PDA

View Full Version : Discussion Subtexting



Back2Front
Nov 17th 2008, 05:33 PM
I have this way of dividing the word of God I call subtexting that I believe is inspired by the Holy Spirit. I believe that we all have an understood subtext from our individual perspectives and current understanding when reading scripture.

Instead of posting three or four verses, then giving a long commentary, I insert my understood subtext right into the verses as the verses flow. Not to change the word as it's written, because I make it clear that the insertions are mine. But rather for the purpose to expose my current understanding of the subtext then to see others as well.

It works out quite orderly actually, and defines clearly my understanding of what scripture says to me. Essentially it amounts to my personal amplification per my current understanding.

for example:

Below Red additions are my understanding of a certain applicable subtext I call the "Anti I can claim I currently own salvation doctrine".

Romans 8:22-25 NIV (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:22-25;&version=31;)

22 We believers in the Christ who are working out our salvation through His Written Law and example of how he lived through it, know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time waiting to be saved in both Spirit and Flesh from our sinful and wicked approach to The Written Law of God. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves as believers in the Spirit made flesh who was living Spirit in the Flesh, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit and not yet the fruits of the Flesh Spirit union, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons in the Flesh as well as the Spirit, the redemption of our bodies through the law of the Flesh as worked out through the Spirit using the example of he who was both perfect in Flesh and Spirit. 24 For in this hope we were saved by the grace of the Spirit and not yet saved in the Flesh. But hope in salvation of the Flesh and Spirit that is seen, is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has directly pertaining to the whole understanding of what it means to be saved in the Flesh through the Spirit? 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have being salvation in the union of Flesh and Spirit, we wait for it patiently while working out our salvation in the law using Christ and his Spirit as to how to do so, and not our inherant sinful nature as seen through the current flesh only authorities and it's wicked spiritless citizens.

Just wondering what Ya'll think?

Yukerboy
Nov 17th 2008, 06:00 PM
You are adding to the Word of God!

Just kidding. I actually thought of using it myself after having seen you do it in previous posts.

Yuke

Back2Front
Nov 17th 2008, 06:04 PM
You are adding to the Word of God!

Just kidding. I actually thought of using it myself after having seen you do it in previous posts.

Yuke

Kewl! I knew that it was good. But I also have gotten some legalists who are dying to accuse somebody of something, say what you joked about.

I think if it's clear that the additions are ones understanding, and not being tried to be passed off as actual scripture, then it is AWESOME!

It clearly defines a persons understandings and eliminates 100's of posts and miscommunications.

Thanks for the feedback.

Back2Front
Nov 17th 2008, 06:57 PM
Please folks.

Weigh in here. If you hate it or think it's wrong or stupid, please tell me so. I won't judge you, though I won't be convinced to the negative. I want to hear from you though if this is a way that I can communicate my thoughts with you that you will accept.

I'm not speaking about the content at this point, just if you can clearly see how I think and how I think the HS speaks to me through scripture. Also, Is there any question as to my understood doctrine?

RabbiKnife
Nov 17th 2008, 07:09 PM
Personally, it is confusing to me. Sort of like the Amplified Bible.

I want to know first, "what does God say."
If I want to, I can then explain what that means to me or how I understand it.

For me, phrase by phrase is confusing and causes me to have little ability to actually understand the entirety of what the author is communicating. I have enough trouble without confusing myself. It also makes it difficult to understand the text within its literary, historical, and cultural context.

But that's just my opinion.

Back2Front
Nov 17th 2008, 07:22 PM
Personally, it is confusing to me. Sort of like the Amplified Bible.

I want to know first, "what does God say."
If I want to, I can then explain what that means to me or how I understand it.

For me, phrase by phrase is confusing and causes me to have little ability to actually understand the entirety of what the author is communicating. I have enough trouble without confusing myself. It also makes it difficult to understand the text within its literary, historical, and cultural context.

But that's just my opinion.

