Your interpretation =/= What the scripture means

[Buzz_B]

Now ~ you have changed your mode to an accusation.
1) your accusation is you think I steer men toward a FANTASY.
2) and the FANTASY IS,
..A) some men are more special than others
..B) some men have a direct line to God, while other do not.
..C) Only some men can know Gods TRUTH

I tend to think that it appears you have two screen names.

razzelflabben and SBC

 

[jerry kelso]

Did I say any such thing? No, I didn't.
Can I talk ABOUT Scripture in my words? Yes.
Can I reference the Scripture? Yes.
Can you look up the reference? Yes.

Did I say, I am rewriting Scripture, and my Word should replace Scripture? No, I didn't.
Did I say the Word of God is to be withheld from anyone? No, I didn't.



Uh huh.



You can read in Scripture for yourself, to see if what I am talking About, is revealed in Scripture according to the Words written in Scripture.



Anyone can claim anything. If you want to know if such claims are inline with Scripture, go read and verify if for yourself.





Now ~ you have changed your mode to an accusation.
1) your accusation is you think I steer men toward a FANTASY.
2) and the FANTASY IS,
..A) some men are more special than others
..B) some men have a direct line to God, while other do not.
..C) Only some men can know Gods TRUTH



1) I first of do not believe anything about Scripture is a FANTASY. I have repeatedly, said, to TRUST to BELIEVE the Word of God.

2~ A) You use the word "special". I would choose different wording, as Scripture does.
...WITH God
Or
...AGAINST God.

WITH God ~ a man experiences Blessings,
That ONLY men WITH God shall experience.

WITHOUT God ~ all men have experienced,
blessing from God, who were WITHOUT God,
And Some continue experiencing the Limit of such blessings.

A man WITH God ~ IS Gods inheritance.
A man WITHOUT God ~ IS NOT revealed to be Gods inheritance.

So there ARE differences between men, dependent upon their choices.
And there ARE differences between what men receive, dependent upon their choices.

DEATH, pursuant to man, can be physical or Spiritual. A Spiritual SEPARATION from God, is a spiritual death unto the man.

ALL experience a Separation from God.
That is the nature of our natural birth.

God has provided a WAY, acceptable to God, for a man to become converted, and reconciled unto God, THUS, the man becomes WITH GOD.

A man who chooses to NOT become converted, to NOT reconcile unto God, THUS, is the man who remains WITHOUT GOD.

2-B) God is a God of the Living. He hears not those separated from Him.

2 -C) I have said NOTHING about only some men CAN KNOW Gods Truth.

I have precisely said the Word of God is Truth. We have written accounts of Gods Word, in Scripture. I Trust the Scriptures are TRUE. Any man can hear, can read, and can decide for himself to Trust Gods Truth, or not.

Pay closer attention to what one says.
Jesus IS the Truth, Gods WORD, manifested in the likeness as a Man.
Jesus' Words are recorded, for anyone to learn His Truths.

IF what Jesus has SAID, is NOT clearly understood by the reader.....SEEK GOD, for His understanding of His OWN WORD.

THAT IS WHAT I HAVE SAID.

IS that seeking, accomplished by a man WONDERING? no, it is accomplished by a man ASKING God.

And? What man can God Hear?
A man WHO IS WITH God.



If you are asking me questions that any primary beginner who has not yet learned the very basics of Scripture, Yes, I would say, get a beginners Bible, get primary beginner direction.



You are giving the impression, you want to dictate which Scripture you believe apply to others, while you also require basic instruction.

I am not a beginner, I am born of God, and already Know, where, from whom, and how to receive Understanding of the Knowledge in Scriptures.
I do not require some person I do not know to decide which Scriptures do or do not apply to me.

