Why the Confusion Over Doctrine

[Andyman_1970]

I would ask you to consider how many people are pulled away from the church by this issue. What is at the root of this problem?
Pastors preach about money because we are not free cheerful givers. Most churches struggle to pay the light bills, how can they be involved in the mission field when they can't even keep the roof fixed? This issue gets to me.

If we are not cheerful givers then why guilt people into giving, that runs contrary to the Scriptures.......can you give cheerfully by being guilted into giving? If your not giving cheerfully does God really want it? What does Jesus say is the most important command?

By misusing Malachi 3 to get people to give, we totally miss the point of the passage. In the context of the OT "robbing God" in Malachi is not taking care of the poor, widow, alien around you..........but we don't hear that when that passage is preached do we???

If we followed the "teachings of Jesus" there would be no need for another sermon on tithing. Tithing is a baby step in christian growth. It's milk preaching.

I agree that if we followed Jesus' teachings this would not be an issue.

 

[eldermike]

By misusing Malachi 3 to get people to give, we totally miss the point of the passage. In the context of the OT "robbing God" in Malachi is not taking care of the poor, widow, alien around you..........but we don't hear that when that passage is preached do we???

You do when I preach it. The fact is, and this statement has plenty of history behind it, I have never noticed a single bit of difference in the ministry activity of a church when people left over preaching about money, it in fact has a positive impact on the church in the long run.

There is a connection between those that are not offended by preaching about money and giving to the ministries of the church.Any preacher that fears bringing this important issue to pulpit has not looked at the numbers, there is no negative impact to preaching this issue in my experience.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I don't beleive that using Bibles other than the KJV, like NASB, NIV, causes confusion. In fact, overall, I like NASB for serious study, KJV for comparison, and NLT for personal prayer time with the Lord.


What I beleive is more important is to study the Bible and see what it really says. Many people add meaning to the scriptures rather than get meaning out of the scriptures. When readind a passage, one needs to ask: who is writing,
to whom are they writing, why are they writing, what is the main point, what is the context - as in historical situation, what event occurred, what act was done. It was in careful Inductive study that I came to conclusions that fit dispensationsim before I ever understood what it was.

Strong's can lead to confusion. What it does is give a very basic definition of the word, and then the English words it was translated into in the Authorized Version - without giving the context to explain WHY that particular English word was used. And those English words can have several meanings too!

Context (who is speaking to whom and why and historical events) is important! Take the simple word 'run'. You can run a race, run an ad, run a business, get a run in your nylons, get in the car and run to the store, run for office. A play on Broadway ends, and folks will say if it had a good 'run' or not. Context affects the meaning.

It seems to me that many take scriptures - whether in KJV, or NASB, or NIV, or other - and use them out of context, giving them meaning that is not in the actual text.

Some Bible tranlsations, though, are terrible! The Clear Word Bible, and a number of others where there is an agenda behind the translation to promote a particular church, or concept.

 

[FreeinChrist]

You do when I preach it. The fact is, and this statement has plenty of history behind it, I have never noticed a single bit of difference in the ministry activity of a church when people left over preaching about money, it in fact has a positive impact on the church in the long run.
There is a connection between those that are not offended by preaching about money and giving to the ministries of the church.Any preacher that fears bringing this important issue to pulpit has not looked at the numbers, there is no negative impact to preaching this issue in my experience.

I have seen people leave a church because of teaching about tithing, but they were what I call 'takers' rather than 'givers'. They wanted to know what the church, and God, would do for them, and had no interest in what they were to give to God or others. But others are moved to give more and to order their lives better. I sell tapes of the sermons after the service (made by the church, the money goes to the church and it is at cost) and it is the sermons about money, marriage issues and dealing with personal pain that people really want copies of, to either give to others or to replay for their own knowledge.



I believe giving money to the Lord is very important because it puts money into perspective. It is easy to make money into an idol, caring about money and things over God. Jesus warns about that.

 

[GreenEyedLady]

Context (who is speaking to whom and why and historical events) is important! Take the simple word 'run'. You can run a race, run an ad, run a business, get a run in your nylons, get in the car and run to the store, run for office. A play on Broadway ends, and folks will say if it had a good 'run' or not. Context affects the meaning.

It seems to me that many take scriptures - whether in KJV, or NASB, or NIV, or other - and use them out of context, giving them meaning that is not in the actual text.

Some Bible tranlsations, though, are terrible! The Clear Word Bible, and a number of others where there is an agenda behind the translation to promote a particular church, or concept.

I wanted to add to your point that back in 1611, they didn't have as many uses for the word RUN as they do now. So it would make sense to use a dictonary from the 1700's so that when studying, you can get the real meaning of the word instead of trying to use a dictonary from 2000.
GEL

 

[Blackhawk]

If you want to be literal (which I am). Paul wrote Jesus' words. The epistles are inspired (God Breathed). I don't really understand this filtering discussion. I take it all as written by the same person... God.

You are right. My point was just that one can't filter Paul's words in the Bible through the gospels. I do not understand the whole filtering thing either.

 

[Blackhawk]

My concern was this:and I agree that many mis-use the text.

Followers of Jesus are committed to a Jesus-centred approach to life, to work, to church, to moral decisions, to priorities, to worship, to finance, to the Bible, to leadership – to everything.

I think this is true except it can be taken too far. Jesus did not speak directly about many things and I think it is wrong to basically disregard the OT for unclear statements from Jesus in the gospel.

But is the teaching of Jesus really central to the way

Christians and churches live?

