance, and leave the scientific and historical guidance to whom they belong - scientists and historians.

 

[Dannager]

That basically would directly imply that sins are subject to change based upon our interpretations of the Scriptures? how could that even be possible?

It's not. What constitutes a sin doesn't change. One's interpretation of something doesn't have any bearing on whether or not it is true. There is still, as always, one right answer about what sin actually is, and what sin actually isn't. Just as fundamentalists not accepting evolution doesn't change the fact that it occurs, someone not accepting that sin works as it says it does doesn't change how sin works.

There are lots of interpretations out there. One of them is correct (or closest to being correct).

 

[chris777]

have any examples?

lol too many to count, I didn't list any because I see it as an overall symptom of apostacy. and not nessesarily due to the individual posters bad theology.
Much of which has been heavily debated, Which Is why
I stated it the way I did, because it covers multiple topics.

But much of it involves the near cliche phrases.

Well my God would never do that, and If he would, then I wouldnt want to be withhim anyway

I dont think God would do that

I feel that

and so on,