Perfection

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by steaver
Scripture interprets scripture. We are not speaking of a "book" here. We are speaking of God's word to man revealed to us through 66 seperate Spirit led writings by some forty different apostles or prophets chosen by God.

If scripture interprets itself, why do we have so many different interpretations?


I know the same way that you know - and that is by my own interpretation or the interpretation of others.

First of all -- I like that idea that the Bible has "66 books" and they are all inspired by God and as Paul says in 2Tim 3:15-17 to be used "for doctrine" KJV21.

But your statement that we need someone else to tell us what to think - is disproven in scripture in two key areas.

1. Acts 17:11 "The studied the SCRIPTURES daily to SEE IF those things spoken to them by Paul were SO" - instead of waiting 2 or 3 hundred years for an ECF to come along - they took the OT text itself and TESTED Paul. (And oh by the way - these guys were not even Christians and STILL they had the ability with SCRIPTURE - to TEST PAUL!).


2. In 1John 2 - John says "you have NO NEED for anyone to teach you.. His ANNOINTING teaches you" - thus the Holy Spirit - the Spirit of Truth was working EVEN then with NT Christians - such that they did not need someone to "tell them what to think" when they read scripture.

3. In Gal 1:6-11 Paul says "Even though WE or an ANGEL FROM HEAVEN" should come along and teach something OTHER than what you have from us at this point - let them be ACCURSED. NO ECF - NO POPE, No Bishop, NO Cardinal has EVER risen to the level of the Apostle Paul or an Angel from Heaven or the 12 other Apostles of the NT age - and yet Paul says that EVEN THEY are to be judged and ACCURSED - based on each of us - taking what we have in scripture and judging THEM - if in fact they did not measure up.

HOW much MORE shall we judge popes, and bishops, and ECFs (many of whom even the RCC itself condemns for their later actions in life)!

I say that instead of just blindly taking whatever they say - the Bible instruction is to TEST them ALL!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Some will be shocked to hear this, but the Book of Hebrews puts the question of "eternal salvation" to rest.

That one can lose their salvation becomes a moot question when one understands how salvation was accomplished.

...

Consider:

Hebrews 5:10-6:1 (King James Version)

10Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.
11Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.
12For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
13For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Hebrews 6

1Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

Now, for the time being, I have stopped us at 6:1.

Don't worry, we aren't leaving anything out, we are just examining these verses for now (I predict several pages of disagreement here).

.

In Heb 5 Paul condemns the Christian readers for being so dull - and not advancing on to maturity in spiritual matters.

7 In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety.
8 Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered.
9 And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation,

10 being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.
11 Concerning him we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.

Paul argues that Christ's role as our High Priest (which he is going to get into - in detail in chapters 7,8,9,10 ) is where He is now serving and where He is "the source of eternal salvation" -- specifically "to those who OBEY him".

Reminds us of John 15 where Christ said "you are my friends IF you do what I command you".

But in Heb 5 - Paul argues the point that going on to the subject of Christ's role as our High Priest - - and the way in which that role provides salvation - is difficult to present to those who have "done something" such that they are stalled at the infant stage in their spiritual growth.

12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food.
13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant.
14 But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.

Paul is clear as to what the problem is - he accuses his readers of not "practicing" what they have learned about "good vs evil". They do not engage in the Christian disciplines and put into practice those truths that they have learned.

Hebrews 6
1 Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God,
2 of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment.
3 And this we will do, if God permits.

Here we have a blatant condemnation by Paul that applies even to Christians today - who are stuck at the "Law condemns the sinner - sinner must Accept Christ to be saved" state - and have not gone on to the "Saved Saints walks by faith - putting to death the deeds of the Flesh" Rom 8 and 1Cor 7:19 -- stage.


in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

[/quote] Heb 6
4 For in the case of [b]those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit[/b],
5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6 and then have [b]fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance[/b], since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.
[/quote]


Here then is a clear case of salvation lost. The lost who have entered into salvation - HAVE experienced "the heavenly gift AND have been make PARTAKERS of the Holy Spirit AND have tasted the good Word of God AND the Powers of the age to come". Thus Paul identifies a state that is NOT the condition of the "totally depraved lost" for they are not daily walking in the Word, partaking of the Holy Spirit and they are NOT among those who have tased of the good things of the age to come (eternal life - reconciliation with God).

