Strange Things the Holy Spirit Cannot Do….

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: Does the absence or presence of the last half of Romans 8:1 come because the Holy Spirit testifies to your spirit that it is the truth? No, it does not. That too is outside the limits of biblical knowledge. The Holy Spirit does not guide in that are no more than he leads in the are of adding two numbers together.

HP: It appears that AIC indeed hit a nerve. Do not turn to the right hand or the left on this issue AIC. You are right on target. It matters not if I agree with your conclusions as to what or if any translations are trustworthy, or if the doctrines you hold to are in accordance to truth or error, you have the absolute right to tell me that the Holy Spirit has lead you to your convictions, and should have every right to post that on any Christian board.
Lead on AIC.:thumbs:

 

[Pastor Larry]

You did, on the 1st page of this thread, when you said to HP...

That was not a statement about ability or right, but about propriety. It would be like telling you child, "You can't talk to your mother that way." In fact, he can, and just did, but it is improper.

Again, I ackowledge that someone might not be correct when they say something like that. If that is the case, God will straiten them out in due time.

God most often uses others who are more knowledgeable in the word to "straighten us out." That's why I posted.

 

[DHK]

HP: It appears that AIC indeed hit a nerve. Do not turn to the right hand or the left on this issue AIC. You are right on target. It matters not if I agree with your conclusions as to what or if any translations are trustworthy, or if the doctrines you hold to are in accordance to truth or error, you have the absolute right to tell me that the Holy Spirit has lead you to your convictions, and should have every right to post that on any Christian board.
Lead on AIC.:thumbs:

Please learn:

Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, Neither the son of man, that he should repent: Hath he said, and will he not do it? Or hath he spoken, and will he not make it good?

 

[Pastor Larry]

This is precisely the point of this thread, to point out clearly how some limit an Omnipotent Sovereign God.

God is the one who has limited himself to speaking through the Scriptures. In them is everything you need for every good work (2 Tim 3:16).

The irony of the remarks of PL is that it IS the Word of God that we are addressing, nothing more or less.

No, we are addressed the doctrine of the Holy Spirit and how the HOly Spirit works.

That is biblical, not ‘extra-biblical.’

Where does the Bible tell you that the Holy Spirit will tell you about textual variants and textual criticism?

It is not a hard thing for the Spirit to spot the absence of what He Authored.

Of course not, but that's not the topic here. The topic here is the work of the Holy Spirit.

Stumble along as one wills through the maze of so-called translations, but as for me, I will seek the Lord directly for my guidance and direction.

And to do so, you must go to the Word. God does not lead apart from his Word.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: These are extra-biblical matters studied in the realm of textual criticism.

HP: The Holy Spirit is officially on notice: He is not needed nor can He be of any help or guidance into matters concerning the Book He authored. DHK and PL say so. That job belongs only to the human textual critics and their faithful supporters.

It is obvious that you have support for the notion that one can leave the Holy Spirit on a vacant park bench and go blindly about seeking and trying to understand what He wrote by human effort alone. As for me, I will seek the Author directly and rely on His testimony to my heart and life, and share my findings as lead by the Holy Spirit with other pilgrims along the way as well.

 

[DHK]

HP: The Holy Spirit is officially on notice: He is not needed nor can He be of any help or guidance into matters concerning the Book He authored. DHK and PL say so. That job belongs only to the human textual critics and their faithful supporters.

It is obvious that you have support for the notion that one can leave the Holy Spirit on a vacant park bench and go blindly about seeking and trying to understand what He wrote by human effort alone. As for me, I will seek the Author directly and rely on His testimony to my heart and life, and share my findings as lead by the Holy Spirit with other pilgrims along the way as well.

Will you also claim that God told you that the one-celled amoeba has two cells and not one?

Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: Will you also claim that God told you that the one-celled amoeba has two cells and not one?

HP: One thing I am certain of, if it is truth its source is God, including 2+2=4.:thumbs:

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Textual critics operate under the assumption or premise that certain man made theories are correct. When one places his faith in modern translations, particularly those associated with the Wescott Hort text and other translations greatly influenced by those men, they are assuming the unproven theories of these men are correct. When we start relying on the determination of what God’s Word should be based on the unproven, and I believe illogical and faulty theories of man, we are heading down a path not worthy of our trust when our eternal destination is at stake.

If you tell me that you feel the Holy Spirit is leading you to follow in step with these man-made theories of Wescott and Hort among others, that is your privilege, but I feel compelled to warn you of what I see as the imminent danger of such a path.

