The Scripture or Experience ?

[Faulty]

According to Mark 16.17-20 scripture and experience work together. If you can’t experience what the scripture teaches then either your experience is flawed or your interpretation of the scripture is wrong.

The foolish thing to do, IMO, is to stubbornly cling to an interpretation of scripture we have been taught even though it does not work as we are taught it should. What is that definition of insanity again?

~Jim

It’s never about knowing the answers; it’s about living them. ~Stephanie Klein​

Since the question is basically which do we give a higher priority scripture or experience, which do you see being held higher in the Mark passage you cite?

That passage starts with "And these signs will follow those who believe". Exactly what are they believing and how do they find out about it?

 

[mrhappy3]

I assume you mean Galatians 3:5.

It's a question that Paul answers in the text. He asks two questions, verses2 and 5.

verse 2 - Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith?

verses 5 and 6 - Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith -just as Abraham "believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness"?

Then he answers in verses 7 through 9:
"Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "In you shall all the nations be blessed." So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith."

He then goes on to tell of those who choose to be justified by the Law are under a curse. I don't see anything in there about the laying on of hands, but rather of those things received by faith alone.

Thanks.

most Pentecostal scholars would say that the "working of miracles" make it look like there is something "active" and experiential going on there.

sorry to labour the point, but how then is the Spirit supplied - by faith only ?

So it refers to regeneration..? ONLY & certainly not the Baptism in the Spirit. ?

thanks again

 

[andreha]

I believe that the more we apply scripture, along with the right priorities, we'll experience the scriptural truth more and more in our lives. Like seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be added unto you. Put God and His ways first, and we'll experience our every need fulfilled.

 

[K2K]

Thanks.

most Pentecostal scholars would say that the "working of miracles" make it look like there is something "active" and experiential going on there.

sorry to labour the point, but how then is the Spirit supplied - by faith only ?

So it refers to regeneration..? ONLY & certainly not the Baptism in the Spirit. ?

thanks again

Yes the Spirit is supplied by or because of faith only.

Faith come from hearing, meaning hearing the Lord speak to us.

Because we believe in the Lord who is the great I AM, we listen to what He has to tell us. And when He tells us to do something and we do it, He provides the power of the Spirit as God deems necessary.

Now if He tells you to lay hands on someone and He sends the Spirit with power, is not that a sign that He has layed His hands [spiritually speaking] on you?

Then it is not the [power] experience, nor is the Scriptures that tell you about God which are the most important thing, but rather listening to the Lord which is the most important thing.

So it is our silliness to ask whether the Scriptures or our experience which is most important. Especially since the Lord told Martha that Mary, who was sitting and listening to Him, had chosen the best part.

So listen to Him and you will study the Scriptures that He had written and you will experience the power of the Spirit which the Lord sends.

 

[alancrookham]

Experience can be deceiving because we can interpret things differently than truth. For example, I have seen witchdoctors who are able to heal, so experience would say that they are doing good. However as Christians we know that it is a lie, and that the "healing" is doing nothing more than ensnaring the person in a different trap. So we have to depend on what scripture says to guide us, otherwise it is very easy to be deceived.

 

[mrhappy3]

Yes the Spirit is supplied by or because of faith only.

Faith come from hearing, meaning hearing the Lord speak to us.

Because we believe in the Lord who is the great I AM, we listen to what He has to tell us. And when He tells us to do something and we do it, He provides the power of the Spirit as God deems necessary.

Now if He tells you to lay hands on someone and He sends the Spirit with power, is not that a sign that He has layed His hands [spiritually speaking] on you?

Then it is not the [power] experience, nor is the Scriptures that tell you about God which are the most important thing, but rather listening to the Lord which is the most important thing.

So it is our silliness to ask whether the Scriptures or our experience which is most important. Especially since the Lord told Martha that Mary, who was sitting and listening to Him, had chosen the best part.

So listen to Him and you will study the Scriptures that He had written and you will experience the power of the Spirit which the Lord sends.

WOW Heavy revy...

 

[mrhappy3]

"Thy words are Spirit and they are life"

 

[JEBrady]

The Berean Jews examined the scriptures daily to see whether the things Paul said were correct, and were called more noble for it.

 

[Faulty]

Faith come from hearing, meaning hearing the Lord speak to us.

Hmmm, let's assume you're correct here, and that hearing = hearing the Lord speak to us.

Ok. Let's pull out the full verse for some resemblence of context... "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17

Now we substitute the word 'hearing' with your definition of 'hearing the Lord speak to us', and we end up with...

"So then faith cometh by [hearing the Lord speak to us], and [hearing the Lord speak to us] by the word of God."

So, we hear the Lord speak to us by the word of God. Probably not where you intended to go, considering you only used part of the verse, and came to a different conclusion.

BTW, the 'word of God' is defined in the preceeding verses as the gospel message being proclaimed through preachers, not by the guidance of some inner voice.

But what may some ask is the gospel being preached? Glad you asked.

1 Cor 15:1-8
"Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born."

So the gospel preached was one founded in the scriptures, and it was by the hearing of this gospel that faith comes, and this gospel is what Paul refers to as the 'word of God' in the Romans passage.

