The crucial necessity of comparing Scripture with other Scripture.

[Bob corrigan]

There is a favorite trick employed by many to teach things that are just not true. It is called the "proof text" method. While some of you are unfamiliar with the term, anybody who has ever heard a sermon in a church building, watched or listened to a media ministry has been exposed to this. In fact, for the majority, some of what they believe Scripture teaches has been formed by another using this ploy. The "proof text" method is this. A particular passage, verse or part of a verse is lifted out of Scripture, read as if it stands alone (not reading any of the verses before or after the selected part, for example, a pastor will be talking about something and at a certain point in his talk, he will spout out, "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me," or "With God all things are possible." This is usually done without giving the verse reference.) Either of these statements is made as if they are a doctrine without any context except for the context the speaker attaches to it. Context is absolutely necessary to determine the meaning of a statement. You have to understand why a statement was made. If you were to read Phil 4:8-13, you would learn the true context of the first statement and easily see why Paul made the statement, the correct context, and understand that it was used with a specific context and cannot be used as a general statement that can be applied whenever or whatever a speaker decides it "fits." The same for the second statement. If you read Mat 19:16-26, you will see the situation and why Jesus made the statement; in other words, you will have the proper context.

I am about to address the key bastion of the Evangelical/Christian world. Instead of me stating, "This isn't true," I am going to say that I don't believe it, and I will show why I don't believe it. The Topic is, "Who does God love?" It also uses the most famous "proof text." Of course, I am speaking of John 3:16. This "proof-text" verse is used to teach that God loves everybody and that His love is unconditional. Let me say it again; I do not believe this is what John 3:16 teaches. So read this post and keep this in mind. I'm not trying to "prove" that the teaching is wrong. I am showing why I don't believe the teaching. If you believe otherwise, so be it. I'm not looking to debate the subject. I picked it to emphasize the need to compare Scripture with other Scripture. Verses with other verses.

First, a technical explanation. People say "agape" means "unconditional love." I can state positively that no Hebrew or Greek word translated into the English word "love" is defined as "unconditional love." I haven't seen one example of "unconditional love" from Jehovah anywhere in Scripture. Another point, with a blanket statement that "Jehovah loves everybody," would have to mean that Jehovah has loved every single person who has lived since Adam and Eve. Since Scripture is a recorded history of how Jehovah interacted with mankind from the creation, we have to see examples of Jehovah showing that He loves everybody, starting in the Old Testament. It is easy to say that the Bible teaches that Jehovah loves everybody, but if you can't show in the Bible examples of Jehovah loving everybody, then you can't say the Bible teaches it. Because if the Bible doesn't show that Jehovah loves everybody, then you can't use the bible to teach it. If you do so, you are guilty of "private interpretation."

To my understanding, "unconditional love" means that Jehovah loves every single person regardless of what kind of person one is, regardless of how they live or think, no matter how wicked, evil or perverse in thought or deed, whether they love Jehovah or hate Jehovah. The first glaring contradiction to this is hell. Why is there hell if Jehovah unconditionally loves everybody? Why did Yeshua have to die an excruciating death on the cross if Jehovah unconditionally loves everybody? Why do people need salvation if Jehovah unconditionally loves everybody? Why do people need to be forgiven for their sin if Jehovah unconditionally loves everybody? The second you put the least restriction or smallest condition on who Jehovah loves, you just destroyed the teaching that "Jehovah loves everybody" and that His love is "unconditional." One statement, "Jehovah loves everybody," has been repeated millions of times, opens up a bunch of questions that can't be answered.

Let's look at the Flood. Mankind had become so wicked and violent that it grieved Jehovah that He had created man and He decided to wipe out all of mankind, including innocent babies and children, except for 8 people. To me, this is easy evidence that Jehovah didn't love all of those people He drowned and that He didn't unconditionally love those He killed. Because under the concept of "unconditional love," it shouldn't have mattered to Jehovah how wicked and violent the people were. While He wouldn't have liked their behavior, He still would have loved them.
What about the drowning of Pharoah and the Egyptian army? Show me in this example how Jehovah loved Pharoah and his army. Show me how Jehovah showed "unconditional love" here. Yes, they rode out to slaughter the Israelites, but couldn't Jehovah have put up a wall of water to keep the army from reaching the newly freed slaves? If Jehovah loves everybody, why would He allow people to hurt and kill each other? Since Jehovah knows the future, why would He expose Eve to the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, knowing that Eve and Adam would both eat of the tree and fall? Doesn't a loving Father protect his children? Would a Father who "unconditionally loves" his child stand back, watch and allow his child to walk into a burning building, thinking to himself, "Well, I did tell him not to walk into a burning building." Another problem with the teaching is it presents Jehovah, not as the ALL-POWERFUL CREATOR GOD, but as a sissy God, a God who is only concerned with "Love, Love, Love," "Can't we all just get along?" or "Will you please do what I want you to do?"
I will admit that to most people's sensibilities and standards, Jehovah seems to be extremely harsh or too severe in the Old Testament. However, the sovereign Jehovah is the one who made the rules and He has always operated under His own rules and standards. Here are three examples in the Old Testament that caused men to lose their lives, when, to our way of thinking, seems to be Jehovah overreacting. A man for gathering firewood on the Sabbath, Num 15:32-35, men who looked into the Ark of the Covenant, 1Sam 6:19 and Uzzah, who thought that the Ark was about to fall off a wagon, 2Sam 1-7. But the question here is why were these people killed? Because they disobeyed God, otherwise known as blasphemy!
Blasphemy is any sin directed against Jehovah or in direct opposition to Jehovah's commands through thought, word or deed. This includes disobeying God's commands, to speak evil against Jehovah, and telling lies against Jehovah and lying about what Jehovah's word, Scripture, teaches.

What about Aaron's sons, Nadab and Abihu, who Jehovah killed? Lev 10:1-2. They disobeyed Jehovah and He took their life. So what if they disobeyed Jehovah? Why did that matter if Jehovah unconditionally loved them? (By the way, their sin wasn't just disobedience, their disobedience was blasphemy against Jehovah!) What about Korah, who, along with others, challenged Moses and Aaron and paid for their blasphemy with their lives? Num 16:1-35. I can cite every single example of Jehovah directly killing people by His own hand and ask the same questions! And I ask the reader, how do these events show that Jehovah unconditionally loved all of those He personally destroyed?
Why did Jehovah command the death penalty for:
Blasphemy
Murder
Adultery
inappropriate behavior with animals
Rape
False prophets
False witnesses
Sorcerers
Mediums
Homosexuality
Disobedient sons

Among other categories in the Old Testament, if He "unconditionally loves" all people? Doesn't instituting the death penalty for different acts of disobedience itself show that there are conditions to being loved by Jehovah? Does Jehovah kill those He loves for "only" disobeying? That doesn't sound like "unconditional love" to me!
And let's not forget Ananias and Sapphira, Acts 5:1-11 and Herod, Acts 12:20-23. Both of these events happened in the New Testament after Yeshua ascended. Isn't there a lot of killing at the hand of Jehovah in the book of Revelation? Why would Jehovah kill those He unconditionally loved? Is that how Jehovah shows His unconditional love?
(Part of my method of teaching is to get people to think for themselves and to look at other things in Scripture rather than simply accepting everything they are told hook, line, and sinker.)

I did start this post stating the neccessity of comparing Scripture with Scripture, so let's do that. Everything I am about to show will also be found in your Bible. I didn't make any of them up.

Ex 20:5-6 "...visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, vs 6 And showing mercy unto the thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments."

Under the concept of "unconditional love," all people would be treated the same, correct? Yet we clearly see that Jehovah curses those who hate Him and shows mercy to those who love Him. All throughout the Old Testament, we see this constant theme. Jehovah blesses those who love and obey Him and curses (Speaks and sends evil) against those who hate and disobey Him. The only time Jehovah punishes people is when they disobey Him. He never punishes (though He does correct at times) those who love and obey Him. There is not one verse that has Jehovah stating that He "loves those who hate Him."

There is a very good reason "pastors" ignore most of the Old Testament. The Old Testament contradicts almost 90% of what is being taught from the pulpits today. Here is a passage from the Old Testament that I can guarantee will never be taught in a church building, all of Lev 26:1-30. Verses 1-13 show how God will bless them if they obey Jehovah. Vs 11 says, "...and My soul will not abhor you."
But, from vs 14 and on, we see Jehovah promises to curse them if they disobey Him.

"But, if you will not obey me and keep all of my commandments. And if you despise my statutes and you abhor My judgments and break my Covenant, I will do this to you! I will appoint terror over you, consumption and a burning fever that will consume your eyes and cause you to sorrow...I will set My face against you and your enemies will slay you, those that hate you will rule over you...And if after this, you will still not obey Me, I will punish you seven times more...And if you walk contrary unto me, I will bring seven times more plague upon you...I will also send wild beasts among you that will kill your children and destroy your livestock...I will bring a sword against you...I will send the pestilence among you...I will walk contrary unto you in my fury...you will eat the flesh of your sons and daughters..., vs 30 I will destroy your high places and cut down your images and cast your carcasses upon the carcasses of your idols AND MY SOUL WILL ABHOR YOU!

The last time I checked, abhor is not a synonym for love. This is straightforward. Blessings if they obeyed, and He would not abhor them. Curses for disobeying, and He would abhor them. I'm sorry, maybe I am missing something, but I don't see any evidence of Jehovah "loving everyone with unconditional love" in this chapter.

Psalm 5:5-6 The foolish will not appear in your sight. YOU HATE ALL WORKERS OF INIQUITY. You will destroy them that speak lies. He will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.

Psalm 11:5 The LORD tests the righteous, but HE HATES THE WICKED AND LOVERS OF VIOLENCE.

Hos 9:15 All their wickedness is in Gilgal: FOR THERE I HATED THEM for the wickedness of their doings. I will drive them out of my house. I WILL LOVE THEM NO MORE. All of their leaders have revolted against me.

Nahum 1:2 Jehovah is angry and will take revenge. He is furious. He will take vengeance on His adversaries. He reserves wrath for His enemies.

Zec 11:8 I cut off (killed) three (false) shepherds in one month. I loathed them, and they abhorred Me.

Mal 1:2-3 Jehovah said "I have loved you." But you ask, 'how have you loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? Jehovah said, "Yet I loved Jacob and hated Esau..

At the same time, Jehovah made it clear who He loved.

Deut 4:37 Because Jehovah loved your ancestors, He then chose you, their descendants.

Deut 7:6-8 For you are a holy (set apart) people unto Jehovah. He has chosen you to be a special people unto Himself, above all other people on the face of the earth. Jehovah did not set His love upon you or choose you because you outnumbered any other people, for you had the fewest people. But because Jehovah loved you...

Deut 10:15 For Jehovah had a delight in your fathers, to love them, and He chose their seed after them...

Deut 33:3 Yes, Jehovah loved the people. All of His saints are in His hand. They sat down at His feet. Every saint will be given His word.

What does the New Testament teach? I typed into my English/Greek translator the following phrases and was shown;

God loves everybody - aux Theos pandes.

God loves all men - aux Theos agape olous anthropous.

Now, if one, or both of these Greek sentences were to be found in the original Greek texts, I wouldn't be doing this study. But they are not. One would think that something this big and important would be found in almost every book in the New Testament! But, nope! You would think this teaching would at least be found in each of the Gospels, but again, nope! To say that John 3:16 teaches that "Jehovah loves everybody and His love is unconditional" is not based on any fact; it is taught based on inference and eisegesis! To say that such a wonderful doctrine, if it were true, rests solely on one single verse is flabbergasting and ludicrous at the least. Is the "doctrine" taught anywhere else in the New Testament? NOPE!

Nowhere in the New Testament does Scripture ever say that Yeshua "loved all people and that his love was unconditional." Because if the Father did this, Yeshua would follow suit. Everyone knows that Yeshua loved the apostle, John. What other individuals did Yeshua love?

Mk 10:21, the rich young ruler, "Then Yeshua looked at him, loved him...

John 11:5 Yeshua loved Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.

John 13:1 Yeshua, having loved his own.

John 13:34, The Apostles

John 15:8-12 The Apostles

John 17:23 God loved Yeshua and the Apostles.

Gal 2:20 Yeshua loved Paul.

Eph 5:25 Yeshua loved the church.

Some verses employ the word "us" in reference to whom Yeshua loved. Any time a writer uses the word "us" in the New Testament, it is used to refer to believers only specifically.

Rom 5:8, 8:37
Eph 2:4, 5:2
2Thess 2:16
1John 3:1, 4:9-11, 19
Rev 1:5

2Thess 2:13, brethren beloved of the Lord.

Show me one verse that teaches Yeshua loves all people! There is not even one verse they can twist to try and teach that. They can shout it from the pulpits! They can say it on camera. They can say it into a microphone. They can say it in blogs, books, and articles. They can teach it in Sunday School. They can instruct it in Seminaries and Bible Schools. They can write it in commentaries and Study Bibles. BUT THEY CAN'T SHOW IT IN SCRIPTURE! Scripture doesn't lie, verses don't lie, words don't lie, BUT MEN DO! If Jehovah loves all people, then Yeshua loves all people. If Jehovah's love is unconditional, then Yeshua's love is unconditional. None of that is true!

I am going to show some verses. Before reading these verses, ask yourself, who does Yeshua love? And who does Jehovah love? And how do you know if a person loves Yeshua? And then answer the questions after you read the verses.

John 14:21 He that has my commandments and keeps (obeys) them is he that loves me. He that loves me will be loved by my Father. I will love him and make myself known to him.

John 14:23 If a man love me, he will keep my words. If he keeps my words, my Father will love him. We will come to him and abide with him.

John 15:9-10 As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you...If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, even as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in His love.

John 16:27 For the Father loves you because you have loved me. You have also believed that I came from God.

1. Who does Jehovah love? Only those who love Yeshua!
2. Who does Yeshua love? Only those who love him and keep the commandments.
3. How do you know if someone loves Yeshua? They keep his commandments.

1 John 5:3 This is how we love God; we keep his commandments.

John 15:14 You are my friends if you do whatever I command you. They never quote this verse when they shout out, "Jesus, the friend of sinners!"

And of course, we know that Jehovah and Yeshua love all of the sheep.

We can also clearly see that there are conditions for being loved by Jehovah and Yeshua!

The follow-up question is, How does one even come to love Jehovah? Jehovah has to love him first,

1 John 4:19 We love Him because He first loved us.

1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved Jehovah, but that Jehovah loved us...

If Jehovah does not love a person first, that person will never love Jehovah. If a person doesn't love Jehovah, he will never love Yeshua.

