Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It boils down to finding out about how to study the Bible.If God's word is not found in the words of Scripture but through some words of Scripture, then how may we really know what's God's word and what's not?
I fear it boils down to what you prefer, what inspires you, or what tickles your fancy. These things in Scripture are God's word. But the stuff that's distasteful to you? Pffff. Clearly not God's word!
But do you see what we've done there? You no longer have a God who stands over and above you who is able to offend you or contradict you. You are worshipping an idealized version of yourself. This is the real instance of idolatry here. It is not idolatry to accept the words of Scripture as God's words.
@bekkilyn this might interest you, it's Dr. David Wagschall's critique of the Bible as revelation. It might also be useful reading for others, to understand the whole reason why considering the Bible to be revelation is problematic:
Three Pillars of the Old Order: Part One - Scripture as Divine Revelation
The last person who linked me to that terrible site was an atheist. Do you really want to be peddling their sites?The mask of what? Google? You could do the same just like I did and read the same list of things from a site that has an address you like better. It's not like they're going to be any different in the next place you see them, or when you actually look them up in scripture.
Basically, all you really need to do is go to the first two chapters of Genesis and see that the order of creation is different in the two different creation accounts.
For me, that's fine because the message that it was God who created everything still stands even if the writer (or writers) of Genesis got things a bit confused in the details. Since the foundation of my faith is in the person of Jesus Christ rather than in an inerrant book, my faith is still intact when contradictions in the book are pointed out.
You can find the Living Christ I worship in the Holy Scriptures. You seem to believe He can be found somewhere else.The mask of what? Google? You could do the same just like I did and read the same list of things from a site that has an address you like better. It's not like they're going to be any different in the next place you see them, or when you actually look them up in scripture.
Basically, all you really need to do is go to the first two chapters of Genesis and see that the order of creation is different in the two different creation accounts.
For me, that's fine because the message that it was God who created everything still stands even if the writer (or writers) of Genesis got things a bit confused in the details. Since the foundation of my faith is in the person of Jesus Christ rather than in an inerrant book, my faith is still intact when contradictions in the book are pointed out.
So he was being deceptive to his own movement to save his own skin?
Or he really believed such. And this is the correct answer as he did not sputter our rote Theology but can see the Love of Christ in his statements.
I agree. The issue in our post-modern church culture is that when the Bible is used it is used to support philosophical or social themes. It is used as a tool across the spectrum of manmade ideas.It boils down to finding out about how to study the Bible.
Without doing at least some thinking and research into what you're reading in the pages of the Bible, the chances are greater to reach a wrong conclusion. The idealized version of yourself that you're trying so hard to avoid becomes more likely to occur without doing some level of investigation.
I agree. The issue in our post-modern church culture is that when the Bible is used it is used to support philosophical or social themes. It is used as a tool across the spectrum of manmade ideas.
More from John Wesley:
"Concerning the Scriptures in general, it may be observed, the word of the living God, which directed the first patriarchs also, was, in the time of Moses, committed to writing. To this were added, in several succeeding generations, the inspired writings of the other prophets. Afterward, what the Son of God preached, and the Holy Ghost spake by the apostles, the apostles and evangelists wrote. - This is what we now style the Holy Scripture: this is that word of God which remaineth for ever: of which, though heaven and earth pass away, one jot or tittle shall not pass away. The Scripture therefore of the Old and New Testament, is a most solid and precious system of Divine truth. Every part thereof is worthy of God; and all together are one entire body, wherein is no defect, no excess. It is the fountain of heavenly wisdom, which they who are able to taste, prefer to all writings of men, however wise, or learned, or holy.
An exact knowledge of the truth was accompanied in the inspired writers with an exactly regular series of arguments, a precise expression of their meaning, and a genuine vigor of suitable affections. The chain of argument in each book is briefly exhibited in the table prefixed to it, which contains also the sum thereof, and may be of more use than prefixing the argument to each chapter; the division of the New Testament into chapters having been made in the dark ages, and very incorrectly; often separating things that are closely joined, and joining those that are entirely distinct from each other.
