The explanation is that those things don't exist in the statement. The statement is self evident. There's nothing in it that suggests the person is a theological liberal, nor is there anything in the statement that suggest the person has abandoned biblical truth, nor is there anything in the statement that suggests that the person denies the Bible as the Word of God.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The fight against dogmatism
- Thread starter stilllearning
- Start date
ReformedBaptist
Well-Known Member
Ok, so I see you just like to reassert your take on it as your reason.
I see I wasted my time explaining myself.
Higher Criticism is a Darwinistic view of the Scriptures. Inspiration is relegated to the margins, and the sole criterion of truth is not "Thus saith the Lord," but "Thus saith the critic."
Its basic assumptions are arbitrary, and the discoveries of the last two centuries has for the most part revealed it to be fantastic.
You're asking for something that doesn't exist. It's like asking "show me biblical support for the claim that airplanes aren't mentioned in scripture". There is no such thing. In like manner, there's nothing in the statement that suggests the person is a theological liberal, has abandoned biblical truth, or denies the Bible as the Word of God. It's completely missing from the statement.
:laugh::laugh::laugh:That's the funniest work of fiction I've read in a while.
Last edited by a moderator:
ReformedBaptist
Well-Known Member
John,
You seem to be a fellow that wants to present himself as intelligent. Surely your then smart enough to know the difference between an denotative meaning and a connotation? Please re-read what I wrote. When I read that statement, that is what I read from it. It is what is implied/inferred/connotes to me.
So, playing the denotative/definition card doesn't work with me.
Did that. I went back, read the original statement, your view of it, and the original statment once more. There's nothing in the original statement that suggests the person quoted is a theological liberal, has abandoned biblical truth, or denies the Bible as the Word of God. Nothing.
ReformedBaptist
Well-Known Member
Ok, let me illustrate this as it relates to words. Words have more than one meaning. They have denotative meanings, and connotative meanings.
Denotative is definitional. This is what your doing in regards to replying to me in this thread...dealing with definitional/denotative meaning.
Connotative is inference. It is how something means to me, or the meaning I ascribe to a word/phrase. This is what I did in my reply.
John, it is therefore incorrect to argue against a connotation with a denotation. That doesn't make sense. It makes more sense to learn why/how a person arrived at their connotation, and then explain your own.
If that is too difficult to understand then I am not sure we could get to point where we could actually have a conversation.
ReformedBaptist
Well-Known Member
Ok, I tried to explain. I guess we just can't have a connotative conversation on the subject.
ReformedBaptist
Well-Known Member
Ring aroudn the rosies and we all fall down.
Not annotation, but denotation. I am starting to believe you dont really want to discuss something with someone, just try to win an argument.
ReformedBaptist
Well-Known Member
Do you just like to hear yourself speak when you read your own words?
Are you a better judge than Jesus' disciples? They did not of whom Jesus was speaking about when he talked about Judas.
How do you know you are of the elect and not just someone who is lulled into thinking something he is not?
When I read of the church just a few years supporting slavery and segregation how can you say the church is more secularized? Segregation has been a practice among churches for many years. In America we have many churches for each ethnic group rather than a church that includes many ethnic groups.
stilllearning
Active Member
Good evening Johnv
You said.......
I think that I know where you are coming from here;
(That we need to understand the world that they were living in, to understand what they were saying.)
-I have been down this road before.-
This would be true for any other book in the world; But not for the Bible.
In fact, applying this rule to the Bible, is dangerous.
Here is a good example:
About 12 years ago, we had a fellowship at Church, and a young man(about 22 years old), who had been invited, was one of the last ones to leave, and he & his mother and I were talking, and his mother asked me to prayer with her about something, and just before I started praying, I noticed this young man removing his cap(he was a professing Christian).
After praying, I asked him why he removed his cap; He didn’t have an answer, so I took him to 1 Corinthians 11:, and proceeded to explain to him, why we removing our hats before praying........
1 Corinthians 11:4
“Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head.”
I further explained, that even though he had removed his hat, that his head was still covered.......
1 Corinthians 11:14-15
V.14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
V.15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.
(This young man, had shoulder length hair.)
Anyway, in the next few minutes, he confessed that he now knew that he was wrong, and that the next day, he was going to get his hair cut.
(Just a note, I normally don’t make a big deal out of this; I just felt as though the Lord wanted me to minister to him in this manner.)
--------------------------------------------------
The next week, he came to see me(having not gone to the barber), and felt that he had to set me straight.
He explained that before he was able to get his hair cut, a “preacher” friend of his, pointed out that I was wrong.
And this young man, explained to me, that he had learned, that all that talk in 1 Corinthians about hair length, does not apply to us today, because it was dealing with an issue, that was going on in that particular Church, at that particular time.
I won’t go into the details of the supposed historical facts, that he had been taught was going on in Corinth at that time, because it doesn’t matter.
The danger of studying the “specific context” of the times of the writings of Scripture, will open all kinds of doors, allowing each of us, to “second guess” the Bible’s instructions to us.
--------------------------------------------------
As for hermeneutics: I choose to interpret the Bible literally.
Therefore I take the instructions in 1 Corinthians 11:, as God’s instructions to the Church.
As for how long, is too long, for a man’s hair to be? This passage does not tell us.
(A man, must seek this answer for himself: Just as a pastor must seek God’s will, as to who to allow behind his pulpit.)
Although it does tell us, how short is too short, for a woman’s hair to be.