This state is one from which the saved saint does not want to FALL. But Paul argues that some indeed have fallen from this state.

YET for those who do fall under these conditions - it is implossible to "RENEW them again" to their former saved condition.



7 For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God;
8 but if [b]it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless[/b] and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned.

Heb 10

26 For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,
27 but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES.[/b]
28 Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.
29 How much severer punishment[/b] do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know Him who said, "" VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY.'' And again, "" THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE.''
31 It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Thus it is pointless when reading these texts in Hebrews to argue that "there is no such thing" or "this is why Paul should not have said that" -- the point is that He DID say it and warns all of the danger.

He does the same thing to the saved saints in Romans 11 "you should FEAR for you stand only by your faith and if God did not spare them - neither will he spare you".


in Christ,

Bob

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Guys,

Steaver is pointing out that by cross referencing and comparing scripture, we come to a balanced interpretation.

Concerning teachers, of course we need teachers.

Teachers that are led of the Holy Spirit.

Teaching is a gift of God, and He established them.

Matthew 28:20 (King James Version)

20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Colossians 3:16 (King James Version)

16Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

1 Timothy 3:2 (King James Version)

2A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

1 Timothy 4:11 (King James Version)

11These things command and teach.

1 Timothy 6:2 (King James Version)

2And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort.

I have just one question:

If we are truly In Christ, and seek peace, can we not discuss doctrine together?

God bless.

 

[BobRyan]

Lets look at it now.

Hebrews 6:1-2 (King James Version)


Hebrews 6


1Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
2Of the doctrine of baptisms,and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

Resurrection of the Dead.


Daniel 12

2And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

...
It says that "many...shall awake", leading some to conclude that there will be those who do not.


John 5
25Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

Who shall hear? The dead. If life were to cease at death, how then would they hear?

The "life" does not "come to life" -- that would be nonsense.

It is the DEAD that come to life.

Your question implies that God cannot bring the DEAD to life - even though HE says "The DEAD shall hear the voice... shall live". Turns out - God can raise the DEAD.

These are they that "sleep in the dust of the earth".

26For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
27And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.

Jesus is the righteous judge.

28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,


ALL that are in the graves shall hear His voice. So we see that the "many" of Daniel is clearly speaking about the number of those who hear, not the percentage (having a connotation of abundance).

29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Sound familiar?

That there was a belief in resurrection is shown by a few verses:

Matthew 22:23-32 (King James Version)

29Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
30For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
31But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.


One of the interesting things about this passage is the fact that Jesus rebukes them for their ignorance of scripture.

Jesus argues that the ONLY SOLUTION that allows God to say to Moses in the book of Exodus "I am the God of Abraham" - is that the Resurrection is a solid fact. And the text of Matt 22 - states that all the Jews saw that this iron-clad air-tight proof of the RESURRECTION - was innescapable and the Sadducees had been "put to silence" by it.

The reason that Jesus says "you err not knowing the scripture" is simply that they had not put these two facts together.

1. God is NOT the God of the dead.
2. God says to Moses that He is the God of Abraham long after Abraham died.

Conclusion: There MUSt be a resurrection coming.

For as Romans 4 says "God calls that which does not exist into being".

What He is saying is this: though it does not say explicitly "This concerns Resurrection of the dead", Jesus makes it clear that they should have realized that because God said, "I AM the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob", they should have been able to put two and two together, and conclude that these three yet lived.

This is facinating. In your own altnerate solution - you argue that the resurrection is NOT the way to solve the problem - rather "the living dead" is the solution.

And we grant you that the living dead - is another way to solve the problem - in fact it would completely defeat Christ's argument that a resurrection is thus required to solve the puzzle.

However - neither Christ nor the Sadducees believed in the "living dead". In this story Christ is AGREEING with the Sadducees on a key point - that while dead - God is NOT the God of the dead. (so many text of scripture that they already had saying "the dead know not anything" and "the dead do not PRAISE God".).

IF the Sadducees believed in the living dead idea to start with - but not the resurrection - they would be stuck at the end of Christ's story with "SO! - you still have not proven anything about needing to have a resurrection of the dead".

Sooo many people completely skim right past that little detail. But it changes everything in that Matt 22 story!