 

[FoundInGrace]

Experience can be deceiving because we can interpret things differently than truth. For example, I have seen witchdoctors who are able to heal, so experience would say that they are doing good. However as Christians we know that it is a lie, and that the "healing" is doing nothing more than ensnaring the person in a different trap. So we have to depend on what scripture says to guide us, otherwise it is very easy to be deceived.

 

[Walter Kovacs]

Scriptures AND experience, perhaps? Why an either-or?

 

[JimB]

Hmmm, let's assume you're correct here, and that hearing = hearing the Lord speak to us.

Ok. Let's pull out the full verse for some resemblence of context... "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17

Now we substitute the word 'hearing' with your definition of 'hearing the Lord speak to us', and we end up with...

"So then faith cometh by [hearing the Lord speak to us], and [hearing the Lord speak to us] by the word of God."

So, we hear the Lord speak to us by the word of God. Probably not where you intended to go, considering you only used part of the verse, and came to a different conclusion.

BTW, the 'word of God' is defined in the preceeding verses as the gospel message being proclaimed through preachers, not by the guidance of some inner voice.

But what may some ask is the gospel being preached? Glad you asked.

1 Cor 15:1-8
"Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born."

So the gospel preached was one founded in the scriptures, and it was by the hearing of this gospel that faith comes, and this gospel is what Paul refers to as the 'word of God' in the Romans passage.

Romans 10.17 is one of the most misquoted and misapplied scriptures in the NT. What Romans 10.17 is actually saying is that the faith that saves us comes from accepting the message of Christ, i.e., hearing and receiving the Gospel. Most modern translations will support that interpretation (see below) and will say “the word/message of Christ” (the Gospel) not “the word of God” (biblical proof texts).

AMP
So faith comes by hearing [what is told], and what is heard comes by the preaching [of the message that came from the lips] of Christ (the Messiah Himself).

ESV
So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

NIV
Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word about Christ.

NLT
So faith comes from hearing, that is, hearing the Good News about Christ.

NASV
So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

CEV
No one can have faith without hearing the message about Christ.

NCV
So faith comes from hearing the Good News, and people hear the Good News when someone tells them about Christ.

~Jim

It’s never about knowing the answers; it’s about living them. ~Stephanie Klein​

​

​

 

[Faulty]

Romans 10.17 is one of the most misquoted and misapplied scriptures in the NT. What Romans 10.17 is actually saying is that the faith that saves us comes from accepting the message of Christ, i.e., hearing and receiving the Gospel. Most modern translations will support that interpretation (see below) and will say “the word/message of Christ” (the Gospel) not “the word of God” (biblical proof texts).

AMP
So faith comes by hearing [what is told], and what is heard comes by the preaching [of the message that came from the lips] of Christ (the Messiah Himself).

ESV
So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

NIV
Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word about Christ.

NLT
So faith comes from hearing, that is, hearing the Good News about Christ.

NASV
So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

CEV
No one can have faith without hearing the message about Christ.

NCV
So faith comes from hearing the Good News, and people hear the Good News when someone tells them about Christ.

~Jim

It’s never about knowing the answers; it’s about living them. ~Stephanie Klein​

Yea, and I thought I was clear that it was referring to the gospel of Christ being proclaimed, because that's what I said, "'word of God' is defined in the preceeding verses as the gospel message being proclaimed through preachers".

Then I expanded on that using Paul's words elsewhere as he explained what that gospel being proclaimed was, through himself specifically, and it's foundation in the scriptures.

 

[Optimax]

A Rabbit Trail on Rom. 10:17

Rom 10:17
So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
KJV


A study of the verse will reveal a powerful truth about faith.

CLUE: The word "comes" in the KJV is in italics.

That means the word was added by the translators to help understanding of the verse.

 

[Tobias]

But what may some ask is the gospel being preached? Glad you asked.

1 Cor 15:1-8
"Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born."

So the gospel preached was one founded in the scriptures, and it was by the hearing of this gospel that faith comes, and this gospel is what Paul refers to as the 'word of God' in the Romans passage.

Which brings me round to another theory I have, one that I'm not quite ready to jump on board with 100% myself, but merits mentioning:

What if the Catholics had it right? These passages above to not point to a "Bible Only" foundation for the Christian life. They talk about the gospel message being preached, a message that is backed up by scripture.

The Catholic Church claims that it's foundation is in both the scriptures and the establishment of the church. That God reveals His will through both. That the true understanding of scripture is to be revealed to those that He has established in His Church to reveal such things.

Now that Catholics have erred in thinking that this is a office that they can pass on to anyone whom they choose. At times psychopathic criminals have occupied this office, and the church still believes the chain of command is unbroken, going all the way back to the Apostle Peter.

But what if the idea behind this is true, even if the application has a few major flaws? That God reveals Himself both through the scriptures, and through the ones He sends to preach His message? That perhaps it's the Five Fold Ministry that holds the anointing and the key to unraveling the truth held by scripture?