Jesus came to Divide.
Luke 12:51

You should learn what that division was for.
Luke 12: 52-53

Men are separated FROM God.
You should learn WHY, men are separated,
Psalms 51:5
Isaiah 59:2

and HOW a man becomes reconciled.
John 14:16

and WHY men become reconciled unto God,
Matt 12:30

and the consequences for a mans decision.
John 10: 24-29
2 Thes 1: 7-9

Understanding ~ IS FROM GOD!
Ex 31:3
Luke 24:45
Eph 5:17
1 Tim 2:7

God Bless,
SBC

sbc,

1. If you think you know what the scripture says and that God shows you the truth of what it means then tell me in depth what he meant and why he spoke about the beautitudes in Matthew 5:1-11. What is the context according to the law of Moses and its connection to the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God. Jerry kelso

 

[Buzz_B]

sbc,

1. If you think you know what the scripture says and that God shows you the truth of what it means then tell me in depth what he meant and why he spoke about the beautitudes in Matthew 5:1-11. What is the context according to the law of Moses and its connection to the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God. Jerry kelso

SBC stands on a foundation built up on belief in what 1 John 2:19-27 says, but by her own flawed perception of it. And she has no way to understand that her perception of John's comments there are flawed. Not John's perceptions, but hers. John's perception is not flawed but hers is. I figure that I should emphasize that else she will be accusing me of saying that what John said was flawed.

So lets talk about what John there spoke and see if we cannot find the fuller flavor of what he meant.

John furnishes us with a few very important background details with which to filter our view of his words so that our view conforms to his.

1 John 2:26 “These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you."

(From that we learn that John was speaking to "you" (the congregation of God) singling out those ones he was concerned not be seduced away from what they as the congregation of God had already been taught through him and the holy spirit. Which of course shows that John thought some of them could be seduced.)

1 John 2:12-13 “I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake. I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.”

(From that we learn that John's primary concern was for the congregation of God, that the "little children" among them not be seduced because they had come to know the Father but were not yet strong as young men nor were they {that is, those little ones} nor those young men as experienced as their fathers (who were elders in the church). By speaking of this to all John is at the same time as helping these little children also helping the stronger young men to grow more experienced as their fathers, equipping the entire congregation of God to be even more stable and better able to help the “little children” among them.)

Having identified that John's main concern is building strength into the church that these ones he calls “little children” whom he sees as able to be seduced may learn how not to be seduced, gives us good reason to pause and reconsider whether our idea that John is telling them that they as individuals have no need of anyone to teach them applies in the way we have been guilty of applying it. For what is John there doing if not teaching the church of God? And is he teaching the church and these “little ones” among the church because they have no need of anyone to teach them? No, he is teaching them because he sees they do have a need for those who are more solid in the truth by means of their walk with the holy spirit to also teach those "little children" among them. John is wisely encouraging and equipping all the church to see how they can help to hold one another up in Christ through the power of the holy spirit.

John is in no way discounting that we as individuals need others who have more experience to share that experience with us, teaching us. And that happens in God's true church. For such ones are as tools in the hand of God by God's holy spirit.

So what we see with the view expressed by SBC is an issue of pride latched onto by mistake. SBC is sincere and not at all trying to manifest false pride. There is no malicious intent to her doing so.

In this world it has become difficult to help one see how they can subtly fall into false pride (a form of arrogance) never having intended to do so nor having ever had any malicious intent. For the world sees us as falsely accusing them when we try to speak of it. Not only have they been programed to apply what John speaks to the church to their self as an individual, but they have been programmed to see such words as condemnation and so these words trigger their fight and flight reaction before they give themselves a chance to listen and learn that nothing is really being said to demean them, but to help them. That fight and flight reaction gets their adrenaline flowing and they can quickly become addicted to the illusion of clear thinking produced of that rush. And each time they are approached again with the help they need they quickly grasp at that illusion of clear thinking their fight or flight gives them, never able to be stilled in their emotions as Job had to be before he could hear and learn from Elihu. Job 32:10; Job 37:14

 

[Buzz_B]

And now this post is for the benefit of those who have paid attention somewhat to our need of understanding the Greek in which these things such as 1 John 2:19-27 were written:

The way in which improper understanding of the Greek grammar is responsible for this error in interpretation of John's words there at 1 John 2 is found in the failure to properly understand the plural Greek pronoun, "humas", which is translated as "you" in verses like verse 27.

John is not saying that of the individual but of the church as God's temple.

Those who through their inexperience unknowingly violate the Greek grammar by mistake apply that to their own self as an individual. This ignorance is innocent but we must accept the responsibility to educate ourselves so that it does not keep happening to us.

 

[jerry kelso]

SBC stands on a foundation built up on belief in what 1 John 2:19-27 says, but by her own flawed perception of it. And she has no way to understand that her perception of John's comments there are flawed. Not John's perceptions, but hers. John's perception is not flawed but hers is. I figure that I should emphasize that else she will be accusing me of saying that what John said was flawed.

So lets talk about what John there spoke and see if we cannot find the fuller flavor of what he meant.

John furnishes us with a few very important background details with which to filter our view of his words so that our view conforms to his.

1 John 2:26 “These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you."

(From that we learn that John was speaking to "you" (the congregation of God) singling out those ones he was concerned not be seduced away from what they as the congregation of God had already been taught through him and the holy spirit. Which of course shows that John thought some of them could be seduced.)

1 John 2:12-13 “I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake. I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.”

(From that we learn that John's primary concern was for the congregation of God, that the "little children" among them not be seduced because they had come to know the Father but were not yet strong as young men nor were they {that is, those little ones} nor those young men as experienced as their fathers (who were elders in the church). By speaking of this to all John is at the same time as helping these little children also helping the stronger young men to grow more experienced as their fathers, equipping the entire congregation of God to be even more stable and better able to help the “little children” among them.)

Having identified that John's main concern is building strength into the church that these ones he calls “little children” whom he sees as able to be seduced may learn how not to be seduced, gives us good reason to pause and reconsider whether our idea that John is telling them that they as individuals have no need of anyone to teach them applies in the way we have been guilty of applying it. For what is John there doing if not teaching the church of God? And is he teaching the church and these “little ones” among the church because they have no need of anyone to teach them? No, he is teaching them because he sees they do have a need for those who are more solid in the truth by means of their walk with the holy spirit to also teach those "little children" among them. John is wisely encouraging and equipping all the church to see how they can help to hold one another up in Christ through the power of the holy spirit.

John is in no way discounting that we as individuals need others who have more experience to share that experience with us, teaching us. And that happens in God's true church. For such ones are as tools in the hand of God by God's holy spirit.

So what we see with the view expressed by SBC is an issue of pride latched onto by mistake. SBC is sincere and not at all trying to manifest false pride. There is no malicious intent to her doing so.

In this world it has become difficult to help one see how they can subtly fall into false pride (a form of arrogance) never having intended to do so nor having ever had any malicious intent. For the world sees us as falsely accusing them when we try to speak of it. Not only have they been programed to apply what John speaks to the church to their self as an individual, but they have been programmed to see such words as condemnation and so these words trigger their fight and flight reaction before they give themselves a chance to listen and learn that nothing is really being said to demean them, but to help them. That fight and flight reaction gets their adrenaline flowing and they can quickly become addicted to the illusion of clear thinking produced of that rush. And each time they are approached again with the help they need they quickly grasp at that illusion of clear thinking their fight or flight gives them, never able to be stilled in their emotions as Job had to be before he could hear and learn from Elihu. Job 32:10; Job 37:14

buzz b,

1. sbc believes in literal approach to the extreme.
If she doesn't know she says God gives her understanding.
But when it comes to pinning her down of the context of certain passages she has no clue or has refused to show any if she has any understanding.
This is why I posted about Jesus teaching under the Mosaic law and the KoH and the KoG.
There is more to understand than just a moral application of Jewish understanding and what it means to the churches.

2. She thinks I believe only me and that no one else is right.
This is not true in the least.
I agree with many who understand proper hermeneutics. That doesn't mean I know everything.
So she overcompensates by copping out and says what it says is what it says and God gives her the understanding of what she don't know.
If it is self explanatory and God gives understanding for what she doesn't know then there is no need to study the word which is against 2 Timothy 2:15.
I don't know her personally but she seems to think the Holy Spirit can't lead and guide into all truth through one studying the word or proper biblical hermeneutics.