 

[DHK]

HP: One thing I am certain of, if it is truth its source is God, including 2+2=4.

HP, I actually agree with you. I believe that the KJV is the most accurate translation in the English language that we have today. That being said, I also believe that the second half of Romans 8:1 should also be included.

But if I state my conviction (and that is what it is--a conviction), as you state it: "The Holy Spirit bears witness with my spirit that Romans 8:1 is correct the way it is in the KJV," then I am calling people like Pastor Larry: heretics, unsaved, and without the Spirit of God.

You see, I rob them of the Spirit of God, because I claim the Spirit of God spoke to me, and therefore I have the truth and they don't. Where does that leave them? Obviously without the Spirit of God.

If they also make the same claim in the same way that you did, then the Holy Spirit becomes schizophrenic with a split personality. He cannot oppose Himself.
Thus we can have convictions about such things, even strong convictions. But it is wrong to say that the Holy Spirit told you that Romans 8:1 is correct as it is written in the KJV, just as it would be wrong to say that 2+2=4. He didn't teach you that, your Math teacher taught you that. I learned Math before I was saved--before I had the Holy Spirit. It is outside of the Holy Spirit's realm of teaching.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

HP, I actually agree with you. I believe that the KJV is the most accurate translation in the English language that we have today. That being said, I also believe that the second half of Romans 8:1 should also be included.

But if I state my conviction (and that is what it is--a conviction), as you state it: "The Holy Spirit bears witness with my spirit that Romans 8:1 is correct the way it is in the KJV," then I am calling people like Pastor Larry: heretics, unsaved, and without the Spirit of God.

HP: Please DHK. Let’s be reasonable. I have neither said nor implied any such thing. My position is simply that I believe on this issue PL is following a source that is based on the unproven theories of man and as such should not be trusted. That is a far cry from calling him a “DHK: heretic, unsaved, and without the Spirit of God.”

DHK: You see, I rob them of the Spirit of God, because I claim the Spirit of God spoke to me, and therefore I have the truth and they don't. Where does that leave them? Obviously without the Spirit of God.

HP: I do not recall PL ever stating that the Spirit of God testifies to him of the truth of Scripture. I simply believe that he needs to seek the Holy Spirit over and above the unproven theories of men like W&H. I do not rob them of the Spirit of God, I have done nothing other than state my own convictions. If that offends you or PL, it might be evidence that you have need of such a settled conviction. Of a truth I absolutely believe that I have some what to offer both of you in the way of truth, as I am certain you do with me on several issues. Are you saying to me everytime you differ with me that you have the Spirit of God and I do not? I know you have no problem with throwing around words like heresy, etc, but you have not heard such words stated or implied by myself. Because you obviously think in those terms of the ideas of others, do not be convinced that in retrospect I am saying or trying to imply that concerning you or PL.

DHK: If they also make the same claim in the same way that you did, then the Holy Spirit becomes schizophrenic with a split personality. He cannot oppose Himself.

HP: I agree completely. The Holy Spirit does not oppose himself, and it is a truth that much confusion lies in the Church as concerning truth. The error is in our understanding not the Holy Spirit. Certainly I believe you and PL are in error in some areas, and both of you believe that I am in error. Reason with me as I will with you, but do not throw around baseless claims on my part of heresy or denying that either of you do not have the Holy Spirit. Of a truth, good men with the Holy Spirit still have misunderstandings and can be lead into deeper truth as we remain humble before Him. He guides us unto truth. He does not simply dump omniscience into our laps. ¶ My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee; 2 So that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom, and apply thine heart to understanding; 3 Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding; 4 If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures; 5 Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God. 6 For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding. 7 He layeth up sound wisdom for the righteous: he is a buckler to them that walk uprightly.
Certainly there is a process in the accumulation of knowledge and wisdom, and God uses men, enlightened by the Holy Spirit, in that process. I desire to be lead by the Spirit of God and be lead and influenced by men and women relying on the Holy Spirit.

DHK: Thus we can have convictions about such things, even strong convictions. But it is wrong to say that the Holy Spirit told you that Romans 8:1 is correct as it is written in the KJV, just as it would be wrong to say that 2+2=4. He didn't teach you that, your Math teacher taught you that. I learned Math before I was saved--before I had the Holy Spirit. It is outside of the Holy Spirit's realm of teaching.