OK Thank you. So you are saying that it may just add more confusion to say maybe a newer believer or even an older one who has difficulty with sight and understanding and such? Not that you do but it just adds more than one is willing to try and understand?

I can see that. Maybe it is more for those who seek to identify what another understands, rather than to understand the scripture itself.

I guess I am more prone to relay my understanding to those who seek to know where the Spirit dictates where I am coming from, rather than trying to convert them to my understanding.

Back2Front
Nov 17th 2008, 07:26 PM
Maybe this will help




Romans 8:22-25 NIV (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:22-25;&version=31;)

22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has? 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.



Below Red additions are my understanding of a certain applicable subtext I call the "Anti I can claim I currently own salvation doctrine".

Romans 8:22-25 NIV Back2Front Amplified (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:22-25;&version=31;)

22 We believers in the Christ who are working out our salvation through His Written Law and example of how he lived through it, know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time waiting to be saved in both Spirit and Flesh from our sinful and wicked approach to The Written Law of God.

23 Not only so, but we ourselves as believers in the Spirit made flesh who was living Spirit in the Flesh, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit and not yet the fruits of the Flesh Spirit union, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons in the Flesh as well as the Spirit, the redemption of our bodies through the law of the Flesh as worked out through the Spirit using the example of he who was both perfect in Flesh and Spirit.

24 For in this hope we were saved by the grace of the Spirit and not yet saved in the Flesh. But hope in salvation of the Flesh and Spirit that is seen, is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has directly pertaining to the whole understanding of what it means to be saved in the Flesh through the Spirit?

25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have being salvation in the union of Flesh and Spirit, we wait for it patiently while working out our salvation in the written law using Christ and his Spirit as to how to do so, and not our inherant sinful nature as seen through the current flesh only authorities and it's wicked spiritless citizens.


Does posting the Authentic first as a reference, and seperating the verses help in a want to read the amplifiers commentary exposing his understanding?

RabbiKnife
Nov 17th 2008, 07:31 PM
Whatever floats your boat.

It appears to me to be more of an interlineated commentary than an attempt to exegete the phrase or passage. Maybe that's the turn-off for me.

I tend to generally avoid commentaries.

Dragonfighter1
Nov 17th 2008, 07:44 PM
I always thought words in red were Christ speaking:lol:

Back2Front
Nov 17th 2008, 07:46 PM
Whatever floats your boat.

It appears to me to be more of an interlineated commentary than an attempt to exegete the phrase or passage. Maybe that's the turn-off for me.

I tend to generally avoid commentaries.

Thank you once again. Can I ask if you have an understood subtext when you read scripture? And if you do, where does it come from? Not a particular commentary of your own per say, but an understood subtext about what is really meant?

Then lastly, when a pastor or preacher or such reads a scripture, then defines to his listeners what that scripture means, do you see that as a commentary on how the preacher sees it, and not necessarily what is intended by the scripture?

Per your inspiration, I ask this because I'm trying to define how one would view what is anothers commentary, and what is actually what the scripture is trying to say.

As we both know, many have many commentaries on what scripture is trying to say, and many depend on those commentaries as their guide.

This is why I ask about your personal approach.

Back2Front
Nov 17th 2008, 07:48 PM
I always thought words in red were Christ speaking:lol:

;)

Perhaps I should use blue as my starting point or even green.

Diolectic
Nov 17th 2008, 07:52 PM
I have this way of dividing the word of God I call subtexting that I believe is inspired by the Holy Spirit. I believe that we all have an understood subtext from our individual perspectives and current understanding when reading scripture.

Instead of posting three or four verses, then giving a long commentary, I insert my understood subtext right into the verses as the verses flow. Not to change the word as it's written, because I make it clear that the insertions are mine. But rather for the purpose to expose my current understanding of the subtext then to see others as well.

It works out quite orderly actually, and defines clearly my understanding of what scripture says to me. Essentially it amounts to my personal amplification per my current understanding.


Just wondering what Ya'll think?I do this also.
It needs to be done with some people take Scripture out of context.
All your doing is putting the context right in the verse.