3. Until she shows that she has a grasp on biblical context and how to reconcile the scriptures together to harmonize with each other then she is not credible.
I asked her about 1 Corinthians 15:31 and she gave me an answer off the top of her head which was nowhere in the ballpark right in its proper context.
Then she started this spill about guessing. It was like that passage couldn't be understood because there were different interpretations so everybody was just guessing. Obviously, God didn't reveal the truth to her because she didn't think it was important? God's word not important? That's quite ridiculous and ludicrous.
Her idea of interpretation is similar to the song, Me and Jesus got our own thing going in an on the surface context which is shallow. She has to do better than that. Jerry kelso

 

[Buzz_B]

buzz b,

1. sbc believes in literal approach to the extreme.
If she doesn't know she says God gives her understanding.
But when it comes to pinning her down of the context of certain passages she has no clue or has refused to show any if she has any understanding.
This is why I posted about Jesus teaching under the Mosaic law and the KoH and the KoG.
There is more to understand than just a moral application of Jewish understanding and what it means to the churches.

2. She thinks I believe only me and that no one else is right.
This is not true in the least.
I agree with many who understand proper hermeneutics. That doesn't mean I know everything.
So she overcompensates by copping out and says what it says is what it says and God gives her the understanding of what she don't know.
If it is self explanatory and God gives understanding for what she doesn't know then there is no need to study the word which is against 2 Timothy 2:15.
I don't know her personally but she seems to think the Holy Spirit can't lead and guide into all truth through one studying the word or proper biblical hermeneutics.

3. Until she shows that she has a grasp on biblical context and how to reconcile the scriptures together to harmonize with each other then she is not credible.
I asked her about 1 Corinthians 15:31 and she gave me an answer off the top of her head which was nowhere in the ballpark right in its proper context.
Then she started this spill about guessing. It was like that passage couldn't be understood because there were different interpretations so everybody was just guessing. Obviously, God didn't reveal the truth to her because she didn't think it was important? God's word not important? That's quite ridiculous and ludicrous.
Her idea of interpretation is similar to the song, Me and Jesus got our own thing going in an on the surface context which is shallow. She has to do better than that. Jerry kelso

And I know you know, as do I, that none of this criticism is meant to be negative or spiteful of her. She is actually able to used of God to provide us a more sharply defined example of the things we all need to be aware to watch out for in ourselves. And she is not condemned simply because she was allowed to remain blind for a time to serve that valuable purpose in the loving hands of God.

I think you, as do I, look forward to a time when we can receive her as our sister in the fullest Christian sense. Until then I know she has much compassion in us toward her.

 

[SBC]

sbc,

1. If you think you know what the scripture says and that God shows you the truth of what it means then tell me in depth what he meant and why he spoke about the beautitudes in Matthew 5:1-11. What is the context according to the law of Moses and its connection to the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God. Jerry kelso

Jerry ~ First one has to decide FOR HIMSELF, If he is willing to TRUST Scripture IS TRUE.

The "TRUTH" of what Jesus meant is an odd phrase.
Either one BELIEVES Jesus IS the Truth, the Word of God IS the Truth, Scripture IS the Truth and What the Word of God means IS the Truth...
Or not.

The CONTEXT of the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes (blessings), is clearly written, for YOU to read and Believe, or not.

The REVEALING is Jesus SPEAKING something NEW, regarding the Condition and Results, concerning a man.

What WAS applicable to a man, of a LEGAL system of Laws, is NOW being taught, the OFFERING of a NEW LIFE for man.

A system of LAWS, were given to the Hebrews/Jews.

NOW, a NEW LIFE, is given to ANYMAN, who chooses to ACCEPT a NEW LIFE.

This NEW LIFE, offered to ANYMAN, did NOT destroy the system of Laws, given to the Hebrews/Jews.

This NEW LIFE, so offered, to ANYMAN, IS Any man's OWN freewill to Accept it, OR NOT.

This NEW LIFE, Jesus teaches, what Conditions, WILL APPLY to them.

The CONDITIONS....inanutshell...

IS about their LIFE, being ABOUT GOD.

IT IS a change FROM, an individuals LIFE, being ABOUT THEMSELVES.

Matt 15:16
And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?

God Bless,
SBC

 

[Sheep dog]

I think that's manifested in all the different schools of thought on scripture that resulted in a bunch of different denominations.

The point seems to be growing in Christ versus arguing about Christ. The more we argue points from scripture the less likely we'll be to grow.

That's my interpretation, don't know how close I am to the truth.

Only for the belligerent.

 

[Sheep dog]

During scriptural debates it becomes evident that certain individuals cannot separate their opinion on how to interpret scripture from scripture. It's related to this controversial subject.

Can't or won't?

 

[Sheep dog]

What if all of them are wrong to a degree?

It stimulates the mind of the student and maybe sooner or later the mind of those who can't make the error work for them and investigate.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Can't or won't?

Yes and, but leave it up to God to discern the motives of the heart.

 

[Sheep dog]

So, which person has the Holy Spirit giving them the correct interpretation?

This is a problem only for those who follow people and not the leading of the Holly Spirit.

 

[Sheep dog]

I sympathize and understand there is certainly some truth in what you are saying. But I could literally bury you in examples where people try to defend a clearly dubious interpretation by basically invoking the authority of the Holy Spirit.

Frauds are everywhere. One needs discernment. Part of this comes from personal study. God did kindly give is written words.

 

[Sheep dog]

After reading all these comments. Here is a scripture that talks about this dilemma.

James 3:1My brothers, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation. 2For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.

My point being. One measurement of something being the truth is the fruit it naturally bears. If the fruit in ones lives and in a local church is really not measuring up. Then perhaps its time to look where no one wants to look. The place where we think we are doing ok and does not need a great amount of examination. The basic gospel "truths" we hold. You know we are not just "born again" by the Holy Spirit. We are also born again by the truth. 1st Peter 1:23

It's the truth!

The only way I know how to be inoffensive is by saying nothing. But then even the presence of a righteous person offends without verbalizing anything. This means no participation on any level. Attendance can be considered participation.

 

[Sheep dog]

It is very interesting that when approaching the interpretation of the Bible, people tend to leave their brains at home. God gave us a brain and the power to reason. It is not the act of reasoning and working things out with our minds which is the problem, it is the basis on which Christless folk base their reasoning. Christless folk are blinded to the truth of God by the god of with world.

However, when a person is born of God, he does not lose his power to reason. It became better, because he has quite a different foundation from which to reason. We can use our brains to interpret the Bible and to analyse different parts of the Bible based on the questions I have already given in my previous post.

The trouble is that many turn their brains off and depend on some sort of "impulse" which they say is the Holy Spirit. The difficulty with that is that nine out of every ten impressions come from the flesh, world, or the devil, so "impressions" are the least reliable way of understanding and interpreting the Bible. The fact is that the Holy Spirit is an intelligent Person and He leads people in intelligent and thoughtful ways. He expects us to think things out, ask the difficult questions, and to come to interpretations of the Bible that fit in with God's plans and purposes for mankind.

Anyone can make the Bible say what he wants it to say and then say it is the "correct" interpretation. It is not the "correct" interpretation at all - it is merely the interpretation he decides it is for his own best interests. Like the guy who fancied a girl named Grace, so he looked for a Scripture that showed that it was God's will for her to be the right one for him. He found it in the verse "Grace be to you and peace though our Lord Jesus Christ." This may sound ridiculous but you'd be surprised at how many use the Scriptures like that for guidance.

In many fundamentalist churches there is an anti-academic attitude, in that anyone who actually went to a Bible College or Seminary and gained a theology degree had allied themselves with the world's intellectual view of the Bible. In fact, Seminary-trained pastors, priests, and ministers came about in the Church because of the heresies that were growing in the Church through "lone rangers" putting forward their own "correct" interpretations of the Bible and of the gospel message. Being trained in sound doctrine protected the body of Christ from disintegrating through the damage caused by self appointed interpreters corrupting the gospel message.

Some come up with crazy interpretations of the Bible saying that God has given them a new revelation. I think that these interpretations are just pure nonsense, because the main thread of sound doctrine has not altered since the writings of the Church Fathers, and of those who have kept to the Nicene Creed in their doctrine through the centuries. The Westminster Confession is the foundation of sound doctrine, and those who depart from it put themselves on very unstable ground indeed, and put those they teach in real danger of falsehood and heresy.

