Thus says the Lord

[Apollo Rhetor]

Thus says the Lord...


...what would it take for you to dare utter these words?

Imagine an emissary of a king in a foreign land. He sees the way the king of this foreign land treats his people and admires it. Feeling compelled to compliment that king, the emissary says, "Thus says my king, 'I am pleased with the way you treat your people and manage your land. My king would like to increase our trade as a sign of his pleasure.'"

That emissary returns home, only to learn that his king is filled with rage. Having heard from another of the way the foreign king manages his people and his lands, he is moved to war.

When the king learns what his emissary spoke, what would happen? I can imagine that such a presumptuous servant would likely meet a severe punishment, perhaps even be put to death - having announced his king is pleased when in truth his king is filled with rage.

In our churches, if someone says "thus says the lord". If someone utters a new 'word' to the congregation, even without the "thus says the lord", we know this is supposed to be from God. How certain are you speaking what He is telling you?

How do you think God will react to those who speak presumptuously in His name? Who offer new words from God that He did not tell them to speak - who listened to their own souls instead?

 

[KerrMetric]

We have in the Bible the written word of God. When we declare that to the world, we stand no chance speaking something that does not please our King.

This is not so and smacks of idolatry.

 

[thejdubb02]

This is not so and smacks of idolatry.

I agree!

 

[Apollo Rhetor]

This is not so and smacks of idolatry.

Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant then. If we declare only the words God has given us in the Bible, then we are not saying anything that displeases Him. We speak only His word.

It is when we stray from His word that we would risk displeasing Him.

Or are you suggesting that we can displease Him by speaking His words from Scripture?

 

[KerrMetric]

Or are you suggesting that we can displease Him by speaking His words from Scripture?

Yep I am. And it smacks of Bible worshipping.

 

[Apollo Rhetor]

Yep I am. And it smacks of Bible worshipping.

The offending sentence has been removed, so that the original intent of my post can be the focus of this thread. We can discuss your objection with what I wrote in another thread if you wish.

 

[eladoni]

Yep I am. And it smacks of Bible worshipping.

No, it does not. God's word is God's word. If we only speak God's word, we can only be in agreement with him. If we are not in agreement with his word, we do not only contend with the word, but with God. Because those who are not for him, are against him.

God's word is the only place where we can draw doctrine from. On theological matters, all doctrine, and all confessions must be drawn from scripture. All doctrine that is not in accord with scripture is heresy.

As for me, I would only say "thus says the Lord" if God said to say it. And when God speaks, we know his voice, because he is the good shepherd, and the sheep know his voice. Also, we should test the spirits...I forget the exact passage right now.

 

[Willtor]

Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant then. If we declare only the words God has given us in the Bible, then we are not saying anything that displeases Him. We speak only His word.

It is when we stray from His word that we would risk displeasing Him.

Or are you suggesting that we can displease Him by speaking His words from Scripture?

The Devil (mis)uses Scripture. We are just as capable of doing the same. It is not enough merely to speak His words from Scripture. They must be applied, aptly.

 

[eladoni]

The Devil (mis)uses Scripture. We are just as capable of doing the same. It is not enough merely to speak His words from Scripture. They must be applied, aptly.

All I have to say is: context, context, context.

We do not have to interperate scripture, scripure interperats itself in most instances. Granted, there are some open questions, where there are two or more different interperatations that could both be correct, but these are all "disputable matters" which it is ok to have a differance on.

But it is still true that if something contradicts what the bible says, then it is not of God. When the devil was tempting Jesus, his interperatation was 1. out of context, and 2. it contradicted another passage, which Jesus pointed out, which made it an invalide interperatation, we, should do the same when examining scripture.

 

[Gwenyfur]

Is there really a difference between:

--Thus sayeth the L-rd! ( Moshe used this phrase a lot)

and

--It is written... (Y'shua, Paul James used this phrase a lot)

 

[eladoni]

Is there really a difference between:

--Thus sayeth the L-rd! ( Moshe used this phrase a lot)

and

--It is written... (Y'shua, Paul James used this phrase a lot)

No, there is no differance...But usually the second is pointing out a previous revealation that bears upon the point that the writers of the new testament are making. i.e. "it is written" is usually used in topical passages (most of hebrews is a massive topical study on christ, and the writer quotes the old testament many times, pointing that christ is great than moses, abraham, etc. ).

I will use "it is written" in my posts on here, but I do not usually use "thus says the Lord". Whenever I use it, it is when I am quoting a passage of scripture, and I am putting it in the analytic method.