In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

...and of eternal judgment.

We also know that we as believers are not in fear of eternal judgement.

There is now no condemnation for them that are in Christ.

See our earlier comparison verse:

John 5:24 (King James Version)

24Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

There are those who should fear what lies ahead of them.

John 3:18 (King James Version)

18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

What you are missing is the fact that Judgment does not always condemn.

In Dan 7 - we see the point that sants on earth suffer persecution "UNTIL Judgment is passed IN FAVOR OF the saints". Daniel 7 describes the Great judgment scene in heaven where this takes place - and once it is complete (according to Dan 7) you get the end of persecution of the saints - you get the 2nd coming.

In 2Cor 5:10 "WE MUST ALL stand before the JUDGMENT seat of Christ to give an account for the deeds done in the body - whether they be GOOD or EVIL".

Hint - the reward for evil is not "less toys in heaven" - Paul argues in Romans 6:23 "The wages of sin is death".

In Romans 2 - Paul spends a great deal of time spelling out how that Judgment determines LIFE vs death.

Obviously - those in that judgment who receive LIFE are not "condemned".

Paul states clearly in Romans 2 "according to my gospel... God WILL judge the secrets of ALL makind through the man Christ Jesus".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Darrell C]

Hello Bob,

Heb 6
4 For in the case of [b]those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit[/b],
5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6 and then have [b]fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance[/b], since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.
[/quote]


Here then is a clear case of salvation lost. The lost who have entered into salvation - HAVE experienced "the heavenly gift AND have been make PARTAKERS of the Holy Spirit AND have tasted the good Word of God AND the Powers of the age to come". Thus Paul identifies a state that is NOT the condition of the "totally depraved lost" for they are not daily walking in the Word, partaking of the Holy Spirit and they are NOT among those who have tased of the good things of the age to come (eternal life - reconciliation with God).

This state is one from which the saved saint does not want to FALL. But Paul argues that some indeed have fallen from this state.

YET for those who do fall under these conditions - it is implossible to "RENEW them again" to their former saved condition.



7 For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God;
8 but if [b]it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless[/b] and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned.





Thus it is pointless when reading these texts in Hebrews to argue that "there is no such thing" or "this is why Paul should not have said that" -- the point is that He DID say it and warns all of the danger.

He does the same thing to the saved saints in Romans 11 "you should FEAR for you stand only by your faith and if God did not spare them - neither will he spare you".


in Christ,

Bob[/QUOTE]


Sorry to see you still have this approach to Hebrews; even worse, to salvation.

But, it may be that one day you will change your mind on your position.

Concerning chapter 6, I will continue that in the study, which, apparently, you are not interested in participating in.

Concerning chapter 10, and v. 26, I wish you would spend a little time in it.

Here's a few pointers about it:

Hebrews 10:20-26 (King James Version)

20By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;

What is the veil, Bob?

What is the new and living way?

HIS Flesh

This refers to His death, His sacrifice on our behalf.

It is the New and Living Way to approach God, to come into His presence.

So what this is talking about is the sacrifice of Christ, and, if you back up, you will find the whole chapter is speaking about His death, contrasted with that of the Levitical sacrifice.


21And having an high priest over the house of God;


Imagine that! Now His priesthood is referenced, and it is not a coincidence, because again, the contrast is between the Old and the New.

22Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.


Sounds a little like the New Covenant to me.

The condition imposed is this: draw near with a true heart.

What happens if we don't?


23Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised

What would you assume of one who did not "hold fast their profession of faith?

Has your faith ever "wavered", Bob?

No, of course it hasn't, but you just wan't to make sure no-one else's does, right?

But if it did, would God cast you out? Count you as a goat?


24And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:

Let's watch for those who may not come to Christ with a true heart.

25Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

What would you assume of one who stopped assembling with other Christians? Apparently you believe all who attend church are born of God.

You would assume they had lost their salvation, correct.

I will suggest to you that they stop assembling with brethren because they are not born-again, and the Spirit of God is not in them.

It is sad to think that the exhortation of the assembly could have kept them in the assembly, but there will be those who attend, and because they are not shown, and do not see, the love of Christ, they forsake the assembling of the brethren.

26For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

The wilfull sin is forsaking Christ.