 

[BobRyan]

There is a favorite trick employed by many to teach things that are just not true. It is called the "proof text" method.

"proof texts" in the correct context are those that prove the point being claimed.

from:

Prooftext - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"A proof text is a passage of scripture presented as proof for a theological doctrine, belief, or principle"​

So for example: Acts 17:11 we have the "proof text" example of sola scriptura testing for all doctrine. The text says "they studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF the things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul, were SO"

This is an example of a "proof text" that actually proves the point being asserted - which is that the NT affirms testing doctrine against the Bible.

Another one like it is in Gal 1:6-9

And another just like it is in Mark 7:6-12 where tradition is "tested" against scripture. Sola Scriptura testing showing that a certain man-made tradition was error.

While some of you are unfamiliar with the term, anybody who has ever heard a sermon in a church building, watched or listened to a media ministry has been exposed to this.

No question such texts exist and they prove the Biblical support for a given idea such as "sola scriptura testing of all doctrine"

In fact, for the majority, some of what they believe Scripture teaches has been formed by another using this

No doubt a lot of us have a list of texts that support a given POV/Doctrine.

The proof text method is this. A particular passage, verse etc is quoted from scripture and quoted verbatim so the reader can see the point made as compared to the claim for a given POV.

The complaint is often that the entire chapter for a given verse is not also read each time a verse is quoted. But of course quoting an entire chapter each time a single verse is quoted - would take a very long time and would drown the reader in what is called "data blindness". So then not a very effective way to make a statement.

What if every time you had to show that a certain person lives at a certain address - you also had to list every person and every address on that same street?

The "proof text" method is this. A particular passage, verse or part of a verse is lifted out of Scripture, read as if it stands alone (not reading any of the verses before or after the selected part, for example, a pastor will be talking about something and at a certain point in his talk, he will spout out, "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me," or "With God all things are possible." This is usually done without giving the verse reference.) Either of these statements is made as if they are a doctrine without any context except for the context the speaker attaches to it.

Certainly there is the old "Judas went out and hanged himself" Matt 27:5 - "Go and do thou likewise" Luke 10:37.

The "detail" skimmed over in this sort of discussion is that a "bad" proof text scenario does not depend on how long the quote is - but rather if it can be shown that verses around that quote show that the use being made of it is incorrect.

Some will simply stop at the point "well you did not quote the entire chapter so that must be a bad-proof-text scenario". Which of course is not a very sound conclusion.

from the same link as in the case above in this post - we have the "may not accurately" element

"Prooftexting (sometimes "proof-texting" or "proof texting") is the practice of using quotations from a document, either for the purpose of exegesis, or to establish a proposition in eisegesis (introducing one's own presuppositions, agendas, or biases). Such quotes may not accurately reflect the original intent of the author,[2] and a document quoted in such a manner, when read as a whole, may not support the proposition for which it was cited.[3][4][5][6] The term has currency primarily in theological and exegetical circles."​

"may not" does not mean "always prove to be in error'. It means some cases are good and some are not.

Context is absolutely necessary to determine the meaning of a statement.

Agreed. Each example of a text being used to support a given idea must be evaluated in context to "SEE IF" it is taken out and used to convey its opposite meaning - or if it is being used consistently with its context.

You have to understand why a statement was made. If you were to read Phil 4:8-13, you would learn the true context

and see that it indeed can be used as a general statement when speaking in the context of faith and action that perseveres under trial. It is about persevering under trial and struggle and the fact that Christ gives strength to endure. (as opposed to the idea that Christ makes everyone a gold medal winner at the olympics)

Phil 4:
8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.
9 Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you.
10 But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly, that now at the last your care of me hath flourished again; wherein ye were also careful, but ye lacked opportunity.
11 Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.
12 I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where and in all things I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need.
13 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

There is a favorite trick employed by many to teach things that are just not true. It is called the "proof text" method. While some of you are unfamiliar with the term, anybody who has ever heard a sermon in a church building, watched or listened to a media ministry has been exposed to this. In fact, for the majority, some of what they believe Scripture teaches has been formed by another using this ploy. The "proof text" method is this. A particular passage, verse or part of a verse is lifted out of Scripture, read as if it stands alone (not reading any of the verses before or after the selected part, for example, a pastor will be talking about something and at a certain point in his talk, he will spout out, "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me," or "With God all things are possible." This is usually done without giving the verse reference.) Either of these statements is made as if they are a doctrine without any context except for the context the speaker attaches to it. Context is absolutely necessary to determine the meaning of a statement. You have to understand why a statement was made. If you were to read Phil 4:8-13, you would learn the true context of the first statement and easily see why Paul made the statement, the correct context, and understand that it was used with a specific context and cannot be used as a general statement that can be applied whenever or whatever a speaker decides it "fits." The same for the second statement. If you read Mat 19:16-26, you will see the situation and why Jesus made the statement; in other words, you will have the proper context.