Your comment about grace or Grace is darling.

 

[Sheep dog]

Why would an unbeliever without the Holy Spirit not be able to understand for example, the genealogies in Scripture? Or the Levitical law (which incidentally applied to all Jews, believers and non were under)? Or the many historical narratives? Of course they do not believe the miraculous events contained within them, but nevertheless they can understand in an intellectual manner of understanding in general, even insulting the Creator of minds while at the same time disdain for the source of their reasoning capability.



Yes, I believe those Scriptures with all of my heart, Jesus Christ is Lord of all truth, all truth is God's truth. With that said though, and I mean this from one Christian to another with gentleness, did the Spirit teach you how to use a computer? Or Mathematics? Or American history? The verses do use the words "all", and if we take them at face value, why do we find so many disagreements among Christians on most everything? I mean even here we are in disagreement, is only one of us being taught and led into truth? I should hope not!



I love a good dictionary, I have often used dictionaries in personal studies, and sometimes enjoy simply looking up words for understanding sake.



I'm right there with you on inspiration and dictionaries, as uninspired as they are, they are very useful tools in gaining a greater understanding. I have to humbly disagree concerning the original languages though. It is true, modern people have to learn them to know them, and while it is true ancient usage of words often differs and can carry meanings foreign to modern minds, there exists many ancient resources to consult for an older meaning. With that said, although helpful, for most it is not necessary, nor their calling to be in the fields where knowledge of those languages are necessary. I also agree completely on sole means.



Well you also said "He is not complicated", but anyway...no need to go over the same material. I do believe many places in Scripture require Spiritual discernment, especially with regard to prophecies, parables, poetry, the genres which are more symbolic or figurative in language, not as clear and well simple.

To a degree we're all heavily influenced by our environment. Divorcing this is very difficult.

 

[SBC]

Jerry kelso, Buzz_B ~

You both are quite amusing.

You can THINK for me and SPEAK for me, then SPEAK in you own WORDS, how my THOUGHTS, (that you have decided for me), how my SPEECH (that you have decided for me), is wrong, is untruthful, is blind, is not warranted to be IN Christ.....

Perhaps you should TRY Harder, to pay attention to what another actually DOES SAY, for themselves, and QUOTE THEIR WORDS, instead of THINKING and SPEAKING FOR THEM!

Trust, Scripture is True.
Trust, the Word of God is True.
Trust, God gives His Understanding OF HIS OWN WORD.

IF that IS NOT to your agreement, Take up your grips with God, not me. (Jerry!)

IF you Buzz, are in agreement with Jerry, pay attention who has qualified himself to think (she thinks, she believes, but void of my words saying such) and speak for me, and land your ciriticism on the one who has qualified himself to think and speak for me, because it happens to be the ONE WHO, by his own testimony, DOES NOT AGREE, all Scripture IS TRUE as it is stated, and that Understanding of Gods Word CAN be figured out, via the Art of Hermeneutics.

Call it by whatever fancy name you choose...matters none to me.

I don't teach or Testify to follow after what men do. Nor do I have to follow after men, simply because they criticize when I reject what they do.

Col 2:8
BEWARE lest ANY man spoil you THROUGH philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world, and NOT AFTER CHRIST.

2 Time 2:7
Consider what I say; and THE LORD GIVE THEE UNDERSTANDING IN ALL THINGS.

Jerry, stop asking ME to give you understanding, what does this mean, what does that mean.....you have been told umpteen times....

Trust the SCRIPTURE IS TRUE.
SEEK GOD FOR HIS UNDERSTANDING OF HIS OWN WORD!

 

[Sheep dog]

The problem with that logic is the same people will turn and call you effeminate for being vegan.

Most likely a bad choice of words. Effeminate has todo with sexual orientation of a male.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Most likely a bad choice of words. Effeminate has todo with sexual orientation of a male.

I've actually heard that preached that way from a pulpit.

 

[Sheep dog]

I've actually heard that preached that way from a pulpit.

It's also the way a dictionary defines the word.