Back2Front
Nov 17th 2008, 07:58 PM
I do this also.
It needs to be done with some people take Scripture out of context.
All your doing is putting the context right in the verse.

Yes thank you. That is what is serves to do as well. But is it understood that the context is purely my understanding of the context and how I think the Holy Spirit is speaking to me through an understanding of other scripture? Rather than me trying to pass it off as actual scripture? I ask because some have accused me of doing that and that is the last thing I want people to think I'm doing. I know that some will accuse no matter what, but for the most part do you think I do a good enough job to make it clear that it is my understanding through an understanding of other scripture, rather than actual scripture?

Walstib
Nov 17th 2008, 08:31 PM
It does boggle my mind a bit, like thinking of two things at once. I read the first then the second then the first again to check. Then I have to skip to the next, loose my place.

One question would be if the commentary changes with what subject is being discussed. If it does not remain constant then to me it seems, can't find the right word... Deceptive.. not quite right...? I mean this board proves people use the scriptures to say just about anything. Not inherently bad but possibly dangerous.

At the same time one passage says many things and has deeper and deeper meanings as I see it. This technique lends itself to the passage saying only one thing.

A further point (I guess I have lots to say today) is to me it seems a bit impersonal. I like having personal discussions and getting to know my brothers and sisters. Meeting them where they are, being all things to all people if you will. That considered it's a body of Christ sort of thing, the ears like it but the eyes get tired. I am still amazed anyone of us ever understands the other..... ;)

Peace,

Joe

Back2Front
Nov 18th 2008, 05:47 AM
It does boggle my mind a bit, like thinking of two things at once. I read the first then the second then the first again to check. Then I have to skip to the next, loose my place.

One question would be if the commentary changes with what subject is being discussed. If it does not remain constant then to me it seems, can't find the right word... Deceptive.. not quite right...? I mean this board proves people use the scriptures to say just about anything. Not inherently bad but possibly dangerous.

At the same time one passage says many things and has deeper and deeper meanings as I see it. This technique lends itself to the passage saying only one thing.

A further point (I guess I have lots to say today) is to me it seems a bit impersonal. I like having personal discussions and getting to know my brothers and sisters. Meeting them where they are, being all things to all people if you will. That considered it's a body of Christ sort of thing, the ears like it but the eyes get tired. I am still amazed anyone of us ever understands the other..... ;)

Peace,

Joe

Thanks Walstib. That is some good feed back. What I'm getting from you that is if one is reading my understood subtext, that could make the scripture one dimensional, as we know that a lot of scripture can be applied to many issues. Hmmm. Then if I were to change the subtext, then it would make me look sort of deceptive.... I see. I'll have to think on this to somehow rectify that. But maybe I won't have to.

The impersonal thing I don't really get but OK.

Anyway... Thanks for taking the time to give me your feedback. Some good things here to think about.

Back2Front
Nov 18th 2008, 06:14 AM
It seems that the general consensus, is that there is the potential of issues all of which I will take into consideration.

I want to thank you all for your feedback. There is much here for me to glean from.

I will be continuing to use this way for now.

Perhaps I will start a thread at a later date to let ya'll here on the board know how it has been working out.

Thanks again.

Walstib
Nov 18th 2008, 11:38 PM
The impersonal thing I don't really get but OK.

I was thinking afterward I did not use enough words even though I had so much to say. It would have been more appropriate to say it could be impersonal if the verse and subtexting was all that was posted. "Bible read my sermon" instead of " "Bible chat.

From all the posts of yours I have read you have been very personal. :)

Peace,

Joe

Back2Front
Nov 20th 2008, 04:29 PM
I just had a post removed and was accused of adding to the word of God.

I guess this way is not yet understood. I know it's no different than what anybody does with speaking their understanding, but I guess its aesthetics are threatening to people. I think It's because they don't bother reading the set up. I feel that even if they did, people are more prone to accuse somebody of something.

It's kinda sad, but I guess I will have to cater more to the immature believer.