While you may hold the position that the wilfull sin is a basic life of sin that Christians can fall into, and thereby lose their salvation, this chapter will not support that.

It will for those who haven't actually read the book of course, but not for those who have actually studied it.

We know there is only one sin that cannot be forgiven by God, the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit...this is rejection of Christ through "resisting the Holy Spirit."

Now you have living people being cast out of God's hand, when the truth is, until a person dies, they still have a chance to respond to the Holy Spirit, and receive Christ.

These here, in v. 26, are being warned of rejecting the only sacrifice that will save them.

They had received the knowledge of Christ, but they are not in Christ.

They have not the Spirit of Christ.

There is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, yet these are to receive judgement.

Now, if you would like to join the study, I welcome you.

But if you seek only to de-rail the thread with your anti-security, anti-assurance position, I would ask you to go back to one of your own threads, where your doctrine will be more appreciated.

But, again, I would love to have you here.

I just ask you examine the whole thread before condemning it.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Bob,

The "life" does not "come to life" -- that would be nonsense.

It is the DEAD that come to life.

Your question implies that God cannot bring the DEAD to life - even though HE says "The DEAD shall hear the voice... shall live". Turns out - God can raise the DEAD.



Jesus argues that the ONLY SOLUTION that allows God to say to Moses in the book of Exodus "I am the God of Abraham" - is that the Resurrection is a solid fact. And the text of Matt 22 - states that all the Jews saw that this iron-clad air-tight proof of the RESURRECTION - was innescapable and the Sadducees had been "put to silence" by it.

The reason that Jesus says "you err not knowing the scripture" is simply that they had not put these two facts together.

1. God is NOT the God of the dead.
2. God says to Moses that He is the God of Abraham long after Abraham died.

Conclusion: There MUSt be a resurrection coming.

For as Romans 4 says "God calls that which does not exist into being".





This is facinating. In your own altnerate solution - you argue that the resurrection is NOT the way to solve the problem - rather "the living dead" is the solution.

And we grant you that the living dead - is another way to solve the problem - in fact it would completely defeat Christ's argument that a resurrection is thus required to solve the puzzle.

However - neither Christ nor the Sadducees believed in the "living dead". In this story Christ is AGREEING with the Sadducees on a key point - that while dead - God is NOT the God of the dead. (so many text of scripture that they already had saying "the dead know not anything" and "the dead do not PRAISE God".).

IF the Sadducees believed in the living dead idea to start with - but not the resurrection - they would be stuck at the end of Christ's story with "SO! - you still have not proven anything about needing to have a resurrection of the dead".

Sooo many people completely skim right past that little detail. But it changes everything in that Matt 22 story!


In Christ,

Bob

So Bob,

According to what you are saying here is this: when people die, they cease to exist.

Or is it that you only wish to say what is contrary to what is posted, whether it makes sense or not.

So you come up with "the living dead".

What was that about skimming past the little details?

Please, slow down and examine the big ones before you get involved with the little ones.

I did like the part where you repeated what I had just said, thanks for that.

God bless.

Additional thought: it just seems very sad to me that here you have read my post, and interpreted it this way.

I guess I need to clarify a bit:

I said this...

Quote:

What He is saying is this: though it does not say explicitly "This concerns Resurrection of the dead", Jesus makes it clear that they should have realized that because God said, "I AM the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob", they should have been able to put two and two together, and conclude that these three yet lived.

And the point was not that they were still physically alive, but that they were still alive spiritually.

This was the Lord's point to the Sadducees, who did not believe in the resurrection.

Didducee it that time?

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Bob,

What you are missing is the fact that Judgment does not always condemn.

In Dan 7 - we see the point that sants on earth suffer persecution "UNTIL Judgment is passed IN FAVOR OF the saints". Daniel 7 describes the Great judgment scene in heaven where this takes place - and once it is complete (according to Dan 7) you get the end of persecution of the saints - you get the 2nd coming.

In 2Cor 5:10 "WE MUST ALL stand before the JUDGMENT seat of Christ to give an account for the deeds done in the body - whether they be GOOD or EVIL".

Hint - the reward for evil is not "less toys in heaven" - Paul argues in Romans 6:23 "The wages of sin is death".

In Romans 2 - Paul spends a great deal of time spelling out how that Judgment determines LIFE vs death.