(1 Corinthians 11:6)
--------------------------------------------------
Please don’t get me wrong; I am not saying that we shouldn’t strive to gain all the understanding that we can........
Proverbs 1:7
“The fear of the LORD [is] the beginning of knowledge: [but] fools despise wisdom and instruction.”
But what I am saying, is that regardless of what we learn, or from whom we learn it, we must always reject anything, that disagrees with the plain teachings of the Bible........
Proverbs 19:27
“Cease, my son, to hear the instruction [that causeth] to err from the words of knowledge.”
--------------------------------------------------
I wish I had time to respond to the rest of your post, but I was gone all day, and have a lot to get done.
See ya later.
You said.......
I think that I know where you are coming from here;
(That we need to understand the world that they were living in, to understand what they were saying.)
-I have been down this road before.-
This would be true for any other book in the world; But not for the Bible.
In fact, applying this rule to the Bible, is dangerous.
Here is a good example:
About 12 years ago, we had a fellowship at Church, and a young man(about 22 years old), who had been invited, was one of the last ones to leave, and he & his mother and I were talking, and his mother asked me to prayer with her about something, and just before I started praying, I noticed this young man removing his cap(he was a professing Christian).
After praying, I asked him why he removed his cap; He didn’t have an answer, so I took him to 1 Corinthians 11:, and proceeded to explain to him, why we removing our hats before praying........
1 Corinthians 11:4
“Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head.”
I further explained, that even though he had removed his hat, that his head was still covered.......
1 Corinthians 11:14-15
V.14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
V.15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.
(This young man, had shoulder length hair.)
Anyway, in the next few minutes, he confessed that he now knew that he was wrong, and that the next day, he was going to get his hair cut.
(Just a note, I normally don’t make a big deal out of this; I just felt as though the Lord wanted me to minister to him in this manner.)
--------------------------------------------------
The next week, he came to see me(having not gone to the barber), and felt that he had to set me straight.
He explained that before he was able to get his hair cut, a “preacher” friend of his, pointed out that I was wrong.
And this young man, explained to me, that he had learned, that all that talk in 1 Corinthians about hair length, does not apply to us today, because it was dealing with an issue, that was going on in that particular Church, at that particular time.
I won’t go into the details of the supposed historical facts, that he had been taught was going on in Corinth at that time, because it doesn’t matter.
The danger of studying the “specific context” of the times of the writings of Scripture, will open all kinds of doors, allowing each of us, to “second guess” the Bible’s instructions to us.
--------------------------------------------------
As for hermeneutics: I choose to interpret the Bible literally.
Therefore I take the instructions in 1 Corinthians 11:, as God’s instructions to the Church.
As for how long, is too long, for a man’s hair to be? This passage does not tell us.
(A man, must seek this answer for himself: Just as a pastor must seek God’s will, as to who to allow behind his pulpit.)
Although it does tell us, how short is too short, for a woman’s hair to be.
(1 Corinthians 11:6)
--------------------------------------------------
Please don’t get me wrong; I am not saying that we shouldn’t strive to gain all the understanding that we can........
Proverbs 1:7
“The fear of the LORD [is] the beginning of knowledge: [but] fools despise wisdom and instruction.”
But what I am saying, is that regardless of what we learn, or from whom we learn it, we must always reject anything, that disagrees with the plain teachings of the Bible........
Proverbs 19:27
“Cease, my son, to hear the instruction [that causeth] to err from the words of knowledge.”
--------------------------------------------------
I wish I had time to respond to the rest of your post, but I was gone all day, and have a lot to get done.
See ya later.
This is one of the most untrue statements ever made.
Shouldn't we be dogmatic? Won't the Lord himself at times ensure we are......
Ezek 3:7-9 But the house of Israel will not hearken unto thee; for they will not hearken unto me: for all the house of Israel are impudent and hardhearted.
8 Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy forehead strong against their foreheads.
9 As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.
KJV
Oh, wait, this was spoken to the house of Israel (to whom spoken). And I'm sure context, higher criticism, and proper hermeneutics and exegesis can be used to show that it is not for modern man to be dogmatic (hardheaded as you will).
Ezek 3:7-9 But the house of Israel will not hearken unto thee; for they will not hearken unto me: for all the house of Israel are impudent and hardhearted.
8 Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy forehead strong against their foreheads.
9 As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.
KJV
Oh, wait, this was spoken to the house of Israel (to whom spoken). And I'm sure context, higher criticism, and proper hermeneutics and exegesis can be used to show that it is not for modern man to be dogmatic (hardheaded as you will).
The problem is that too many have been dogmatic about ignorance and things they have not studied for themselves and know little or nothing about. However they have been rather timid about discipleship and evangelism.
Actually, higher criticism would say that Ezekiel didn't write these words, that they were penned much later in fragments over many years from many different contributors, receiving it's final form from a final redactor as a history viewed from a certain point of view. Higher Criticism allows the concept of inspiration as the eddy and tide of forces that resulted in the form of the Scriptures as they exist today, much like the Theistic Darwinist says that God used evolution.
It purposefully leaves the door open to consider that the point of view of the final redactor, and even that of the imaginary sources, may have been fallacious, and that the forces that gave us the Scriptures are still operating to revise and reinterpret them.
Then you're interpreting scripture incorrectly. While many passages were intended to be taken literally, there are numerous passages in scripture which were not intended to be taken literally.
The assertion that hermeneutics is unnecessary to interpret scripture is one of the most untrue statements ever made.
Actually dogmatism says Ezekiel didn't write these words, but that God wrote the words.
Last edited by a moderator: