Luke and Theophilus

[C R F]

In the gospel of Luke , at the beginning, it says it was written to Theophilus, "most excellent". The meaning of the name Theophilus is friend of God. Moses was said to be a friend of God as he seen him as face to face. Abraham was a friend of God because he believed God and that was counted for his righteousness and he believed by faith. In James it says he who is friend to this world is enemy to God so enemy to this world is friend to God.
Jesus said it right there in Luke, if you do not hate everything of this world,you brother and sister and even you own life you cannot be a disciple of his. You have to give up all you posess.
What it all means is it is all written in and has to be interpreted into spiritual understanding if you want to know the truth. Straight away you find there is no Theophilus in the bible anywhere except when Luke mentions him. The gospel like the others are all written and true events but they have been translated into parable forms and then you have to have the understanding of one who sees the Lord face to face, one who has removed the flesh from his heart.
Now it is easy to say that but to show it is a different matter but I can. You see how it is written Jesus was born of the virgin but the virgin means a woman not defiled by the teachings of this world. Unclean teachings defile a woman and of course the woman means the church or a church. You see Jesus born in the Bethlaham and that means the place of bread. See John crying in the wilderness, dresses with the skins of animals like the beast of the world, sinners. John, son of woman, not son of man or of spirit.
You see the gospels written and then it says stuff like , IN THIS WISE, or as of the prophets had written. That all means the same, they are to be understood as the prophets understood scripture and with spiritual wisdom
Jesus was born around sheep and goats and cattle and those are all types of people. He was in a manger with swaddling cloth. All that has spiritual meanings.
All the gospels were written and the four are for the flaming swords that keep the way of the tree of life and the earthly understanding of them has to be overcome and that is when they become the gospel of truth and of Jesus.

 

[25R]

Please provide scripture that clearly affirms your claims. No offense, but 1 persons opinion should sway no one's understanding of scripture.

Why can Luke not have had a friend named Theophilus, just like he said. Without scripture affirming your ideas, you are just needlessly confusing people.

 

[C R F]

Please provide scripture that clearly affirms your claims. No offense, but 1 persons opinion should sway no one's understanding of scripture.

Why can Luke not have had a friend named Theophilus, just like he said. Without scripture affirming your ideas, you are just needlessly confusing people.

1 cor, 2/ 14

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[25R]

I agree that, salvation, redemption and other subjects taught are contrary to the thinking of unbelievers and cannot be understood without God's grace and spirit teaching.

But I read your post as saying that biblical text that is simply historical (i.e who wrote and to whom it was written) should be interpreted as more. That seems dangerous to me. I believe that God wrote what he wanted, for our edification. Personally, I don't want to risk using my very fallible wisdom to get more than is written clearly.

 

[amadeus2]

...I read your post as saying that biblical text that is simply historical (i.e who wrote and to whom it was written) should be interpreted as more. That seems dangerous to me. I believe that God wrote what he wanted, for our edification. Personally, I don't want to risk using my very fallible wisdom to get more than is written clearly.

In what way dangerous? If God is really on a person's side what does he have to fear?


Yes, indeed, God had written that which He wanted, but He also desired people to ask of Him in order to receive more than what they initially had.


I believe you are correct in not wanting to use your own fallible wisdom, but what did the people who heard the naturally spoken parables of Jesus do in order to receive the interpretations?


You notice that the following verse is not speaking only of people who have been born again:


"That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." John 1:9


I believe that the verse means that every man born of woman received enough Light to know to search and ask for more. In other words, don't ever stop seeking and asking and knocking! [see Matt 7:7]

Anyone who can read, can read the Bible, but the ability to read it, in itself, doesn't give anyone full understanding.

If another person knows more than you or me about the things of God, then will not some of the things that person says to us seem to be beyond us? Perhaps that person has already asked for more of God than we have, and has already received more... Wouldn't what such a person says, even if it is wrong, only be dangerous to people who fear what other people can do to them? [Matt 10:28]

 

[C R F]

In what way dangerous? If God is really on a person's side what does he have to fear?


Yes, indeed, God had written that which He wanted, but He also desired people to ask of Him in order to receive more than what they initially had.


I believe you are correct in not wanting to use your own fallible wisdom, but what did the people who heard the naturally spoken parables of Jesus do in order to receive the interpretations?


You notice that the following verse is not speaking only of people who have been born again:


"That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." John 1:9


I believe that the verse means that every man born of woman received enough Light to know to search and ask for more. In other words, don't ever stop seeking and asking and knocking! [see Matt 7:7]

Anyone who can read, can read the Bible, but the ability to read it, in itself, doesn't give anyone full understanding.

If another person knows more than you or me about the things of God, then will not some of the things that person says to us seem to be beyond us? Perhaps that person has already asked for more of God than we have, and has already received more... Wouldn't what such a person says, even if it is wrong, only be dangerous to people who fear what other people can do to them? [Matt 10:28]

Hi Amadeus. So what do you think my friend. Do you think the literal understanding is right or the spiritual. As I have said often, I believe the events of the life and times did happen but were written so you can only understand them when you learn to understand parables. Well they were written in parable forms.

Nice to see you back here by the way.

 

[amadeus2]

Hi Amadeus. So what do you think my friend. Do you think the literal understanding is right or the spiritual.

I believe that the spiritual is right, because that is what God speaks to my heart. As to the literal, man's history may or may not agree with the literal interpretation of scripture, but man's history has often been proven by man using man's own methods alone to be in error.

What do I care for the historical, if I have all that God desires for me to have and it is alll spiritual? (I am not saying that I have it all, but if I did, what else would I need that man could provide?)

As I have said often, I believe the events of the life and times did happen but were written so you can only understand them when you learn to understand parables. Well they were written in parable forms.

Nice to see you back here by the way.

Yes, I am certain that the written scriptures show us much of what happened naturally or historically, but, the most important thing for the one reading those scriptures should be any message that God has for him, if he is able to receive it. I believe that God has a message in the written scriptures for anyone who is really interested in finding it.

 

[C R F]

I believe that the spiritual is right, because that is what God speaks to my heart. As to the literal, man's history may or may not agree with the literal interpretation of scripture, but man's history has often been proven by man using man's own methods alone to be in error.

What do I care for the historical, if I have all that God desires for me to have and it is alll spiritual? (I am not saying that I have it all, but if I did, what else would I need that man could provide?)




Yes, I am certain that the written scriptures show us much of what happened naturally or historically, but, the most important thing for the one reading those scriptures should be any message that God has for him, if he is able to receive it. I believe that God has a message in the written scriptures for anyone who is really interested in finding it.

We agree Amadeus. Thank you for your imput.

 

[ebia]

"I don't like what the bible is [a narrative of God's working in the world to put it right] so I'll reinvent it as something else [a set of timeless truths]

And if anyone dares to challenge what I think I'll pull out Paul out of context and assume that means "I'm right and you're wrong"

Now that does not necessarily mean Theophilus was ever a real individual - it may be a way of addressing the book to the generalized believer.

Nor does it mean everything in scripture is a literal account of what a camera would have recorded had it been there.

But essentially scripture is a story about events that invites us to live our part of the story, not timeless truths. Spriritalising it, like forming systematic theologies from it, is liable to loose that.