Obviously - those in that judgment who receive LIFE are not "condemned".

Paul states clearly in Romans 2 "according to my gospel... God WILL judge the secrets of ALL makind through the man Christ Jesus".

In Christ,

Bob

Eternal Judgement, Bob, Eternal Judgement...this is one of the big details.

Eternal:

166. aionios ahee-o'-nee-os from 165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well):--eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

Judgement:

2917. krima kree'-mah from 2919; a decision (the function or the effect, for or against ("crime")):--avenge, condemned, condemnation, damnation, + go to law, judgment.

This judgement will be eternal.

In the list of chapter 6, v. 2 speaks of Eternal Judgement, which is a basic principle of Judaism.

We have a more complete knowledge of Judgement, and we know that when we are judged, it is not one of condemnation, for "we shall be saved."

Saved, yet as by fire, which shall try what...our works.

Not our fate, as those who stand before the Great White Throne, who, by the way, are dead.

We, having been given eternal life, will not be judged with the dead.

If that were so, Bob, how do you account for the tribulation martyrs?

Why is their resurrection separate from those who stand before the great white throne?

It is because they will be judged separately from those who are saved.

They are dead, and their judgement will be eternal.

Great reference from Daniel, wish I could join you making a connection about the judgement of the wicked and the salvation of the saints, but I can't.

This is the very thing the writer is warning the Hebrew audience about: returning to the Old Covenant.

Give the study a chance, Bob.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Hello to All,

As we finish up this section (5:11-6:12), which is preceded by one of our study words (5:9) and itself contains two of our study words (5:14 and 6:1), we come to a second list given by our writer, and from the Holy Spirit.

Our first list, which contain basic principles of Judaism, and specific command not to lay again this foundation, refer directly with the problem our writer is addressing.

And it is a familiar problem.

We see people "come to Christ", associate with the Church, sometimes for years, and then...they "fall away."

Why is this.

Well, on one side, it is said they have lost their salvation.

On the other, it is said they were never saved.

So, which is it?

A question before we get into our second list.

We are clearly told to go on unto perfection, not laying again foundational principles of Christ, and as we finish up our first list, we are told "we will do this if God permits".

What exactly does this mean?

Look forward to your answers.

God bless.

 

[BillySunday1935]

First of all -- I like that idea that the Bible has "66 books" and they are all inspired by God and as Paul says in 2Tim 3:15-17 to be used "for doctrine" KJV21.

But your statement that we need someone else to tell us what to think - is disproven in scripture in two key areas.

That's not my statement - it’s yours. I never said: “…we need someone else to tell us what to think”. However, if you actually believe that others have not influenced you along your spiritual journey, (and in profound ways) I can only surmise that you are not being honest with yourself.

Take ten people who have never read or heard the gospel, isolate each one from another and from the outside world, let each read the entire bible, and you will probably get ten different interpretations of the book.

snip...
I say that instead of just blindly taking whatever they say - the Bible instruction is to TEST them ALL!

in Christ,

Bob

Acts 8:29-31 (New International Version)

29 The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it."

30 Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. "Do you understand what you are reading?" Philip asked.

31 "How can I," he said, "unless someone explains it to me?" So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

1) The eunuch had no way of "TESTING" if what Philip told him about scripture was true as he knew nothing about scripture.

2) How do you know that the interpretation by which you are "TESTING" others is itself completely correct? This sounds to me like the scenario of - if you don't hold to my interpretation of scripture, then you are wrong and I am right. In my opinion, this is why there exists so much fractured theology in the world.

Peace!

 

[BobRyan]

Steaver is pointing out that by cross referencing and comparing scripture, we come to a balanced interpretation.

Concerning teachers, of course we need teachers.

Teachers that are led of the Holy Spirit.

Teaching is a gift of God, and He established them.

Matthew 28:20 (King James Version)

20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

True. So look what happens. The book of Matthew is written by Matthew decades AFTER Christ was raised from the dead and ascended to heaven. So when Matthew complies with the Matt 28 instruction of Christ - he "writes the book of Matthew" which contains the teachings of Christ.

It contains the "all things whatsover I have commanded you" during the ministry of Christ.

Shockingly then - It contains the pre-cross teaching of Christ on the correct view of the Law and the Gospel - and given even to Jewish followers of Christ. THIS is the message that was being proclaimed to the NT saints!