In the language of the sacred writings, we may observe the utmost depth, together with the utmost ease. All the elegancies of human composures sink into nothing before it: God speaks not as man, but as God. His thoughts are very deep: and thence his words are of inexhaustible virtue. And the language of his messengers also is exact in the highest degree: for the words which were given them accurately answered the impression made upon their minds: and hence Luther says, "Divinity is nothing but a grammar of the language of the Holy Ghost." To understand this thoroughly, we should observe the emphasis which lies on every word; the holy affections expressed thereby, and the tempers shown by every writer. But how little are these, the latter especially, regarded? Though they are wonderfully diffused through the whole New Testament, and are in truth a continued commendation of him who acts, or speaks, or writes."
-- from the "Preface" to Explanatory Notes on the New Testament.
Good start, now put it in context with Wesley's focus and you may discover that he is using more classic definitions than the modern idea of God taking control over people's bodies and forcing them to write everything he directly and literally dictates to them. While Wesley believed the bible as the primary (not sole or only) authority (he in actuality referenced many other books as well as the bible), he did not view the bible as a god or as God.
I think he was human just like the rest of us, and felt pressures just like we do to fit in in his country and his church, and likely even to a greater degree. I'm not an expert on Wesley, though, but I trust that the Methodist church does have genuine expertise on interpreting Wesley's teachings
Do you have evidence Wesley was knowingly misleading his flock because he felt coerced by what exactly? The Anglican inquisition?But now that you mention it, there has always been the story that he was secretly ordained as a bishop by a Greek bishop because to be ordained anything else but Protestant at the time brought a death sentence. So who knows.
Did I say that. One finds the words of Christ and His teachings in Scriptures.Equating loving the Bible with loving Christ seems misguided.
And this from Wesley:
"My ground is the Bible. Yea, I am a Bible-bigot. I follow it in all things, both great and small."
--From the Journal: "June 5, 1766"
"But the Christian rule of right and wrong is the word of God, the writings of the Old and New Testament; all that the Prophets and "holy men of old" wrote "as they were moved by the Holy Ghost;" all that Scripture which was given by inspiration of God, and which is indeed profitable for doctrine, or teaching the whole will of God; for reproof of what is contrary thereto; for correction of error; and for instruction, or training us up, in righteousness. (2 Timothy 3:16.)
"This is a lantern unto a Christian's feet, and a light in all his paths. This alone he receives as his rule of right or wrong, of whatever is really good or evil. He esteems nothing good, but what is here enjoined, either directly or by plain consequence, he accounts nothing evil but what is here forbidden, either in terms, or by undeniable inference. Whatever the Scripture neither forbids nor conjoins, either directly or by plain consequence, he believes to be of an indifferent nature; to be in itself neither good nor evil; this being the whole and sole outward rule whereby his conscience is to be directed in all things."
--From the Sermons: "The Witness of Our Own Spirit."
Interesting. Is that why post modern approaches to the Bible go to great lengths to deny God’s inspiration of the texts?If anything, postmodern and postliberal approaches to the Bible very much ask us to read the Bible on a deeper level than what many people who criticize it suggest, and not merely to instrumentalize it.
The last person who linked me to that terrible site was an atheist. Do you really want to be peddling their sites?
I’m curious what “other disciplines” means.
Interesting. Is that why post modern approaches to the Bible go to great lengths to deny God’s inspiration of the texts?
What’s to cherry pick? Those are firm statements unless of course you have quotes or sermons which contradict his own teachings?Well at least cherry-picking Wesley to try to prove a definition that didn't exist in his time (particularly as he also pointed out contradictions in scripture from time to time) is better than cherry-picking scripture to use as a weapon against other people in the name of God. (Not that I'm accusing you specifically of doing that, but I've seen it quite a bit in general.)
As in what?Do they? Or are they trying to get away from certain understandings of inspiration that inherently imply instrumentality in the Scriptures themselves?
The last person who linked me to that terrible site was an atheist. Do you really want to be peddling their sites?
Which definition did not exist in his time?Well at least cherry-picking Wesley to try to prove a definition that didn't exist in his time (particularly as he also pointed out contradictions in scripture from time to time) is better than cherry-picking scripture to use as a weapon against other people in the name of God. (Not that I'm accusing you specifically of doing that, but I've seen it quite a bit in general.)
You can find the Living Christ I worship in the Holy Scriptures. You seem to believe He can be found somewhere else.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?