I am about to address the key bastion of the Evangelical/Christian world. Instead of me stating, "This isn't true," I am going to say that I don't believe it, and I will show why I don't believe it. The Topic is, "Who does God love?" It also uses the most famous "proof text." Of course, I am speaking of John 3:16. This "proof-text" verse is used to teach that God loves everybody and that His love is unconditional. Let me say it again; I do not believe this is what John 3:16 teaches. So read this post and keep this in mind. I'm not trying to "prove" that the teaching is wrong. I am showing why I don't believe the teaching. If you believe otherwise, so be it. I'm not looking to debate the subject. I picked it to emphasize the need to compare Scripture with other Scripture. Verses with other verses.

First, a technical explanation. People say "agape" means "unconditional love." I can state positively that no Hebrew or Greek word translated into the English word "love" is defined as "unconditional love." I haven't seen one example of "unconditional love" from Jehovah anywhere in Scripture. Another point, with a blanket statement that "Jehovah loves everybody," would have to mean that Jehovah has loved every single person who has lived since Adam and Eve. Since Scripture is a recorded history of how Jehovah interacted with mankind from the creation, we have to see examples of Jehovah showing that He loves everybody, starting in the Old Testament. It is easy to say that the Bible teaches that Jehovah loves everybody, but if you can't show in the Bible examples of Jehovah loving everybody, then you can't say the Bible teaches it. Because if the Bible doesn't show that Jehovah loves everybody, then you can't use the bible to teach it. If you do so, you are guilty of "private interpretation."

To my understanding, "unconditional love" means that Jehovah loves every single person regardless of what kind of person one is, regardless of how they live or think, no matter how wicked, evil or perverse in thought or deed, whether they love Jehovah or hate Jehovah. The first glaring contradiction to this is hell. Why is there hell if Jehovah unconditionally loves everybody? Why did Yeshua have to die an excruciating death on the cross if Jehovah unconditionally loves everybody? Why do people need salvation if Jehovah unconditionally loves everybody? Why do people need to be forgiven for their sin if Jehovah unconditionally loves everybody? The second you put the least restriction or smallest condition on who Jehovah loves, you just destroyed the teaching that "Jehovah loves everybody" and that His love is "unconditional." One statement, "Jehovah loves everybody," has been repeated millions of times, opens up a bunch of questions that can't be answered.

Let's look at the Flood. Mankind had become so wicked and violent that it grieved Jehovah that He had created man and He decided to wipe out all of mankind, including innocent babies and children, except for 8 people. To me, this is easy evidence that Jehovah didn't love all of those people He drowned and that He didn't unconditionally love those He killed. Because under the concept of "unconditional love," it shouldn't have mattered to Jehovah how wicked and violent the people were. While He wouldn't have liked their behavior, He still would have loved them.
What about the drowning of Pharoah and the Egyptian army? Show me in this example how Jehovah loved Pharoah and his army. Show me how Jehovah showed "unconditional love" here. Yes, they rode out to slaughter the Israelites, but couldn't Jehovah have put up a wall of water to keep the army from reaching the newly freed slaves? If Jehovah loves everybody, why would He allow people to hurt and kill each other? Since Jehovah knows the future, why would He expose Eve to the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, knowing that Eve and Adam would both eat of the tree and fall? Doesn't a loving Father protect his children? Would a Father who "unconditionally loves" his child stand back, watch and allow his child to walk into a burning building, thinking to himself, "Well, I did tell him not to walk into a burning building." Another problem with the teaching is it presents Jehovah, not as the ALL-POWERFUL CREATOR GOD, but as a sissy God, a God who is only concerned with "Love, Love, Love," "Can't we all just get along?" or "Will you please do what I want you to do?"
I will admit that to most people's sensibilities and standards, Jehovah seems to be extremely harsh or too severe in the Old Testament. However, the sovereign Jehovah is the one who made the rules and He has always operated under His own rules and standards. Here are three examples in the Old Testament that caused men to lose their lives, when, to our way of thinking, seems to be Jehovah overreacting. A man for gathering firewood on the Sabbath, Num 15:32-35, men who looked into the Ark of the Covenant, 1Sam 6:19 and Uzzah, who thought that the Ark was about to fall off a wagon, 2Sam 1-7. But the question here is why were these people killed? Because they disobeyed God, otherwise known as blasphemy!
Blasphemy is any sin directed against Jehovah or in direct opposition to Jehovah's commands through thought, word or deed. This includes disobeying God's commands, to speak evil against Jehovah, and telling lies against Jehovah and lying about what Jehovah's word, Scripture, teaches.

What about Aaron's sons, Nadab and Abihu, who Jehovah killed? Lev 10:1-2. They disobeyed Jehovah and He took their life. So what if they disobeyed Jehovah? Why did that matter if Jehovah unconditionally loved them? (By the way, their sin wasn't just disobedience, their disobedience was blasphemy against Jehovah!) What about Korah, who, along with others, challenged Moses and Aaron and paid for their blasphemy with their lives? Num 16:1-35. I can cite every single example of Jehovah directly killing people by His own hand and ask the same questions! And I ask the reader, how do these events show that Jehovah unconditionally loved all of those He personally destroyed?
Why did Jehovah command the death penalty for:
Blasphemy
Murder
Adultery
inappropriate behavior with animals
Rape
False prophets
False witnesses
Sorcerers
Mediums
Homosexuality
Disobedient sons

Among other categories in the Old Testament, if He "unconditionally loves" all people? Doesn't instituting the death penalty for different acts of disobedience itself show that there are conditions to being loved by Jehovah? Does Jehovah kill those He loves for "only" disobeying? That doesn't sound like "unconditional love" to me!
And let's not forget Ananias and Sapphira, Acts 5:1-11 and Herod, Acts 12:20-23. Both of these events happened in the New Testament after Yeshua ascended. Isn't there a lot of killing at the hand of Jehovah in the book of Revelation? Why would Jehovah kill those He unconditionally loved? Is that how Jehovah shows His unconditional love?
(Part of my method of teaching is to get people to think for themselves and to look at other things in Scripture rather than simply accepting everything they are told hook, line, and sinker.)

I did start this post stating the neccessity of comparing Scripture with Scripture, so let's do that. Everything I am about to show will also be found in your Bible. I didn't make any of them up.

Ex 20:5-6 "...visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, vs 6 And showing mercy unto the thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments."

Under the concept of "unconditional love," all people would be treated the same, correct? Yet we clearly see that Jehovah curses those who hate Him and shows mercy to those who love Him. All throughout the Old Testament, we see this constant theme. Jehovah blesses those who love and obey Him and curses (Speaks and sends evil) against those who hate and disobey Him. The only time Jehovah punishes people is when they disobey Him. He never punishes (though He does correct at times) those who love and obey Him. There is not one verse that has Jehovah stating that He "loves those who hate Him."

There is a very good reason "pastors" ignore most of the Old Testament. The Old Testament contradicts almost 90% of what is being taught from the pulpits today. Here is a passage from the Old Testament that I can guarantee will never be taught in a church building, all of Lev 26:1-30. Verses 1-13 show how God will bless them if they obey Jehovah. Vs 11 says, "...and My soul will not abhor you."
But, from vs 14 and on, we see Jehovah promises to curse them if they disobey Him.

"But, if you will not obey me and keep all of my commandments. And if you despise my statutes and you abhor My judgments and break my Covenant, I will do this to you! I will appoint terror over you, consumption and a burning fever that will consume your eyes and cause you to sorrow...I will set My face against you and your enemies will slay you, those that hate you will rule over you...And if after this, you will still not obey Me, I will punish you seven times more...And if you walk contrary unto me, I will bring seven times more plague upon you...I will also send wild beasts among you that will kill your children and destroy your livestock...I will bring a sword against you...I will send the pestilence among you...I will walk contrary unto you in my fury...you will eat the flesh of your sons and daughters..., vs 30 I will destroy your high places and cut down your images and cast your carcasses upon the carcasses of your idols AND MY SOUL WILL ABHOR YOU!

The last time I checked, abhor is not a synonym for love. This is straightforward. Blessings if they obeyed, and He would not abhor them. Curses for disobeying, and He would abhor them. I'm sorry, maybe I am missing something, but I don't see any evidence of Jehovah "loving everyone with unconditional love" in this chapter.

Psalm 5:5-6 The foolish will not appear in your sight. YOU HATE ALL WORKERS OF INIQUITY. You will destroy them that speak lies. He will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.

Psalm 11:5 The LORD tests the righteous, but HE HATES THE WICKED AND LOVERS OF VIOLENCE.

Hos 9:15 All their wickedness is in Gilgal: FOR THERE I HATED THEM for the wickedness of their doings. I will drive them out of my house. I WILL LOVE THEM NO MORE. All of their leaders have revolted against me.

Nahum 1:2 Jehovah is angry and will take revenge. He is furious. He will take vengeance on His adversaries. He reserves wrath for His enemies.

Zec 11:8 I cut off (killed) three (false) shepherds in one month. I loathed them, and they abhorred Me.

Mal 1:2-3 Jehovah said "I have loved you." But you ask, 'how have you loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? Jehovah said, "Yet I loved Jacob and hated Esau..

At the same time, Jehovah made it clear who He loved.

Deut 4:37 Because Jehovah loved your ancestors, He then chose you, their descendants.

Deut 7:6-8 For you are a holy (set apart) people unto Jehovah. He has chosen you to be a special people unto Himself, above all other people on the face of the earth. Jehovah did not set His love upon you or choose you because you outnumbered any other people, for you had the fewest people. But because Jehovah loved you...

Deut 10:15 For Jehovah had a delight in your fathers, to love them, and He chose their seed after them...

Deut 33:3 Yes, Jehovah loved the people. All of His saints are in His hand. They sat down at His feet. Every saint will be given His word.

What does the New Testament teach? I typed into my English/Greek translator the following phrases and was shown;

God loves everybody - aux Theos pandes.

God loves all men - aux Theos agape olous anthropous.

Now, if one, or both of these Greek sentences were to be found in the original Greek texts, I wouldn't be doing this study. But they are not. One would think that something this big and important would be found in almost every book in the New Testament! But, nope! You would think this teaching would at least be found in each of the Gospels, but again, nope! To say that John 3:16 teaches that "Jehovah loves everybody and His love is unconditional" is not based on any fact; it is taught based on inference and eisegesis! To say that such a wonderful doctrine, if it were true, rests solely on one single verse is flabbergasting and ludicrous at the least. Is the "doctrine" taught anywhere else in the New Testament? NOPE!

Nowhere in the New Testament does Scripture ever say that Yeshua "loved all people and that his love was unconditional." Because if the Father did this, Yeshua would follow suit. Everyone knows that Yeshua loved the apostle, John. What other individuals did Yeshua love?

Mk 10:21, the rich young ruler, "Then Yeshua looked at him, loved him...

John 11:5 Yeshua loved Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.

John 13:1 Yeshua, having loved his own.

John 13:34, The Apostles

John 15:8-12 The Apostles

John 17:23 God loved Yeshua and the Apostles.

Gal 2:20 Yeshua loved Paul.

Eph 5:25 Yeshua loved the church.

Some verses employ the word "us" in reference to whom Yeshua loved. Any time a writer uses the word "us" in the New Testament, it is used to refer to believers only specifically.

Rom 5:8, 8:37
Eph 2:4, 5:2
2Thess 2:16
1John 3:1, 4:9-11, 19
Rev 1:5

2Thess 2:13, brethren beloved of the Lord.

Show me one verse that teaches Yeshua loves all people! There is not even one verse they can twist to try and teach that. They can shout it from the pulpits! They can say it on camera. They can say it into a microphone. They can say it in blogs, books, and articles. They can teach it in Sunday School. They can instruct it in Seminaries and Bible Schools. They can write it in commentaries and Study Bibles. BUT THEY CAN'T SHOW IT IN SCRIPTURE! Scripture doesn't lie, verses don't lie, words don't lie, BUT MEN DO! If Jehovah loves all people, then Yeshua loves all people. If Jehovah's love is unconditional, then Yeshua's love is unconditional. None of that is true!

I am going to show some verses. Before reading these verses, ask yourself, who does Yeshua love? And who does Jehovah love? And how do you know if a person loves Yeshua? And then answer the questions after you read the verses.

John 14:21 He that has my commandments and keeps (obeys) them is he that loves me. He that loves me will be loved by my Father. I will love him and make myself known to him.

John 14:23 If a man love me, he will keep my words. If he keeps my words, my Father will love him. We will come to him and abide with him.

John 15:9-10 As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you...If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, even as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in His love.

John 16:27 For the Father loves you because you have loved me. You have also believed that I came from God.

1. Who does Jehovah love? Only those who love Yeshua!
2. Who does Yeshua love? Only those who love him and keep the commandments.
3. How do you know if someone loves Yeshua? They keep his commandments.

1 John 5:3 This is how we love God; we keep his commandments.

John 15:14 You are my friends if you do whatever I command you. They never quote this verse when they shout out, "Jesus, the friend of sinners!"

And of course, we know that Jehovah and Yeshua love all of the sheep.

We can also clearly see that there are conditions for being loved by Jehovah and Yeshua!

The follow-up question is, How does one even come to love Jehovah? Jehovah has to love him first,

1 John 4:19 We love Him because He first loved us.

1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved Jehovah, but that Jehovah loved us...

If Jehovah does not love a person first, that person will never love Jehovah. If a person doesn't love Jehovah, he will never love Yeshua.

Too long to read, with all due respect. Can you condence in one short paragraph for those who like it plain and simple?
Blessings.

 

[The Righterzpen]

There is a favorite trick employed by many to teach things that are just not true. It is called the "proof text" method. While some of you are unfamiliar with the term, anybody who has ever heard a sermon in a church building, watched or listened to a media ministry has been exposed to this. In fact, for the majority, some of what they believe Scripture teaches has been formed by another using this ploy. The "proof text" method is this. A particular passage, verse or part of a verse is lifted out of Scripture, read as if it stands alone (not reading any of the verses before or after the selected part, for example, a pastor will be talking about something and at a certain point in his talk, he will spout out, "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me," or "With God all things are possible." This is usually done without giving the verse reference.) Either of these statements is made as if they are a doctrine without any context except for the context the speaker attaches to it. Context is absolutely necessary to determine the meaning of a statement. You have to understand why a statement was made. If you were to read Phil 4:8-13, you would learn the true context of the first statement and easily see why Paul made the statement, the correct context, and understand that it was used with a specific context and cannot be used as a general statement that can be applied whenever or whatever a speaker decides it "fits." The same for the second statement. If you read Mat 19:16-26, you will see the situation and why Jesus made the statement; in other words, you will have the proper context.