There is a concern (in some baptist and anabaptist quarters) about:

• *The way the Old Testament has been used to justify practices that are
inconsistent with what Jesus taught (e.g. warfare, swearing oaths, tithing).

I do not believe that Jesus came to make the law's moral teachings completely null and void and I think we can learn much by learning about them. Some things in the OT are just as valid today as they were when they were written. It is not wrong when Jesus did not make any definitive statements about a certain item and many times Jesus agreed with the OT. For instance what did Jesus say about war? No passages come to my mind where he is speaking directly about whether christians should or should not be involved in war for any reason.

• *

The way other parts of the New Testament have been used to support

behaviour that does not square with the way Jesus lived according to the
Gospels (e.g. unquestioning loyalty to the state, restricting the participation of
women).
•

So are saying that the use of the other NT passages are wrong? You are not saying that parts of the NT actually contradict the teachings of Jesus correct? If so then I think that I can go along with you on this however I think we might have different views on what are ways in which the other NT teaching is perverted.

*The way church leaders have been willing to set aside Jesus’ teaching in return

for political support or social stability.

I am agreement with you here but again I think we might have different views on what teachings the leaders cahnge.

•*

The way church traditions, clever interpretations of the Bible and doctrinal

statements have hindered Christians from listening to Jesus and taking him
seriously.

True although the reverse is true. The Church has often interpreted the Bible correctly and has helped many come to know Christ. I have bee nreading recently how the church kept the Arian heresy and others like it out of the church. I am so happy that they viewed the gospel tradition as important. The Bible does not come down on all tradition. Just the tradition that is made just by men. In Deuteronomy God ordained that the Israelites start a tradition.

Is the way we think about certain issues more influenced by our culture than by the

gospel?

yes

Is the way our church operates more influenced by its traditions than the teaching of

Jesus?

Sure whether we are Protestant or Catholic this is true.

Are there subjects on which we are guided by the Old Testament rather than the New

Testament?

I do not see such a problem with using the OT as a guide for us. Many items in the OT are still true today. I believe that unless the NT gives us a more complete revelation then the OT teaching is still correct. I try to use the whole Bible (in context, and acknowledging that there is a new covenant) to shape my beliefs. Christ used the OT alot and if I am to be like Christ then I need to also.

Do we pay more attention to Paul’s teaching than to the teaching of Jesus?

Read Matthew 15:1-11.

I think you are finding a problem here that I do not believe exists.

Here, as in many other places in the Gospels, Jesus challenges his contemporaries to

obey God rather than following their human rules and customs. He angers the
Pharisees as he claims the right to challenge Old Testament practices (or at least the
ways these were being interpreted) and teach new ways of living.

I agree that we should obey god's word rather than the tradition of men but I thin the application of this thought is where we differ.

‘Jesus at the center’ means that we do not allow his example, lifestyle and teaching to

be pushed to one side by our traditions, the way we interpret the Bible, or any other
factors.

Again I think the apllication of what you stae here is where we differ.

That's what I was trying to say. I offer this only for the clarification of my thought and am not looking to debate with my brothers and sisters here. I understand from your posts that you think differently on some points.

In Fellowship.

Okay no debate. I just wanted to show you my side but if you do not want to debate (as you have said) then do not respond to this post.

 

[9-iron]

I want to add a quick point here. You can't look at the individual church, but each individual in the church. I was previously a memeber of Baptist church that ran about 400 members. Amazingly there were about 4-5 different groups that held differing opinions on scripture. What I see is that individual draw to the church that serves their views the best. Whatever church serves their ideology the best is where they go.

As far interpretation of scripture, we all are succeptible to getting out of the Bible what we want. We all, since childhood have formed worldviews and bias about the enviroment around us. We take all of these into our interpretation of what the scripture says.

We also stick to interpretations that suit us. For example, we take up causes and issues and then go dig up scripture to justify it.

Some poster said we need to go back and look at Jesus and pay more attention to His teachings. I totally agree. The most important commandment in the OT & the NT is the love God with all your heart and to love others as well.

I think if we keep these in mind in our interpretation of scripture, living a Christian life, etc. we will all gradually drift to a more unified interpretation.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I wanted to add to your point that back in 1611, they didn't have as many uses for the word RUN as they do now. So it would make sense to use a dictonary from the 1700's so that when studying, you can get the real meaning of the word instead of trying to use a dictonary from 2000.
GEL

I was using 'run' for an example of context. Strong's simply gives the English words that a given Greek or Hebrew word is translated into without giving the context. A more detailed lexicon will give context, and one word can takes pages to define.
So Strong's is an okay tool, but not great.

Even using an English dictionary from the 1600's will not help. Example - suffer meant to suffer (as in pain) in that time also.

 

[BronxBriar]

Okay no debate. I just wanted to show you my side but if you do not want to debate (as you have said) then do not respond to this post.

I would like to thank you however for your thoughtful and considerate response. You have provided me with some points to ponder.

Warmest Regards,
Henry

 

[BronxBriar]

Reviewing the OP I came across this nugget of gold:

The Lord gave the apostle Paul the latest instructions for us today and when one starts there first then the rest starts to make sense:

2 Tim 2:7 Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things.

Now this has given me pause. It's something I am praying over and I wonder if its discussion dosen't deserve a thread of its own?

Regards.

 

[AVBunyan]

Reviewing the OP I came across this nugget of gold:

Now this has given me pause. It's something I am praying over and I wonder if its discussion dosen't deserve a thread of its own?

Regards.

The Lord obviously laid it on your heart - go for it!

God bless

 

[BT]

I have to back over it because I'm not sure what the quote is saying.