HP: With all due respect to your math teacher, apart from the Hoy Spirit no truth would exist to be taught. He is the Spirit of truth. Even a math teacher, though even possibly an atheist, owes a debt of gratitude to the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is at work revealing truth to man far before one comes to the age of salvation. Even the basic concepts that allow us to conceive of math come at the hand of God enabling man with wisdom via intuitive understanding. No truth is completely outside of the realm of the Holy Spirit. He is again, the Spirit of truth.

1Jo 4:6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Textual critics operate under the assumption or premise that certain man made theories are correct.

Any theory of textual criticism (whether eclectic/critical, majority, or the TR) is "man made" by this definition. Scripture does not reveal a theory of textual criticism.

The TR was compiled under a man-made theory. The KJV was translated under a man-made theory.

When one places his faith in modern translations, particularly those associated with the Wescott Hort text and other translations greatly influenced by those men, they are assuming the unproven theories of these men are correct.

When someone place his faith in the KJV, he is assuming the unproven theory of those in that line of thinking (including Erasmus, Burgon, Hills, and many others).

When we start relying on the determination of what God’s Word should be based on the unproven, and I believe illogical and faulty theories of man, we are heading down a path not worthy of our trust when our eternal destination is at stake.

YOu have no other option, as I demonstrated. Scripture gives no theory for text criticism.

If you tell me that you feel the Holy Spirit is leading you to follow in step with these man-made theories of Wescott and Hort among others, that is your privilege, but I feel compelled to warn you of what I see as the imminent danger of such a path.

Do you also feel compelled to tell us that you do not have enough information to be sure? You should. All text critical theories (whether critical, majority, or TR to a much lesser degree) have strengths and weaknesses. In each case, one gains some strength but embraces some weakness.

Since God had not given us revelation about this matter, we must rely on his common grace and his promise of preservation, while looking at the methods of preservation he has used throughout the centuries.

 

[Pastor Larry]

My position is simply that I believe on this issue PL is following a source that is based on the unproven theories of man and as such should not be trusted.

But as I showed, your own position has the same liabilities.

I do not recall PL ever stating that the Spirit of God testifies to him of the truth of Scripture.

Your memory is faulty. Earlier in this thread I spoke of the “Inner testimony of the Spirit” which the work of God that convinces a man that the Bible is true. It is closely connected with the Spirit’s work of regeneration.

I simply believe that he needs to seek the Holy Spirit over and above the unproven theories of men like W&H.

The Holy Spirit seems to work through this process of manuscript transmission. We need to seek what he has done and is doing through that.

 

[DHK]

HP: I do not recall PL ever stating that the Spirit of God testifies to him of the truth of Scripture. I simply believe that he needs to seek the Holy Spirit over and above the unproven theories of men like W&H. I do not rob them of the Spirit of God, I have done nothing other than state my own convictions.

I would be happy if you would simply state your convictions, and then we could have a reasonable discussion. But that is not what you are doing. You are in PL's words "using the Holy Spirit card" to state your case. And that is wrong.
You have stated many times the first half of Romans 8:16, using its phraseology, to state that God has revealed to you this extra-biblical knowledge concerning the textual criticism of Rom.8:1 that the last half of the verse is authentic. The Holy Spirit did not tell you that. That information came from textual criticism, a study of it, and not from God. It is your conviction based on study outside the Word of God, outside the realm of the operation of the Holy Spirit.

In any area such as that, whenever you state "The Holy Spirit bears witness with my spirit that....is true" then you have just stated that the opposite position is false. Correct? By implication, then, those that believe the opposite position--in this case more than have the members of this board--do not have the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit bears witness to your spirit but not their's. Correct? What does that make them? You tell me: Without the Spirit of God? Unsaved? Heretics? In what category does Pastor Larry fall if he does not have the Spirit of God, as you have implied since you have it; not him?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

PL: The Holy Spirit seems to work through this process of manuscript transmission

HP: What do you mean, ‘seems to work?’ If you do not know for certain, how can you place your faith in the results? Does the “inner testimony of the Spirit” you speak of bear witness to the truth.. of WHAT? Anything and everything some want-to-be translator or translation says it means? They all do not say the same things. Intellectual honesty tells us that some of them of necessity are wrong. Has God simply left us wallowing about in confusion as to the truth? Is the Holy Spirit hog tied and unable to reveal His Word to His children? What is God's Word to man? Is it anything that any translator says it is?

What do you define as this process of ‘manuscript transmission?’ Does this ‘inner witness of the Spirit” testify to the truth of this process? If so, what does it testify to you? If not, how can it be trusted to safely guide us to the truth?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

The insanity of this conversation is that I am being taken to task for utilizing ‘extra biblical’ understanding, NOT in the interpretation of Scripture, but rather as to what is and what is not Scripture, i.e., the Words of God. The Holy Spirt is bound fast and cannot reveal such truth to our hearts claim Pastor Larry and obviously DHK as well. Pastor Larry, the leading detractor, while being highly critical of my approach of the enlightenment via the Holy Spirit, uses evidently for himself some form of “manuscript transmission.” IS THIS LIST LISTENING? I know some of you are, but there are many possibly asleep at the wheel.

Speaking of ”extra biblical’ means of understanding the truth of what is in actuality Scripture, how about this unproven theory Pastor Larry mentions of “manuscript transmission??” Would you please show us where Scripture tells us that such a means is a trustworthy means to establish the spoken Words of God? Chapter and verse Larry. Speaking of an ‘extra biblical’ means of determining the Words of God. Speaking of the pot calling the kettle black.

So you see, Pastor Larry simply has made a choice differently than I, he holds to his “manuscript transmission” theories and I hold to the ability of the Holy Spirit to illuminate God’s written Word to our hearts. One thing is for certain, when he points a finger at me, four are pointing back at his own methods as being ‘extra biblical’ for attaining truth.

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

 

[DHK]

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

And as you claim this verse, do you also claim omniscience? Do you claim to know "all truth"?
Why take the verse out of context, and make it mean something that it was never intended to say?

 

[Pastor Larry]

What do you mean, ‘seems to work?’

It’s simple: As best as we can tell from our finite human perspective, the Spirit works through imperfect human copying to preserve his word.

If you do not know for certain, how can you place your faith in the results?

Because the promise of Scriputre that my faith is in does not address the process of manuscript transmission.

Does the “inner testimony of the Spirit” you speak of bear witness to the truth.. of WHAT?

That the Scriptures are the word of God. If you are unfamiliar with this concept, study it out so you can learn.

What do you define as this process of ‘manuscript transmission?’

For centuries, scribes copied manuscripts by hand.

Does this ‘inner witness of the Spirit” testify to the truth of this process?

No.

If not, how can it be trusted to safely guide us to the truth?

Again, study to learn what the issues are. Don’t mock people who know.

The insanity of this conversation is that I am being taken to task for utilizing ‘extra biblical’ understanding, NOT in the interpretation of Scripture, but rather as to what is and what is not Scripture, i.e., the Words of God.

No, you are showing you still don’t know what the conversation is about. This is not about extra-biblical understanding. We all use that. The problem is that you claimed information from the Spirit.

The Holy Spirt is bound fast and cannot reveal such truth to our hearts claim Pastor Larry and obviously DHK as well.

No, that wasn’t the claim. Again, you show that you don’t understand the conversation.

Pastor Larry, the leading detractor,

Since when is explaining biblical doctrine “detracting”? I don’t get that.

Would you please show us where Scripture tells us that such a means is a trustworthy means to establish the spoken Words of God?

Study the quotes of the OT in the NT. It will show what I am saying.

So you see, Pastor Larry simply has made a choice differently than I, he holds to his “manuscript transmission” theories and I hold to the ability of the Holy Spirit to illuminate God’s written Word to our hearts

No that’s not the difference. It is much more serious than that.

One thing is for certain, when he points a finger at me, four are pointing back at his own methods as being ‘extra biblical’ for attaining truth.

First, I don’t have five fingers. Second, I never said that we don’t use extra-biblical methods to determine the readings of Scripture.

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Yes, this was given to the apostles to preauthenticate the NT Scriptures that they would write.

This has become a little surreal to be honest. You repeatedly show that you don’t understand what the conversation is about. You cannot provide any biblical support for your position. In the end, you do exactly what I do (rely on theories of men to ascertain the correct reading of the text) but you attribute it improperly to the Holy Spirit.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: And as you claim this verse, do you also claim omniscience? Do you claim to know "all truth"?
Why take the verse out of context, and make it mean something that it was never intended to say?

HP: Is to be guided into all truth the same as being Omniscient? Is to claim the guidance of the Holy Spirit on Romans 8:1 the same as claiming omniscience? DHK, you are beside yourself and any semblance of reason on this matter. I am quoting the Word of God. If you don't like the way I quote Scripture, ask God to quote it for you.

How am I taking this verse out of context? I have not claimed omniscience, neither for myself or the ones to which this passage was directly being addressed. Neither have I tried to interpret this passage. God is no respecter of persons. What He has done for others He can do for you or myself as well. It is simply unreasonable to even ask such a question. This passage does not offer nor even suggest the remote possibility of omniscience to any. Omniscience belongs to God. Again, if you cannot figure out what God is speaking about, and cannot ascertain the reasonable limits placed on knowledge promised in this passage, ask Him to reveal the truth to your heart. He is God you know, a Sovereign God that nothing is too hard for Him to do. One thing is for certain. God wrote His Word to reveal its truth to the heart of those that diligently seek Him. We are not left up to sift throught the conflicting opinions of the theories of man to understand His Word. God has promised His aide via the Holy Spirit.

 

[DHK]

HP: Is to be guided into all truth the same as being Omniscient? Is to claim the guidance of the Holy Spirit on Romans 8:1 the same as claiming omniscience? DHK, you are beside yourself and any semblance of reason on this matter. I am quoting the Word of God. If you don't like the way I quote Scripture, ask God to quote it for you.

What do you not understand about the phrase "all truth"?
Did you not understand Pastor Larry's explanation to you about this verse:

this was given to the apostles to preauthenticate the NT Scriptures that they would write.

The meaning seems clear to me. Why are you having such a problem with it. If every verse applies to you can you stretch out your hand or rod over the Red Sea (or any body of water) and watch it divide into two? Can you turn water into blood? Can you bring upon the land a plague of locusts? a plague of frogs? a plague of lice? How about a plague of the firstborn of every family in America? Does every verse really apply to you.
Well John 16:13 doesn't apply to you either. It was written/spoken to the Apostles, and applies to them, as it was speaking of Scripture and how it was to be penned.
If it applied to you, you would know all truth, wouldn't you?
Why do you keep avoiding this logical conclusion?

How am I taking this verse out of context? I have not claimed omniscience, neither for myself or the ones to which this passage was directly being addressed.

You are claiming "all truth" applies to you. How much more plain can it get. "All truth" means you are omniscient if you know all truth, does it not?

Neither have I tried to interpret this passage. God is no respecter of persons. What He has done for others He can do for you or myself as well. It is simply unreasonable to even ask such a question. This passage does not offer nor even suggest the remote possibility of omniscience to any.

Then what does "all truth" mean to you?

Omniscience belongs to God. Again, if you cannot figure out what God is speaking about, and cannot ascertain the reasonable limits placed on knowledge promised in this passage, ask Him to reveal the truth to your heart.

God does. He gives me understanding of the Scripture. "All truth" still means "all truth." Do you have "all truth"?

He is God you know, a Sovereign God that nothing is too hard for Him to do. One thing is for certain. God wrote His Word to reveal its truth to the heart of those that diligently seek Him. We are not left up to sift throught the conflicting opinions of the theories of man to understand His Word. God has promised His aide via the Holy Spirit.

He has promised to help us understand his word. That is true. Did He promise to give you ALL truth? Do you have all the truth? Are you omniscient?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: Did you not understand Pastor Larry's explanation to you about this verse:

PL: this was given to the apostles to preauthenticate the NT Scriptures that they would write.

HP: You and Pastor Larry deny the Holy Spirit the ability and means to communicate the truth of the actual written Word, yet you want me to just accept Pastor Larry’s ‘extra biblical’ means (whatever that amounts to in this case) of interpretation concerning it? First things first DHK. If the Holy Spirit cannot even testify to ones heart the truth of the passage itself, that it is as He intended for it to read, I certainly can place no faith in Pastor Larry’s opinion, that is without the least shred of supporting evidence other than ‘Pastor Larry says so.”

We have probably hashed this subject out enough that the listener could, if engaged in doing so, understand the clear positions you, Pastor Larry, and myself believe and the obvious differences that exist. You both deny that the Holy Spirit can enlighten ones understanding as to His original intents, and I say God has not left the humble seeker of his Word to wallow about in the confusion of the proliferation of so-called translations, but rather can testify to a believers heart the truth of His intended Words. Your position, and the position of Pastor Larry, clearly limits the Omnipotent God, something I see as strange coming from the camp that so often touts God as Omnipotent and Sovereign when it is in favor of some position they desire to take, yet as we see clearly demonstrated in this discussion, flatly deny it when it comes to other issues.

I will leave this issue with the readers unless others decide to enter into the discussion lest we bore the readers.