The point of comparing Scripture with Scripture is to examine how one complete message (the salvation plan) can be congruently presented by compiling and correctly piecing together all these varying statements (many of which appear to contradict each other). The Bible is like putting together one giant pictorial puzzle using linguistic pieces.

And that puzzle is a tricky one! It's tricky because it's built on many layers of information and some of the that linguistic information isn't "surface obvious" as to what it means. And yes there are places where there are words in the Bible that are not repeated and so we may have some limited understanding to what they mean. There are some phrases and words in Daniel that are of Persian or Egyptian origin that may not exactly have similar concepts in Hebrew.

Sometimes too, simple historical knowledge can help. (For example: "Before the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crows twice; you will deny me three times." Well if you have some basic knowledge of how the Roman army operated; you'd know that "the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crowing" had nothing to do with a chicken. "The [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crowing" was a military colloquial term that was two trumpet blasts 10 to 15 minutes apart that called soldiers to watch. Civilians obviously also used this as a "time indicator". The "[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]" that commenced the beginning of that (fourth) watch would have been (approximately) 3 AM.

Which that piece of historical information; though it's interesting; doesn't really have a whole lot of relevance to the redemption plan. Or at least on the surface it doesn't. But if you were to go to a different layer of Scripture; a metaphoric representation that conveys a truth; like in several parables mention the "4th watch of the night". A good portion of those talk about the return of Christ. Now compare all those passages about "4th watch" and there's likely some Biblical truth that conveys something about the return of Christ. Now what exactly that means? Well, that's not "surface clear" either. This is where "comparing Scripture with Scripture" becomes difficult to decipher because of the varying layers. BUT we can safely say that we know it's telling us something; we're just not always 100% sure what.

The other tricky thing I've found too, is that something that tends to catch a lot of peoples' attention (like the 666 number in Revelation); very well may be in other places in Scripture that are not necessarily easy to find because of translation. (666) as opposed to "six hundred sixty and six" (Ezra 2:13) & "six hundred threescore and six" (talents of gold) (1 Kings 10:14) Now in both Revelation and Ezra the "666" is a "census number". In Ezra it's the number of descendants of a family who was in the line of King David who came out of the Babylonian captivity. In Revelation it's the number subtracted from the number that belong to the beast. And in 1 Kings, the 666 of gold is a tributary payment from "the kingdom of Tyre" to Solomon. Solomon is a parabolic representation of Christ. This fellow who's a descendant of David coming out of Babylon with his 666 descendants is a parabolic representation of Christ. So who is "the man" whom the 666 number belongs to who've "come out of the beast"? If we are "comparing Scripture with Scripture" that can only be Christ.

Now here's another detail thrown in there that how many people have caught this one? The word "mark" (of the beast) or (of the man) in Revelation is three different words. The "mark of the man" culturally was a tattoo (or "branding") put on soldiers so anyone who came in contact with that soldier within the Roman Empire knew he could not be sold as a slave; because he belonged to the army. Thus when the Roman army would captured men in combat who'd become slaves to the army; they could gain their freedom by joining the army with permission of their master. (Whom their master was also in the army. This is one of the places where the concept of "soldier sons" came from. These soldiers were "adopted" by men of higher rank in their legion. The centurions who asked Jesus to heal their servants. This is where those servants would have come from. They were either slaves captured in combat or adopted "soldier sons".)

And when one joined the Roman army, it was a life long commitment and one's legion became their family. So they would "mark" the soldiers (and slaves who'd become soldiers) with an obsolete Greek letter and the legion symbol (or commander's symbol). And guess what that "obsolete Greek letter" was. (It was a cross.)

So there's one understanding of Bible interpretation that comes to make sense when one has some understanding of the "historical layer" of Scripture.

Here's another one: Backdrop of New Testament event into Old Testament event; that can be seen by paying careful attention to the Greek words used. The event is Pentecost and the manifestation is "speaking in tongues". Now we know from the context of what's happening in acts that they are speaking in foreign languages. We have two groups present in this event.

1. Foreigners who are hearing the apostles in a foreign language.
2. Unbelieving Jews who are hearing something that (though it may sound vaguely familiar to them) they can't decipher.

Now here's where it gets interesting. Take a real close look at the descriptor in the Greek for the phrase "hear them in the language where we were born". That Greek word isn't conveying "geographical location of birth" as much as it's conveying "origin point of language". Now where did all these foreign tongues originate from? (The Tower of Babel.)

So what language were the apostles actually speaking (which all foreigners heard in their native language) but unbelieving Jews couldn't understand? It was probably some form of "paleo-Hebrew" that went back to the Tower of Babel. And now why couldn't these unbelieving Jews understand it (though it may have sounded familiar to them - i.e. like "garbled Hebrew" as to why they claimed the disciples were "drunk"!) Yet all the foreigners clearly understood what they were saying.

New Testament event that hearkens back to Old Testament event! And there is "another form" of "comparing Scripture with Scripture".

I.E. Scriptural interpretation is a "multi-layered picture book".