Amazing!

11These things command and teach.

1 Timothy 6:2 (King James Version)

2And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort.

I have just one question:

If we are truly In Christ, and seek peace, can we not discuss doctrine together?

God bless.

Yes! most certainly!

However consider this - in John 16 Christ said to his own disciples in John 16 "I have many more things to teach you but YOU cannot bear them now". Their problem is not that they don't "want" to follow Christ - their problem is that they are so tied to man-made tradition (cast in their minds as if it were the word of God Himself) that they could not see that the real role of the Messiah was to die for the sins of the world!

If even they were blinded by tradition, culture and circumstances while ministering in the very visible presence of Christ Himself - might we see that same thing among Christians - still today?

If almost the entire Christian church leaps into darkness in the dark ages - to the point of torturing fellow saints and then supposing "they do God service" by doing so -- how then do we think WE are going to escape such blinders-on bias?

I say it is by listening closely to the Holy Spirit and applying sound principles of Exegesis. And those principles require that they look at context, at the same concepts taught by the same author in his other books, at the same concepts taught by other authors in their books - and combining all that to get "the big picture" not just a tiny "snippet".

It was the "Bible teachers" the leaders in Israel that rejected Christ.


in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Acts 8:29-31 (New International Version)

29 The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it."

30 Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. "Do you understand what you are reading?" Philip asked.

31 "How can I," he said, "unless someone explains it to me?" So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

1) The eunuch had no way of "TESTING" if what Philip told him about scripture was true as he knew nothing about scripture.

2) How do you know that the interpretation by which you are "TESTING" others is itself completely correct? This sounds to me like the scenario of - if you don't hold to my interpretation of scripture, then you are wrong and I am right. In my opinion, this is why there exists so much fractured theology in the world.

Your argument results in the conclusion:"They did it wrong in Acts 17:11 - they cannot test the apostle Paul! They are not even Christians! How can they possibly know if their understanding of the Bible is right! Someone has to tell them what the Bible says first".

Your argument results in the conclusion "Paul is wrong in Gal 1:6-11 to say that church members are to reject the teaching of Paul, of Apostles, even of angels from heaven - if that teaching does not match up with the scriptures already given at that point in time. How can any church member TEST an Apostle. They should just believe whatever the Apostle or the Angel tells them. Not testing is even POSSIBLE". Your solution would result in each one of us -- going to our own church leaders and saying "tell me what to think". Our own church leaders would say "the Catholics are wrong" and "every other group teaching doctrine different from the way we see scripture is wrong". So - how in the world does that "solve" something for us?



NOTE - Paul does not say "reject anything further that an Apostle or an Angel might say". The point he makes is not to reject further light, further teaching and thus not be helped by any explanation or teaching that might come. Rather his position is to TEST ALL - yes even what a supposed "Apostle" might say!


We see clearly then that - the Bible model "allows" for Philip to explain scripture to someone - and for that somone to compare the scripture to what Philip "claims" that it means to SEE IF Philip's explanation (of scripture - of the OT which as always - is STILL valid scripture) is making light clearer - or in fact is flatly contradicted by scripture.



in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

11These things command and teach.

1 Timothy 6:2 (King James Version)

2And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort.

I have just one question:

If we are truly In Christ, and seek peace, can we not discuss doctrine together?

God bless.

WE can "discuss" doctrine - but how to see points of error? That is the question.

Given 5 Bible students from 5 diffferent denominations - and the study of a complex book like Hebrews - we would expect "at least" 4 of them will be confronted with evidence that some part of their denominational bias is challenged - is in fact dead wrong. And "at worst" they ALL are being confronted by the fact that their denominational bias - doctrines are at some point being shown to be in error.

That is the obvious fact of what is happening - and we all know it.

The question is - how to address it! How to position ourselves in such an objective "sola-scriptura-testing" basis where ALL 66 books of scripture actually have doctrinal weight (as 2Tim 3:16-17 tells us).

The "blinders-on" methods used to defend a given denominational bias - will predictably prevent the Catholic from seeing their errors, or the Lutheran from seeing theirs ... etc. Thus the most likely outcome is that NONE of them admit to a problem of any kind. And sure enough - that is what we see.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Darrell C]

Hello Bob,

Concerning this last post, I believe that the Spirit of God can overcome the denominational doctrinal differences of true believers.