In which case, we would be dependent on God's servants called to these ministries. Until we learn to discern the will and voice of God for ourselves, of course. As new believers we would learn quite a bit from the pastor/teachers. But as our knowledge and understanding grows, pretty much our dependency upon them would decrease. The Apostle and Prophet could conceivably speak a word from the Lord into our lives at any time... as that is how He is known to do things.

I have learned to sense a ministry anointing on all those I respect and listen to. Actually, I tune my ear to hear the wisdom of my God as spoken through these individuals. It is quite possible that my foundations do contain some of the same elements as the Catholic one, just, I trust a different set of ministers than what they think I should!

 

[Tamara224]

Good thoughts, Tobias.

Some of the accusations leveled at Protestants by Catholics have merit. I agree with you that they take it too far... but... the idea of "just me and my Bible" doesn't find a lot of support in Scripture.

Paul certainly didn't seem to be advocating that view in 1 Corinthians 12-14. We need the whole Body. Christ established the Church (as a whole, as a community) to represent Him here on earth. He speaks through the Church.

 

[AudioArtist]

I completely agree about the importance of the Body of Christ in understanding (and living out) Scripture. It's the point I made a few pages back - that we all need each other in understanding the attributes of God. We must all remain teachable and open to the ideas of others who also love the Lord and who are better gifted in understanding facets of His character and His commands we are not so familiar with. This "one man and his Bible" idea is indeed foreign to the early Church and to most of the history of God's people from ancient times to today.

Also, (and this might offend some people, though I don't mean to offend), the main problem (and the real irony) with teachers opposed to experience is that they rely on human reason and the rational mind to come to their "inerrant" conclusions regarding Christian faith and practice.

Of course, knowledge and logical thinking do play an important role in our Christian journey. Reason is a gift of God that can and should be used for our activities on Earth, for our spiritual progress and for the benefit of others. But it's just that - a gift - and our application of it can't override the fact that we are told not to lean on our own understanding when it comes to anything - especially when it comes to interpreting Scripture and God's mysterious and seemingly "foolish" ways! Tell me - what's "reasonable" and "logical" about the Cross? Did not the wisest and most learned of the day consider it nonsense? (I'm not just going with Paul here - I've got a huge scholarly book with source material chronicling Greco-Roman Pagan responses to the New Testament in the early decades of Christianity!) God choses the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and His wisdom is different from the wisdom of the world.

If we are as absolutely depraved as these men claim we are (more extreme and anti-experiene cessationists tend to be very Calvinistic), then why are we to rely so faithfully on the powers of our own brains? Is not the heart ever deceitful, as Jeremiah stated? Does not culture, with its ever shifting values, have an unfortunate and undeniable effect on how our intellectual thinking, no matter how 'objective' we try and be about interpreting scripture? Or do they think that because they're now regenerate, their intellectual capabilities are suddenly more or less infallible, and that through the process of perfect hermeneutics (though everyone has their own hermeneutic - and the difference between Eastern and Western approaches are huge) the truth on all matters can be found? They may claim the indwelling of the Holy Spirit guides their use of reason, but their processes often look very similar to any usual process of logically deducing truth - 'if it seems unreasonable to me, I reject it. If this violates my understanding of scripture - rooted in the thinking of the reformers (who, of course, were more or less infallible) or how I've presumed the outplaying of these Scriptures must look, then it is heretical.'

Who would you rather trust - a man who believes God no longer speaks prophetically to us today and no longer gives us revelations of the Truth at all - or somebody who, as Smith Wigglesworth puts it, reads the Word "in Holy Ghost"? A man who, with the open heart of a child, asks: "Please come, Holy Spirit. Work among us in any way you wish, no matter what it looks like in the eyes of men - and lead us to all truth", and then sees supernatural power manifest - or a man who has declared such things false from the outset through the use of study (using rational processes not dissimilar to how nonbelievers might argue against all sorts of things we believe) - and a man who has ignored the promise of Luke 11:11-13 in considering others' experiences?

 

[franky67]

The Scripture or Experience ?

I know ideally the two should match. But they don't always match.

Now there are two sides to this. There are scriptural promises that weare not currently experiencing but continue to believe for in faith. There also is this ugly issue of saying things are from God and not having any scripture to back it up.

I am thinking of both. I spent the day reading some Christian classics. Smith Wigglesworth , Finney and Watchman Nee were on the reading list today. I see a difference in their writings that they leaned more heavially upon the Bible than a lot of the modern ministries do.

Mark 16:17,18 Jesus, our Savior, and our teacher, said certain signs would accompany those who have believed.

IF one who does not experience these signs, then says that those words mean something else, then they are re-writing the bible to match their experience.

 

[Yitzchak]

Scriptures AND experience, perhaps? Why an either-or?

It is inevitable that our experience at times does not match the scriptures. That is the testing of our faith which is promised by God to happen. We receive promises from God , but then comes the perserverence until those promises become our experience.

 

[JEBrady]

It is inevitable that our experience at times does not match the scriptures. That is the testing of our faith which is promised by God to happen. We receive promises from God , but then comes the perserverence until those promises become our experience.

All of which won't be experienced in this flesh.