While Hebrews may not be the best book to throw on new believers, seeing that an understanding of Old Testament doctrine is vital to understanding Hebrews in its fullest detail, I do believe that thorough study will lead to an understanding at a basic level.

Denominational devotion can be a problem for many, because we all want to believe that "where we go is the right place."

It is also one of the things that some will garner assurance from (whether you hold to eternal salvation or that you can lose it).

But as far as how do we (of opposing views) come to a conclusion about who is right, if we are honest, we will of course yield to the authority of God's word.

What is sad is this: if you measured the knowledge of the average congregation, I would be surprised if you found more than 20% with a knowledge of scripture that exceeds the basics.

So, if they really are unaware of the deeper things of God, why are they loyal to their particular denomination/faith.

My guess is because of the fellowship.

Now, how do we, you and I, Bob, come to a conclusion?

Not with doubtful disputation, I'm pretty sure of that.

But if we examine this, I think we can at least say we tried.

We will answer to Jesus concerning our behavior toward each other, and I am sure He would not have His people acting untoward to each other (though I admit, doctrinal position runs near to both our hearts).

Again, I would ask you to look at the premise of this thread, and just give it a chance.

God bless.

 

[BobRyan]

Concerning this last post, I believe that the Spirit of God can overcome the denominational doctrinal differences of true believers.

I agree. I do not mean to say that it is never done - just the the flawed human condition requires that everyone in that 5-person scenario I gave - realize their inner tendancy and put the matter before God to stop them from letting their bias simply eisegete into the text whatever their traditions "need" rather than being willing to admit to a problem when they find one.

While Hebrews may not be the best book to throw on new believers, seeing that an understanding of Old Testament doctrine is vital to understanding Hebrews in its fullest detail, I do believe that thorough study will lead to an understanding at a basic level.

Agreed. My point is that the complexity in the book of Hebrews means that we are virtually "guaranteed" to get 5 different answers from the 5 different voices in that scenario and "at best" 1 of them is right.

Denominational devotion can be a problem for many, because we all want to believe that "where we go is the right place."

It is also one of the things that some will garner assurance from (whether you hold to eternal salvation or that you can lose it).

Agreed. Everyone is stuck with the problem. It is the inertia to be overcome - but to do it - we must first admit that it exists in each person participating in the exercise.

But as far as how do we (of opposing views) come to a conclusion about who is right, if we are honest, we will of course yield to the authority of God's word.

What is sad is this: if you measured the knowledge of the average congregation, I would be surprised if you found more than 20% with a knowledge of scripture that exceeds the basics.

True and Paul complains about that fact in Hebrews 5.

So, if they really are unaware of the deeper things of God, why are they loyal to their particular denomination/faith.

My guess is because of the fellowship.

And because it is "simpler" to simply believe what you are told and enjoy all the friends and club-membership benies that come along with that --

Now, how do we, you and I, Bob, come to a conclusion?

Not with doubtful disputation, I'm pretty sure of that.

True - it will take convicting by the "Holy Spirit of Truth" (John 16) for either one of us to budge in areas where we differ.

However in the case where I am in error and you have a valid Bible position by contrast - I will be most benefitted by your making your case in as clear and compelling terms as possible. Ranting and name calling means slightly less than nothing to me as a form of argument or persuasion (just ask DHK ) - I simply skip past it looking for a Bible based argument that might have some substance to it.

Thus I try not to hesitate from responding in kind with a compelling Bible based argument.

But if we examine this, I think we can at least say we tried.

We will answer to Jesus concerning our behavior toward each other, and I am sure He would not have His people acting untoward to each other (though I admit, doctrinal position runs near to both our hearts).

Agreed. So name-calling gets dumped at the outset.

Again, I would ask you to look at the premise of this thread, and just give it a chance.

Will do.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

If we go back to the OP - we notice that you quote Matt 5 - and then go over to Hebrews.

My response was to look at the context for the Matt 5 statement that you used as the introduction in the OP.

=====================================

Jesus said, "Be ye perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect." Is this a command Jesus gave to God the Father about humans?

Is it a command Jesus gave to God the Holy Spirit about what to do with the saints?

Or is it a command Jesus gave to the people of God?

The Matt 5 Context is helpful in answering the question.

Quote:

Matt 5

42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
46For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
47And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

These commands are from Christ to the listener. Not from Christ to the Holy Spirit - or from Christ to Himself regarding what He should do with sinners that come to Him for salvation.

I think we can all agree there.

Paul affirms this teaching in Romans 2 ?


Quote:
5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the [b]righteous judgment of God,
6 who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS: [/b]

7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.
9 There will be [b]tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil[/b], of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

In 2Cor 5:10 Paul says that we are all to stand before the Judgment seat of Christ to give an account for the deeds done IN THE BODY whether they be good or evil.

In Heb 6 we see Paul bringing in the subject of future judgment of the saints.

In Romans 2:13-16 - He does the same thing calling it a part of the Gospel.

In Rev 14:6-7 John does the same thing. Points us to the future judgment as "part of the everlasting Gospel".

In Dan 7 - the judgment "passed in favor of the saints" is what actually determines the limit - the end of the persecution of saints on earth.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BillySunday1935]

Your argument results in the conclusion:"They did it wrong in Acts 17:11 - they cannot test the apostle Paul! They are not even Christians! How can they possibly know if their understanding of the Bible is right! Someone has to tell them what the Bible says first".

No - that would be your resultant conclusion. Besides, you never offered the constraint that only Christians need/can test what someone else says until now. Further, both the Thesolonians and the Bereans tested what the apostle Paul said - the former rejected him and the latter found him correct.

Your argument results in the conclusion "Paul is wrong in Gal 1:6-11 to say that church members are to reject the teaching of Paul, of Apostles, even of angels from heaven - if that teaching does not match up with the scriptures already given at that point in time.

No - that would be your resultant conclusion. I honestly can't see where you are going with this...

How can any church member TEST an Apostle.

Well, the Bereans and the Thesolonians were church members and they tested Paul.

They should just believe whatever the Apostle or the Angel tells them. Not testing is even POSSIBLE".

See the above....

Your solution would result in each one of us -- going to our own church leaders and saying "tell me what to think".

Nope - I never proposed that either.

Our own church leaders would say "the Catholics are wrong" and "every other group teaching doctrine different from the way we see scripture is wrong".

And how do you know that you are interpreting what you see in scripture correctly?

NOTE - Paul does not say "reject anything further that an Apostle or an Angel might say". The point he makes is not to reject further light, further teaching and thus not be helped by any explanation or teaching that might come. Rather his position is to TEST ALL - yes even what a supposed "Apostle" might say!

And I will ask you again... how do you know that the interpretation, by which you "TEST" something, is itself correct?

We see clearly then that - the Bible model "allows" for Philip to explain scripture to someone - and for that somone to compare the scripture to what Philip "claims" that it means to SEE IF Philip's explanation (of scripture - of the OT which as always - is STILL valid scripture) is making light clearer - or in fact is flatly contradicted by scripture.

in Christ,

Bob

1) To which "bible model" are you refering?
2) Where did I state that the OT was NOT scripture?
3) What is clearly contradicted in scripture -- testing Philip or the fact that the OT is scripture?

Peace!

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan

Your argument results in the conclusion:"They did it wrong in Acts 17:11 - they cannot test the apostle Paul! They are not even Christians! How can they possibly know if their understanding of the Bible is right! Someone has to tell them what the Bible says first".

No - that would be your resultant conclusion. Besides, you never offered the constraint that only Christians need/can test what someone else says until now. Further, both the Thesolonians and the Bereans tested what the apostle Paul said - the former rejected him and the latter found him correct.

On the contrary - my position is that Acts 17:11 demonstrates that the sola-scriptural model is so reliable that EVEN non-Christians can use it to test PAUL himself!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

3) What is clearly contradicted in scripture -- testing Philip or the fact that the OT is scripture?

Peace!

Correction -- there is no Bible principle contradicted in testing Philip according to the scriptures or in using the OT as scripture.

Rather what we see is that the Bible model is fully supported by both of those facts. The Ethiopian was reading the Bible AND is testing what Philip tells him as he reads it - just as the non-Christians of Acts 17:11 are reading the Bible AND testing what Paul is telling them - by checking it against the scripture.

Perfect harmony on those points.

in Christ,

Bob